Realist Posted October 13, 2004 Posted October 13, 2004 This guy has just admitted a "can't do" philosophy. I really hate "can't do" philosophies. This coach has officially got on my nerves and made me angry. What I saw in the forth quarter on Sunday verses the Jets was a team that had the capacity to put up quick scores (like Indy)...throw deep (like Indy)...a tailback that can make backbreaking plays (like Indy). Marv Levy would never tell players what they couldn't do. It's the "I know more about this stuff than you do" condescending crap that we've dealt with for the past 3 years. Now we have to hear it from this rookie HC moron? What ever happened to shutting your trap about what your "philosophy" was going to be anyways? Why give your upcoming opponents the heads up? Hey Dolphins, we are sticking with the three yards and trip on your toes game plan in case you were wondering. Jerk. Malarkey's press conference comments: "When you say opening up the offense I'm not sure what open up (means). Are we going to be Indianapolis? No. I can tell you no," said Mularkey, who has initiated some no-huddle to change the pace and some gadget plays but without much success. "Throw it a little more, maybe deeper? We tried that (vs. the Jets) and we got sacked. We're going to keep doing what we can to protect (Drew) and take some shots when the shots are there. But I don't think we're going to change our whole offensive philosophy because when we've done it right, it's worked. It's something we believe in as a staff and I know this team does because you would know when there was doubt and there's not." 67520[/snapback] What he says in a press conference means absolutely nothing. He will never give away a gameplan in a PC. He's just saying the usual drivel. I wouldn't get my panties in a wad over what anyone says in a PC whether its MM or TD or anyone else at OBD.
zow2 Posted October 13, 2004 Posted October 13, 2004 And therein lies the rub. My opinion is that a good QB makes the OL and team look better. here we have to 'max protect', 'give him the weapons', 'give him time to sit and throw', 'get may recievers that can get open' etc. Planning for this takes away a lot of flexibility the O coaches need. We are babying him and really trying to make him look good. Who cares ? I would rather have an above-average QB that can cope with some of the lines faults and make everything look better.{dare I say this ?} That was where Flutie was good - he could do things even with a weak arm that compensated for the faults of the O-Line. That is where Favre is a God - he cannons the ball between defenders even if the receiver is not 'open'. So sometimes he gets intercepted but most of the time he makes the receivers look good. 67985[/snapback] Hey, as long as you brought up the little guy, If the 5'9" Flutie were given the same opportunities to play this many seasons (as a starter) as the 6'5" Bledsoe...I think we can all agree that Flutie would have equal or better numbers when all is taken into consideration. And the funny thing is that years from now, Flutie will be considered a "gimmick" in the NFL while Bledsoe will go down as one of the better QB's. It all boils down to opportunity. No one ever committed to Flutie. Flutie Games 85 Comp 1159 Att 2119 Pct 54.7 Yds 14,487 TD 85 INT 68 Sacks 105 rating 76.2 Games 85 rushes 330 yds 1610 avg. 4.9 rush td 9 Bledsoe Games 160 Comp 3257 Att 5708 Pct 57.1 Yds 37,671 TD 206 INT 168 Sacks 384 rating 76.9 Games 160 rushes 326 yds 650 avg. 2.0 rush td 6
silvermike Posted October 13, 2004 Posted October 13, 2004 What's amazing is that Flutie and Bledsoe have the same number of rushes. Half the games for Flutie, but who would think he only runs twice as often?
Fan in Chicago Posted October 13, 2004 Posted October 13, 2004 What's amazing is that Flutie and Bledsoe have the same number of rushes. Half the games for Flutie, but who would think he only runs twice as often? 68118[/snapback] Just to dwell on the little guy a bit longer - it is not about rushes only but also about scrambling and stepping away from pressure. But I agree - the stat by itself is surprising. My point again is that - if we have a crown jewel OL, receiver, RB and general supporting cast, we don't need a QB with a powerful arm. Just about any above-average QB will do. In the absence of one or many of the crown jewels, you are better off with a scrambling and pressure sensing QB. Am I stating something that is way too obvious to be mentioned ?
Recommended Posts