Jump to content

ctk232

Members
  • Content Count

    1,008
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

348 Excellent

About ctk232

  • Rank
    RFA

Recent Profile Visitors

655 profile views
  1. And in OT - why we didn't run the ball to him in OT is absolutely maddening to me...all the time in the world, no need to put it all on Josh when you need to drive ~40 yds and kick a FG.
  2. Went down a film rabbit hole primarily with his games against Georgia, Bama, Florida, and Texas. Granted, I'll always lead with the fact that I'm certainly no scout or expert beyond having played the game and my own investment, but the part I have to agree with Erik about is the cerebral nature of how Edwards approaches the position. Noting the skepticism around his physicality at the LOS and blocking ability, I didn't see anything glaring in that film sample to be a huge ding on his draft stock, but certainly has room to grow there. However, the way he plays the WR position from a mental standpoint stands out and could even stand alone as it's own physical trait in the way it translates to his game. He understands coverages better than most college QBs, and applies that to how he runs his routes down to footwork, hand placement, acceleration, and body placement in context to the DB/coverage. Erik does a great commentary on how Edwards finds the DB blindspots and holes in bracketed coverage - including against top SEC teams. Match that with his ability to recognize blitzes and positions himself for quick throw contingencies, which is something we sorely needed this year with Allen. To comment briefly on his actual physicality, he high points with the best of them as far as I can tell, and with a rather inaccurate QB. Great hands compensates for his lesser separation at times, but knows how to work the DB in coverage to create indirect separation with eye/body movement, hand placement/push offs, and the way he disguises his routes. All that to say, I would love to see him in the 3/4 rounds, but honestly wouldn't hate a late round 2nd on him depending on how the first goes. It's a deep WR draft with some great names, plenty above him still, so can't see why he wouldn't be worth a 3rd or 4th. I don't expect him to become the next OBJ, JJSS, or the like - but his understanding of the position could impact this offense greatly, and certainly give Allen that extra help.
  3. Word - I'd love to be a fly on the wall with the in-game communication b/t Daboll and Allen for one, but also to hear what McD might be saying and when. Especially in relation to those "break the glass" moments like you mention. There were ample opportunities, in my mind, during OT where we could've taken a timeout, assessed the situation, and interjected more of the run game with Singletary. Either within Allen himself or from McD or Daboll, there was no reason to let Allen attempt to carry everyone, and just settle him down. From those last few 4Q drives and into OT, he was playing like he had something to prove to everyone, and like he had to win the game on the next play. The pressure will always be there for Allen and the coaches, but it felt like all we needed was a timeout to gather ourselves and approach this like a new game. But man I'd love to hear the headset conversations for those last few drives.
  4. Wholly agree, but in relation to the OT gameplan exclusively, that was the piece of it all that I just couldn't understand. After getting a stop on the Texan's opening drive in OT - I'll never get why we didn't bring back the run with Singletary to be the primary offensive attack, or at least complement the pass with it more so. The durability concerns should have been out of the question at that point, and the kid was having an all-pro game - especially with his YAC. There were no prior injury scares in the game, and in the playoffs there's no excuse to not have your RB1, performing the way he was on Saturday, not be featured in your OT offense. Given that there had to be a winner, the clock wasn't even a consideration so there was no need to have a pass heavy attack (almost exclusively), the entirety of OT. This clearly wasn't the reason we lost the game, but the personnel and game plan decisions entering a "sudden" death overtime were beyond questionable. We only needed a FG to win and ~40 yards of offense to get it - there's no reason to abandon the run the way we did with that goal in mind. I wouldn't attribute this to McD, and I believe the conservative/defensive-minded coach criticism and trope to be tired and baseless - but whether it be McD, Daboll, or some combination of the two, I'm beyond curious who decided to approach that situation in OT the way we did. Edit to bring it back to the main discourse of this thread - as much as I'm left distraught regarding the above OT gameplan, I'd still rather see Daboll return and Allen continue to develop within the system he's learned thus far. What I'd like to see, however, is improvement to in-game response to adapting the scheme/gameplan and Josh improving within the system; something to indicate that both Allen and the offensive scheme are working in unison and not in conflict like we saw at times this season. Given what's come out since the game, I'm hopeful that this happens.
  5. A little false start there, but man I'm glad to see him practicing with Watt coming up.
  6. Classic Madden TE post route right there - just air it up over and we’re not breaking for commercial.
  7. No doubt on Bates - I'm more curious than anything, but wouldn't expect it to be a game changing decision. I'd just like to see Ford get inside and showcase what he has there as well, and if Bates could simply sustain the present average play we have with Ford at RT. 12 set would certainly help with the rush and hopefully with blitz concepts, but also keep the offense on the field controlling the pace. There was self-criticism from Daboll about not doing more to get in a rhythm, which is what we typically do with the 12/21 personnel sets. There was also a line in the Athletic article going around from Erik Turner that got me thinking. Essentially, that we dialed up more max protect schemes than anything against the Ravens which did help, but overall didn't help Allen's reticence to get the ball out more quickly and scheme receivers open in time to make the throws, regardless of the max protect. Given this, I'd be equally curious whether keeping us in the spread with 54-55 protections would a) force the defense to honor the quick pass receiving threats, given a few completions, and b) force Allen to progress in his reads post-snap, but also give him more options to throw if given a small window of time. It was a bit of everything on Sunday, but if we could have completed a few flat/quick routes against their cover zero/man schemes and even zone blitzes, I think we see the Ravens back off the pressure a bit in the second half. That article points to the go-concept read with Smoke in the flat, and again with Beasley having room to run on the cross field throw and drop by Knox. Given the Still's proclivity and roster talent for similar schemes, I'd be curious to see which Allen would execute more efficiently. All that to say, could very well be neither, too but that's why we play the games.
  8. Pretty sure he'll play, but if not I expect to see Long at RG and Ford at RT based on previous subs when Feliciano was out. What I'd be more interested to see though, would be Ford RG and Bates RT to start - can always put Long in at RG and swing Ford back out if Bates can't hold his own either. But it's really a question of who would you rather have blocking TJ Watt and Dupree occasionally...and I don't know that I'm entirely confident in either.
  9. Except for maybe the OL... Kroft I could take or leave but honestly feel he could still contribute if he could stay healthy. Knox's drops aren't great, but the kid has shown enough upside in the passing game and consistent blocking in his first year. There's no reason to make any definitive statements on him at the moment. I'd rather not spend money on Hooper and first focus on re-signing our own through the next couple years before making any splashes. One could argue OL/DE would be better in FA this year, but honestly would rather we re-sign known talent in our otherwise very young roster. Draft, develop, retain, repeat.
  10. Doesn't necessarily mean we have to let Spain go next year either - Long could be the odd man out at back-up Guard positions if we push Ford inside. in general to Ford, his footwork/agility was always a concern for the Tackle position in the NFL, but the kid is a stud in run blocking and while on his rookie contract there's no reason to dismiss him this early whatsoever. Hopefully Nsekhe is back sooner than later for this season's playoff push, and we can see about other RT options moving forward or if Ford improves with a good offseason. That said, Joe B. is consistently down on him where others have seen promise and good play. No question he's had bad reps against two of the best DE's in the league, as to be expected for any rookie, but he's been able to hold his own when needed as well. We also seem to have played both Denver and Dallas well enough with Ford at RT, so I'm not entirely concerned until Nsekhe's back either.
  11. I’m not advocating for bringing him back so much as saying how do either McKenzie or Foster simulate his size and ability? If any of them, Foster at least compares in size and speed but lacks the change of direction ability. Since we’re at it though, exactly in what ways does a 5’8” 178 lb McKenzie simulate a 6’2” 212 lb Jackson? Why is McD looking then if our roster has that many “Jacksons?” Really couldn’t care less if it’s Tyree or anyone at all frankly, but McKenzie? Mmkay. Roberts I could certainly see helping out here.
  12. More so just in comparison to Foster - to me, Jackson would seem to be the more physical runner, and have better change of direction ability. As such, Foster wouldn't be an accurate simulation at all in that case, but who knows.
  13. He's on an XFL roster, lol - I wasn't thinking bring him back longterm, but if they're looking to find a guy to simulate him for a week, why not?
×
×
  • Create New...