I was worried for nothing!

[Webbfann]

Frazier said the secondary did a good job. He said Robinson did a good job. He said the OC and DC are doing good jobs.

I guess I'm just a Negative Nancy. They all did good jobs!!!!

[Funkytown]

...on what planet?

[dead_poet]

He's not going to say they suck. He's likely using classic media/public-facing "coach speak."

[Webbfann]

...on what planet?

the one he lives on during press conferences. And the rest of the time

[Webbfann]

He's not going to say they suck. He's likely using classic media/public-facing "coach speak."

Not appropriate. That's appropriate when you lose a close one. He didn't have to say they suck; he said they did good jobs.

Here's another gem: He said we'd have "an extra day to prepare" for next Monday.

[dead_poet]

You just need your Frazier to English dictionary.

He said: "The way our team is set up, errors, for us, are sometimes difficult to overcome." (Frazier for: "We're not good enough to overcome turnovers (or failing to execute when one is gifted to us).)"

Also: "Erin's done a...FAIRLY...good job for us in the middle" (Frazier for: "He's not doing enough/We need a better MLB")

"We've got some work to do" (Frazier for: "We're kind of sucking right now.").

When questioned about giving up over 31 points/game: "Points are a big deal." See? He gets it.

Frazier also referenced Sanford's drop about three times and how "better execution" (catching the #### ball) would've, you know, helped. The Cassel pick and Sanford drop pretty much set the tone.

He also said: "We also have pretty good depth at linebacker." Must be confident with Hodges/Mauti/Cole or he was drunk.

You're right in that he seemed to criticize Rhodes more than Robinson. The "he (Robinson) didn't give up many big plays" comment was an interesting one. Maybe Rhodes was playing the wrong coverage on the long TD? I've seen that suggested and Fraizer himself the 79-yarder wasn't "all Josh's fault." Looks like there was more than one culprit in there. Made a reference to Xavier, but wasn't specific. I re-listened a couple times, though, and it sounds like he was kind of covering for him, publicly, and didn't want to chastise him in the media.

I do like his attitude, though. He could've come out all negative or angry and he came out encouraging and positive.

[Mothman]

You just need your Frazier to English dictionary.

He said: "The way our team is set up, errors, for us, are sometimes difficult to overcome." (Frazier for: "We're not good enough to overcome turnovers (or failing to execute when one is gifted to us).)"

Also: "Erin's done a...FAIRLY...good job for us in the middle" (Frazier for: "He's not doing enough/We need a better MLB")

"We've got some work to do" (Frazier for: "We're kind of sucking right now.").

When questioned about giving up over 31 points/game: "Points are a big deal." See? He gets it.

Frazier also referenced Sanford's drop about three times and how "better execution" (catching the #### ball) would've, you know, helped. The Cassel pick and Sanford drop pretty much set the tone.

He also said: "We also have pretty good depth at linebacker." Must be confident with Hodges/Mauti/Cole or he was drunk.

LOL I'll go with "he was drunk".

Your translations are perfect.

You're right in that he seemed to criticize Rhodes more than Robinson. The "he (Robinson) didn't give up many big plays" comment was an interesting one. Maybe Rhodes was playing the wrong coverage on the long TD? I've seen that suggested and Fraizer himself the 79-yarder wasn't "all Josh's fault." Looks like there was more than one culprit in there.

I need to watch that play again. As I recall, Robinson released the receiver who scored (I forget his name) as if he were playing zone and that receiver was leaving his zone. By the time he turned and saw the guy wide open, it was way too late. There was clearly a misunderstanding or miscommunication about assignments on that play.

[Funkytown]

I do like his attitude, though. He could've come out all negative or angry and he came out encouraging and positive.

I get that, but at some point don't you need to acknowledge there is a problem so you can fix it? I honestly don't believe Frazier believes things are as good or positive as he pretends, but what is the harm in expressing his concerns? Or doesn't he have that many? His cover-ups aren't doing anyone any good. We're not blind. He should just pull a Dr. Phil and tell it like it is! Is that too much to ask? Acknowledgement from our coaching staff would be something to be positive about, and that's about the only thing to be positive about these days, but we can't even get that!

[Funkytown]

Here's another gem: He said we'd have "an extra day to prepare" for next Monday.

I'm so glad, because having extra time is just what the doctor ordered. Not because we'll do any better, but because I need an extra day to recover from last round.

[im4mnvikes]

I'm so glad, because having extra time is just what the doctor ordered. Not because we'll do any better, but because I need an extra day to recover from last round.

I second that one.

[dead_poet]

I get that, but at some point don't you need to acknowledge there is a problem so you can fix it? I honestly don't believe Frazier believes things are as good or positive as he pretends, but what is the harm in expressing his concerns? Or doesn't he have that many? His cover-ups aren't doing anyone any good. We're not blind. He should just pull a Dr. Phil and tell it like it is! Is that too much to ask? Acknowledgement from our coaching staff would be something to be positive about, and that's about the only thing to be positive about these days, but we can't even get that!

Calling out your team publicly is never a good way to earn points in the locker room and he's trying to cultivate a positive atmosphere. He knows, as does the team, that everything from coaching to execution (there's that word again) needs improvement. Always take what coaches say in public with a grain of salt. Things can really spiral downhill as far as team chemistry, responsiveness, etc. when a coach starts down the negative road. Oftentimes it does more harm than good.

[mondry]

Just pulled up the long TD on nfl game rewind cause I was curious to see how it wasn't josh robinson's fault and there is nothing here. Lafell just blows by him because Robinson is doing this like side ways back pedal while staring at Newton and in the process he completely loses track of Lafell. Mean while Lafell is just running slightly to the sideline but straight down the field, theres at least 7 yards between Robinson and the WR when it gets completed. Mean while Rhodes is blanketing his receiver perfectly so I'm not sure how in any sane world this is Rhodes fault. The only way Rhodes factors into this play is once again he's closer to making the play / tackle on Robinsons guy than robinson is! He gets smashed by the WR he was covering when he goes to make the tackle for Robinson. Unless rhodes is suppose to play safety on this play and help Robinson over the top there's nothing to me that shows it's rhodes' mistake.

Here are some screen caps, look at Robinson's hips in screen shot 1 / 2, completely turned the wrong way. There's no chance of being able to run with Lafell who's already breaking into top line speed. Cam Newton looks that way the entire play, and why not! If he wasn't suppose to cover Lafell I don't know who he was suppose to cover cause there's no one else there. By screen 3 (they go off screen for a little bit) you can see how far Robinson is behind Lafell and how open he is. Screen 4 is Rhodes leaving his guy to try and make the play.

[Funkytown]

...and he's trying to cultivate a positive atmosphere.

Winning cultivates a positive atmosphere. The End.

[dead_poet]

Winning cultivates a positive atmosphere. The End.

Ohhh...right. Because winning. He should just do more of that. Problem solved!

[Mothman]

Ohhh...right. Because winning. He should just do more of that. Problem solved!

... and it was so obvious! I mean, it was right there in front of everyone all along.

Gosh, Frazier must feel silly for overlooking that.