Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha
The offense has been undoubtedly affected by the injuries to the o-linemen. Moreover, when JC drops back to throw and dumps it off, it's hard to know what play was actually called. Did Saunders call for JC to dump it off? Or were the wideouts covered and was JC, therefore, forced to throw to a back in the flats? So, it's hard to conclusively say that the offense is "conservative."
However, we did seem to be running the ball an awful lot. I understand that it is important to run the ball and get the d-linemen to back off of bliting JC. But, when the running game is your bread and butter, and it is ineffective because the D is stacking the box, it is important to at least establish the threat of going deep. We have been able to do that in some games and have failed to do so in other games.
Hopefully, our offensive woes are a function of the injuries and once guys heal, our offense will display the explosiveness that we all expect, or at least want, to see.
|
True- and I'll be the first to admit that when i watch the game, I probably can't tell you what the aim of each pass call was...but i tend to agree with pain train with the perception of conservatism. We seem to run, run, pass, punt far too often with the lead. fact is, we aren't good enough to run for first downs consistently...
I also agree that the 0-line injuries are largely a part of it, but aren't these guys pros? Wasn't Wade supposed to be so good as to challenge jasen (teammate opinion? At this point, a lot of the line have played several games together not to mention practice (i'm not specifically talking about yesterday's game either), if they aren't good enough to fill the void (perhaps we should be more prudent about giving way draft pick- which deplete our depth).
at the same time, a win is a win...
i'll take it...4-2 ain't bad