Uncle Si
Active member
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2007
- Messages
- 20,596
- Reaction score
- 3
I think we see something less conservative
I think you're the only person here that feels that way, myself included (for me because of the o-line injuries). Why is that (serious question, not smart-assed)?Uncle Si":3pxb0dxg said:I think we see something less conservative
hawksfansinceday1":h2lniyh9 said:I think you're the only person here that feels that way, myself included (for me because of the o-line injuries). Why is that (serious question, not smart-assed)?Uncle Si":h2lniyh9 said:I think we see something less conservative
You have a gut feeling. I get that.Uncle Si":22z17h4r said:hawksfansinceday1":22z17h4r said:I think you're the only person here that feels that way, myself included (for me because of the o-line injuries). Why is that (serious question, not smart-assed)?Uncle Si":22z17h4r said:I think we see something less conservative
I'm probably wrong... just hoping they want to go after the Browns the way they went after the Rams.
Maybe the run is the better play tomorrow.
I think the issue people have with Carroll is that his offenses lack nuance. Running isn't bad per-say, but how we do it is questionable. I've seen series where we go two downs back to back with the same running play drawn up. I abhor the Carroll philosophy of being blatantly obvious about what we're going to be doing. Our whole playbook only seems to consist of two or three different running plays on the books.MontanaHawk05":1er2fv4s said:Cleveland's run defense is graded much worse than its pass defense. Between that and the desire to take the pressure off of our backup OL players, I predict a run-heavy approach with deep play action shots to test their backup corners.
The Carroll haters groan about a "relapse" and ignore all the context above.