(09-13-2021, 10:12 AM)Bullseye Wrote:

(09-12-2021, 09:23 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: 1.  I agree that it was a bad day for the refs and it mostly went against us.

2.  Although I didn't object to switching to the 3-4, players matter more than scheme.  No matter what scheme you play, you need good players and they need to play it right.

3.  I wonder what the impact would have been if Griffin had made that interception.  Is it a momentum change that completely alters the complexion of the game or do the Jaguars just screw it up on the next play anyway?  As for Wingard, I was surprised he made the team.  Being a starter is almost mind-boggling.  We were lucky the impact wasn't even worse.  The Texans missed some opportunities against him today.

4.  The number of drops was surprising.  I'm hoping Chark was just rusty.  For the others, I don't know what to make of it.  I'm hoping it was just an opening game fluke.  Not every throw was perfect, but there were a bunch of catchable balls that weren't caught.

5.  I don't put much into play calling in the preseason.  Fans think of it as a game, but coaches think of it as practice.  Sometimes coaches want to practice their weakness in order to get better.  However, I do consider play calling in the regular season important and it was atrocious today.  How can we give our offensive MVP from last year, James Robinson, only 5 carries against a team that has a bad run defense?  That's inexcusable.

6.  I would have to admit that the offensive line did better than I expected.  Maybe I just had low expectations for them.  The penalties were bad, but I agree that some of them appeared to be complete fiction.

7.  Rookies

a.  I agree on Lawrence.  I'm not concerned about him.  I saw potential in his play today.  He'll cut down on the rookie mistakes.

b.  I'm sure some will inevitably blame our offensive failures this year on the loss of ETN.  "If we just had ETN, all of our problems would be solved."  If so, I don't buy it.  

c.  I hated the Campbell draft pick at the time.  Sometimes I hate it when I'm right.  All we can do is hope he improves.   

d.  Walker Little was inactive.  It's a strange move.  Meyer obviously felt more comfortable with Richardson as the backup.  I'm wondering if Meyer has a major distrust of rookies (aka Wingard over Cisco).

e.  The stat sheet shows Cisco with one tackle, but I don't recall it.

f.  Tufele was inactive.

g.  Smith was inactive.

h.  I caught a glimpse of Farrell on the field once during special teams.  If he played offense, I didn't see it.  

8.  Agnew didn't make an impact?  That's an understatement.  He had 2 punts returns for 1 yard combined.  Yes, that's right, he provided us with a grand total of 1 yard of positive field position.  How much did we pay him?  I don't get some people (include Meyer's) obsession with special teams.  Under current NFL rules, most kickoffs go for touchbacks and punt returns rarely amount to a hill of beans.

9.  While I would obviously prefer he makes every field goal, I'm not going to get upset over Lambo missing a 55 yard field goal.  That's a long field goal.

10.  I'm usually big on blaming the players and not coaches, but this is a game where I feel the coaches came up short.  They made poor personnel decisions such as starting Wingard over Cisco.  They had terrible play calling on offense.  They had bad clock management.  They also had penalties that seemed to reflect back on poor coaching such as the 12 men in the huddle and 3 illegal formations.  

11.  Agree.

2.  I agree irrespective of scheme, you need the players to run it.  That said, though it's very early and he may still develop into a good player, I shudder to think of what superior players we passed up to take Campbell at the top of round 2.

3.  Had he held onto that INT, I think it would have given the team a confidence boost.   It's reasonable to think we could have at least come out of it with a field goal.  Maybe for the first half, the game is called a little differently and for our part, there wouldn't have been such a lopsided run-pass imbalance.  Would that have assured the win?  Of course not.  It was so early in the game, and we have so many holes and made so many mistakes, it may not have changed the bottom line result.

4.  Agreed.

5.  I can sorta see how the run/pass imbalance got so out of whack, but I don't understand abandoning Robinson the way we did.  Did he get hurt?  Was this a case of UM turning to guys he knows best in crisis?

6.  This morning, Boselli was saying the OL did not perform well, no matter what the stats say.  I readily concede that may well have been the case, and been more a function of the Texans not having any viable pass rushers.  The next two games will be a much better barometer of our OL.  I am NOT confident.

7b.  I think ETN may have made a difference, but anyone pinning ALL our offensive failures either against Houston or every game this season on his absence would be misguided.

c.  Right now it's painful to watch him play.

d.  That sounds like a good theory.  Nothing else would seem to explain why Little was inactive and Cisco didn't start.  Even if Little still has a way to go before he could be considered a solid upgrade over either T, it just doesn't make much sense.

---

(09-13-2021, 07:34 AM)jaglyn Wrote: If we would have continued running it, we would have set the record for penalties.

The NFL wanted to to showcase the 1st Overall Pick's arm and passing abilities, so refs were instructed to force the Jags to pass

As outlandish as that sounds, the penalties sure seemed to have that effect, didn't they?

---

(09-12-2021, 10:56 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: Need to assign Manhertz to follow him around the field pre-snap. Make him the Personal Protector for whoever Miller is against that play.

A traveling pass blocker?

Like a CB that travels to cover the other team's top WR?

It's crazy enough to try at this point.