Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
so i've got to get permission from you to respond to your posts now?
|
You can do whatever you like, never said you couldn't. I did ask you why you bothered responding to my posts when you don't intend to respond to anything in the actual post. You know? You literally responded to nothing in my post. Rather you continued an anti-Griffin diatribe which is fine, but has nothing to do with the post you responded.
Remember?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 30gut
They have got to find a competent TE in base personnel. I think the lack of success in the 1st unit base personnel runs is because Compton at TE invites teams to sell out run commit or at the very least commit his defender to 100% run. Gotta find a better answer.....or don't run from base personnel/formations?
Good to see the screens game, which was missing in the 1st 2 preseason games. We saw 2 screens in the 1st 2 series 1 WR screen(intercepted) and 1 RB screen against 2nd and long. Even saw some hurry up which is good.
If Kirk was playing as short a stint as Griffin vs the Lions he would have been 3-5 with 1 INT and 1 Fumbles snap.
Kirk took a helacious hit against a blitz on a pass that was broken up which luckily wasn't picked off and almost got Grant sent to the hospital. If it was Griffin throwing that pass he would have crucified, that would have been used in the referendum rhetoric.
Kirk and 1st unit offense didn't cross the 50 yard line til 6 minutes left in the 2nd qtr.
And the 2 minute drill TD drive was against the Ravens 2nd unit defense.
But it was good to see the offense get going eventually.
I like seeing Keenan suplex that WR.
Nice seeing 1st unit defense get a goalline stop even though it was against their 2nd O.
o I saw Reed make an effective block in the 1st qtr....maybe there's hope?
o Grant, Crowder and Jones looked good again
o Colt is the master of the bootleg, even under duress
|
Your response:
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
do you honestly think rgiii could have gotten 27 passes off without getting hurt again? that's like 7 sacks minimum for him...{non-related Griffin diatribe}
|
But now that you've seen the original post again maybe there is something you would actually want to respond to non-Griffin related? I won't hold my breath.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
|
and how am i moving the goal posts? sacks = big hits = potential injuries. that doesn't seem that hard to follow.
|
You move the goal posts by asking a question (rhetorical one at that; which is posted above) about Griffin getting hurt then proceed to discuss sacks. Its like asking a question about elusiveness then talking about speed. They're related but not the same.