DN: Lions will end streak, finally beat Redskins

[robotfire]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!! It was '91 all over again, baby!

[bubba9497]

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071008/SPORTS08/710080348/1126

click link for full article

Blame defense, too

Burning questions from the Lions' 34-3 loss to the Washington Redskins at FedEx Field Sunday:

Q . It was a bad performance by the offense. How much was the offense to blame?

A . It gets its share, no doubt. The Lions wound up with 76 yards passing -- after 30 yards were deducted from Jon Kitna's total because of five sacks.

There was nothing good about anything from anybody in the game -- players and coaches. But the defense shouldn't get off without criticism.

Q . Shouldn't the offense give the defense some help?

A . Yes, but it isn't against the rules for the defense to help out the offense, either. The Redskins were able to get five sacks by rushing four linemen, with almost no blitzing. They beat the Lions' offensive line man for man to get to the quarterback.

If the Redskins could do that, then there's no reason the Lions' defense shouldn't be accountable for not getting to Jason Campbell. The Lions didn't have a sack.

On three of their first four possessions, the Redskins had the ball for 12 plays and punted, 14 plays on an 80-yard touchdown drive and seven plays on an 83-yard touchdown drive.

There were plenty of opportunities in there for the defense to make a play, and it didn't.

Q . What about the offense, with only three points and no touchdowns?

A . It's fun to watch Mike Martz's offense, with all the passing, but it's as maddening as it is fun that the running game gets neglected week after week.

The Lions had two running plays on their first possession and had only two runs by a running back the rest of the first half. That isn't enough to get any kind of running attack going.

Martz has a reputation in the NFL of being pass-happy, and it's well deserved.

Q . Grade the Lions.

A . An F for the offense -- no touchdowns. A D for the defense, even though there really was no D. Special teams gave up a long punt return for a D+, and coaching gets a D.

Q . Lions players said the Redskins didn't do anything on defense that they didn't expect. They rushed four men and dropped their safeties deep into coverage. Why couldn't the Lions' adjust and take advantage of what they knew was coming?

A . That's twice in three games that the Lions have lost the chess game. The Eagles did it to them two weeks ago, on offense and defense, and the Redskins' defense destroyed them. That's something for the coaches to figure out, if they can.

Q . Rod Marinelli kept Jon Kitna in the game again all the way, just like he did against the Eagles. Right thing to do?

A . No, on two fronts. First is the unnecessary risk of injury. They made changes on the offensive line, so they can do it at quarterback. And the other side is that the backups could have used some game work when it was 27-3 with three minutes left.

Q . Aveion Cason fumbled in the last two minutes of the first half, but the Lions kept possession. What about having Cason in the game?

A . Another coaching decision that defied logic. Tatum Bell and Kevin Jones are the healthy tailbacks, but neither was on the field at a critical point of the game.

Cason has been released twice since the end of the exhibition season. He was signed in the middle of last week. There was no way in that situation on Sunday Cason could have been a better choice than Bell or Jones.

Q . You made the Lions over the Redskins your best bet. Why?

A . Because I'm an idiot. :laugh:

[flexxskins]

So, I guess that Mr.O'Hara is now eating off of paper plates and is now a month late with the rent? :laugh:

How many members here have already emailed this guy?

[*Connecticut_Skins_Fan*]

NEXT!!! Hail Redskins fans!