Floyd becomes new “Z” receiver in San Diego Posted by Mike Florio on November 17, 2012, 3:35 PM EST APAfter Vincent Jackson left the Chargers for the Buccaneers, San Diego needed a new “Z” receiver. In the Chargers’ system, the “Z” lines up next to tight end Antonio Gates, with the goal of forcing defenses to choose one for extra focus — giving the other a little more room to operate. Newcomer Robert Meachem had been the “Z” receiver in place of Jackson. But now it’sMalcom Floyd. “I’ve been moving around, but I’m comfortable playing that position. It’s becoming fluid now, but I understood ‘Z’ responsibilities after watching VJ and Meachem do it,” Floyd tells Scott Bair of U-T San Diego. “With Antonio and I lining up next to each other, we put a strain on whatever side we’re on.” Meanwhile, Meachem has been sent to the bench, with Danario Alexander filling Floyd’s former spot. The fact that the Chargers signed Meachem to do a job that one of their holdovers could have done — and is now doing — becomes another piece of evidence for the “fire A.J. Smith” column on owner Dean Spanos’ legal pad. But if the Chargers win more games with Floyd as the “Z” wideout, maybe the “keep A.J. Smith” column eventually will include the words “made it to the playoffs . . . somehow.” http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/11/17/floyd-becomes-new-z-receiver-in-san-diego/
Which part of the "IF" we win more games didn't you understand Ike ? I don't see any mention of "won a game" in that article !!!!
Sounds like desperate measures to me. I hope Norv gets fired on Monday after the Broncos tar and feather us tomorrow afternoon. I don't even know that I'm going to be watching, I'm so disgusted with this franchise right now.
We can all dream Matti, still wont change a damn thing..............Spanos simply doesnt have it in him. Norf will be still be the HC (unless he resigns) regardless of the outcome, bank on it.
The Negative Nelly's are always good for a laugh..or an eye-roll. I'm not big on faith when it comes to faith systems (such as religion) but, I always believe that the Chargers can win "the next game". Call me a homer or a delusional fan, I don't give a flying fork. My optimism is my opium....I reckon.
The statement from the article was: Which is an if-then logical argument. The "if" clause states: However, the Chargers have not won any games with Floyd as the "Z" wideout, which makes winning more games impossible. You have to win a game in order to win more games and not simply games, under the conditional of Floyd being the Z Wideout. Hopefully this cleared up the difficulties you were having understanding my post.
Not really, you are overanalyzing the quote. The Chargers have won games...... a fact. If the Chargers win with Floyd at the "Z" position, then they will have "won more games".
Yes, but they will not have "one more games with Floyd at the "Z" position". If they win today with Floyd at the Z position, then they could write that sentence next week, but not this week. This week, the sentence the author was trying to write was, "If the Chargers are able to win more games now that they've moved Floyd to the Z Position, ..." or, "If moving Floyd to the Z Position wins more games for the Chargers, ..." but as written, it creates a clause which doesn't exist. You can't win more games with a given condition until you win a game with that condition. Sorry.
You're talking about the U-T here....... this isn't exactly what you'd call a professional newspaper.
"Z" "X" or "Y" doesn't matter at this point. Just want them "WR's and TE's" do there jobs. See ball catch ball get first down or TD. Need to block on Run plays. Just Blocks. Pretty Simple. Along the way it would be nice to see some "W" those are WINS
