"Hit him when he has the ball, hit him when he doesn't have the ball"

[supafly]

How about we legally hit Manning in the ankles?

This should be defensive gameplan #1, aside from hoping that he slips getting off of the bus.

Unfortunately, he releases the ball so quickly and is very difficult to hit/get to, as he has either the 1st or 2nd lowest sack numbers along with Matthew Stafford from DET.

It's a great idea, just easier said than done.

 

[patsfan-1982]

im sure Wes wants to have a great game vs the pats and Manning will try to help him but if the pats game plan is to stop wes welker they will be blown out by 20 points,

Demaryius Thomas, 60 rec 914 yards 9 TD's
Eric Decker, 54 rec 792 yards 3 TD's
Julius Thomas, 45 rec 590 yards 10 TD's

welker will be a problem on 3rd and short and in the red zone but dose are the 3 guys they have to keep in check if they want to win but IMO Brady will need to go no huddle for the full game and keep scoring it will take 35 plus to win

 

[manxman2601]

The PittPatriot (and family) do not like this plan. We love Wes and would rather have him sit out then get further brain damage, you know?

I give up. Which one's the real Wes? They're all about the right size.

 

[IllegalContact]

This should be defensive gameplan #1, aside from hoping that he slips getting off of the bus.

Unfortunately, he releases the ball so quickly and is very difficult to hit/get to, as he has either the 1st or 2nd lowest sack numbers along with Matthew Stafford from DET.

It's a great idea, just easier said than done.

targeting opponents injuries, even if legal, will deem you a scumbag

even though that's exactly what you should do

 

[Ring 6]

It's very telling when that is considered the worst game of the season for you and your offense due to the fact that you hand it off for 2 short yardage scores instead of throwing it for TD's; yet you still put up numbers like these, have another RB rush for 80 yards, and almost 2 more WR's who have 100 yard days apiece :

Manning--323 yards 60% completion 1 TD (O INT/0 sacks)

Red Zone effeciency 3/4 27 total offensive points

TD's in the first 3 quarters while it was still a game. Ran out the clock with running game and a FG in the 4th quarter.


Considering the fact it was the KC Chiefs and their #1 defense, I'd have to say that he "took them apart" pretty nicely. The only thing missing was basically another TD pass from Manning, which he could have had on either of the 2 short run TD drives.

Ok so if the ref made the right call and then Brady QB sneaked it in from the one we took apart the panthers defense?

 

[TonyTucker]

Pretty much, the only time the Patriots didn't score was because of a fumble and penalties (plus the one that wasn't called). Brady completed 75 percent of his passes.

 

[Kontradiction]

so he's a scumbag, right?

He wasn't targetting a pre-existing injury, but it's still a scumbag move.

 

[Kontradiction]

targeting opponents injuries, even if legal, will deem you a scumbag

even though that's exactly what you should do

No it isn't. There are plenty of ways you can make big, clean hits to other areas of the body and there are also times when you have no choice but to hit the opponent in an area of injury to make a tackle. There are a ton of ways that you can avoid specifically targetting the injured area. Sorry I hurt your feelings but it is what it is.

 

[Huckleberry1]

I think they need to be willing to give up traditional 'big plays' ie long passes, and take away the short stuff that they have been living on.



I find the 'keep them on the sidelines' concept very overrated. All you are doing by eating clock is reducing the possessions BOTH teams have. If you play a dangerous offense that scores on half their drives, you have to keep up with them whether is 7 drives or 14 each. The key is not eating clock, its putting points on the board. No matter how long you hold the ball if you don't score, you are in the same boat, just as if you do, its the same whether it takes 30 seconds or 6 minutes, unless you are in a situation where you defense has worn down.

Killing time in and of itself doesn't do much, but scoring touchdowns on long drives and winning the TOP battle and limiting drive opportunities is a recipe for winning. I would never suggest that just eating clock will beat a team like Denver, and I think that when they get in fourth down situations they are going to have to seriously consider taking their chances over the points because field goals won't beat them either.

 

[Ring 6]

Killing time in and of itself doesn't do much, but scoring touchdowns on long drives and winning the TOP battle and limiting drive opportunities is a recipe for winning. I would never suggest that just eating clock will beat a team like Denver, and I think that when they get in fourth down situations they are going to have to seriously consider taking their chances over the points because field goals won't beat them either.

But a long drive or a short has pretty much the same result, points.

Thats what I'm trying to say. The inclousion of time of possession and 'keeping them on the sidelines' just clouds the argument. The offense needs to score whether it does it quickly or methodically.

 

[IllegalContact]

He wasn't targetting a pre-existing injury, but it's still a scumbag move.

so he's a scumbag, right? or are you going to continue to dance around the question?

 

[IllegalContact]

No it isn't. There are plenty of ways you can make big, clean hits to other areas of the body and there are also times when you have no choice but to hit the opponent in an area of injury to make a tackle. There are a ton of ways that you can avoid specifically targetting the injured area. Sorry I hurt your feelings but it is what it is.

so you're saying to avoid whatever the opposing team lists in the injury report?

because that's what everyone does?

pretty naive to say the least.

by the way, this is football

 

[Kontradiction]

so you're saying to avoid whatever the opposing team lists in the injury report?

because that's what everyone does?

pretty naive to say the least.

by the way, this is football

I understand this is football, but I remember as far back as Tiki Barber breaking his arm and guys going out of their way to avoid that area of the body if they could. It's not like what I'm saying is unprecedented. If you fully understand the nature of professional football (which I'm not sure if you do), you understand that these guys are professionals. They do this for a living. Outside of the Suh's of the league, most professionals aren't going to go out of their way to target injuries because it could lead to ruining another guy's livelihood. Go listen to what Jeff Saturday had to say on the subject after the first Lions/Vikings game this season and maybe you'll get some perspective on it. What I'm saying actually seems to be the norm in this sport. What you're saying led to one of the more well known scandals in NFL history and is also a reason why people want specific players out of the league, even their peers. Sorry, but you're still advocating a scumbag move here, and haven't argued otherwise to date.

 

[IllegalContact]

I'm not sure what's worse.... How naive you are, or how far out of context you have taken my point.

I understand this is football, but I remember as far back as Tiki Barber breaking his arm and guys going out of their way to avoid that area of the body if they could. It's not like what I'm saying is unprecedented. If you fully understand the nature of professional football (which I'm not sure if you do), you understand that these guys are professionals. They do this for a living. Outside of the Suh's of the league, most professionals aren't going to go out of their way to target injuries because it could lead to ruining another guy's livelihood. Go listen to what Jeff Saturday had to say on the subject after the first Lions/Vikings game this season and maybe you'll get some perspective on it. What I'm saying actually seems to be the norm in this sport. What you're saying led to one of the more well known scandals in NFL history and is also a reason why people want specific players out of the league, even their peers. Sorry, but you're still advocating a scumbag move here, and haven't argued otherwise to date.

 

[PATRlOT]

This should be defensive gameplan #1, aside from hoping that he slips getting off of the bus.

Unfortunately, he releases the ball so quickly and is very difficult to hit/get to, as he has either the 1st or 2nd lowest sack numbers along with Matthew Stafford from DET.

It's a great idea, just easier said than done.

I wouldn't mind taking a 15 yard penalty in exchange for a 1 second late shot on him

 

[Kontradiction]

I'm not sure what's worse.... How naive you are, or how far out of context you have taken my point.

At exactly which point did I take your "points" out of context? Cite examples. As for the "naive" part, keep it coming, because it won't be long before you're banned... again.

 

[IllegalContact]

I wouldn't mind taking a 15 yard penalty in exchange for a 1 second late shot on him

Careful......you'll be classified as disgusting scum.....if you try really hard, you'll be labeled as a jets troll

 

[IllegalContact]

When you resort to threats, you know you've lost the point. Whether it's one or the other, you can choose because it is one or the other.

At exactly which point did I take your "points" out of context? Cite examples. As for the "naive" part, keep it coming, because it won't be long before you're banned... again.

 

[Kontradiction]

When you resort to threats, you know you've lost the point. Whether it's one or the other, you can choose because it is one or the other.

There's no threat there, just a simple statement. Further, there can't be a threat because I don't have the power to ban you. You called me naive because I took the same stance that former NFL players have. That's just asinine.

 

[Deus Irae]

That was Tedy Bruschi's explanation for the gameplan against Marshall Faulk in superbowl 36. As the broncos game approaches I'm beginning to wonder If we need to bring that mentality into this game, specifically in regards to wes welker.

One thing that struck me in the chiefs/broncos game last week was how many times Cornerback Brandon flowers hit and knock down welker when he didn't have the ball. Nbc even put together a video package of how many times it occurred in the first half alone. With welker most likely coming to town with neck injury and a concussion I think it would be a great idea to knock him around LEGALLY when he doesn't have the ball. With the broncos facing another tilt with the physical chiefs, they might limit his snaps or pull him completely in favor of having him ready for their divisional matchup next week. I'd love to hear some thoughts on this.

KC put their best corner on Welker, and they had him fouling him all over the field. The result was that Welker made Flowers his *****. That's a losing strategy. You can't single Welker all game long.

That's why the Denver offense is so similar to the 2007 Patriots offense: the personnel is so much alike. You've got the deep threat that takes multiple defenders or a bracket (D. Thomas) and the slot guy who's the same way (Welker), you've got a solid 3rd option (Decker) a decent 4th option (J. Thomas), a legitimate threat coming out of the backfield (Moreno) and you've got a triggerman who can get the ball there Manning).