SECTION 11
vibraslap
Pace
Davis
Bell
(drumroll)
Wendell Bryant
Davis
Bell
(drumroll)
Wendell Bryant
Strongside End? Follow me grasshoppa...
- Thread starter SECTION 11
- Start date
Not a bad idea Sec. I guess you're NOT just another pretty face.
Mrospi
Registered User
Why not put Kenny King in for Davis.... I think that gives us the best DL of what we have currently.... rotate Wakefield & Davis to keep guys fresh
OP
OP
SECTION 11
vibraslap
Does anyone think our D line will collapse if we don't have the mighty Wendall Bryant in the middle? Just move him five feet to the left and get our four best guys out there.
Mrospi
Registered User
Definitely agree..... get the best guys out there and with the new scheme..... shooting the gaps.........let's create some havoc.......our LB's are fast enough to cover up if the line misses, just get into the backfield
I guess your saying that at this point davis > king. hmmmm...
maybe for now. I'd like to see king at either the LDE or RT spot for a quarter or, even better a half, and take a good look at him against the hags 1st string oline.
cardsunsfan
ASFN Lifer
I already mentioned this 
Started my own little thread with this to... Why can't Bryant play end? Sorry to screw up your drumroll Except I thought it might be could to try King instead of Davis.... At least give it a try, heck try it both ways.
Started my own little thread with this to... Why can't Bryant play end? Sorry to screw up your drumroll Except I thought it might be could to try King instead of Davis.... At least give it a try, heck try it both ways.
Originally posted by SunCardfan
I already mentioned this
I once knew a gal who used to go both ways. Fun, fun, fun.
conraddobler
I want my 2$
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2002
- Posts
- 20,052
- Reaction score
- 237
Left and right, up and down....... I'm confused as to your meaning here...
;-)
RugbyMuffin
ASFN IDOL
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2003
- Posts
- 30,485
- Reaction score
- 4,877
You are right on it Section 11.
Bryant
Davis/Bell
King - who is at the least will get a push because he is strong
Pace
Still not good, but not that bad!
Now to convince Boldin he has to play both ways as our other CB!
Bryant
Davis/Bell
King - who is at the least will get a push because he is strong
Pace
Still not good, but not that bad!
Now to convince Boldin he has to play both ways as our other CB!
kerouac9
Klowned by Keim
(Notice the rare Kerouac9 AllCaps post) DON'T PLAY YOUR POTENTIAL STARS OUT OF POSITION!!! YOU DRAFTED THIS PLAYER TO BE A TACKLE, HE WANTS TO BE THE BEST TACKLE IN THE LEAGUE, AND HE HASN'T LEARNED THE POSITION YET!!!
Russell Davis is as bad as Fred Wakefield. It's a wash.
Russell Davis is as bad as Fred Wakefield. It's a wash.
Northern Card
All Star
King would be a 280 lb... tackle at would get eaten up on down 1 and 2....
IMO... let him get an opportunity to develop his skills at LDE over the season... and get him into the tackle position on third down from time to time...
The coach has made it clear, time and time, again... that Bryant is a TACKLE... and that any move away from this would stunt his development...
So, why do some constantly bring up this NON-STARTER?
IMO... let him get an opportunity to develop his skills at LDE over the season... and get him into the tackle position on third down from time to time...
The coach has made it clear, time and time, again... that Bryant is a TACKLE... and that any move away from this would stunt his development...
So, why do some constantly bring up this NON-STARTER?
I can't cope, the pressure of the real season is getting to much for me. Why ?
Because I actually agree with kerouac9, I know this seems unlikely given that most of the time K sounds like a apprentice "He who should be named".
I need a beer, I can't take this
OP
OP
SECTION 11
vibraslap
Potential star?? Development??
He can want to be the Pope for all I care. We need him at end.
I don't care where he wants to play, they drafted him because he can play end and tackle, he's pretty ineffective at tackle and we need an end.
What's Wakefield doing here? Napping?
He can want to be the Pope for all I care. We need him at end.
I don't care where he wants to play, they drafted him because he can play end and tackle, he's pretty ineffective at tackle and we need an end.
What's Wakefield doing here? Napping?
kerouac9
Klowned by Keim
Re: Potential star?? Development??
Hey, maybe Wakefield would be a little more effecive if they didn't play him as a "Sam" linebacker and expect him to cover the flat on passing downs.
I'm just saying that you didn't draft him to be a "tweener". The Cards drafted him despite the fact that he's a "tweener." If they wanted an end, they should have drafted one. Instead, they took a tackle, and that's where they should play him.
Boy, wouldn't it be nice if we'd signed Vonnie Holliday or Marco Coleman?
Hey, maybe Wakefield would be a little more effecive if they didn't play him as a "Sam" linebacker and expect him to cover the flat on passing downs.
I'm just saying that you didn't draft him to be a "tweener". The Cards drafted him despite the fact that he's a "tweener." If they wanted an end, they should have drafted one. Instead, they took a tackle, and that's where they should play him.
Boy, wouldn't it be nice if we'd signed Vonnie Holliday or Marco Coleman?
red desert
ASFN Addict
Re: Re: Potential star?? Development??
That's funny.
That's funny.
cardsunsfan
ASFN Lifer
This should be a whole new caption this thread, that's hilarious
Northern Card
All Star
Re: Re: Potential star?? Development??
An if we had signed the former, we likely would not have Calvin Pace... as for Marco Coleman, what exactly would he have done last Sunday that would've made a critical diifference? Nada, IMO.
An if we had signed the former, we likely would not have Calvin Pace... as for Marco Coleman, what exactly would he have done last Sunday that would've made a critical diifference? Nada, IMO.
Northern Card
All Star
Re: Potential star?? Development??
It's not about Bryant's preferences. although they are clear. It's about the coach's wants and needs. Also, I'm curious how a "pretty ineffective" 310 lb tackle, to use your term... becomes an effective LDE?
As for ineffective; I reviewed my tape.. and a) Detroit sure couldn't run on him... and b) he was putting on a pretty good push despite being double teamed, and often held.
It's not about Bryant's preferences. although they are clear. It's about the coach's wants and needs. Also, I'm curious how a "pretty ineffective" 310 lb tackle, to use your term... becomes an effective LDE?
As for ineffective; I reviewed my tape.. and a) Detroit sure couldn't run on him... and b) he was putting on a pretty good push despite being double teamed, and often held.
OP
OP
SECTION 11
vibraslap
Re: Re: Potential star?? Development??
Well I don't see him getting flattened like Wakefield and I don't see him being any more effective than Bell at DT.
He's playing DE in our 3-4 alignment anyway isn't he? What's the tale of the tape there, I don't remember.
Well I don't see him getting flattened like Wakefield and I don't see him being any more effective than Bell at DT.
He's playing DE in our 3-4 alignment anyway isn't he? What's the tale of the tape there, I don't remember.
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 89,071
- Reaction score
- 41,006
Re: Re: Potential star?? Development??
that's what I saw too, tackles or not he was doing his job. I think he can play DE but I think we need him more at DT. I think if we move him to DE we'll be having threads about signing Darrell Russell if he's reinstated again.
Having watched one weekend of college football I have decided the Cards next draft should be CB's and defensive lineman. There seem to be enough and we sure seem to need them.
that's what I saw too, tackles or not he was doing his job. I think he can play DE but I think we need him more at DT. I think if we move him to DE we'll be having threads about signing Darrell Russell if he's reinstated again.
Having watched one weekend of college football I have decided the Cards next draft should be CB's and defensive lineman. There seem to be enough and we sure seem to need them.
