Redskins.com: You first, coach.

[skins4eva]

again, Suisham looks like the real deal. and in a league where the scores are 16-13 and 20-17 each week, his emergence could give us an extra 1-2 wins this season we might not have been able to count on, even in 2005 when we were 10-6.

for all those people that look at the 16-13 game against Miami and point to the negatives let me remind you that the Eagles LOST 16-13 and made a BOATLOAD of mental and physical mistakes in their game against the Packers

A win is a win is a win in this league. Unless your the Colts or the Pats (with video cameras) you can't expect to dominate the competition.

[Diggs43]

Eh, we kicked the field goal against the Seahawks in OT on 2nd down...nobody expressed doubts about Gibbs then...and it was only like 6 yards closer than the one against the Dolphins was.

Gibbs' goal was to obtain a victory, not to make fans "feel good". I'm MORE than fine with the decision.

Exactly, good point. Gibbs made a good decision because we won. If we lost, then not so much. He was trying to avoid a mental mistake which often occur when players are tired. Our O-line was definately fresher than the Dolphins D, but on a hot day like that in OT I don't blame Gibbs for his choice. I don't think his choice had anything to do with lack of confidence in his offense, but rather confidence in his kicker. Which is a pleasant surprise for a change.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

The field goal from 40 yards out reminded me of Gibbs's decision to kick a 48 yarder last year agains the Giants when we were down by three scores in the fourth, and we had a 4th and 2. Sometimes, Gibbs is way too conservative.

Not even slightly the same thing...

[Larry]

again, Suisham looks like the real deal. and in a league where the scores are 16-13 and 20-17 each week, his emergence could give us an extra 1-2 wins this season we might not have been able to count on, even in 2005 when we were 10-6.

Good point. Kickers are people, too.

(Remembering when the Raiders took Janikowski in the First Round. Lots of experts were saying it was idiocy to take a kicker that high. But Berman pointed out that, in the two years prior to taking him, the Raiders lost 11 games by 3 points or less.)

[skins4eva]

Not even slightly the same thing...

Oh, I disagree completely...

[Oldfan]

A well-written argument, Art. And right on the money.

As unlikely as it would have been, imagine the kind of feeling the team and its fans might have had if we had simply pounded the ball into the endzone in OT. We need something like that.

It was good to win that game, but winning in OT on a squeamish call for a FG against a 6-10 team that turned over its coach, its QB, and most of its O line wasn't much of a statement that we're back and ready to contend for the division title.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Let us know when you "get it"

I've been complaining about Gibbs game management for three years. I feel like the world just caught up to me.

And it frightens me.

[PeterMP]

I agree this a problem, but I would have pointed to his decision not to watch (or half watch the actual kick). You made the decision to kick it so stand there like a man and take the result.

[isle-hawg]

Wow!!!

You wrote what I think too, but don't expect a big raise from JG this year;)

[Larry]

Well, it's settled.

If we lose Monday Night, it's Gibbs' fault.

[bulldog]

forget 'statement' games

this team has spent too long in the NFL wilderness to be in the status-making business.

in 1982 this team went 8-1 and got the top seed in the NFC during the strike-shortened season...........

you know how the team won? defense, a ball control offense and Mark Moseley.

let's not discount a 16-13 win when in 1982 we won games 37-34, 15-14, 12-7, and 13-9.

count the wins not the differentials.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I agree this a problem, but I would have pointed to his decision not to watch (or half watch the actual kick). You made the decision to kick it so stand there like a man and take the result.

Eh. He's always done that. In a lot of ways, I prefer my big brother's Stoic nature...but this is part of the Gibbs' charm. When you win 11 games every year, it's fun. When you lose 11 games, it's troubling.

[skins4eva]

I've been complaining about Gibbs game management for three years. I feel like the world just caught up to me.

And it frightens me.

I don't think you're the only one. At the same time, watching Brian Billick's play calling last night made me glad we have Gibbs...he brings Boller in and throws 3 times from the 2 yard line? You know Gibbs is taking that ball up the middle 4 times.

[Vi]

I don't know. I'm torn.

A large part of me agrees with you completely. Gibbs was coaching scared and maybe making his players think they need to play scared too. I don't like that. It is certainly no way to get the swagger back into this team.

At the same time, it was the first game. It was OT, it was hot and we were losing the turnover battle. The refs seemed to be calling every little thing on us. In that way... I kinda understand.

It's like a battle of mind and heart. My mind tells me it makes sense, my heart tells me this isn't the kind of call the team that Mann let his fingers get mangled for would make.

I admit, I'm conflicted.

Good article, though. Food for thought.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Cali,

It's not really about making fans happy. I'm willing to guarantee there are a number of players in that locker room who utterly hated how the game ended, despite the win. I'd almost go so far as to say this reasonably controversial statement. The team was actually HARMED, as a unit, MORE by winning like that than they would have been losing with Rabach having a hold, or Portis fumbling.

This is a team we'll ask to power out victory again and again and when called upon to do it, deep down, they can't help but wonder if the guy asking them even thinks they can without messing it up. It's a culture of play. Right now our culture is one of fearing the big negative rather than expecting the big positive. It's that transition that will mean everything for us.

I would guarantee that NONE of the players will be caring one iota how they won the first game of the year if the Skins are 9-6, playing against Dallas for the division title...they'll just be glad they did. Because it allowed them to be in that position in the first place.

In reality, there are no downs in OT once you've reached your kicker's makable range...had Portis ran to the 17 yard line instead of the 22, and we kicked the FG, would anyone really have cared? Moss ran from around the 45 yard line all the way down to the 16 against the Seahawks. We were where we needed to be to have an excellent shot at making the field goal. The only other play that was even considered was a run to put the ball more in the center of the field.

[The Waterboy]

Combination of both?

I said in another post that I didn't see the same "killer" instinct in Gibbs II as I saw in HOF Gibbs. I see a lot of hesitancy and undeciveness that wasn't there before.

Some said I was second guessing Mr. Gibb and wanted to know my qualifications to be a head coach. I was not second guessing, but merely comparing HOF Gibbs with Gibbs II in approach to game execution.

Same for half time adjustments. HOF Gibbs brought out almost a different team at the start of second half. Gibbs II teams look pretty much the same as the one that went into the locker room at half time.

Just curious to me. Maybe HOF Gibbs relations with owner Mr. Cook was more solid from a personal relationship than Gibbs II relationship with owner Mr. Synder.

Maybe Gibbs II is trying to run the operation like NASCAR .... I don't know. Just observing.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I don't think you're the only one. At the same time, watching Brian Billick's play calling last night made me glad we have Gibbs...he brings Boller in and throws 3 times from the 2 yard line? You know Gibbs is taking that ball up the middle 4 times.

Billick's playcalling has always been too cute by half. I think he's a great coach except when he gets into these "Hey, watch me coach over here!" type moods. He and Tony LaRussa might be long lost brothers.

[SkinsGuy]

Great article!

That article hit the nail on the head, thats exactly how I feel. I still view this as a 6-10 team, and Sunday's performance did not improve that.

We went through 6 months of offseason and 2 weeks before the real bullets start flying we trade for our starting LG...scratching head

Greg Williams has forgotten how to dial up a blitz package that works, with 27 packages, you would think one of them could get one guy coming unblocked.

We still have pass rush issues against the right handed version of noodle arm Brunell, what are the McNabb's and the Romo sits to pee's going to do to us twice this year? Not that they are scramblers, but they can move out of the pocket.

Portis runs about 4 plays per quarter and Betts the other 4, who is making 50 million here?

Moss caught a case of the drops and Brandon should be wearing street clothes and working in a local night club as wide reciever impersonator.

Reading your nonsense, you would think the Redskins lost the game 37-0.

[Tarhog]

I would guarantee that NONE of the players will be caring one iota how they won the first game of the year if the Skins are 9-6, playing against Dallas for the division title...they'll just be glad they did. Because it allowed them to be in that position in the first place.

In reality, there are no downs in OT once you've reached your kicker's makable range...had Portis ran to the 17 yard line instead of the 22, and we kicked the FG, would anyone really have cared? Moss ran from around the 45 yard line all the way down to the 16 against the Seahawks. We were where we needed to be to have an excellent shot at making the field goal. The only other play that was even considered was a run to put the ball more in the center of the field.

I won't go as far as Mills - I think he's reading a little into the decision (which I think was a LOT more about Gibb's belief in Suisham than it was about a lack of confidence in his offense). I think you have to consider not just the chance you make it from there though, you have to think about giving the ball up to the opponent with great field position if you miss it as well.

I think its also possible you could argue that play call took big balls. Had we missed it, Gibbs would've taken a lot of heat for the decision to try it from there when we had them on their heels.

I agree with the overall premise though, I think part of whats held us back in Gibbs II is Gibb's ultra-conservative decision-making. We need to have the courage to risk. We've got enough talent to take some risks, and the old Gibbs wasn't averse to it. Theres a place for gutsy decisions. I hope he finds ways to embrace that again this year.

[isle-hawg]

I don't think his choice had anything to do with lack of confidence in his offense, but rather confidence in his kicker. Which is a pleasant surprise for a change.

I sure hope your right and also that the team takes it that way, but based on Art's comments many within the team did not take it that way...

As much as I am happy with having a clutch kicker again, JG cannot alienate the O starters in the process if we are to have long term success this year.

[kevinklein]

Cali,

It's not really about making fans happy. I'm willing to guarantee there are a number of players in that locker room who utterly hated how the game ended, despite the win. I'd almost go so far as to say this reasonably controversial statement. The team was actually HARMED, as a unit, MORE by winning like that than they would have been losing with Rabach having a hold, or Portis fumbling.

This is a team we'll ask to power out victory again and again and when called upon to do it, deep down, they can't help but wonder if the guy asking them even thinks they can without messing it up. It's a culture of play. Right now our culture is one of fearing the big negative rather than expecting the big positive. It's that transition that will mean everything for us.

Once again Art, I respectfully disagree. Not that I doubt your knowledge of the team, or perhaps even the personalities of its players, but I think it's mildly pretentious to say that players on our team were unhappy with the games ending. And I would go as far as to say that your statement is 100% incorrect.

I think the players may have been unhappy with the decision when it was made, and for those 3 minutes given to us to think about it thanks to Cam's extra timeouts, really weren't a fan of Gibbs. Once that ball sailed through the uprights, however, I'm sure all doubt was lost.

I know you know this team was a joke last year. Our season was horrible and our players embarrased. This is a team that's trying to prove that our 10-6 campaign is the standard for them. That was a year that our wins came by some very interesting means. Week 1, of course, was the 9-6 shootout over Chicago.

I'm not sure how you can possibly think that losing devastingly, in overtime, after winning the coin toss, driving down the field, getting in FG range, and then fumbling or having a holding call, against a 6-10 team with a new QB and coach, at home, in the opening game after a rancidly dissapointing season, could be less damaging than bringing home the W and traveling into Philly with a hand in the division lead.

But hey, that's just me.

[Tarhog]

I sure hope your right and also that the team takes it that way, but based on Art's comments many within the team did not take it that way...

As much as I am happy with having a clutch kicker again, JG cannot alienate the O starters in the process if we are to have long term success this year.

Art's just stating his opinion. As far as I know, he hasn't had any conversations with players about how they 'felt about the call'. He's simply putting it out there as a possibility. Its equally possible players are ecstatic with a win no matter how it was gained.

[kevinklein]

forget 'statement' games

this team has spent too long in the NFL wilderness to be in the status-making business.

in 1982 this team went 8-1 and got the top seed in the NFC during the strike-shortened season...........

you know how the team won? defense, a ball control offense and Mark Moseley.

let's not discount a 16-13 win when in 1982 we won games 37-34, 15-14, 12-7, and 13-9.

count the wins not the differentials.

If my signature wasn't currently on lockdown, this might be it.

[Goskinz0721]

Sorry Art, but you're really reaching here.

Conservative call by Coach Gibbs? Sure. But how much confidence do you think this gave to Suisham? The team? How ballzy was it to call a kick by an untested kicker in that situation? Pretty freaking ballzy, no? Think he would have tried that last year with Hall? Or that forgotten kicker from UMd? Nope. This is huge to Suisham's confidence. And to the confidence of the team in him.

Quit the hating. This constant evaluation of Coach Gibbs' calls is mind-numbing. I think he knows what the eff he's doing. He's in the HOF for making the timely decisions. I trust in that more than some Monday morning QB saying "we need to make a statement".

He made the statement: "I have faith in my kicker".

When was the last time we were able to say that?

[SkinsGuy]

More than likely, the players were just glad the game was over and they could get out of the freaking heat.