Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pre-season Game 1 Discussion

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Pre-season Game 1 Discussion

    Looks like Hart started at S, and Floyd started at WR (davis at the three)


    sig by bosanac01

  • #2
    Quick Notes from the game: the starters looked vary shaky- not that they arent as talented as last year, but that the communication wasnt there..

    I don't know if Marty not being the coach any more but ill tell you guys what, if Marty's team went out and had a bunch of stupid penalties, didnt look focused, organized or motivated.. they would get a good ear full

    I'm worried about the team- the talent is there the preperation is not. (the mccree td is a perfect example)

    On the positive side, its the first pre season game..
    Last edited by Average OT LB; 08-13-2007, 01:39 AM. Reason: to add 'last year'


    sig by bosanac01

    Comment


    • #3
      Okay I'll give a run-down as far as what I can remember, just off the top of my head...

      The game started out kind of sloppy, there were some drops, sacks, fumbles, and a whole lot of penalties. That's too be expected of an early game like this, but the penalties really killed us. I'll try to break it down by position, since I'm having trouble remembering specific things, and I didn't write anything down during the game.

      Quarterback
      Rivers looked pretty good I thought, he threw mostly short passes, but didn't throw any bad passes which was key. He could have gotten rid of the ball a little better on the two sacks, but a lot of that was the fault of the O-Line. It's also important to remember Rivers typically got better as the games went on last year, so him starting out solid was a big thing...Floyd didn't help him with that drop either, though he played probably the best out of all our WRs. Volek didn't look terrible as a backup either, though he has to make sure he holds on to the ball better. On that fumble the defense came straight through, but he's gotta keep two hands on the ball in the pocket. He played real well in the third quarter though, especially with the TD Whitehurst was hard to judge, but he was rather average if not unimpressive...I'd like to see him play with some of the other units, but still, he is only the third string QB, and I wouldn't get too happy or upset with him just yet in his career.

      Running Back
      Tomlinson Looked great on the sidelines, really made the team look good :-P...Turner looked explosive and ran hard like he usually did, though he only got four carries, so there wasn't much to judge him on. Sproles on the other hand, I thought really made a big statement about himself. He could play a role in this season as well as next, in the draw and screen game. He's a little guy but he sure as hell is quick, and sure runs a lot bigger then he is. He was explosive and powerful, and I think calmed a lot of people's nerves about him, and maybe quieted the speculation on him being cut. I was most impressed with his play on offense. Gross only had the two carries for 12 yards, but he looks like the kind of guy who will work hard. I doubt he makes the team when its all said and done, but there could be a spot on the practice squad for him. Pinnock I'm just not a huge fan of. I don't like him running the ball, and I don't like him blocking. I don't think he made a big statement for himself in this game, but he still has three more chances to do it. He'll make the team, almost by default, in my opinion. Neal I was disapointed that he didn't make that 4th and 1, but as a blocker, he did fine as usual, no complaints.

      Wide Receivers
      I felt the wide receivers were really up and down this game. Vincent Jackson had the one catch, that was nice, but then fumbled the ball, and got called on holding, although with the way he typically blocks down field I'll take that penalty, although it set us back quite a bit. Overall he needs to play better if he's going to be a number one guy for us this year. Craig Davis had the first catch and looked great on it, but then he fumbled the end-around. The bad news, obviosuly is that he could not handle the ball, but on the bright side, it does look as if they are trying to involve Davis a good deal, and that end around was set up, from what I saw at least, very well. It was an average performance from him on a day where I felt our rookies did well. Floyd had me really mad with that dropped ball, since it would have been a huge conversion on a ball with nice touch by Rivers. He had no excuse to drop that ball, but he did have, proabably, the best game out of all our Wide Receivers. Overall, he looked the best, although he was also targeted much more frequently. Naanee I was very impressed with. I felt all our rookies did well today, but Naanee looked like he's going to make an impact this year, and even had some work with the first team, though he didn't do much with them. He looks like he can be used everywhere, and didn't make any bad plays, and did make a couple good ones. Impressive performance from him. Camarillo and Osgood both looked decent, but played against much weaker players. Osgood will clearly make the team because of special teams, but this might be the year Camarillo is cut. We already have 6 WRs, assuming VJ, Davis, Floyd, Parker, Naanee, and Osgood make it. I feel he's the odd man out.

      Tight Ends
      Gates was Antonio Gates. No bad plays were made, and he made one really good play. What more did we want from him, I didn't want him in the game that much anyway. Chandler sure looked great though. He could prove to be very useful. If we can line him up at TE this year, and count on him, that lets us split out Gates more often, and could be huge for our passing game. As a receiver, he sure looked great out there, another rookie who did well.

      O-Line
      I'm not going to go to indepth with them, but I'm going to say they played very average. McNeill flat out missed a block that led to a sack. Hopefully, that is something that we can already eliminate as happening again, and be something we don't have to worry about. I was disapointed in him, as he was so money last year, and didn't come off as strong today. We also didn't pick up a blitz, though in the line's defense, they brought 6 and we blocked with 5...that would be hard to pick up anytime, especially preseason. The push was there, for the most part, on the running plays. But the pass blocking has to improve. Too often Rivers could not step up to throw, and Volek and Whitehurst were hit often.

      D-Line
      To be honest, I was more focused on the Linebackers and Secondary, so if someone else feels like highlighting them, it would be appreciated. I know Jamal did well, he always does, but unfortunately I did not pay as much attention as I would have liked. Maybe I'll rewatch the game tomorrow, and post more information, but for now, I can't say much about them. Does anyone know why Oshlansky didn't start though, I doubt it's seirous I just didn't know.

      Linebackers
      I would have liked to see Wilhelm play today, but unfortunately he did not. Cooper did not do much out there, for someone who is expected to start the season, but didn't look terrible either. He wasn't one of the key guys I was focusing in on though, since his role is pretty much established. One guy who I lost a lot of confidence in is Dobbins. I don't feel he can play at an NFL starting level yet, which is concerning since he started the game. He was too often being pushed back, not getting off blocks, and just getting in the way, which we can't afford. That is not what we need from our linebackers, and I feel he can't start, based on today. Waters on the other hand, I was very happy with. Another rookie who did well, Waters was much better with getting off blocks then Dobbins, and made many more impact plays I felt, and was more often to the ball, despite having less tackles. I also felt he was much more aware in coverage and run support then Dobbins was, despite being a rookie. Polk played well, and according to NFL.com led the Chargers in tackles, but also played a significantly while longer. He looks like he'll be average, but nothing special. Merriman and Phillips did not play long enough for me to judge, although neither of them really got that close to the QB when they were in, which borderline concerns me. Though its still early, it would have been nice if they were able to rush the passer a little better, especially on the opening drive where the secondary was more or less torn apart. Harris looked decent out there, and is always a solid depth guy. The rest, are mostly insignifcant, or I forgot to mention them, but no one else really caught my eye in the linebacking core.

      Secondary
      This was something I was focusing big on this game. Jammer is obviously the guy to start with, since he's our leader in the secondary. There wasn't much to say about him, he wasn't in there too long. Unfortunately he got a lot of blame for the touchdown that McCree let up. He could have played it better, but McCree was backpedalling and should have been over the top on that. That play shouldn't go against Jammer. Florence I thought played well, and I'm really bummed he wont be here next year. His pick was nice, it shows he's been working on his hands big time, which he has, but it also came with a penalty, and a rather obvious one. That's gotta be fixed, but it is still early, and overall I thought he looked decent out there. Cromartie I didn't see much of out there, which isn't bad or good. If I'm mistaken someone let me know, since I was mostly focusing on Weddle when he was out there, but I didn't see Cromartie get beat very often, which is a good sign. He won't start this year, which means he'll still have time to grow as well. Hart really didn't show me anything, and I think Weddle far outpreformed him today. Granted, he wasn't out there as long, and he didn't make any huge mistakes, but he didn't make many plays either. McCree I was furious with. For a guy who is our best safety, and should be a leader in the secondary, he cannot get beat in quarters, where he has the deep middle/right part of the field. It made the secondary look much worse then it played, and it looked really poor for Jammer. Hopefully it was just something he was confused on and can be fixed in films before the season starts, but that's not a great way to start off. Weddle I was so impressed with. His interception was nice, however it really was kind of given to him. It was an overthrow that went right in his area, but credit should still be given for making the play. His intensity though was great. He was always hitting or always moving, and always ready to play. He read the run and pass well, and was always up in run support, or on his zone/man in coverage. I couldn't have been happier with him, he's a smart kid. Gordon I thought looked very poor, and was not impressed with. I feel he'll be cut this year but I could be wrong. Oliver was beat bad on the touchdown, and played the worst of all the rookies in my opinion. Granted he's been with the team the shortest, but his speed looked to be a concern. He did however have burst on the blitz and tracked down Wallace, so maybe it was just nerves that got him, but his coverage skills have to improve. I think he'll make the team as the fourth corner, behind Jammer, Florence, and Cro, but I feel Weddle would go in at corner before he did. Basically He's there to be groomed for nickel next year.

      Special Teams
      Kaeding and Scifres both looked great, Kaeding made the 50 yarder, Scifres had some booming punts. The coverage was pretty good all around, but the return game was just average. I didn't focus much on special teams this game.

      Overall
      Sloppy first half, as to be expected. Who knows how much missing LT hurt us though, he's our team, so naturally the offense won't be as crisp. I liked what I saw out of all the rookies though. The big concerns I have right now is if the O-Line can play at least years level, if the receivers can stay focused (VJ, Davis, Floyd mainly), how the linebackers will play, and how our pass rush will be. Overall, not a terrible game, but not a great one either. We need better preparation.

      Comment


      • #4
        Again i think we the subtration of Marty our team has taken a large step backward. remember, where Marty was weak (offense) cameron was amazing... I keep hearing that this Norv thing will maintain the offense and not hurt the defense (since he wouldnt change it) but i disagree greatly..

        In san francisco rememeber what he did- he turned alex smith into an okay quarterback. Now im not bashing smith but there is a reason for that... Norv had a very conservative offense focusing on ball control .. Sound firmiliar? If you guys recall, LT ways a 100 rec runningback with that kind of offense... alot of short passes to the running back .. a short inside run.. then shotgun on third down.. Extremely predictable, very dependent on the runningback..I dont like it becuase the TE doesnt get involved and the WR dont go long

        on the positive side, thats exactly what our offense is

        who's this cottrell guy and what the hell is he doing?


        sig by bosanac01

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Average OT LB View Post
          Again i think we the subtration of Marty our team has taken a large step backward. remember, where Marty was weak (offense) cameron was amazing... I keep hearing that this Norv thing will maintain the offense and not hurt the defense (since he wouldnt change it) but i disagree greatly..

          In san francisco rememeber what he did- he turned alex smith into an okay quarterback. Now im not bashing smith but there is a reason for that... Norv had a very conservative offense focusing on ball control .. Sound firmiliar? If you guys recall, LT ways a 100 rec runningback with that kind of offense... alot of short passes to the running back .. a short inside run.. then shotgun on third down.. Extremely predictable, very dependent on the runningback..I dont like it becuase the TE doesnt get involved and the WR dont go long

          on the positive side, thats exactly what our offense is

          who's this cottrell guy and what the hell is he doing?
          The reason I'm not worried about Norv's offense is because like you said, that's what our offense is catered to. Short, precise passes, focussed around the running game and Tomlinson. It's what our receivers are set up for, and it's what our running game is best used with. The reason I am not as concerned as you is because look at the invovlement our TE's did have in the preseason game. Chandler looked great out there, and Rivers' first (I think) completion was on the rollout to Gates, a play that went for 18 yards. Hopefully the addition of Davis, and what looked like Norv trying to utilize him early on, will allow Norv to go deep, but if not, I'm still not concerned, Davis' speed alone could stretch the field both on revereses (opens up the middle for the run), and on deep decoy routes (opens up the underneath for VJ, Floyd, and Gates).

          Defense though, I am a little concerned with Cotrell. What I Hope is he was simply keeping the defense quiet and vanilla, because it was the first preseason game. But we got next to no pressure at all on any of the quarterbacks, until the end of the game with Oliver. That flat out can't happen, we need to be aggressive and crazy with our blitzes, it's what the defense is suited for. We can't afford to not let Merriman, Phillips, Castillo, and the other linebackers mix it up a little to get after the QB.

          Overall, my biggest dissapointment in the coaching staff was the terrible discipline we had. That was the biggest fear going into the year, how Norv would uphold the team's discipline, and if he could match what Marty did, not on the field but in the locker room, and he failed miserably at that last night. The playcalling on offense and defense can be chalked up to not wanting to be too creative in the first game of the preseason, so don't get too worried about the offense being predictable, or the defense not being like Wade's (though I admit, I am a little worried myself about the defense). It is also possible though, the reason you find the playcalling so predictable is because you've followed the offense for so long you know what to expect. Almost all offenses will be predictable if you've studied them long enough, but no matter how predictable they are, Norv, for the most part, has always had success with his offenses.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JK17 View Post
            The reason I'm not worried about Norv's offense is because like you said, that's what our offense is catered to. Short, precise passes, focussed around the running game and Tomlinson. It's what our receivers are set up for, and it's what our running game is best used with. The reason I am not as concerned as you is because look at the invovlement our TE's did have in the preseason game. Chandler looked great out there, and Rivers' first (I think) completion was on the rollout to Gates, a play that went for 18 yards. Hopefully the addition of Davis, and what looked like Norv trying to utilize him early on, will allow Norv to go deep, but if not, I'm still not concerned, Davis' speed alone could stretch the field both on revereses (opens up the middle for the run), and on deep decoy routes (opens up the underneath for VJ, Floyd, and Gates).

            Defense though, I am a little concerned with Cotrell. What I Hope is he was simply keeping the defense quiet and vanilla, because it was the first preseason game. But we got next to no pressure at all on any of the quarterbacks, until the end of the game with Oliver. That flat out can't happen, we need to be aggressive and crazy with our blitzes, it's what the defense is suited for. We can't afford to not let Merriman, Phillips, Castillo, and the other linebackers mix it up a little to get after the QB.

            Overall, my biggest dissapointment in the coaching staff was the terrible discipline we had. That was the biggest fear going into the year, how Norv would uphold the team's discipline, and if he could match what Marty did, not on the field but in the locker room, and he failed miserably at that last night. The playcalling on offense and defense can be chalked up to not wanting to be too creative in the first game of the preseason, so don't get too worried about the offense being predictable, or the defense not being like Wade's (though I admit, I am a little worried myself about the defense). It is also possible though, the reason you find the playcalling so predictable is because you've followed the offense for so long you know what to expect. Almost all offenses will be predictable if you've studied them long enough, but no matter how predictable they are, Norv, for the most part, has always had success with his offenses.
            I agree mostly with what you've said..

            to extend on it- Although i do find it a factor, the duration and extent to how i watch games, but i still think its predictable. Look as far back as the washington term he spent at the helm, and maybe some Mr. Concussion (his OC stint w/cowboys). Largely the offense consisted of short passes - big time west coast stuff. I seriously disapprove with that strategy because i believe it just stunts the growth of all the players involved.. how are our young recievers gonna get better? VJ isnt good at running slants but thats all hes gonna be doing. Rivers? forget about him throwing deep over the middle- thats something that will not be exploited in this offense.

            I'm just concerned with a 2 minute offense and the weaknesses of our recievers being exploited. I see now why we didnt go after jarrett (although im still confused why we didnt go after rice) .. because davis is the quick good handed reciever we need.. I expect him to start double digit games this year


            sig by bosanac01

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Average OT LB View Post
              I agree mostly with what you've said..

              to extend on it- Although i do find it a factor, the duration and extent to how i watch games, but i still think its predictable. Look as far back as the washington term he spent at the helm, and maybe some Mr. Concussion (his OC stint w/cowboys). Largely the offense consisted of short passes - big time west coast stuff. I seriously disapprove with that strategy because i believe it just stunts the growth of all the players involved.. how are our young recievers gonna get better? VJ isnt good at running slants but thats all hes gonna be doing. Rivers? forget about him throwing deep over the middle- thats something that will not be exploited in this offense.

              I'm just concerned with a 2 minute offense and the weaknesses of our recievers being exploited. I see now why we didnt go after jarrett (although im still confused why we didnt go after rice) .. because davis is the quick good handed reciever we need.. I expect him to start double digit games this year
              Hopefully we see both sides, offense and defense develop some more wrinkles before the season starts. And hopefully we learn how to stop committing penalties too.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by JK17 View Post
                Hopefully we see both sides, offense and defense develop some more wrinkles before the season starts. And hopefully we learn how to stop committing penalties too.
                On a positive note i thought dobbins played very well.. but the DE that replaced Igor just simply isnt strong enough to be a quality backup


                sig by bosanac01

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Average OT LB View Post
                  On a positive note i thought dobbins played very well.. but the DE that replaced Igor just simply isnt strong enough to be a quality backup
                  I disagree on that, I was very disapointed with how Dobbins played. Everytime I saw him he was in the way, or getting pushed back by a blocker, or too slow in coverage. I thought he struggled way toooo much to be a starter at this point in his career. For depth he's fine, but I expected him to play much better, since he started the game.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by JK17 View Post
                    I disagree on that, I was very disapointed with how Dobbins played. Everytime I saw him he was in the way, or getting pushed back by a blocker, or too slow in coverage. I thought he struggled way toooo much to be a starter at this point in his career. For depth he's fine, but I expected him to play much better, since he started the game.
                    Didn't you say that weddle played very well because he was showing alot of effort and went 110%? to me dobbins had a constant motor and never slowed up.. he may have been slowed in the running game, and doesnt have the mobility one would like in the passing game but he had a constant motor and thats all you can ask for from a backup. As far as weddle who ill agree with you played well, but didnt exactly seperate himself from dobbins preformance. the only differences i can see is the positions they play, and the seattle quarterbacks reluctance to test weddle and scramble more. IMO dobbins weaknesses were exposed and the game played to teh secondaries strengths..


                    sig by bosanac01

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Average OT LB View Post
                      Didn't you say that weddle played very well because he was showing alot of effort and went 110%? to me dobbins had a constant motor and never slowed up.. he may have been slowed in the running game, and doesnt have the mobility one would like in the passing game but he had a constant motor and thats all you can ask for from a backup. As far as weddle who ill agree with you played well, but didnt exactly seperate himself from dobbins preformance. the only differences i can see is the positions they play, and the seattle quarterbacks reluctance to test weddle and scramble more. IMO dobbins weaknesses were exposed and the game played to teh secondaries strengths..
                      I didn't see the motor out of Dobbins, as much as I saw it out of some of the other linebackers, like Waters who I thought played great. Weddle did have his motor going 110% and never slowed up, but he made things happen when they did. As far as a backup, yeah Dobbins is okay, what I mean is as a starter I'm disapointed. He might not have slowed up, but he was constantly pushed backwards and out of position. This is different from Weddle, Weddle hawked to the ball and was always in position to make the plays, whereas Dobbins was there....downfield.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by JK17 View Post
                        I didn't see the motor out of Dobbins, as much as I saw it out of some of the other linebackers, like Waters who I thought played great. Weddle did have his motor going 110% and never slowed up, but he made things happen when they did. As far as a backup, yeah Dobbins is okay, what I mean is as a starter I'm disapointed. He might not have slowed up, but he was constantly pushed backwards and out of position. This is different from Weddle, Weddle hawked to the ball and was always in position to make the plays, whereas Dobbins was there....downfield.
                        yeah but then i guess you gotta consider that the seattle seahawk line (starting line) is very good? is it not? seneca wallace does not pass effectively.. i will need to see weddle play more to make a fair judgement on him because he just simply wasnt tested and was allowed to ball hawk..

                        beause of your extensive linebacking experience ill take your word for it that dobbins is a horrible player and we should just give up on him as a starter since hes not strong enough to beat the run and hes not fast either


                        sig by bosanac01

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Average OT LB View Post
                          yeah but then i guess you gotta consider that the seattle seahawk line (starting line) is very good? is it not? seneca wallace does not pass effectively.. i will need to see weddle play more to make a fair judgement on him because he just simply wasnt tested and was allowed to ball hawk..
                          True, and Dobbins also had to go against more first stringers then Weddle so it's a fair statement to make. But based on what I saw, which is all I can do from this game, Weddle's performance was hands down better then Dobbins'.

                          Originally posted by Average OT LB View Post
                          beause of your extensive linebacking experience ill take your word for it that dobbins is a horrible player and we should just give up on him as a starter since hes not strong enough to beat the run and hes not fast either
                          Well I mean hold on, I don't remember saying we should give up on Dobbins just yet, but from what I saw in the game, he did not belong with the first unit. He's a second year player, with a lot of heart, so who knows whats in his future, but right now, based on last game, he doesn't have the tools we need to start him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by JK17 View Post
                            True, and Dobbins also had to go against more first stringers then Weddle so it's a fair statement to make. But based on what I saw, which is all I can do from this game, Weddle's performance was hands down better then Dobbins'.



                            Well I mean hold on, I don't remember saying we should give up on Dobbins just yet, but from what I saw in the game, he did not belong with the first unit. He's a second year player, with a lot of heart, so who knows whats in his future, but right now, based on last game, he doesn't have the tools we need to start him.
                            So hold on i dont get it... lets do a short review

                            -Dobbins is and will never be fast
                            -We drafted him for his hitting and run defense
                            -He was being pushed back in nearly all running plays
                            -He was clearly ineffective

                            So if he has no speed, no strength.. whats he good for? why not pass judgement on him? he cant cut it. simply put. hes a career backup?
                            Or do you think that maybe hell be less ineffective the next game.. because ... hes gonna... um.. get stronger? or maybe hell magically develop speed and be donnie edwards?

                            which is it?


                            sig by bosanac01

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Average OT LB View Post
                              So hold on i dont get it... lets do a short review

                              -Dobbins is and will never be fast
                              -We drafted him for his hitting and run defense
                              -He was being pushed back in nearly all running plays
                              -He was clearly ineffective

                              So if he has no speed, no strength.. whats he good for? why not pass judgement on him? he cant cut it. simply put. hes a career backup?
                              Or do you think that maybe hell be less ineffective the next game.. because ... hes gonna... um.. get stronger? or maybe hell magically develop speed and be donnie edwards?

                              which is it?
                              Are you serious right now?

                              Dobbins' speed will never be his strong aspect of the game, I said that, and I agree with it. We did draft him for his hitting and run defense, I didn't say that, but I agree with it. He was being pushed back, and he was ineffective, I said those things and agree with them.

                              He has strength, I didn't say he didn't, but he didn't use it well enough in this game. His speed isn't where I'd want it to be, but that doesn't mean he has none at all. Why shouldn't we pass judgement on him? Because as hard as I was on him for this game, I don't remember ever saying players can't and don't develop. He's a second year player, and all I said was I was disapointed in what he showed in the game, and that this year he can't start, not yet at least. It's not a cut him or start him situation, it's not a one or the other thing. He'll develop, hopefully, he'll build on his technique and understanding of the defense which is what I thought his problem were. He was getting stood up by blockers, which is two things, strength and technique. The strength is there but his technique isn't. He can build on that, but he hasn't built on it enough to be effective as a starter, yet. He struggled in coverage, partly because he's a linebacker and not as fast, but partly because he didn't understand as well his coverage, or recognize the receiver's pattern, things that he'll pick up in time.

                              I stand by what I said, that I was disapointed and he is not ready to start yet, but I don't remember ever saying he won't develop into a player, or we should get rid of him now.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information