FOR NON HATERS ONLY

by Philinwood on Oct 30, 2009 5:12 PM CDT Comment 20 comments

pretty good analysis of the double reverse from Sunday vs. Dolphins

That's pretty much all I have to say, the rest is in the link but I have to try to get this to seventy five words. I really hope the loss of Evans doesn't hit the Saints too hard, he was really a godsend. i think we will be ok, but it's hard to imagine any replacement fullback being as good a weapon and pass catcher as Evans.

Anatomy of a Play: Bush's double-reverse touchdown

This FanPost was written by a reader and member of Canal Street Chronicles. It does not necessarily reflect the views of CSC and its staff or editors.

0 recs | Comment 20 comments | Add comment

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It's actually not a double reverse, right?

Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!

by Saintsational on Oct 30, 2009 5:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

It's not

It’s just a reverse. I can’t remember the last time I saw a double reverse in the pros.

Super Bowl 44: "If you play in this league and it's not your goal, there's something wrong with you." -- Marques Colston

by MtnExile on Oct 30, 2009 6:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know it’s “technically” only a reverse but everything (including the TV guys and even the NFL guys) call it a double reverse. So I say just call it a double reverse and can this silly “end around” mess.

by FriarBob on Nov 2, 2009 11:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

This was just posted as a fanshot

original post

As for it being a double reverse, it depends on who you ask I guess. I broke down the difference in my post on the other thread.

by HB-NOLA on Oct 30, 2009 5:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

It is a double reverse

when one wr gets the ball and goes in one direction and then th other wr comes from the opposite side, I think that’s what a double reverse is. You couldn’t have one more handoff..at least that’s what I always thought.

"Indecision may or may not be my biggest problem" - Jimmy Buffett

by Philinwood on Oct 30, 2009 7:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Yeah its a double reverse...

Don't worry I got your back cuz...

by TAYDIGGA on Oct 30, 2009 8:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

it's a double reverse

from what i saw.

Superbowl bound!!!...I know! do you?! Go Saints!!

by skinnykinney on Oct 31, 2009 12:50 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Double, Schmuble

It worked! thanks to Drew making the crucial block.

Fat, dumb, and happy. Hell, two out of three ain't bad!

by Just 'Nother Day on Oct 31, 2009 7:05 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't think

the lineman would have caught Reggie anyway. I would have rather seen a better effort out of our man on the goal line. Reggie would have walked in but it would not have been as dramatic as the hurdle into the endzone, Then Reggie would not have been on the cover of Sports Illustrated and nobody would be worried about he Curse. Funny how things escalated fro that one play. Now we are even worried about what color uniforms they wear…………Lots of people out here that are superstitious about change . It does not bother me…………..

by saint-sly on Oct 31, 2009 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

it’s a 300 lb lineman. don’t think he’d get there. Brees just sorta stepped in the way and gave a lil nudge. Stichcomb was at the goal line and he did an awful job of blocking. IDC if we’re on SI or wearing pink pants, we’re winning this year!

Superbowl bound!!!...I know! do you?! Go Saints!!

by skinnykinney on Oct 31, 2009 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

It wasn't Stinchcomb at the goal line

Goodwin is the one that missed his block on the safety.

by HB-NOLA on Oct 31, 2009 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thats correct !!!!!!!!!!!!

Could’a done a better job and all this other crap would be a non-issue. Reggie would never have made the cover of SI but maybe the positive attention will do him some good. I think his confidence was starting to fade

by saint-sly on Oct 31, 2009 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

oh

i thought i heard or read that it was stinchcomb. my b. either way, horrible blocking and it makes me feel better that it wasn’t stinchcomb. We need a new center anyways I think.

Superbowl bound!!!...I know! do you?! Go Saints!!

by skinnykinney on Nov 1, 2009 9:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

The lineman

would not have caught Bush but would have forced him into a wider swing. As it happened, Bush was “flying” out of bounds and reached in with the ball. He probably had the touchdown by 3~4 inches? A wider arc on his run would have put him out of bounds at the 2 yard line.

Fat, dumb, and happy. Hell, two out of three ain't bad!

by Just 'Nother Day on Oct 31, 2009 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excellent point.

The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.

If stupidity is a cancer, you're terminal.

When you die and go to hell, you come back as a Jets fan.

by Hooahsaint on Nov 1, 2009 2:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

good point

but would that make him try to cut it back inside then? anyways, good thing drew got in the nudge to keep him in by flying b/c it’s a nice photo

Superbowl bound!!!...I know! do you?! Go Saints!!

by skinnykinney on Nov 1, 2009 9:54 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow, just think

how cool would it be to have another photo like that but with #9 on the jersey! I think defensive linemen across the league would start packing their bags! Ha!

Fat, dumb, and happy. Hell, two out of three ain't bad!

by Just 'Nother Day on Nov 1, 2009 4:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs