That's 2 games in a row they really didn't do a fucking thing. Carr had all fucking night to throw. Guys are dropping shoulders and not wrapping up. YAC is killing us. Receivers are running wide open.
I will give them some credit in that I thought they stopped the run fairly well against the Raiders.
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
It may have been a gameplan specific thing. Sorenson, despite being abused by Waller, may simply be better in man coverage (against TE's) and run support. They did try Thornhill in there i wanna say, mid 3rd or so after it was evident Sorenson wasn't up the task.
Thornhill got beat so bad off the line by Waller that i realized why Sorenson was in there in the 1st place.
when it was clear that they were going to abuse Sorensen I would've just put Gay on him and bracket him with either a nickel corner or HB. Gay is faster and in a simple man coverage could make use of his athleticism without having to think about scheme. Quarters coverage, man underneath and if Agholor beats you so be it.
I like Spags, and I'm not pretending to know more than he does about football, but I don't understand why there was no adjustment made there. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
I think we may just be over complicating it.
We don't have anyone to match up against an elite TE. That problem is exasperated when you also have an A o-line and a running game, and receivers with enough speed to require your safeties to play in deeper coverage.
But you know who else has that? The Bucs.
The Bucs do not have an OL even remotely close to as good as the Raiders. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
when it was clear that they were going to abuse Sorensen I would've just put Gay on him and bracket him with either a nickel corner or HB. Gay is faster and in a simple man coverage could make use of his athleticism without having to think about scheme. Quarters coverage, man underneath and if Agholor beats you so be it.
I like Spags, and I'm not pretending to know more than he does about football, but I don't understand why there was no adjustment made there.
Gay really struggled in pass coverage last night. Not sure that wouldn't have been an even worse disaster. [Reply]
Originally Posted by OKchiefs:
And we're obviously not smart enough to get Sorensen and Niemann out of the lineup. What is it with this team and shitty white players with an endless leash?
Those guys are better against run heavy teams, which I would say the Raiders fall into that category. Gay wasn't any good either in this game, and I'd have to go back and watch the tape but it was definitely one of Honey Badger's worst games this year. I saw Thornhill struggle on at least a handful of plays, too. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
They have a better QB, better receivers and an OL that's good enough.
They'll pose similar problems for our defense is my point.
Different kind of offense...Tampa is gonna push down the field much more than the Raiders who attack the LB area. Also the Raiders have more speed on the edge the Bucs have more size.
I also doubt Brady will play as well as Carr did. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
Different kind of offense...Tampa is gonna push down the field much more than the Raiders who attack the LB area. Also the Raiders have more speed on the edge the Bucs have more size.
I also doubt Brady will play as well as Carr did.
I hate giving Carr credit but he was fantastic last night, saw the field really well and was hitting 3rd, 4th options regularly. If Agholor catches that long pass on 3rd down its a different ball game, even Moreau had a big drop late. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Shoes:
I hate giving Carr credit but he was fantastic last night, saw the field really well and was hitting 3rd, 4th options regularly. If Agholor catches that long pass on 3rd down its a different ball game, even Moreau had a big drop late.
The FB had two drops late in the game that would have moved the chains. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
They’re a completely different matchup because their OL is a weakness not a strength, which is my point.
Clinics might someday show snippets of Sunday’s victory against the Raiders in Las Vegas as examples of a clean pocket. Brady appeared to be touched only once in that 45-20 romp, when he finished 33-for-45 for 369 yards, four touchdowns and no interceptions. Additionally, the offense’s only false-start infraction was whistled against Brady himself. https://www.tampabay.com/sports/bucs...-brady-scolds/ [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic: Clinics might someday show snippets of Sunday’s victory against the Raiders in Las Vegas as examples of a clean pocket. Brady appeared to be touched only once in that 45-20 romp, when he finished 33-for-45 for 369 yards, four touchdowns and no interceptions. Additionally, the offense’s only false-start infraction was whistled against Brady himself. https://www.tampabay.com/sports/bucs...-brady-scolds/
Umm that was one game and the Raiders don’t have a very good pass rush outside of one guy. How’s they do against the Saints? [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
Umm that was one game and the Raiders don’t have a very good pass rush outside of one guy. How’s they do against the Saints?
Right, which is one team that they struggled with. You can hope that we are just like NO but we aren't.
Their Oline can play well and if we play D like we did last night it's going to get ugly fast.
Speaking of New Orleans, they were playing PLAYOFF level football against Tampa and it spooked them. Sure, if KC shows up like it's January we can do great too. Right now we have a bunch of work to do to get there. [Reply]