Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

An interesting scenario....


SkinsHokieFan

What do you think of the new site?  

63 members have voted

  1. 1. What do you think of the new site?

    • Amazing
      30
    • Cool
      24
    • Could be better
      5
    • A letdown
      5

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

Training camp starts this week and I am bored so here it is....

It is week 17 and it is Dallas week here in DC. The Redskins have had a complete turnaround from the 2006 season and Jason Campbell is everything we hoped he would be. The defense rebounded and the Redskins are 13-2 and have just clinched home field advantage the week before, making this a meaningless game for the Redskins. The Redskins come into this game a little banged up, with starters who have nagging injuries that can play if it was a critical game. However some rest would be key for the playoffs

The Cowboys come in 9-6. After a slow start and falling to 5-6 with a humiliating home loss to the Redskins, the Cowboys have won 4 games in a row and are on fire. They are the team "nobody wants to play in the playoffs" if they qualify. The Cowboys need to win this game to make the playoffs, a loss and they go home

What do you do if you are Joe Gibbs? Do you rest the starters essentially giving Dallas a win and a playoff spot? If you do that, the Redskins could face Dallas in the 2nd round and who knows what will happen. Or do you risk injury to make sure the Cowboys stay at home for the playoffs, even though the result of this game will have no bearing on the Redskins seed for the playoffs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging from what teams in similar positions have done in recent years I'd say he'd probably only play the starters minimally (perhaps a quarter) and then rest them.

However, remember back in '91 when we were 14-1 and played the Eagles? It seemed like the starters played a signficant portion of the game (into the second half at least), before coming out. I recall the focus was whether the Skins would set the record for least sacks allowed in a season, but once the Eagles got to Rypien several times to ensure that we wouldn't break the record, I know at least he came out. Does anyone else recall if other starters came out earlier?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging from what teams in similar positions have done in recent years I'd say he'd probably only play the starters minimally (perhaps a quarter) and then rest them.

However, remember back in '91 when we were 14-1 and played the Eagles? It seemed like the starters played a signficant portion of the game (into the second half at least), before coming out. I recall the focus was whether the Skins would set the record for least sacks allowed in a season, but once the Eagles got to Rypien several times to ensure that we wouldn't break the record, I know at least he came out. Does anyone else recall if other starters came out earlier?

I remember that by the 3rd quarter most of the starters were out of the game

As for this, I go for the win. It is one thing against a non division rival, but to have a chance to deliver a knock out punch to a division rival I think is big. You don't want to play a team 3 times in one season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless you have a chance at going undefeated, if you've clinched homefield by the last game it wouldn't be too smart to play your starters especially in the scenario you've presented with the Skins being a "banged up" team.

If only it came true and this becomes a real heated discussion here on Extremeskins come December. :wish:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never like the thought of resting the starters unless injuries are an issue and that resting the players will be benifical enough to overcome the possible loss of momentum going into the post season ....

Football is a violet and agressive game you cannot worry about injuries because they can strike at any time and it alwasy better to finish the season comming off a win ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if we play the starters and Dallas wins? Big hit on morale going into the playoffs.

As a matter of fact, we'd probably lose even if the starters were in. Dallas would be on fire trying to get into the playoffs, and we'd be coasting, whether consciously or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if we play the starters and Dallas wins? Big hit on morale going into the playoffs.

As a matter of fact, we'd probably lose even if the starters were in. Dallas would be on fire trying to get into the playoffs, and we'd be coasting, whether consciously or not.

Good point, I didn't think of that angle

I still say go for the win

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Win or lose we're getting a bye in the first round right?

It would be tempting to whup the boyz out of the playoffs, but I'd lean towards resting up key players (especially the older ones who were nicked up.) I'd also trim the gameplan -- making it more of a running game and scout out how they adjusted to it. Get our younger guys to play a real physical game against the boyz so they're the one's all worn out trying to work through the wildcard scenarios.

The only reason I'd play everyone and go for the win would be if a December 30 win over the boyz was needed to ensure home-field throughout the playoffs. Also, if there was a NFC foe we wanted to avoid early on and winning on December 30 meant we were in the other bracket, I'd go for win in that situation too!

If neither of the above, I'd pull in the reins on our nicked up, aging, or vital regulars and let a lot of the backups get a shot at the boyz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging from what teams in similar positions have done in recent years I'd say he'd probably only play the starters minimally (perhaps a quarter) and then rest them.

However, remember back in '91 when we were 14-1 and played the Eagles? It seemed like the starters played a signficant portion of the game (into the second half at least), before coming out. I recall the focus was whether the Skins would set the record for least sacks allowed in a season, but once the Eagles got to Rypien several times to ensure that we wouldn't break the record, I know at least he came out. Does anyone else recall if other starters came out earlier?

I will never ever ever, forget that game. We only gave up 4 sacks the whole season. The Eagles got 3 in the first half. That Eagles team, the D anyway, might have played the best defensive game I've ever seen. It's like they were saying "We are the NFC East and we are the best, go win us a Super Bowl". There was no way in hell we were going to win that game, regardless of who we put in and it didn't matter.

If that was our record, we would be getting a week off anyway to rest everybody. Two weeks would, or at least could, make the team complacent. That would be like us getting into the playoff mode early and then getting a week off. When ever we have a chance to beat the cowboys, we should do it. Especially if we can knock out "the team to beat".

:dallasuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish I could recall the specifics but in '92 (Gibbs' last year) we lost to the Raiders in our season finale on a Saturday and the only way we could make the playoffs was for the Vikings, playing at home, to beat the Packers the next day. I recall the Vikes had already clinched a playoff spot (although I'm not sure if the position they'd play in was still up in the air). Anyway, they wound up beating the Packers 27-7, gaining the prize of hosting the Skins at home in the wildcard round........guess who won? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if we play the starters and Dallas wins? Big hit on morale going into the playoffs.

As a matter of fact, we'd probably lose even if the starters were in. Dallas would be on fire trying to get into the playoffs, and we'd be coasting, whether consciously or not.

That is my exact thought...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will never ever ever, forget that game. We only gave up 4 sacks the whole season. The Eagles got 3 in the first half. That Eagles team, the D anyway, might have played the best defensive game I've ever seen. It's like they were saying "We are the NFC East and we are the best, go win us a Super Bowl". There was no way in hell we were going to win that game, regardless of who we put in and it didn't matter.

But we were winning the game somewhat convincingly anyway until the scrubs came in and the Eagles made a late run.

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...