Board index » Stillers Talk » Forced into success
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
- lloydrules
- Grizzled Veteran
- Posts: 348
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:30 pm
Forced into success
I can't help feeling that had we had our full compliment of players (FWP and Simmons) we would have lost this game. With the Rooneys being unrelenting in their support of Shittons and with the team's inability to grasp when rushing up the middle too much is wasting plays and causes too many punts, their hand was forced into a better game plan.
The offense was far more effective without wasting so many rushes up in the middle. They were like a real offense, against a very good defense. In other words, it wasn't like pulling teeth to move the ball.
And when they had to march down the field for the winning TD, they could do it.
We are blessed that Simmons is out the rest of the year. But watch, when he comes back next season he wins the starting position without earning it.
I heard fans from MN say that they thought Moore should have received far more playing time, even with Peterson there.
The guy was effective.
What a great win.
Defense came to play.
As beat up as this team, they showed a great effort.
The offense was far more effective without wasting so many rushes up in the middle. They were like a real offense, against a very good defense. In other words, it wasn't like pulling teeth to move the ball.
And when they had to march down the field for the winning TD, they could do it.
We are blessed that Simmons is out the rest of the year. But watch, when he comes back next season he wins the starting position without earning it.
I heard fans from MN say that they thought Moore should have received far more playing time, even with Peterson there.
The guy was effective.
What a great win.
Defense came to play.
As beat up as this team, they showed a great effort.
Re: Forced into success
Well, Chester Taylor was the backup to Peterson. Moore was the third string. But if they meant that he should be in more (Moore?) to utilize his pass catching ability then I would agree. He is definitely a different back than we have had in a while. He's not the bruiser or the speedster, he is a pass catching scatback (Davenport?). Hopefully he can help open up our playbook and maybe even pass some of those skills over to Mendenhall and the other young backs. Hopefully this will add another dimension that we haven't had in as long as I can remember.
- lloydrules
- Grizzled Veteran
- Posts: 348
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:30 pm
Re: Forced into success
GCCSteel wrote:Well, Chester Taylor was the backup to Peterson. Moore was the third string. But if they meant that he should be in more (Moore?) to utilize his pass catching ability then I would agree. He is definitely a different back than we have had in a while. He's not the bruiser or the speedster, he is a pass catching scatback (Davenport?). Hopefully he can help open up our playbook and maybe even pass some of those skills over to Mendenhall and the other young backs. Hopefully this will add another dimension that we haven't had in as long as I can remember.
I don't know if we win unless FORCED to play the guy. Jax knows how to stop Parker. Certainly have no problem with Dookie. Had Pgh showed up with the "We are going to run FWP all night" it would have ended up leading to putting Ben in 3rd and 8 and obvious passing downs. I fucking can't stand when they just stick to basically no creativity and mindlessly rushing FWP. It is so shit-fer-brains.
I firmly believe having a FWP on hand would have led to a loss. Do I think that means FWP sucks? No. It means I think when they have him available that their play calling turns into wet shit.
There is clear evidence that this is true.
3 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests