(02-04-2016, 05:17 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Billings could probably do both. 
I think he'd best suited as a 1T who move around. He's got the build and skill set to hold the POA and his pass rush isn't really refined enough to be a 3T.

I'd play him as a 1T and let him blow up centers in the run game all day

Sounds great to me. Love me some Billings.

(02-04-2016, 03:39 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Double to the LB

That is not even a double team.  That is the OG working through traffic to get the backside LB.  Any time a guard is asked to block the backside LB he will have to rub off the center and his man.

(02-04-2016, 03:39 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Double to the LB

Same here.

That is the backside LB he picks up.

(02-04-2016, 05:58 PM)fredtoast Wrote: That is not even a double team.  That is the OG working through traffic to get the backside LB.  Any time a guard is asked to block the backside LB he will have to rub off the center and his man.

(02-04-2016, 06:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Same here.

That is the backside LB he picks up.

I pray to god you are just trolling and don't buy this shit. 

Double front side, chip or double to backer backside.....from what I can remember.

(02-04-2016, 05:58 PM)fredtoast Wrote: That is not even a double team.  That is the OG working through traffic to get the backside LB.  Any time a guard is asked to block the backside LB he will have to rub off the center and his man.

Smith and Zeitler deuce block to the next level. 

(02-04-2016, 06:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Same here.

That is the backside LB he picks up.

34 defense. Both LBs are "play side" by alignment.
Lead blocker takes first man. 
OL takes next LB. 

Holy shit this is pathetic even by your standards fred. 

(02-04-2016, 06:03 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Smith and Zeitler deuce block to the next level. 


34 defense. Both LBs are "play side" by alignment.
Lead blocker takes first man. 
OL takes next LB. 

Holy shit this is pathetic even by your standards fred. 

Correct

(02-04-2016, 06:05 PM)Wyche Wrote: Correct

Basic rules of a power run like that. 

Any other way would create too much traffic to navigate and muddy up lanes.

(02-04-2016, 06:06 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Basic rules of a power run like that. 

Any other way would create too much traffic to navigate and muddy up lanes.

Correct again.

(02-04-2016, 06:03 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Smith and Zeitler deuce block to the next level. 


34 defense. Both LBs are "play side" by alignment.
Lead blocker takes first man. 
OL takes next LB. 

Holy shit this is pathetic even by your standards fred. 

If the OL's assignment is the LB then he is not double teaming the DT.

Anytime a playside OG has to get to the backside LB he has to rub off the center and NT/DT.

(02-04-2016, 06:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If the OL's assignment is the LB then he is not double teaming the DT.

.......but he is mostly told to "chip" the DT to help get him turned before engaging the backer.....it's a form of a double team.

(02-04-2016, 06:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If the OL's assignment is the LB then he is not double teaming the DT.

Anytime a playside OG has to get to the backside LB he has to rub off the center and NT/DT.

What we have here, is a lack of understanding what a double team is. 
You are under the impression that the only double teams are the ace, deuce and trey apparently. (all of which usually require a peel block on to the backer)

Except that's not it. The chip blocks or rubs, are double teams.

You are walking in circles and saying nothing and contradicting yourself at every turn. Give it up. 

(02-04-2016, 06:11 PM)Wyche Wrote: .......but he is mostly told to "chip" the DT to help get him turned before engaging the backer.....it's a form of a double team.

Correct.

(02-04-2016, 06:14 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Correct.

It's been a while....a long while....but I still remember most of my instruction.

(02-04-2016, 06:14 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: What we have here, is a lack of understanding what a double team is. 
You are under the impression that the only double teams are the ace, deuce and trey apparently. (all of which usually require a peel block on to the backer)

Except that's not it. The chip blocks or rubs, are double teams.

You are walking in circles and saying nothing and contradicting yourself at every turn. Give it up. 


Correct.

I am not contradicting myself at all.  We are just disagreeing on semantics.  Some of these runs look like inside zone runs, and if you go back and read my posts you will see that i mentioned zone schemes as being different from true double teams.

Also a chip block is not what many people consider a double team.  That is why you will often hear a analyst say that a team will have to double team a guy OR at least give him a chip block.

(02-04-2016, 06:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am not contradicting myself at all.  We are just disagreeing on semantics.  Some of these runs look like inside zone runs, and if you go back and read my posts you will see that i mentioned zone schemes as being different from true double teams.

Also a chip block is not what many people consider a double team.  That is why you will often hear a analyst say that a team will have to double team a guy OR at least give him a chip block.

You have repeatedly said a DT can command a double team.
Then you have repeatedly said an offense dictates the double team. 

Make up your mind. 

Either way, I look forward to you bringing me up in a conversation I have no part in so you can try to get a cheap shot in on me.

It's actually a pretty darn good LB FA. The Bengals could easily pick up a couple of guys who would fix their LB troubles without having to break the bank. Pick up Mark Barron (yes, he's a LB now) and say a Zach Brown. Both 2nd tier FAs, but both huge improvements over what they currently have.

Mark Barron (26), Zach Brown (26), Vontaze Burfict (26)... you'd then be significantly more talented and also younger at LB, turning a position of need into a position of strength without having to spend huge FA money while also opening up your draft possibilities more.

(02-05-2016, 01:19 AM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: You have repeatedly said a DT can command a double team.
Then you have repeatedly said an offense dictates the double team. 

Make up your mind. 

Are you complaining that our DTs don't beat as many double teams as other teams or are you saying the offense does not double team our DTs as much as others?  I don't have to make up my mind because these are two DIFFERENT questions.  You said that Geno does not get double teamed very much which would be because other teams chose not to double team him very much, but then you start talking about how our DTs can't beat double teams.

So can you make up your mind?

(02-05-2016, 02:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Are you complaining that our DTs don't beat as many double teams as other teams or are you saying the offense does not double team our DTs as much as others?  I don't have to make up my mind because these are two DIFFERENT questions.  You said that Geno does not get double teamed very much which would be because other teams chose not to double team him very much, but then you start talking about how our DTs can't beat double teams.

So can you make up your mind?

Aww his squirming when he gets pinned up against a wall when people call out his bull shit is fantastic. 

I said Geno doesn't get double teamed as much as you think as you implied he was drawing them all day (before you changed your stance on this)

Peko, Sims and Thompson are inconsistent at best vs double teams. Often getting driven off the ball and failing to obstruct the OL enough to give the LBs a clean shot. 

You are flailing at this point fred. It's sad. It's just sad.

(02-05-2016, 03:24 PM)RoyleRedlegs Wrote: Aww his squirming when he gets pinned up against a wall when people call out his bull shit is fantastic. 

I said Geno doesn't get double teamed as much as you think as you implied he was drawing them all day (before you changed your stance on this)

Peko, Sims and Thompson are inconsistent at best vs double teams. Often getting driven off the ball and failing to obstruct the OL enough to give the LBs a clean shot. 

You are flailing at this point fred. It's sad. It's just sad.

I am not squirming at all.

Your own words were that our LBs had to deal with a guard "on every snap".  Then when I pointed out that Geno drew lots of double teams you started backpeddling and you have not stopped since.   I am guessing you are posting this from someplace way out in the parking lot by now.

How can you say that our LBs have to deal with a guard "on every snap" when Geno gets double teamed as much as any DT in the league and handle them very well?

You actually make some decent points sometimes but your tendency to exaggerate every single claim costs you a lot of credibility.









(waits for a post from Royle with lots of personal insults and terms like "sad" and "laughable" but no real substance)

(02-05-2016, 05:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am not squirming at all.

Your own words were that our LBs had to deal with a guard "on every snap".  Then when I pointed out that Geno drew lots of double teams you started backpeddling and you have not stopped since.   I am guessing you are posting this from someplace way out in the parking lot by now.

How can you say that our LBs have to deal with a guard "on every snap" when Geno gets double teamed as much as any DT in the league and handle them very well?

You actually make some decent points sometimes but your tendency to exaggerate every single claim costs you a lot of credibility.





(waits for a post from Royle with lots of personal insults and terms like "sad" and "laughable" but no real substance)

Coming from the ***** who brought me up in a conversation I wasn't apart of, it is sad and laughable fred. 
I don't bring you up unless we are talking. I'm not a coward like you.

I haven't changed any of my stances. I'm sorry your "lawyer" lernin' left out hyperbolic responses, as nothing truly happens "every play". 

But I am glad you tried to turn this on me you whiny *****. 

There, some actual insults since you can't seem to differentiate between calling you out on being wrong and an actual insult. 

Bottom line:
I posted proof you are wrong. 
One of the other former blockers (Wyche) has confirmed it as well. 
You are wrong. As you usually are on matters of the OL.