- This topic has 10 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
I thought Schott was solid. I think a lot of things put on him were context and execution and personnel issues. For example, in Tavon’s case, I thought Tavon was the main issue.
But IMO it’s now simply not a “winnable” debate on either side. (Not saying anyone was losing sleep over it.)
I think the offense WILL improve. I think guys like Tavon can step up in year 3 and do more. Not sure I EXPECT that but it is genuinely possible. Plus as wv points out, chances are Foles will SEE Tavon on those fly routes he runs sometimes. Speaking of which, Foles can clearly play better than Hill or Davis. The OL, with new additions, could make it through the season without a major injury storm and remain relatively healthy. The defense could make fewer game-costing, soul-killing mistakes, and so put the offense in a better position to win.
If all that happens, I will say that’s execution and personnel; some will say it’s Cigz v. Schott. Yet of course no one (under the circumstances I describe here) could prove they are “right.”
But then if they are winning, I doubt anyone will care if they are “right” about this or not.
Which is why I said this was a minor issue. Just a funny thing about discussion and posting over things that were at one point hot issues…sometimes, a debate can never be resolved. Not even time will tell. BTW I expect Cigz will be good. I would be surprised if he wasn’t. I have nothing to back that up with. It’s just a hunch.
…
I thought that the first half of his rookie year he appeared to have tired legs. imo
Last year he seemed to have ?some minor nagging injury. Anyway most of his first two years he did not seem to have the elite quickness that he displayed in college. imo
I think he had a lot to learn. Bailey certainly caught on quicker. imo
I liked shotty, mostly in the Red Zone. But, I was not always a fan of some of his play designs. Too often, they seemed to rely on fooling the opposition, is the best way I can put it.
AgamemnonI liked shotty, mostly in the Red Zone. But, I was not always a fan of some of his play designs. Too often, they seemed to rely on fooling the opposition, is the best way I can put it.
It’s true that he relied a lot on misdirection and deception. That to me was part of the whole “he’s predictable” thing too, paradoxically. He would run plays to the strength of the formation—meaning, if it was 3 TEs he would run, if it was 3 WRs he would throw–because he was trying to set up simple physical mismatches. But then just when you thought he was going to run another one up the middle, wham, they would throw a long pass to a blocking TE. That kind of thing. Run plays to the strength of the formation but do that as a way to set up big plays. That’s a very Schott thing. When it worked it worked.
But then here I am STILL engaging in the debate I said that can’t be resolved now…………
I know! Let’s start a “what would happen if both Bradford and Schott stayed and they brought back a healthy Jake Long” discussion!
Kidding.
.
I liked shotty, mostly in the Red Zone. But, I was not always a fan of some of his play designs. Too often, they seemed to rely on fooling the opposition, is the best way I can put it.
It’s true that he relied a lot on misdirection and deception. That to me was part of the whole “he’s predictable” thing too, paradoxically. He would run plays to the strength of the formation—meaning, if it was 3 TEs he would run, if it was 3 WRs he would throw–because he was trying to set up simple physical mismatches. But then just when you thought he was going to run another one up the middle, wham, they would throw a long pass to a blocking TE. That kind of thing. Run plays to the strength of the formation but do that as a way to set up big plays. That’s a very Schott thing. When it worked it worked.
But then here I am STILL engaging in the debate I said that can’t be resolved now…………
I know! Let’s start a “what would happen if both Bradford and Schott stayed and they brought back a healthy Jake Long” discussion!
Kidding.
.
I believe in playing better than the opponent. 😉 Unless you know exactly what he is thinking. Why fool yourself? Let the other guy do that.
AgamemnonI believe in playing better than the opponent…
I dont believe in gimmicks
like that.w
v
“Whatever you do in life, surround yourself with smart people who’ll argue with you.”
John WoodenYour right, I really believe in playing worse than my opponents and then beating them. That makes them feel real bad. 😉
Agamemnon
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
