Poor tackling was the reason for the return, not a deep kick. If anyone who laid a hand on him didn't whiff and miss the tackle completely, a deep kick works in our favor. Can't blame Nuge for this one.
Deep kick WITHOUT HEIGHT was the reason he took it out. If it was HIGH and DEEP he would not have. The next kick, to the goalline was abetter kickoff because it had some height.
He should have been nailed on the 14. Then on the 20, and again on the 28. That's just terrible tackling.
how does one out kick coverage when there is no coverage? david bowens ate a fat one with his half assed arm tackle.
Yep. It was a good KO...the coverage got to him inside the 20. It was an issue of tackling...not kicking.
I never complained when his kicks were high. It was just not a great kick. His other kicks were high. You guys all want distance, but the height is more important.
I dunno, the fact that the kick was enough for the coverage to have a chance inside the 20 suggests it was pretty good. It seems you're just judging the play by the aftermath, not noticing that it was missed tackles that led to the TD, not "out-kicking the coverage".
Well, obviously both are important, so wouldn't it be a balance between the two that should be top priority? And besides, I still think distance is more important. Kick the ball far enough, and it sails right through the endzone. Instant touchback. You can kick the ball as high as you want, but if there's no distance, it just won't go anywhere. Furthermore, the coverage could still miss tackles when the ball comes back down, leading to a TD. Distance > Height, in that case.
I really don't think they had a shot at the 10.. they just hit his ankles, it's not like they were squared up to make a tackle.
Yes, and everyone and their brother on this site screams for the distance.. His kickoffs last yr were not bad.
