WP: Gibbs has no regrets

[Bacon]

Hmmm that is a fair and interesting point, but i would argue that if i remember correctly we were in an I formation and a 2 tight end set. Dont know how much surprise was coming and the gaints were stacking the line.

I'm not necessarily saying I agree with Gibbs, but I understand his point. If I were in that position, I would have skipped the spike altogether and tried this:

1st down: Play action pass to Cooley or Sellers

2nd down: QB sneak

3rd down: Screen pass to Portis

4th down: Run Sellers up the middle and to the right (we ran all day to the left, which is what they would expect, so running to the right would play up the element of surprise and Sellers' strength and size would negate any risk of running on the line's weaker side)

:2cents:

[HEavyJumbo85]

cry me a river..... waaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh

the coach wont call the plays I want or run the team the way I want it..

sound like a bunch of damn kids..

go to bed, school tomorrow.

but the plays i would've called definitley would have worked, i'm 100% sure of it :laugh:

[praise_gibbs]

I'm not necessarily saying I agree with Gibbs, but I understand his point. If I were in that position, I would have skipped the spike altogether and tried this:

1st down: Play action pass to Cooley or Sellers

2nd down: QB sneak

3rd down: Screen pass to Portis

4th down: Run Sellers up the middle and to the right (we ran all day to the left, which is what they would expect, so running to the right would play up the element of surprise and Sellers' strength and size would negate any risk of running on the line's weaker side)

:2cents:

ALL 4 downs: Run Sellers up the middle and to the right (we ran all day to the left, which is what they would expect, so running to the right would play up the element of surprise and Sellers' strength and size would negate any risk of running on the line's weaker side)

That is what I would have done. If they could stop Sellers four times. They deserve the game. If Gibbs wants POWER running.. look no further then #45.

[HEavyJumbo85]

ALL 4 downs: Run Sellers up the middle and to the right (we ran all day to the left, which is what they would expect, so running to the right would play up the element of surprise and Sellers' strength and size would negate any risk of running on the line's weaker side)

That is what I would have done. If they could stop Sllers four time. They deserve the game. If Gibbs wants POWER running.. look no further then #45.

The play they called on second down, play action to Sellers, was a touchdown if Campbell makes a decent throw. He threw it way behind him and it was basically uncatchable. Sellers catches that ball he walks in...and this thread doesn't exist.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

ironic that sellers had carries in both of the previous games in short yardage situations, and in the one game we need 1 yard more badly than we'd needed it before, ladel betts gets the call.

i wonder when people are gonna get over the ladel betts one month love affair.

[illone]

At 2-1, should he have regrets?

Is he accountable to us for a detailed explanation as to why?

I personally would have had Portis in the game, too, but I figure Gibbs to have seen that exact play run with Betts 50 times in practice before he would allow it in a game, right?

The guys crowing about him being conservative are the same posters who suggest he took a risk with Betts. Make up your mind. Which one is it.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

The play they called on second down, play action to Sellers, was a touchdown if Campbell makes a decent throw. He threw it way behind him and it was basically uncatchable. Sellers catches that ball he walks in...and this thread doesn't exist.

very true, but the clock had stopped, and since the play was a failure, bring in your friggin stud runningback and put the game in his hands. we failed to do this.

[Bacon]

ALL 4 downs: Run Sellers up the middle and to the right (we ran all day to the left, which is what they would expect, so running to the right would play up the element of surprise and Sellers' strength and size would negate any risk of running on the line's weaker side)

That is what I would have done. If they could stop Sellers four times. They deserve the game. If Gibbs wants POWER running.. look no further then #45.

Yes, that's certainly another positive way to go. It's also one of the reasons that I think the "we lost because Portis wasn't in there" posts are a bit ridiculous. He wasn't even our best option, IMO. I think at least one pass on those four downs would have been key in stopping the clock, however.

[HEavyJumbo85]

very true, but the clock had stopped, and since the play was a failure, bring in your friggin stud runningback and put the game in his hands. we failed to do this.

oh i agree there, you definitley want your goal line package in on the goal line. It was a mistake, he'll do things differently next time.

[Portis4Lfe]

As much as gibbs sticks up for his players, I 100% promise u Portis will be on the field in the next similar scenario, Gibbs might not have suffer from "killem now" attitude but hes not stupid(takes a lot to be a PE Major

[praise_gibbs]

The play they called on second down, play action to Sellers, was a touchdown if Campbell makes a decent throw. He threw it way behind him and it was basically uncatchable. Sellers catches that ball he walks in...and this thread doesn't exist.

I am not so sure. He still had to turn and break two tackles. He had one guy breathing down his neck and another guy ready to make a hit.

Sellers 'A' game isn't to catch the ball and turn in hopes to have enough power to break two tackles. A swing pass would have worked, perhaps if his shoulders were already squared up when he catches the ball. But, if you want to throw it in the flat with defenders crowding.. throw it to Cooley. If you want power running AND the TD.. give it to Sellers.

We barely ever give the ball to Sellers. Is it because it makes too much damned sense?

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

I am not so sure. He still had to turn and break two tackles. He had one guy breathing down his neck and another guy ready to make a hit.

Sellers 'A' game isn't to catch the ball and turn in hopes to have enough power to break two tackles. A swing pass would have worked, perhaps if his shoulders were already squared up when he catches the ball. But, if you want to throw it in the flat with defenders crowding.. throw it to Cooley. If you want power running AND the TD.. give it to Sellers.

We barely ever give the ball to Sellers. Is it because it makes too much damned sense?

he had 2 carries against miami in short situaions.

he had 4 carries against the eagles on short situations.

he had 0 carries against the giants.

i couldnt explain that if i tried, other than "our coaches are dummies".

[HEavyJumbo85]

I am not so sure. He still had to turn and break two tackles. He had one guy breathing down his neck and another guy ready to make a hit.

Sellers 'A' game isn't to catch the ball and turn in hopes to have enough power to break two tackles. A swing pass would have worked, perhaps if his shoulders were already squared up when he catches the ball. But, if you want to throw it in the flat with defenders crowding.. throw it to Cooley. If you want power running AND the TD.. give it to Sellers.

We barely ever give the ball to Sellers. Is it because it makes too much damned sense?

watch the play again, i was suprised to see how open Sellers was the second time i watched the play. The linebacker trailing him was in no position to make a play, the saftey was 4 yards deep in the endzone and trailing. All Mike had to do was catch it and step in, even one of those quick sidesteps that he does would've worked.

[skinsn24]

At 2-1, should he have regrets?

Is he accountable to us for a detailed explanation as to why?

I personally would have had Portis in the game, too, but I figure Gibbs to have seen that exact play run with Betts 50 times in practice before he would allow it in a game, right?

The guys crowing about him being conservative are the same posters who suggest he took a risk with Betts. Make up your mind. Which one is it.

No that is not correct. Having Betts in the game was not a risk, it was a mistake. There was no higher upside than with portis, only a lower downside.

A risk (that is worth taking) has to have a higher possible reward than a non risky option.

The upside of having portis in the game is the same as betts, just less risky. Therefore it was a mistake, or a risk that was totally miscalculated.

[praise_gibbs]

This coaching staff tries to be too much by the book. Mix it up a bit. Portis and betts are our RB's but, they shouldn't be the only ones seeing carries. LB AND Portis were not having one of their better days running the ball. So, why not try something else?

Also, **** that stupid end around. If I see that play one more time, I will flip out. That play NEVER works. If we want to waste a down.. just kneel down to lose the yard or two. :doh:

[skinsn24]

watch the play again, i was suprised to see how open Sellers was the second time i watched the play. The linebacker trailing him was in no position to make a play, the saftey was 4 yards deep in the endzone and trailing. All Mike had to do was catch it and step in, even one of those quick sidesteps that he does would've worked.

Hmm do you have a clip of the play, everytime i saw it, it really looked like there were 2 guys there and 1 guy who basically had his hands on Sellers (like close enough to tackle him)..but i dont have a clip right now, would be nice to see.

I also think he was a 1-2 yards shy of the goaline.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

theres no reasoning behind having betts in the game at that point, whatsoever. other than gibbs babbling on and on about how theyre interchangeable. portis has 3 touchdowns already this year, why he wasnt getting that carry is completely ridiculous, no two buts about it.

[skinsn24]

This coaching staff tries to be too much by the book. Mix it up a bit. Portis and betts are our RB's but, they shouldn't be the only ones seeing carries. LB AND Portis were not having one of their better days running the ball. So, why not try something else?

Also, **** that stupid end around. If I see that play one more time, I will flip out. That play NEVER works. If we want to waste a down.. just kneel down to lose the yard or two. :doh:

I agree 100% on the end around. I think that is saunders though. That is such a horrible play for this team, it has not worked yet, time to dump it.

[skinsn24]

theres no reasoning behind having betts in the game at that point, whatsoever. other than gibbs babbling on and on about how theyre interchangeable. portis has 3 touchdowns already this year, why he wasnt getting that carry is completely ridiculous, no two buts about it.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[RedskinzOwnU]

No regrets huh? That makes one of us.

[Bacon]

Would hitting Cooley on a crossing route have been too predictable and potentially detrimental?

[praise_gibbs]

watch the play again, i was suprised to see how open Sellers was the second time i watched the play. The linebacker trailing him was in no position to make a play, the saftey was 4 yards deep in the endzone and trailing. All Mike had to do was catch it and step in, even one of those quick sidesteps that he does would've worked.

I will watch it again but, I have my doubts that Big Mike could have had a TD easy, there.

Running Sellers up the gut because the Giants were EXPECTING run would have been the best option. Trying to bounce outside, even if it were Portis, at that time was retarded.

[skinsn24]

No regrets huh? That makes one of us.

Lol.

A little off topic but some plays i would like to see inside the 10/5 yardline with this team.

1. Sellers

2. QB Draw from the shot gun

3. Rollout with run/throw/get out of bounds triple option.

What i dont want to see

1. Betts carry

2. Betts carry

3. Betts carry

[jrt212]

it isn't just the playcalling, or having betts in the game instead of our franchise runningback, or any one issue. there are many many problems with the way our end-of-half and end-of-game series are run, and that boils down to coaching issues. with the game on the line, you get the ball to your playmakers, you put your aces in their places, and you say "our best against your best is good enough." you dont rush out your teams, have players running around looking like they don't know what they are doing, and then snap the ball as soon as they get set with 20 seconds left on the playclock. everyone in the stadium knew it was not a pass because the wr's were running around to different places, not knowing where they belonged.

eventually, you cannot live off of joe gibbs' former superbowls. no one on this messageboard will ever deny that he is one of the greats of all time, but it is a neverending issue of game management. our coaching staff has looked like a bunch of 1st year coaches in the last two games, and it might be an issue of everyone being a general, and no one stepping up, telling everyone on the sidelines to stfu, listen, and run things one particular way.

yes, we are 2-1, but that does not mean that everything is fine and dandy, and that there is nothing to regret or wish would have gone differently. i would much rather be 3-0, and right now, our biggest issue, aside from having our players drop like flies to the injury bug, is game management. that, i regret, because we have such a stacked set of coaches, that should be a non-issue, but in fact it is our biggest one.

[skinsn24]

just watched 3rd down run again, betts was really close...soo fustrating to watch