I haven't read the full article just a skim. It's a lengthy one Con, great job as always! As for the quote above you nailed it. Miami's pass defense is suspect. While you can cure that and focus on a single part of a teams passing game you'd like to stop, you're only opening another slot of weakness. Taking from Peter to pay Paul, you could say. I'd hope that J. Allen could become a reliable consistent corner which would help ease this pain. Thanks again Con!
I know it is long, (sorry) but I try to give as much information as possible. I realize everyone isn't as manic about this as I am, so maybe I need to cut it down just a bit. It takes me about 5-6 hours to get this think ready each week so i guess it is an hour a page which isn't too too bad. If I get a general wish for me to cut a bit of fat from this stuff I will.
Are you crazy????? Don't shorten it!!! It is the fact that you DO go into such depth and specificity that make it worth reading. If people want a short, condensed summary that doesn;t explain anything too deeply there are CNNSI, ESPN, NFLN, and a host of other very basic-level, superficial sources for coverage available. Besides, I don;t think people were saying it is bad that it's long, only that in order to read it we need to set aside a chunk of time to give your articles the attention they deserve. What you provide is something more intelligent for the serious fan, and which includes your insight as a former NCAA player who understands football in ways most fans do not. You understand positional technique and the X's and O's in ways we usually aren;t privy to having explained to us by the mainstream media. That is precisely what separates your great articles from the typical articles out there. Now, if you want to post an abridged version on the front page I would al least ask that you still please post the full version, in depth, in the Club section! Without your lengthy anaylsis, how can I give my long-winded replies? lol. Great job again, Richard. I'll drop my thoughts into the Club thread. Shorter than my usual treatise, but still longer than it should be....
Your insight to what's happening on the O-line is paramount. Hopefully we can get ahead early so that we can benefit from running some quick Screen and Draw plays to limit the overmatch against our RG. Thanks Con, incredible In-Depth as always
Your ability to convey every aspect of the upcoming contest is amazing! Look forward to the write up every week. Wish I had the knowledge and ability to break a game down like that. Thanks so much for your time and efforts.
Richard, well done once again. I SO look forward to your work every week, and I seriously appreciate the time you put into these wonderful breakdowns. I don't think anyone has an issue with the length, your work is worth setting aside the time to properly digest it. I'll be reading it again this afternoon.. and I'll bet others reread it too. It is very generous of you sir to do this for us, thank you very much.
Con, great stuff as usual...I love reading your columns.... Reading this analogy, you would think Seatle is closer to 6-2 than having a record of 2-6. The one emphasis you did make is that the things we've done well in past games, can't always be taken for granted... For example, last weeks game appeared to be solid win and the game wasn't in doubt when watching the game the second and third times (I know, no life, huh ?), but watching the game live I never got the sense we were really in the game until very late...scary...
If there's something such as appointment reading, this is it. I find myself setting aside some time so that I can read the article - then reread it again for meaning. Excellent stuff as always. I do like our chances this week, but I'm nervous that we are overconfident.
Sorry for the confusion, been a busy day and I haven't had a chance to post back in this thread. I was just saying that I should shorten it by a page or so, thats all. I can't stand the four sentences breakdowns of stuff. One time I called a sports radio station to speak to the hosts about the upcoming game, they told me that "no one cares about the stuff I wanted to talk about" - the techniques, and why a team will win other than we're great and we'll win. I don't even listen to sports radio, or even watch Sportscenter to be honest, I find it ridiculous how they dumb things down - why do that to people? People watch because they want to improve their knowledge, not be spoon fed baby food. And by the way don't thank me for doing any of this stuff, I'm just gald that I have a place to put it. Still trips me out that people read this.
Never shorten it Con. It was great just the way it was. Wonder why you would think ST's are a push though. Seattle is ranked #6 on returns and we are somewhere like 25.
I just think that it will be an area that the team may win in. When I watched Seattle play their special teams didn't seem all that impressive, thats all. And they have Olindo Mare
Seriously, Con, I can't believe we're all reading for free analysis that puts to shame the stuff in the newspapers and magazines.
Hey, I never turn down donations Let me know if there are any other misconceptions I can clear up for you.
Required reading for me on Thursday nights. For those that find the column long winded, might I suggest that instead of clicking "next", they use the "print" button so that the text fits on one page. You can bounce from one idea to the next, and come back to a previous point much more swiftly in such a configuration. It does wonders for me visually. Thanks again for the analysis Con.
