Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Plaxico & Shockey


killadingo

Recommended Posts

You'll probably see a dose of our FL (Free Linebacker) on both Shockey and Burress would be my guess. Springs will probably be the main cover guy on Burress though, but Burress is a pretty physical receiver and it seems like Sean really comes after those guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shockey and Burress are BOTH 6-5 and they both play the ball very well in the air. They also have Eli manning as their QB, so getting them the ball wont be a problem. The redskins can shut down fast teams and they can shut down physical rushing teams, but teams who have TWO guys that WILL make plays even when you have perfect coverage are a problem. Because of Shockey and Burress, this game is going to be close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if we get pressure on Eli we wont have to worry about who is covering either one of these guys...pressure on a young qb is the key..i dont care if his last name IS Manning.[/Quote]

The Broncos got pressure on him and didn't get a sack. They got pressure on him the last drive of the game and he got the Giants in the endzone. To get pressure on Manning you have to blitz him. That will leave Shockey or Burress or Toomer or Carter or Barber out of the back field open. And Manning is getting pretty good at finding those open guys.

This should be fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

']The Broncos got pressure on him and didn't get a sack. They got pressure on him the last drive of the game and he got the Giants in the endzone. To get pressure on Manning you have to blitz him. That will leave Shockey or Burress or Toomer or Carter or Barber out of the back field open. And Manning is getting pretty good at finding those open guys.

This should be fun.

Agreed. Tiki breaking out for a long one concerns me the most as we have given up some big running plays in the last few games. I think we should be able to cover Shockey with a sceme similar to what we used against Whitten.

Good to see you TOM you haven't been around much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be close the defensive scheme against the Chiefs. With Free Safety help on Shockey and Springs covering Buress. Buress is 6'6" and Keyshown Johnson is 6'4" and we didn't do anything special with Keyshown. Buress is a possesion receiver with not much speed, I don't think Possesion receivers do too well against GW's defenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be close the defensive scheme against the Chiefs. With Free Safety help on Shockey and Springs covering Buress. Buress is 6'6" and Keyshown Johnson is 6'4" and we didn't do anything special with Keyshown. Buress is a possesion receiver with not much speed, I don't think Possesion receivers do too well against GW's defenses.

Plax is surprisingly speedy, atleast much faster than Key. However, I am not worried about a single player having a huge game against us, it just won't happen. This will be a hard fought game and hopefully we can pull out another close one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

guys, their offense isn't that good. Only ranked 15th in the NFL. Their first in scoring because their defense is ranked second to last and they have to score in order to win.

I see us moving the ball at will. As long as we win the turnover battle and hold them to field goals instead of TD's in the red zone, than we should be ok.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed. Tiki breaking out for a long one concerns me the most as we have given up some big running plays in the last few games. I think we should be able to cover Shockey with a sceme similar to what we used against Whitten.

Good to see you TOM you haven't been around much.

Yeha I said basically the same thing in another thread. I'm not looking for us to get a ton of sack but rather play really good pass defense. We dont want ELi taking advantage of our blitz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taylor going to have to cover Shockey. I suspect they will put Rodgers on Burress M/M with some type of scheme help underneath. It's really to bad Lavar hasn't stepped up in coverage because you could put him on Shockey and Taylor on Burress. And use your SS and Corners to nullify everyone else in Zone and Zone blitz on the edges against Barber. Come on Lavar, all he would have to do is jam him at the line of scrimmage, cover run when they run and stay with him in pass coverage. Lavar could beat the crap out of Shockey at the line of scrimmage. But he has always refused to learn the sublties of coverage. Maybe anothe big change this week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

guys, their offense isn't that good. Only ranked 15th in the NFL. Their first in scoring because their defense is ranked second to last and they have to score in order to win.

I see us moving the ball at will. As long as we win the turnover battle and hold them to field goals instead of TD's in the red zone, than we should be ok.[/Quote]

I'm sorry but this may be the dumbest post I've ever read. Plenty of teams have bad defenses but can their offense score just because they have to? The Giants offense scores because it can and because it IS good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely think that this is a winnable game. However, we have put ST on Shockey because ST will be physical with him. I believe that we cover Plax just like we cover any other receiver. He can go up an get the ball because of his size but I believe Springs has enough good mechanics to provide good coverage which will allow for Manning to start forcing the ball and we will have 2 picks by the end of the game.

Then Toomer will get an awesome hit by Taylor and he will become a nonfactor.

Hail to the Redskins! :gaintsuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think we will have a problem at all with Shockey. Lavar has covered him in the past and our other LB's can also cover him. Taylor can cover either one of them. I think we will use alot of different coverages on both of them. I think we definetly have the personel to match up with them two in alot of different ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With our tendency to give up the big running play of late, I'd be more worried about what Tiki is going to do in this game than Shockey or Plexiglass. Our secondary is phenomenal, so I am not worried one bit about them. Tiki, however, is another story. Brandon Jacobs could present a problem as well, although he runs high -- a good pop from Sean Taylor ought to take a lot of gas out of his tank...:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's going to be a time of possession game. Both offenses are pretty good so if the Skins can control the clock (which win or lose, they seem to be able to), then that will limit the amount of plays under center for the opposition.

In that regard, I actually like our offense's chances against the Giant's D. It's going to be tough, but I think the Skins can grind it out against them and hopefully wear them down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the last drive Denver had Ian Gold, who has decent speed, cover Shockey and Gold got burned. You don't want to cover him with a LB at crunch time

Burress' height will present problems but if I know Joe Gibbs, he'll have the referees watching Burress and his newfound propensity for pushing off, i.e., Michael Irvinitis.

You have to hit Burress hard when the ball comes his way to try to get into his head a little. Easier said than done but it worked that way when he was with the Steelers.

You also have to find a way to hit Eli to try to get him to get rid of the ball quicker than he wants. In addition, the D has to do what they did against Denver and use the controlled blitz that covers Barber at all times when he's in the backfield. For this reason, I'll think we'll see Tiki split out more often so he can't be tied up.

I have a feeling it's gonna be one of "those games".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...