Coaching has Nothing to do with Seattle Abusing the Broncos

Discussion in 'Fan Zone' started by khiladi, Feb 5, 2014.

  1. Carharris2

    Carharris2 Well-Known Member

    5,331 Messages
    4,489 Likes Received
    I'm very confused. What exactly is this thread about.
    I've beard op's explanations and I'm more confused.
    Let's start over. No. Let's don't.
    WoodysGirl and casmith07 like this.
  2. Heelsboy

    Heelsboy Well-Known Member

    589 Messages
    819 Likes Received
    One of these days you are going to have to realize that sarcasm is hard to decipher on a message board or the internet in general.
    WoodysGirl likes this.
  3. Carolina Cowboy

    Carolina Cowboy Well-Known Member

    791 Messages
    426 Likes Received
    Sorry OP. I respectfully disagree with your premise.
  4. khiladi

    khiladi Well-Known Member

    17,017 Messages
    7,153 Likes Received
    I never said it wasn't coaching, thus the point about Jason Garrett's 'coaching'...
  5. khiladi

    khiladi Well-Known Member

    17,017 Messages
    7,153 Likes Received
    Let's summarize:

    Seattle has talented players, no doubt, but..
    Sherman says that they studied what Peyton did and knew what he was calling, including his hand signals
    Sherman says Denver could have been more effective if they adjusted, including giving some ways such as double-moves, thus the implication of ADJUSTING THE GAME-PLAN during the actual game

    This brings me to the analogy to the excuses for our actual head COACH Jason Garrett and HIS OFFENSE and IT'S SIMPLICITY as compared to stopping one of the most prolific offenses ever.

    This idea of the Garrett homers of just beating your men up front is what wins games is the reason why Garrett looks bad is just utterly ridiculous, i.e. he supposedly doesn't have the talent (which is BS) and he's hamstrung...

    How on earth somebody doesn't understand the sarcasm in my point about coaching has nothing to do with it is utterly befuddling..

    ABQCOWBOY Moderator Staff Member

    41,750 Messages
    6,886 Likes Received
    This entire thread reminds me of a Star Trek episode entitled, "A Piece Of The Action."

    Capt. Kirk: The name of the game is called, uh... fizzbin.

    Kalo: Fizzbin?

    Capt. Kirk: Fizzbin. It's, uh... not too difficult.

    Kalo: Mm-hmm.

    Capt. Kirk: Each player gets six cards, except for the dealer, er, the player on the dealer's right, who, er, gets seven.

    Kalo: On the right?

    Capt. Kirk: Yes. The second card is turned up, except on Tuesday.

    Kalo: On Tuesday.

    Capt. Kirk: Mm-hmm.

    Capt. Kirk: [exited] Ooh, look what you got, two jacks. You got a half fizzbin already!

    Kalo: Hehe! I need another jack.

    Capt. Kirk: No, no. If you got another jack, why, you'd have, er, a sralk.

    Kalo: A sralk?

    Capt. Kirk: Yes. You'd be disqualified.

    Kalo: Oh.

    Capt. Kirk: No, what you need now, is either a king and a deuce, except at night, of course, when you'd need a queen and a, and a four.

    Kalo: Except at night.

    Capt. Kirk: Right. Oh, look at that. You've got another jack!

    [Kalo laughs]

    Capt. Kirk: How lucky you are! How wonderful for you. Now, if you didn't get another jack, if you'd gotten a king, why, then you'd get another card, except when it's dark, when you'd have to give it back.

    Kalo: If it were dark on Tuesday!


    My head hurts.....

Share This Page