Hubbs Posted October 18, 2010 Author Share Posted October 18, 2010 The Skins D is hitting harder than ever. NO ONE wants to play them. Receivers are scared to lay out. When he has the personnel he needs, Haslett will prove you wrong. Do I really have to bring up that this is a new scheme, we're only 6 games into the season and that the players on this team are what he was dealt?Dude... Firing is a bit knee-jerk for my taste.But he needs to be called on the carpet for waiting until the Colts 3rd to last series to play press-man coverage across the board. Criminally dumb mistake. The flip side we dropped 4 picks. Ron Lynn Jr took two double digit sack players and neutered them.Isn't it the job of a coach to scheme to his player's strengths? Who in their right mind takes Andre Carter's hand out of the dirt and stands him up or forces him to play coverage? Haslett was out of the league for a reason. You would be brain dead to fire any coach this early in the season. Our defense gave us the chance to win it, we came up short. On 3rd and 1 we had no business calling a pitch out sweep when we were hammering off tackle all night. That 1st down could have changed the game but too late now. No, Jim called a good game tonight. Manning runs the hurry up only against the best defenses. Haslett should be fine as long he stay consistent and as long he has these players playing for him. I wonder how many people will post without reading the OP. As we have seen before it doesn't matter who get's knocked out cause the backups tear us up too. No one except the 31 other teams in the league that are ranked above the skins in terms of defense.oops, did I bring stats into this? My bad, I forgot we were drinking the 3-3 flavoraid: there is nothing wrong with the D, they dominate, teams are scared of them, they're just unlucky. During every game. During every series. On every down... Noone wants to read a bunch of crying that is why skipped over what you said and just responded to the title of the thread...FAIL on your part... Yes, FAIL on my part. The OP obviously doesn't matter in any thread. People should respond based on the title and the title alone. Oh wait.... maybe looking up what "A Modest Proposal" means in the entire ****ing English language s important because it shows that reading the proposal is important. Maybe you should have done that. Plenty of morons. Indeed ... indeed. READ THE POST.HTTR LOL. I almost did until I read your post. Haha, nice. This will be a good test to see who reads and who doesn't. I was about to jump all over you when I read the topic title. Good post, but too bad everyone will still have the same kneejerk reactions week after week. Yes, the people who didn't read the OP are stupid. Apparently they're numerous as well. I can't wait to see the replies to the replies that say, "Wow, we suck, we couldn't beat the Colts!" Those replies will be epic. And they will be for the simple reason that someone is already sarcastically mocking them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLredskin Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Just felt like this thread wasted a couple seconds of my life. I didn't come in here looking for a full blown argument. Just wanted to say what I had to say and leave... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Are you F-in kidding me starting this thread? You deserve to be banned just for being an idiot. How many times tonight were our players in the right position to make an interception only the player didnt come down with it..... I got news for you 4 times! How you can blame the coach is beyond me. So what if we gave up yards in past years we didnt give up yards but ended up 4-12 how can u say that is better? Starting a thgread like this only shows u know jack about football. So many times tonight i thought the colts were gonna show up on this drive and start to blow us away only for our defense to give up 0 points. I"m sure u would love to go bakc to the Greg Blache defense who gave up minimal yards but allowed to colts to blow us out. EVen Peyton said earlier this week there isnt one defensive coach in the nfl who will trade you yards for points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan1523 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Well I am pretty bummed about the loss, but I gotta say this thread is making me feel better. My apologies, but I am having a good laugh at some of you right now. People are astonishingly ignorant. Maybe it's the alcohol? Lol, this is kind of funny. Don't drink and post people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x96bryan10 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Read the OP. OK I mised the fact that this may be a joke thread but im pretty sure in the rules it says something about labeling the title of your thread correctly and accurately for other people to respond to Not my fault the OP decided to break the rules. 8. Please use descriptive and accurate topic titles for your thread. Adherence to this rule assists visitors in utilizing discretion when selecting content to read. It serves to notify members if a particular topic has already been posted and discussed and potentially prevents multiple threads on the exact same topic. Be respectful of the fact that some people come to ExtremeSkins explicitly for latest Redskins news and content, without the editorializing of titles by members. We are having a preponderance of threads being started, particularly in the Stadium forum, where a title of 2 to 3 non-descriptive words is used. This shows a lack of courtesy to your fellow members. With an ever-increasing number of new threads every day, and an expanding member base, members become more selective about which threads to open and spend their time reading, and which ones to bypass. They cannot do that if the thread titles are 'Guess what?', 'Hey, I just noticed...', or 'WTF!' You are also creating extra work for the Staff who, instead of just merging redundant, repetitive threads based on accurate titles, now has to open each one up and try and figure out where it belongs. So, regardless of the forum, if your thread title is simply "Santana Moss" or any other person's name and nothing else, you may find yourself in the No New Threads group. In all our forums, we expect accurate and clear descriptions of your topic in your title. Apparently i forgot that our fan base is made up of the most saracstic pricks you can imagine. GIve me one good reason to satrt a thread like that only to totally refute yourself in the post. Attention Whore Alert. 9. False posts or misleading subject titles are prohibited. Deception at the expense of the audience devalues the medium and the content it provides. Violation of this rule is regarded as a serious offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins_Fan82 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Manning was only touched ONCE during the game (the strip). we got NO hits on Peyton. Was it a good idea to sit Haynesworth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Manning was only touched ONCE during the game (the strip). we got NO hits on Peyton. Was it a good idea to sit Haynesworth? In retrospect he probably would have passed out trying to keep up with Manning's offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadKarma Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Haslett is a below average coach, he will be replaced in the offseason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fullnelson9999 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 OK I mised the fact that this may be a joke thread but im pretty sure in the rules it says something about labeling the title of your thread correctly and accurately for other people to respond to Not my fault the OP decided to break the rules.8. Please use descriptive and accurate topic titles for your thread. Adherence to this rule assists visitors in utilizing discretion when selecting content to read. It serves to notify members if a particular topic has already been posted and discussed and potentially prevents multiple threads on the exact same topic. Be respectful of the fact that some people come to ExtremeSkins explicitly for latest Redskins news and content, without the editorializing of titles by members. We are having a preponderance of threads being started, particularly in the Stadium forum, where a title of 2 to 3 non-descriptive words is used. This shows a lack of courtesy to your fellow members. With an ever-increasing number of new threads every day, and an expanding member base, members become more selective about which threads to open and spend their time reading, and which ones to bypass. They cannot do that if the thread titles are 'Guess what?', 'Hey, I just noticed...', or 'WTF!' You are also creating extra work for the Staff who, instead of just merging redundant, repetitive threads based on accurate titles, now has to open each one up and try and figure out where it belongs. So, regardless of the forum, if your thread title is simply "Santana Moss" or any other person's name and nothing else, you may find yourself in the No New Threads group. In all our forums, we expect accurate and clear descriptions of your topic in your title. All it takes is a little bit of reading. No rules broken here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan1523 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 OK I mised the fact that this may be a joke thread but im pretty sure in the rules it says something about labeling the title of your thread correctly and accurately for other people to respond to Not my fault the OP decided to break the rules.8. Please use descriptive and accurate topic titles for your thread. Adherence to this rule assists visitors in utilizing discretion when selecting content to read. It serves to notify members if a particular topic has already been posted and discussed and potentially prevents multiple threads on the exact same topic. Be respectful of the fact that some people come to ExtremeSkins explicitly for latest Redskins news and content, without the editorializing of titles by members. We are having a preponderance of threads being started, particularly in the Stadium forum, where a title of 2 to 3 non-descriptive words is used. This shows a lack of courtesy to your fellow members. With an ever-increasing number of new threads every day, and an expanding member base, members become more selective about which threads to open and spend their time reading, and which ones to bypass. They cannot do that if the thread titles are 'Guess what?', 'Hey, I just noticed...', or 'WTF!' You are also creating extra work for the Staff who, instead of just merging redundant, repetitive threads based on accurate titles, now has to open each one up and try and figure out where it belongs. So, regardless of the forum, if your thread title is simply "Santana Moss" or any other person's name and nothing else, you may find yourself in the No New Threads group. In all our forums, we expect accurate and clear descriptions of your topic in your title. He didn't break the rules, Learn what a modest proposal is first before you starting blindingly posting in topics, and quoting rules he did not break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hatethe cowboys Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Noone wants to read a bunch of crying that is why skipped over what you said and just responded to the title of the thread...FAIL on your part... It's not ridiculous to expect people to read the original post..gotta find out what the poster is actually saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalhead Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 I wonder how many people will post without reading the OP. That's what I was thinking too. We all knew going in that we did not have the personnel for a 3-4 upon his hire. I was under the impression that at least another full offseason was needed to see it's true effect. So far we've only focused on glaring weaknesses. What I don't understand is, if we are rebuilding and implementing new philosophies on both sides of the ball, then why in the world are we fielding the oldest team in the league?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horton_Predator48 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 dude, we got beat by PM. Please!!! He is the best QB ever! WE didn't give the game away. enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLredskin Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 It's not ridiculous to expect people to read the original post..gotta find out what the poster is actually saying The title says he want Haslett gone...what else is there to read??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianm23 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 OK I mised the fact that this may be a joke thread but im pretty sure in the rules it says something about labeling the title of your thread correctly and accurately for other people to respond to Not my fault the OP decided to break the rules.8. Please use descriptive and accurate topic titles for your thread. Adherence to this rule assists visitors in utilizing discretion when selecting content to read. It serves to notify members if a particular topic has already been posted and discussed and potentially prevents multiple threads on the exact same topic. Be respectful of the fact that some people come to ExtremeSkins explicitly for latest Redskins news and content, without the editorializing of titles by members. Apparently i forgot that our fan base is made up of the most saracstic pricks you can imagine. GIve me one good reason to satrt a thread like that only to totally refute yourself in the post. Attention Whore Alert. Just stop dude. Just say...."my bad, I replied without reading your post" ....and be done with it. The thread title is fine and he's not broken any rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLredskin Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 It's not ridiculous to expect people to read the original post..gotta find out what the poster is actually saying The title says he want Haslett gone...what else is there to read??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x96bryan10 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Once again the rules dont make exceptions because this guy was trying for irony. It says to be accurate i your thread title. I really dont see how that can be mistaken, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fullnelson9999 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 The title says he want Haslett gone...what else is there to read??? This is mind-bottling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins55 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 OMG.. This is hilarious.. READ THE GOD FORSAKEN OP PEOPLE!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Colts double rushing yards against us. A team who never runs gashes us on the ground. That speaks volumes. If we want to be like Pittsburgh we're gonna have to go back and see how they play defense. Did anyone pick up on Collinsworth's comment about why we were getting run all over? He said we are standing up straight and getting easily bowled over. Other teams will see that and run all over us the rest of the season unless there is a change of method. We gave up nearly 500 yards and were still in the game. That shows we have heart, but our defense is getting eaten alive and will continue to do so as the year progresses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 What else is there to read??? The OP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 Hmmm. It seems several of the reactionary posts earlier in this thread have been edited. I understand why the posters would do this, but it will ruin the fun for others. At least some of the gems were quoted before being ninja edited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan133 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 On the subject of Hubb's post though, I thoroughly disagree. Jim Haslett is doing all sorts of stupid things with this 3-4. Full disclosure: I'm of the opinion that switching from the 4-3 to the 3-4 (for NO reason at all) was the worst decision in the Redskins organization in the last decade. Jim is sending people in on ineffective blitzes all game long. Secondly, the freaking zone defense is killing us. Absolutely killing us. Along the same lines, the corners are playing way too far off the line most of the time. What really killed us tonight though was our absolute inability to get a three and out. That three and out to give us the ball back at the two minute warning was literally a miracle. You have to couple all of this with the piss-poor play of the offense tonight, but to not criticize Haslett is insane, so is putting all of the blame on the players. Sure, dropped interceptions really hurt (especially 4 of them, I'm looking at you Rogers), but ultimately, you have to realize these essential facts: -we have pretty much the same defense personnel-wise that we've had for the last couple of years, give or take a few players. The defense has always been the bright spot of this team since about 2004. Switching from the 4-3 to the 3-4 was an unnecessary change for the sake of change. These players are not the sort of players needed for the 3-4. given that, why would we sacrifice a league top 10 already assembled 4-3 defense for a 3-4 defense that is last in the league statistically. All of you poo-pooing that are freaking retarded, of course it matters. There's a direct correlation between yards given up and the amount of points scored you morons. Sure, it may not be a difference of 14+ points, but I can tell you what, a three and out tonight, just one, could have been the difference between one of those scoring drives Indy had. I got further news, preventing just one of those drives would have made all of the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x96bryan10 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 The title says he want Haslett gone...what else is there to read??? Exactly like i said rule #8 pick the topic of your thread according to what your going to post. Dont pick a title then decide your going to do an complete 180 in your post i get what he was going for but dont bash me and other poeple because we thought this thread was bashing our DC. with a title like that what are you supposed to think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins55 Posted October 18, 2010 Share Posted October 18, 2010 The title says he want Haslett gone...what else is there to read??? He's being sarcastic!! He's playing the role of people who say that they want Haslett fired but in his post he names all the counter arguments. Are some of you really that slow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.