Winners and Losers...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rockdog1293000. Show Rockdog1293000's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    Yes and I don't mean to pick on you either. We should save the harsh words to Jets fans who predict super bowl victories and that guy who is negative about everything. Babe parilli?

    Ridley looked awesome, which is exciting. Hopefully Vereen's hammy gets better so we can see what he can do as well. I'd be thrilled if he was a home run threat. He looked teriffic catching the ball at camp. Obviously he needs to stay healthy to make any impact, so he'll have to convince the coaches he can stay on the field to do anything.

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Winners and Losers... : They opened as a 3-4. I wasn't picking on you for seeing Vereen, but Ridley actually played last night. Ridley also was in camp earlier than Vereen so he's way ahead of the guy who unfortunately pulled up lame. I am glad you liked what you saw. I am looking  forward to seeing him play too.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from fatsam72. Show fatsam72's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    "That's the only thing i don't like about Z. He's really condecending when he disagrees and he's never wrong."

    dude, that's priceless
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rockdog1293000. Show Rockdog1293000's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    Boom. Below is video of the first play.


    Here's the first play of the game. Nink, Guyton, and Fletcher are at LB. Cunningham, Richard, Love, and Moore have their hands down at DL. I'm sorry, that is a 4-3!!! 


     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rockdog1293000. Show Rockdog1293000's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    Here's a picture of the first play. I can't do any better than that. 4 guys with their hands on the ground, Nink rushing off the side, and 2 other LB behind them. That's not 3-4.



     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Winners and Losers... : First thanks for be condescending, it was most welcome. I know it must be hard to except but you weren't the only one who played football for any length of time. I know what they showed at the beginning of the game. But I saw Cunningham more times then not stood up off the line and off the T at the 7 position on the outside rush of the C gap. To me that signifies that he's in the OLB rushing position not the DE position. Nin and Moore with their hands down over the D gap were more DE's then Cunningham imo. But, as you pointed out being lined up at the 7 position can be a setup for the 43 DE or the 34 OLB. The difference for me was that the personal (Guyton and Fletcher. Guyton on the strong side) with Nin/Moore on the strong side leads me to believe Cunningham was playing out of the OLB slot with the Pats rushing 4-5 in a modified 34. On passing downs I saw Cunningham lined up as a DE but for the 1st quarter I saw him more as a OLB then a DE. But I only played for 4 yrs and not 6 so you must be completely right on this one
    Posted by PatsEng[/QUOTE]

    Please. Don't go down that road. You introduce every post meaning to explain how every set is really 34 by telling me and others they are confuesed.

    Essentially what you are saying is the Moore (268 lbs) is acting as a 3-4 end though playing in the spot where a 4-3 end would play, and Cunningham is just a linebacker with his hand in the dirt in the spot where the other 4-3 end plays?

    What everyone else saw, and BB was defending earlier this week, is that it is a rather vanilla 4-3 arrangment. And it is part of the 43 playbook that he has run here and elsewhere all along.

    What you are doing is describing a 4-3 alignment, and using terms that describe a 43 defense but you keep saying 'it tells you' it's a modified 34. It's becoming circular. One guy with his hand in the dirt over the 7 (a.k.a. D gap if there is a TE) and another with his hand down over the D-gap (a.k.a. 7 ) is 4-3. It's incredibly standard 4-3 as a matter of fact.

    If we drew this on a placemat here ... you would be drawing a 43.

    There are no tells in that alignment that make the 43 become a modified 34. None of those gap assignments change the fundamental plan.

    But just claiming people are playing other roles to make things 34 all the time is reducing the defense to the point of absurdity. I mean, what is nickel but 3-4 defense right? You just have one light linebacker and one linebacker with his hand in the dirt.


     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from sfpat. Show sfpat's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]Wait all these posts and no one mentioned Tom Brady as a loser last night?  With Hoyer and Mallet looking so good, Tom's days are numbered......I mean he hasnt won a super bowl since 2004!!! (Hopefully everyone will recognize this is a joke, except Rusty of course)
    Posted by Patsman3[/QUOTE]

    If Tate is a loser for not playing, why not Brady (and Wilfork, Mankins, Light et al)?
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from patthepatriot666. Show patthepatriot666's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    if W was the decider zbellino is the condescender
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rockdog1293000. Show Rockdog1293000's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    Well, Z was right. I thought he explained it rather well. I find it funny that some people go to such extreme lengths to justify the 3-4 alignment. It's just an alignment. 

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]if W was the decider zbellino is the condescender
    Posted by patthepatriot666[/QUOTE]
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]Here's a picture of the first play. I can't do any better than that. 4 guys with their hands on the ground, Nink rushing off the side, and 2 other LB behind them. That's not 3-4.
    Posted by Rockdog1293000[/QUOTE]

    Thanks RD. I love photos of plays. They just look cool.

    Often times, in these kind of disagreements, though, people are too invested and it won't make a difference.

    The defense and offense right there are incredibly vanilla. 31strong dog vs strong I pair is a natural combination.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rockdog1293000. Show Rockdog1293000's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    No problem. It's just football talk in August. They can change to a 3-4 week 1 for all I know but it's just silly to come up with a conspiracy theory as to how they ran a 3-4 yesterday. It's only August so things will change, but I see a lot of potential with Vince, Hayneworth, and Carter killing QB's even with last nights vanilla scheme.

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Winners and Losers... : Thanks RD. I love photos of plays. They just look cool. Often times, in these kind of disagreements, though, people are too invested and it won't make a difference. The defense and offense right there are incredibly vanilla. 31strong dog vs strong I pair is a natural combination.
    Posted by zbellino[/QUOTE]
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]if W was the decider zbellino is the condescender
    Posted by patthepatriot666[/QUOTE]

    PLease. Really. I am trying to explain something to someone. I didn't tell him he was confused, which he has done to me a couple of times in unsolicited comments in other threads.

    The part that is becoming frustrating about it is how night and day plain this is, yet the emotional investment in the Patriots' identity as a "34" team won't let people just sigh, relax and call a 43 a 43.
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rockdog1293000. Show Rockdog1293000's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    LOL! Alright Russ, 3-4 nickel it is. It's odd that they'd start off the first play of the game in nickel and not in their base D, but I guess these things happen.



    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Winners and Losers... : Looks like a 3-4 nickel to me, hands down or not.  Not to mention when they introduced the starting D it was a 3-4 front. How they lineup or what they show is irrelevant. A 4-3 has 4 DL and 3 MLBs across the middle.  That's 2 MLBs. Thanks for the photo but I am done with this.  Again, I blame Ty Warren. I just hope each team's offenses and coordinators are arguing more than we are when they look at the film. heh
    Posted by RidingWithTheKing[/QUOTE]
     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from geadie5025. Show geadie5025's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    Add Nink to the winners.  Fletcher was crashing gates all first half but it was Nink that sent him the business.  Guyton is the loser on any running play.  O line pitched a shutout

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]LOL! Alright Russ, 3-4 nickel it is. It's odd that they'd start off the first play of the game in nickel and not in their base D, but I guess these things happen. In Response to Re: Winners and Losers... :
    Posted by Rockdog1293000[/QUOTE]

    I know RD, this is mindbending.

    34 Nickel? On a running down. With two running backs. Where is the extra CB to make it nickel? Or is Cunningham both CB and OLB, but playing with his hand in the dirt?

    Middle linebackers can line up anywhere -- in situations where they are shifted right or left it's called strong or weak. It's a strong formation because they are rolled to the TE side. Courtesy of an article on Pete Carrol's 4-3 defense, slide 7 strong side run responsibility. Again ... this is vanilla football 101 stuff guys. Come on!


     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    Hey look I can post pic's too






    This is very similar to many formations they ran with Cunningham lined outside the T regardless of hand down or not and the other OLB lined up over/outside the TE. Many times they lined up with 5 men on the line not 4 with 2 men outside the T position. Take a look at Rock's picture then shift the 3 man front towards the strong side slightly and then take a look at this 34 setup. Oddly familiar looking isn't it?

    Considering we saw Arrington lined up at DE a couple times last year would it shock you to see Moore lined up as a DE Z? I mean really you would question a guy at 263lb lined up as a 34 DE yet you don't remember BB lining up a CB! as a 34 DE last year.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rockdog1293000. Show Rockdog1293000's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    Cmon patseng, let's end it.

    They lined up Arrington at OLB a few times last year on obvious passing situations. When you watch the play Moore isn't two gapping. But whatever, no matter how obvious a vanilla 4-3 it is I'll concede it's some topical 3-4 to match whatever argument you or Russ will cook up. To others like Tedy Bruschi, it'll be a 4-3 with Moore playing end and Nink playing the strong side over the TE. That way we both win. 

    Go pats.

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]Hey look I can post pic's too This is very similar to many formations they ran with Cunningham lined outside the T regardless of hand down or not and the other OLB lined up over/outside the TE. Many times they lined up with 5 men on the line not 4 with 2 men outside the T position. Take a look at Rock's picture then shift the 3 man front towards the strong side slightly and then take a look at this 34 setup. Oddly familiar looking isn't it? Considering we saw Arrington lined up at DE a couple times last year would it shock you to see Moore lined up as a DE Z? I mean really you would question a guy at 263lb lined up as a 34 DE yet you don't remember BB lining up a CB! as a 34 DE last year.
    Posted by PatsEng[/QUOTE]
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from James-B. Show James-B's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    Agree whole heartedly with all of the above. 

    In my opinion, the Special Plate of the Day goes to Fletcher...all over the place, and you can tell he was playing with all his heart, as well. I think they had him in on some special teams play, and on one, he really made a great tackle.

    Agree with the poster who said Butler didn't appear as too be playing all out, agree with that, he appeared to jsut going through the motions; Merriweather still hasn't gotten the angle of attack & tackling down yet;

    Finally, I've never been a Wilhite fan, constantly being beat; on most plays you just see the #24 his back as he's chasing down the guy that beat him; I thought he had been cut already, guess not, but doubt he will be around very long, and I think Butler will be right behind him

    Overall, a great performance by the team last night, imagine what the 1st team will be like come opening day, can't wait!
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from AFL_Pat. Show AFL_Pat's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    Z,
          I'd like to thank you for all of your contributions to this blog. You are the
    person I always read first.  Please keep up the good work.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]Cmon patseng, let's end it. They lined up Arrington at OLB a few times last year on obvious passing situations. When you watch the play Moore isn't two gapping. But whatever, no matter how obvious a vanilla 4-3 it is I'll concede it's some topical 3-4 to match whatever argument you or Russ will cook up. To others like Tedy Bruschi, it'll be a 4-3 with Moore playing end and Nink playing the strong side over the TE. That way we both win.  Go pats. In Response to Re: Winners and Losers... :
    Posted by Rockdog1293000[/QUOTE]

    Wait so Arrington played over the T (closer then where Cunningham was lined up) yet you say he was a OLB not a DE?

    http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/new-england-patriots-bill-belichick-defense-has-become-liability-051111

    "Belichick actually used cornerback Kyle Arrington at defensive end a little bit last season"

    He lined up as a DE over the T on most of his rushes where the typical 34 DE lines up. How can you possibly claim Cunningham as a DE lined up outside the T and say Arrington lined up as a OLB (with hand down since you like to point to that as being considered a lineman or not) over the T?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    I think the point some people are trying to make is that some people said no way are they playing the 43 this year, Bill Belichick would never!!! And what do they do? Go out and get a bunch of 43 players. Not sign or draft 34 players (the imortall Roth). Cut some guys that have played 43 (and well) here for years. Then to top it all off the... line up with 4 guys up front, with their hands in the dirt...going forward, not sideways, backwards...but forward at high rates of speed. Then the even stranger thing is they had 3 guys standing up behind them, that looked alarmingly like linebackers...just running all around crazy like.

    Now people can cover this all up by saying...well they're not going to be playing 43 all the time, but yeah they will be playing it. Just because it looks like a 43 historically looks doesn't mean it's a 43. The way the tackles played over C and D...is clearly not the same as B and A, so you know it's gotta be a modified 34 that looks a whole lot like 43 - it's just that Bill is so wild that he's developing the 34343 -43. On and on and on. Hell, they could put a punter, Merriweather, and a roll of tape out there and some would still say it's a superbly modified ancient (pre Jesus Christ) version of the 34.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rockdog1293000. Show Rockdog1293000's posts

    Re: Winners and Losers...

    Well, you got me there. Based on that technicality referencing a few plays last year (which wasn't their base, as Arrington was a starter at CB most of the year) they are still playing a 3-4, even though everyone else acknowledges it's a 4-3. Have a great weekend. 

    I like that roll of tape theory too mthurl. Clearly, if you see the roll of tape it's a 3-4 bc Belichick would never play that roll of tape out of position in a 4-3. It's science.

    In Response to Re: Winners and Losers...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Winners and Losers... : Wait so Arrington played over the T (closer then where Cunningham was lined up) yet you say he was a OLB not a DE? http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/new-england-patriots-bill-belichick-defense-has-become-liability-051111 " Belichick actually used cornerback Kyle Arrington at defensive end a little bit last season " He lined up as a DE over the T on most of his rushes where the typical 34 DE lines up. How can you possibly claim Cunningham as a DE lined up outside the T and say Arrington lined up as a OLB (with hand down since you like to point to that as being considered a lineman or not) over the T?
    Posted by PatsEng[/QUOTE]
     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share