Washington offensive game plan easy to read. (merged)

[cozmikbuffalo]

Dude. Is there more than one of you using that account?

I said I will run those numbers. I didn't say I would do it in this thread. Jeez!! Once again OM read the thread, there is nothing there about yardage per attempt for the umpteen time explaining this. Just go back and read the thread and you will understand. You brought up the question about yardage not me. I responded ballpark estimate with you and suddenly it's about yardage per attempt. Talk about twisting what is in print, much less said.

[One Shot]

Quote by One Shot- if not for the 1st kickoff going for 6 the game would have been easier to manage but atleast we won right?

I am not the one that brought up the "ifs" I was showing you that by that logic one could debate that other possibilities and outcomes could be rethought also. You simply can't have it one way man.

?

When did I say that?

[cozmikbuffalo]

The main stat I look at is points.

Washington Redskins 23

New York Jets 20

Yeah it sure is always good to win I don't deny that. But understanding why we are a mediocre team cannot be done by just looking at the score. A different example would be like saying "Yeah, the engine in my car is making this terrible noise but I just turn up the radio and as long as I can't hear it everything is OK" And this too is also a ridiculous statement.

[talby1027]

the thread title should be "Washington offensive game plan was effective"

No, the thread title should be "Another STUPID offensive game plan was unnecessarily called".

How long before Gibbs is out of here? Please say next week!

Almost 300 yards rushing and they win by just 3 in overtime, against a 1-7 team. STUPID!!!

[z0eboy]

Quote by One Shot- if not for the 1st kickoff going for 6 the game would have been easier to manage but atleast we won right?

I am not the one that brought up the "ifs" I was showing you that by that logic one could debate that other possibilities and outcomes could be rethought also. You simply can't have it one way man.

i said that and the part about the "ifs" why talk about what ifs why not just talk about the reality? we won the game running the football, thats redskins football

[cozmikbuffalo]

Those 2 posts were 13 minutes apart. What happened?

What are yo asking me now. Did you bother to read the post?? Wow , for being a President and having so much history on this forum I don't understand why it is so hard to read what it was that I posted in the first place.

If you do that then you will realize that your first question about yardage was "Off Topic" OM.

I did say that I would run those numbers. I didn't say today or within this thread.

Hey man, you keep making such a big deal about something that is completely "off topic" And repeatedly throwing in my face the fact that I even tried to answer the question you posed to me about yardage. Now all the sudden I am some kind of freak because I am not talking about yardage.

If you are so interested in it than you do the math and report it in a different thread.

If you want to talk about what it is that I began this thread with than cool. Otherwise go to a different thread and leave me alone already.

[Om]

I said I will run those numbers. I didn't say I would do it in this thread. Jeez!! Once again OM read the thread, there is nothing there about yardage per attempt for the umpteen time explaining this. Just go back and read the thread and you will understand. You brought up the question about yardage not me. I responded ballpark estimate with you and suddenly it's about yardage per attempt. Talk about twisting what is in print, much less said.

You start a thread criticizing the play selection on first down, and don't think the success of those plays is relevant? Are you interested in exploring the various related (and clearly relevant) angles of your topic, or simply pounding your shoe on the lectern?

[One Shot]

Cozmik, put down the bottle.....

[cozmikbuffalo]

I apologize to One Shot. You weren't the one about the "ifs". My mistake, see I make them.

[z0eboy]

if betts scored that TD against the giants and if moss doesnt fumble against the packer we could be 6-1, what other what if's do you want to talk about? what if the redskins win the superbowl would you perfer the patriots or the colts?

[cozmikbuffalo]

You start a thread criticizing the play selection on first down, and don't think the success of those plays is relevant? Are you interested in exploring the various related (and clearly relevant) angles of your topic, or simply pounding your shoe on the lectern?

I am interested and would be very interested to know what those numbers and other ramifications will turn out to be. I am not however going to neither have I already done so today or tonight period.

And no I am not simply stamping my shoe on the lecturn. I believe the point I am making is by itself a very valid point and one that backs up what I have been saying for some time now. That Gibbs game planning is singly dimensional and easy to predict and it is.'

The fact that we ran 300 yards today against the 27th team in the league is nothing to stamp anyones shoe on the lecturn about is it??

[cozmikbuffalo]

if betts scored that TD against the giants and if moss doesnt fumble against the packer we could be 6-1, what other what if's do you want to talk about? what if the redskins win the superbowl would you perfer the patriots or the colts?

And if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their ass every time they jump!! Enough with the "If's". How about this "If". "If" we had an innovative coach I wouldn't have posted this thread.

[Om]

I am interested and would be very interested to know what those numbers and other ramifications will turn out to be. I am not however going to neither have I already done so today or tonight period.

Just so I understand ... you took the time to calculate the average yards per first down carry excluding the 3 specific carries you chose to remove, but didn't bother to calculate the yards per carry with ALL first down runs included? Maybe it's just me, that seems kinda strange.

But, no worries. Not looking to tax you here.

And no I am not simply stamping my shoe on the lecturn. I believe the point I am making is by itself a very valid point and one that backs up what I have been saying for some time now. That Gibbs game planning is singly dimensional and easy to predict and it is.'

Valid? Sure, it's "valid." It's just all that compelling given you're not interested in considering the context. Like going against a bad run D. And like the fact it was working. Or anything else, apparently.

But, again. No worries.

The fact that we ran 300 yards today against the 27th team in the league is nothing to stamp anyones shoe on the lecturn about is it??

No, it certainly isn't. And yet, here we are in a thread in which you seem vexed by the very fact they zeroed on an obvious weakness and successfully took advantage of it all day long.

One of us is definitely missing something here.

[cozmikbuffalo]

Just so I understand ... you took the time to calculate the average yards per first down carry excluding the 3 specific carries you chose to remove, but didn't bother to calculate the yards per carry with ALL first down runs included? Maybe it's just me, that seems kinda strange.

But, no worries. Not looking to tax you here.

But, again. No worries.

One of us is definitely missing something here.

I am beginning to wonder if you will ever understand at all or maybe you are simply being sarcasticly impervious to what it is that I am saying to you.

First of all I never calculated any yardage, I answered you with a ball park guess since this thread was NEVER ABOUT YARDAGE. For the last time OM, for the love of mike why don't you read the thread and than you should understand that it was not me bringing up yardage. It was you and I tried to answer your question with a guess, simple as that. Where you come up with this idea that it is my intention to discuss yardage is plain funky, goofy and once again"Off Topic".

Can I make myself any clearer than that?? Criminee pal give me a break here.

I am sorry that I tried to answer your question at all at this point. I should have pointed out that you were off topic then and perhaps we could have avoided this whole ugly episode. Or not depending on how much of a cynic you might be.

How can you possibly say that we were successful all day when we didn't even get the lead until the middle of the fourth quarter and still just pulled the win out of our ass more by luck than skill. We had to kick 5 field goals against the Jets dude. You call that successful. We have yet to throw a touchdown pass to a WR and this was our 8th game of the season. Yeah I would agree that one of us simply doesn't understand and it ain't me.

[Aston]

Yeah it sure is always good to win I don't deny that. But understanding why we are a mediocre team cannot be done by just looking at the score. A different example would be like saying "Yeah, the engine in my car is making this terrible noise but I just turn up the radio and as long as I can't hear it everything is OK" And this too is also a ridiculous statement.

And understanding the issues of our offense can't be done just looking at the number of run vs. pass plays without taking into consideration the effectiveness of those plays!! Yardage doens't matter? Effectiveness doesn't matter?

Do you think the Patriots fans start threads complaining about not being balanced? No. You know why? What they do works. What we did today worked. So please, Eeyore, cheer up. We won.

[cozmikbuffalo]

And understanding the issues of our offense can't be done just looking at the number of run vs. pass plays without taking into consideration the effectiveness of those plays!! Yardage doens't matter? Effectiveness doesn't matter?

Do you think the Patriots fans start threads complaining about not being balanced? No. You know why? What they do works. What we did today worked. So please, Eeyore, cheer up. We won.

Did you bother to read the thread?? Obviously not because NOWHERE did I ever say anything about yardage dude. NOWHERE. This thread is simply about how easy it is for our opponents and non coaches ( me ) to predict what will happen and when. And I don't want to hear that it doesn't matter if they know what we are going to do as long as we execute because that is a ludicrous arguement. Of course it matters that we become unpredictable. And Yeah we won, by the fricking skin of our teeth and with 300 yards rushing. If you don't see this as a problem than maybe you should take a good look at yourself in the mirror buddy.

[mitchie]

It still amazes me just how few three receiver sets we run. We almost never spread the field and I think it's the biggest reason we have such a hard time generating big plays and scoring points.

can you even name three receivers to run it. we have one receiver. he's great but he's also a skinny midget with a bum leg.

[Om]

I am beginning to wonder if you will ever understand at all or maybe you are simply being sarcasticly impervious to what it is that I am saying to you.

First of all I never calculated any yardage, I answered you with a ball park guess since this thread was NEVER ABOUT YARDAGE. For the last time OM, for the love of mike why don't you read the thread and than you should understand that it was not me bringing up yardage. It was you and I tried to answer your question with a guess, simple as that. Where you come up with this idea that it is my intention to discuss yardage is plain funky, goofy and once again"Off Topic".

Can I make myself any clearer than that?? Criminee pal give me a break here.

I am sorry that I tried to answer your question at all at this point. I should have pointed out that you were off topic then and perhaps we could have avoided this whole ugly episode. Or not depending on how much of a cynic you might be.

You really ought to stop.

But since you don't seem to know when ... again, what you are saying is that in considering the teams' run/pass ratio and criticizing them for opting to run more than pass heavily in this game,

1) the quantifiable success they had (yardage, average) is not relevant

2) that they were going against a ****ty run defense is not relevant

3) that the fact the strategy worked is not relevant

Given the depth of that thesis, then okay, I guess I'm done here. Looking for a little more depth. I apparently erred in thinking you might have been interested in pursuing some as well.

[chesapeakehog]

They kept running the ball because it was WORKING. If it's so predictable, the Jets would've stopped it. Knowing a play is coming is all fine and dandy, but now you have to stop it, and the Jets couldn't.

I agree with you on this One Shot if you can't stop the run then keep running it.

Who cares about the average on first downs or run-pass ratio. It was working so we stuck with it.

[nneece]

They kept running the ball because it was WORKING. If it's so predictable, the Jets would've stopped it. Knowing a play is coming is all fine and dandy, but now you have to stop it, and the Jets couldn't.

You've got to mix some play action passes in. Maybe the Jets couldn't stop it but most teams we've played this season have stopped the run.

[Om]

You've got to mix some play action passes in. Maybe the Jets couldn't stop it but most teams we've played this season have stopped the run.

Absolutely.

The broader question of how aggressive or balanced the O is or isn't on 1st down is still out there, but in this thread we've been talking specifically about the play selection today, in this game, against this opponent.

That's what a few of us have been trying to get at.

[cozmikbuffalo]

You really ought to stop.

But since you don't seem to know when ... again, what you are saying is that in considering the teams' run/pass ratio and criticizing them for opting to run more than pass heavily in this game,

1) the quantifiable success they had (yardage, average) is not relevant

2) that they were going against a ****ty run defense is not relevant

3) that the fact the strategy worked is not relevant

Given the depth of that thesis, then okay, I guess I'm done here. Looking for a little more depth. I apparently erred in thinking you might have been interested in pursuing some as well.

Stop?? I started this thread buddy. And you wish to invoke details to the comment that never existed in the first place. You really can't be this obtuse can you??

[riggins4452]

About bleepin time! RUN THE ROCK;)(run CP)!!!!

[Dan T.]

Stop?? I started this thread buddy. And you wish to invoke details to the comment that never existed in the first place. You really can't be this obtuse can you??

Friend, you're embarrassing yourself. I suggest taking a break. You're not thinking clearly, and it's showing.

[Om]

Stop?? I started this thread buddy. And you wish to invoke details to the comment that never existed in the first place. You really can't be this obtuse can you??

That's around a half dozen straight replies you've made complaining about me supposedly picking on you and/or not understanding your deeply penetrating intellectual thread. How about answering the simple question I keep posing to you instead.

Is the quantifiable success of the one thing your thread was created to criticize relevant or not?