Indy Dave Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 Mike Williams with a #4. Denney (in a trade-up). Josh Reed. No blocking. No first round draft pick. Missed the opportunity to trade Travis Gump. TD sucks, and should be fired tonight. 54890[/snapback] Missed the opportunity to trade Travis Henry? OK Bill....everyone gets it. You don't like Travis Henry. Travis could go for 215 yards and four touchdowns and you'd B word about him. Willis can't even get on the field. Maybe that should tell you something: HE'S NOT READY. Barring a setback, he'll be ready by the start of the 2005 season. Therefore, you don't trade Travis Henry. He's too good of a player at way too good of a price. He had 98 yards today. If he gets 98 yards every week, his trade value, should TD decide that's what he wants to do, will be very high. B word about someone else besides Travis. There's plenty of people worthy of your criticism, and much more deserving on top of that.
Coach Tuesday Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 Actually I thought MW played extremely well today, and I've been ripping him here lately. I saw him gobble people up on a bunch of running plays, a few times dominating Seymore (who is one of the best DLs in the game). I don't know who's fault it was on that 4th down play, but Mularkey did say it was "one of the offensive linemen" who blew an assignment on that play... hmmm....
Kultarr Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 It was williams who failed to block down on the 4th down play that ended in a bledsoe sack and fumble return for a Pats TD. I watched the replay several times. Williams blocked the man over him, doubling with the TE, instead of blocking down and filling in for the guard who pulled. It was his blown assignment. Too many mistakes....and it happens every week. Bills were in the game, but...... 54888[/snapback] I noticed Williams helping block or getting help on blocks with other defenders running right by him countless times today. Harrison blitzed untouched through the right side of the line what seemed like 100 times in a row. I don't know whether it was all Fat Mike or the other idiots on the line, but it was simply pathetic.
Larry Playfair Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 MW was NOT supposed to fill the hole for CV. It was a designed fake play. They had been setting it up all day, by running the same Siscors running play (trap play). Only this time, Drew was to fake it to Travis who was supposed to get gobbled up by Bruski (the man you say MW missed) while Drew ran a bootleg around the left end for the 3 yards. Only Travis took a mis-step and knocked the ball out of Drews hands which allowed Bruski to read it. 54904[/snapback] Let me get this straight. You think the play was designed to leave a LB, who is directly over the guard, unblocked, while Williams and the TE double the DE, and Bledsoe runs for the first? If so, that is the most retarded play ever called. 1) Bledsoe could not run for a first to save his life 2) Henry ran directly left, so how could the LB gobble him up 3) If so, we would not need to double the DE b/c the TE had a perfect angle to block down on him 4) all Williams had to do was step down and jack the LB once to stop his rush into the backfield 5) if your description of the play was the way it was supposed to happen to get us a first im going to jump off a bridge
34-78-83 Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 I noticed Williams helping block or getting help on blocks with other defenders running right by him countless times today. Harrison blitzed untouched through the right side of the line what seemed like 100 times in a row. I don't know whether it was all Fat Mike or the other idiots on the line, but it was simply pathetic. 54934[/snapback] Those defenders actually came inside of MW.
34-78-83 Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 MW was NOT supposed to fill the hole for CV. It was a designed fake play. They had been setting it up all day, by running the same Siscors running play (trap play). Only this time, Drew was to fake it to Travis who was supposed to get gobbled up by Bruski (the man you say MW missed) while Drew ran a bootleg around the left end for the 3 yards. Only Travis took a mis-step and knocked the ball out of Drews hands which allowed Bruski to read it. 54904[/snapback] That is exactly right. MW today = good to very good game. Other notes on the O-line: -Jennings is good Ouch did we need him in there late in the 4th or what? -Tucker did an ok job filling in at Center.
CosmicBills Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 Let me get this straight. You think the play was designed to leave a LB, who is directly over the guard, unblocked, while Williams and the TE double the DE, and Bledsoe runs for the first? If so, that is the most retarded play ever called. 1) Bledsoe could not run for a first to save his life 2) Henry ran directly left, so how could the LB gobble him up 3) If so, we would not need to double the DE b/c the TE had a perfect angle to block down on him 4) all Williams had to do was step down and jack the LB once to stop his rush into the backfield 5) if your description of the play was the way it was supposed to happen to get us a first im going to jump off a bridge 54941[/snapback] That's what I am saying. I am not basing this on my own interpretation of the play, it is what MM said in the post game press conference. If you watched the game closely, you would have seen that they had been tearing the Pat's up with that Siscor's running play, (pulling the guard, Travis takes a counter step and hits inside if Bruski bites, or outside if Bruski sits back) and every time Bledsoe had been running a bootleg left (without the ball) and everytime no one paid attention to him. So in MM mind he had set up that play to get three yards. Do I agree with the call? Not really. But the logic is sound and had Travis not bumped Bledsoe, it may have worked because everyone bit on the fake.
Larry Playfair Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 That's what I am saying. I am not basing this on my own interpretation of the play, it is what MM said in the post game press conference. If you watched the game closely, you would have seen that they had been tearing the Pat's up with that Siscor's running play, (pulling the guard, Travis takes a counter step and hits inside if Bruski bites, or outside if Bruski sits back) and every time Bledsoe had been running a bootleg left (without the ball) and everytime no one paid attention to him. So in MM mind he had set up that play to get three yards. Do I agree with the call? Not really. But the logic is sound and had Travis not bumped Bledsoe, it may have worked because everyone bit on the fake. 54955[/snapback] Wow. I'm depressed that was the best play we had. From the replay, the play doesnt look like it had a chance as Brushi was in there in a second.
34-78-83 Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 Wow. I'm depressed that was the best play we had. From the replay, the play doesnt look like it had a chance as Brushi was in there in a second. 54970[/snapback] I can see how it would look that way too. Although if TH would have run the right way (as in faking the scissors play off RG that worked all day) that would have been the focus of the LB.
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 But he has done a helluva lot of good. 54870[/snapback] 17 wins 34 losses......get yourself some more of that DonaHO country time purple kool-aid.
BB2004 Posted October 4, 2004 Posted October 4, 2004 Move him to left tackle or move him inside. There is no reason to get rid of him with the big contract.
Recommended Posts