Undefeated
Active Member
- Messages
- 205
- Reaction score
- 166
Some videos posted by ****NOT-AN-OFFICIAL-SOURCE***, I believe it is every pass attempt from Dak in 3 games without Dez.
We have damn profanity filter? You ******** me?I move that we add the name "Dez" to the list of words not allowed by the profanity filter....What say ye?
Here are the averages for each game, broken down by half.I’m pretty sure the success in those games had to do more with the fact that they averaged 188 yards rushing in those games against three rotten defenses. NFL teams have typically won those games 85% of the time, regardless of what their QB was or wasn’t doing.
Unfortunately using these three games as some sort of barometer of how well this offense can perform on a consistent basis without Dez is severely flawed for obvious reasons, so I simply cannot understand the attempt to do so.
Beasley was really good during that stretch.
Why?
The 90's formula, points in the passing game, punish them late with the run.Here are the averages for each game, broken down by half.
1st half
18 passes, 149 yards (5 td 0 int)
15 runs 92 yards
2nd half yards
10 passes, 91 yards
18 runs, 96 yards
Not that it proves anything about "Dak Without Dez," but QB performance has a lot to do with the correlation between high rushing yardage totals and wins.
Because it hurts their agenda.Why?
Pretty well stated by two posters above but,
GB 2nd worst pass D in the league
SF worst run D in the League
CIN 11th pass, 21st run D
Obviously passing is going to be a lot easier as horrible run defenses are going to have to over commit to the run against top rushing teams.
Some videos posted by ****NOT-AN-OFFICIAL-SOURCE***, I believe it is every pass attempt from Dak in 3 games without Dez.