RichNhansom
Active member
- Joined
- May 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,256
- Reaction score
- 5
BuZzB28":3vybwuw5 said:
Good ol Buzz
Always fun trying to interpret your posts. Did you get tired of the Webzone finally?
Welcome to .net
Thomas or Chancellor?
- Thread starter scutterhawk
- Start date
Good ol Buzz
Always fun trying to interpret your posts. Did you get tired of the Webzone finally?
Welcome to .net
A
Anonymous
Guest
RichNhansom":8j64gaxb said:
Welcome back Buzz!
Can I ask where you are from?
scutterhawk
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2010
- Messages
- 9,826
- Reaction score
- 1,797
Good grief man, if Y'all can't swim, Ya need to stay away from the deep end.BuZzB28":2n8iacr3 said:
The once again HEALTHY LOB is gonna re-establish their dominance, and prove once again that they are the best of the best.
vin.couve12
New member
This thread is kind of funny. Kam Chancellor literally netted the Seahawks wins when he came back and his not being there was noticed in the overall defense and even in ET, who makes his keys off of that communication (ET also had the shoulder as well, his down year was two full). Rather than getting back into cover 3 principles all over again, I'll just say that you might not like that Chancellor was right in his value to the team, but he was right none the less. I never liked the situation myself, but it is what it is. Even in the highlights below, which were lacking for last year, there were a couple where the lot of everyone who was watching said, "Game!"
[youtube]pYgs5lfL0zA[/youtube]
This is a dumb thread. Even if you narrowed down the cover 3 to spacial geometry you'd see that they're really equal parts in design. Slightly different, but equal parts none the less. In a cover 3, even you MLB has to be able to run his arse off in coverage and we have that. Reason being is that is will be only him and one other person (usually the SS, in our case) covering the short to middle zones. Unless you're running a cover 4, no other defense makes 2 defenders cover THAT much space in the middle of the field in pass coverge. Those players have to be really special. Your FS works in tandem with them depending on what they think they're looking at. If you REALLy wanted to talk about value to the overall structure of that defense then the MLB might have the single most difficult criteria in the defense. He's got to be able to take on OL on a regular basis and also get back and cover a ton of area in the cover 3 in the middle of the field.
[youtube]pYgs5lfL0zA[/youtube]
This is a dumb thread. Even if you narrowed down the cover 3 to spacial geometry you'd see that they're really equal parts in design. Slightly different, but equal parts none the less. In a cover 3, even you MLB has to be able to run his arse off in coverage and we have that. Reason being is that is will be only him and one other person (usually the SS, in our case) covering the short to middle zones. Unless you're running a cover 4, no other defense makes 2 defenders cover THAT much space in the middle of the field in pass coverge. Those players have to be really special. Your FS works in tandem with them depending on what they think they're looking at. If you REALLy wanted to talk about value to the overall structure of that defense then the MLB might have the single most difficult criteria in the defense. He's got to be able to take on OL on a regular basis and also get back and cover a ton of area in the cover 3 in the middle of the field.
scutterhawk
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2010
- Messages
- 9,826
- Reaction score
- 1,797
vin.couve12":2uvjkka8 said:
Hmm, that's why you only participated in this particular thread with THREE different responses, as it was your posts that were the only ones with any merit? ....Okay.
vin.couve12
New member
And then?scutterhawk":2xne5t0r said:
scutterhawk
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2010
- Messages
- 9,826
- Reaction score
- 1,797
And then like a moth to a flame, you post a FOURTH time in a "Dumb Thread"vin.couve12":3hderj6h said:
vin.couve12
New member
scutterhawk":1aag6mo7 said:
hawkfan68
Well-known member
Chancellor is great but he doesn't have the ball skills and coverage ability Thomas has. Thomas is the reason why guys like Sherman, Maxwell, Thurmond, are good to great. These guys are really good but Thomas gives them the luxury to play freely and not have to worry about getting beat. Having him back there let's them focus on winning their battles. Chancellor is not that type of player. He's great at what he can do but no way can he be the guy that Thomas is and what he does. Thomas can hit too. He's a smaller guy but has some nice hits too.
scutterhawk
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2010
- Messages
- 9,826
- Reaction score
- 1,797
vin.couve12":1y5xogcf said:
Hmm, that's why you only participated in this particular thread with THREE different responses, as it was your posts that were the only ones with any merit? ....Okay.[/quote]
And then?[/quote]
And then like a moth to a flame, you post a FOURTH time in a "Dumb Thread"[/quote]
[/quote]Sensitive to what...your posts?, yeah, & I cry at puppet shows too. LOL
Nice try though. LOLOL
A
Anonymous
Guest
:thcoffee:
Similar threads
