lefty420 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 he said they wished they could have taken more shots and after how the defense was playing and how everything was going they decided their best bet was trying to control the clock. similar to the Seattle game in 2005 where we had the ball so damn long. the diff is our offense did not execute. they mixed it up and threw passes on first down and we had penalties, drops and poor blocking that lead to 3 and outs. this is gibbs since the 80's. he is conservative and decided to be vanilla to limit the mistakes, i assume the campbell int resulting in a td made him go this route. the cards were playing a cover 2 and shutting out any deep stuff. the run game was there the line did not do its job. there were games riggins would run it 35-40 times a game. the diff was execution. and that comes from time working together. and we will get there. the line being so hurt does not help. but what i saw was classic gibbs and a struggling injured offense. he rode the back of the defense. based off of how we played it was a smart move. one time they went spread with 4 recievers wade totally did not see the end or touch him and campbell got laid out. thats what killed the drive after the big kick return. we lost 10 yards on that one play. next drive we went 11 plays for 55 yards. we executed very well all the way. thats what we should look like. after that a big holding call on samuels and a dropped cooley pas killed 2 other drives and the third cause we couldn't pass block worth a lick after we went for a deep pass thrash should have caught. once again execution. now the defense may have gotten tired but they also had some issues. piss poor tackling and 2 big penalties on dead balls caused the cardnals to score a touchdown and get momentum. landry late hit. this was a 4th down play and we would have had the ball at mid field. fletcher taunting. as a team we played poorly specially on offense and htis has nothing to do with playcalling. defense late in the game had some costly penalties and failure to block and penalties killed 3 of our drives late in the 4th quarter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty420 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 he said they wished they could have taken more shots and after how the defense was playing and how everything was going they decided their best bet was trying to control the clock. similar to the Seattle game in 2005 where we had the ball so damn long. the diff is our offense did not execute. they mixed it up and threw passes on first down and we had penalties, drops and poor blocking that lead to 3 and outs. this is gibbs since the 80's. he is conservative and decided to be vanilla to limit the mistakes, i assume the campbell int resulting in a td made him go this route. the cards were playing a cover 2 and shutting out any deep stuff. the run game was there the line did not do its job. there were games riggins would run it 35-40 times a game. the diff was execution. and that comes from time working together. and we will get there. the line being so hurt does not help. but what i saw was classic gibbs and a struggling injured offense. he rode the back of the defense. based off of how we played it was a smart move. one time they went spread with 4 recievers wade totally did not see the end or touch him and campbell got laid out. thats what killed the drive after the big kick return. we lost 10 yards on that one play. next drive we went 11 plays for 55 yards. we executed very well all the way. thats what we should look like. after that a big holding call on samuels and a dropped cooley pas killed 2 other drives and the third cause we couldn't pass block worth a lick after we went for a deep pass thrash should have caught. once again execution. now the defense may have gotten tired but they also had some issues. piss poor tackling and 2 big penalties on dead balls caused the cardnals to score a touchdown and get momentum. landry late hit. this was a 4th down play and we would have had the ball at mid field. fletcher taunting. as a team we played poorly specially on offense and htis has nothing to do with playcalling. defense late in the game had some costly penalties and failure to block and penalties killed 3 of our drives late in the 4th quarter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzSkinsFan63 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Actually the more I think about it the more I understand it..Pucillo was not playing as good as he needed to be that's for sure. Rabach probably could have gone but the skins kept him out for this week. It was a close call to go completely conservative but end the end it worked... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzSkinsFan63 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Actually the more I think about it the more I understand it..Pucillo was not playing as good as he needed to be that's for sure. Rabach probably could have gone but the skins kept him out for this week. It was a close call to go completely conservative but end the end it worked... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megared Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 My question is how are we going to expect to ever be able to rely upon our offense if Gibbs isn't letting it develop? Our O-line was terrible in run blocking. You have to show WRs, TEs, QB that you trust them...otherwise how can you expect them to have consistency? How can you expect for them to block hard/fly around when you're essentially freezing them out of the game? We can't expect our defense to hold up entire 2nd halves with that god-awful prevent. They were directly responsible for 14 of our 21 points we put up, when they were turned loose. Injuries occur...we aren't the only team to lose starters. Nor by any means is our IR list the longest. Let's not act like this is the first time we came out after halftime and didn't do a DARN THING. I mean do we practice being conservative during the week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megared Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 My question is how are we going to expect to ever be able to rely upon our offense if Gibbs isn't letting it develop? Our O-line was terrible in run blocking. You have to show WRs, TEs, QB that you trust them...otherwise how can you expect them to have consistency? How can you expect for them to block hard/fly around when you're essentially freezing them out of the game? We can't expect our defense to hold up entire 2nd halves with that god-awful prevent. They were directly responsible for 14 of our 21 points we put up, when they were turned loose. Injuries occur...we aren't the only team to lose starters. Nor by any means is our IR list the longest. Let's not act like this is the first time we came out after halftime and didn't do a DARN THING. I mean do we practice being conservative during the week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail2TheRedskins! Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Your question is not a bad one. The problem with relying on the passing game to hold onto a lead is that you are susceptible to giving back the ball after running virtually no time off the clock. This was a big problem with the “run and shoot” for example. Remember the '92 wild card game when the Oilers blew a 35-3 lead? Or going further back in 1990 the Lions actually blew a 35-14 lead against our very own Redskins. I know you will say that if you are not picking up first downs with the running game then you are also giving back the ball quickly. But at least the clock keeps running. Also, it is not a “given” that the running game will not be able to pick up a first down. Although things were not going well I would not have been surprised if Portis had gotten a little seam and made a 10 or 12 yard run. Also, I think we did mix a few passing plays in there. I think Gibbs admitted that he cut things a little too close but my point is the basic strategy of calling more running plays when the team has a lead and the defense is playing exceptionally well is reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail2TheRedskins! Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Your question is not a bad one. The problem with relying on the passing game to hold onto a lead is that you are susceptible to giving back the ball after running virtually no time off the clock. This was a big problem with the “run and shoot” for example. Remember the '92 wild card game when the Oilers blew a 35-3 lead? Or going further back in 1990 the Lions actually blew a 35-14 lead against our very own Redskins. I know you will say that if you are not picking up first downs with the running game then you are also giving back the ball quickly. But at least the clock keeps running. Also, it is not a “given” that the running game will not be able to pick up a first down. Although things were not going well I would not have been surprised if Portis had gotten a little seam and made a 10 or 12 yard run. Also, I think we did mix a few passing plays in there. I think Gibbs admitted that he cut things a little too close but my point is the basic strategy of calling more running plays when the team has a lead and the defense is playing exceptionally well is reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctorfro Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Gibbs game plan excuse................crap. Doesn't float. More excuses. Produce, HOF coach!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctorfro Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Gibbs game plan excuse................crap. Doesn't float. More excuses. Produce, HOF coach!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Why? Because Gibbs just doesnt get it. Succesful teams arent scared to lose. Succesful teams do what works, and keep doing it. A conservative gameplan with good defense does NOT work well. For once id wish people would do some research on the subject and realize, the only time that a running game wins games is if its coupled with an absolutely dominant defense. And not top 5 good, top 3 good. Even then, the running game is the weakest of the two options. Welcome to the NFL, its a passing league. All of the top scoring teams last year? Passing teams. All of the playoff teams last year? Passing teams(excepting top 3 defenses). Its quite simple, in order to be good in this NFL, you HAVE to pass the ball. We SHOULD have lost that game to the Cardinals. They missed a FG by a foot. Thats good coaching? We didnt take time off the clock, we didnt get first downs, we didnt get points, we didnt keep the defense off the field. Just how succesful was it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Why? Because Gibbs just doesnt get it. Succesful teams arent scared to lose. Succesful teams do what works, and keep doing it. A conservative gameplan with good defense does NOT work well. For once id wish people would do some research on the subject and realize, the only time that a running game wins games is if its coupled with an absolutely dominant defense. And not top 5 good, top 3 good. Even then, the running game is the weakest of the two options. Welcome to the NFL, its a passing league. All of the top scoring teams last year? Passing teams. All of the playoff teams last year? Passing teams(excepting top 3 defenses). Its quite simple, in order to be good in this NFL, you HAVE to pass the ball. We SHOULD have lost that game to the Cardinals. They missed a FG by a foot. Thats good coaching? We didnt take time off the clock, we didnt get first downs, we didnt get points, we didnt keep the defense off the field. Just how succesful was it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctorfro Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I see this alot. Teams that play "not to lose" rather than "playing to win". Losing becomes a habit and winning becomes an accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctorfro Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I see this alot. Teams that play "not to lose" rather than "playing to win". Losing becomes a habit and winning becomes an accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.