Proehl Article

FWIW, Wharton owned Rice on the deep pass to Proehl in the first half. I recall him doing a respectable job, maybe not so much in the running game.

 

So that disparity has nothing to do with anything? I don't believe so. There's not much of a drop between Proehl's current stats and last year's, but a great drop between Colbert's 04 and 05, especially in relation to each other. Both were in offenses where neither was getting anywhere near the attention that the #1 was getting.

 

Yes Rice did definitely play the first game because I remember thinking we handled the "Great And Wonderful Mr Rice" just fine toward the end of that game.

I can well imagine it's tough to stay mentally up through camp, preseason, and then 16 more games, but I'm not ready to just hand out a "bad game free pass" regardless. If you're really sick or have nagging injuries (Morgan probably can't wrap up a tackle with his shoulder - but that's another argument about whether he should even be OUT there to begin with) then you're performance is going to fall off. But there's also a thing called pride and self respect and though I'm not nor have ever been an athlete, I have crap days at work and I may not do my usual 100%, but I damn sure don't turn in stinkers like yesterday. And the whole team all at once each game that they've played badly? What about Smith - he gets taken out sometimes because of coverage and no real second threat on our part, but I've not gotten the sense this season that he's "just not into it". And Minter too - he may not make all his plays, but I've never seen him not out there giving it all he's got. No, I can see being less then your best throughout the season, but I just can't see the whole team coincidentally having a real off day.

Personally I have to give at least a little weight to what Proehl said - there've been some hints of the same thing throughout the season both defensively and offensively. No, the players don't always know best, but when certain players express concern, I think it can have some reflection of what's going on. And it might also go a small way toward explaining emotional "flatness" - if the players feel they're being reined in, then that might indeed make them play flat. At times when our D has played what fans perceived as soft, they've also been flat - maybe they feel they're not being given the opportunity to do what they do best and it gets in their heads.

Don't know, all speculation, but I can't dismiss that Proehl is just a malcontent.

 

very much agreed. This type thing doesn't happen often, but when it does, it shows that we've made mistakes in our thought process as a team. As others have said, it gets fixed, but it shouldn't make it to this big of a problem regardless.

 

Malcontent?

After however many, what is it, 17-18 years of NFL success -- and Carolina begging to have him back in 2005 -- it seems a bit absurd to even start a rumor that Proehl could be a malcontent.

 

I'm pretty sure I said that both the disparity in Proehl's stats from last year to this year and the disparity in Colbert's stats from last year to this year are attributable to Delhomme. That's the simplest explanation by far, and the most logical. Both have gone down significantly, Colbert just had farther to fall.


And I don't think anyone ever suggested that Proehl was a malcontent. He's a competitor and it's natural that he wants to be on the field, but that's not always the best thing for us. As noted, Tampa very rarely used 3 WRs and they did just fine.

 

Oh well. In essence, we're left arguing predetermined positions without reasonable proof of what we're arguing.

We're not Tampa, so that doesn't really have bearing.

Hilliard on Manning isn't that great of a matchup for them, and they had a lead much of the game and are setup to use formation to misdirect. So using 3 WR doesn't really bode well for them regardless.

For us, with a 10+ point hole, it does make sense to go 3 wide more, it does make sense to go with a little more 'gun, etc.

Past that, as I noted, I had issue when Proehl said that Tampa dictated things to us because of what they were doing. We must dictate to the other team within the confines of reason, not simply react to the defense, especially when reaction just isn't working.

 

We did go to three wide once Tampa Bay scored that second touchdown, and we had some success with it until the Buccaneers woke up and decided to blitz. As for the rest, we moved the ball well on that first drive and then were handicapped by poor field position the rest of the day until the drive culminating in the interception.

 

We did have some success running against Tampa three wide in 2003. We never really tried that against them since.

 

I'd think it would've helped out in getting back what we had early in the game, running inside of Spires. Getting them in nickel gets Quarles off the field, too.
But that wouldn't have made us block McFarland or even Hovan better. Have no idea how we did well against them last time, and not so much this time. Sure, holes were there sometimes, and that doesn't excuse Foster or Davis from missing them, but the holes weren't where they were designed to be, so it's not like we executed well inside.
still had some faith in the sweep game, but of course we ran that well dry quickly.