InGibbsITrust Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 I've got to be honest, I love that DC has gone crazy over this whole LaVar situation, talked about all day on 980, articles in the Post, countless threads here, etc. I love it. Seriously I do. This is how I see the whole thing. Think back to the preseason. What if someone had come up to you and said the biggest "problem" or "contraversy" facing the Skins wouldn't be 1. Do we have a real NFL QB? 2. Will we ever beat Dallas again? 3. Can Joe Gibbs coach in today's NFL? 4. Can we win close games? 5. Can we not hurt ourselves with penalties/turnovers? 6. Do we have any sort of deep threat? But rather our biggest problem so far, after a freakin' 3-0 start, would be how much playing time our 3-time Pro Bowl linebacker is getting on our top 5, top 10, in the league defense. If i had been told we wouldn't have to worry about those five questions and LaVar and his playing time on our kickass defense would be the issue, I would have taken that in a heartbeat. So yeah I love the LaVar "problem" because its the kinda problem that fans talk about when their teams are 3-0. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinzOwnU Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 I'll drink to that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Money Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 Makes sense to me :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
202Chaz Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 A good cover-up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OVCChairman Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 i'm feelin you on that one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 If we go up and beat Denver in a close defensive game to go 4-0, we'll probably have to start complaining about how we're boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal2Washington Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 If we go up and beat Denver in a close defensive game to go 4-0, we'll probably have to start complaining about how we're boring. And you know that man. The press will need something to write about, and a 17-10 win sounds right up the alley of "yeah there 4-0 but so boring, can Gibbs win with excitment." :gaintsuck :dallasuck :eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Ha! A good question to ask is what would we do if they started to play Lavar and he was happy? I don't think ANYBODY around here is used to, well, no drama within the Redskins! :whoknows: ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 A good cover-up ??? What do you mean by that? Care to elaborate a tad? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 Nice post, I really hadnt thought of it quite like that. Kind of puts thing in perspective... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 This is true, it does turn the attention away from the other "issues" those talking heads were blabbering about in ESPN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 At this rate, I hope it lasts the entire season! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted October 6, 2005 Share Posted October 6, 2005 First, im of the same opinion. I mean, I think LaVarr is a great playmaker and would do well on defense(warrick holdman has done NOTHINg over 3 games except drop a pick. 3 tackles I believe), but, we dont need him. Thats the good thing. Because Greg Williams has done such a fantastic job, he gets the benefit of the doubt with any decision, and frankly, although I havent read about it yet, him playing DE might be a great idea. ALthough the list is a little misleading. No one can say at this point that we have a "real" nfl QB until brunell can really perform(any QB can hit wide open recievers, but hes missed every deep ball except the 2 in dallas). But even then I think we can win with MB as is... But that brings me to point 3, Gibbs still has, in my humble opinion, some work to do to get up to speed with todays NFL, and it really showed against seattle. My whole family(3 generations) have been avid redskins fans all our lives. The oldest remember.... when sonny was playing QB. They all have a common consensus that Gibbs needs an offensive coordinator(as great a motivator and teacher as he is). I dont think so though, provides he learns 2 things I think were glaring in the Seattle game. 1. When other teams blitz we seem lost and confused. Recievers run 30 yard routes and the Oline has to block for eternity. In the 1st and 4th quarters of that game NO hot routes were called on blitzes. In the second and third (where we dominated), if you watch the tape, you see the slants on blitzes and throws towards the blitz. We have to hot route blitzes or they will keep bringing them, thats todays NFL. 2. I can sit in front of the TV and tell you when the redskins are running or passing with a 95% accuracy rate(ok I made that up). So can defenses. Its great if you can sheer dominate them but we dont have riggins and the hoggs. He needs to play action more out of the big set(Did it 2 times during the game both times VERY succesful), and run more out of 3-4 wide out sets(did it two or 3 times I believe). Seattle had 9 men in the box at points in the game because they knew what we were doing. I think the redskins are 2 changes, the ones above, from being a playoff team REGARDLESS of whos QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.