Originally posted by fulgin
Originally posted by ReadingFC
Thank you, and you are right, it did have an effect on the game. How much of an effect is hard to say.
I offered the challenge to Belfast to show that we could beat them without a gimmick play. I guess I need to just come clean and say I do feel guilty after the fact. I wanted to win so bad that I pushed it a little to far. I thought if I only use it for one quarter it would be alright. But now I feel a little slimy. Everyone makes mistakes, so I would like to officially apologize to the Belfast Brawlers. When we play our re-match I will remove it entirely from the playbook.
I have enjoyed competing and playing against all the coaches in this league. I don't want to have a reputation as an exploiter. But I also like to win, which I think is an attribute we all share. Consider it a lesson learned. Good luck tomorrow to Clydesdale as well as to the teams in Zeta.
I see that did not effect your playcalling in the next game.
I look forward to facing you again next season in AA, and more importantly, where you have to run more than 1 play for half the game.
f.
What? I removed the all slam in the third quarter. I added random to the formation of my inside runs. I made it a point to change other strong I inside to off tackle plays (which can be stopped if you scheme right). For example:
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=472394&pbp_id=18836774 and
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=472394 and
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=472394I even spread the carries out more between our level 36 and level 50. We are a running team, that is what we have done all year.
The Brawlers had a reason to bitch. But I don't see what you are complaining about? Either you don't know how to watch game film and just looked at the number of rushes or you are just pissed about losing to us twice.