PDA

View Full Version : Vikings offense finally finds way out of stacked box



StillPurple
10-09-2008, 04:58 PM
I was actually happy to see us run that option pass, with Chester throwing the ball into the end zone. FINALLY ! I kept thinking, as I saw those 4 linebackers and linemen keying on Peterson, "throw the gol 'darnit ball !".

Defenses since the 49ers game last year have really mostly found a way to bottle up AP, by just stacking the box. It is nice to see us finally (!
::)) find an answer to that, by throwing out of that situation, even if it is a running back who is doing the throwing.

You have to keep the defenses honest, as they say

Mr Anderson
10-09-2008, 05:17 PM
One trick play is not going to take men out of the box for the rest of the season.

IMO what we're gonna have to do if we ever want to establish the run again is:

Spread it out, 3-4 wide receiver sets, start spreading the ball around the field.
Use Shiancoe to keep them honest deep by hitting him behind the safeties.
Then when the safeties are back, we start running the ball.
If we have 7 in the box, Peterson will be successful.
With a successful running game, we start running the play action.

BloodyHorns82
10-09-2008, 05:22 PM
"Mr" wrote:


One trick play is not going to take men out of the box for the rest of the season.

IMO what we're gonna have to do if we ever want to establish the run again is:

Spread it out, 3-4 wide receiver sets, start spreading the ball around the field.
Use Shiancoe to keep them honest deep by hitting him behind the safeties.
Then when the safeties are back, we start running the ball.
If we have 7 in the box, Peterson will be successful.
With a successful running game, we start running the play action.


Nice post...what I'd like to see more than anything is the 3-4 WR sets.
WIthout that it's way too easy to stack the box.

With that said, I loved the HB option pass.


Right after the snap when I saw the hand off to Chester I said out loud "Oh man, I don't like that...I don't like that at all".
Then after I saw chester bring his arm back to throw I started yelling "Oh, yeah!
I like that!
I like that!
TOUCH DOWN!! WHOOOOOOOO..." and so on.


Bad play by the Vikes or not, it was an entertaining game on many levels.

ragz
10-09-2008, 05:28 PM
"Mr" wrote:


One trick play is not going to take men out of the box for the rest of the season.

IMO what we're gonna have to do if we ever want to establish the run again is:

Spread it out, 3-4 wide receiver sets, start spreading the ball around the field.
Use Shiancoe to keep them honest deep by hitting him behind the safeties.
Then when the safeties are back, we start running the ball.
If we have 7 in the box, Peterson will be successful.
With a successful running game, we start running the play action.

exactly, and one drive in the 4th quarter isn't going to do it either.
but its a step in the right direction.
now i know everyone is excited about the 100 yd recieving day and the 3 deep balls that we threw that set up the 10 points for the win.
but we have to keep in mind the first pass was into double coverage and becuz it was underthrown was completed.
and the 3rd pass was on a 3rd and 3 with a minute left and the saints had 2 timeouts left.
ferrotte threw into double coverage, well covered, 40 yards down the field.
now it worked out and we got the win.
but i dont exactly think that is the formula for being more efficient.

with our pass game even with jackson, it seemed like we are all or nothing.
either short intermediate passes, slants, come backs.
or deep streaks.
why dont we use the middle a bit more.
we dont seem to use the wrs in the middle of the field 10+ yards down the field.
we've seen them hit the tight ends a couple of times but not alot of wr stuff.
i still think there is alot to be had just over the linebackers and not necessarily behind the safeties.
but we still are not doing it.
to me that is gonna be the best way to start reopening up the run game.

VikingsTw
10-09-2008, 05:29 PM
IMO the run blocking has sucked all season long, aside from the Colts who everyone has sucess on. The guys up front are getting smoked, we've seen stacked boxes for three years and there never gonna disappear unless we get an elite passing attack.

The Oline has also failed to protect our QB on a regular bases wether thats Tarvaris or Gus Frerotte. The Colts game was about as good as it gets and I'm very disapointed in the way those guys are performing considering who they are and what their paid. This offense will only go as far as the Oline takes them, right now our Will is no stronger than the Defenders and considering we just played the Saints and got owned its quite sad.

StillPurple
10-09-2008, 06:52 PM
I agree with the 3 and 4 receiver set idea.

I also think that we need to do more with slants and stuff like that. If the defense has 3 linebackers surging forward to stop AP, that means that a lot of real estate is open where those linebackers came from. And that is when you throw the slant. This is called PLAY ACTION !

By the way, I was watching the game north of Dallas, and they had a current Dallas Cowboy linebacker in the house doing a radio program (Kevin Barnett). Barnett picked us to win, and he said, "the reason, is they will run play action". SO DAMN RIGHT !!

I just wish we did it more often. It works. Heck, it even worked when Tarvaris ran it (exhibit A: the Bears away game last year).

ultravikingfan
10-09-2008, 06:57 PM
"StillPurple" wrote:


I agree with the 3 and 4 receiver set idea.

I also think that we need to do more with slants and stuff like that. If the defense has 3 linebackers surging forward to stop AP, that means that a lot of real estate is open where those linebackers came from. And that is when you throw the slant. This is called PLAY ACTION !

By the way, I was watching the game north of Dallas, and they had a current Dallas Cowboy linebacker in the house doing a radio program (Kevin Barnett). Barnett picked us to win, and he said, "the reason, is they will run play action". SO DAMN RIGHT !!

I just wish we did it more often. It works. Heck, it even worked when Tarvaris ran it (exhibit A: the Bears away game last year).


Play action is when you fake the handoff the a back.

We do a lot of slants as it is.

3 LB's are not always "surging" to the run either.

patistheman
10-09-2008, 07:09 PM
When we do run play action it is darn close to ineffective.
The RB is always a yard or a couple away from the QB during they fake.
Most of our fakes aren't fooling anybody.
When the Saints ran play action on Monday night there were many times I thought Brees had handed the ball off, but it was just good execution of the fake handoff.
At the moment I don't remember anytime in recent games where we had a fake that I thought the ball had been handed off(I know it has happened I just don't remember the last time I have seen it).
I don't know if its coaching or just the way the plays are designed but it is something I believe needs to be fixed to improve our play action passes.

Also on another note I noticed on Monday that when Tahi is in the backfield it seems to me he sits back in his stance more on pass plays than on run plays.
Has anybody else noticed that or is it just me?
If its not just me I'm sure defenses pick up on that right away.

VikingMike
10-09-2008, 07:11 PM
"Mr" wrote:


One trick play is not going to take men out of the box for the rest of the season.

IMO what we're gonna have to do if we ever want to establish the run again is:

Spread it out, 3-4 wide receiver sets, start spreading the ball around the field.
Use Shiancoe to keep them honest deep by hitting him behind the safeties.
Then when the safeties are back, we start running the ball.
If we have 7 in the box, Peterson will be successful.
With a successful running game, we start running the play action.



Very good points...would love to see us spread it out, and even do some running plays in the spread O. As far as Shiancoe splitting the seam...hell yeah, and once and for all we'll see if he's a keeper.

VikingMike
10-09-2008, 07:16 PM
"patistheman" wrote:


When we do run play action it is darn close to ineffective.
The RB is always a yard or a couple away from the QB during they fake.
Most of our fakes aren't fooling anybody.
When the Saints ran play action on Monday night there were many times I thought Brees had handed the ball off, but it was just good execution of the fake handoff.
At the moment I don't remember anytime in recent games where we had a fake that I thought the ball had been handed off(I know it has happened I just don't remember the last time I have seen it).
I don't know if its coaching or just the way the plays are designed but it is something I believe needs to be fixed to improve our play action passes.

Also on another note I noticed on Monday that when Tahi is in the backfield it seems to me he sits back in his stance more on pass plays than on run plays.
Has anybody else noticed that or is it just me?
If its not just me I'm sure defenses pick up on that right away.



Play action will never work unless you have an honest passing game, regardless of how good the fakes look. Sometimes it is ludicrous to do play action...like when you're on the 15-yd line, have no TO's and 0:13 on the clock...no sense at all.

IMO, Tahi is not long for us.

StillPurple
10-09-2008, 08:17 PM
When did I say it is always good to run play action ? I merely was saying, we need to do it "often enough". Of course, there are situations when you don't do it.

One situation where you do run it is in the red zone. Bill Walsh always said this. He said, when the defense has its back to the endzone, it is way too easy for linebackers to just run at the running backs (there is nothing behind them in terms of space to make them worry). So Walsh's solution was to run play action. It generally works, too. And yet, I constantly see most NFL teams, when they get down to 2nd and goal from the 4, run straight at the "teeth" of the defense, and it generally doesn't work. When they run play action, they almost always get single or zero coverage.

This "let's win on the line and just knock them back" stuff also mostly fails, because they just add linebackers and then it is your 6 or 7 offensive blockers against their 7 or 8 or 9. But throwing works, and call it finesse or whatever you want, but that is what the 49ers did and they have 4 rings (or is it 5 ?).

jargomcfargo
10-09-2008, 08:47 PM
"Mr" wrote:


One trick play is not going to take men out of the box for the rest of the season.

IMO what we're gonna have to do if we ever want to establish the run again is:

Spread it out, 3-4 wide receiver sets, start spreading the ball around the field.
Use Shiancoe to keep them honest deep by hitting him behind the safeties.
Then when the safeties are back, we start running the ball.
If we have 7 in the box, Peterson will be successful.
With a successful running game, we start running the play action.


Exactly right. In addition, we will finally be able to run the screen, flair, and draw successfully. It will give more space in the short passing game the west coast offense demands as well.
A fine example would be what Brady did to our defense 2 years ago. We don't have Brady.But we would be better if we spread them out more.

SharperImage
10-09-2008, 09:03 PM
What genius thought of the double post route on the Berrian TD.. i know childress wife told him.. theres no way bevel and chilly is that smart.

idahovikefan7
10-09-2008, 09:11 PM
Nice to see something a little fancy from this team for a change...but now can we open up that play book a little more please?

ItalianStallion
10-09-2008, 09:23 PM
"SharperImage" wrote:


What genius thought of the double post route on the Berrian TD.. i know childress wife told him.. theres no way bevel and chilly is that smart.


Either somebody screwed up that play, or it was a horrible design.
Why would you want to run both patterns in the same area?...

Chazz
10-09-2008, 09:24 PM
I would love to see a flea flicker with AD, Shank would be guarenteed to be uncovered down field, hell I think BB would end up uncovered down field. The problem is I don't think our OL could protect long enough for that.

Chazz
10-09-2008, 09:26 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"SharperImage" wrote:


What genius thought of the double post route on the Berrian TD.. i know childress wife told him.. theres no way bevel and chilly is that smart.


Either somebody screwed up that play, or it was a horrible design.
Why would you want to run both patterns in the same area?...


AA had to of run the wrong route. But with Childress as HC I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

VikingMike
10-09-2008, 09:28 PM
"Chazz" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"SharperImage" wrote:


What genius thought of the double post route on the Berrian TD.. i know childress wife told him.. theres no way bevel and chilly is that smart.


Either somebody screwed up that play, or it was a horrible design.
Why would you want to run both patterns in the same area?...


AA had to of run the wrong route. But with Childress as HC I wouldn't bet the farm on it.



According to BB, he (BB) ran the wrong route and shouldn't have been there, but he saw the ball and went after it.

PurplePeopleEaters
10-09-2008, 09:33 PM
"VikingMike" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"SharperImage" wrote:


What genius thought of the double post route on the Berrian TD.. i know childress wife told him.. theres no way bevel and chilly is that smart.


Either somebody screwed up that play, or it was a horrible design.
Why would you want to run both patterns in the same area?...


AA had to of run the wrong route. But with Childress as HC I wouldn't bet the farm on it.



According to BB, he (BB) ran the wrong route and shouldn't have been there, but he saw the ball and went after it.


Yep. It looked retarded but Berrian made a pretty nice adjustment in his route to the ball. It wasn't a well advised throw by Frerotte but it worked out for the best. I guess I'm not complaining.

Chazz
10-09-2008, 09:42 PM
"VikingMike" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"SharperImage" wrote:


What genius thought of the double post route on the Berrian TD.. i know childress wife told him.. theres no way bevel and chilly is that smart.


Either somebody screwed up that play, or it was a horrible design.
Why would you want to run both patterns in the same area?...


AA had to of run the wrong route. But with Childress as HC I wouldn't bet the farm on it.



According to BB, he (BB) ran the wrong route and shouldn't have been there, but he saw the ball and went after it.


Right on...I hadn't heard that. I knew that they both should not of been at the same place.

ragz
10-09-2008, 09:57 PM
"StillPurple" wrote:


When did I say it is always good to run play action ? I merely was saying, we need to do it "often enough". Of course, there are situations when you don't do it.

One situation where you do run it is in the red zone. Bill Walsh always said this. He said, when the defense has its back to the endzone, it is way too easy for linebackers to just run at the running backs (there is nothing behind them in terms of space to make them worry). So Walsh's solution was to run play action. It generally works, too. And yet, I constantly see most NFL teams, when they get down to 2nd and goal from the 4, run straight at the "teeth" of the defense, and it generally doesn't work. When they run play action, they almost always get single or zero coverage.

This "let's win on the line and just knock them back" stuff also mostly fails, because they just add linebackers and then it is your 6 or 7 offensive blockers against their 7 or 8 or 9. But throwing works, and call it finesse or whatever you want, but that is what the 49ers did and they have 4 rings (or is it 5 ?).

you know what else we do alot of which doesnt make any sense based on that theory, is run screen passes inside the 20.
if walsh believed as you say he spoke, the linebackers are not going to drop into coverage, they are still keying on the running back and that is why screens are not too effective inside the 20.
to be honest about 1 for every 20 screens we run are effective so why should in the redzone be different.
but to me this is again an adjustment the coach has to make.
no one is respecting your pass, or wrs, so screens are not gonna be effective for us, and they haven't cuz no one is gonna be fooled or scared that you might pass downfield.
if 8 guys are in the box and reading running back all the way, then the screen is dead.
i mean most of our screens just turn out to be balls thrown into the ground cuz nothing is there.
this is a big part of the wco, but you have to establish the other parts of your passing game for those things to work.

Purple Floyd
10-09-2008, 10:27 PM
There are proven ways to counter the pressure we have been facing on the LOS, we just have not done any of them well.

In the WCO (KAO) , the way that you are supposed to attack the defense is with short passes that rely on acute timing between the QB and the receivers( either the WR,TE or the RB)
as the QB throws to a spot in the field where he anticipates the WR to be. This works because the defenders cannot react fast enough to get to the ball until it is caught and when executed right the play often leads to big gains.


The problem that we have had is that there has never been that type of timing between our QB's and WR's and also the line has never gotten to the point where they have been able to successfully pass block long enough to be able to provide the time for that timing to develop. And to top it off, on the times when everything else seems to have fallen into place, the Wr's drop the damn ball.

So what it looks like to me is that they have gone away from the shorter timing routes much of the time and have made a decision to try to stretch the field vertically under Gus. I believe with the personnel we have, that this is what they should be doing and have said it for 2 years. It may take a few more games but I think that the longer passes will start to happen more frequently and that the result will be the running game will improve because there will not be as much pressure at the LOS.

It is sad that it has taken the staff this long to see that they need to run the offense in this way but hopefully it is sinking in. If they do not continue to push the ball downfield the running game will not look good by years end.

ragz
10-09-2008, 10:53 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


There are proven ways to counter the pressure we have been facing on the LOS, we just have not done any of them well.

In the WCO (KAO) , the way that you are supposed to attack the defense is with short passes that rely on acute timing between the QB and the receivers( either the WR,TE or the RB)
as the QB throws to a spot in the field where he anticipates the WR to be. This works because the defenders cannot react fast enough to get to the ball until it is caught and when executed right the play often leads to big gains.


The problem that we have had is that there has never been that type of timing between our QB's and WR's and also the line has never gotten to the point where they have been able to successfully pass block long enough to be able to provide the time for that timing to develop. And to top it off, on the times when everything else seems to have fallen into place, the Wr's drop the gol 'darnit ball.

So what it looks like to me is that they have gone away from the shorter timing routes much of the time and have made a decision to try to stretch the field vertically under Gus. I believe with the personnel we have, that this is what they should be doing and have said it for 2 years. It may take a few more games but I think that the longer passes will start to happen more frequently and that the result will be the running game will improve because there will not be as much pressure at the LOS.

It is sad that it has taken the staff this long to see that they need to run the offense in this way but hopefully it is sinking in. If they do not continue to push the ball downfield the running game will not look good by years end.

very true.
but i would also contend that the offensive line should not have to pass block that long with a short passing game, but the plays haven't been there.
and even when timing has been there, particularly when jackson was in there wrs did not have separation so you saw a handful of defenders knocking balls down or being right on the wr.
i think this has happened cuz corners are playing us at the line of scrimmage and not giving up the cushions for those easy short gains we see hit on us.
and i also think cuz the linebackers are keying on run so much and are not fearful of the passes over them the are in the lanes of a lot of the short passes we wanna throw.
the thing thats aggravating about this is that its been going on for a while. its not like this is all new stuff.
but the things you said are also a very big part of it too, and if you combine it it makes for one of the more sorry offenses of recent years.

Purple Floyd
10-09-2008, 11:01 PM
"ragz" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


There are proven ways to counter the pressure we have been facing on the LOS, we just have not done any of them well.

In the WCO (KAO) , the way that you are supposed to attack the defense is with short passes that rely on acute timing between the QB and the receivers( either the WR,TE or the RB)
as the QB throws to a spot in the field where he anticipates the WR to be. This works because the defenders cannot react fast enough to get to the ball until it is caught and when executed right the play often leads to big gains.


The problem that we have had is that there has never been that type of timing between our QB's and WR's and also the line has never gotten to the point where they have been able to successfully pass block long enough to be able to provide the time for that timing to develop. And to top it off, on the times when everything else seems to have fallen into place, the Wr's drop the gol 'darnit ball.

So what it looks like to me is that they have gone away from the shorter timing routes much of the time and have made a decision to try to stretch the field vertically under Gus. I believe with the personnel we have, that this is what they should be doing and have said it for 2 years. It may take a few more games but I think that the longer passes will start to happen more frequently and that the result will be the running game will improve because there will not be as much pressure at the LOS.

It is sad that it has taken the staff this long to see that they need to run the offense in this way but hopefully it is sinking in. If they do not continue to push the ball downfield the running game will not look good by years end.

very true.
but i would also contend that the offensive line should not have to pass block that long with a short passing game, but the plays haven't been there.
and even when timing has been there, particularly when jackson was in there wrs did not have separation so you saw a handful of defenders knocking balls down or being right on the wr.
i think this has happened cuz corners are playing us at the line of scrimmage and not giving up the cushions for those easy short gains we see hit on us.
and i also think cuz the linebackers are keying on run so much and are not fearful of the passes over them the are in the lanes of a lot of the short passes we wanna throw.
the thing thats aggravating about this is that its been going on for a while. its not like this is all new stuff.
but the things you said are also a very big part of it too, and if you combine it it makes for one of the more sorry offenses of recent years.


I am not going to argue your points, but with the WCO, we should still be completing passes even with defenders in close coverage. Actually the close coverage should work to our advantage because once the WR makes the break and the ball is delivered they should be behind the WR and in a worse position to make the tackle. There are also the "Rub" or pick routes across the middle that can give the necessary separation. Plus if they are playing tight to the line, they are more vulnerable to pump fakes and double moves that can exploit them deep.

And for the line, they shouldn't have to block that long for sure, but face it, most of last year the QB was having pressure even before he got to the 3rd step of his drop. That is way too soon. compare that to what the Packers has in their offense where Brett had several seconds and had a great year. No single part was the problem, it was systematic across the board and all areas shared in the blame but mostly I feel the personnel was wrong for the system.

ragz
10-09-2008, 11:12 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


There are proven ways to counter the pressure we have been facing on the LOS, we just have not done any of them well.

In the WCO (KAO) , the way that you are supposed to attack the defense is with short passes that rely on acute timing between the QB and the receivers( either the WR,TE or the RB)
as the QB throws to a spot in the field where he anticipates the WR to be. This works because the defenders cannot react fast enough to get to the ball until it is caught and when executed right the play often leads to big gains.


The problem that we have had is that there has never been that type of timing between our QB's and WR's and also the line has never gotten to the point where they have been able to successfully pass block long enough to be able to provide the time for that timing to develop. And to top it off, on the times when everything else seems to have fallen into place, the Wr's drop the gol 'darnit ball.

So what it looks like to me is that they have gone away from the shorter timing routes much of the time and have made a decision to try to stretch the field vertically under Gus. I believe with the personnel we have, that this is what they should be doing and have said it for 2 years. It may take a few more games but I think that the longer passes will start to happen more frequently and that the result will be the running game will improve because there will not be as much pressure at the LOS.

It is sad that it has taken the staff this long to see that they need to run the offense in this way but hopefully it is sinking in. If they do not continue to push the ball downfield the running game will not look good by years end.

very true.
but i would also contend that the offensive line should not have to pass block that long with a short passing game, but the plays haven't been there.
and even when timing has been there, particularly when jackson was in there wrs did not have separation so you saw a handful of defenders knocking balls down or being right on the wr.
i think this has happened cuz corners are playing us at the line of scrimmage and not giving up the cushions for those easy short gains we see hit on us.
and i also think cuz the linebackers are keying on run so much and are not fearful of the passes over them the are in the lanes of a lot of the short passes we wanna throw.
the thing thats aggravating about this is that its been going on for a while. its not like this is all new stuff.
but the things you said are also a very big part of it too, and if you combine it it makes for one of the more sorry offenses of recent years.


I am not going to argue your points, but with the WCO, we should still be completing passes even with defenders in close coverage. Actually the close coverage should work to our advantage because once the WR makes the break and the ball is delivered they should be behind the WR and in a worse position to make the tackle. There are also the "Rub" or pick routes across the middle that can give the necessary separation. Plus if they are playing tight to the line, they are more vulnerable to pump fakes and double moves that can exploit them deep.

And for the line, they shouldn't have to block that long for sure, but face it, most of last year the QB was having pressure even before he got to the 3rd step of his drop. That is way too soon. compare that to what the Packers has in their offense where Brett had several seconds and had a great year. No single part was the problem, it was systematic across the board and all areas shared in the blame but mostly I feel the personnel was wrong for the system.

yah, or the system wrong for the personnel so make some changes.
i hear you on the pass routes, but we dont see it you know.
you dont see alot of the wrs having a step with a corner behind him.
alot of times the corner is actually getting his hand in on the ball.
or alot of those pick plays where one guy is standing wide open with some room to run.
and we definitely have not seen alot of pump fake and double moves.
so it is a part of the wco, but i haven't seen that much of all these things being attempted, let alone executed.

Prophet
10-10-2008, 06:24 AM
"VikingMike" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"SharperImage" wrote:


What genius thought of the double post route on the Berrian TD.. i know childress wife told him.. theres no way bevel and chilly is that smart.


Either somebody screwed up that play, or it was a horrible design.
Why would you want to run both patterns in the same area?...


AA had to of run the wrong route. But with Childress as HC I wouldn't bet the farm on it.



According to BB, he (BB) ran the wrong route and shouldn't have been there, but he saw the ball and went after it.


Makes you wonder how often that happens on the Vikings O verses other offenses.
Their has obviously been a problem with the QB/WR chemistry for years on this team.
Berrian had the first 100 yd game for a WR in who knows how long.
That is pathetic.

El Vikingo
10-10-2008, 06:29 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flea-flicker

vikings4life33
10-10-2008, 10:02 AM
"patistheman" wrote:


When we do run play action it is darn close to ineffective.
The RB is always a yard or a couple away from the QB during they fake.
Most of our fakes aren't fooling anybody.
When the Saints ran play action on Monday night there were many times I thought Brees had handed the ball off, but it was just good execution of the fake handoff.
At the moment I don't remember anytime in recent games where we had a fake that I thought the ball had been handed off(I know it has happened I just don't remember the last time I have seen it).
I don't know if its coaching or just the way the plays are designed but it is something I believe needs to be fixed to improve our play action passes.

Also on another note I noticed on Monday that when Tahi is in the backfield it seems to me he sits back in his stance more on pass plays than on run plays.
Has anybody else noticed that or is it just me?
If its not just me I'm sure defenses pick up on that right away.


Thats a good point about Tahi. i noticed his stance but didnt look close enough at it between pass or run plays. i will keep my eyes open.

grpape
10-10-2008, 05:05 PM
"PurplePeopleEaters" wrote:


"VikingMike" wrote:


"Chazz" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"SharperImage" wrote:


What genius thought of the double post route on the Berrian TD.. i know childress wife told him.. theres no way bevel and chilly is that smart.


Either somebody screwed up that play, or it was a horrible design.
Why would you want to run both patterns in the same area?...


AA had to of run the wrong route. But with Childress as HC I wouldn't bet the farm on it.



According to BB, he (BB) ran the wrong route and shouldn't have been there, but he saw the ball and went after it.


Yep. It looked Challenged Hillbilly Lover'd but Berrian made a pretty nice adjustment in his route to the ball. It wasn't a well advised throw by Frerotte but it worked out for the best. I guess I'm not complaining.

After watching the game again, both AA and BB had single coverage, and had their defenders beat. The fact that BB ran the wrong route, brought his defender into the picture. AA saw BB coming and pulled up for a second, a very heads up play. If AA keeps running his route without BB in the picture, the ball is right there. Either way, it was a good throw by Gus.