The offense.... it's Brunell.

[Die Hard]

However, we cannot seem to rush for first downs on 3rd and short... nor can we complete short passes on 3rd and short.

In fact, the game-ending drive against Arizona.... we gained 4 yards on 2 carries. On 3rd and 6.... Portis can for 4 yards and was stopped cold. It was Randy Thomas and another offensive lineman who jumped into the pile and move the scrum forward to gain the first down and seal the victory.

But really... we were "this close" to punting there again. I know the guys in the lockerroom were pleased about getting the first down to seal the game. Since we haven't had much luck in similar circumstances in the past.

Just like the ESPN highlights showed the same situation for the Colts and Jags.... and Manning completed the pass.... "you play to WIN the game". You throw on 3rd and long to get the first down. Not run and run the clock down.... and punt.

The season is on the line... now is the time to get risky with the playcalling. Just like Dallas opened up against KC.

[Om]

I see Die Hard’s boiled-down posting style is going over particularly well today.

Okay, what the hell. I'll add my voice to the clamor.

I think most Redskins fan would agree that Mark Brunell isn’t playing as well today as he did earlier this year.

I think most probably would also agree that's due to a number of factors, not just one ... including but not limited to such things as his health (legs, shoulder, hand?), his arm perhaps tiring, a lack of confidence/chemistry with any WR other than Moss, perhaps the performance or lack thereof OF any WR other than Moss, Coach Gibbs’ basically conservative nature becoming even more so given all the above-noted physical considerations, etc.

Clearly, we’ve lost the downfield component. And clearly, that’s a weakness that the pretty good teams we’re going to face the next couple of weeks are going to try to exploit. Whether our other GOOD factors—our defense, our special teams, our running game, our heart—are enough to overcome that limitation and keep us in the playoff hunt remains to be seen.

I don’t believe even Tony really believes we’re going to get “crushed” this weekend, though. That’s pretty inconsistent with what we’ve seen from this team this year, especially at home. I think he was on a roll when he wrote that, and wishes he’d just left that part out now. I could be wrong though.

I think that the Redskins are pretty close to being a damn good team. They’re a tough out already, even with the obvious holes at pass-rushing DE and downfield threat in the passing game. But if I was, say, Bill Parcells this weekend, I know what my approach would be: I’d put 8 and 9 in the box all day long, roll my coverages to Brunell’s left, and take my chances. If we see anything OTHER than that I’ll be shocked.

All that said ... unless Mark gets seriously hurt in the next two games, I don’t think we’re likely to see either Patrick or Campbell. If either of those guys is going to play this year, in my mind it’ll be either because Mark does go down, or against Philly if any playoff hopes are gone. I’ll have lots more to say about Ramsey vs. Campbell another time. For now, I’ll just leave it that I don’t think Patrick’s going to be here next year.

I also think Sunday's going to be tough, for the very reasons Tony stated. The passing game is a real concern, as are the injuries to a whole lot of guys we really can't afford to lose and the fact that Parcells ain't no dummy and knows the Skins every bit as well as we think we do.

I'd just stop way short of the "crushed" thing. We could well come up short ... or on the other hand, we could surprise a lot of people and ride the crowd and our strengths to a tough win.

Either way, I'm pretty sure Dallas will know they've been in a football game.

Ramble over.

[zoony]

The biggest thing this thread is lacking is context.

None of us know the overall gameplan for AZ. Nobody knows what the offense was trying to accomplish.

It could very well be that every pass route you saw was designed to keep their secondary and linebackers from keying on our rush.

It could have been scaled back because of Brunell's thumb injury.

It could have been scaled back because we had the lead in the 3rd quarter and our running game was pounding them into submission.

Who knows the reason? You mention youth football... imagine that YOUR little league QB throws two interceptions in the first quarter because the receivers didn't know the plays, and another interception off of a tipped ball. Meanwhile, your run game is ripping off 5 yard gains like they're nothing.

You decide to adjust your offense, and you tell your QB and your receivers that the gameplan is going to be completely vanilla. "We don't want to risk anything, especially a turnover. Work the short passing game to backs and TE's... and ignore the WR's streaking down the field." is what you tell your QB. Because it's just not gonna happen.

Guess what? You win the game. Your run game gets you the victory and you have 0 turnovers after the adjustments.

Then one of the fathers of your players accuses you of having no imagination in your passing game, even after a win.

And you are ESPECIALLY confused by this because that father has seen your passing game flourish on several occasions that year and in years past, you are in the Little League HOF, you have 3 World Little League Championships, and you are poised to make the playoffs after the win.

But Father Knows Best? not sure I see it.

That being said, I do appreciate your POV and your post.

[arkowi]

OK, I have read most of this thread and I can't take it anymore...

DH, I agree with you totally. I made similar observations in the game thread and was called a hater by several people.

I don't care what you folks think, but my lack of faith (or yours, or Die Hards) has no bearing on if we win or not. He is simply stating the facts that are plainly obvious. If our offense continues to strugle like it has vs. the Cards and the Rams do you think we have any chance against closing out the Boys and the Giants? We handed the ball back to the Cards on 3 and outs several times in the 4th quarter on Sunday, luckily they could not do anything with it.

On that same token, no matter how much YOU (and this is directed at the general poster) focus on next weeks opponents, watch your tivo'ed game, and convince yourself of our 100% gaurunteed victory...it does not matter.

I said it at the begining of the year when he replaced Ramsey. I said it after the Brunell game winner, and I say it now: I like Brunell, he is a good guy, but anything over .500 with him at QB is going to be icing. It was not a popular statement and it probably not now.

This does not make me less of a fan to speak what I see or say why I feel. I love my team. I am just being honest with myself and telling you what I think.

If Brunell comes out and throws the ball away a few times at the start of this game, I think it's time to sit him down. For who, I don't care at this point.

[Die Hard]

I also think Sunday's going to be tough, for the very reasons Tony stated. The passing game is a real concern, the injuries to a whole lot of guys we really can't afford to lose, and the fact that Parcells ain't no dummy and knows the Skins every bit as well as we think we do.

Mark, you can even ask TK... before the game... I said to him that I noticed Williams has been starting off games VERY aggressively early before backing off later in the game. I told TK that I wouldn't be surprised, given the Cardinals passing offense, if the Redskins took out a linebacker with a defensive back and played conservatively to open the game... before bringing the house later in the game.

That's exactly what happened. In fact, Wynn mentioned in the lockerroom that's exactly what happened... and the Skins started off the game with 3 down linemen.

If I'm Dallas, I do as you suggested. And on offense... on the road in a big game..... I think you're going to see Parcells' Cowboys come out gunning early and plenty. Try to get a lead early and make the Redskins play from behind.... which is good if you want to effectively eliminate the Redskins running game... which is essentially all they have.

In my mind, Glenn is underrated with the Cowboys. He can be just as effective as Joey Galloway was. And I think he'll be a big factor against us.

If the Cowboys can protect Bledsoe.... he'll pick us apart. And Bledsoe WILL gamble... he'll throw that deep ball and he'll connect a few times.

We don't have that. We don't do that. And that's going to cost us in this game.

[Cool Hand Loki]

Agreed with Om that there are more factors at play here. I think they've been severely restricted due to injuries. Am I the only one who read the ESPN article about Santana's success this year? They talk about how his go-to route has been a post-curl; it's not a tremendously inventive route, but it's certainly not just a square-in, square-out, or go pattern. That may have been all they ran on Sunday - I was watching from my couch, and couldn't see the routes develop. But at least we can relax and know that Gibbs does in fact have more dynamic routes available.

Also, Brunell has shown some ad-lib ability - I'd point you to his first completion to Moss in the Monday night game vs. Dallas, as well as Santana's questionable catch on the sidelines on Sunday. Those are the first two that come to mind, but I'm sure there are myriad other examples.

I'm not happy about the recent lack of downfield completions either, but to ignore certain things about what Brunell has done and what Gibbs has tried to call, and just pick the instances of unimaginative route design and receiver stare-downs does them an injustice.

As far as Dallas goes, I would look for the three 'U' boys to step it up. Taylor, Portis, and Moss are going to have to shoulder the load if the Redskins are to have a chance in this one. I know you could say that about almost any game this year, but with all the injuries on D and the recent ineffectiveness of Brunell, I think those three players will have to make the difference.

[Gallntfox]

That's not to say that Gibbs won't win.... because I believe next year is OUR year.

Die Hard,

You say that next year is OUR year....and which QB do you see leading us in OUR year?

[Om]

Mark, you can even ask TK... before the game... I said to him that I noticed Williams has been starting off games VERY aggressively early before backing off later in the game. I told TK that I wouldn't be surprised, given the Cardinals passing offense, if the Redskins took out a linebacker with a defensive back and played conservatively to open the game... before bringing the house later in the game.

That's exactly what happened. In fact, Wynn mentioned in the lockerroom that's exactly what happened... and the Skins started off the game with 3 down linemen.

If I'm Dallas, I do as you suggested. And on offense... on the road in a big game..... I think you're going to see Parcells' Cowboys come out gunning early and plenty. Try to get a lead early and make the Redskins play from behind.... which is good if you want to effectively eliminate the Redskins running game... which is essentially all they have.

In my mind, Glenn is underrated with the Cowboys. He can be just as effective as Joey Galloway was. And I think he'll be a big factor against us.

If the Cowboys can protect Bledsoe.... he'll pick us apart. And Bledsoe WILL gamble... he'll throw that deep ball and he'll connect a few times.

We don't have that. We don't do that. And that's going to cost us in this game.

It might, T.

You still standing by "crushed," though?

[aussieskin]

when the skins win on sunday and both of us are 8 - 6, does that mean that the skins will be in a better position regarding the playoffs. I think the skins will win by at least 6 points.

[Die Hard]

Die Hard,

You say that next year is OUR year....and which QB do you see leading us in OUR year?

Jason Campbell.

That's why I'm tempering that thought a bit. I think year 4 is "more" our year. I can see Campbell having some success next year. We do have a decent running game.. and I think Campbell would improve our passing game as well. Assuming his "rookie" mistakes aren't killers... I think we can make the playoffs.

[Die Hard]

It might, T.

You still standing by "crushed," though?

"Crushed" is relative right? I mean, Dallas can drive 90 yards and then fumble on the Redskins 1-yard line. You can rack up 450 yards of offense and score 13 points... because of turnovers. Is that getting crushed? Or is only the score indicative of the reflection of the game.

Myself, I thought in our victory over Dallas... the Redskins got crushed. They were down 13 points... and for all intents and purposes.... should have lost by 13 points. Double digits.

If not for 3 desparation plays.... Brunell's huge run on 4th and forever.. and 2 Santana Moss bombs... we got killed in that game.

The score won't reflect being "crushed".

But I've been on teams where that's been the case.... and I'm not exactly fearing my opponent the next time I see them either

The difference between winning 14-13 and say... losing 36-0 to the Giants.... was exactly 3 plays. That's how badly the Redskins played.

Now, go figure, I thought the team played awesome in their 36-35 loss to the Bucs.

[HaVoC]

Wow, Jason Campbell starting. I think not. Brunell will enter the year as our starter. gibbs will NOT start a rookie QB over Brunell. He wouldn't start a 4 year starter for other teams over Brunell. You need to lay off the pipe

[Om]

Nice moonwalk.

Didn't know Canadians could dance.

[Die Hard]

Nice moonwalk.

Didn't know Canadians could dance.

I tend to look at the flow of the game moreso than the final score or outcome (who wins).

Myself, I thought we matched up pretty evenly against the Cardinals. And I think that's very disconcerting on a few levels.

I can see Dallas beating us by double digits though. And the very least, I see them dominating the tempo of the game. That's exactly it. I see Dallas dictating this game... and expect us to "react".

[Gallntfox]

It might, T.

You still standing by "crushed," though?

I hate to see anybody misquoted...he said "KILLED" ...not "crushed"

[Om]

I hate to see anybody misquoted...he said "KILLED" ...not "crushed"

So noted. My bad ... not sure where I got that.

Thanks, teach.

[Cub Mcdude]

And we are even farther handicapped by the fact that our coach insist on playing the absolute worst QB to ever dawn a Redskin uniform

would like a word with you.

[bobzmuda]

If not for 3 desparation plays.... Brunell's huge run on 4th and forever.. and 2 Santana Moss bombs... we got killed in that game.

To be fair, without Dallas's desperation flea-flicker, they only score 6 points. Hardly a crushing defeat. Especially on the road.

In regards to your original post...

First, the comeback is one of the most-run routes in this offense. I don't have the time now, but perhaps this offseason I'll draw up the Redskins 5 most called offensive and defensive plays. The comeback will definitely be featured in a few of those. (random observation: One of Williams' favorite plays, the double CB blitz, has been rarely called lately (probably due to injuries and the max protection) but I'll definitely draw that up)

Second, I wouldn't draw conclusions just from this one game. Arizona did several unique things to stop the Redskins offense. Most notably, they tried to prevent Brunell from rolling out and keeping him in the pocket by playing a 5-3. What's more is that the Cards put a man over the C, LG, AND LT consistently. I suspect this was also to take advantage of a 1-on-1 matchup against Dockery where he couldn't get help in the passing game and where he couldn't mash on someone on a run-play double team. Adrian Wilson, one of their safeties, was constantly rushing from Brunell's left side. It was pretty clear that the Cards game plan was unlike anything seen so far this year and its objective was to keep Brunell in the pocket.

Give Gibbs credit as he recognized this and tried to beat it with a reverse, and a couple of counters (though it is difficult to counter to that side if all of the linemen are covered up since no lineman can down-block to create some horizontal space). I suspect if Dallas tries this approach, and I can't see why they wouldn't (using Roy Williams in the Adrian Wilson role), Gibbs will have schemed a good deal more for this (including reverses, counters, TE/HB screens, etc.).

I do agree with you however that Brunell is looking increasingly uncomfortable in the pocket. Perhaps he's so concerned about fumbling on a blind-side hit he's a bit overzealous to break out of the pocket. If anything, Brunell's performance should only reinforce the fact that an NFL team is typically only as good as its performance at QB.

EDIT:

I tend to look at the flow of the game moreso than the final score or outcome (who wins).

Myself, I thought we matched up pretty evenly against the Cardinals. And I think that's very disconcerting on a few levels.

I can see Dallas beating us by double digits though. And the very least, I see them dominating the tempo of the game. That's exactly it. I see Dallas dictating this game... and expect us to "react".

Dallas did control the first game as it was able to stop the run and pressure the QB. I don't see how much as changed there. I do think the Redskins will be better off defensively though as the Cowboys are really hurting over the loss of Adams and the play of Tucker and Pettiti (sic). I just can't see Gibbs trying to open anything up or taking any shots to go up more than a score. As a result, I think it will be a defensive struggle that will eventually go the Cowboys way because of their ability (and more importantly willingness) to throw the ball down the field.

[Peregrine]

AzSkins... Not as bad as some want to believe? Our defense produced 4 turnovers and our offense scored only 10 points on ARIZONAs Defense!!! Thats not a bad day? Clinton Porits ran for over 100 yards and STILL only 10 points.

In one breath you talk about how a win is a win, in the next you criticize Parcells for winning with "pansie crap", correct me if im wrong, but the cowboys are 8-5, and we are 7-6. You are quick to complain about the refs, and everything else, but misplaced criticism DOESNT help us win games.

Zoony, Bad day? Brunell has one of the lowest YPA among all starting QBs. Hes in the bottom half of QBs in turnovers. In recent games the passing offense has been anemic, and the only reason it ever gets any yards is because of short routes to TE/HBacks that get YAC. As for question 2, Man coverage is good for go routes because not only do you have one man dedicated to the reciever, you will have the safety over the top. The problem with YAC in a zone is instead of 1 man in your vicinity, you will probobly have 2-4 as soon as you make the catch. Zones are looking back at the QB and adjusting to where the recievers run their routes. As for your observations, an NFL DB is not a very simple uncordinated individual. If a team is only running a couple simple routes, whether its a go route or comeback, when the WR makes the move he can cover it. If the WR keeps running, its a go, if he makes a hard stop, its a comeback. As for your Gibbs gameplan theory, thats all well and good, if he ever changed things up. Which he doesnt. We scored only 10 points on arizonas defense with 4 turnovers. 3 of which way down in Arizonas territory.

[Gallntfox]

would like a word with you.

For a 1st post ...........you came strong! Congrats!!!

[Die Hard]

would like a word with you.

The new guy knows That nice to see.

However, I'd also throw Tony Banks in there.

Gawd... seriously. Have you seen some of the names we've had at QB the past few years?

Jeff George, Tony Banks, Shane Matthews, Danny Weurfel, John Friesz. Disgusting.

[RDSKNfaithfull]

I think Brunell did a heck of a job this year but Its about that time Ghost's post saying Brunell will be our downfall start popping up:doh: He is starting to look a lot like last year:doh: Not just against arizona but he hasn't lit it up for quite a few weeks:doh:

[arkowi]

The new guy knows That nice to see.

However, I'd also throw Tony Banks in there.

Gawd... seriously. Have you seen some of the names we've had at QB the past few years?

Jeff George, Tony Banks, Shane Matthews, Danny Weurfel, John Friesz. Disgusting.

Heath Schuler

[Aghar]

would like a word with you.

:applause: Well said.

:rotflmao:

[Underwater Ally]

I think its clear Brunell is just having a few bad weeks, he'll be ready for Dallas

Obviously he is. But with his age and experience, I'm not so certain that a few bad weeks is something that can be turned around.

It is certainly possible for us to win given the history of the rivalry. However if we do pull it off, it will have to be somewhat unconventional (ie scoring off of turnovers, scoring on special teams, etc.). We don't have any margin for error, and well need some luck to bounce our way as well.