praise_gibbs Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Bubba and Rdskns4lyf owned this thread. Great job gentlemen! :applause: :notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diesel22 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 The real story of this game is Stroud and Henderson. Dock and Randy better have it strapped up tight in a couple weeks when Jax comes to town. This is the most dominant set of DTs I have seen in my lifetime. It's not even close. They will shut down your run and then collapse your pass pocket from the inside out. I love Big Grif and Joe -- but if our line was anchored by these two.....we wouldn't have to worry about blitzing so much. Pitt has a HELL of an O-line and Jax was getting to 7 with a four man rush.....consistently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 You're right Diesel22. However, their DBs are pretty darn good as well. Don't forget that they pretty much shut down T.O. and Glenn after the first quarter. The Jags D is nasty and is probably one of the top 3 in the league. I don't see us beating them absent some sort of major injury issues for them or a miracle turnaround for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCommiesGo Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 :2cents: The real story of this game is Stroud and Henderson. Dock and Randy better have it strapped up tight in a couple weeks when Jax comes to town. This is the most dominant set of DTs I have seen in my lifetime. It's not even close. They will shut down your run and then collapse your pass pocket from the inside out. I love Big Grif and Joe -- but if our line was anchored by these two.....we wouldn't have to worry about blitzing so much. Pitt has a HELL of an O-line and Jax was getting to 7 with a four man rush.....consistently. Their D is just nasty. Stroud and Henderson are just unbelievable they get such a good push up the middle, makes the QB move out of the pocket and throw on the run, and causes mistakes. Another thing is their WR's are big boys they broke some tackles and converted some crucial 3rd downs. Matt Jones looks like hes coming into his own at WR, hell he almost had that hail mary jump ball. I really don't know what to even think about when we play them. Dock, Rabach and Thomas better get on some HGH or something because that could be a lonnnngggg day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUforREDSKINS Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 quick passes to moss and randle el (like the first play of the season) along with a loud crowed and we should be able to move the ball. Doesn't look like we will be able to run much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbar3383 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 But it is so fun to compare apples to bananas!Like Campbell and Brunell for instance.... Or Fans and Trolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 If you watch Big Ben closely, which I have in the past, he only makes 1-2 reads. I'd put he and Brunell in the same category there, except Ben has years to learn and overcome that. Brunell is a seasoned vet and is the last guy who should be caught doing that. Now it's as if Brunell automatically waits for the underneath routes to develop before he throws it. Plus, Ben faced a tough defense and just seemed kinda off. He's a good quarterback with a ton of upside. He doesn't rattle easily and usually finds ways to make plays with is feet. Monday night, though, the Jags made him look horrid. It's sad when you find some other decent QB who has a bad night and you have to compare it to your QB who plays like that every week:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins55 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 The Jaguars defense is much better than Dallas.. There is no comparrison! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt Rich Fla Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Is that what we are supposed to say? "The other defense was pretty good, OH WELL. This was supposed to be a good yaer for the skins. WTF. Are we cursed? I'm sick of the skins being the goat all the time. YES I feel like a selfish Bast*** for saying these things but I we've been eating **** and asking for seconds for years now. I and alot of fans are groing severly impatient. You can take away every single person from the dynasty pats and I bet they would still find a way to look dominant. AGAIN-WWWTTTFFF. Just getting a first down for us is gut wrenching. I thought this week (the anger) would slowly die down, but it isn't. I want someone head to roll. Even if it's a peanut vendor. someone!:mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 It is time to consider bringing in a new QB, Brunell looks out of shape, slow and old, even older than he did after getting injured last season. I am baffled by the lack of effort being shown by the entire team.. Give me a break, how can you write anyone off after only two games, despite what he has done just six months ago. And a HOF Coach still believes in him means nothing? well bubba that must have been one heckuva nights sleep you got last night for you to wake and waffle today!!! or are you just a true homer? brunell does suck, he never should have been brought here to begin with. it is really about the only decision gibbs has made that just made NO sense at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 It is time to consider bringing in a new QB, Brunell looks out of shape, slow and old, even older than he did after getting injured last season. I am baffled by the lack of effort being shown by the entire team.. Give me a break, how can you write anyone off after only two games, despite what he has done just six months ago. And a HOF Coach still believes in him means nothing? well bubba that must have been one heckuva nights sleep you got last night for you to wake and waffle today!!! or are you just a true homer? brunell does suck, he never should have been brought here to begin with. it is really about the only decision gibbs has made that just made NO sense at all. what's to explain, the first comment was made shortly after an upsetting loss, and was simply reactionary... no thought into it.. I was upset. You never made statements in the heat of the moment you later changed after you calmed down? :laugh: But after calming down, rewatching the game I noticed there where several things I missed.. like Brunell not being able to step into his throws many times, under a heavy rush many times, dropped balls. I also starting thinking about Joe Gibbs... and how many times he has said something, or made a decision everyone questioned or flat out laughed at at the time, but after timed passes... turns out he was completely correct Sticking with Brunell after 04, Stuck with Frost, trading Coles for Moss, giving up a second round pick to draft Cooley in the third... etc.... When we were 5-6 and lost bad to NY & lost to a bad Oakland team... everyone was panicking as well... but that turned out okay. He knows more than I do about what's going on and knows his players. I trust his decision. Are there problems ... Yes but Gibbs has faced them before and almost always corrected them. Maybe Brunell is washed up, but until Gibbs says so, I have faith... has nothing to do with being a homer just knowing Gibbs and his coaching abilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 i have faith in gibbs as well hence the name sake but i truely cant begin to see what coach sees in him. it is about performance at game time not what you do on the practice field or anywhere else for that matter. and mark just isnt getting it done. if joe sticks with mark and i am wrong and we at least finish 10-6 again then i will start the thread that I AM WRONG. but we must at least finnish 10-6. no reason with our aquisitions that we should not do as well as last year. last year i told my friends that we just didnt have enough options out there or we would have finished 12-4 or better. now we have the options and we couldnt beat a no name team like MN and we lost to the cowchips. neither of those teams are really that good and we made them both look good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 i have faith in gibbs as well hence the name sake but i truely cant begin to see what coach sees in him. it is about performance at game time not what you do on the practice field or anywhere else for that matter. and mark just isnt getting it done. if joe sticks with mark and i am wrong and we at least finish 10-6 again then i will start the thread that I AM WRONG. but we must at least finnish 10-6. no reason with our aquisitions that we should not do as well as last year. last year i told my friends that we just didnt have enough options out there or we would have finished 12-4 or better. now we have the options and we couldnt beat a no name team like MN and we lost to the cowchips. neither of those teams are really that good and we made them both look good. There is a lot of things we don't see, like practice, game film breakdowns, knowing the play call, we don't even see the whole field on TV, to see who is open or getting burned. Like on Cooley's pass that was int'd. Was it a bad pass by Brunell, or did Cooley not come back for the ball, because it was intentionally under thrown by design, to get separation? Things are not always as they appear, if you don't know what's going on behind the scenes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 There is a lot of things we don't see, like practice, game film breakdowns, knowing the play call, we don't even see the whole field on TV, to see who is open or getting burned.Like on Cooley's pass that was int'd. Was it a bad pass by Brunell, or did Cooley not come back for the ball, because it was intentionally under thrown by design, to get separation? Things are not always as they appear, if you don't know what's going on behind the scenes very valid points. i hate to say this but the one thing the XFL had that i wish the NFL would do is have the cam behind the oline .... you know like in madden? not the guys that were on the field but the angle we get to see every now and again from the sky cams. with that view we could all get to read the field. when moss catches one 40 yards out switch cams after the catch to the traditional angle and watch him all the way to the end zone!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Roethlisberger NEVER won a game for the Steelers he just didn't make mistakes.I'd say they are quite similar in that aspect. All because Big Ben has the rest of the tools and his name is known EVERYWHERE doesn't mean him and Brunell are opposites. In fact Brunell had a better TD/INT ratio than him last year.... are you really trying to say that brunell doesn't make mistakes? and throw out last year, btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 There is a lot of things we don't see, like practice, game film breakdowns, knowing the play call, we don't even see the whole field on TV, to see who is open or getting burned.Like on Cooley's pass that was int'd. Was it a bad pass by Brunell, or did Cooley not come back for the ball, because it was intentionally under thrown by design, to get separation? Things are not always as they appear, if you don't know what's going on behind the scenes you have a point, but the part in bold is bogus. when you intentionally underthrow a pass, you don't hang it up in the air for 6 seconds while throwing off your back foot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monte51Coleman Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Did he throw a duck or did Cooley not come back for the ball, that was supposed to be thrown a little short? Wow, Bubba! That just might be the stretch of the year. :laugh: I heard Billy Kilmer was watching the game and said; "Damn, now that's what I call a duck". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monte51Coleman Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Bubba and Rdskns4lyf owned this thread. Great job gentlemen! :applause: :notworthy I love me some sarcasm. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Wow, Bubba! That just might be the stretch of the year. :laugh:I heard Billy Kilmer was watching the game and said; "Damn, now that's what I call a duck". is it?, we ran those passes all last season where the reciever came back to the ball, several of Moss' big catches where on those type passes. All teams run them, so did Saunders at KC here's another one by Tandler On the Redskins’ first offensive series, it was third and four. Brunell threw a little flare to the right to Ladell Betts, who was open and appeared to have enough running room to get the first down. Betts was looking over his outside shoulder for the ball and Brunell threw it to the inside. The pass fell incomplete and it looked like Brunell had misfired both on the stat sheet and to the untrained eye.Did Betts look the wrong way or did Brunell throw over the wrong shoulder? The logical place for that ball to go is to the inside, where the back can run upfield without breaking stride. That is something for them to sort out in the film room and something that we’ll never know the answer to http://redskins.scout.com/2/570067.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 you have a point, but the part in bold is bogus. when you intentionally underthrow a pass, you don't hang it up in the air for 6 seconds while throwing off your back foot. that's what I saw, and stated above we ran several of those type passes last season. Brunell rarely throws into double coverage, unless it is a comebacker. The thing is WE DON'T KNOW, Gibbs does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Bubba and Rdskns4lyf owned this thread. Great job gentlemen! :applause: :notworthy ^^^either most sarcastic or worst post ever. take your choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 that's what I saw, and stated above we ran several of those type passes last season. Brunell rarely throws into double coverage, unless it is a comebacker. The thing is WE DON'T KNOW, Gibbs does it wasn't double coverage. but since he threw a floater off his back foot, williams had time to come from the HASHMARK to make the play. either way, i still say it should have been PI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 here's another one by Tandler http://redskins.scout.com/2/570067.html um, i would venture to say that pass should go to the outside shoulder, you know, AWAY from the defense. but i could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeknows Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 is it?, we ran those passes all last season where the reciever came back to the ball, several of Moss' big catches where on those type passes. All teams run them, so did Saunders at KChere's another one by Tandler On the Redskins’ first offensive series, it was third and four. Brunell threw a little flare to the right to Ladell Betts, who was open and appeared to have enough running room to get the first down. Betts was looking over his outside shoulder for the ball and Brunell threw it to the inside. The pass fell incomplete and it looked like Brunell had misfired both on the stat sheet and to the untrained eye. Did Betts look the wrong way or did Brunell throw over the wrong shoulder? The logical place for that ball to go is to the inside, where the back can run upfield without breaking stride. That is something for them to sort out in the film room and something that we’ll never know the answer to um no, on 3 and 4 if you ar egonna dump wide you go 4 yards and get the ball over the outside shoulder so as to not set up a pick oppurtunity. on 3 and 4 the objective is to get a 1st not run upfield with it. if you get run room..... great but the priority is the 1st even if it means catch and step out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Only 26 yards rushing?!!! I think this is the same problem we have this offense does not work if we can run the ball. Watching the game last night maybe Dallas has a very good D as well, hate to say it but their front 7 is one of the best and Newman is a new person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.