No Quarters Coverage: Jags ran this constantly against Ny where the corner is responsible for the sideline while the safety's shade over to cover the deep routes. Flat out if Eli were more accurate we lose that game. Eli missed 2 maybe even 3 td's where Beckham and Shepard found the hole in the zone for easy td's. Tom is the Goat and much more accurate then Eli. He will not make those same mistakes
Keep hitting Tom: The giants will tell you that the best way to beat Brady is to keep hitting him. Make him uncomfortable and rush his throws. If we continue to play soft and left him pick us apart it is going to be a long day. Keep the pressure on
Win T.O.P Run the ball, convert 3rd downs, control the clock. Brady can't hurt us if he is on the sideline. Give the defense rest and keep them fresh. We can't afford for the team to go 3 and out constantly.
Turnovers: The team that wins the turnover battle usually wins the game. Force some pat mistakes and minimize ours.
24 points: Thats the number I think we need to score to win
Yeah - they can’t play as much zone against Brady.
The offense will need to play with better discipline and execution. The play calling will need to stay aggressive and creative.
These things are do-able.
There really is only one key, hit Brady hard and often.
If you can't do that, the other things won't matter.
Scoring more points then them
(09-10-2018, 05:15 PM)Predator Wrote: [ -> ]There really is only one key, hit Brady hard and often.
If you can't do that, the other things won't matter.
True enough.
I think they’ll manage that.
I guess my “list” is more adjustments to be made based on the NYG game.
They seem to be currently in form to pressure Brady frequently. Of course they’ll have to dial up the blitz when necessary. I believe they will.
Stop getting stupid penalties. Step 1.
Do what we did in the first half of the AFCCG but for 4 quarters.
(09-10-2018, 06:15 PM)imtheblkranger Wrote: [ -> ]Do what we did in the first half of the AFCCG but for 4 quarters.
Lol! This ^ haha.
Whether Fournette is healthy or not we have to run the ball better. Shorten the game and keep TB12 on the sidelines, and when he’s in the game hit him hard and often.
This might be wishful thinking but I suspect the jags deliberately played with somewhat of a limited playbook against the Giants, especially in the second half when LF being out seemed to make us go more conservative and limited the 2 back packages we saw in the preseason. I'm hoping they've kept a few things up their sleeves for the pats. Kinda reminds me of how different the playbook was for the Steelers playoff game than the Bills one.
(09-10-2018, 05:24 PM)JAGFAN88 Wrote: [ -> ]Scoring more points then them
And pay the referees
The Patriots don't seem to get rolling until about Week 6. They are very beatable early in the season.
(09-10-2018, 05:15 PM)Predator Wrote: [ -> ]There really is only one key, hit Brady the refs hard and often.
If you can't do that, the other things won't matter.
FIFY
(09-10-2018, 07:44 PM)JagJohn Wrote: [ -> ]This might be wishful thinking but I suspect the jags deliberately played with somewhat of a limited playbook against the Giants, especially in the second half when LF being out seemed to make us go more conservative and limited the 2 back packages we saw in the preseason. I'm hoping they've kept a few things up their sleeves for the pats. Kinda reminds me of how different the playbook was for the Steelers playoff game than the Bills one.
I also got the feeling the jags were holding back once they said LF was healthy enough to have kept playing.
We might have gotten away with looking ahead.
(09-10-2018, 07:44 PM)JagJohn Wrote: [ -> ]This might be wishful thinking but I suspect the jags deliberately played with somewhat of a limited playbook against the Giants, especially in the second half when LF being out seemed to make us go more conservative and limited the 2 back packages we saw in the preseason. I'm hoping they've kept a few things up their sleeves for the pats. Kinda reminds me of how different the playbook was for the Steelers playoff game than the Bills one.
Sandbagging in the reg season? I would be very disappointed if this was the case. This is the NFL, not college, any team can win each week. If you don't come prepared, you are going to lose. If they used a limited playbook in anticipation for a week 2 matchup against the Pats, then this is the wrong coaching staff to have. In this league, you can NEVER EVER look ahead to opponents. You focus week by week.
I don't think that's the case though. If they want to use 2 RB packages in the future then it's almost mandatory to have a 4th RB on the team. Once 4nette went down I don't think they wanted to use both healthy RBs on the field at same time in case of injury. If a running teams playbook all of a sudden gets shortened due to a injury to ONE RB, then they don't have enough. I was very confused why this team didn't keep 4 rb's. Don't need 6 wide outs when you aren't even going to throw down field.
(09-10-2018, 05:24 PM)JAGFAN88 Wrote: [ -> ]Scoring more points then them
DING! DING! DING!
Keep it simple.
(09-10-2018, 08:12 PM)The_Franchise_QB Wrote: [ -> ] (09-10-2018, 07:44 PM)JagJohn Wrote: [ -> ]This might be wishful thinking but I suspect the jags deliberately played with somewhat of a limited playbook against the Giants, especially in the second half when LF being out seemed to make us go more conservative and limited the 2 back packages we saw in the preseason. I'm hoping they've kept a few things up their sleeves for the pats. Kinda reminds me of how different the playbook was for the Steelers playoff game than the Bills one.
Sandbagging in the reg season? I would be very disappointed if this was the case. This is the NFL, not college, any team can win each week. If you don't come prepared, you are going to lose. If they used a limited playbook in anticipation for a week 2 matchup against the Pats, then this is the wrong coaching staff to have. In this league, you can NEVER EVER look ahead to opponents. You focus week by week.
I don't think that's the case though. If they want to use 2 RB packages in the future then it's almost mandatory to have a 4th RB on the team. Once 4nette went down I don't think they wanted to use both healthy RBs on the field at same time in case of injury. If a running teams playbook all of a sudden gets shortened due to a injury to ONE RB, then they don't have enough. I was very confused why this team didn't keep 4 rb's. Don't need 6 wide outs when you aren't even going to throw down field.
Both Fournette and Marrone said that he could have gone back into the game and that holding him out was just precautionary. Why would they do that unless they valued the next game more than the current one and were looking ahead? Can you imagine the kickback if you make a precautionary decision and you lose? All games at this point of the season are important.
The only other explanation I can think of is that Fournette's injury is a little more serious than they want to let on.
IDK. I just thought that holding out a supposedly healthy enough Fournette was odd.
(09-10-2018, 08:38 PM)Predator Wrote: [ -> ] (09-10-2018, 08:12 PM)The_Franchise_QB Wrote: [ -> ]Sandbagging in the reg season? I would be very disappointed if this was the case. This is the NFL, not college, any team can win each week. If you don't come prepared, you are going to lose. If they used a limited playbook in anticipation for a week 2 matchup against the Pats, then this is the wrong coaching staff to have. In this league, you can NEVER EVER look ahead to opponents. You focus week by week.
I don't think that's the case though. If they want to use 2 RB packages in the future then it's almost mandatory to have a 4th RB on the team. Once 4nette went down I don't think they wanted to use both healthy RBs on the field at same time in case of injury. If a running teams playbook all of a sudden gets shortened due to a injury to ONE RB, then they don't have enough. I was very confused why this team didn't keep 4 rb's. Don't need 6 wide outs when you aren't even going to throw down field.
Both Fournette and Marrone said that he could have gone back into the game and that holding him out was just precautionary. Why would they do that unless they valued the next game more than the current one and were looking ahead? Can you imagine the kickback if you make a precautionary decision and you lose? All games at this point of the season are important.
The only other explanation I can think of is that Fournette's injury is a little more serious than they want to let on.
IDK. I just thought that holding out a supposedly healthy enough Fournette was odd.
I hear you, but the way I took it was if NEEDED 4nette could have came back in. Something like a playoff game, divisional game, etc.. Wasn't something worth risking game 1 of the season in case of re-aggravating it and making it worse. Hammy's can be real weird. My point is, if they are holding things back in the playbook and thinking ahead towards specific opponents.... well that's completely different in my book and the entire staff should be gone. During preseason we saw the 2 back set and since this is a run first team, figured we would see it. Once 4nette went down, IMO it was gone from the playbook because only 2 RB's left. That's a problem for a run first team.
Maybe not sandbagging, but being conservative. It was rainy, the defense was playing well. Why pull out all the tricks and details in a game you're controlling well? A non conference road game in week 1. If there's a game to lose, its that one.