Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 49 to 60 of 182
  1. #49
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    24,375
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?



    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Silver View Post
    Sorry, this is idiotic on a level unseen. Wildcat, whatever is going to be sniffed out the second Tyrod comes on the field. He is a back up, NOT Reggie Bush.

    Want to improve the offense??? Fix the offensive line. TRASH the zone blocking. Fundamentally we are BROKEN there, the Ravens changed what worked to something that CLEARLY does not. If Tyrod can't play CENTER, then there is no reason for his ass to be on the field.

    We have a shotgun wound to the offensive line and you Tyrod backers want to fix it with some Purple-Kool Aid? Fix the real problem, not create cute fixes.


    /thread
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  2. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Owings Mills
    Posts
    1,639

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    I love how the guy has 1 play for 18 yards and people actually believe he will now help improve the offense. He was an average QB at VT and will never be more than a career backup and some of you actually think he will provide a spark? Do you really think any team is losing sleep over the threat of us using Tyrod in whatever system you want to call it?

    If you actually believe he will benefit this team in any fashion, this clip is for you!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0
    Hating Steeler Fans Since Birth

    Section 126, Row 33




    Lets Go Flacco




  3. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    24,375
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rayvens52 View Post
    I love how the guy has 1 play for 18 yards and people actually believe he will now help improve the offense. He was an average QB at VT and will never be more than a career backup and some of you actually think he will provide a spark? Do you really think any team is losing sleep over the threat of us using Tyrod in whatever system you want to call it?

    If you actually believe he will benefit this team in any fashion, this clip is for you!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0


    As soon as the Ravens trot Taylor out onto the field again, guess what defenses are going to key on?

    Taylor is only going to do one of two things: 1) run it or 2) pass it. He is limited as a wild cat option and putting him at QB basically makes the offense have 10 players because Flacco (if still on the field) isn't going to break anyone's ankles on a route.

    This is why a lot of teams don't incorporate a lot of trickery into the offensive play design.

    If you want some real innovative play designs, look at what the Eagles are doing with Nick Foles who is practically the same type of QB that Flacco is. I'd argue Flacco is significantly more athletic.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger


    My RSR Blog:
    http://russellstreetreport.com/author/paullukoskie/

    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  4. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Bel Air
    Posts
    38

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    Going with a dual-QB scenario, which is what it seems some are advocating, is not thinking outside of the box. That's just flat out being dumb. What team has ever run a dual-QB scenario and been successful? I'll save you the trouble of researching that one: the answer would be zero.

    If the offensive coaches want to think outside of the box, then they should reinstitute out routes, come backs and back shoulder throws. Better yet, how about they throw in a few blitz-beating pass plays? That way Flacco isn't constantly staring at a free-runner while waiting for his receivers to break into their routes 10 yards down the field.

    Right now, most of their throws are going to the middle of the field, which works in favor of the defenses because they're stacking the box and then dropping into shallow zones.

    Flacco has been bad at times, but the overall offensive scheme has been just really unintelligent.
    For The Record: I never mentioned a dual-threat system in the article. I haven't seen anyone else suggest it. The point of this thread is to use Tyrod with creativity. If we can START thinking of things to use him with-- I'd imagine the folks getting paid a lot of money to do so can too. It's time to see what Taylor has as an ATHLETE.




  5. #53

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeWedra View Post
    For The Record: I never mentioned a dual-threat system in the article. I haven't seen anyone else suggest it. The point of this thread is to use Tyrod with creativity. If we can START thinking of things to use him with-- I'd imagine the folks getting paid a lot of money to do so can too. It's time to see what Taylor has as an ATHLETE.
    Nice word hard to deliver, when we are not winning LOS.




  6. #54

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeWedra View Post
    For The Record: I never mentioned a dual-threat system in the article. I haven't seen anyone else suggest it. The point of this thread is to use Tyrod with creativity. If we can START thinking of things to use him with-- I'd imagine the folks getting paid a lot of money to do so can too. It's time to see what Taylor has as an ATHLETE.
    Thats what he is... an athlete that possesses less skills at those positions than the guys that are currently there. Its time for Tyrod to.... keep sitting on the bench, where all good backup QBs belong.
    -JAB




  7. #55

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    Thats what he is... an athlete that possesses less skills at those positions than the guys that are currently there. Its time for Tyrod to.... keep sitting on the bench, where all good backup QBs belong.
    He can throw better than Rice or Pierce, and he can run better than Flacco. Which is why people are making the "creativity" stipulation and not arguing he should enter the game for Flacco and play drop-back QB.

    Obviously this whole conversation is predicated on the undeniable fact that our offense is steaming pile of crap right now, and that it is virtually impossible to make it worse by using 2-3 unorthodox plays out of dozens.

    Heck, the one flea-flicker we ran was wide open. Sure the ball was underthrown, but we still got the PI. How an offense this bad can then shelve such a play for another year is mind-boggling, but I bet we do.

    Obviously the 'best' way to improve the offense is to have the O-line play better, the WRs play better, the RBs play better, and the QB play better. But while we perpetually keep wishing that will happen starting the next play, we could also attempt to improve the offense by changing things up, making it mentally harder for the opposition to defend, and perhaps catching them napping for a single random big play.




  8. #56

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    He can throw better than Rice or Pierce, and he can run better than Flacco. Which is why people are making the "creativity" stipulation and not arguing he should enter the game for Flacco and play drop-back QB.

    Obviously this whole conversation is predicated on the undeniable fact that our offense is steaming pile of crap right now, and that it is virtually impossible to make it worse by using 2-3 unorthodox plays out of dozens.

    Heck, the one flea-flicker we ran was wide open. Sure the ball was underthrown, but we still got the PI. How an offense this bad can then shelve such a play for another year is mind-boggling, but I bet we do.

    Obviously the 'best' way to improve the offense is to have the O-line play better, the WRs play better, the RBs play better, and the QB play better. But while we perpetually keep wishing that will happen starting the next play, we could also attempt to improve the offense by changing things up, making it mentally harder for the opposition to defend, and perhaps catching them napping for a single random big play.
    Ill concede he can throw better than Rice or pierce but at the same time Flaccos pretty underrated as an athlete/runner. Wed have more success having flacco do designed runs when the defense isnt expecting it than tyrod when theyre zeroed in on him. Granted nobody wants their 120 million dollar QB running into defenses but if the argument is thatll itll help our offense, id say that would have better outcome than Tyrod.
    -JAB




  9. #57

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    Quote Originally Posted by JAB1985 View Post
    Ill concede he can throw better than Rice or pierce but at the same time Flaccos pretty underrated as an athlete/runner. Wed have more success having flacco do designed runs when the defense isnt expecting it than tyrod when theyre zeroed in on him. Granted nobody wants their 120 million dollar QB running into defenses but if the argument is thatll itll help our offense, id say that would have better outcome than Tyrod.
    Flacco may be underrated as a runner, but he still cannot run like Tyrod. Especially if we are talking about shiftiness and not straight away speed.

    But as to your point, I agree, we should use Flacco's athleticism more as well. More roll-outs, naked boot-designed runs, even QB draws from shotgun-spread formations (though our interior line may not be able to handle that even against 3 man fronts, lol).

    The main point I am making is that this "idea" proposed by the OP is not one that is being proposed for a team that is marching down the field with ease. The same idea proposed for the Broncos or Saints, or Packers or Lions would be infinitely more questionable.

    As it stands, it is hard to see much downside to such a suggestion, even if we stipulate the upside may not be what some are imagining. Because our offense currently sucks and is losing us games.




  10. #58
    iggyman555 Guest

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post


    As soon as the Ravens trot Taylor out onto the field again, guess what defenses are going to key on?

    Taylor is only going to do one of two things: 1) run it or 2) pass it. He is limited as a wild cat option and putting him at QB basically makes the offense have 10 players because Flacco (if still on the field) isn't going to break anyone's ankles on a route.

    This is why a lot of teams don't incorporate a lot of trickery into the offensive play design.

    If you want some real innovative play designs, look at what the Eagles are doing with Nick Foles who is practically the same type of QB that Flacco is. I'd argue Flacco is significantly more athletic.
    3) hand it off




  11. #59
    iggyman555 Guest

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    Quote Originally Posted by JoeWedra View Post
    For The Record: I never mentioned a dual-threat system in the article. I haven't seen anyone else suggest it. The point of this thread is to use Tyrod with creativity. If we can START thinking of things to use him with-- I'd imagine the folks getting paid a lot of money to do so can too. It's time to see what Taylor has as an ATHLETE.
    yup some folk like to twist words to fit their argument..smh




  12. #60
    iggyman555 Guest

    Re: Should Tyrod Taylor be included more often?

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    He can throw better than Rice or Pierce, and he can run better than Flacco. Which is why people are making the "creativity" stipulation and not arguing he should enter the game for Flacco and play drop-back QB.

    Obviously this whole conversation is predicated on the undeniable fact that our offense is steaming pile of crap right now, and that it is virtually impossible to make it worse by using 2-3 unorthodox plays out of dozens.

    Heck, the one flea-flicker we ran was wide open. Sure the ball was underthrown, but we still got the PI. How an offense this bad can then shelve such a play for another year is mind-boggling, but I bet we do.

    Obviously the 'best' way to improve the offense is to have the O-line play better, the WRs play better, the RBs play better, and the QB play better. But while we perpetually keep wishing that will happen starting the next play, we could also attempt to improve the offense by changing things up, making it mentally harder for the opposition to defend, and perhaps catching them napping for a single random big play.


    /thread




Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland