I thought it was clear what I was getting at.. I don't think either of them would get us where we want to go. So I would wish them well while they play here, but I will know that we'll still need to address the QB position. Like I did with Hoyer. I wouldn't hope for him to get hurt, but I know he would. And at that point we could then hopefully really address the QB position.
Yeah, if you think about it the only true adaptation we saw of his offense (or that I saw) was when guys like Yates or Weeden came in and had to pick things up very very quickly. In those cases, O'Brien was forced to dumb things down. But I'm not so sure he would do that if he had a guy for a full offseason. He may very well expect the guy to run his offense the way he wants it.
if this organization is really looking to change then they would bring in a guy like RG3 to compete at least if he is willing. We need a QB than can escape the pocket when it collapses. There were too many times that Hoyer had 10-15 yards of open space in front of him but he decided to throw into coverage.
A lot of people are not real fans, or they want the team to win their way. If we get RG3 guarantee you that there will be people that are hoping he fails just so they can say "See, told you so." they don't really care if the team loses they are just happy to be proven right.
Well, yeah. It's his system adapted to the players within it. Every coach has a system and some will make changes within the framework to make it fit the players. Some won't at all and expect the players to make all of the adjustments (see Kubiak, Gary).
Soo is he still on the team or what? Obviously he won't play there but I haven't seen anything confirmed yet or perhaps I just haven't looked hard enough
Duh. That's like saying I'm flexible in how we communicate but I want to communicate in a language I understand.
Yes I am. Using my analogy, I'm willing to find common words, use sign language, or draw pictures. You speaking gibberish and expecting me to understand is not the only definition of flexible. Flexible doesn't mean you can bend every single way, it means you're not stuck in your one way and are willing to adapt/compromise. Even the Patriots can't work with certain players. No one is 100% flexible.
Heard it on the radio today. Trade Clowney, our first round pick, and a 3rd rounder...to move up into the top 7 picks and take one of the top two QBs remaining.
I think working with four different QBs (five if you include BJ) in a season and changing your game plan for each is pretty flexible. And I'm not an O'Brien fan.
Well, that's part of coaching...every team deals with injuries and adjusts. I'm more talking about game planning. OB isn't the flexible guy he came in saying he was. Look at KC as an example. Week 1 was terrible game planning against KC. What happened in the playoff game? Exact same thing. Kelce only had 3 100 yard games on the year, but two of them came against us. KC beat us exactly the same way a few days ago as they did in week 1...no change at all in how we prepared for them. That's the flexibility that I'm referring to. All coaches are "flexible" with their roster bc there is no other choice when injuries occur.
With all the turnovers in the first half, the Chiefs were up by only two scores to start the third quarter and they kept Kelce out of the endzone. The defense played Kelce much better than they did in week 1.
