SonnyJ Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 As I said, I've no idea that's the case and suspect he'll get lots of playing time. Smoot did not have a good game. He had an ok game but hardly locked his man down. I don't know that means he can't cover. The longest pass he surrendered was 14 yards or something, right? LKB is the King of Declaring Certitude Based on Some Circumstantial Evidence and a Hunch. Smoot gives up some passes, he can't cover anyone one-on-one anymore and is useless. I loved his earlier doozy about the Redskin coaches "absolutely" benching lots of players based on contracts and personal grudges. Of course he has no real facts at his disposal, he just saw some plays and read some stuff and formed his own conclusions, which become certitude in his mind. This all stems from the belief that, though he has scant information as compared to those who have lots of it, he, and he alone, has the correct answers to everything. Must be his "genius" :laugh:. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GibbsFactor Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Gibbs just said they are saving Springs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 LKB is the King of Declaring Certitude Based on Some Circumstantial Evidence and a Hunch. Smoot gives up some passes, he can't cover anyone one-on-one anymore and is useless. I loved his earlier doozy about the Redskin coaches "absolutely" benching lots of players based on contracts and personal grudges.Of course he has no real facts at his disposal, he just saw some plays and read some stuff and formed his own conclusions, which become certitude in his mind. This all stems from the belief that, though he has scant information as compared to those who have lots of it, he, and he alone, has the correct answers to everything. Must be his "genius" :laugh:. Was Smoot a good corner in Minnesota for the last two year? Yes or No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 I'm not ready to send Smoot to the Old Corners Home (where I hear Lester Haynes steals all the tapioca pudding) quite yet. . . :laugh: I heard that too. He spreads it all over his hands like stick 'em so he doesn't drop the remote control in the TV Room. Rave on, LKB! Don't know if I agree with everything, but you're cracking me up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megared Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Question: Can Smoot cover any decent receiver one on one at this point? Yes he actually can. He can't cover in a cover 2 shell though which is exactly 1. what our defense was "supposed to be getting away from" 2. exactly what they ran vs. Miami & the majority of last season 3. What Minnesota primarily runs. We didn't play very much man' date=' nor dial blitzes often. If you know Smoot's weakness is cover 2...and you still play him over Springs (easily the best CB in the division) there has to be something going on. As terrible as the D was last season, why prove a point now? Just win the damn game. [b']Chambers should not have had close to 100 yards on us.[/b] I didn't see a 'lack of explosiveness' when he laid the wood on Peele in the 2nd quarter. Or when he recovered that Chatman's fumble... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DixieFlatline Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Hmmm why didn't Springs just say that? Instead, Springs says, "I don't know what Coach Gibbs is talking about."?????? Maybe Springs doesn't agree with the assumption that he might be a little nicked and not full speed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Was Smoot a good corner in Minnesota for the last two year? Yes or No? Honestly' date=' I have no idea because I really didn't see many Viking games. I seem to remember him returning a pick or two for TDs, but that doesn't mean that he was good. And I doubt you have any real knowledge, either, other than what you've read or heard or saw in some highlights. I don't believe for a second that you've broken down and analyzed his play in Minnesota, but merely decided that, [b']since the Redskins wanted him[/b] and you saw him get beat a few times in Minnesota, he was no good anymore. My guess would be that he performed below expectations, thus getting cut. I would imagine that was also partially a PR move. I do know different players do well in different situations. Walt Harris was villified here, goes to SF, and becomes a Pro Bowl CB. Now, is he playing all that different than from here? I don't really know, but the evidence would seem to indicate that. And Smoot isn't as old as Harris and doesn't have the injury history. Is it out of the realm of possibility that Smoot can regain his previous Redskin form here? Yes or No? Why or why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins84 Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Seriously, you are my man Bubba, and even you have to see this awful patternIts not the fact that players get phased out. It happens all over the NFL It is HOW they get phased out It starts with the non starts. Or not having them in on any plays Suddenly they are non entities within the locker room. A black hole on the roster This is a disturbing pattern that I was hoping the organization had grown up from. Clearly they haven't come on now, we all know bubba drinks the kool-aid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 I don't know about all this stuff and I really don't care, but I do know that giving up roughly 200 yards passing is not considered a bad game in the NFL, especially when you only give up 66 yards on the ground. (that and I took the over on # of pages.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z0eboy Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 I don't know about all this stuff and I really don't care, but I do know that giving up roughly 200 yards passing is not considered a bad game in the NFL, especially when you only give up 66 yards on the ground. yeah how about 9 catches TOTAL for all phins WR chambers had 6 catches and the WR's had a TOTAL ZERO TDS. the phins 2nd leading catcher?? RB chatman... hmm must be some good downfield coverage if you cant get the ball to the WR's... :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Adama Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Ok, I am going to have to go with Bubba on this one. JLC has a track record of making a situation more negative than it really is. Springs will start, but when the coaches feel he is ready to take the full load. He was not held out of the game, rather he was limited. Coach Gibbs says he will talk with Springs this week, so we should see a resolution. Also, the Defense played fantastic. Coverage was great, so I don't see why everyone is open in arms about. Springs will have a great season, as will the Defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCMONEY Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Arrington was better than Holdman...period. No matter how you slice it not playing your best player at that position is stupid since no matter what in the end of the day you are there to win.Now some food for thought here. Why is it we have the similar problems with....GULP....the defense only? I will tell you why because of Gregg Williams. I bet you anything when Gibbs got him to coach the defense in 04 the deal was "I Gibbs will NEVER mingle on that side of the ball". I just can't believe that Gibbs would not have stepped in way before the Lavar issue got out of hand. You remember how he was secretive about Lavar's not playing status while Holdman was getting eaten alive out there? Same thing with Springs. I mean when is the last time any of us have heard things like hey I am not starting my best CB because in "practice" he is not cutting on the ball well. Not only that what coach waits until 10 minutes before the game to tell that CB hey you sucked at practice so we are not starting you? Come on guys we are all much smarter than this. I am almost positive this is eating at Gibbs but he made a deal with the devil and now he has to pray it works out. :notworthy :applause: :notworthy :applause: Ding Ding Ding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campbell's_da_man Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Yeah and Arrington was so good that.... oh... wait... :doh: Really people. You all sound like a bunch of gossipy women. THe fact is tha none of us knows what is going on. The fact is that the coaches DO know more than us. So heres an idea, let's let this play out and see what happens. OK? Okay, then get ready for some more political football. And let's take a look back at what really happened the last time we played political football, and what might happen if we follow in those same tracks again. The year was 2005. Yeah, that's the last time we made the playoffs, but don't let that fool you. The truth is that we weren't even a good team when the season started. We had great talent, yeah, but politics were keeping Arrington on the bench behind Holdman, who couldn't make a game saving tackle if his family's life depended on it. Our record was a terrible 5-6, when someone got the bright idea to hang a sign up saying, "5 in a row - or we don't go." No doubt about it, we stunk so bad we even lost to the winless raiders that year, and a few other teams that had no business beating a team with our talent. This was political football at it's best. I don't know who finally got the message through to our prideful political coaches, but Arrington, very mysteriously, somehow found his way back into the starting lineup again. Then soon after, our defense started clicking on all cylinders again, as we rode into the playoffs on the tails of our defense, but only by the skin of our teeth. Do we really want to relive that horror story again? If so, we'll probably have some coaches that will finally be told what they can do with their political football. Maybe they have gotten confused by what happened in MLB, where Congress had to step in and straighten things out? Yeah, we could be headed in that direction again, but I certainly hope not. And I'm sure that Dan Snyder will not be satisfied with just making it to the playoffs, or being only one or two wins from playing in the big game. Nope, the last time we played political football, we made it to the playoffs by the skin of our teeth, but we also dumped a 5-11 record in Snyders lap the following year. If they try this tactic again, you can be sure that some heads are gonna role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 I don't know who finally got the message through to our prideful political coaches' date=' but Arrington, very mysteriously, somehow found his way back into the starting lineup again.[/quote']Arrington was better than Holdman...period. No matter how you slice it not playing your best player at that position is stupid since no matter what in the end of the day you are there to win. Lavar was INJURED. AP: Arrington: 'I could have handled things a bit better' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campbell's_da_man Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 Lavar was INJURED. AP: Arrington: 'I could have handled things a bit better' Hmmmmm, so was Springs!!! Isn't that a coincident? Or is it deja vu'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCMONEY Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 I don't know about all this stuff and I really don't care, but I do know that giving up roughly 200 yards passing is not considered a bad game in the NFL, especially when you only give up 66 yards on the ground.(that and I took the over on # of pages.) Keep in mind the Dolphin WR's dropped a few. And no Trent Green didn't throw for a zillion yards. I was looking at the way the Skins corners played. They played like they were scared to get beat. The large cushion they give. Hopefully this all is just talk but if anyone here is saying that its not at least a concern, their kidding themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinDan0557 Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 LKB is the King of Declaring Certitude Based on Some Circumstantial Evidence and a Hunch. Must be his "genius" :laugh:. So true. :laugh: He also makes strained analogies and infers that you lack his level of intelligence to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted September 11, 2007 Share Posted September 11, 2007 So true. :laugh: He also makes strained analogies and infers that you lack his level of intelligence to understand. And he is incredibly arrogant, what his boyish good looks and athlete's build. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.