the conservative game plan approach

[TheTotalPackage]

Man, you should be head coach, ya think you can take a 5-11 team to 4-2 the next year. LEAVE GIBBS ALONE

I'M NOT HATING ON GIBBS so leave that be.

[z0eboy]

never touched rugby. i played linebacker.

what i'm saying is if that was his reasoning for doing it, then he'd have said "our o line is banged up, but we were ahead so we just played it safe" that's NOT what he said. he basically said our defense was killing so we just let them have the ball.

regardless of whether the line is hurt or not, the offense's responsibility is to try to move the chains as much as possible. by your logic they might as well take a knee down after down.

you make no sense, i played WR/TE/RB/DB and so what i remember LB's not being the brightest guys on the field, any who its simple football logic the offensive line isnt that good, if they cant run/pass block how do you expect the QB/RB to be effective? if your defense is playing good why not just try and do the simpliest thing available in football which has the lowest chance of turnover and gives the other team less time to make plays? run the ball and keep the clock running... its simple logic, we play to win the game not put up stats... :doh:

[z0eboy]

never touched rugby. i played linebacker.

what i'm saying is if that was his reasoning for doing it, then he'd have said "our o line is banged up, but we were ahead so we just played it safe" that's NOT what he said. he basically said our defense was killing so we just let them have the ball.

regardless of whether the line is hurt or not, the offense's responsibility is to try to move the chains as much as possible. by your logic they might as well take a knee down after down.

you make no sense, i played WR/TE/RB/DB and so what i remember LB's not being the brightest guys on the field, any who its simple football logic the offensive line isnt that good, if they cant run/pass block how do you expect the QB/RB to be effective? if your defense is playing good why not just try and do the simpliest thing available in football which has the lowest chance of turnover and gives the other team less time to make plays? run the ball and keep the clock running... its simple logic, we play to win the game not put up stats... :doh:

[Redskins4ever]

How about the Redskins offensive line is not fully intact? How about the reason being the pass protection and run blocking isn't as good with four backups and one starter. The offensive line is the main component to an effective offense. Without the o line, you can't score Tds, or get into field goal range.

Rabach was out. Thomas is out. Jansen is gone for the season.

A conservative game plan with good defense works well. It's better for JAson Cambell, who has to manage the game. It's works well for Santana and Antwaan too because the routes they run are underneath and the passes thrown to them are high percentage throws. It works well for the running game too because it helps take time off the clock.

[Redskins4ever]

How about the Redskins offensive line is not fully intact? How about the reason being the pass protection and run blocking isn't as good with four backups and one starter. The offensive line is the main component to an effective offense. Without the o line, you can't score Tds, or get into field goal range.

Rabach was out. Thomas is out. Jansen is gone for the season.

A conservative game plan with good defense works well. It's better for JAson Cambell, who has to manage the game. It's works well for Santana and Antwaan too because the routes they run are underneath and the passes thrown to them are high percentage throws. It works well for the running game too because it helps take time off the clock.

[TheTotalPackage]

you make no sense, i played WR/TE/RB/DB and so what i remember LB's not being the brightest guys on the field, any who its simple football logic the offensive line isnt that good, if they cant run/pass block how do you expect the QB/RB to be effective? if your defense is playing good why not just try and do the simpliest thing available in football which has the lowest chance of turnover and gives the other team less time to make plays? run the ball and keep the clock running... its simple logic, we play to win the game not put up stats... :doh:

running backs aren't too bright. they run headfirst into a roadblock every time they're involved in a play so your point is moot.

still, your argument that the players might get hurt makes no sense. IT'S FOOTBALL. there is the potential of them getting hurt on every play regardless of whether your OLine is intact and you have an extra 12 man. bodies collide wherever and whenever as long as you step on the field. as a matter of fact, more people get hurt trying to AVOID injury than if they played straight up.

what i'm saying that the whlole point of conservatism is to keep the ball in our hands and prevent the opposition from getting opportunities. at the end of the game, OUR DESTINY WAS IN THEIR HANDS, which defeats the purpose of being conservative.

if rackers had connected, what would you be saying then? you'd hear nothing but "we let this one get away from us......the offense needs to help out the defense.....we let them off the hook...etc"

don't let the W fool you. if the breeze had blown the ball back to the right, we would be crying in our soup and lamenting a lost season. the cards shouldn't have even had the opportunity. it wasn't my intention to question the coaches' decision when i created this thread..but i can't help but notice that we've blown leads, large and small many times in recent years, with an INTACT offensivel line so that argument may as well be moot too. in my OPINION, if the coaches want to go conservative, they should do it by keeping the ball in our hands and opening the offense up just enough to move the chains.

[TheTotalPackage]

you make no sense, i played WR/TE/RB/DB and so what i remember LB's not being the brightest guys on the field, any who its simple football logic the offensive line isnt that good, if they cant run/pass block how do you expect the QB/RB to be effective? if your defense is playing good why not just try and do the simpliest thing available in football which has the lowest chance of turnover and gives the other team less time to make plays? run the ball and keep the clock running... its simple logic, we play to win the game not put up stats... :doh:

running backs aren't too bright. they run headfirst into a roadblock every time they're involved in a play so your point is moot.

still, your argument that the players might get hurt makes no sense. IT'S FOOTBALL. there is the potential of them getting hurt on every play regardless of whether your OLine is intact and you have an extra 12 man. bodies collide wherever and whenever as long as you step on the field. as a matter of fact, more people get hurt trying to AVOID injury than if they played straight up.

what i'm saying that the whlole point of conservatism is to keep the ball in our hands and prevent the opposition from getting opportunities. at the end of the game, OUR DESTINY WAS IN THEIR HANDS, which defeats the purpose of being conservative.

if rackers had connected, what would you be saying then? you'd hear nothing but "we let this one get away from us......the offense needs to help out the defense.....we let them off the hook...etc"

don't let the W fool you. if the breeze had blown the ball back to the right, we would be crying in our soup and lamenting a lost season. the cards shouldn't have even had the opportunity. it wasn't my intention to question the coaches' decision when i created this thread..but i can't help but notice that we've blown leads, large and small many times in recent years, with an INTACT offensivel line so that argument may as well be moot too. in my OPINION, if the coaches want to go conservative, they should do it by keeping the ball in our hands and opening the offense up just enough to move the chains.

[SKINZ33]

Man, you should be head coach, ya think you can take a 5-11 team to 4-2 the next year. LEAVE GIBBS ALONE

Simple comments like this are ridiculous IMO. Wow, so in your eyes he can do no wrong?:doh: Yeah, we're 4-2, but don't start puting Gibbs back on that high horse yet my friend, there is a lot of work to be done.

Offensive line being injured or not, Gibbs can't just put the games completely on the defense. What is he going to do if they have an off game? It's not like our team can just turn it on offensively at the drop of a dime. It's games like the Cardinals one where we can afford to open up the offense for the sake of moving the chains, killing the clock, and keeping our D fresh. Then if we are in a situation where our Offense has to win a game, it won't seem foreign to them. However, it's damned if you do damned if you don't because either way if it doesnt work people will jump all over the him.

Take a couple of shots for a first down at least because lately the play calling for such situations has been truly painful.

[SKINZ33]

Man, you should be head coach, ya think you can take a 5-11 team to 4-2 the next year. LEAVE GIBBS ALONE

Simple comments like this are ridiculous IMO. Wow, so in your eyes he can do no wrong?:doh: Yeah, we're 4-2, but don't start puting Gibbs back on that high horse yet my friend, there is a lot of work to be done.

Offensive line being injured or not, Gibbs can't just put the games completely on the defense. What is he going to do if they have an off game? It's not like our team can just turn it on offensively at the drop of a dime. It's games like the Cardinals one where we can afford to open up the offense for the sake of moving the chains, killing the clock, and keeping our D fresh. Then if we are in a situation where our Offense has to win a game, it won't seem foreign to them. However, it's damned if you do damned if you don't because either way if it doesnt work people will jump all over the him.

Take a couple of shots for a first down at least because lately the play calling for such situations has been truly painful.

[dinkymark67]

I think once a team has a decent lead and has a dominant defense then you may want to play conservative if you don't have a lot of confidence in your offense because you don't want to blow the lead with turnovers. I think Gibbs meant they throttled back once they had a good lead.

[dinkymark67]

I think once a team has a decent lead and has a dominant defense then you may want to play conservative if you don't have a lot of confidence in your offense because you don't want to blow the lead with turnovers. I think Gibbs meant they throttled back once they had a good lead.

[Taylor 36]

i'm asking for clarification to his logic if he's saying "our defense was dominating so we decided to play it safe" (not verbatim). in theory it doesn't make sense.

Sure it does, this isn't Madden being played on an HDTV here. If our defense can dominate and win a game for us, there is no need to risk further injuries or our offense giving the game away when everyone knows/knew that the offense is majorly hurting right now.

[Taylor 36]

i'm asking for clarification to his logic if he's saying "our defense was dominating so we decided to play it safe" (not verbatim). in theory it doesn't make sense.

Sure it does, this isn't Madden being played on an HDTV here. If our defense can dominate and win a game for us, there is no need to risk further injuries or our offense giving the game away when everyone knows/knew that the offense is majorly hurting right now.

[Mister Happy]

put some points on the board? a offense is only as good as their offensive line, this line sucks and so does the offense end of story gibbs is protecting what offense he has left, i would hate to see CP go down or Campbell attempt a 5 step drop with a DL coming scott free a getting free shots at your playmakers due to poor O line performance, go a watch the film bro this O Line cant dominate the Line of scrimage last i checked thats the first thing football teams attempt to accomplish control the line of scrimage push guys around and knock people on the ass, what do you play rugby or something? this is american football buddy

How are we going to make it through the season then? According to you, we won't be able to score any points, and it's only a matter before Portis and Campbell get injured.

[Mister Happy]

put some points on the board? a offense is only as good as their offensive line, this line sucks and so does the offense end of story gibbs is protecting what offense he has left, i would hate to see CP go down or Campbell attempt a 5 step drop with a DL coming scott free a getting free shots at your playmakers due to poor O line performance, go a watch the film bro this O Line cant dominate the Line of scrimage last i checked thats the first thing football teams attempt to accomplish control the line of scrimage push guys around and knock people on the ass, what do you play rugby or something? this is american football buddy

How are we going to make it through the season then? According to you, we won't be able to score any points, and it's only a matter before Portis and Campbell get injured.

[dieselfan44]

sucks....enough said

[dieselfan44]

sucks....enough said

[Santana_Fan]

running backs aren't too bright. they run headfirst into a roadblock every time they're involved in a play so your point is moot.

still, your argument that the players might get hurt makes no sense. IT'S FOOTBALL. there is the potential of them getting hurt on every play regardless of whether your OLine is intact and you have an extra 12 man. bodies collide wherever and whenever as long as you step on the field. as a matter of fact, more people get hurt trying to AVOID injury than if they played straight up.

what i'm saying that the whlole point of conservatism is to keep the ball in our hands and prevent the opposition from getting opportunities. at the end of the game, OUR DESTINY WAS IN THEIR HANDS, which defeats the purpose of being conservative.

if rackers had connected, what would you be saying then? you'd hear nothing but "we let this one get away from us......the offense needs to help out the defense.....we let them off the hook...etc"

don't let the W fool you. if the breeze had blown the ball back to the right, we would be crying in our soup and lamenting a lost season. the cards shouldn't have even had the opportunity. it wasn't my intention to question the coaches' decision when i created this thread..but i can't help but notice that we've blown leads, large and small many times in recent years, with an INTACT offensivel line so that argument may as well be moot too. in my OPINION, if the coaches want to go conservative, they should do it by keeping the ball in our hands and opening the offense up just enough to move the chains.

Exactly, I agree with everything you posted, and it's understandable. When we had a good o-line, the Offense still played conservative. I like Gibbs alot, but dinking and dunking gets you nowhere in the long run. He said himself that, Campbell's strength is going downfield...so why not let him? Not saying that he hasn't tried to make it happen, but it should happen a lot more often than it is, throughout a 60 minute game. It's sad when me and my friends watch a game, and can actually call everything that's about to happen next. I knew we'd let the Cards get back into the game...we don't even give our defense time to rest. It would really be interesting to hear how people would have reacted if we let another game slip through our hands, being that it would have been our 3rd loss, in a game that we "should've" won.

[Santana_Fan]

running backs aren't too bright. they run headfirst into a roadblock every time they're involved in a play so your point is moot.

still, your argument that the players might get hurt makes no sense. IT'S FOOTBALL. there is the potential of them getting hurt on every play regardless of whether your OLine is intact and you have an extra 12 man. bodies collide wherever and whenever as long as you step on the field. as a matter of fact, more people get hurt trying to AVOID injury than if they played straight up.

what i'm saying that the whlole point of conservatism is to keep the ball in our hands and prevent the opposition from getting opportunities. at the end of the game, OUR DESTINY WAS IN THEIR HANDS, which defeats the purpose of being conservative.

if rackers had connected, what would you be saying then? you'd hear nothing but "we let this one get away from us......the offense needs to help out the defense.....we let them off the hook...etc"

don't let the W fool you. if the breeze had blown the ball back to the right, we would be crying in our soup and lamenting a lost season. the cards shouldn't have even had the opportunity. it wasn't my intention to question the coaches' decision when i created this thread..but i can't help but notice that we've blown leads, large and small many times in recent years, with an INTACT offensivel line so that argument may as well be moot too. in my OPINION, if the coaches want to go conservative, they should do it by keeping the ball in our hands and opening the offense up just enough to move the chains.

Exactly, I agree with everything you posted, and it's understandable. When we had a good o-line, the Offense still played conservative. I like Gibbs alot, but dinking and dunking gets you nowhere in the long run. He said himself that, Campbell's strength is going downfield...so why not let him? Not saying that he hasn't tried to make it happen, but it should happen a lot more often than it is, throughout a 60 minute game. It's sad when me and my friends watch a game, and can actually call everything that's about to happen next. I knew we'd let the Cards get back into the game...we don't even give our defense time to rest. It would really be interesting to hear how people would have reacted if we let another game slip through our hands, being that it would have been our 3rd loss, in a game that we "should've" won.

[ATCRedskin82]

Well its a good thing we pulled the game out because it was ugly and we shoudl have lost. We have a young QB with a good arm and some fast recievers....why we dont try to stretch the field to help a banged up O line in the runnin game is beyond me. One of our WR is gonna need to catch a TD this week if we want to win.

[ATCRedskin82]

Well its a good thing we pulled the game out because it was ugly and we shoudl have lost. We have a young QB with a good arm and some fast recievers....why we dont try to stretch the field to help a banged up O line in the runnin game is beyond me. One of our WR is gonna need to catch a TD this week if we want to win.

[BKSkinsFan]

We can call the game plan conservative, but they were still trying to take shots and get the ball moving. It just so happened that the Cards front four were getting ridiculous pressure, and even a screen pass which is considered a conservative call got picked. Would it make sense after seeing that to call riskier plays and let the Cards D beat us?

An end around shouldn't be that risky of a play either, a tackle for loss at worst, and that lost us the Packer game. We are failing at even being conservative at this point, so attempting to be an attacking offense may be out of the question until we can prove we are capable of executing basic plays without coughing it up.

[BKSkinsFan]

We can call the game plan conservative, but they were still trying to take shots and get the ball moving. It just so happened that the Cards front four were getting ridiculous pressure, and even a screen pass which is considered a conservative call got picked. Would it make sense after seeing that to call riskier plays and let the Cards D beat us?

An end around shouldn't be that risky of a play either, a tackle for loss at worst, and that lost us the Packer game. We are failing at even being conservative at this point, so attempting to be an attacking offense may be out of the question until we can prove we are capable of executing basic plays without coughing it up.

[z0eboy]

We can call the game plan conservative, but they were still trying to take shots and get the ball moving. It just so happened that the Cards front four were getting ridiculous pressure, and even a screen pass which is considered a conservative call got picked. Would it make sense after seeing that to call riskier plays and let the Cards D beat us?

An end around shouldn't be that risky of a play either, a tackle for loss at worst, and that lost us the Packer game. We are failing at even being conservative at this point, so attempting to be an attacking offense may be out of the question until we can prove we are capable of executing basic plays without coughing it up.

:notworthy :applause: exactly my point finally someone understands the logic behind wining games when your offense really cant do anything, it goes back to my previous analogy why open up a can of whoop ass when all you have is a jack in the box? in lamens term why try and open up the offense if you cant run/pass block people the opposing defense will just be taking free shots at key players you have left like J Campbell and CP, im just trying to point out why not avoid a nasty fight if your already winning the war :2cents:

[z0eboy]

We can call the game plan conservative, but they were still trying to take shots and get the ball moving. It just so happened that the Cards front four were getting ridiculous pressure, and even a screen pass which is considered a conservative call got picked. Would it make sense after seeing that to call riskier plays and let the Cards D beat us?

An end around shouldn't be that risky of a play either, a tackle for loss at worst, and that lost us the Packer game. We are failing at even being conservative at this point, so attempting to be an attacking offense may be out of the question until we can prove we are capable of executing basic plays without coughing it up.

:notworthy :applause: exactly my point finally someone understands the logic behind wining games when your offense really cant do anything, it goes back to my previous analogy why open up a can of whoop ass when all you have is a jack in the box? in lamens term why try and open up the offense if you cant run/pass block people the opposing defense will just be taking free shots at key players you have left like J Campbell and CP, im just trying to point out why not avoid a nasty fight if your already winning the war :2cents: