when you have equally matched coordinating, it comes down to talent. imo
Symon
offline
offline
It certainly helps, but as a former DC, it was not a difficult gameplan for Texas.
1 WR 64
2 WR 60
3 WR 58
4 WR 57
5 WR 52
Apoc's CB's
1 CB 59 -5
2 CB 54 -6
3 CB 48 -10
4 CB 47 -10
5 CB 46 - 6
They knew it, we knew it. Still could not stop them. Stuffed their run really well though.
If nothing else, maybe we showed other teams how to beat them.
1 WR 64
2 WR 60
3 WR 58
4 WR 57
5 WR 52
Apoc's CB's
1 CB 59 -5
2 CB 54 -6
3 CB 48 -10
4 CB 47 -10
5 CB 46 - 6
They knew it, we knew it. Still could not stop them. Stuffed their run really well though.
If nothing else, maybe we showed other teams how to beat them.
Edited by Symon on Aug 26, 2009 00:25:45
supgreg
offline
offline
Originally posted by Dysman
So what are you trying to say here? We beat you because we outlevel you by a little bit?
I have seen a LOT of lower leveled teams beat higher leveled teams. It's about game planning as well. Definately a good game today between us but don't make it about levels.
So you're saying your game plan sucks? Lower leveled teams with great schemes beat higher level teams with bad management. When you have 2 good teams with good scouting and AIs, talent wins, period. Higher level players have more EQ, SAs and VAs, which is the difference.
So what are you trying to say here? We beat you because we outlevel you by a little bit?
I have seen a LOT of lower leveled teams beat higher leveled teams. It's about game planning as well. Definately a good game today between us but don't make it about levels.
So you're saying your game plan sucks? Lower leveled teams with great schemes beat higher level teams with bad management. When you have 2 good teams with good scouting and AIs, talent wins, period. Higher level players have more EQ, SAs and VAs, which is the difference.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
