Quentin Nelson LOL

[HOZER]

15 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

LOL, look who's changing the topic.  Its not about a play that happened about 150 times this weekend between the NFL, college, and HS football. 

 

The attitude imbedded in the tweet was the motivation...and topic....of the thread.  That Nelson, and he alone, caused the DB to "give up".

 

Why do you come out when the narrative on Nelson isn't 100% supported by all of the posts?  So predictable.

 

 

He was asked a question and he answered it. What was he supposed to say? “Ummmmm....routine play, he did a great job blocking me, thank god no one was hurt, glad he’s ok!”

 

 

 

[Coffeedrinker]

4 minutes ago, HOZER said:

He was asked a question and he answered it. What was he supposed to say? “Ummmmm....routine play, he did a great job blocking me, thank god no one was hurt, glad he’s ok!”

Well, if he did that then certain posters would have knocked him for his lack of enthusiasm and talking about how he's becoming complacent.

[DougDew]

26 minutes ago, HOZER said:

He was asked a question and he answered it. What was he supposed to say? “Ummmmm....routine play, he did a great job blocking me, thank god no one was hurt, glad he’s ok!”

 

 

 

Actually, your proposed response was better.  Since it was Nelson getting his legs cut that put him more at risk of getting hurt than the DB, so thanking God no one was hurt is appropriate.

 

It was a routine play, for a G who has the speed and control to get to the corner.  So to him, it was no big deal, right?  He'll make that play a lot in his career, if it is a long career.

 

How do you think a player like Rodney Harrison would react to Nelson's tweet?

 

"Sorry Q, but your left knee was the only thing between me and the running back's legs"  "If you didn't make it a point to tell the world you blast DBs, I may have tried to make the tackle some other way"

 

[Coffeedrinker]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

How do you think a player like Rodney Harrison would react to Nelson's tweet?

 

"Sorry Q, but your left knee was the only thing between me and the running back's legs"  "If you didn't make it a point to tell the world you blast DBs, I may have tried to make the tackle some other way"

 

Since you are apparently talking about about the tweet, where exactly did Nelson make it a point to tell the world that he blasts DBs?

[throwing BBZ]

12 hours ago, chad hugo said:

The rookie was probably thinking...

 

 

 Actually, the guy dove down and went after Q's ankles.
 I was glad that Q was ok.

[CamMo]

But can we at least appreciate him enough to spell his name correctly?   Come on, @Chloe6124 

 

I need another jersey now that Luck has retired. “Big Q” would be pretty cool.

[DougDew]

16 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Since you are apparently talking about about the tweet, where exactly did Nelson make it a point to tell the world that he blasts DBs?

Maybe it wasn't deliberate.  At 22 or 23, it would serve him well to answer the media with a bit of humble pie.  If its not his nature to be humble, then he should at least learn how to fake it well.

 

Enough stupid banter.  You seem to focus on olineman, so I have a legitimate question.

 

When a G charges hard at the DB on a play like this, it pretty much gives the DB only one option to make a play, go through the Gs legs, right?

 

OTOH, if the G backed off a bit, had a bit of distance, the legs would be too far for the DB to go through, so he would have to go around the G, instead of taking the shortest distance through him, correct?

 

I know its fun for us to watch the blast, but unless you're needing to move the defender off the ball in a short yardage situations, blasting isn't really the most professional way to make the block.  JMO.

[Coffeedrinker]

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Maybe it wasn't deliberate.  At 22 or 23, it would serve him well to answer the media with a bit of humble pie.  If its not his nature to be humble, then he should at least learn how to fake it well.

Again, where did Nelson say he likes to blast DBs?

8 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

Enough stupid banter.  You seem to focus on olineman, so I have a legitimate question.

 

When a G charges hard at the DB on a play like this, it pretty much gives the DB only one option to make a play, go through the Gs legs, right?

 

OTOH, if the G backed off a bit, had a bit of distance, the legs would be too far for the DB to go through, so he would have to go around the G, instead of taking the shortest distance through him, correct?

 

I know its fun for us to watch the blast, but unless you're needing to move the defender off the ball in a short yardage situations, blasting isn't really the most professional way to make the block.  JMO.

There seems to be a question there but then you answer it yourself so, that would indicate you are not really looking for an answer.  But I will answer it;

 

No, the DBs only option is not going through the legs of the lineman, but a lot of teams coach that if you cannot make a play then neutralize the blocker so someone else can make a play, it's no different than when a 180lb DB tries to tackle a bigger RB, they go low.  The DB can also try to run around the guard or they can try turning and taking an angle to the RB but then they are, in essence, doing the blockers job for them.  So, there are other options but the best "team" option is to neutralize the blocker so he cannot block anyone else on the play. 

 

2nd, no, it's never a good idea to "back off a bit"  When any guard is pulling they do not know who is going to be there, it's there job to block the first person they see, if they were to try and change something based on who that person it, that is when injuries happen or the play gets blown up.  I've seen more injuries from a lineman trying to quickly change their speed or change direction than I have from seeing a DB hit a lineman's legs.  I'm sure it's happened, but I don't think I have ever seen a DB injure a lineman in the open field. 

 

As far as, your opinion on things, I don't know, in football you hit the guy across from you as hard as you can within the rules.  The most professional way is to do your job every play and if on that play it requires blocking a DB, then you block the DB the best way possible.  If the DB had not gone done, Nelson probably would have blocked him and hardly slowed down which means he could have blocked someone else further down the field and it could have resulted in a longer play.

[ColtsGermany]

Somebody noticed that Q looked down to the ground when he got to Mack? I think he was searching for the CB somewhere on the ground.... Or maybe he thought Oliver might stick at his sole and he didn't notice 

[DougDew]

26 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Again, where did Nelson say he likes to blast DBs?

There seems to be a question there but then you answer it yourself so, that would indicate you are not really looking for an answer.  But I will answer it;

 

No, the DBs only option is not going through the legs of the lineman, but a lot of teams coach that if you cannot make a play then neutralize the blocker so someone else can make a play, it's no different than when a 180lb DB tries to tackle a bigger RB, they go low.  The DB can also try to run around the guard or they can try turning and taking an angle to the RB but then they are, in essence, doing the blockers job for them.  So, there are other options but the best "team" option is to neutralize the blocker so he cannot block anyone else on the play. 

 

2nd, no, it's never a good idea to "back off a bit"  When any guard is pulling they do not know who is going to be there, it's there job to block the first person they see, if they were to try and change something based on who that person it, that is when injuries happen or the play gets blown up.  I've seen more injuries from a lineman trying to quickly change their speed or change direction than I have from seeing a DB hit a lineman's legs.  I'm sure it's happened, but I don't think I have ever seen a DB injure a lineman in the open field. 

 

As far as, your opinion on things, I don't know, in football you hit the guy across from you as hard as you can within the rules.  The most professional way is to do your job every play and if on that play it requires blocking a DB, then you block the DB the best way possible.  If the DB had not gone done, Nelson probably would have blocked him and hardly slowed down which means he could have blocked someone else further down the field and it could have resulted in a longer play.

Well, I'm never without an opinion about things I witness with my own eyes, so I answered my question as to offer a possible outcome.  I was interested in differing opinions.

 

As far as backing off, I don't mean to suggest that the G doesn't get to the corner quickly.  My point was more about the point of engagement.  I'm sure DB coaches never coach a DB to take on a G head on, to try to stuff the G back into the RBs path.  An LB, probably, but not a DB, especially not a corner. 

 

It seems to me the G is going to know the DB will go low, so if a G approaches the point of engagement with the intent to take him head on, he's going to get taken to the ground fairly violently, like Nelson was.  I assume the DB was coached to go low.  Its the corner's job to neutralize the blocker so the blocker can't make another block, and he did that very effectively in this case by taking Nelson to the ground.  The problem is that there were no other defenders close to fill in.  I don't think we see it much differently.

 

OTOH, when facing  a Dlineman, the only way for a G to really block it is to take him on head on with steam because the DL is going to try to stuff the G back into the pocket or LOS.  Can't back off much there.

 

Different plays require different techniques, and Nelson can do them all.  I'd hate for the Colts to lose him.

 

 

[OffensivelyPC]

Pretty sure I would have done the same thing.  I can't have one of the best linemen in the country messing up these good looks.  

[Coffeedrinker]

17 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Well, I'm never without an opinion about things I witness with my own eyes, so I answered my question as to offer a possible outcome.  I was interested in differing opinions.

 

As far as backing off, I don't mean to suggest that the G doesn't get to the corner quickly.  My point was more about the point of engagement.  I'm sure DB coaches never coach a DB to take on a G head on, to try to stuff the G back into the RBs path.  An LB, probably, but not a DB, especially not a corner. 

Again, no.

17 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

It seems to me the G is going to know the DB will go low, so if a G approaches the point of engagement with the intent to take him head on, he's going to get taken to the ground fairly violently, like Nelson was.

That's funny you think nelson was taken to the ground violently.

17 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

  I assume the DB was coached to go low.  Its the corner's job to neutralize the blocker so the blocker can't make another block, and he did that very effectively in this case by taking Nelson to the ground.  The problem is that there were no other defenders close to fill in.  I don't think we see it much differently.

Wow, way to repeat what I have stated a few times in this thread and make it seem like it's your own idea. 

17 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

OTOH, when facing  a Dlineman, the only way for a G to really block it is to take him on head on with steam because the DL is going to try to stuff the G back into the pocket or LOS.  Can't back off much there.

Can't back off in either case.  Again you are acting like an olineman running full speed has the agility to change direction in that situation. If it were any other guard you wouldn't say anything but since it's Nelson you want to chime in.

17 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 

Different plays require different techniques, and Nelson can do them all.  I'd hate for the Colts to lose him.

That is why nelson didn't use the same technique on the DB has he does in the trenches.

[Nickster]

It's funny but that corner might have saved a TD by taking Q out.  Q is going to get to the 3rd level if he doesn't go down and might spring Mack.

 

That was hilarious to see though.

[CR91]

 

Pretty sure Baldy would explode if that happened

[throwing BBZ]

  Grady Jarrett - 1 tackle
 Left the game, with a toe injury. Missed the 4th Q i believe.

[Coltscrazy]

One of the joys of being a big guy is being able to crush little guys like bugs.  Football is still a big man's game.  If this upsets poor Doug, he can watch soccer or the new wimpy NBA.  Just for clarification, the reason crushing the little bug was impressive is because he is the weak side guard and he pulled al the way to the strong side to clear a path for Mack.  The bug was wise to give up.  It gets real fun when you can crush other big guys like bugs.  That makes you a very, very bad human being.

[Coltscrazy]

Must repeat.  Halleluja we can convert 3rd and 1.  Watched the Saints without Brees crush somebody, and I looked at their line.  Ramzek, Warford, and more.  Then I watched the Rams with all their speedy little receivers who can't pull ahead of a team who has all four starters injured in the secondary in Cleveland.  See the pattern?  Glad that isn't us any more.  Braden Smith is almost as nasty as Q, and I'm loving it.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Reich will probably make Nelson an eligible receiver next game by the goaline or run him in from the 1 yard line for a TD  . Nelson is due to score, he does everything else. I see us winning big vs the Raiders.

[southwest1]

On 9/22/2019 at 9:07 PM, CR91 said:

 

 

Appreciate the visual. Thank you CR91. You know when people talk about a near death experience or a light that flashes before your eyes? I fully grasp what they mean now. Jesus...A one man wrecking crew. 

[cbear]

The DB did what he needed to do in that case, which is take out the lead blocker and hope he has support behind him.  So they both did their job.  Just a great call by the Colts. 

 

But check out Qs footwork just before he pulls.  He does a quick step and fake into the line to sell a run up the middle.  Then he pulls.  That was one of the more impressive moves I've seen from a guy that big.  Amazing. 

[cbear]

17 hours ago, DougDew said:

I think most corners would lose that battle against most Gs.  

 

Careful Big Q, having a tough guy attitude towards the little guys might result in one of those corners "giving up" and taking out a knee.

 

He has a tough guy attitude with everyone.  Size is irrelevant.  Don't know if I'd want to be best buds with him (frankly, to be honest, he seems a little off to me, like something is going to explode one day), but I love a bit of attitude in all the players.  As long as he doesn't take it to the stupid level like Burfict or Suh. 

[Dark Superman]

Big Q was successfully blocking 300 pound men with one arm. Lol.

[jimmy g]

8 hours ago, Coltscrazy said:

Must repeat.  Halleluja we can convert 3rd and 1. 

Amen!!!!!  Way too many years of no hope via a run up the middle.

[MackAttack]

Crazy how hes about to be a back to back all pro and our own fanbase still cant spell his name right

[Myles]

11 minutes ago, MackAttack said:

Crazy how hes about to be a back to back all pro and our own fanbase still cant spell his name right

How do you misspell Q?

[jvan1973]

13 minutes ago, MackAttack said:

Crazy how hes about to be a back to back all pro and our own fanbase still cant spell his name right

I still see Payton Manning from time to time 

[Myles]

9 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Reich will probably make Nelson an eligible receiver next game by the goaline or run him in from the 1 yard line for a TD  . Nelson is due to score, he does everything else. I see us winning big vs the Raiders.

I'm not that confident.   All 3 of our games have been close.  I hope it is not a pattern, but it could be the way this team plays.   Carr has been very accurate an Jacobs has been a beast.   I see the game being the Colts win 24-17.   

[coltsva]

4 minutes ago, Myles said:

How do you misspell Q?

Cue?

[2006Coltsbestever]

13 hours ago, Myles said:

I'm not that confident.   All 3 of our games have been close.  I hope it is not a pattern, but it could be the way this team plays.   Carr has been very accurate an Jacobs has been a beast.   I see the game being the Colts win 24-17.   

There is a possibility TY will not play so it could be around a 7-10 point game. Obviously one should never overlook an opponent but this is one of our easier games on the schedule IMO. No wins are automatic, I have watched football long enough to know that. We would have to play bad to lose this game as in turning it over, etc.. I don't think they can stop our run game, JMO. Carr is above average to good but Matt Ryan is better than he is.

[Myles]

8 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

There is a possibility TY will not play so it could be around a 7-10 point game. Obviously one should never overlook an opponent but this is one of our easier games on the schedule IMO. No wins are automatic, I have watched football long enough to know that. We would have to play bad to lose this game as in turning it over, etc.. I don't think they can stop our run game, JMO. Carr is above average to good but Matt Ryan is better than he is.

I hope I'm wrong, but we may have trouble stopping their offense.   

I just wouldn't take this game likely.  

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Look at Ebron and Doyle pancaking their defenders. Lol

 

 

[Lucky Colts Fan]

On 9/23/2019 at 9:21 AM, DougDew said:

The thread is about the tweet, about Nelson's attitude that was portrayed in it.  its not about the play.  Because you don't understand the topic of the thread in the first place doesn't mean I'm changing the topic.

 

This thread started out pretty simply:  a tweet about a play where Nelson was a mismatch against a corner.  The tweet was absolutely about the play and not about Nelsons' attitude.  YOU made it about his attitude and his knees.  Then YOU brought up "immature machismo" (talk about left field).  Then YOU called out @Coffeedrinker for calling you a contrarian in past threads.  Then YOU brought up college and high school plays (even though you claim the thread isn't about the play).  You completely changed this thread single-handedly.

 

You repeatedly change the topic, apply your own narrative, and move the goalposts in countless threads on this forum.  Your posts are becoming a punchline because your contrived opinions are a joke.

 

On 9/23/2019 at 9:32 AM, DougDew said:

Why do you come out when the narrative on Nelson isn't 100% supported by all of the posts?  So predictable.

 

What's predictable is that when there isn't 100% support concerning certain players, you are ALWAYS one of the dissenters (and sometimes the ONLY dissenter).  It's like you look for ways to be "that one fan"...