"Mandate" to STOP THE RUN ...

[LJpalmbeacher2]

This is exactly the trouble with today's society. Whether it's sports or anything else is has to be "instant". Instant everything is nice to have. However, unrealistic when it comes to building things that last. 3 years is a fraction of time to building a "monster" so to speak that will endure for many more years after the fact. Especially "winning" sport franchises. The NFL is not a fast-food restaurant. Accept it and deal with it, IMO.

Respectfully don't agree. The NFL stands for "Not For Long".

3 years is a significant amount of time for a unit to be built or atleast have building blocks already established.

Our best OLineman was drafted by Polian. From the center to the RT we were downright awful not knowing who the starters or 3rd stringers were. We had a different C every week.

Our answer so far to upgrade the OL is signing a 32 year old in FA. There still are huge question marks going into year 4.

Our Defense gets gashed one week on the ground and then the next week gets torched in the air. No building blocks here either,except for a couple good corners.

No dominant or even a adequate NT, something you think would be a priority right away in a 3-4 defense. Our linebackers can't cover well and we have NO IDEA WHO WILL PLAY SAFETY opposite of Adams who is up there in age and we very fortunate to get him at last minute last year!

If we ever build the "monster" on Defense, most of the players aren't even on the roster yet and we are going on year four.

[ColtRider]

I'm getting to the point where I don't care if it's Goldman, Davis, Phillips, or Armstead, I just want them to draft someone in the first round who is going to be a monster that wreaks havoc on the line and stops teams from running all over us. I really hope the staff is looking hard at the D-Line

Yes sir, "Defjamz26"! Totally agree with your assessment 100%. Stopping the run is priority 1. Nice ring to that.

[Superman]

You know, IMO, I really am not satisfied with being 9th or 12th notwithstanding New England. Would like to see at the very least a top 3 defense against the run. Why not?

You don't have to be satisfied. Just trying to dispel the myth that our run defense is terrible.

[Superman]

Coaching. Our coaching staff couldn't figure out their same game plan not once,

not twice but three frickin' times in a row!

Not a defense of the coaching, but it wasn't really the same gameplan.

[Jay Kirk]

Maybe our D wouldn't fade so much if our Offense could sustain some decent drives.....

Don't see that being a problem anymore.

[ColtRider]

You don't have to be satisfied. Just trying to dispel the myth that our run defense is terrible.

I'm outta likes. So, "I like this!" Not implying negativity, just would like to see a better number one day, Superman.

[Jay Kirk]

To paraphrase Bill Polian, size has little to do with it.  It has to do with skill and whether or not they fit your system.  You could have Mount Cody on your roster, but if he doesn't fit your system, he won't be of much use.  The Colts had the leagues heaviest roster last year, but that size doesn't stop the run.  Ability and scheme fits do.

Ive got to agree , and being at playing weight and in shape help. We have 3 DLs that may have the talent but playing over weight slows them down and limits strength .If they get in shape the right way would make a diff. Im almost sure we will take a DL in the 1rst.Your also right about game plan or scheme ,if its not right doesn't matter who you line up it wont work against a well coached and prepared team.

[Indianapolis-Colts-Fan]

Teams have worn our D down with running the ball. We gave reasonable resistance for a half or so, but eventually the D tired and we gave up chunks. We need to establish a punishing running game and keep the ball longer. This means we need road grader O lineman. Establish the run and throw when they stack the box.

Now, on the other side, a dominating NT or DE is required. Carl Davis or Goldman can fill that role. Also, I posted on another theme that taking Marcus Peters and having two shut down CBs follows what Seattle has done. By shutting down the other team's WRs the D line has more time to pressure the QB and/or more time to stop the run. Just a thought. comments?

Offense won TOP for over half the season before Pitt then we lost TOP resulting in your tired D whiched seemed somewhat improved apon last year.

[ColtRider]

Respectfully don't agree. The NFL stands for "Not For Long".

3 years is a significant amount of time for a unit to be built or atleast have building blocks already established.

Our best OLineman was drafted by Polian. From the center to the RT we were downright awful not knowing who the starters or 3rd stringers were. We had a different C every week.

Our answer so far to upgrade the OL is signing a 32 year old in FA. There still are huge question marks going into year 4.

Our Defense gets gashed one week on the ground and then the next week gets torched in the air. No building blocks here either,except for a couple good corners.

No dominant or even a adequate NT, something you think would be a priority right away in a 3-4 defense. Our linebackers can't cover well and we have NO IDEA WHO WILL PLAY SAFETY opposite of Adams who is up there in age and we very fortunate to get him at last minute last year!

If we ever build the "monster" on Defense, most of the players aren't even on the roster yet and we are going on year four.

Thanks, "LJpalmbeacher", for the "respectfully disagree". Your point is very well taken and understood. I differ, however. Yes, I am fully aware that there have been teams in the NFL that have reached Super Bowls during a tenure of only 3 years where head coaches and staff have been replaced. i.e. Dallas in the late 80's to mid 90's comes to mind first with Jimmie Johnson and that staff. However, not only does it come down to -only- that it is acquiring the players as well. All things have to come to an injunction first in order for that to happen.

The term, "Good things come to those who wait!", comes across much better IMO more often than not when creating an NFL powerhouse that lasts. I, too, would love to see the Indianapolis Colts win the Super Bowl this year. (just may happen). The nucleus is there on offense and defense. Making that more prevelant by the draft and other means before the season starts is going to determine the outward look for several more years, IMO. So, I'm biding my time with the outcome. Totally get where you're coming from though.

I remember the stretch from 1979-1994. Not pretty. Bags over fans heads and the like. So, in closing, I can say this with the utmost confidence factor on high ... Give it a little more time. It will most certainly happen, IMO ... Building that Monster!

[Grigs build the lines plz.]

Not a defense of the coaching, but it wasn't really the same gameplan.

Smashing our defensive front off of the line while racking up tons of yards on the ground?

If it wasn't the same game plan then it was very similar.

[southwest1]

Don't see that being a problem anymore.

I will admit that the o-line looked better late in the season & yes, the additions of Gore & Johnson should keep the 1st down chains moving, but to me, I still see Luck running too much behind our line & I wanna Andrew take the snap under center, slide backward, go thru his reads, & throw. Andrew just seems like he doesn't have enough time to release the ball without having his feet carry him to another spot where he can get the ball to either Allen or TY. 

 

Luck's protection is better than the beginning of this past season, but nowhere near I'd like it to be. Andrew's still taking too many hits & I don't wanna see him hurt. If he goes down, we are so screwed. Grigs has got to provide Luck a better pocket where he can just go thru his reads & bang release the ball. He's scrambling way too darn much. 

[Superman]

Smashing our defensive front off of the line while racking up tons of yards on the ground?

If it wasn't the same game plan then it was very similar.

 

In general terms, yes. But the way they ran the ball, their formations and blocking schemes, were different. I know a lot of people couldn't stomach rewatching those games, but I did. I learned a lot.

 

They used a lot of what I call "double strong" formations in the regular season game. They used an extra OL on one side, and Gronkowski on the other side. Since Gronk is such a great blocker, it's like both sides were the strong side. They could run it either way and have an advantage, so however we set up our defense, they were able to exploit it. On top of that, the DL did a terrible job playing the gaps and sealing the edge.

 

In the playoff game, we actually did a better job against those double strong formations. So they switched up and started the angle blocking and wham blocking. They'd hit the DT with a quick double team from the center and guard, then the center would shoot up to the ILB, and then a pull blocker from the other side would hit the DT again, and there were gaping holes right in the middle. They ran several variations of this, with a lot of success.

 

In both games, the tackling was poor.

[ColtRider]

In general terms, yes. But the way they ran the ball, their formations and blocking schemes, were different. I know a lot of people couldn't stomach rewatching those games, but I did. I learned a lot.

 

They used a lot of what I call "double strong" formations in the regular season game. They used an extra OL on one side, and Gronkowski on the other side. Since Gronk is such a great blocker, it's like both sides were the strong side. They could run it either way and have an advantage, so however we set up our defense, they were able to exploit it. On top of that, the DL did a terrible job playing the gaps and sealing the edge.

 

In the playoff game, we actually did a better job against those double strong formations. So they switched up and started the angle blocking and wham blocking. They'd hit the DT with a quick double team from the center and guard, then the center would shoot up to the ILB, and then a pull blocker from the other side would hit the DT again, and there were gaping holes right in the middle. They ran several variations of this, with a lot of success.

 

In both games, the tackling was poor.

Actually did that very same thing, Superman! (watching the games over & over) Came to the exact conclusions. Forcing your opponent to scramble all over the place from a scheme thesis is exactly what New England does better than any team in the league. Once you figure out the approach, they're incorporating the next move even before you figure out the first strategy to begin with. It's a lot like chess with Bill Belichick. He's got several moves ahead of you while trying to deal with the present board the way it stands.

[Jay Kirk]

I will admit that the o-line looked better late in the season & yes, the additions of Gore & Johnson should keep the 1st down chains moving, but to me, I still see Luck running too much behind our line & I wanna Andrew take the snap under center, slide backward, go thru his reads, & throw. Andrew just seems like he doesn't have enough time to release the ball without having his feet carry him to another spot where he can get the ball to either Allen or TY. 

 

Luck's protection is better than the beginning of this past season, but nowhere near I'd like it to be. Andrew's still taking too many hits & I don't wanna see him hurt. If he goes down, we are so screwed. Grigs has got to provide Luck a better pocket where he can just go thru his reads & bang release the ball. He's scrambling way too darn much. 

Your correct , however we were playing with rookies a lot , and dealing with injuries , never had the same line long enough to develop the chemistry needed . With the addition of Herremans , if the line stays healthy I think they will be vastly improved. Gore brings the threat for the run on any down, and nothing slows a pass rush more.

[southwest1]

In general terms, yes. But the way they ran the ball, their formations and blocking schemes, were different. I know a lot of people couldn't stomach rewatching those games, but I did. I learned a lot.

 

They used a lot of what I call "double strong" formations in the regular season game. They used an extra OL on one side, and Gronkowski on the other side. Since Gronk is such a great blocker, it's like both sides were the strong side. They could run it either way and have an advantage, so however we set up our defense, they were able to exploit it. On top of that, the DL did a terrible job playing the gaps and sealing the edge.

 

In the playoff game, we actually did a better job against those double strong formations. So they switched up and started the angle blocking and wham blocking. They'd hit the DT with a quick double team from the center and guard, then the center would shoot up to the ILB, and then a pull blocker from the other side would hit the DT again, and there were gaping holes right in the middle. They ran several variations of this, with a lot of success.

 

In both games, the tackling was poor.

I applaud you for doing that Superman because whenever NE mops the floor with us I never wanna see that game again. I respect your ability to breakdown our weaknesses in simplistic easy to understand terms too. You're good at it. Nothing earth shattering here I know, but I'm a firm believer in letting people know what they excel at that's all. Enough said. 

[bap1331]

Maybe our D wouldn't fade so much if our Offense could sustain some decent drives.....

Ive been saying this all along...

[Grigs build the lines plz.]

In general terms, yes. But the way they ran the ball, their formations and blocking schemes, were different. I know a lot of people couldn't stomach rewatching those games, but I did. I learned a lot.

 

They used a lot of what I call "double strong" formations in the regular season game. They used an extra OL on one side, and Gronkowski on the other side. Since Gronk is such a great blocker, it's like both sides were the strong side. They could run it either way and have an advantage, so however we set up our defense, they were able to exploit it. On top of that, the DL did a terrible job playing the gaps and sealing the edge.

 

In the playoff game, we actually did a better job against those double strong formations. So they switched up and started the angle blocking and wham blocking. They'd hit the DT with a quick double team from the center and guard, then the center would shoot up to the ILB, and then a pull blocker from the other side would hit the DT again, and there were gaping holes right in the middle. They ran several variations of this, with a lot of success.

 

In both games, the tackling was poor.

I have nothing for that, excellent post. Belichick just plain outcoached our staff.

[ColtRider]

Actually did that very same thing, Superman! (watching the games over & over) Came to the exact conclusions. Forcing your opponent to scramble all over the place from a scheme thesis is exactly what New England does better than any team in the league. Once you figure out the approach, they're incorporating the next move even before you figure out the first strategy to begin with. It's a lot like chess with Bill Belichick. He's got several moves ahead of you while trying to deal with the present board the way it stands.

Fight fire with fire! If the Indianapolis Colts can rediscover it's identity from a "strategic" view and "implement" schematics via talented players, coaches, and staff that backs those into ONE (make the new slogan fit) winning "system" that all can adhere to by being on the same page ... then you have something ... It's called "World Championships!" I'm not saying it's easy to configure or formulate in just a couple of years. However, once created, tried and tested, longevity enters the picture for quite some time. i.e. New England, Green Bay, Pittsburgh, Baltimore, and now Dallas/Seattle to the mix. Stick to your guns, Mr. Irsay and Mr. Grigson. You're not that far off from multiple titles. Seize the day!

[amfootball]

In general terms, yes. But the way they ran the ball, their formations and blocking schemes, were different. I know a lot of people couldn't stomach rewatching those games, but I did. I learned a lot.

 

They used a lot of what I call "double strong" formations in the regular season game. They used an extra OL on one side, and Gronkowski on the other side. Since Gronk is such a great blocker, it's like both sides were the strong side. They could run it either way and have an advantage, so however we set up our defense, they were able to exploit it. On top of that, the DL did a terrible job playing the gaps and sealing the edge.

 

In the playoff game, we actually did a better job against those double strong formations. So they switched up and started the angle blocking and wham blocking. They'd hit the DT with a quick double team from the center and guard, then the center would shoot up to the ILB, and then a pull blocker from the other side would hit the DT again, and there were gaping holes right in the middle. They ran several variations of this, with a lot of success.

 

In both games, the tackling was poor.

Thanks for the break down. I did not realize how much the run scheme blocking changed from the first game to the second game.

I think also with the playoff game, Brady has a much better day passing the ball than the regular season game which also helped the run game to be more effective and Blount is a better RB than Gray as well in terms of being able to shift and avoid tacklers and get down field.

[Smonroe]

In general terms, yes. But the way they ran the ball, their formations and blocking schemes, were different. I know a lot of people couldn't stomach rewatching those games, but I did. I learned a lot.

 

They used a lot of what I call "double strong" formations in the regular season game. They used an extra OL on one side, and Gronkowski on the other side. Since Gronk is such a great blocker, it's like both sides were the strong side. They could run it either way and have an advantage, so however we set up our defense, they were able to exploit it. On top of that, the DL did a terrible job playing the gaps and sealing the edge.

 

In the playoff game, we actually did a better job against those double strong formations. So they switched up and started the angle blocking and wham blocking. They'd hit the DT with a quick double team from the center and guard, then the center would shoot up to the ILB, and then a pull blocker from the other side would hit the DT again, and there were gaping holes right in the middle. They ran several variations of this, with a lot of success.

 

In both games, the tackling was poor.

Excellent post. I couldn't even watch the shortcut again.

There's no shame in being out coached by the best coach in the league. But we weren't even close after halftime. If adjustments were made, they obviously were the wrong ones. Outplayed, and out coached three times in a row by them? Sad.

I keep thinking how well the Ravens match up against the Pats, and if the Pats didn't totally confuse them at the end of the playoff game, we would have played the Ravens at home. Ifs and buts.

[Grigs build the lines plz.]

Excellent post. I couldn't even watch the shortcut again.

There's no shame in being out coached by the best coach in the league. But we weren't even close after halftime. If adjustments were made, they obviously were the wrong ones. Outplayed, and out coached three times in a row by them? Sad.

I keep thinking how well the Ravens match up against the Pats, and if the Pats didn't totally confuse them at the end of the playoff game, we would have played the Ravens at home. Ifs and buts.

Belichick has Pagano's number.

[Jason_]

Respectfully don't agree. The NFL stands for "Not For Long".

3 years is a significant amount of time for a unit to be built or atleast have building blocks already established.

Our best OLineman was drafted by Polian. From the center to the RT we were downright awful not knowing who the starters or 3rd stringers were. We had a different C every week.

Our answer so far to upgrade the OL is signing a 32 year old in FA. There still are huge question marks going into year 4.

Our Defense gets gashed one week on the ground and then the next week gets torched in the air. No building blocks here either,except for a couple good corners.

No dominant or even a adequate NT, something you think would be a priority right away in a 3-4 defense. Our linebackers can't cover well and we have NO IDEA WHO WILL PLAY SAFETY opposite of Adams who is up there in age and we very fortunate to get him at last minute last year!

If we ever build the "monster" on Defense, most of the players aren't even on the roster yet and we are going on year four.

 

well, respectfully, I disagree with pretty much all of this.  First, saying "3 years is a significant amount of time for a unit to be built" is not taking all factors into consideration.  Factors such as the fact that Grigson had to deal with what, ~30+ mil in dead cap space that first year?  Not to mention the fact that there was virtually no offense on the roster going into FA and the draft that year.  That's why Grigson drafted a QB, 2 x TE, 2 x WR and a RB.  Plus the picks of Harnish and Anderson and that's 8 out of 10 draft picks that were spent trying to build an offense. 

 

In 2013, we were still left with mostly leftovers on defense from the Polian/Dungy tampa 2 days.  This was the first year Grigson was really able to spend FA money on the defense. However, he had no defensive core to work with...Redding and Mathis were really the only vets on the defense and since most draft picks in 2012 were spent on the offense, there was still no young developmental talent either.  So in FA, Grigson did not have the luxury of going after a couple of playmakers and instead had to pretty much sign a starting defense.  That offseason he signed Aubrayo Franklin, RJF, Walden, Toler and Landry hoping that 4 of these 5 could turn into long-time starters (Franklin was just brought in as a stop-gap while Chapman got up to speed after missing his entire rookie season).  Toler and Walden worked out but Landry and RJF didn't.  The 2013 draft was Grigson's first real opportunity to spend draft picks on defense and he did in Werner, Hughes and Boyett.  Unfortunately, Boyett is a bonehead and got himself cut but Werner and Hughes are still two good pieces that are still developing.

 

You say no building blocks on defense?  That's absurd.  First, your assessment of Chapman is simply wrong.  He is definitely better than adequate and should only get better considering last year was his first year as a full time starter.  Yes, he got outplayed against NE, but so did the rest of the defense.  Other than that, he played well far more often than he played poorly.  Plus, the whole lack of experience thing.  Other building blocks on defense include Art Jones who is only 28, Werner, Newsome, Hughes, Kerr, Langford, Freeman, Toler, Davis and Butler. 

 

Our LBs can't cover well?  Well that's true but only against the elite TEs (or good TEs who have an elite QB throwing to them) and here's a hint...EVERY team has difficulty covering the elite TEs. 

 

Yes, there is still a need at Safety, but there is still the draft. 

 

BTW, yes, some people call the NFL the "not for long" league, but that's only because of impatient fans and some of the owners that want the immediate gratification that seldom comes in the NFL.

[Jason_]

Belichick has Pagano's number.

 

Belichick has the number of a lot of coaches

[Grigs build the lines plz.]

Belichick has the number of a lot of coaches

We need to figure out what Harbaugh knows in Baltimore.

[Flash7]

We need to figure out what Harbaugh knows in Baltimore.

I always wondered about this. I assume that most coaches in the AFC respect Belichick, but don't necessarily like him. Are they able to talk to one another and game plan against him and the Patriots?

[theanarchist]

Maybe our D wouldn't fade so much if our Offense could sustain some decent drives.....

This is the reason we have to be able to run the ball effectively. Running the ball controls the clock, wears down a defense and opens up the passing game. If we start running the ball better. Our run defense becomes better.

[ColtRider]

Belichick has Pagano's number.

Pretty sure that Belichick and Kraft have a lot of "NFL Organizations' " number than just coaches. Knowing your opponent's entirety is the art of winning sports franchises.

[theanarchist]

We need to figure out what Harbaugh knows in Baltimore.

1) strong running game

2) Offensive line is a strength not a liability

3) pressure Brady

[Grigs build the lines plz.]

1) strong running game

2) Offensive line is a strength not a liability

3) pressure Brady

I will add with a strong run defense, but apparently from another poster that Belichick

tweaks their O line blocking to blow open running lanes, regardless what we do on

defense.

[ÅÐØNϧ 1]

Its been a painful reality since the Mora days. We've been gettin a mudhole stomped in our D going on 2 decades now.

 

 

 

Either we stop the run or we need a new defensive minded coach because this Defense has been nothing but Offensive ..

 

Its unbelievable how long it has been I always wondered how the heck the worst defense in 06 stopped the run on the way to the 07 Superbowl but not before or much since .  

 

Thru the Peyton Manning era into the Andrew Luck era when will this organization finally put a defense on the field than can just stop the run will it be this year ? Every year this is my hope every year I'm terribly disappointed .

[Superman]

Excellent post. I couldn't even watch the shortcut again.

There's no shame in being out coached by the best coach in the league. But we weren't even close after halftime. If adjustments were made, they obviously were the wrong ones. Outplayed, and out coached three times in a row by them? Sad.

I keep thinking how well the Ravens match up against the Pats, and if the Pats didn't totally confuse them at the end of the playoff game, we would have played the Ravens at home. Ifs and buts.

 

The adjustments in the playoff game were made by the Patriots. Our defense had done a decent job in the first half. Had two stops at the beginning of the game, then Cribbs fumbled and the Pats got new life. They had a takeaway halfway through the 2nd quarter. 

 

The Pats really went to the short passing game, exploiting some of the open areas that were created by our defense crowding the box -- which was necessary to stop the run and cover Gronk. That's a really good counter. Had we tackled better, I think we would have gotten more stops in the first half.

 

And it's been said many times that the offense was incredibly ineffective. Seven points, several stalled drives, turnovers, missed FG, etc. Just not good.

 

But after halftime, three TDs by the Pats (one was illegitimate), three bad drives by our offense, and suddenly it's 38-7. Lots of poor tackling from a tired defense, and some terrible DL play, and some terrible offense (Luck really got duped by Revis on the pick). It really wasn't just bad run defense. It was a bad game, by all phases. The offense was just as bad as the run defense.

[Smonroe]

The adjustments in the playoff game were made by the Patriots. Our defense had done a decent job in the first half. Had two stops at the beginning of the game, then Cribbs fumbled and the Pats got new life. They had a takeaway halfway through the 2nd quarter. 

 

The Pats really went to the short passing game, exploiting some of the open areas that were created by our defense crowding the box -- which was necessary to stop the run and cover Gronk. That's a really good counter. Had we tackled better, I think we would have gotten more stops in the first half.

 

And it's been said many times that the offense was incredibly ineffective. Seven points, several stalled drives, turnovers, missed FG, etc. Just not good.

 

But after halftime, three TDs by the Pats (one was illegitimate), three bad drives by our offense, and suddenly it's 38-7. Lots of poor tackling from a tired defense, and some terrible DL play, and some terrible offense (Luck really got duped by Revis on the pick). It really wasn't just bad run defense. It was a bad game, by all phases. The offense was just as bad as the run defense.

Thanks for the summary. I haven't been able to re-watch that game so I guess I'm piling on.

You're spot on, the offense contributed as much to that fiasco as did the D.

[Grigs build the lines plz.]

I always wondered about this. I assume that most coaches in the AFC respect Belichick, but don't necessarily like him. Are they able to talk to one another and game plan against him and the Patriots?

This would help if they talked and compared notes, but our staff has tape of all three Pat

losses, yet the losses keep getting worse it seems.

[Grigs build the lines plz.]

This is the reason we have to be able to run the ball effectively. Running the ball controls the clock, wears down a defense and opens up the passing game. If we start running the ball better. Our run defense becomes better.

This is the key to beating the Pats right here. Running the ball well and controlling the clock is about

the only way to beat these clowns. Our running game has sucked the past few years so our losses

go hand in hand with our lousy run game.

[DalTXColtsFan]

I've brought this up for discussion previously but it's worth bringing it up again - why *didn't* Cincinnati and Denver try to emulate NE's game plan against us?  Or *did* they try and for whatever reason just weren't able to execute it as well as NE?  Is NE just a better running team than people give them credit for?

 

Cincinnati was actually the #6 team in the NFL at rushing the football - NE, surprisingly, was #18 (Denver was #15).

 

Could Cincy or Denver have emulated NE's success and were just too stupid or stubborn to do it?

[ColtRider]

1) strong running game

2) Offensive line is a strength not a liability

3) pressure Brady

Nice. I would add to your list, theanarchist, the ability to stop the run as well ... however ...

Right on the dime, my man, right on the dime!

[Coffeedrinker]

The Ravens put up good running numbers against us too. Forsett was running wild.

Forsett had 6 carries in that game for 42 yards.  one was a 29 yarder, so that means the other 5 were for 13 yards.  That is not running wild.

[Solon]

Forsett had 6 carries in that game for 42 yards.  one was a 29 yarder, so that means the other 5 were for 13 yards.  That is not running wild.

Someone already told me I was wrong, but why not? Seems like you "get off" by telling people they're wrong. I put the overall running yardage in Forsett's name. 

[TrueBlue12]

"I think a big part of this is scheming."

"I think it comes down to scheming."

Has anyone ever seen an arrow into another arrow in Archery? I JUST DID ... with this post from "21isSuperman"! Nice shot!

I'm totally not impressed with the arrow in arrow thing. I think Kevin Costner also did it. I am a somewhat experienced archer with both recurved and compound bows. I have never achieved anything near that accuracy.

 

Darrell Pace, who lives in my community, is far more impressive. 

 

Look see: 

 

Edited April 4, 2015 by 21isSuperman

[TrueBlue12]

"I think a big part of this is scheming."

"I think it comes down to scheming."

Has anyone ever seen an arrow into another arrow in Archery? I JUST DID ... with this post from "21isSuperman"! Nice shot!

Just one other semi-funny thought...

 

I am a scientist and so the arrow in arrow video makes me laugh.

 

There is a principle in science, yet to be disproven, that two objects cannot occupy the same space at the same time. Watching the TV show "Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey" did not change my view on this principle.

 

Yet, the arrow in arrow video did. Congratulations for identifying the disproof of the theory!!! Astrophysicists worldwide will be convening in a convention in Brussels to rethink the existing laws of physics....lol. Of course, this is just a good natured post.

 

Darrell Pace forever... Japanese video modifiers never!

Edited April 4, 2015 by 21isSuperman