Offense eager for tests
 

[url=http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9939680/Offense-eager-for-tests]Offense eager for tests - NFL News - FOX Sports on MSN[/url]-

Re: Offense eager for tests
 

Glad to hear Scott Burley only had strained quads -- it looked like something with the knee at first and I thought his career was over before it began.

I'm really not worried at all about the D giving up 500 yards, most of those yards were from the 3rd and 4th string. While the starters gave up some yardage to the Ravens starters, we held them to field goals both times.

I'm absolutely confident our D is going to be freaky-nasty this year.

Re: Offense eager for tests
 

well, so far they failed the " first" test :(

Re: Offense eager for tests
 

[quote=dmek25;576213]well, so far they failed the " first" test :([/quote]

But wait. They couldn't get into a "rhythm". 10 plays aren't enough. Guess that means we won't be seeing any TDs on opening drives this year. Sheesh. Does everything have to be absolutely perfect for these guys?

Re: Offense eager for tests
 

i agree with you. i wonder why so little playing time?

Re: Offense eager for tests
 

[quote=dmek25;576232]i agree with you. i wonder why so little playing time?[/quote]Fear of expectations. It's an organization wide issue.

We can't play Campbell/Samuels/Cooley/Fletch more than a few plays because we can't risk them getting hurt. When you function as a marginal team, you literally need to squeeze every play out of the talent you have. Unfortunately, we're really the only example of a team in the league that consistently performs like a marginal contender, but expects to perform like a great team (although Dallas, if they don't fit the bill, is darn close).

If nothing else, the Campbell saga from March proves that we're not going to objectively evaluate where we are as a team in order to make the best move. We're not going to do that. We're going to set a bar at a goal, potentially unrealistic, and if the team fails to achieve that goal, we're going to fire everyone involved.

So instead of playing all of our players for a reasonable amount of time and not worrying about the injury risk (because after all, an injury risk in the preseason is an injury risk in the regular season), we're just going to get them out of there to protect them.

I don't share this philosophy, but if I'm in Zorn's shoes, I'd have to do the same thing to protect my own ass.

Re: Offense eager for tests
 

[quote=GTripp0012;576238]We can't play Campbell/Samuels/Cooley/Fletch more than a few plays because we can't risk them getting hurt. When you function as a marginal team, you literally need to squeeze every play out of the talent you have. Unfortunately, we're really the only example of a team in the league that [B]consistently performs like a marginal contender, but expects to perform like a great team[/B][B].[/B][/quote]

That is the plain truth.

I don't know if we're the only team whose players have such an inflated sense of their true abilities, but ours surely do. It particularly annoys me when we lose to teams on our own level (mediocre) or even teams that are worse than ours and the players act like they weren't able to get up for playing a supposedly inferior opponent. And we often lose to these types of teams [U]at home[/U], too!

If any group needs alot of reps against outside opponents it's our offense. They just didn't get the job done last season.

Re: Offense eager for tests
 

[quote=44Deezel;576231]But wait. They couldn't get into a "rhythm". 10 plays aren't enough. Guess that means we won't be seeing any TDs on opening drives this year. Sheesh. Does everything have to be absolutely perfect for these guys?[/quote]
We always make these excuses like our team is the only one that has adversity lol