Login

08-28-2017, 07:25 PM

I wasn't in camp all I could do is read the reports. If Coley and Adams were clearly better than Treadwell wouldnt' the coaches move them up the depth chart? And as far as preseason games they aren't playing against the #1's of the opponent. So hard to compare in many ways.

08-28-2017, 07:28 PM

Quote: @Tom Moore said:

@twgerber said:
Just because the NFL sells tickets for crazy prices doesn't mean the coaches are going to treat them anything close to regular season. Preseason is for working on new concepts, new schemes, etc. By it's nature it will be somewhat practice like.
Yes, but it is common NFL knowledge that game 3 is a dress rehearsal. I guarantee you that Zimmer did not say, "Okay defense, let's shit our pants out there in front of our fans and national TV, cuz its only a preseason game. And offense, do nothing". It is not life and death, but the 3rd preseason game is key. Whoever is in front at the half is a good gauge, as those are the opening day starters. Our team looked like it was the first preseason game.

Playing hard and executing is different that putting in exotic scheme to win.

Oh I agree execution was bad 1st half. However it's not a thing you can really extrapolate to regular season success. I think history proves the score and preseason record of a team doesn't mean much to the regular season record.

Would we all like to have seen better play? Yes absolutely. Would make us all feel better. Don't know you can say that is indicative to how they WILL play. It does make me nervous but I've been watching Vikings long enough to know not to read too much into preseason.

Teams also don't really do any scheming for their opponent even in game 3. It's more about their own schemes. At least that is what I have always read.

08-28-2017, 07:30 PM

Quote: @Tom Moore said:

@twgerber said:
Craps me up anyone would want Adams or Coley ahead of Treadwell. Why? Cause they flash playing against 3rd stringers?

Treadwell was tearing up camp until his hammy.

I would suggest we wait until actual games (i.e. not preseason) with apples to apples comparison.

The overreaction to preseason is awesome

There is more to who plays than what we see in a preseason game. The coaches have different goals for these games than fans do.

You often see teams that do great in preseason but not diddly in regular season and vice a versa.

There is a reason for that....
No offense to your take. We were in camp and watching the WRs. Treadwell was NOT tearing it up, he just was more involved than last year. Coley is the better of the 3, and Adams has Patterson-like wiggle. He's not as good as Patterson, but he is good for 10-12 plays a game. More than Wright and maybe more than Treadwell. And we all want Treadwell to prove us wrong. He's got prototypical size.

I would concur on this as well. I don't know that I can remember a memorable day by Treadwell that I was there. Now maybe it was before we got there. But I'd have to say that he was fairly lackluster. I would Love to see the kid flourish as Tom says he has the size.

08-28-2017, 07:31 PM

Quote: @twgerber said:
I wasn't in camp all I could do is read the reports. If Coley and Adams were clearly better than Treadwell wouldnt' the coaches move them up the depth chart? And as far as preseason games they aren't playing against the #1's of the opponent. So hard to compare in many ways.

Treadwell is a #1 pick. They want him to turn the corner, so they will give him every rep they can. If I were to rank the WRs where they belong in order (and they all play different wideout positions), it would be 1) Diggs, 2) Thielen, 3) Floyd (he has not been #1 impressive yet), 4) Coley 5) Adams 6) Wright, 7) Treadwell 8) Freuchte.

I suspect the depth chart looks like this for now 1) Diggs 2) Theilen 3) Floyd 4) Treadwell 5) Coley 6) Adams 7) Wright 8 Freuchte

08-28-2017, 07:34 PM

Quote: @twgerber said:
I wasn't in camp all I could do is read the reports. If Coley and Adams were clearly better than Treadwell wouldnt' the coaches move them up the depth chart?

Not necessarily. They are going to try and get anything they can out of Treadwell because of where he was selected. As fans we'd love to see "The best man for the job" thing play out but that simply isn't how it's going to work. If they need to cut bait on a guy that they thought was a good bet at his draft position they need to KNOW that it is time to cut bait. Likewise if they are going to keep him they need to know where they are going to use him in the starting offense.

08-28-2017, 07:39 PM

Quote: @twgerber said:
I wasn't in camp all I could do is read the reports. If Coley and Adams were clearly better than Treadwell wouldnt' the coaches move them up the depth chart? And as far as preseason games they aren't playing against the #1's of the opponent. So hard to compare in many ways.

well even in camp, weren't Coley and Adams running against the 3s while Tread was running against the 1s? Saw Tread make some catches against Rhodes for sure. So yes, hard to compare them.

08-28-2017, 07:41 PM

Quote: @Tom Moore said:

Playing hard and executing is different that putting in exotic scheme to win.

Big difference is that SF used exotic schemes and played hard and executed. Our guys mostly played hard, but execution was happening and we certainly didn't scheme. So I don't take much from the game honestly.

08-28-2017, 08:04 PM

Maybe there was exotic schemes and maybe there wasn't... I don't know. I just know that almost every play for their first string offense was significant positive yardage. At least until into the second quarter. Now we DID force them to punt three times.... So that's good and maybe Zimmer decided to start playing against them instead of going solely vanilla, but the first quarter they were just ripping off huge chunks of yardage. I was pretty down on the team last night. And I think a lot of it was for good reason, but looking at the plays and how the half wore on, I could make the argument that perhaps Zimmer got the D to settle down, or maybe the 49ers offense dialed it back. I'm not sure which happened, but that first quarter was atrocious. The funny thing is that it looks like they were averaging 2.7 yards per carry so our Run defense actually wasn't too bad at all. The pass defense early on wasn't good. It was bad. Then we got some incompletes to help out in the second quarter. BUt we were averaging 9.25 yards per pass play even including the incompletions. Yuck.

Here's their plays
Run 5 yards
Pass 10 yards
Run 2 yards
Pass 16 yards
Pass 46 yards - Touchdown

Run 3 yards
Run 3 yards
Pass 15 yards
Run 2 yards
Pass 14 yards
Pass 5 yards
Pass 16 yards
Pass 6 yards
Run 0 yards
Pass 24 yards Touchdown

Pass Incomplete
Run 7 yards
Pass Incomplete
Punt

Pass Incomplete
Pass 13 yards
Run -1 yards
Pass 8 yards
Pass Incomplete
Punt

Pass Incomplete
Pass 3 yards
Pass -9 yards (Sack)
Punt

08-28-2017, 08:06 PM

Oh I agree, it looked awful. Just not sure how much I put into it.

08-28-2017, 08:09 PM

Quote: @greediron said:
Oh I agree, it looked awful. Just not sure how much I put into it.

Yeah the only thing I try to take away from it is "did they have confidence and competence?" I didn't get that feeling last night, but then again we could see something totally different come opening day. It's natural to look at what it was and say it is what it is, but the truth I guess is that IT may not be THAT when we get to the regular season. See.... my optimism is already being refilled.