Results 13 to 15 of 15
Thread: Ed Reed's fault?
-
10-16-2006, 10:52 AM #13
Re: Ed Reed's fault?
It was more Reed's fault than Rolle. Reed was basically a no-show the whole game.
There was one way the Panthers could beat us and was if Smith had a monster day. Don't you think the D-scheme would have been to have help on Smith ALL DAY no matter what? And why wasn't C-Mac on Smith in the second half? I question the strategy of not having your #1 cover guy on their #1 WR. We got burned by Smith all day and it cost us the game.
FM
-
10-16-2006, 12:33 PM #14Veteran Poster
- Join Date
- Aug 2006
- Posts
- 3,341
Re: Ed Reed's fault?
The reason why CMac wasnt in there on Smith was because the type of receiver SS is vs the type of corner CMac is just doesnt jive.
CMac is the big physical corner,which is why he was on KJ and not SS who is the smaller shiftier receiver.Rolle is probably the better pure cover guy in terms of quickness and speed(didnt look like it yesterday) which is why he was on him.
I still dont think Rolle is completely healthy ,that foot is still bothering him if you ask me.CMac hid an injury that was bothering him last year we found out about after the season,and I wouldnt doubt that Rolle might be doing the same.
-
10-16-2006, 12:40 PM #15
Re: Ed Reed's fault?
Oh well, we live and we learn with things like this...
The bye week will definitely do us lots of good...
Hopefully by then the lobotomy Samari Rolle is having performed tonight will make him forget all about being torched to a burnt crisp...
Bookmarks