Failure to adjust

If you call popping in with your mopey face saying "why is everyone so negative?" in every thread "handling it", ok.

 

Somebody’s gotta keep you pessimists in line

 

How's that working out for you?

 

Actually pretty good.
I guess you haven’t figured out how all this works yet? Or maybe you have Watt Whack?

 

On offense? Punt block gives then the ball at the 3, INT gives them the ball at the 11, turnover on downs gives them the ball in FG range.

That's 17 of the 27 right there.

 

Thanks. I might make that my profile picture.

 

Wow. We are the only team in the NFL 2 score from a short field given by the Special team, or Defense. Oh wait I believe Dallas, and Buffalo maybe close 2 the top of that list...oh wait they are also on top of the lists in scoring 2.....How odd. LoL

 

I'm saying the O was helped immensely from the D when it was suggested the O had a great quarter.

 

In med dogs world credit is rarely given, but there’s always plenty of criticism to go around.

 

Adjustments? Most fans wouldn't recognize adjustments if they sat down and watched hours of game film.

 

I've already cited what great, splash plays the D and ST made, the credit needs to be steered more to them, not the O.

Not a hard concept.

 

This is the kind of thing that gets old. Productive discourse has to allot for the possibility an alternative view has merit. Attempting to dismiss it entirely because you choose to assume, or intentionally caricature, it to say only that which you can try to counter and continue a narrative with is disingenuous and lazy. It makes your arguments seem more like trolling (especially if you have a history of getting into arguments with moderators over defying board rules/requests, throwing down homosexual epithets as part of your tantrum).

Here, your argument has numerous holes:

• The poster didn't say the O had a great quarter. They asserted 27 points in the 4th quarter indicated some adjustments were made.
• It wasn't clearly specified said adjustments were limited to the offense.
• Regardless, you've been around other threads critiquing the offense's inability to punch it in on a short field or short yardage. That they were able to so with greater success in the 4th quarter suggests adjustments were made.

As you say, not a hard concept.

 

I may have conflated with another post in the thread that explicitly called out offensive adjustments, but Marvology intimated in his post that it wasn't defensive adjustments he was talking about.

It's going to be hard, but you need to quit me. Is there a nicorette for Maddog addicts?

 

And again, you miss the point. And ignore parts of a post you can't answer to without pushing a lame narrative.

If I encounter a troll whenever I cross a bridge I enjoy, it doesn't stop me from crossing it.

 

And I'm suggesting that all Os are Helped immensely by Special teams, and D. Most of the top scoring teams are if You go Look.
About time the D got some turnovers.

 

I don't disagree, but that is not germaine to the subject, IMO.

 

You have no audio proof of that claim.

 

How is it not? The subject of the thread is failure to adjust. I would think if someone was speaking to any adjustments they've seen, it's germane to the topic of the thread.

 

Maybe he meant Jermaine. As in Jackson.

 

We were having a conversation on offensive adjustments, not D and ST. 17 of the 27 4th Q points came on 21 yards of offense.

 

Making game time adjustments is not our strong suite, it also does not mean only schemes, it could mean making personnel changes to better suite what's happening during the game, something we are really bad at. "Getting Bush off the field when he is killing us".

 

That's a pretty straw man nicely played

 

Same reason Brady went a decade without throwing a pick against the Steelers. “We do what we do”. The Steelers actually brag about playing the same type of football for a decade.