indatrenches Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 Joe Gibbs always has been a coach who preaches "dont beat yourself with turnovers, and mistakes" type of mentality. He knows that we dont have a firepower team to hang loose or play come back ball last year and maybe this year. So the best way for us to win right now is to get a quick lead grind the clock, keep the defense fresh and not beat ourselfs with turnovers. And after looking at last year i think that Coach Gibbs knows what qb on the roster is better at managing the game and minimizing mistakes. Take a trip back to 2004 for a couple games Giants Loss How: The infamous turnover game Portis starts out by carring the ball like a loaf of bread fumbling twice, and Ramsey still in fun' n' gun mode trying to do to much rather than take what is given to him (managing the game)throws 3 int. Result lose by 6 points. Browns Loss How: Having the lead in the 3rd quarter ready to grind out the clock Portis fumbles again in Redskins territory. (Remember we are not a come from behind team yet so in trying to come back Coles fumbles to seal the game) Result lose by 3 points. cowboys Loss How: Bad call on PI call puts us behind early. Bad no call on PI on Gardner during comeback drive. Defense caught out of posistion on HB pass for touchdown Result lose by 3 points Ravens Loss How: Got a quick lead ready to grind out the clock and special teams gives up a punt return for a touchdown. Granted MB fumbled the ball away but that was a horrible effort on Betts pass protection(we still had the lead). Result: Wasted defensive effort on a potential shutout lose by 4 points Green Bay Loss How: Defensive secondary shredded in first half minus ST. Team pulls back in the game with lead changing TD throw taken away by bad call. I promise you we would have grinded out the clock for the win. Result: (bad call takes wind out of team sails int on next play) we lose the game not as bad a score would say. Minus the turnovers and couple Special teams lapses(beating ourselves) there was a good chance for that team to win maybe 9-11 games last year. i dont see why if we cut out the turnovers, cant we win with the same philosophy this year? I know the schedule is different and i took that into consideration. There is only one team we play this year that plays mostly mistake free football which is the Eagles. Outside of the Bucs and Chargers i dont see a team on our schedule with a good runstoppng defense wherein lies our strength "running the football" Here is to a good year... HTTR!!! 1-0 BABY!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 Other than injuries, turnovers are the great difference in a league that has parity. If the Redskins don't turn the ball over they can win each game. They can also lose each. But the CHANCE is there. If the Redskins commit 3 turnovers in a half again, they are not going to win. Last year the team finished near or at the bottom in the turnover differential category in the NFC. Based on that a 6-10 record was not a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 One question: what was the whole offseason about? What were Santana Moss and David Patten about? Improving and opening up the offense for the purpose of generating more big plays and scoring more points. Putting in Brunell isn't just turning your back on Ramsey, it's turning your back on everything you claim your offseason adjustments were about. QUIT TRYING TO PUT LIPSTICK ON A PIG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins56 Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 Brunell gives us the best chance to win on Monday. I find it hard to believe that Ramsey has not improved more at this point in his career. When you see Ramsey in person you get a good feel for how bad some of his reads are. He will pass up a wide open receiver five yards away from a guy who is double-teamed and try to thread it between two defenders. It doesn't make sense at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No_Pressure Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 "Indatrenches" Thankyou for saying what people have been laughing at me for saying around school, etc. The reason lots of people get nervous about the redskins is we are not a flashy team. We will get turnovers on defense but we generally dont put up very much at all on offense. We CAN get by with this though because our defense was very good and what is mostly overlooked about our losses last year is how close they really were. Brunell fumbled a LOT lastyear I believe it was 6 fumbles. His injury certianly dropped his mobility however and he should not have been playing hurt. As you mentioned, that Ed Reed play against the Ravens (which is always confused with Brunell sucking) was made entirely possible by the terrible blocking by ladell betts. If Brunell has no turnovers and Portis keeps the ball in his hands not on the ground we will beat the Cowboys with mostly defense and it really is possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 actually, both Moss and Patten have experience in passing attacks where they take short and intermediate passes and use their speed to stretch and gain YAC. I don't see how that means that Brunell on the field make them less effective Contrary to popular belief, Tom Brady and Chad Pennington are not qbs that are primarily deep throwers. So, why expect these qbs former receivers to be non-plussed by playing with Brunell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Xtrmskn04 Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 Problem is now, we have the game manager. What happens if we get behind and need to rely on the pass? Do you think Brunell will bring us back from behind? Will he be able to move us down the field quickly, score quickly if we need to? I guess we are just hoping that doesn't happen. That we keep all the games within 7 points so Brunell can continue to "not hurt us" and we will have a chance to win the game. I think if we get down now by more than 10 points we may not be able to come from behind with Brunell. He is not going to make big plays. If Ramsey is in there I would at least feel like we have a shot at making a few big plays and getting back in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 Other than injuries, turnovers are the great difference in a league that has parity. If the Redskins don't turn the ball over they can win each game. They can also lose each. But the CHANCE is there. Exactly. And this is where our edge, the defense comes in. With those guys getting stingy with points, and getting some turnovers here and there, we're going to win more games than we lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 the problem with Ramsey was for each big play he made of over 20 yards he suffered TWO or THREE negative plays which impacted either the scoreboard or our field position. his interceptions and fumbles in fact often came on the heels of those 25-30 yard completions that had fans out of their chairs in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawgjk9 Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 i agree with xtrmskn04 but i also agree with everyone else. i do feel that ramsey gives us a MUCH better chance to come back from behind, but i alos think that brunell (considering the injury excuse last year was the truth and assuming that hes 100% healthy now) does look like he has a little zip on the ball, and he did throw for 250yds against dallas last yaer on monday night also. 2TD 0INT. as long as we cna keep dallas respecting the pass a little bit by completing one PA deep early and a 15yarder here n there we will have a good opportunity to beat the cowboys on monday night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myzhi Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 If you are going to post about last year's turnovers, lets be fair. Where's MBs? How many lead directly to points? Yeah, PR gives the ball away, but it doesn't lead to points. Even the game against Bears, score was 0-0 when PR was benched. Can't say same for Mr. Safe Veteran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 the problem with Ramsey was for each big play he made of over 20 yards he suffered TWO or THREE negative plays which impacted either the scoreboard or our field position. his interceptions and fumbles in fact often came on the heels of those 25-30 yard completions that had fans out of their chairs in the first place. The problem with Scott is he only has THREE or FOUR negative plays a game without any big plays. At lleast he courageously fumbles the game away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidPennSkin Posted September 14, 2005 Share Posted September 14, 2005 the problem with Ramsey was for each big play he made of over 20 yards he suffered TWO or THREE negative plays which impacted either the scoreboard or our field position. his interceptions and fumbles in fact often came on the heels of those 25-30 yard completions that had fans out of their chairs in the first place. Yes, when he hits on a good completion, he gets overconfident and throws into double or triple coverage and gets picked, or holds the ball too long and gets sacked. Two plays after the 45 yard completion to Moss in the Bears game, he gets sacked and fumbles. Too emotional, too inconsistent. Maybe he can learn to play on a more even keel in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.