Thailog80 Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 Why ? Tell me it wasn't by design.I would've bet my last buck that NC would be all over Clayton. We also played off the WR's quite a bit again. I guess Im trying to sit back and digest/understand what went wrong yesterday. Where were our DE's? I know there will be growing pains but these guys were flat yesterday.
nick in* england Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 Why ? Tell me it wasn't by design.I would've bet my last buck that NC would be all over Clayton. We also played off the WR's quite a bit again. I guess Im trying to sit back and digest/understand what went wrong yesterday. Where were our DE's? I know there will be growing pains but these guys were flat yesterday. 446213[/snapback] Well we don't normally rotate our coverage too much. Remember last week NC was switching sides? That's a new things for us. Maybe Gray felt like we needed to show a different look this week... Also - we only gave up 130 odd yars in the air - which is not bad at all. Yeah we needed more pressure from the front 4, but with the Bucs running the ball so well the DEs would be kind of flat footed looking to cover up the run... Don;t forget too - the WCO hits those underneath routes fast, so the DL doesn't have much time to get to the QB...
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 But why, on the first touchdown, double coverage on Hilliard and nobody on Clayton? That was damn fool defense if I've ever seen it.
Ghost of BiB Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 But why, on the first touchdown, double coverage on Hilliard and nobody on Clayton? That was damn fool defense if I've ever seen it. 446232[/snapback] Yeah, that standing there waving thing was nice.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted September 19, 2005 Posted September 19, 2005 Yeah, that standing there waving thing was nice. 446239[/snapback] Takeo was WAY out of position on one of the TD passes. By WAY i mean about 15 yards.
Recommended Posts