Enemy Fan Forums: San Diego Chargers

[DK Sweets]

frosted did such a great job with this last year, and it seemed to be a big hit. Nobody picked this up last week, so I figured I'd give a stab at it.

I'm starting this pretty early in the week, and I'll do my very best to add more as we get closer to gameday, particularly on Saturday. That said, if anybody else decides to pop in and check their forums and would like to post what they see, that would be a great help. I do most of my posting on mobile and updating a thread like this on my phone isn't realistic.

Here are the enemy fan forums of the week:

Official San Diego Chargers Fan Forum
http://forums.chargers.com/index.php

Bolt Talk Chargers Fan Forum
https://bolttalk.com/forums/chargers-fan-forum.18/

Scout Chargers Forum
http://www.scout.com/nfl/chargers/forum ... o-chargers

San Diego Union Tribune Forums
http://forums.sandiegouniontribune.com/ ... ay.php?f=9


What they're saying:

I'm a little concerned about the defense. Will we be able to stop AP and Bridewater in the run game? Will the secondary keep Wallace and Wright in front of them?...I think they bounce back, Teddy's arm doesn't scare me.
I think we'll see a heavy dose of Gordon and Woodhead and the offense should flow as long as they hold onto the football.

Adrian Peterson may run all over our d-line...that worries me. We should win this game but boneheaded mistakes cant happen like in Cincy. But I am preparing myself for another chargers classic.

I say we dial in on AP and learn from how the Niners stopped him; wrap up his ankles.

As far as our featured back, MG3 breaks for 100 yards

Unfortunately Norv is not the head coach

Their OLine is horrible and Norv still calls for the deep passing plays. That guy may ruin Bridgewater's career unless the Vikings get Norv far from there.

I still remember Norv's last season really got Rivers banged up. Again that OLine was horrible and Norv still called for 7-step drop passes. By the end of it you could tell he was hearing footsteps and rushing throws when there was really a pocket and time to read and throw. McCoy was a great upgrade that Rivers needed to fix him

I don't think Norv's insight will help in scheming against our QB since Rivers is pretty good on the fly.

I think this is a good matchup for the Chargers and I think we will win in Minnesota! Everybody things we will get run over by Peterson but I think out run defence has improved heaps this year and we can at least minimize the damage AP can do. Bridgewater hasn't looked great this year and our secondary has been playing really well. If we can get a consistent pass rush going then we could have a good time defensively against them.

I think Melvin Gordon breaks his 100 yard duck in this game and I also think he scores his first touchdown!

We better damn well put a 40 spot on these wanna-be's

watch Melvin Gordon run for 120 and 2td.
outplaying AP

So far, it seems like the biggest storylines for them are Norv Turner and Melvin Gordon. They really hate Norv.

[PurpleMustReign]

If SD scores 40, I will be really upset... Thats silly.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[IrishViking]

Thanks!

I always get a kick out of reading what other team's fans think of us.


I guess I really don't see how they aren't worried about Bridgewater. He has shown in both games the ability to extend plays and accurately hit in the 15-25 yard range. So what if he isn't hitting the 40-50 yarders. Those are cool but if he consistently hits on 10+ yarders that's all you need. He looked good against Detroit just no need for big numbers because AP had nearly 200 all purpose yards and Line pounded one in from the one.

[Just Me]

If SD scores 40, I will be really upset... Thats silly.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Agreed. The last time a team put up 40+ points against us was IN GREEN BAY last year, and even they couldn't do that playing against us at home (they scored 24 points). Prior to that we have to go back to our "Cover no one" defense under Frazier in 2014. Basically, since Zimmer took over we've only given up 40+ points one time, and that was to a team (at their field) that arguably should have won the NFC that year. I don't think we're the "Purple People Eaters", but we aren't going to give up 40 points...

[jackal]

Wanna be's we are one the better franchises historically, right ??

I don't understand the Norv hate.. IMO Marty was much worse and cost them more

[IrishViking]

Its the typical thing. You could bet if Norv was still there and Rivers had ended up with the Vikings we would be hearing about how god awful Rivers was at implementing Norv's genius play calling

[Jordysghost]

Wanna be's we are one the better franchises historically, right ??

Now I like the Chargers a little bit, but idk who the #### that guy thinks his team is that he has a right to call anyone a wanna be.

Seriously, who embodys the spirit of a wannabe more then the Chargers? They are like a make believe SuperBowl Contender. If anyone here gets what I mean.

[Jordysghost]

Its the typical thing. You could bet if Norv was still there and Rivers had ended up with the Vikings we would be hearing about how god awful Rivers was at implementing Norv's genius play calling

Now I personally dont believe that to be true, most fans truly are harder on coaches then the players in my experience and opinion.

[dead_poet]

Clearly their fan base missed the Vikings-Lions game and probably only watched the 49ers game. The question is: which Vikings defense shows up? The one that played the 49ers or the one that played the Lions?

Our defensive line should have the advantage in this one. I believe San Diego's offensive line is a weakness and is missing a couple of guys (one we poached!). Let's see if Rhodes shadows Allen. With Green and Johnson in the mix it will be another tough test for the linebackers and secondary in coverage.

[Mothman]

Agreed. The last time a team put up 40+ points against us was IN GREEN BAY last year, and even they couldn't do that playing against us at home (they scored 24 points). Prior to that we have to go back to our "Cover no one" defense under Frazier in 2014. Basically, since Zimmer took over we've only given up 40+ points one time, and that was to a team (at their field) that arguably should have won the NFC that year. I don't think we're the "Purple People Eaters", but we aren't going to give up 40 points...

It's unlikely at home but, as you said, they gave up 40+ to Green Bay last year so it's not as if Zimmer's teams are incapable of giving up a lot of points. Miami scored 37 against the Vikes last year. That's not quite 40 but it's definitely not good.

Basically, that sort of thing should only happen if turnovers become a factor so if the Vikes take care of the ball, I doubt they'll allow 40 at home against San Diego or anybody else.

[Mothman]

Thanks!

I always get a kick out of reading what other team's fans think of us.

I guess I really don't see how they aren't worried about Bridgewater. He has shown in both games the ability to extend plays and accurately hit in the 15-25 yard range. So what if he isn't hitting the 40-50 yarders. Those are cool but if he consistently hits on 10+ yarders that's all you need. He looked good against Detroit just no need for big numbers because AP had nearly 200 all purpose yards and Line pounded one in from the one.

They're probably not worried about Bridgewater because by NFL standards, the Vikings passing game isn't particularly worrisome. It's not incapable of producing so it can't just be dismissed or ignored but stopping Peterson is still the key to stopping the Vikes offense.

[IrishViking]

They're probably not worried about Bridgewater because by NFL standards, the Vikings passing game isn't particularly worrisome. It's not incapable of producing so it can't just be dismissed or ignored but stopping Peterson is still the key to stopping the Vikes offense.

I agree I have just always been confused by fans who get worried about a QB who has 400 yards passing and something like 2 TDS and 2 interceptions but laugh off the a QB that has 160 yards for 12 first downs 1 TD and no interceptions. I have always been a fan of efficiency over gaudy numbers. efficient passing and no turnovers is way better then massive passing yards with turnovers. IMO.

[Mothman]

I agree I have just always been confused by fans who get worried about a QB who has 400 yards passing and something like 2 TDS and 2 interceptions but laugh off the a QB that has 160 yards for 12 first downs 1 TD and no interceptions. I have always been a fan of efficiency over gaudy numbers. efficient passing and no turnovers is way better then massive passing yards with turnovers. IMO.

I see your point because those turnovers can be pretty destructive if they come at the wrong place and/or time. For me, it's all about context and point production. If the QB had 400 yards passing, 2 TDs and 2 INTs, the offense scored 28+ points and the two INTs were a Hail Mary at the end of the first half and a shot over the middle where the receiver lost the ball after a big hit, that was probably a terrific performance. If that stat line was part of a game in which the offense only scored 14 points and the two INTs were both returned for TDs... not so good.

By the same token, that 160 yard, 12 1st downs, etc. stat line you posted wouldn't be worth much at all if the offense only mustered 7 points in a loss that day.

I guess that's a long-winded way of saying I don't think efficiency means much unless it's leading to points (and the same can be said for gaudy numbers). DK and Frosted were discussing Bridgewater's efficiency thus far this season as a positive in the Thoughts Week 2 thread and while I thought his performance against Detroit was efficient in a positive way, I don't think his performance against SF was particularly efficient or positive. I thought it was pretty bad, regardless of completion percentage. When I think of efficiency, I think of productivity with minimal effort, of precision, accuracy, effectiveness. That wasn't Bridgewater in week 1.

I hope all of that makes sense!

[IrishViking]

I see your point because those turnovers can be pretty destructive if they come at the wrong place and/or time. For me, it's all about context and point production. If the QB had 400 yards passing, 2 TDs and 2 INTs, the offense scored 28+ points and the two INTs were a Hail Mary at the end of the first half and a shot over the middle where the receiver lost the ball after a big hit, that was probably a terrific performance. If that stat line was part of a game in which the offense only scored 14 points and the two INTs were both returned for TDs... not so good.

By the same token, that 160 yard, 12 1st downs, etc. stat line you posted wouldn't be worth much at all if the offense only mustered 7 points in a loss that day.

I guess that's a long-winded way of saying I don't think efficiency means much unless it's leading to points (and the same can be said for gaudy numbers). DK and Frosted were discussing Bridgewater's efficiency thus far this season as a positive in the Thoughts Week 2 thread and while I thought his performance against Detroit was efficient in a positive way, I don't think his performance against SF was particularly efficient or positive. I thought it was pretty bad, regardless of completion percentage. When I think of efficiency, I think of productivity with minimal effort, of precision, accuracy, effectiveness. That wasn't Bridgewater in week 1.

I hope all of that makes sense!

Absolutely I agree all things require context but in my experience I see context usually being applied to the gaudy games and low yardage games almost always being dismissed unless you end up with a freakish amount of touchdowns (like 3 off of 100 yards). I think anyone who watched Bridgewater's performance against the Lions would probably come to the conclusion that he played well and there was no need for him to sling it. But usually fans checking the stat lines will see a sub 200 yard number for the QB, check and see 1 touchdown and skip to the next game "assuming" that QB had a poor game.

I can't speak for anyone else but I was extremely happy with Teddy's ball security in week one all things considered. He didn't give up a turnover until the end when he was trying to force a miracle. I don't usually like saying this because it ends up in a "well it didnt", "But if it had" argument. That said and ignored however . IF Wallace pulls that in (which I would put it at fairly likely with no PI) suddenly Bridgewater has close to a 300 yard game with a TD. Not great but certainly not the really rough start. Even if we just get the PI, he doesn't get the yards and the TD but he marched us right down the field for a probably TD. Simply put I just don't think Teddy was as poor in game one so much as just had a couple of unlucky breaks. He looked much better against the Lions and if takes he next step against the Chargers it will take a terrible stretch for me to lose confidence in him.

[Mothman]

I agree all things require context but in my experience I see context usually being applied to the gaudy games and low yardage games almost always being dismissed unless you end up with a freakish amount of touchdowns (like 3 off of 100 yards). I think anyone who watched Bridgewater's performance against the Lions would probably come to the conclusion that he played well and there was no need for him to sling it. But usually fans checking the stat lines will see a sub 200 yard number for the QB, check and see 1 touchdown and skip to the next game "assuming" that QB had a poor game.

That's true. I wonder if it's been reinforced over the years by the popularity of fantasy football, since FF leans heavily on stats and yardage numbers.

I can't speak for anyone else but I was extremely happy with Teddy's ball security in week one all things considered. He didn't give up a turnover until the end when he was trying to force a miracle. I don't usually like saying this because it ends up in a "well it didnt", "But if it had" argument. That said and ignored however . IF Wallace pulls that in (which I would put it at fairly likely with no PI) suddenly Bridgewater has close to a 300 yard game with a TD. Not great but certainly not the really rough start. Even if we just get the PI, he doesn't get the yards and the TD but he marched us right down the field for a probably TD. Simply put I just don't think Teddy was as poor in game one so much as just had a couple of unlucky breaks. He looked much better against the Lions and if takes he next step against the Chargers it will take a terrible stretch for me to lose confidence in him.

The deep throw to Wallace did look on target so maybe he would have caught it without the uncalled PI penalty. Unfortunately, we'll never know. What I didn't like about Bridgewater's performance in that first game was that he didn't look composed or sufficiently accurate to me. I thought he looked overwhelmed at times. However, that game is behind him now and he looked much better against Detroit. Hopefully, he'll be even better against San Diego.