zippo59
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2006
- Messages
- 5,082
- Reaction score
- 0
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Aqua4Ever04 said:I never wished injury apon Rodney. I just hope he never returns to his level of play he was once at. He is a cheap SOB and I hate him with a passion just like the Pats.
Well, we'll just have to disagree.pats1 said:I've broken down all 3 of those plays and see it a bit differently.
I agree - the 1st-9:30 block was 'good.'
But I'd say the worse of the other two was 1st-14:52.
On 1st-13:01, Watson may have gotten knocked back a bit and didn't have the best angle, but he didn't let the SLB break free for a second, and really didn't slide into Dillon's hole. I laid the blame squarely on Mills. His job was to hit that hole hard, stay ahead of Dillon, and get a good drive block on the penetrating FS. Instead, he stutter-stepped at the line in indecison on whether or not to help Watson or hit the hole. He can't be worrying about Watson's job, because it was done adequately. Mills stopping before the hole slowed down Dillon and stretched the play out. He can bodyslam the FS down all he wants after the stop, but it doesn't change the fact he didn't block him to start out with.
Betting money on the Fish?Aqua4Ever04 said:Think about how stupid your bet sounds. Even when you lose you still wouldn't pay any way. Making a bet over the internet isn't the smartest thing to do. Sorry for being just a little bit smart about putting myself out there on the web. If I could find any one up here in Washington to make that bet with me I sure as hell would do it. I already have several bets on the Fins making the post season this year.
arrellbee said:Well, we'll just have to disagree.
1st-14:52 was not too bad. He held the block long enough to keep his man out of the play for most plays. But he didn't hold the block long enough to keep his man out of some possible delayed contribution.
1st-13:01 - respectfully, but I don't think you are looking at it very well. Did you go back and look at it again before you made this post ?
First, Watson took his guy on the guy's right shoulder, not the left (the running lane is to the guy's left). You have to agree with that, right ? That right there is a bad block.
Second, if Mills hasn't slowed to get in Watson's guy's way but shoots on thru, Watson's guy has a pretty good shot at Dillon. Watch the guy's feet. He has taken 2 steps toward the running lane against Watson's block before Mills gets in his way and Dillon is still a step away from the hole. You have to agree with that - it's right on the video. That right there is an ineffective bad block allowing his guy to get toward the running lane.
I already said that Mills should have gone on thru, so we agree on that. I even already said that Dillon might have been able to bull thru Watson's guy. But that's not the point. The point is Watson's block to begin with. It was simply bad. I don't see how you can disagree.
Just to make SURE that this isn't taken out of context - I called this one play a MICROSCOPIC example. One play couldn't be anything different. But if Joyner's compilation has any validity, I think this is an example of the type of block that he is calling unsuccessful.