|
Post by CS on Sept 22, 2024 6:19:29 GMT -6
He’s speaking in general terms. I’ve been at schools that could run multiple coverages and some that really couldn’t. It’s all relative to the situation so no I don’t necessarily agree with him. I would actually rather be extremely good at my base and pretty good at my change ups. Not pretty good at everything. I think yours is a reasonable approach, and if pressed, I think he'd probably agree with your position (don't want to speak for him of course; if I remember right I think he said something similar to what you argued for at a different time, i.e. being really good at base and ok at changeups, so that may be underlying what he said on the first thing I was talking about). Your point may be based on a misunderstanding/misrepresentation of what I was saying? My stance was if you are getting torched by a good QB because you are running a lot of Cover 1 and Cover 0, play safer coverage, and make them earn their way down the field, that way you aren't making it easy for them, you are making them earn it and testing their patience. Also notice where I said if you do that and then they STILL gash you, THEN you tip your cap because they are the better team. It happens. I never said it would solve the problem or was a silver bullet? I also argued for sims which again aren't a silver bullet either, but it's a way to still get pressure, force them to throw hot and take yardage in small chunks instead of accessing downfield throws and still have decent coverage behind it. Ok, let's split them up then, flexbone and any other offenses you think present similar issues to the defense, and then "traditional caveman" football (kind of an oxymoron I know, but here we are). What base coverage would you want to live in vs flexbone and similar? And, why do you think spot drop 3 is problematic vs flexbone and similar (I would imagine you've had that discussion on here before haha, so if you know a specific thread to direct me to, shoot me the link and I will check it out)? What base coverage would you want to live in vs non-flexbone and similar? Just do me questions. This thread has already gotten off the rails enough
|
|
|
Post by tripsclosed on Sept 22, 2024 9:47:14 GMT -6
I think yours is a reasonable approach, and if pressed, I think he'd probably agree with your position (don't want to speak for him of course; if I remember right I think he said something similar to what you argued for at a different time, i.e. being really good at base and ok at changeups, so that may be underlying what he said on the first thing I was talking about). Your point may be based on a misunderstanding/misrepresentation of what I was saying? My stance was if you are getting torched by a good QB because you are running a lot of Cover 1 and Cover 0, play safer coverage, and make them earn their way down the field, that way you aren't making it easy for them, you are making them earn it and testing their patience. Also notice where I said if you do that and then they STILL gash you, THEN you tip your cap because they are the better team. It happens. I never said it would solve the problem or was a silver bullet? I also argued for sims which again aren't a silver bullet either, but it's a way to still get pressure, force them to throw hot and take yardage in small chunks instead of accessing downfield throws and still have decent coverage behind it. Ok, let's split them up then, flexbone and any other offenses you think present similar issues to the defense, and then "traditional caveman" football (kind of an oxymoron I know, but here we are). What base coverage would you want to live in vs flexbone and similar? And, why do you think spot drop 3 is problematic vs flexbone and similar (I would imagine you've had that discussion on here before haha, so if you know a specific thread to direct me to, shoot me the link and I will check it out)? What base coverage would you want to live in vs non-flexbone and similar? Just do me questions. This thread has already gotten off the rails enough It's not really off the rails though, every single bit of my last post was still relevant to what I wrote about when I created this thread. But ok. Edit: Mind you all of what I wrote about in my last post was in response to stuff YOU wrote in this thread. And also, this is my thread, that I started, so I was fine with the discussion we were having. I think you'd have a similar mindset if this was your thread you had started. Saying it went off the rails when it in fact had not is crazy, why would you say that? Kinda funny you write that after I demonstrated pretty clearly that your "point" was based on a misunderstanding/misrepresentation of what I was saying...Sweeping under the rug much?
|
|
|
Post by CS on Sept 22, 2024 11:20:55 GMT -6
Just do me questions. This thread has already gotten off the rails enough It's not really off the rails though, every single bit of my last post was still relevant to what I wrote about when I created this thread. But ok. Edit: Mind you all of what I wrote about in my last post was in response to stuff YOU wrote in this thread. And also, this is my thread, that I started, so I was fine with the discussion we were having. I think you'd have a similar mindset if this was your thread you had started. Saying it went off the rails when it in fact had not is crazy, why would you say that? Kinda funny you write that after I demonstrated pretty clearly that your "point" was based on a misunderstanding/misrepresentation of what I was saying...Sweeping under the rug much? Wow. Not really sweeping anything. I still feel the way I feel. I was actually referring to discussing the caveman offense stuff which is more scheme related than best practice which is what I thought this thread was about. And my phone changed where I said DM me the questions you wanted me to answer As far as me misunderstanding you’re right I had glossed over the part where you said “tip your cap” to the other team. I just don’t feel it’s good as a profession to disparage another for not doing what you think is “better.” Especially if you don’t know the circumstances
|
|