• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

A few questions?

mthoopsfan said:
What’s your take on what’s happening with qb reps?
Click to expand...
I don't know honestly.

I think the coaches like AY much more than some posters on here. As such, I don't think they gave him reps during the past couple of "easy games."

I think he will play substantially in every game when he is healthy...

I like AY and I think the team positively responds to him far more than many posters.
 
SoldierGriz said:
I don't know honestly.

I think the coaches like AY much more than some posters on here. As such, I don't think they gave him reps during the past couple of "easy games."

I think he will play substantially in every game when he is healthy...

I like AY and I think the team positively responds to him far more than many posters.
Click to expand...
Your 2d and 3d paras are correct, I believe. Thx.
 
SoldierGriz said:
I don't know honestly.

I think the coaches like AY much more than some posters on here. As such, I don't think they gave him reps during the past couple of "easy games."

I think he will play substantially in every game when he is healthy...

I like AY and I think the team positively responds to him far more than many posters.
Click to expand...
I expect to see a big dose of Fife this weekend. We'll need him.
 
I think we are lucky to have both guys versus the past. Those years with LJ or Humphrey where they got hurt at or near the end of the season really sucked.

I think KAY could have some success in the running game, but I think we have enough speedy weapons to work the edge pretty well without having to beat up either QB.
 
garizzalies said:
What would the penalty be?
Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but not sure that’s how it works. Pretty sure it’s either targeting and ejection or they pick up the flag. Can’t be just a penalty. Kinda like how someone is either pregnant or not
Click to expand...
You didn’t include the important context of my post that was one line above what you quoted.

I’m saying the problem is the rule, not the penalty call. I even said it was a legit call by the rules we have. I really don’t understand how you could misconstrue such a simple statement.
 
SoldierGriz said:
I don't know honestly.

I think the coaches like AY much more than some posters on here. As such, I don't think they gave him reps during the past couple of "easy games."

I think he will play substantially in every game when he is healthy...

I like AY and I think the team positively responds to him far more than many posters.
Click to expand...
If AY plays more than Fife on Saturday night. We lose by multiple TDs.
 
kemajic said:
Agree - why we'll need to out-score them. Their pass defense is very suspect.
Click to expand...
Agree, what I've seen I believe our defense is better than their defense now, our O weapons against their weakness on defense seems better than USD's O against our D. As always matchups matchups who wins them. I just believe our D will do better against their Offense than the other way around.
 
PTGrizzly said:
You didn’t include the important context of my post that was one line above what you quoted.

I’m saying the problem is the rule, not the penalty call. I even said it was a legit call by the rules we have. I really don’t understand how you could misconstrue such a simple statement.
Click to expand...
Mmkay, so what penalty would you have called?
 
garizzalies said:
Mmkay, so what penalty would you have called?
Click to expand...
Well, in this wildly thought out hypothetical, it would be called targeting with a 15 yard penalty rather than ejection. An ejectable targeting would only be for what appears to be severe, intentional hits to the head.

In an ideal world we’d see offensive players get called for targeting too, but with the reffing we have, that’s pretty unrealistic.
 
There should have been no penalty. The qb was then in running position not passing, so not defenseless. The hit was a good hit. The helmets barely touched. It was a great play and nice tackle. Crappy officiating. These officials, or some of them, were awful.
 
SoldierGriz said:
I don't know honestly.

I think the coaches like AY much more than some posters on here. As such, I don't think they gave him reps during the past couple of "easy games."

I think he will play substantially in every game when he is healthy...

I like AY and I think the team positively responds to him far more than many posters.
Click to expand...
Fife definitely throws a more consistent deep ball which AY can fix with reps. But AY has the big advantage of being faster, more agile (his backdoor escape), and goes through his progressions faster. Fife takes wayyy too much time in the pocket to make a decision. He can run but doesn't have the quick cuts. AY is dangerous with the QB draw and the RPOs they call for him. I'm glad we have BOTH on our team because they are two very good QBs. Honestly, when is the last time we can say we have two QBs who can manage the game?
 
mthoopsfan said:
There should have been no penalty. The qb was then in running position not passing, so not defenseless. The hit was a good hit. The helmets barely touched. It was a great play and nice tackle. Crappy officiating. These officials, or some of them, were awful.
Click to expand...
“the helmets barely touched”

Head to head contact is almost always going to be called targeting on the defensive player.
 
PTGrizzly said:
I did think that, but not the scenario I’m talking about. He was an offensive player tackling.

How often do you see a running back lower his head to create contact and get called for targeting? Almost never.
Click to expand...
It is a stupid double standard of the rules. Why does the offensive player get to do that and the defender can't? I get trucking someone with a shoulder and knocking them down, I'm all for that but helmet to helmet contact initiated by a RB should be targeting. Case Cookus is the only exception and he didn't even have the ball.
 
PTGrizzly said:
Well, in this wildly thought out hypothetical, it would be called targeting with a 15 yard penalty rather than ejection. An ejectable targeting would only be for what appears to be severe, intentional hits to the head.

In an ideal world we’d see offensive players get called for targeting too, but with the reffing we have, that’s pretty unrealistic.
Click to expand...
Yep, that’s what I figured. I don’t think you understand the basis of the rule. It was specifically designed to avoid the subjectivity you are suggesting.
 
PTGrizzly said:
I did think that, but not the scenario I’m talking about. He was an offensive player tackling.

How often do you see a running back lower his head to create contact and get called for targeting? Almost never.
Click to expand...
No, he was blocking.
Again, not sure you understand the rule. It does not include ball carriers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top