|
Shadow225 posted:Hope you guys enjoy. As for a question: What are the trademarks and base play for the Wing-T offense? The basic idea is misdirection, the backfield action is specifically meant to look similar on all plays of a particular series (series of plays as part of the playbook, not a series of offensive possessions on the field) and this makes it very difficult for a defense to get a good read on the play and keeps each defender guessing as to who has the ball. As for the moment, I'd say the trademark plays (or at least the ones ran most frequently and most effectively) would be the jet sweep, option, dive and trap, although these are plays that could be run by any offense, and the trap is pretty much one of the most fundamental running plays in football. I agree with what Hero said of the similarities between the Wing T and Wildcat. If you look at the Dolphins, a lot of the success of their wildcat plays is predicated on misdirection in the backfield and blocking schemes similar to the wing. I can attempt to put together a more substantial Wing T write up in a future post, I have 5 years of playing experience in a Wing system and 2 years of coaching experience, but I don't have the time at the moment to write up a huge post. Here is a good article on the wildcat in the meantime. http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/jets-at-dolphins-how-the-wildcat-works/
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2010 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 17:01 |
|
|
Groucho Marxist posted:it's always fun finding out new ways Pioli owns. I'm glad your happy with him 
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2010 07:16
|
|
|
McKracken posted:The basic idea is misdirection, the backfield action is specifically meant to look similar on all plays of a particular series (series of plays as part of the playbook, not a series of offensive possessions on the field) and this makes it very difficult for a defense to get a good read on the play and keeps each defender guessing as to who has the ball. Thanks for this. The wing-t is something to behold when it's run well. My high school team was a perennial champion until they ran into a Fresno team that ran the wing-t. Watching from the bleachers it was like Three Card Monty; you never had any loving idea who had the ball.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2010 03:20
|
|
|
I think this is the most appropriate place for this question: I went to Vegas a couple weeks ago and during a visit to the sportsbook at my hotel I noticed that there were futures available for the "NFL Championship" (I'm coming back to this after my primary question). That's not out of the ordinary, of course, but you could actually bet on which division is home to the would-be champs. So you could select on the AFC East, AFC North, etc. all at various odds. The division with the BEST odds? AFC West at 5/2 I think. So my question is this: What's going on in the AFC West that makes it the most likely division to end up having one of its teams be the NFL champs? Bonus question: My dad was wondering why futures for the Super Bowl are listed as "NFL Championship" and the only thing I could think of is that the NFL probably has a copyright to "Super Bowl" and would go after any sportsbook that dare use that phrase without permission. Am I right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2010 23:42
|
|
|
danifestmestny posted:I think this is the most appropriate place for this question: The thing people have to remember about betting is that lines are there so that the books can get an equal amount of money on both sides of the bet. The books don't necessarily think that the AFC West has the best odds at winning, more that that line gives them the correct amount of action to balance out the money on every division. It is the same way with the spread. I know that certain teams(Texas, ND, USC, etc.) always get a lot of money put on them to cover, so those spreads are actually higher then Vegas expects them to be so that the money will work out correctly on both sides of the line. As for the NFL Championship v. Super Bowl thing I expect you are right. The NFL has been suing everyone who uses Super Bowl. I know they even tried to get the rights to The Big Game, but Stanford and Cal bitched enough until they gave that one up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2010 23:52
|
|
|
drunk leprechaun posted:The thing people have to remember about betting is that lines are there so that the books can get an equal amount of money on both sides of the bet. The books don't necessarily think that the AFC West has the best odds at winning, more that that line gives them the correct amount of action to balance out the money on every division. It is the same way with the spread. I know that certain teams(Texas, ND, USC, etc.) always get a lot of money put on them to cover, so those spreads are actually higher then Vegas expects them to be so that the money will work out correctly on both sides of the line. Just making sure I'm understanding what you mean: I dunno what the line opened at but for argument sake let's say the AFCW opened at 9/1 (since it's the Chargers and 3 teams that I feel safe in assuming have a snowball's chance in contending for the Vince Lombardi Trophy). Maybe enough people saw 9/1 (or whatever the original odds were) as lucrative enough to gamble on the Chargers, to the point where the book decided that the best thing to do - in order to avoid paying out a ton of money to those people and possibly more - was to increase the odds to 3/1 or 5/2, effectively putting the brakes on the action? Is that what you mean?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2010 01:00
|
|
|
danifestmestny posted:Just making sure I'm understanding what you mean: Exactly. Now I am by no means a sports betting expert, but that is how I understand it. Someone who actually understands this stuff better should come in and explain it more, but that is what I have learned from reading about lines and stuff on the internet and placing the odd bet myself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2010 01:36
|
|
|
drunk leprechaun posted:Exactly. Now I am by no means a sports betting expert, but that is how I understand it. Someone who actually understands this stuff better should come in and explain it more, but that is what I have learned from reading about lines and stuff on the internet and placing the odd bet myself. Yeah I just failed to connect that logic, which I knew applied to individual games, to futures bets. Which was dumb of me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2010 02:12
|
|
|
Ok I figure this is as good a place as any to ask: I've been out of the college football loop for a while because of real life. Can somebody please explain to me what the hell went on last month with all the Big-12 conference bullshit? I tried google but all I get are old articles from the beginning of June. All I can tell is that Nebraska joined the Big-10; Texas, OU, and a bunch of other teams were offered invitations to join both the Pac-10 and SEC, and Colorado joined the Pac-10. Other than that I don't know what the gently caress So is Texas and OU remaining in the Big-12? Has any other team joined another conference that I'm not aware of?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 12:58
|
|
|
Utah and Boise changed conferences http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_NCAA_conference_realignment#Membership_changes
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 14:18
|
|
|
terrin posted:Utah and Boise changed conferences Is that a more prestigious conference? All I know about Boise State was from watching Out of the Blue by accident once.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 14:32
|
|
|
Zorkon posted:Is that a more prestigious conference? All I know about Boise State was from watching Out of the Blue by accident once. Its more prestigious, but not by a whole lot. Had Utah stayed, they would have had a good shot at being an autobid conference, but prolly not without them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 15:41
|
|
|
Doppelganger posted:I like making dumb lists, so I've broken down the league into a few categories for someone who wants to pick a team to root for. Nice, but opinions are like assholes and I have got one. Also you missed a couple teams but I think I got them all. 1. The Up and Comers It's fun to start following a team who isn't terrible, but still has some improvements to make. When you invest a little time in watching your team grow, it makes it that much more satisfying when they get a major win. This might also be a team who has been enjoying success for the last few years after decades of despair.
New Orleans Saints - will be a contender this year and defending Super Bowl winner, absolutely terrible history San Diego Chargers - could very well be a contender, but they have a habit of choking in the playoffs Cincinnati Bengals - their offense is star studded, they will lead the league in drama Tennessee Titans - Best running back in the league Atlanta Falcons - One of the best young QBs in Matt Ryan Miami Dolphins - wildcat formation San Francisco 49ers - My favorite Coach who doesn't coach the team I root for 2. The Underdogs Ok, maybe you'd rather pick a team with even farther to go? You probably liked the beginnings of sports movies like Little Giants when the characters all still suck, and then you get kinda bored when they start clicking as a team 45 minutes in. That's fine though, the NFL has plenty of fixer-uppers with nowhere to go but up!
Buffalo Bills - will be worst team this year, might move to Toronto Tampa Bay Buccaneers Detroit Lions - Historically most pathetic team in NFL history St. Louis Rams Jacksonville Jaguars - probably moving to Los Angeles Seattle Seahawks Cleveland Browns - Best pro team in Cleveland Carolina Panthers Arizona Cardinals Kansas City Chiefs Chicago Bears 3. The Villains All the girls love a bad boy. You might like rooting for a team that most everyone else loves to hate.
New York Giants Oakland Raiders - Owned by Darth Vader Philadelphia Eagles - their fans hate everything Pittsburgh Steelers - Their QB currently leads the league in rape Denver Broncos - Their QB is probably chugging Jack Daniels right now 4. The Superstars - for the upcoming season You may get called a bandwagoner by some, but you'll always enjoy watching your dominant, consistently solid team rack up wins, and usually hit the playoffs.
Green Bay Packers - Aaron Rodgers Indianapolis Colts - Peyton Manning Baltimore Ravens - Very popular pick but I am not sold yet Dallas Cowboys - best offense on paper, IMO New England Patriots - Tom Brady > Mark Sanchez edit: added some comments texaholic fucked around with this message at 06:57 on Jul 30, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 04:16
|
|
|
Specifically Dallas and New England should be put in the Villain category because most of the country wants to see them collapse and probably more than any of the other teams you have listed. Dallas for their insufferable fans and piles of money and New England for their perceived smugness.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 10:34
|
|
|
Yeah, Dallas and New England not being in the Villans category was not expected. also please explain how Dallas has the best offense on paper.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 13:23
|
|
|
ThatOtherGuy posted:Yeah, Dallas and New England not being in the Villans category was not expected. I am quoting this to point out my complete and total agreement.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 14:50
|
|
|
ThatOtherGuy posted:Yeah, Dallas and New England not being in the Villans category was not expected. 4th best quarterback to ever play the game: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_rating_career.htm They have 3 very solid running backs and a great WR group. Dez Bryant is going to light the league up. Get ready for it. Their linemen are also in a band.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 14:56
|
|
|
Bashez posted:4th best quarterback to ever play the game: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_rating_career.htm Ah yes, the measure that makes Aaron Rodgers and Matt Schaub better than Dan Marino. Truly the stat of kings.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 15:00
|
|
|
No Safe Word posted:Ah yes, the measure that makes Aaron Rodgers and Matt Schaub better than Dan Marino. Truly the stat of kings. QB stands for quarterbacks not kings. They take the snap from center and distribute the ball according to the play called. QB rating determines which quarterbacks are better. Happy to help you here in the newbie thread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 15:08
|
|
|
"Is QB rating a flawed stat? How could it be, it's called QB rating" - Bashez
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 15:56
|
|
|
No Safe Word posted:Ah yes, the measure that makes Aaron Rodgers and Matt Schaub better than Dan Marino. Truly the stat of kings. Yes, because I truly believe that Tony Romo is a better quarterback than Joe Montana. You can't convince me otherwise. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 15:58
|
|
|
Neil O'Donnell Bernie Kosar Dave Krieg all better than Warren Moon Fran Tarkenton John Elway Johnny Unitas
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 16:05
|
|
|
I'm going to watch the finals for the American Football European Championship 2010 tomorrow in Frankfurt, Germany. As it's the first football game of my life, I was more than happy to see this thread  The forums just won't let me down. Thanks SA!
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 17:20
|
|
|
ThatOtherGuy posted:Yeah, Dallas and New England not being in the Villans category was not expected. You are right but I believe they both teams very capable of winning the super bowl this year. I guess I could have them in both categories.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 19:37
|
|
|
If you could not ever put Mark Sanchez's name next to three time Super Bowl Champion, two time MVP, five time Pro Bowler Tom Brady, I'd appreciate it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 21:19
|
|
|
texaholic posted:You are right but I believe they both teams very capable of winning the super bowl this year. I guess I could have them in both categories. The thing with Villains in football is that the ones you really hate are the ones that are a threat. Technically the Washington Generals are "villains" but after awhile you feel sorry for them like holy gently caress these guys suck and they have to go home to their SO and explain why they lost by 100 points and can't please them ever. Things have gotten so hosed that the Raiders are starting to be looked at with a sympathetic light. I mean they were bad but who deserved loving Jamarcus Russell? People who used to fear Al Davis now feel sorry for him for being so senile. And then the teams can get turned into villains instantly. The Vikings for getting Favre. The Jets for Rex Ryan's abrasiveness The Broncos for getting rid of all their players and getting Tebow. And the Eagles for getting rid of McNabb. pasaluki fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Jul 30, 2010 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 21:59
|
|
|
No Safe Word posted:Neil O'Donnell Jerome Bettis, the greatest Steelers quarterback of all time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 22:50
|
|
|
By this metric David Carr isn't even the worst Texans QB of all time (GO gently caress YOURSELF CHRIS BROWN)
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 22:58
|
|
|
I dont get the Broncos as villains. I mean McDaniels is a weenie, but I dont see how a team hilariously self-destructing can really be considered villainous. A villain needs to be scary. Which is why the cowboys/patriots/steelers are villains.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 22:58
|
|
|
WinnebagoWarrior posted:I dont get the Broncos as villains. I mean McDaniels is a weenie, but I dont see how a team hilariously self-destructing can really be considered villainous. A villain needs to be scary. Which is why the cowboys/patriots/steelers are villains.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 23:10
|
|
|
I honestly and unironically believe that Drew Brees was robbed of two MVP awards.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 23:37
|
|
|
kyuss posted:I'm going to watch the finals for the American Football European Championship 2010 tomorrow in Frankfurt, Germany. As it's the first football game of my life, I was more than happy to see this thread I had no idea this existed, if you think of it maybe put a bit of a trip report together? Curious about this league.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 00:21
|
|
|
A.o.D. posted:I honestly and unironically believe that Drew Brees was robbed of two MVP awards. Well yeah. One of the best parts of the Superbowl post game ceremonies was Sean Payton calling Brees the league's MVP when he handed him the Lombardi  but I mean Manning got it so it's not like they gave it to some overhyped hack
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 01:38
|
|
|
Ozu posted:Head coach/QB hatred. Same principle that causes the Jets to be a villain. The Jets haven't won poo poo in decades yet they get the same amount of hatred outside of their division that the Pats used to (and probably still do to some extent) receive. Everyone in the AFC West still hates the Raiders more. The Raiders are the ultimate villains of the AFC West, AFC, and NFL. No one denies this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 02:32
|
|
|
SteelAngel2000 posted:Everyone in the AFC West still hates the Raiders more. Not the Raiders so much as just Al Davis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 02:36
|
|
|
Dominion posted:Not the Raiders so much as just Al Davis. And John Madden. There are people who don't know John Madden was a coach. gently caress John Madden
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 02:39
|
|
|
A.o.D. posted:I honestly and unironically believe that Drew Brees was robbed of two MVP awards. I believe this too. I was talking up Brees and saying that he was a top 3 QB for years and people were just like "lol the guy who's like 3 feet tall and got replaced by Rivers" and I just always said "YEAH HE loving RULES SHUTUP". I felt pretty  after the SB, but by that time pretty much everyone was saying that Brees was one of the best in the league. I still claim to be OG Brees though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 04:00
|
|
|
SteelAngel2000 posted:And John Madden. The majority of people here weren't even alive while he was coaching. Why should we care?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 08:47
|
|
|
Wollawolla posted:The majority of people here weren't even alive while he was coaching. Why should we care? He was successful with a rival??? Duh??? Like don't you have hundreds of pounds of resentment for Gale Sayers?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 08:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 17:01 |
|
|
SteelAngel2000 posted:Everyone in the AFC West still hates the Raiders more. I'm pretty sure more people actually hate the Chargers or the Broncos. Regardless of the Raiders being my second team, you can't truly hate an irrelevant team. Things are hopefully changing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 11:16
|
|