Re: Soooo, after the first preseason game, whatchya think?
Hammer
> I only watched the first half.
>
> While I'd like to believe we'll be competing for Vince, I just don't see it.
> Our top-level talent is nice, but the dropoff is huge, once the 2nd-tier comes in.
> Sanchez, at least to me, is still a big question-mark. Even if he improves over last
> season, there's just something about his play, that scares me (can't define it yet).
>
> Then, there's the whole issue about the O. I like the talent, but Schott's still the OC.
> I'll have to wait for the regular season, to see if he can integrate all the talent, into
> the mix.
> Did Gholston even play ;)
> Why is Drew Coleman still on the team?
>
> What I saw of Folk, lessened my concern. Did he have any longer FG attempts in the
> 2nd-half?
> Braylon looks very focused. Greene, if he stays healthy, looks great.
> LT looked as I expected, an improvement over TJ.
> Bryan Thomas looks like he's bulked up, but still showed quickness.
>
> All-in-all the team looked decent, in what I saw... but they have a lot of selling to do,
> in order for me to see a championship calibre team.
I basically agree with you. My thoughts:
1) Don't work too hard to get Revis in, since this isn't a superbowl-
calibre team with or without him. I hope I'm wrong.
2) Non-called facemask on Lowery causing a Giant TD was total BS. How
was that not called?
3) Sanchez INT was sort of flukey, I can't totally blame it on him.
4) Surprised Pace not called for roughing the passer on play where
Manning got hit
5) Folk missed a 46 yarder in the second half. Very concerned about
him.
6) Most of the Jets second team unit looked terrible. #15 whatever his
name was sucked and should be cut. McKnight sucked. Woodhead looked
good like last year.
7) Clemens looked pretty good surprisingly. Brunell did nothing.
O'Connell didn't impress me.
8) Cotchery looks like the Jets' best receiver, but Edwards and Holmes
played well too.
9) O Line without Mangold was a bit rough.
10) Schott's play-calling sucks.
John C TX
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 06:22:02 -0700 (PDT), John C TX <johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> Then, there's the whole issue about the O. I like the talent, but Schott's still the OC.
> >> I'll have to wait for the regular season, to see if he can integrate all the talent, into
> >> the mix.
>
> >that issue.
>
> OK... you start ;)
>
>
>
> >:)
> >> Did Gholston even play ;)
>
>
> Well, that's nice.
> I looked for him twice, and both times he quit on plays.
> If it's between keeping him, or Kenwin Cummings, ba-bye Vern.
They will keep him because if he is cut then the bonus hit comes home
in the uncapped year. Next year he is gone.
Michael
> I only watched the first half.
>
> While I'd like to believe we'll be competing for Vince, I just don't see it.
> Our top-level talent is nice, but the dropoff is huge, once the 2nd-tier comes in.
> Sanchez, at least to me, is still a big question-mark. Even if he improves over last
> season, there's just something about his play, that scares me (can't define it yet).
>
> I'll have to wait for the regular season, to see if he can integrate all the talent, into
> the mix.
>
> What I saw of Folk, lessened my concern. Did he have any longer FG attempts in the
> 2nd-half?
> Braylon looks very focused. Greene, if he stays healthy, looks great.
> LT looked as I expected, an improvement over TJ.
> Bryan Thomas looks like he's bulked up, but still showed quickness.
>
> All-in-all the team looked decent, in what I saw... but they have a lot of selling to do,
> in order for me to see a championship calibre team.
1. sanchez about has the best feet i have ever seen in a pro qb.
2. i like the way green ran the ball
3. if braylon can keep it up....
4. jenkins looked great
5. ducasse and slauson BOTH looked fantastic in general. ducasse has
massive power , but still looks raw with his footwork. his feet are
fast, but confused. he also seems that he does not rotate much in the
hips to push blockers asside. even hunter did some good work. i'm
beginning to give callahan more and more credit for the play of the
lets offensive line. despite all the changes in who plays where
over , the entire line played well as a unit.
6. wilson looked good for the most part.
7. where were cromartie's vaunted ball skills ???
8. it was fun to see the starters for an entire half. not usual for
1st preseason game.
Tutor
1. Sanchez: The awful INT on his first pass was a terrible decision
and throw by him. He didn't see the coverage and threw it right into
the thick of it. Someone above said it was a fluke! I disagree. It
resembled a lot of his INTs from last season. No fluke. As the
announcers pointed out, Sanchez seems to have field vision problems to
his left. The vast majority of his INTs last season were to the
left. This needs to be worked on consistently and immediately. After
the INT, Sanchez recovered very nicely and performed quite well in the
face of a pretty intense pass rush all throughout the 1st half. He
made smart decisions, was much better at checking down and I was
impressed. He seems to be picking up right where he left off. No
doubt, there will be ups and downs through 2010... 2 steps forward...
one step back sort of thing. But as long as the movement is positive
overall, things will be fine. Sanchez was pretty good overall last
night and the Giants 1st string defense was playing well. I am
cautiously optimistic. Let's not forget how young he is and how
little college experience he had.
2. Running game: Even with Mangold on the sidelines, I was happy with
the performance of the line in blocking. Turner did a good job and
the holding call on him on the LT TD was questionable. LT does not
have the burst he once had, that much is clear. But he looked very
good nonetheless, especially running outside and catching the ball.
His TD catch and sprint was a nifty piece of running. Too bad it got
called back. T. Jones couldn't catch. LT can. Therein lies the
difference for the Jets in 2010. LT will be used a lot as a check
down option for Sanchez. Heck... even Shonn Greene caught a pass last
night. That was nice to see. What LT doesn't do well anymore is run
between the tackles. That's what Shonn Greene is for. Greene's
running is exciting to watch. He is the bruising back that I had
hoped Thomas Jones would be, but never was. He is one tough mofo to
bring down and if he stays healthy, he will be a force to be reckoned
with. Liked what I saw of him yesterday! As for the pathetic
bakups... Woodhead looked fine I guess and should make the squad only
because McKnight is no where close to being ready. He is so far
removed from being ready for the NFL that I question the wisdom of the
pick. He really looked bad at moments. Not happy with him at all.
Overall, I'm not sure that the running game will be as productive and
produce as lofty numbers as last year, but it will be good.
3. WRs: Cotch very reliable as usual. Thank goodness for JCO.
Braylon Edwards is an enigma. He can make the most ridiculous
difficult catches (one last night was simply spectacular), which shows
he has amazing hands. It is mind boggling when he loses concentration
and drops easy ones (did not happen last night). His size and build
remind me of Rob Moore, Keyshawn and Toon a bit. I expect big plays
from him this year. Holmes is one of the best route runners I have
ever seen. In a split second, he separates from what looks like
blanket tight coverage. The man is a play maker and the most exciting
WR on the team. It is so frustrating that he won't see the field
until week 5. But then again, the suspension had a lot to do with his
low cost from the Steelers. As a WR trio, Edwards, Cotch and Holmes
are among the best in the NFL. Tanny has given Sanchez a nice set of
weapons, including the pass catching LT and Keller and the rookie TE
Cummings? who seems to be able to catch anything. Give credit to the
FO for giving Sanchez the tools he needs to succeed. I hve not been
this excited about Jets WRs since Keyshawn-Chrebet-Ward in 1998, and
the trio now is a lot better, IMO. I sure hope the FO finds a way to
keep JCO, BE and SH for years to come.
4. On the DL, I think Gholston will be cut in the last round of cuts.
If not, he should be. He is flat out awful. He almost made one play
but couldn't finish it. He has no intensity at all and I thought I
saw him quit on more than one play. Rex has to let him go despite the
huge signing bonus he got. There can be no more excuses or tolerance
for his paly. This of course makes the DL as thin as can be (but not
NE thin quite yet). Maybe the Jets FO can troll the waiver wire for
cuts and bring another player or two in because if Ellis goes down,
the DL is in big trouble. BLT (now #58) looked decent out there last
night. I was mildly surprised to see his energy and him making a huge
effort. As for Jason Taylor, what can I say. Seeing him in Jets
green is just weird. They showed the video of him from last season
throwing the ball into the Jets logo on the wall behind the endzone
after running it in following a Shonn Green fumble and then taunting
the crowd, telling us we had nothing several times. I despise him.
Maybe that will change when he starts pressuring opposing QBs and
getting some sacks. Let's see him knock Henne out down in Florida.
But I am thankful he is here because we got nothing in Gholston.
Nothing.
5. Cromartie is incredibly athletic. I thought I saw him quit early
on a couple of plays (recollect Shonn Greene's TD run against the
Chargers last year). But the man can cover!. I just don't want to
see any Kerry Rhodes-like aversion to physical contact, and I thought
Isaw some of that last night, particularly on the Bradshaw 58 yard
catch and run (although Leonard attempt to tackle him was laughable
too). With Revis holding out, I am glad we have the Cromartian
there. I liked what I saw of Wilson last night. What a steal so late
in the draft. Sure tackler. Damn, if Revis gets back, the corners on
this team look match up well with the WR trio. Did anyone watch
Poole? I didn't have my eye on him so I can't comment. Why did
Lowery look so damned bad in the second half? Has he regressed?
6. Folk makes me nervous. One of his FGs from less than 40 squeaked
through and I think he missed a 40+ in the second half. I hate
feeling like we have an iffy kicker, but I fear that we do.
7. Pass protection: Woody showing his age on letting ookie Pierre-
Paul (Rupaul?) fly by him and get to Sanchez or was it just a lack of
effort? Otherwise the line held up well against a consistent pass
rush. Giants seemed to blitz more than usual.
8. Loved watching Eli bleed all over (sorry, but I can't help it)
9. Please lets not start with the Schott shit yet. Dammit it is
preseason and you are only going to see vanilla right now. You guys
can't wait to pounce. Give it a rest at least until after the Ravens
and Pats games. Kill the pre conceived agenda and give this a shot
(no pun intended). If after the Ravens and the Pats his play calling
sucks, then I'll chime in with you, but you are not going to be able
to make a valid judgment (nor should you be) from what you see of his
play calling in pre season. That's just the way it is. Same is true
for any NFL team. I did like some of the plays that allowed Edwards to
get wide open. Very nice. But for pete's sake, dont judge by
preseason palycalling. That's just stupid.
biggest takeaways: Sanchez on the right path. WRs looking good. DL
not so hot on pass rush yet but not much blitzing in a vanilla schele
yesterday. Gholston needs to pack his bags and be logged in as one of
the worst Jets draft picks of all time. Right there with, or worse
than, Johnny Lam Jones, Blair Thomas and many others. Running game
will be very good.
Johnny Morongo
Thanks for the detailed post, Tut, which I agree with for the most
part. I still don't like Schott's play calling. When I can tell what
plays are coming (in the first half, which is all that I really
watched) I have to think that his tendencies are very apparent. You
may have something about Sanchez and his passes to the left side.
Good observation. But the kid still needs a hit in the head with a
ball bat for repeated stupidity. Green is great. McNight was at a
disadvantage though, having to make a gazillion runs into the tackle
holes. He just can't do it. I wonder if it was Rex who wanted to see
what he had in him or if it was Schott's brain dead calls. 1st team D
is very good & will be great when Mevis is back. Liked Slauson's
play. Didn't see much of Holmes though, if at all. Wonder how this
game will play on Hard Knocks.
Michael
> My take:
>5. Why did
>Lowery look so damned bad in the second half? Has he regressed?
Lowery does not have the speed to cover flankers on the fly. He's
fairly instinctive and can stick with slot guys well, but he simply
does not have the speed to stay with fast wr's. They can use him on
slot guys or in a shallow zone, but NO WAY can he play man on wr's.
> 6. Folk makes me nervous. One of his FGs from less than 40 squeaked
> through and I think he missed a 40+ in the second half. I hate
> feeling like we have an iffy kicker, but I fear that we do.
I'd bet folk costs them at least one game. His kick-offs looked good,
but his fg work was shakey.
> 7. Pass protection: Woody showing his age on letting ookie Pierre-
> Paul (Rupaul?) fly...
Woody looked caught off gaurd there....
> 8. Loved watching Eli bleed all over (sorry, but I can't help it)
I like Eli... He seems a very good fellow and a good qb. I wont
project my dislike for giants fans on poor eli... i'm glad he was not
badly hurt.
>Gholston needs to pack his bags and be logged in as one of
> the worst Jets draft picks of all time.
Gholston had nothing. No moves, no technique... He may be athletic,
but he's obviously not a football player...
Hammer
>
> - Show quoted text -
2 things:
1) ESPN made the observation about Sanchez's passes to the left side,
but I don't know if it was based on fact or just unscientific
observation. In general their coverage was very poor in my opinion.
They act like a bunch of frat boys drinking beers and watching the
game rather than knowledgable football commentators.
2) I said that Sanchez's pass was "flukey". I know he forced it and it
was his fault, but it did take a very unlucky bounce off a defender's
back, and he only did forced it the one time.
John C TX
Johnny I haven't re watched the entire 1st half but what about that
first TD drive did you not like? We then settled for FG's on the next
two & the last one a sack made it tough.
MZ
Michael
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> > 5. ducasse and slauson BOTH looked fantastic in general. ducasse has
> > massive power , but still looks raw with his footwork. his feet are
> > fast, but confused. he also seems that he does not rotate much in the
> > hips to push blockers asside. even hunter did some good work. i'm
> > beginning to give callahan more and more credit for the play of the
> > lets offensive line. despite all the changes in who plays where
> > over , the entire line played well as a unit.
>
> Faneca. For whatever his flaws on pass blocking, today he is better
> than both our LG's today. I jut watched the Jets 1st scoring drive
> again. Here is what I saw.
>
> Slauson is not fast enough to get outside on some of the screens we
> run which is important when one of your backs likes to catch the
> ball. He didn't get "blown up" like Faneca, a DT ran around him on a
> pass play. At least Faneca, when beaten, slowed the rusher down. He
> did OK on run blocking but is not the road grader you talked about. I
> also remember a play later in the 1st or 2nd Q when he tried to pull &
> looked like drunk leaving a saloon. Granted he played without Mangold
> but Turner may be the better choice there. I hop eyou are right nut
> you didn't see it in yesterday's game.
John... I was at the game yesteday and did a lot of watching as far as
the line goes. The only guy I saw that got beat badly was Woody by
the Giants new edge guy. I also saw Slauson pull out to the right
several times. He did not look slow to me. On a few of the Green
carries, Slauson mauled the DT. I have to go back and watch the game
to pick out the things you saw.
> As for Callahan, I think he is a step up from what we had.
> I hate that we got rid of Feeley, Faneca & Washington. It ruined our
> offs season and could bite us in the ass.
I can understand the Washington deal, but I dont get the Feeley
thing. That IMHO was their biggest blunder. Folk looks shakey and it
wasnt like Feeley was costing them much. As far as defending my book
on Faneca... I dont have to. I've got the Cards fans to do it for me
now. He's getting smoked in drills by Docket and he'll be getting
smoked in games as well. I would not be surprised if a QB there gets
injured because of it. He's one of the best guards ever to play the
game, but now he's a liability. Not to mention one more time... How
much the Jets paid to bring in a guy that was washed up.
papa.carl44
"John C TX" <johnc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:103dc269-2cdd-4e85...@z28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
X-No-Archive: Yes
> 5. ducasse and slauson BOTH looked fantastic in general. ducasse has
> massive power , but still looks raw with his footwork. his feet are
> fast, but confused. he also seems that he does not rotate much in the
> hips to push blockers asside. even hunter did some good work. i'm
> beginning to give callahan more and more credit for the play of the
> lets offensive line. despite all the changes in who plays where
> over , the entire line played well as a unit.
Michael, stop defending your book when it comes to getting rid of
Faneca. For whatever his flaws on pass blocking, today he is better
than both our LG's today. I jut watched the Jets 1st scoring drive
again. Here is what I saw.
Slauson is not fast enough to get outside on some of the screens we
run which is important when one of your backs likes to catch the
ball. He didn't get "blown up" like Faneca, a DT ran around him on a
pass play. At least Faneca, when beaten, slowed the rusher down. He
did OK on run blocking but is not the road grader you talked about. I
also remember a play later in the 1st or 2nd Q when he tried to pull &
looked like drunk leaving a saloon. Granted he played without Mangold
but Turner may be the better choice there. I hop eyou are right nut
you didn't see it in yesterday's game.
As for Callahan, I think he is a step up from what we had.
I hate that we got rid of Feeley, Faneca & Washington. It ruined our
offs season and could bite us in the ass.
Yup....big time. Especially Feeley and Faneca....I did not see any great
line play from the new gang at all. I'll wait and see what the new RB's do.
Michael
wrote:
> Yup....big time. Especially Feeley and Faneca....I did not see any great
> line play from the new gang at all. I'll wait and see what the new RB's do.
You did not see any good line play ??? For a line that did not have
their center, who is one of the best in the NFL, I think they did a
very good job. I saw a lot of good no frills holes pop open on the
interior of the line. They also gave Sanchez excellent protection. He
had a lot of time to throw the ball.
Johnny Morongo
I don't think I said anything about that first (er, second) drive,
John. The plays that I didn't like were the repeated inside calls for
McKnight. That smacked of his old mule hardheadedness when he gave us
a steady diet of up the gut runs featuring TJ the last two years. Or
don't you remember my nausea at this element of his game planning?
The two FG attempts didn't bother me. I wanted to see Folk kick.
IIRC, he did OK when we were ahead, or tied, but then missed when we
were down.
Michael
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 13:13:03 -0700 (PDT) Johnny Morongo
>
> <j.mireh...@harmonicconcordance.com> wrote:
> >I don't think I said anything about that first (er, second) drive,
> >John. The plays that I didn't like were the repeated inside calls for
> >McKnight. That smacked of his old mule hardheadedness when he gave us
> >a steady diet of up the gut runs featuring TJ the last two years.
>
> this week about how McKnight was gaining all his yards in practice by
> running wide, and Rex wanted to see him running inside the tackles so he
> wouldn't be one dimensional. I personally feel that if they wanted a
> runner who could bust through the line and break off a 50 yard run, then
> they should have kept Leon.
> --
> graybeard
mcnight was not able to crash through what the line gave him like
jones could do, also... for a guy that was billed as being very
fast, he did not appear to me as being too explosive. perhaps he has
some flat out speed to run to the outside, but he does not look like
he is gonna be any use up the gut. may be on a delayed hand off, but
he cant crash through
papa.carl44
"Michael" <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:52f089d9-9632-4e8e...@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
Oh boy....once again, go read what I wrote. There is a signifcant
difference between "Great" and "Good"......I wanted to see a marked
improvement. Clauson has a very hard time pulling and getting out in
front...in that offense that skill is absolutely critical, period.
John C TX
>
> read more »
Johnny if you read what I wrote you will see I wrote 1st TD drive,
stupid.
:)
OK, you are talking about the 2nd half. Maybe the want to get
McKnight some carries or run the plays the reserves would see if
pulled up or maybe Schott sucks biut that would be unfair to reach
that conclusion from watching the 2ndhalf of a pre-season game.
Michael
wrote:
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
Papa... I know you have some real first hand experience with football,
but I'm questioning this here in my ignorance. The Jets ran better
behind Moore last year than they did behind Faneca. Moore is not a
pulling guard. He blows open no frills holes. One and done. Faneca
did run out down field a lot and throw blocks, but he could not move
the pile. I think the Jets want to move the pile. They can get WR's
to throw blocks downfield. All of their power running plays were
right handed last year because Faneca got smoked on the line. Now,
they can run "gut" plays to the right side too. So as far as your
argument that their type of offense needs a pulling specialist at
LG... The way I see it, they had to go with what they had last year.
Meaning a LG that could not blast the type of holes that a ground and
pound "all weather offense" likes to see.
MZ
> All of their power running plays were
> right handed last year because Faneca got smoked on the line.
Or because Faneca could move and Moore can't.
Harlan Lachman
graybeard <gray...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 13:13:03 -0700 (PDT) Johnny Morongo
> <j.mir...@harmonicconcordance.com> wrote:
>
> >I don't think I said anything about that first (er, second) drive,
> >John. The plays that I didn't like were the repeated inside calls for
> >McKnight. That smacked of his old mule hardheadedness when he gave us
> >a steady diet of up the gut runs featuring TJ the last two years.
>
> Johnny, your first instinct was correct. Rex was quoted several times
> this week about how McKnight was gaining all his yards in practice by
> running wide, and Rex wanted to see him running inside the tackles so he
> wouldn't be one dimensional. I personally feel that if they wanted a
> runner who could bust through the line and break off a 50 yard run, then
> they should have kept Leon.
Which one Gray? The Leon before the injury or the one with a rod in his
leg who is still not practicing or playing fully.
Both had unreasonable salary demands.
It may be Leon comes back stronger, a metal man. OTOH, maybe he never
comes back.
But, as much as the morons who say just pay Revis annoy me, at least
Revis is perhaps an indispensable part of the team. The just pay Leon
folks really pissed me off.
I am glad we are not dealing with his agent, his wife, and his
unreasonable demands.
harlan
John C TX
or the TE was on the right or the RB's favor the right or that Sanchez
is right handed or..........
Harlan Lachman
"papa.carl44" <papad...@nospamverizon.net> wrote:
None of these departures, nor James Dearth, bother me. If Revis was not
one of the most selfish players in the league, the only one with a
contract, much less one with three years on it, sitting out of camp,
they would be footnotes.
Our FG unit may suck. I understand the gamble to let a FG kicker who
missed two in the AFC championship game go in order to sign Taylor. I
understand the decision to let Dearth, a guy with only one skill go.
Faneca may be better than Slauson or Ducasse; if he is, it means we
cannot draft or coach up OL because faneca was not great at pass
blocking or straight ahead blocking.
As I posted in another thread, Leon's salary demands were unreasonable
before he got a rod inserted in his leg. He has not fully practiced or
played yet. There is no assurance he ever comes fully back but we got
rid of his agent, his catty wife, and his unreasonable demands.
Our offseason will not be the reason we don't do better than last year.
harlan
Harlan Lachman
MZ <ma...@nospam.void> wrote:
or to make sure Michael gets it:
Faneca pulled as well as anyone. Moore does not. Moore was the better
straight ahead blocker. That meant are best point of attack was having
Faneca pull and support Moore and Woodie.
Even if Faneca did get smoked on straight ahead blocking, had Moore
tried to pull, all he would do was provide comic relief to our opponent.
I sure hope Slauson or Ducasse can pull or we will have no running with
a pulling guard this season.
h
Michael
not a very good point you are making... keller can move better than
both moore and faneca, but i dont think you'd want to plug him in to
the lg spot. faneca is gone because he could not do his job any
longer. i'll say it again... we have wr's to throw blocks down
field. what you need a lg to be able to do is stand up under a pass
rush and move the pile. you dont disregard the absolute importance of
those abilities just because a guy that CANT do EITHER of them any
longer is still willing and able to do the blocking job a wr should
do.
It bothers you because I said faneca was not worth the money and i was
exactly just right. if you and who ever else is in love with the guy,
get his poster and hang it up some place. right now he's exactly in
the right place that is best for the jets. on another team...
MZ
> On Aug 18, 9:59 am, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
>> Michael wrote:
>>> All of their power running plays were
>>> right handed last year because Faneca got smoked on the line.
>> Or because Faneca could move and Moore can't.
>
> not a very good point you are making... keller can move better than
> both moore and faneca, but i dont think you'd want to plug him in to
> the lg spot.
Keller doesn't block on the move better than Faneca.
> faneca is gone because he could not do his job any
> longer. i'll say it again... we have wr's to throw blocks down
> field.
On ILBs?
> what you need a lg to be able to do is stand up under a pass
> rush and move the pile.
And block at the second level. And pull. And do lots of other things.
> It bothers you because I said faneca was not worth the money and i was
> exactly just right. if you and who ever else is in love with the guy,
> get his poster and hang it up some place. right now he's exactly in
> the right place that is best for the jets. on another team...
I'm really starting to wonder why you're so interested in fattening
Woody's wallet.
Michael
mark... i dont understand why you are discounting the point im
making. it is ideal if you have a guard that can pull like faneca IF
he can also do a decent job on the line with pass blocking and hole
blasting. it is fatal to start a guy that cant do those things so
well even if he can still flatten ray lewis in open field with a head
of steam. i was tired of watching him get smoked. he was the worst
pass blocking line guy i have seen the jets dress since the days of
clement and clarke. he was arguably the worst pass blocking G in the
NFL last year.
MZ
I'm discounting your point because you're ignoring one of a guard's
attributes. If what you say is true, that being able to move is not a
good attribute, then teams wouldn't ask their guards to pull or block at
the second level. But 32 teams in the league do. So I have no idea why
you were going down that road. You seem to have softened that stance a
little in the rest of your post, so whatever.
Michael
>
>
>
> > > As for Callahan, I think he is a step up from what we had.
> > > I hate that we got rid of Feeley, Faneca & Washington. It ruined our
> > > offs season and could bite us in the ass.
>
> > I can understand the Washington deal, but I dont get the Feeley
> > thing. That IMHO was their biggest blunder. Folk looks shakey and it
> > wasnt like Feeley was costing them much. As far as defending my book
> > on Faneca... I dont have to. I've got the Cards fans to do it for me
> > now. He's getting smoked in drills by Docket and he'll be getting
> > smoked in games as well. I would not be surprised if a QB there gets
> > injured because of it. He's one of the best guards ever to play the
> > game, but now he's a liability. Not to mention one more time... How
> > much the Jets paid to bring in a guy that was washed up.
>
>
> They had to have someone get taken through FA to take Taylor.
>
> As for Cardinal fans, wow, guys who read about a player getting beat
> in a one on one drill & deciding Faneca is done. The last time I
> watched a game I saw11 guys on the field. Faneca would still be our
> best option at LG this year and if Slaussson or Ducasse work out but
> for $1MM in cash you don't take that risk. as for getting QB's hurt
> watch the 1st TD drive.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
John... It is more than just a few Cards fans pointing out that Faneca
is done. By the numbers and by my eyes, he was the worst pass
blocking guard in the league last year. not to mention... ONE MORE
TIME... his inabilty to push defenders off the line. please let him
retire to canton in peace. remeber namath with the rams ???
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
i was not discounting the importance of pulling. just saying you need
the other things too at a reasonable level. imho, the most value that
we MAY OR MAY NOT have got out of faneca was his effect on brick. on
faneca's watch brick's improvement looked to have quickened a good
deal. may be faneca helped him. who knows... if that was the case,
faneca was worth it. we got a much improved LT out of faneca's
experience and leadership. good lt's are priceless
more on pulling... there has been some recent comments in here from
fans that watched the game that slauson did not look to be able to
pull well. i need to see more first to say yay or ney on that part.
he was never said to be a guy that could not move well.
MZ
I didn't watch the game, so I have no comment. My only contribution was
to say that having mobile guards is very important. It's probably
Mankins' best quality and everybody is creaming their jeans over that guy.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
i agree... if i had the chance, i would trade slauson, turner, hunter
AND ducasse to have faneca as a rookie
John C TX
> is done.
Point them out. Conventional wisdom got us into Iraq. It is worse
with sportswriters.
>By the numbers and by my eyes, he was the worst pass
> blocking guard in the league last year. not to mention... ONE MORE
> TIME... his inabilty to push defenders off the line. please let him
> retire to canton in peace. remeber namath with the rams ???
The worst guard in the league?From a guy who goes to every Jet home
game effectively making you a non-tv watcher half the time. So how did
you see all the guards? The worst guard in the league what are you
smoking?
The point I have made over & over is that Faneca does other things
that make him incredibly valuable. I can accept that a guy without
the benefit of replay can either miss it or disagree with my
position. Why can't you step back & realize the Jets let go of Faneca
for $1MM? My main grip about this is if he truly was not a better
option this year then cut him at the end of camp. That would happen
by measuring him head to head with these two. In an uncapped year
getting one game from the Super Bowl, well that is just stupid.
Comparing him to Namath is just stupid.
Michael
> > John... It is more than just a few Cards fans pointing out that Faneca
> > is done.
>
> Point them out. Conventional wisdom got us into Iraq. It is worse
> with sportswriters.
"Matt Williamson of Scouts Inc. observes that new Cardinals LG Alan
Faneca "is more or less washed up."
"He is a declining player that cannot protect very well," Williamson
said in an ESPN chat. Though Faneca's release from the Jets was
blasted in some circles, the consensus among those who broke down his
2009 play was that the end is nearing for the 33-year-old. The good
news for Arizona is that Faneca can still run block, and the Cards
will be running more this year."
How many more examples do you want ??? You dont have to search too
hard to find more of this. And even if I get you ten more examples,
you'll continue to give your opinion on Faneca more weight than you
give to Tanny, Rex, or me for that matter.
> >By the numbers and by my eyes, he was the worst pass
> > blocking guard in the league last year. not to mention... ONE MORE
> > TIME... his inabilty to push defenders off the line. please let him
> > retire to canton in peace. remeber namath with the rams ???
>
> The worst guard in the league?From a guy who goes to every Jet home
> game effectively making you a non-tv watcher half the time. So how did
> you see all the guards? The worst guard in the league what are you
> smoking?
If my opinions and observations are worthless to you, check the stats.
How may sacks went agaisnt Faneca and how many went against other NFL
guards ???
> The point I have made over & over is that Faneca does other things
> that make him incredibly valuable. I can accept that a guy without
> the benefit of replay can either miss it or disagree with my
> position. Why can't you step back & realize the Jets let go of Faneca
> for $1MM? My main grip about this is if he truly was not a better
> option this year then cut him at the end of camp. That would happen
> by measuring him head to head with these two. In an uncapped year
> getting one game from the Super Bowl, well that is just stupid.
I think they let him go for two reasons. First, they felt he was
dangerous to keep in front of Sanchez and they believed that Slauson,
even though unproven was still better protection. Next... And this is
unfounded and unqualified. I'm obviously not in the locker room, but
I think there was a problem despite his "leader" image. In my job I
get to chat it up with sports fans all over the country. More than
just a few of the Steeler fans have told me that Faneca was "bucking
the system" and the management and coaching was sick of him. I neve
read or heard anything like that, but that is what I have heard. May
be he was pulling the same crap with the Jets. Again.. Just full
blown third party guess work
MZ
I was looking forward to them using Faneca as a TE or lead blocker. I
think he would be excellent in those roles.
papa.carl44
Michael, You just changed the subject. Stick to the point. All I said was
I didn't see any "great" offensive line play and that it does not look like
Slauson can get the job done getting outside. Now if you are going to talk
about WR's throwing the same blocks downfield that a pulling guard does all
your are pointing out to everyone who reads it is you flat out don't
understand the game. Of course a WR is supposed to block downfield, perhaps
the best I've seen at that was Keyshawn Johnson...he got it done in that
respect. But, a pulling guard is the guy who picks up the LB's and backside
linemen reacting to the play and making the cutoffs a completely different
deal......as for all this power stuff, I did not see a lot of Giants D
Linemen getting blown away in a "great" play. It was OK at times...not
GREAT.
papa.carl44
On Aug 18, 9:59 am, MZ <m...@nospam.void> wrote:
> Michael wrote:
> > All of their power running plays were
> > right handed last year because Faneca got smoked on the line.
>
> Or because Faneca could move and Moore can't.
not a very good point you are making... keller can move better than
both moore and faneca, but i dont think you'd want to plug him in to
the lg spot. faneca is gone because he could not do his job any
longer. i'll say it again... we have wr's to throw blocks down
field. what you need a lg to be able to do is stand up under a pass
rush and move the pile. you dont disregard the absolute importance of
those abilities just because a guy that CANT do EITHER of them any
longer is still willing and able to do the blocking job a wr should
do.
Michael...this statement shows clearly you have NO understanding of how the
game works or what a pulling guard does and it has NOTHING in common with
what the TE or the WR does. Period. I don't want to seem disrespectful,
but you are going somewhere you should not, it does not make any sense.
papa.carl44
"MZ" <ma...@nospam.void> wrote in message
news:X8udnUz2u7lwnPHR...@giganews.com...
In fact...the entire evolution of the position of guard involves the ability
to pull and either lead the play, turn up field and then pick off the first
threat from the inside, not down the field and if no threat appears continue
to the next level...usually the pulling guard winds up getting the trailing
LB or sealing the play from the inside or kicking it out and the play goes
up inside the TE...all of this does not even account for all the
misdirection pulling that goes on these days and pulling out to give some
cover to a QB who is rolling. True, there have been a few offenses that
give this job to tackles at times...and the guards are more of a driving
unit...but it ain't the Jets offense.
papa.carl44
"Harlan Lachman" <har...@eeivt.com> wrote in message
news:harlan-A29A71....@news60.forteinc.com...
And you may be correct....I hope so.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
i know what line backer is. now it is you that needs to go back and
read what i have been saying. it is nakedly antagonistic for you to
suggest that i dont understand the game. the point im making about
faneca is that the only unique thing i saw him do was to get far down
in front of the play and take out DB's. you dont see guards do that
too often. we all know lb's need to be cleared out by the guys on
the line. why do you insist that faneca is the only guy that can make
it to a lb ??? may be it is you that needs a little refresher clinic
this time out. it is an ideal to have a guard that can do an
extraordinarly job pulling if he can also do the other things a guard
needs to do. with that said, i wound not give a bucket of piss for
any guard that cant pass protect or move the pile no matter how he
pulls.
Michael
wrote:
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
go back and read what i wrote above.. i'm telling you the only unique
thing i saw faneca do was get far down field. im not talking about
clearing out lbs. "pulling" and "blocking".... yes... i know what
both are... i did 30 years ago when i first started watching. i think
next you are going to say that i cant read or write... you are a bit
compulsive in cutting me down. faneca is washed up... just accept
it... we dont need a guard to take out db's and faneca is not the only
guy that knows how to take a step up, turn to his right and cut of a
lb. must have been his 4.3 speed.
papa.carl44
I never once mentioned Faneca. I only commented on what I think I saw in
one game, you assumed it was a shout for Faneca...I don't care who they have
playing as long as the guy gets the job done. I thought Clauson looked very
awkward and slow at pulling...end of discussion.
papa.carl44
What you are describing is a best case scenario usually. That meant that
the "flow" got caught up in all the movement on the line, actually cut off
because the play side O line was moving people off the ball, that is when
the pulling guard is free to keep moving down the field leading a play. And
if a guard or tackle gets into that level they don't even have to hit
anybody, they take up enough space and are that much of a threat...DB's do
get out of their way to live to play again. The guard that has difficulty
with pass protection but does other things well is the guy who gets assigned
help by a RB staying in. I'm not advocating for Faneca...only looking at
what gets done now...and I need to see some more games.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
clauson ??? you mean slauson ??? you are now the third experienced guy
i know that said slauson looked slow on monday. we'll have to watch
more to see for sure. i want to see how the line works with mangold
in there. the next game is an away game. so i wont be able to stay on
the line. next wednesday, hard knox will feature the slauson/ducasse
battle... i wonder if we'll hear anything telling one way or the
other.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
clearly you know a lot more than i do about the nuts and bolts... no
argument there as i have never played or coached. i also agree we
need to see more of slauson and vlad. they only thing i was sure of
was poor pass protection and point of attack by faneca. my early
assessment of slauson is a rank amatures opinion, but i think my
reasoning was sound. i still think he'll start... if you are right
about him being slow it would probably mean he'll be replaced by the
faster guy, Ducasse when he's got more of the offense and technique
worked out
John C TX
> On Aug 18, 3:18 pm, John C TX <johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > John... It is more than just a few Cards fans pointing out that Faneca
> > > is done.
>
> > Point them out. Conventional wisdom got us into Iraq. It is worse
> > with sportswriters.
>
> "Matt Williamson of Scouts Inc. observes that new Cardinals LG Alan
> Faneca "is more or less washed up."
>
> "He is a declining player that cannot protect very well," Williamson
> said in an ESPN chat. Though Faneca's release from the Jets was
> blasted in some circles, the consensus among those who broke down his
> 2009 play was that the end is nearing for the 33-year-old. The good
> news for Arizona is that Faneca can still run block, and the Cards
> will be running more this year."
>
> How many more examples do you want ??? You dont have to search too
> hard to find more of this. And even if I get you ten more examples,
> you'll continue to give your opinion on Faneca more weight than you
> give to Tanny, Rex, or me for that matter.
You give me one example that proves my point, so thanks, this guy who
has done little scouting, is from Pittsburgh, and works for a web site
has decided he is done. Do you have any idea what they get paid?
there is areason he is writing for a website. HS head football
coaches make 3X what these guys do. Assistants in teh right school
districts mke 2 -3X what these guys make.
He may be done but as you are prone to do, you can't stay with the
discussion. This usually happens because you fire off something
stupid and can't defend it. My point all along was that for $1MM
Faneca should have been brought to camp. I still maintain he is better
than what we have this year and losing him restricts what we can do
when we have the ball.
>
> > >By the numbers and by my eyes, he was the worst pass
> > > blocking guard in the league last year. not to mention... ONE MORE
> > > TIME... his inabilty to push defenders off the line. please let him
> > > retire to canton in peace. remeber namath with the rams ???
>
> > The worst guard in the league?From a guy who goes to every Jet home
> > game effectively making you a non-tv watcher half the time. So how did
> > you see all the guards? The worst guard in the league what are you
> > smoking?
>
> If my opinions and observations are worthless to you, check the stats.
> How may sacks went agaisnt Faneca and how many went against other NFL
> guards ???
Think again about what you wrote, "the worst guard in the league."
>
> > The point I have made over & over is that Faneca does other things
> > that make him incredibly valuable. I can accept that a guy without
> > the benefit of replay can either miss it or disagree with my
> > position. Why can't you step back & realize the Jets let go of Faneca
> > for $1MM? My main grip about this is if he truly was not a better
> > option this year then cut him at the end of camp. That would happen
> > by measuring him head to head with these two. In an uncapped year
> > getting one game from the Super Bowl, well that is just stupid.
>
> I think they let him go for two reasons. First, they felt he was
> dangerous to keep in front of Sanchez and they believed that Slauson,
> even though unproven was still better protection. Next... And this is
> unfounded and unqualified. I'm obviously not in the locker room, but
> I think there was a problem despite his "leader" image. In my job I
> get to chat it up with sports fans all over the country. More than
> just a few of the Steeler fans have told me that Faneca was "bucking
> the system" and the management and coaching was sick of him. I neve
> read or heard anything like that, but that is what I have heard. May
> be he was pulling the same crap with the Jets. Again.. Just full
> blown third party guess work
If you remember from Day one I said there has to be another issue
because this is too stupid a football move.
papa.carl44
Right...Slauson....names get harder and harder when you get this old and
have been hit in the head this many times...to say nothring of all the
anasthesia and the beer from back in the day.
Michael
John... As I said... I figured you would discount anything I offered
to demonstrate that Faneca is now less capable than other options.
And I have never once said that they Jets should not have held on to
him and cut him in camp. I suggested that the Jets migth have done so
to give him an early start on looking for a new gig since they were
SURE he was a liability. Of course, you still persist on saying that
I did not speak to that point. I dont agree with you that he is better
than what we have. He cant get the job done and I dont care how good
he is at pulling if he cant stop a bull rusher or create any
sembelance of a hole at the line.
> > > >By the numbers and by my eyes, he was the worst pass
> > > > blocking guard in the league last year. not to mention... ONE MORE
> > > > TIME... his inabilty to push defenders off the line. please let him
> > > > retire to canton in peace. remeber namath with the rams ???
>
> > > The worst guard in the league?From a guy who goes to every Jet home
> > > game effectively making you a non-tv watcher half the time. So how did
> > > you see all the guards? The worst guard in the league what are you
> > > smoking?
>
> > If my opinions and observations are worthless to you, check the stats.
> > How may sacks went agaisnt Faneca and how many went against other NFL
> > guards ???
>
> Think again about what you wrote, "the worst guard in the league."
How many sacks did he allow ???
> The point I have made over & over is that Faneca does other things
> > > that make him incredibly valuable. I can accept that a guy without
> > > the benefit of replay can either miss it or disagree with my
> > > position. Why can't you step back & realize the Jets let go of Faneca
> > > for $1MM? My main grip about this is if he truly was not a better
> > > option this year then cut him at the end of camp. That would happen
> > > by measuring him head to head with these two. In an uncapped year
> > > getting one game from the Super Bowl, well that is just stupid.
>
> > I think they let him go for two reasons. First, they felt he was
> > dangerous to keep in front of Sanchez and they believed that Slauson,
> > even though unproven was still better protection. Next... And this is
> > unfounded and unqualified. I'm obviously not in the locker room, but
> > I think there was a problem despite his "leader" image. In my job I
> > get to chat it up with sports fans all over the country. More than
> > just a few of the Steeler fans have told me that Faneca was "bucking
> > the system" and the management and coaching was sick of him. I neve
> > read or heard anything like that, but that is what I have heard. May
> > be he was pulling the same crap with the Jets. Again.. Just full
> > blown third party guess work
>
> If you remember from Day one I said there has to be another issue
> because this is too stupid a football move.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
There may or may not be another issue... We have a lot to go on as far
as performance related reasons and nothing solid to go on as far as
"attitude" or "personality" issues.
It could very well have been that they were 100 % convinced he was a
danger and they let him get an early start on finding a new job. It
is thin, but in the end, ultimately, it was performance related. Who
knows for sure why they did not bring him to camp.
John C TX
You did write they should not have brought him to camp. Look it up.
You are also the guy who claimed Napoleon beat the Russians but why
bring up old posts. Johnny will remind me I liked Hobson.
If you remember what triggered this thread was your comment on how
good Slauson & Ducasse looked. I called BS because I actually watched
it a second time and that didn't happen.
I believe he gave up 6.5 sacks last year. It isn't a stat maintained
by the league. You might take a look at 2008's stats. Would you cut
Mankins & Hutchinson as well? It is one part of his job.
26. Logan Mankins (Pats) 5.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)
26. Andrew Whitworth (Bengals) 5.0 sacks allowed (10 starts)
28. Daryn Colledge (Packers) 6.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)
29. Steve Hutchinson (Vikings) 7.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-
BOWL*
29. Alan Faneca (Jets) 7.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*
31. Chris Kemoeatu (Steelers) 7.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)
32. Derrick Dockery (Bills) 8.25 sacks allowed (16 starts)
Michael
<SNIP>
> You did write they should not have brought him to camp. Look it up.
> You are also the guy who claimed Napoleon beat the Russians but why
> bring up old posts. Johnny will remind me I liked Hobson.
I was GLAD they did not bring him in to camp. I could really care
less if they kept him until the end of camp or not. I'm SURE we have
better. I have agreed that your point has merret, and it would not
have cost them to hold on to Faneca for a few more weeks. In the end,
same result... He's gone and they are better for it.
And by the way... I said Napoleon achieved his military objectives in
the Russian campaign. He did, indeed. What happened after Moscow was
a result of misjudging the political climate. Tchikovsky wrote his
little overture in celebration of a battle that his royalist pals
lost. And I think it was you that said the US army blew it by
rejecting the Spencer. "But why bring up old posts"
> If you remember what triggered this thread was your comment on how
> good Slauson & Ducasse looked. I called BS because I actually watched
> it a second time and that didn't happen.
They did look good. And I've been saying all along that Vlad needs a
lot of polish. I ALSO wrote that in the post. Selective amnesia,
John ??? And I went back and watched my tape of the game. I dont
think Slauson looked criticaly slow. Not at all. I saw him trip up
going to the right, but I'm not going to sum it up to mean that he
cant pull. But then again John... You can just "call bs". I was not
watching the game. I'm not even a Jet fan. When the games are on,
I'm not really at the stadium, right ??? I'm alone in a dark room with
a bottle of J&B. This way you dont need so much merrit to any of your
points. Nice and easy...
> I believe he gave up 6.5 sacks last year. It isn't a stat maintained
> by the league. You might take a look at 2008's stats. Would you cut
> Mankins & Hutchinson as well? It is one part of his job.
>
> 26. Logan Mankins (Pats) 5.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)
> 26. Andrew Whitworth (Bengals) 5.0 sacks allowed (10 starts)
> 28. Daryn Colledge (Packers) 6.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)
> 29. Steve Hutchinson (Vikings) 7.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-
> BOWL*
> 29. Alan Faneca (Jets) 7.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*
> 31. Chris Kemoeatu (Steelers) 7.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)
> 32. Derrick Dockery (Bills) 8.25 sacks allowed (16 starts)- Hide quoted text -
I cant say that I saw too much of any of those guys. I did see plenty
of Faneca and I was sick of watching the guy get smoked. It reminded
me of Adrian Clarke. I honestly did not see any NFL guards get blown-
up as badly and as often as he did.
John C TX
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 13:45:17 -0700 (PDT) Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> >On Aug 19, 3:42 pm, John C TX <johnctxj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> JETS! Just End The Squabble!
>
> Christ, pedantry can be boring.
> --
> graybeard
fair enough
John C TX
> Christ, pedantry can be boring.
> --
> graybeard
& don't call Michael a pedant
:)
Michael
aww, man... i was hoping to break 100 posts...
i'm gonna say we'll have more to write about in a new thread after
next wednesday's hard knox about the vlad/slauson battle. the preview
looked as if that will play heavy...
papa.carl44
My guess is they trade Clemmens for a guard....
Michael
wrote:
> "Michael" <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
you know... i cant believe im gonna say this... i thought clemmens did
well on monday...
Harlan Lachman
<6930ab52-b6ca-47af...@s9g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
John C TX <johnc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> > It may be Leon comes back stronger, a metal man. OTOH, maybe he never
> > comes back.
> >
> > But, as much as the morons who say just pay Revis annoy me, at least
> > Revis is perhaps an indispensable part of the team. The just pay Leon
> > folks really pissed me off.
> >
> > I am glad we are not dealing with his agent, his wife, and his
> > unreasonable demands.
> >
> > harlan
>
> H, we had him cheap this year. To me a 4th rounder, especially when
> the 4th rounder is McKnight makes little sense. If we took another
> player, maybe, but I would be happy to have him right now.
>
> http://blog.seahawks.com/2010/08/11/wednesday-in-hawkville-25/
And, I am still glad his agent, wife and demands are gone and he will
have to take less from another team even though we could have made him
stay another year on the cheap.
h
papa.carl44
He did...quite well, that's why they are gonna get a good guard for him.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
i'm not so sure they gonna trade him... i also think the jets feel
that they are in decent shape with vlad, slauson, hunter, turner...
unless they consider smith their # 3 qb, with ainge up the spout in
rehab, they may keep clemmens and brunell too... this is gonna be
interesting...
also worth considering... clemmens was playing against scrubs and the
game was fairly well dialed down... i wonder if clemmens would look as
good agaisnt a first team defense with the pace jacked up...
papa.carl44
They did not bring in Brunell to be with Babyface Sanchez to cut him post
training camp.
They will keep Kevin O'Connell. Ainge is history at this point, forget about
him, he isn't even on the roster list.
Smith is always an option, he is a bonus in that. So I think they will have
Sanchez, Brunell, O'Connel and Smith as the bonus.
Clemens will get traded, I'm sure of it...but I've been wrong before. They
are very thin...no depth, it may not be a guard but they will add some depth
with the move I think.
John C TX
He did. I think O'Connell looked awful but o did Brunnell.
btw Bomar looked good but I thought Ratliff would start for Cleveland
last year.
Michael
>
> - Show quoted text -
i thought o'connel looked awful... though, i admit i had my mind made
up about him given where he came from... if the bb camp cant do
anything with him, it is like the rex camp not being able to do
anything with a lb they are trying to develop. no stops for you left
after those i'd guess...
papa.carl44
"John C TX" <johnc...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0b3deeb5-817a-4392...@x21g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
If we want to get really honest about this...Sanchez did not "amaze" me
either....I did look at him though and work my way down. I just can't see
them trading Brunell, they have him there to calm down Sanchez and mentor
him.....the others are not tradable so that leaves Clemens. They intend to
play Sanchez no matter what, and if he goes down, probably their best hope
would be Smith and some kind of Wildcat offense or something....after four
games they have some WR's in the house...then they could trade one of them
or something....but they have got to get some depth on that team....they are
hurtin beyond the starters from my observation, which is very limited...I'd
love to sit at camp for a day or two.