Alexir

Members
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    10,091

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Posts posted by Alexir

  12. Posted · Report post

    Preston reports that Kubiak is trying to put together an offensive staff before he makes it official and that our current staff is in trouble.

    I know it's just Preston but it makes sense lol. Good bye Hostler? Maybe Castillo's going too. Who knows?

    Derrick Mason for WR coach! Make it happen

    0

  13. Posted · Report post

    So would Hostler be Ned Stark? He seems to be the one who was in great position, but has had his head cut by this latest development.

    But I think the decision of those guys makes the most sense. We've been incorparating things from that offense for years, now we get the whole thing.

    My initial reaction is excitement but a little bit of me fears the theme of " too many chieftains, not enough Indians ".

    0

  14. Posted · Report post

    Thanks! I've enrolled in an remedial reading course this morning at your suggestion.

    I've been reading some of your posts to get some practice reading and it is amazing how many posts it takes you to get your incorrect point across. There are also remedial writing courses out there!

    I said Joe could throw short passes as well as long passes if that's what his OC & HC wanted. I stand by that. I don't need you to rattle off statistics about his accuracy. His accuracy has obviously been affected by the number of long passes he was required to throw. His passing accuracy and Ray Rice's performance would both be enhanced by the implementation of the WCO. My assertion was based upon my observations of his short passing. I've seen him throw short passes right into the breadbasket of certain receivers to remain unnamed only to have them drop a pass that would have resulted in a first down. Joe has been implementing gameplans that he was given by two bad OCs --- Cam and Caldwell. One was a "its my way or the highway" playcaller and the other one had to sit in a sky box to figure out what was going on and then made decisions by committee. He was clearly a "too many cooks in the kitchen" type of playcaller who tried to reach consensus among the other coaches wrt the best situational play call. We need someone who has confidence in his system and lets the QB concentrate on the execution.

    BTW, you complimented Joe's performance in 2010 when he threw more checkdown passes. I just got out of my first remedial reading class! It was great!! Have a good one!!!

    TL;DR

    But the last part, 2009 was the check down year

    -1

  20. Posted · Report post

    Well if we hire Shanahan, we're going to see which is the real Joe Flacco. Is he the inconsistent guy you've mentioned or is he the guy we saw during our title run. If Joe can't succeed in Shanahan's system, then something's wrong.

    Our offense will have defenses on their heels all game in Shanahan's system. The O-line would drastically improve in the passing game becasue the ball is going to be coming out of Joe's hands quicker, which means the lineman don't have to hold their blocks as long. It's so many things a QB can do in Kyle's system. All I know is we need to hire this guy and stop fooling around. The suspense is killing me. lol.

     

    Now that it's between him and Hostler, I would rather have him...hopefully like others have said, we get the Texans version not the Dadskins version

    0

  21. Posted · Report post

    I'm on the fence about Flacco's accuracy. On one hand, he's completed under 60% the last 3 seasons, but during his first 3 seasons, he completed over 60%. I'm leaning more towards him being an accurate QB, then not. I mean he sure looked accurate throwing the ball during our title run, when he had more than one good WR to throw to. and a O-line that helped the backs produce in the running game. He was making back shoulder throws, putting the ball where only his receivers could make a play on the ball, throwing it in between 2 or 3 defenders. The average QB can't make the kind of throws he made.

    Also Joe throws deep the majority of the time. Deep throws are completed at a lower rate than short passes. So if Joe is going to be throwing more short passes, his completion perception should increase as well. So we won't know how accurate Joe is until we bring in a system that incorporate short throws into the equation.

     

    Well his championship run was special. He was playing out of his mind. As for the first 3 years of his year, he was very captain checkdowny. Especially in 2009 AKA the year of the screen pass. But he looked sharp in 2010.

    0

  23. Posted · Report post

    What don't you like about Kyle's system? It does everything it can to try to help the QB be productive. The only thing that you could possible criticize is the lack of the no huddle. Other than that, it's as dynamic as it gets. The Packers run a similar type system and if their system can make Flynn look like a decent QB, I'm sure Kyle system would make Joe look like league MVP. A good offensive system is more valuable than some players imo.

     

     

    Did y'all not read the articles I posted earlier? In one of them, it says Kyle doesn't run a typically west coast offense. He run a reverse/air coyell/Pistol offense type west coast offense. Meaning his system attacks defense with the deep pass, to set up the short passes and the running game? How does that not fit Joe?

    Joe strengths is throwing the deep ball, the only change for Joe would be him having to throw more short routes and over the middle in Kyles scheme, versus rarely throwing short or over the middle in Cams or Caldwells Air coyell system. So I think Joe would put up big numbers in Shannahan's system. I mean if you don't have faith in Joe to throw short, then maybe we should be looking for a new QB and not an OC from your point of view.

    Now Kyle being stubborn, I can't argue that. But I'll rather hire a guy that knows his x's and o's, and can call plays based off the flow of the game than to hire a guy who's learning on the job as he go, which is going to require a lot of growing pains.

     

    EDIT: Also I just read that Kirby is out of the running. So it looks like it's going to be Kyle as OC... Atleast I hope so.

     

    Missed that article. I ll have to read it. I like what they did with the run game but they got away from it at times but I guess every OC is going to make mistakes.

    Flacco's strengths are definitely his arm, his outside passes, durability and when he CHOOSES, his escapability and mobileness. I would never claim he is an accurate passer though. Not a bad thing, his strengths out way his weaknesses (to me anyways) but he needs to be more cerebral which I hope a QB coach would assist him with.

    0

  24. Posted · Report post

    Gates went to the probowl with less than 1000 yards receiving twice.  And Rivers' lone probowl appearance with Cameron, he threw for fewer yards, fewer TDs, a lower completion percentage, and had just one less interception than Joe had in 2010 - btw a year in which, Joe did NOT make the probowl.  In Drew Brees' lone probowl appearance under Cam, the same holds true across the board except for completion percentage.  These guys made the probowl with less than 3500 yards passing.  Alex Smith made the pro bowl this year, and the same holds true for him.  So I'd hardly use players going to the probowl as a measure of Cam Cameron's, or any coordinator's, success.

     

    Again, for people doing the cliff notes version of the boards, I was making a point that their have been successful players when Cameron has been an OC and where is the line where we contribute that to talent over coaching. It was brought up because he was saying Schaub, RG3 and a few other guys flourished under Kyle....

    0

  25. Posted · Report post

    With all due respect it was Marty Schottenheimer, Drew Brees and LaDainian himself, not Cam Cameron, who made LaDainian Tomlinson into an NFL star.

     

    As for the OC, we should go with the guy who was my 1st pick before the process began and that would be ---- Kyle Shanahan.

    He will be the best fit for Joe Flacco and John Harbaugh. Joe doesn't need a BFF; he  needs an OC who will push him to grow. John Harbaugh needs a younger coach like Shanahan so he [Harbaugh] won't feel threatened.

     

    As for your baseless claim that the West Coast Offense isn't a good fit for Joe, its preposterous. Joe Flacco is talented enough to adapt his game to any offense, given the right WRs, TEs, RBs and O-line. He adapted his game this year and we went 8-8 as compared to 8-7-1 for the almighty Green Bay Packers team led by Aaron Rodgers for most of the year. He also threw for just shy of 4,000 yards. Had he not been injured late into the season on a dirty, low hit to the knee for which no penalty was even thrown, he would have easily thrown for more than 4.000 yards.  

     

    Learn to read! I am making a point, which is clearly stated that when do we give credit to the talent and when to the OC. A West coast offense is good for guys like Tannehill, Pennington who are very accurate but don't have the strongest arms. Air Coryell is the kind of offense Joe fits into. Hell, 2009 was the year of the screen pass and even Flacco couldn't get the ball where it needed to be 10 yards away... Baseless? I am stating he is not an accurate passer for short/intermediate routes. Where is your proof that he is accurate in that range?

     

    Rodgers played 8 games really. Getting injured that early in Chicago doesnt count and he went 6-2. No one said he was invinceible but it is LAUGHABLE, You are comparing Flacco's 8-8 season to Rodgers' 6-2 season basically.....Rodgers almost had as many TDs and missed 8 games....bad move on you trying to bring up Rodgers (which i dont understand why you did in the first place because no one was talking about Rodgers!)

     

    Who says Joe needs a BFF? He needs a guy that will help him to grow and that has nothing to do with OC. We need a QB coach no matter who the OC is

    Where are you going with this? You are on this tangent that is irrelevant to what we are talking about....

    0