D521646

That's for sure, but he does have a point to a degree. That said, the American black family is in much dire shape than the rest fo us, and it ain't due to lack of money or effort on the part of the rest of America. Tim-

Tebow is damaged goods IMO. I like your idea (Heck I said this two years ago that he was better suited a TE/FB) but the circus that would ensue is just too much,IMO

I agree JM57. We really don't know what we have due to Ftiz inability to throw the deep ball. I saw many a times last year that WR were open deep but Fitz couldn't hit them. Opposing Defense knew it too. I say that WR is not our glaring weakness, QB is, and also big fast LB core. oh and maybe a new saftey and CB. Tim-

Although I wasn't around, and as a student of none revised history, I'd say that times were best prior to the mid 60's in America. Of course somewhat subjective (What isn't in the mind of a liberal), I'd say that prior to the Vietnam War, and the sexual/drug revolution, the people representative of what it was to be American were pretty amazing people. Fast forward a bit and in the late 70's, and early 80's when every day became a working day; the onset of the 24/7 culture began the decline of the American family. Not all by itself I imagine, the working woman, or two working parent household surely didn't help matters, but to me when I try an reflect and identify what is wrong with society, it always comes down to moments when the American family has been weakened from one attacking source or another. No fault divorce, discrimination in child custody matters favoring women, forcing both parents to work just to make ends meet, decline of religion (Although I'm an atheist) in society. The list is long and not one thing was the catalyst, but the moral decay in entertainment hasn't helped, holding our children accountable in school and at home, removing failure as an option.. I mean I could go on forever, and all to often good well intentioned government is not sophisticated enough to craft policy with the knowledge that no one really knows the effects. This is so true of the little tiny things that have eaten away at our family culture over the years. If there is one thing that is true on a macro scale about change, it is that, it happens slowly, and the future consequences are virtually never quantifiable. Although I'm not religious I oppose gay marriage, and my liberal friends always are puzzled and I say simply that no one knows how much further adopting gay marriage will erode the American family. Some argue that it might strengthen it, yet I see no reason to believe that theory, and please I'm using gay marriage as merely an example, NOT for a topic of debate. I've argued the issue ad infinitum, and there's nothing I haven't heard on the subject. Point is, I'm babbling now, but it is my firm opinion that a society is as strong as the strength and importance it places on the family unit. The weaker the family, the weaker the society. Tim-

This^^^ Draft Nassib, and have Fitz and TJax fight it out for top spot. Tim-

Didn't impress me too much against the Tide tonight. More like an NFl offense than most and he seemed a little off to say the least. Tim-

And...? Your point that we need fewer pure linebackers means what? I'll wait to see who and what we're actually going to do before I deliver my opinions, but our defense is only missing a couple of spots to be good. Marrone needs to stop, watch film before jumping the gun on this, IMO. Tim-

Please for the love of God NOT a 3/4 system. We need to design a defense based on the quality of players NOT fit them into a system, Jesus has no one learned anything? Tim-

Saw it, wasn't terrbly impressed but I understand how overwhelming it can be this early. His answers were very none specific, but that could be because of a number of factors. Tim-

Actually it was the Hamilton T-Cats, and Rocky Dipietro was his slot back (similar to TE in the NFL) and they were a great tandem. Tim-

I was with you if you recall. To me, if this kid gets his personal act together he can be as good as Lewis, and I mean that! As to Fletcher, I laugh now because I was ridiculued for suggesting that we sign him for what would amount to a really good deal, when he was a FA last year. Tim-

I dunno if it won't translate to the NFL. It is common knowledge that Billy boy over in NE consulted with him last year to up-tempo the NE offense. Seems to have done alright? Tim-

Hmm.. There is no reason AT ALL to believe any of this nonesense. Tim-

Wrong. You're only ever committing one LB or a DB in whcih case the SS of FS makes the sight adjustment and assume cover responsiblities to the free TE. "little league"? Was that necessary? Tim-

Ok, so I've watched countless tape now on the "modern" day read option, and I have some observations on how to defend it. I don't have diagrams so I'll do my best to describe it. Qb read option is really simple. QB RB line up usually (almost 90% of the time) RB lines up weak side with a single DE. Ball is hiked, QB holds the ball looking at the DE, andif the DE moves to cut off the RB sweeping the line, the QB keeps the ball, and runs past the DE and usually into an open field for 10 or more yards. Teams have been trying to defend it by having the DE stand still using their hands to stay off the block from the tackle, but in a lot of the caes where successful the tackle runs the DE out of an effective position to tackle the QB, and the play usually goes for a big gain, especially with the likes of Wilson, CK, Newton etc.. What I am not seeing is the following site adjustment ebing made by teams, and I'm not sure why. In the above scenario, the QB rarely uses the read option to play action pass, so as DC you can mainly assume that the run is coming from either the QB or the RB. If the RB, losing your DE because he's staying home isn't a bad trade off as long as everyone else is making the same sight adjustments. If the Qb hands the ball off, the play is a run, and the LB's role is to fill those holes, however, may I suggest two reads depending on the way the offense lines up. 1. If the offense lines up with a slot reciever to the weak side, the slot DB rushes the QB and that's his only job. He essentially becomes a blitzing DB. The DE plays the run (As he would normally) and the weak side FS covers the slot receiver to the weak side. 2. If the offense lines up with a single WR to the weak side, the Defense needs man cover, and the FS joins the SS on the strong side. The SS acts as a LB filling gaps and attacking the offensive lines. The FS covers the immediate zone in pass coverage. The DE on the weak side still plays the run, and the OLB makes the sight adjustment and rushes the QB from the weak side. In my experience the read option is run to the weak side better than 80% of the time, so the above would be the way to defend it, however, it can sometimes be run to the strong side, in which case the only adjustment needed is for the FS to make the sight adjustment give himself up and rush the QB, making it man, or zone on the strong side in the event of a pass. Now, I'm no genius but you'd think that Wanny knows this, and that our guys "get the concept" of defending this play, so I ask, why are they not doing it? Why do they leave the DE on the island to have to make that choice in the heat of battle? Any sound DC needs to plan in the event that the DE will get fooled or out of position more often than not, and using the LB to attack the QB in a single WR look, or a DB to attack the QB in a double WR look against a team that effectively has 11 attackers on offense, is just sound defensive scheming. Thoughts? Tim-

Brady hit only one of his sideline passes past 20 yards all game if memory serves, but yeah he took what SF gave him for all those 5 - 7 yarders all day long and that's how they came back, IMO. I watched the game to, and it just struck me that Brady was getting tired in the arm. Tim-

Please no not Tebow, butg yes I agree a mobile QB that can throw with the threat of CJ as the option is just too damn enticing to me to build an offense on. Tim-

Exactly, and that's my point. The Read option IS tough to defend against, EVEN when you're ready for it. Add a Qb with these attributes, another WR, a TE, a tough gritty LB like Burfict, and another corner, and OL and these are our needs going into next year. Not necessarily in that order, but to think we could have had Wilson instead of Graham last year makes me sick to my stomach, even though Chan would have tried to turn him into a pocket passer anyway, it still makes me sick. Tim-

Ok, so seeing the success of this years, and Kapernick from last years crop of QB's, the read option is used by all of them with great success. But to me if we pick a Qb in this years draft we need to have a guy with a strong arm, and someone that can run like the wind. We already have CJ, and Fred (if we don't trade him for a draft pick) and to me a lot of teams really have trouble defending this style of offense. Fitz can't run it, but maybe TJackson can? So anyone we get has to have those attributes IMO. Wanny clearly didn't coach the defense on how to stop the read option against Seattle, but we stopped it last year with Tebow, but that's only because Tebow can't throw worth a damn so defenses don't have to worry about the pass. However, a QB that is mobile, with a strong running back, and can actually throw down field is a asset in this new NFL, IMO, and we should get with the program. Thoughts? Tim-

Wow, someone else noticed this too. I was watching the game by myself and all i could think of was that Brady looked weak in his arm. I think that there is some truth to this statement. So, begs the question, is the way to beat the Pats in stopping the run, cover btween the hash marks and let Brady beat you on the outside man on man? Me thinks so, Wanny are you listening? Tim-

Well we need to sign them both Levitre and the Byrd man... Get er done Tim-

I dunno, times have changed a lot since back then. Depends on rules of course and field, but I give the better CFL teams a slight advantage on their turf, and on American turf it wouldn't evev be close, IMO. Tim-

No God Damn way I want Dungy here? Are you kidding me? Have you ever watched SNF? He's a has been that coached amazing players, not to mention a sure fire HOF in Manning. I want someone that can turn someone into Manning, not coach Manning. Tim-

At least Harbaugh has some gonads as a head coach. He benches a winning QB ranked third in most stats for a second year player, and the team keeps winning. Granted they have a top tier Defense, but come on. Clearly, Smith and Harbaugh knock heads, and clearly Smith is NOT happy in San Fran. Can Smith win in Buffalo? Not sure, but at least he can throw the deep ball, and is accurate enough to hit recievers in stride. I say we offer them a straight up trade after the season ends since both of their contracts are about the same dollar-wise. thoughts? oh and yeah we still draft a QB in the first round, period! Tim-

Easy, the Colts do one thing on offense, they run, then throw deep, then run and then throw deep. Take away Wayne, and they're without their speedster Avery this week. Waybe is by far Lucks favorite receiver, and if he isn't doubled on every play Wanny needs his head examined. Rush 4 until it appears it no longer works. Keep a scout on Luck in the backfield. Essentially play them to run, and double Wayne and make Luck beat you with his other receivers. For the Bills offense. The Colts are suspect in the run defense both up the middle and on the outside. They are also prone to the screen which will come as a big plus for Chan's offense. Look for the usual from Chan and Fitz in this game as the Colts D does not matchup well with Chan's offense. That's the plan, now execute. Tim-