Well, they are terrible actually. But also alternatingly very good.
I think the problem is offensive identity, in-game adjustments and consistency in execution and play calling - but I do believe we have the horses to be good.
If you had 4 people watch only a quarter of this game each, all 4 would have very different perceptions of who we are and what we are good or suck at.
Rudolph looked great in the first. So did play calling. Running game looked great in the third. If you just watched the 2nd, you would assume we would get blown out on O and D. The 4th was a four alarm clown explosion offensively.
I can't tell if that means there are just a few problems or if we have more holes than we can plug, but it does tell me we have the elements needed to be a good offense.
I think the problem is offensive identity, in-game adjustments and consistency in execution and play calling - but I do believe we have the horses to be good.
If you had 4 people watch only a quarter of this game each, all 4 would have very different perceptions of who we are and what we are good or suck at.
Rudolph looked great in the first. So did play calling. Running game looked great in the third. If you just watched the 2nd, you would assume we would get blown out on O and D. The 4th was a four alarm clown explosion offensively.
I can't tell if that means there are just a few problems or if we have more holes than we can plug, but it does tell me we have the elements needed to be a good offense.
