40 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

This is a weird take. Hurts isn't the reason why we suck at screens.

You figure we'd be better at the bubbles as AJ is a YAC guy and Pascal is a good blocker - but that might be an easy personnel grouping/tendency to identify, hence we have odd situations where Quez is blocking for Smitty or vice versa which isn't ideal.  Then there is my only real AJ gripe... he's 100% when he has a chance to get the ball, but his effort in other situations is questionable.

3 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Totally forgot about literally the most recent one   

thanks

Easy to understand; McVay looks like he'd have been a waterboy instead of in uniform on game days.

3 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

We were awesome with them for years with McNabb and even Vick at QB, though. I think it's more of a schematic issue, with an expertise that's currently lacking among our staff.

 

2 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

doesnt add up though. We have always had a moble, QB. Actually a step further, we have always had a running QB. 

We were a great screen team with McNabb, and Vick at QB. That cant be it.

Good point. Not sure if teams rush Hurts differently or the way teams line up defensively has changed over the years. Or because we use Hirys so much in the run game that it congrats that part of the field. 

Or maybe we suck at them. 

51 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

This is a weird take. Hurts isn't the reason why we suck at screens.

I think he is

as people correctly observe, all the other factors are there

45 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Anyone notice anything odd about this offensive line formation?

 

Is Quez our right tackle of the future?

I noticed that too, and I think you're right. Many people have been clamoring to use that top ten pick on a right tackle to eventually replace Lane, but what if we already have that guy in house? This could be a game-changer that would give us more draft flexibility!

48 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Anyone notice anything odd about this offensive line formation?

 

Is Quez our right tackle of the future?

Yup, saw that, at least he should be able to pull...

2 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

I think he is

as people correctly observe, all the other factors are there

 

Yes, of course you do. 

27 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

If you think "cuss words” are the only words censored, you are missing my point.  Many of the censored words in the filters suggest a censorship of Victorian age.  But then again, I am pretty libertarian in nature, view words in their many meanings as tools and being offended by a word seems akin to being offended by a screwdriver.  We see the memes, articles and videos on here all the time that use words that get censored when we write so the censorship is unevenly applied.  The filters go way past George Carlin’s seven words.   The censorship made sense for a corporation but seems out of place in a collective that clearly isn’t sensitive to those words as a whole.

I think the filters are overly restrictive as well, but downplaying some forms of language as simply being tools by which nobody should take offense to is also grossly naive. Taken to its extreme, should we dismiss those who took offense to the n-word as being overly sensitive and compare that to being offended by a screwdriver? What about those of a certain sexual orientation that take offense to the f-word (the 6 letter variety, not the 4-letter one)? What about any of the other ethnic slurs? Plenty of those words carry a context in which a history of hate and derision can be tough to simply brush off. I think even the F-word isn't really something that we desperately need to throw around every other post, but I do agree that probably 80% of the filtered words don't really need to be censored.

I think our o line is too good for screens, the d doesn't buy them just letting them go by

2 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

I think he is

as people correctly observe, all the other factors are there

How good were the colts at screens when Sirianni was there? What about the chargers with Steichen? Sure seems like that would be a much larger factor, no?

Zeke

Edit:   ****d!ck used to work and now it's filtered to Zeke 

1 hour ago, ToastJenkins said:

At the same time i felt like after losing wentz we were done and the Vikings would beat us…

so maybe my negative vibes are just preempting a letdown

Actually, once I saw the Vikings beat the Saints on that miracle, for the first time ever, I was 100% confident we were going to the Super Bowl.  I wanted no parts of the Saints.  And with that freak play, Minnesota was definitely like, we are a team of destiny, we will be playing the Super Bowl in our home stadium, we just have to show up.   Well, they got it handed to them!!

8 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

Good point. Not sure if teams rush Hurts differently or the way teams line up defensively has changed over the years. Or because we use Hirys so much in the run game that it congrats that part of the field. 

Or maybe we suck at them. 

I think you nailed it right here. It's definitely due to all of the Hirys congratulating that part of the field. 

2 minutes ago, mikemack8 said:

Zeke

Edit:   ****d!ck used to work and now it's filtered to Zeke 

Way to go zekehead

2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

How good were the colts at screens when Sirianni was there? What about the chargers with Steichen? Sure seems like that would be a much larger factor, no?

Even if the Colts or Chargers were good at them, teams are lining up the same way as they are against us. 

23 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

I’m ready for it should it happen. Things aren’t quite the same after 2017. That one can never be taken away from us. 

I've been thinking about this for awhile now but haven't really been able to articulate it properly in my mind. There's just no way that a loss this weekend will be as devastating to me as the earlier championship game losses. Granted I'll be disappointed...severely...but it won't be that gut-wrenching devastation that came with those previous ones because of that feeling then of "Are we EVER going to win a Super Bowl?" We already have. We've earned our seat in the lunch room with the cool kids.

Just now, we_gotta_believe said:

I think you nailed it right here. It's definitely due to all of the Hirys congratulating that part of the field. 

Way to go dope

Lol. Fat fingered that one. "Hurts” and "congesting.”

5 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

I think he is

as people correctly observe, all the other factors are there

Can't remember many RB screens this year, one comes to mind where Sanders hit the ball had blockers out in front and a wide alley to pick up a bunch of yards and he just inexplicably runs directly into the back of one of the O lineman and out of bounds for like a 6-7 yard game, at least he picked up a First but dude seems to have some pretty poor vision on  screens and one can't just run them to gainwell or teams will key on that.

1 minute ago, Utebird said:

Can't remember many RB screens this year, one comes to mind where Sanders hit the ball had blockers out in front and a wide alley to pick up a bunch of yards and he just inexplicably runs directly into the back of one of the O lineman and out of bounds for like a 6-7 yard game, at least he picked up a First but dude seems to have some pretty poor vision on  screens and one can't just run them to gainwell or teams will key on that.

Hurts threw a pick on a screen vs Minnesota...if I remember right the ball was bobbled around and the play looked weird right from the snap. 

1 hour ago, HazletonEagle said:

@downundermike or any other stats nerds

Anyone know the league average yards per play on a WR screen? And what we have been getting on them ever since we stopped using Quez and started using Smith on them? I feel like its been pretty successful over the past say..... 5 or 6 weeks.

imo, RB screens are potential big plays. Maybe my thinking is biased because I remember the reid, and even Chip days and how well we ran them. But WR screens rarely seem to be big plays for anyone. It seems you generally hope to get about 6-10 yards on those.

 

Don't know if you saw this, I am not finding anything to break it down since the change.

 

56 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

This is a few weeks old now, but shows how we stack up vs the rest of the league.

 

 

3 minutes ago, Utebird said:

Can't remember many RB screens this year, one comes to mind where Sanders hit the ball had blockers out in front and a wide alley to pick up a bunch of yards and he just inexplicably runs directly into the back of one of the O lineman and out of bounds for like a 6-7 yard game, at least he picked up a First but dude seems to have some pretty poor vision on  screens and one can't just run them to gainwell or teams will key on that.

Hurts threw a pick off Gainwell’s hands. I believe that was a screen as well. 

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Hurts threw a pick off Gainwell’s hands. I believe that was a screen as well. 

Yes, it was a tunnel screen. Haven't ran that play to a single RB or WR since.

Hurts is way better than Wentz was at screens.  Hurts' ball placement and composure is on point. I dont think thats it.

 

I actually wonder if the recent NFL fixation with ineligible men downfield discourages the classic screen.  Maybe its just not worth the risk/reward when you can essentially accomplish the same goal with the WR screen.   Far less movement at the LOS, no risk of your QB getting killed, more green space for the receiver to catch and run...

12 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

Good point. Not sure if teams rush Hurts differently or the way teams line up defensively has changed over the years. Or because we use Hirys so much in the run game that it congrats that part of the field. 

Or maybe we suck at them. 

It would make sense that the way defenses play hurts would effect the screen game 

Normally on a screen the O line draws the D line in giving them a run at the QB then the OL pull out to block.

If a D is mush rushing it's going to effect that screen, if a D is used to seeing hurts take off when he feels pressure and instead he is retreating they probably know something is up, if they have a spy on hurts then that could effect the screen as well.

I don't think the screen game doesn't work because of anything hurts is doing wrong I think the screen game doesn't work just as a product of how defenses react to hurts skill set that is counteractive to screens 

1 hour ago, jsb235 said:

Anyone notice anything odd about this offensive line formation?

 

Is Quez our right tackle of the future?

You've never seen an unbalanced line before?

1 minute ago, Mike31mt said:

Hurts is way better than Wentz was at screens.  Hurts' ball placement and composure is on point. I dont think thats it.

 

I actually wonder if the recent NFL fixation with ineligible men downfield discourages the classic screen.  Maybe its just not worth the risk/reward when you can essentially accomplish the same goal with the WR screen.   Far less movement at the LOS, no risk of your QB getting killed, more green space for the receiver to catch and run...

That's true as well, WR screen isn't going to get your QB lit up, where as a tradition RB screen could get ones QB lit up