Jimmy Garoppolo, QB, Los Angeles Rams

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Just one time go route or sluggo and JG just bleeping throws the bleep out of it.. one time in my life.. let us try it see what happens..

Do it to Deebo not these punks Benjamin or RR.. no offense Ray Ray

Come on Shanny.

Let it happen before we need it in the SB. Prax makes perfect.

Danny Gray?

999 let's f**king goooo

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
NC what do you consider 2nd "and long" though? IMO, 2nd and long is much different than 3rd and long (for obvious reasons), and should be treated differently. Like, 2nd and 7 to me isnt 2nd and long, but 3rd and 7 is.

Just curious.

Me? I vacillate on 2nd and 7 or 2nd and 8. I'd be fine either way but to be clear, my focus is really 1st downs because we know the ripple effect that has on our passing game...like ANY penalty.

In years past, when we're picking up positive yards (3/4+), we're rolling. Kyle's playbook is fully opened.

But as we've seen with the I/OZ, so often we're in negative yards (2-4 yard losses). Boom or bust.

I think Kurt Warner touched on it well, that there are some easy schematic changes Kyle can make to make life a little easier on the QB and passing game and stay ahead of the sticks. Hence why CMC was such a huge addition.

This is why I watch first down production (or lack thereof); because of that ripple effect.

And completely ignore the night and day difference in production between the two RB's on 1st down. All of the negative 1st down runs were from the same RB. On top of that, they were alternating series throughout the game. So it wasn't like CMC wore them down in the 1st half and Mitchell took advantage of it in the 2nd half. CMC just had a poor game rushing. That is it. Nothing more to it.

So you think the Chargers played the two RB's EXACTLY the same way? And the OL blocked EXACTLY the same way for the two RB's? Seems quite doubtful. Perhaps the Chargers were just keyed in more on stopping CMC running.

Yes. Here's the gameplan. Lets shut down CMC and let that no body Mitchell gash us for 6+ yards on 1st down all game long. Also, the O line said, we like that guy Mitchell more than we do that new hotshot RB CMC. So we are going to block better for our boy Mitchell. F that CMC dude.

Not quite lol. They saw CMC absolutely torch the Rams, so they said "make someone else beat us." They were run blitzing 2-3 guys every time CMC carried the ball. The safeties were at the LOS to help by the time CMC got there. That's not a run read, that's a run blitz. I didn't see that when Mitchell was in, so he had more space to work, and the zone blocking was able to do it's job.

So you are saying that LAC's never adjusted to the other guy who was gashing the s**t out of them on 1st down all game long? Someone should fire that f**king coach. 😂

Not sure why you're trying to make a very complicated conversation and analysis so simple. There's a lot to it, it's not as simple as "CMC sucked and Mitchell was great against the Chargers."

Why? I will tell you why. Because it doesn't fit the blame Kyle Shanahan narrative that is being thrown around in here. The truth is, CMC had a poor game rushing and you and NC refuse to change your blame pie to include him because of your bias against Kyle. It really isn't as complicated as you are making it out to be.

I just don't buy it that CMC went from having an all-time great performance as a RB two weeks ago to just sucking as you're trying to argue.

And you're talking about the most complicated sport in the world lol. It's 11 on 11 tackle football with the best of the best coaches (for the most part lol) in the game. It's NEVER as simple as one player sucked and one player was good. Especially in a one game sample size.

And I don't have a "bias" against Kyle. He's the head coach, and is in charge of the roster. So the personnel and play calling stops with him. He's made good adjustments the past two games and we've played much better in the 2nd half compared to games earlier in the season. Let's hope he continues to ditch the turtle shell offense in favor of letting his QB and WR's/RB's/TE's make plays.

I think you are underestimating the difference in the back that CMC is and the back that Mitchell is. They are not the same and do not run or play the game the same. Mitchell is a better version of Wilson Jr. CMC is not a downhill run over defenders type back. He is an elusive make guys miss type back. YAC monster, if you will.

You are right that LAC game planned to stop CMC. They didn't have much film on Mitchell for this season and probably didn't know how many snaps he'd see coming back for his first game of action since week 1. But the chargers never adjusted to Mitchell's game.

The best reason for having a 1-2 punch at RB is the very thing we witnessed in the chargers game. When a team sells out to stop 1 type of back, they leave themselves vulnerable to the other. Mitchell, Deebo and CMC wore their asses out by the 3rd quarter just like George Kittle said.

NC's argument was that the negative plays on 1st and 2nd down did the QB and O line no favors. Just because CMC had a poor rushing performance doesn't mean Kyle is a poor play caller. There are possible reasons for Kyle continuing to call CMC's number in those situations even though he wasn't getting it done.

Also, Sometimes players have bad performances. It happens even to great players from time to time. The truth is Mitchell's solid performance made up for it and that it did in fact help the QB and O line late in the game when we needed big 3rd down conversions. Their front 7 were worn out and their pass rush was non existent.

I understand that Mitchell has more power than CMC, but he was getting past the LOS with a head of steam before getting contact whereas CMC was getting touched in the hole. We can debate the reasons all day long, but to me Kyle stuck with CMC running into a stacked box for too long. Although as 5GR pointed out, those zero gainers set up big chunk plays to Kittle and Aiyuk.

Kyle is better at this than any of us give him credit for, for sure lol. I think we're lucky to have him and Jimmy. Now if they can both get on the same page and bring out the best in each other, we have a real shot at #6. But even if we don't win it all, they are still fun to watch.

Originally posted by picklejuice:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by 49erFaithful6:
Just one time go route or sluggo and JG just bleeping throws the bleep out of it.. one time in my life.. let us try it see what happens..

Do it to Deebo not these punks Benjamin or RR.. no offense Ray Ray

Come on Shanny.

Let it happen before we need it in the SB. Prax makes perfect.

Danny Gray?

This @JCam_17 story about the great Al Davis is legendary.

(via @NextRoundLive) pic.twitter.com/UeQICbNKSp

— Las Vegas Raiders (@Raiders) August 20, 2021

999 let's f**king goooo

Just one time then we can go back to 50+ run strat

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
NC what do you consider 2nd "and long" though? IMO, 2nd and long is much different than 3rd and long (for obvious reasons), and should be treated differently. Like, 2nd and 7 to me isnt 2nd and long, but 3rd and 7 is.

Just curious.

Me? I vacillate on 2nd and 7 or 2nd and 8. I'd be fine either way but to be clear, my focus is really 1st downs because we know the ripple effect that has on our passing game...like ANY penalty.

In years past, when we're picking up positive yards (3/4+), we're rolling. Kyle's playbook is fully opened.

But as we've seen with the I/OZ, so often we're in negative yards (2-4 yard losses). Boom or bust.

I think Kurt Warner touched on it well, that there are some easy schematic changes Kyle can make to make life a little easier on the QB and passing game and stay ahead of the sticks. Hence why CMC was such a huge addition.

This is why I watch first down production (or lack thereof); because of that ripple effect.

And completely ignore the night and day difference in production between the two RB's on 1st down. All of the negative 1st down runs were from the same RB. On top of that, they were alternating series throughout the game. So it wasn't like CMC wore them down in the 1st half and Mitchell took advantage of it in the 2nd half. CMC just had a poor game rushing. That is it. Nothing more to it.

So you think the Chargers played the two RB's EXACTLY the same way? And the OL blocked EXACTLY the same way for the two RB's? Seems quite doubtful. Perhaps the Chargers were just keyed in more on stopping CMC running.

Yes. Here's the gameplan. Lets shut down CMC and let that no body Mitchell gash us for 6+ yards on 1st down all game long. Also, the O line said, we like that guy Mitchell more than we do that new hotshot RB CMC. So we are going to block better for our boy Mitchell. F that CMC dude.

Not quite lol. They saw CMC absolutely torch the Rams, so they said "make someone else beat us." They were run blitzing 2-3 guys every time CMC carried the ball. The safeties were at the LOS to help by the time CMC got there. That's not a run read, that's a run blitz. I didn't see that when Mitchell was in, so he had more space to work, and the zone blocking was able to do it's job.

So you are saying that LAC's never adjusted to the other guy who was gashing the s**t out of them on 1st down all game long? Someone should fire that f**king coach. 😂

Not sure why you're trying to make a very complicated conversation and analysis so simple. There's a lot to it, it's not as simple as "CMC sucked and Mitchell was great against the Chargers."

Why? I will tell you why. Because it doesn't fit the blame Kyle Shanahan narrative that is being thrown around in here. The truth is, CMC had a poor game rushing and you and NC refuse to change your blame pie to include him because of your bias against Kyle. It really isn't as complicated as you are making it out to be.

I just don't buy it that CMC went from having an all-time great performance as a RB two weeks ago to just sucking as you're trying to argue.

And you're talking about the most complicated sport in the world lol. It's 11 on 11 tackle football with the best of the best coaches (for the most part lol) in the game. It's NEVER as simple as one player sucked and one player was good. Especially in a one game sample size.

And I don't have a "bias" against Kyle. He's the head coach, and is in charge of the roster. So the personnel and play calling stops with him. He's made good adjustments the past two games and we've played much better in the 2nd half compared to games earlier in the season. Let's hope he continues to ditch the turtle shell offense in favor of letting his QB and WR's/RB's/TE's make plays.

I think you are underestimating the difference in the back that CMC is and the back that Mitchell is. They are not the same and do not run or play the game the same. Mitchell is a better version of Wilson Jr. CMC is not a downhill run over defenders type back. He is an elusive make guys miss type back. YAC monster, if you will.

You are right that LAC game planned to stop CMC. They didn't have much film on Mitchell for this season and probably didn't know how many snaps he'd see coming back for his first game of action since week 1. But the chargers never adjusted to Mitchell's game.

The best reason for having a 1-2 punch at RB is the very thing we witnessed in the chargers game. When a team sells out to stop 1 type of back, they leave themselves vulnerable to the other. Mitchell, Deebo and CMC wore their asses out by the 3rd quarter just like George Kittle said.

NC's argument was that the negative plays on 1st and 2nd down did the QB and O line no favors. Just because CMC had a poor rushing performance doesn't mean Kyle is a poor play caller. There are possible reasons for Kyle continuing to call CMC's number in those situations even though he wasn't getting it done.

Also, Sometimes players have bad performances. It happens even to great players from time to time. The truth is Mitchell's solid performance made up for it and that it did in fact help the QB and O line late in the game when we needed big 3rd down conversions. Their front 7 were worn out and their pass rush was non existent.

I understand that Mitchell has more power than CMC, but he was getting past the LOS with a head of steam before getting contact whereas CMC was getting touched in the hole. We can debate the reasons all day long, but to me Kyle stuck with CMC running into a stacked box for too long. Although as 5GR pointed out, those zero gainers set up big chunk plays to Kittle and Aiyuk.

Kyle is better at this than any of us give him credit for, for sure lol. I think we're lucky to have him and Jimmy. Now if they can both get on the same page and bring out the best in each other, we have a real shot at #6. But even if we don't win it all, they are still fun to watch.

You don't think that has anything to do with how each approach's the run game or how they have different skillsets? Mitchell explodes through the hole. He has an elite 1st step. Do yourself a favor and watch it closely. He doesn't give time for the D line to close the hole on him before he hits it.

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:


Julio Jones had 2 redzone touchdowns in 2016.

I almost posted the same thing

Classic example of something sounding correct in theory but not in reality.

Classic example of proving the point you've been arguing against for years, and not realizing it.

What exactly are you saying I have been arguing against?

Dude you and the other Jimmy haters have been arguing for YEARS that Kyle doesn't trust Jimmy, and that's why he checks down to RB's and doesn't throw to WR's. That he's conservative, especially in the red zone, because of his QB. Then you cite a stat that in Matt Ryan's MVP season (the one that the Jimmy haters LOVE to reference to disparage Jimmy) that Julio only had 2 TD's in the red zone. Two RB's had more red zone targets than him. So that is PROOF that it's a Kyle offensive design/problem/issue or whatever you want to call it.

Kyle was, is, and likely always will be a smash mouth, physical, run oriented offensive play caller. Doesn't matter who is QB is, that's what he wants to do. You proved it lol. Again, thank you.

*Sigh* where to even begin with this post.

First and foremost, you are talking to the wrong person. I was saying over and over again that I have no idea if Kyle trusts Jimmy fully or not, and there is a ton of evidence that proves EITHER opinion. I posted that many many times, specifically after the 2019 playoffs. So don't lump me in with those people. I can try to find receipts if you'd like.

Secondly, Matt Ryan had 23 redzone touchdowns in 2019. Twenty three. You are trying to draw conclusions about Kyle Shanahan and comparing two totally different strategies. Ryan threw substantially more RZ touchdown passes than Jimmy has in his best season. It wasn't a reflection of Julio Jones at all. It was a reflection of Ryan throwing a lot of touchdown passes in the Redzone and not Jimmy. You can decide for yourself what the reason for that is. (This would evidence that Kyle doesn't fully trust Jimmy, but like I said, there is plenty of evidence on the other side as well).

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
NC what do you consider 2nd "and long" though? IMO, 2nd and long is much different than 3rd and long (for obvious reasons), and should be treated differently. Like, 2nd and 7 to me isnt 2nd and long, but 3rd and 7 is.

Just curious.

Me? I vacillate on 2nd and 7 or 2nd and 8. I'd be fine either way but to be clear, my focus is really 1st downs because we know the ripple effect that has on our passing game...like ANY penalty.

In years past, when we're picking up positive yards (3/4+), we're rolling. Kyle's playbook is fully opened.

But as we've seen with the I/OZ, so often we're in negative yards (2-4 yard losses). Boom or bust.

I think Kurt Warner touched on it well, that there are some easy schematic changes Kyle can make to make life a little easier on the QB and passing game and stay ahead of the sticks. Hence why CMC was such a huge addition.

This is why I watch first down production (or lack thereof); because of that ripple effect.

And completely ignore the night and day difference in production between the two RB's on 1st down. All of the negative 1st down runs were from the same RB. On top of that, they were alternating series throughout the game. So it wasn't like CMC wore them down in the 1st half and Mitchell took advantage of it in the 2nd half. CMC just had a poor game rushing. That is it. Nothing more to it.

So you think the Chargers played the two RB's EXACTLY the same way? And the OL blocked EXACTLY the same way for the two RB's? Seems quite doubtful. Perhaps the Chargers were just keyed in more on stopping CMC running.

Yes. Here's the gameplan. Lets shut down CMC and let that no body Mitchell gash us for 6+ yards on 1st down all game long. Also, the O line said, we like that guy Mitchell more than we do that new hotshot RB CMC. So we are going to block better for our boy Mitchell. F that CMC dude.

Not quite lol. They saw CMC absolutely torch the Rams, so they said "make someone else beat us." They were run blitzing 2-3 guys every time CMC carried the ball. The safeties were at the LOS to help by the time CMC got there. That's not a run read, that's a run blitz. I didn't see that when Mitchell was in, so he had more space to work, and the zone blocking was able to do it's job.

So you are saying that LAC's never adjusted to the other guy who was gashing the s**t out of them on 1st down all game long? Someone should fire that f**king coach. 😂

Not sure why you're trying to make a very complicated conversation and analysis so simple. There's a lot to it, it's not as simple as "CMC sucked and Mitchell was great against the Chargers."

Why? I will tell you why. Because it doesn't fit the blame Kyle Shanahan narrative that is being thrown around in here. The truth is, CMC had a poor game rushing and you and NC refuse to change your blame pie to include him because of your bias against Kyle. It really isn't as complicated as you are making it out to be.

I already said it's cool to use him. He was just part of the issue on first downs. If you say those are good calls and they are execution issues because of what Mitchell did, that's fine too. But how many did Kyle need to see before he came off CMC? Doesn't that fall in the play calling pie too? Use him instead in the passing game while they're still expecting run? It's not like he didn't have 41 attempts to figure it out.

Now that is a really good question. If I had to guess. It was probably a little bit of he didn't want to tip his hand with who was lining up out there and giving CMC the benefit of the doubt. Hoping he would turn it around. If I am not mistaking, they stated using Mitchell more late in the 4th quarter when we were trying to run out the clock and why Mitchell ended up with more carries. Kyle did say the plan was to get them equal carries.

I'd also add Kyle needed to manage Mitchell's snaps as well so he might have stuck with CMC either way and then, like you said, had Mitchell, more fresh for the final drives. Naturally Mitchell would be more of a 'trusted agent' at this point in the running game.

Kittle stated that the run game wore the chargers out by the 3rd quarter. So the game plan worked to perfection. It was actually the execution that held the scoring back, not the play calling.

Given they were still down in the 4Q, I wouldn't go that far. After their other two DT's went down it started to wear on them half way through the 4th and esp. on the final TD drive.

The original point was, it didn't have to be perfect execution or this difficult. They have plenty of talent and options and had two weeks to prepare for any type of game flow against a DC Kyle knows. And full health.

In your estimation, what would a game plan and play calling have to look like for you to have concerns? Even in a win?

Jimmy G just needs to help win the super bowl and ride off to the sunset to another team.

Thread of 3rd and long throws from Jimmy (that were actually thrown past the 1st down sticks)


good reads, throw, and good play calling. Wild that can be a thing!

Continuing the convo from yesterday looks like someone was wrong lol

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
NC what do you consider 2nd "and long" though? IMO, 2nd and long is much different than 3rd and long (for obvious reasons), and should be treated differently. Like, 2nd and 7 to me isnt 2nd and long, but 3rd and 7 is.

Just curious.

Me? I vacillate on 2nd and 7 or 2nd and 8. I'd be fine either way but to be clear, my focus is really 1st downs because we know the ripple effect that has on our passing game...like ANY penalty.

In years past, when we're picking up positive yards (3/4+), we're rolling. Kyle's playbook is fully opened.

But as we've seen with the I/OZ, so often we're in negative yards (2-4 yard losses). Boom or bust.

I think Kurt Warner touched on it well, that there are some easy schematic changes Kyle can make to make life a little easier on the QB and passing game and stay ahead of the sticks. Hence why CMC was such a huge addition.

This is why I watch first down production (or lack thereof); because of that ripple effect.

And completely ignore the night and day difference in production between the two RB's on 1st down. All of the negative 1st down runs were from the same RB. On top of that, they were alternating series throughout the game. So it wasn't like CMC wore them down in the 1st half and Mitchell took advantage of it in the 2nd half. CMC just had a poor game rushing. That is it. Nothing more to it.

So you think the Chargers played the two RB's EXACTLY the same way? And the OL blocked EXACTLY the same way for the two RB's? Seems quite doubtful. Perhaps the Chargers were just keyed in more on stopping CMC running.

Yes. Here's the gameplan. Lets shut down CMC and let that no body Mitchell gash us for 6+ yards on 1st down all game long. Also, the O line said, we like that guy Mitchell more than we do that new hotshot RB CMC. So we are going to block better for our boy Mitchell. F that CMC dude.

Not quite lol. They saw CMC absolutely torch the Rams, so they said "make someone else beat us." They were run blitzing 2-3 guys every time CMC carried the ball. The safeties were at the LOS to help by the time CMC got there. That's not a run read, that's a run blitz. I didn't see that when Mitchell was in, so he had more space to work, and the zone blocking was able to do it's job.

So you are saying that LAC's never adjusted to the other guy who was gashing the s**t out of them on 1st down all game long? Someone should fire that f**king coach. 😂

Not sure why you're trying to make a very complicated conversation and analysis so simple. There's a lot to it, it's not as simple as "CMC sucked and Mitchell was great against the Chargers."

Why? I will tell you why. Because it doesn't fit the blame Kyle Shanahan narrative that is being thrown around in here. The truth is, CMC had a poor game rushing and you and NC refuse to change your blame pie to include him because of your bias against Kyle. It really isn't as complicated as you are making it out to be.

I already said it's cool to use him. He was just part of the issue on first downs. If you say those are good calls and they are execution issues because of what Mitchell did, that's fine too. But how many did Kyle need to see before he came off CMC? Doesn't that fall in the play calling pie too? Use him instead in the passing game while they're still expecting run? It's not like he didn't have 41 attempts to figure it out.

Now that is a really good question. If I had to guess. It was probably a little bit of he didn't want to tip his hand with who was lining up out there and giving CMC the benefit of the doubt. Hoping he would turn it around. If I am not mistaking, they stated using Mitchell more late in the 4th quarter when we were trying to run out the clock and why Mitchell ended up with more carries. Kyle did say the plan was to get them equal carries.

I'd also add Kyle needed to manage Mitchell's snaps as well so he might have stuck with CMC either way and then, like you said, had Mitchell, more fresh for the final drives. Naturally Mitchell would be more of a 'trusted agent' at this point in the running game.

Kittle stated that the run game wore the chargers out by the 3rd quarter. So the game plan worked to perfection. It was actually the execution that held the scoring back, not the play calling.

Given they were still down in the 4Q, I wouldn't go that far. After their other two DT's went down it started to wear on them half way through the 4th and esp. on the final TD drive.

The original point was, it didn't have to be perfect execution or this difficult. They have plenty of talent and options and had two weeks to prepare for any type of game flow against a DC Kyle knows. And full health.

In your estimation, what would a game plan and play calling have to look like for you to have concerns? Even in a win?

Did you skip the part where I said it was execution that held the scoring back?

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:


Julio Jones had 2 redzone touchdowns in 2016.

I almost posted the same thing

Classic example of something sounding correct in theory but not in reality.

Classic example of proving the point you've been arguing against for years, and not realizing it.

What exactly are you saying I have been arguing against?

Dude you and the other Jimmy haters have been arguing for YEARS that Kyle doesn't trust Jimmy, and that's why he checks down to RB's and doesn't throw to WR's. That he's conservative, especially in the red zone, because of his QB. Then you cite a stat that in Matt Ryan's MVP season (the one that the Jimmy haters LOVE to reference to disparage Jimmy) that Julio only had 2 TD's in the red zone. Two RB's had more red zone targets than him. So that is PROOF that it's a Kyle offensive design/problem/issue or whatever you want to call it.

Kyle was, is, and likely always will be a smash mouth, physical, run oriented offensive play caller. Doesn't matter who is QB is, that's what he wants to do. You proved it lol. Again, thank you.

*Sigh* where to even begin with this post.

First and foremost, you are talking to the wrong person. I was saying over and over again that I have no idea if Kyle trusts Jimmy fully or not, and there is a ton of evidence that proves EITHER opinion. I posted that many many times, specifically after the 2019 playoffs. So don't lump me in with those people. I can try to find receipts if you'd like.

Secondly, Matt Ryan had 23 redzone touchdowns in 2019. Twenty three. You are trying to draw conclusions about Kyle Shanahan and comparing two totally different strategies. Ryan threw substantially more RZ touchdown passes than Jimmy has in his best season. It wasn't a reflection of Julio Jones at all. It was a reflection of Ryan throwing a lot of touchdown passes in the Redzone and not Jimmy. You can decide for yourself what the reason for that is. (This would evidence that Kyle doesn't fully trust Jimmy, but like I said, there is plenty of evidence on the other side as well).

Wait you don't think having Julio Jones helped their red zone offense at all? Whoa okay.

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by krizay:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:


Julio Jones had 2 redzone touchdowns in 2016.

I almost posted the same thing

Classic example of something sounding correct in theory but not in reality.

Classic example of proving the point you've been arguing against for years, and not realizing it.

What exactly are you saying I have been arguing against?

Dude you and the other Jimmy haters have been arguing for YEARS that Kyle doesn't trust Jimmy, and that's why he checks down to RB's and doesn't throw to WR's. That he's conservative, especially in the red zone, because of his QB. Then you cite a stat that in Matt Ryan's MVP season (the one that the Jimmy haters LOVE to reference to disparage Jimmy) that Julio only had 2 TD's in the red zone. Two RB's had more red zone targets than him. So that is PROOF that it's a Kyle offensive design/problem/issue or whatever you want to call it.

Kyle was, is, and likely always will be a smash mouth, physical, run oriented offensive play caller. Doesn't matter who is QB is, that's what he wants to do. You proved it lol. Again, thank you.

*Sigh* where to even begin with this post.

First and foremost, you are talking to the wrong person. I was saying over and over again that I have no idea if Kyle trusts Jimmy fully or not, and there is a ton of evidence that proves EITHER opinion. I posted that many many times, specifically after the 2019 playoffs. So don't lump me in with those people. I can try to find receipts if you'd like.

Secondly, Matt Ryan had 23 redzone touchdowns in 2019. Twenty three. You are trying to draw conclusions about Kyle Shanahan and comparing two totally different strategies. Ryan threw substantially more RZ touchdown passes than Jimmy has in his best season. It wasn't a reflection of Julio Jones at all. It was a reflection of Ryan throwing a lot of touchdown passes in the Redzone and not Jimmy. You can decide for yourself what the reason for that is. (This would evidence that Kyle doesn't fully trust Jimmy, but like I said, there is plenty of evidence on the other side as well).

Wait you don't think having Julio Jones helped their red zone offense at all? Whoa okay.

I reread my post right after I clicked submit and thought to myself that I probably should edit the "at all" part, but left it alone. Sure enough, you nitpicked those few words out of my entire post and ignored everything else. I should have known better.

Having Julio obviously helped, but not in the way that you were implying when you initially brought him up...and you know that. He was likely double teamed a bunch in the redzone, similar to how Kittle is....which opened the offense up for TWENTY ONE redzone touchdown passes for the other players. One would assume the blanketing of Kittle in the redzone would do the same for us, but here we are.

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by YACBros85:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
NC what do you consider 2nd "and long" though? IMO, 2nd and long is much different than 3rd and long (for obvious reasons), and should be treated differently. Like, 2nd and 7 to me isnt 2nd and long, but 3rd and 7 is.

Just curious.

Me? I vacillate on 2nd and 7 or 2nd and 8. I'd be fine either way but to be clear, my focus is really 1st downs because we know the ripple effect that has on our passing game...like ANY penalty.

In years past, when we're picking up positive yards (3/4+), we're rolling. Kyle's playbook is fully opened.

But as we've seen with the I/OZ, so often we're in negative yards (2-4 yard losses). Boom or bust.

I think Kurt Warner touched on it well, that there are some easy schematic changes Kyle can make to make life a little easier on the QB and passing game and stay ahead of the sticks. Hence why CMC was such a huge addition.

This is why I watch first down production (or lack thereof); because of that ripple effect.

And completely ignore the night and day difference in production between the two RB's on 1st down. All of the negative 1st down runs were from the same RB. On top of that, they were alternating series throughout the game. So it wasn't like CMC wore them down in the 1st half and Mitchell took advantage of it in the 2nd half. CMC just had a poor game rushing. That is it. Nothing more to it.

So you think the Chargers played the two RB's EXACTLY the same way? And the OL blocked EXACTLY the same way for the two RB's? Seems quite doubtful. Perhaps the Chargers were just keyed in more on stopping CMC running.

Yes. Here's the gameplan. Lets shut down CMC and let that no body Mitchell gash us for 6+ yards on 1st down all game long. Also, the O line said, we like that guy Mitchell more than we do that new hotshot RB CMC. So we are going to block better for our boy Mitchell. F that CMC dude.

Not quite lol. They saw CMC absolutely torch the Rams, so they said "make someone else beat us." They were run blitzing 2-3 guys every time CMC carried the ball. The safeties were at the LOS to help by the time CMC got there. That's not a run read, that's a run blitz. I didn't see that when Mitchell was in, so he had more space to work, and the zone blocking was able to do it's job.

So you are saying that LAC's never adjusted to the other guy who was gashing the s**t out of them on 1st down all game long? Someone should fire that f**king coach. 😂

Not sure why you're trying to make a very complicated conversation and analysis so simple. There's a lot to it, it's not as simple as "CMC sucked and Mitchell was great against the Chargers."

Why? I will tell you why. Because it doesn't fit the blame Kyle Shanahan narrative that is being thrown around in here. The truth is, CMC had a poor game rushing and you and NC refuse to change your blame pie to include him because of your bias against Kyle. It really isn't as complicated as you are making it out to be.

I already said it's cool to use him. He was just part of the issue on first downs. If you say those are good calls and they are execution issues because of what Mitchell did, that's fine too. But how many did Kyle need to see before he came off CMC? Doesn't that fall in the play calling pie too? Use him instead in the passing game while they're still expecting run? It's not like he didn't have 41 attempts to figure it out.

Now that is a really good question. If I had to guess. It was probably a little bit of he didn't want to tip his hand with who was lining up out there and giving CMC the benefit of the doubt. Hoping he would turn it around. If I am not mistaking, they stated using Mitchell more late in the 4th quarter when we were trying to run out the clock and why Mitchell ended up with more carries. Kyle did say the plan was to get them equal carries.

I'd also add Kyle needed to manage Mitchell's snaps as well so he might have stuck with CMC either way and then, like you said, had Mitchell, more fresh for the final drives. Naturally Mitchell would be more of a 'trusted agent' at this point in the running game.

Kittle stated that the run game wore the chargers out by the 3rd quarter. So the game plan worked to perfection. It was actually the execution that held the scoring back, not the play calling.

Given they were still down in the 4Q, I wouldn't go that far. After their other two DT's went down it started to wear on them half way through the 4th and esp. on the final TD drive.

The original point was, it didn't have to be perfect execution or this difficult. They have plenty of talent and options and had two weeks to prepare for any type of game flow against a DC Kyle knows. And full health.

In your estimation, what would a game plan and play calling have to look like for you to have concerns? Even in a win?

Did you skip the part where I said it was execution that held the scoring back?

ST, the dropped TD. CMC rushing. Yup.

As to the bold? No worries if you don't feel comfortable answering.

Originally posted by NYniner85:
Thread of 3rd and long throws from Jimmy (that were actually thrown past the 1st down sticks)

Jimmy G's throws 3rd and 5 or longer that went past the first down marker.

3rd-and-12 pic.twitter.com/cyWvOhoHZ3

— Rich (@richjmadrid) November 15, 2022

good reads, throw, and good play calling. Wild that can be a thing!

Yup, Jimmy saved his ass.

Give some love for the PP too esp. on that first one!