Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Why did Deangelo Hall cut back on his INT return? (Video)


skinsdomination09

Recommended Posts

Sigh. Really? Okay. To answer you question,probably thought Flacco was going to cut him off before getting into the endzone.

I reeeaaally find that hard to believe. when Hall cuts back, he's already practically past Flacco AND he has a lead blocker. The fact that you're so sure that this was the reason is kinda hilarious to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha i screamed at the tv when he did that, as if it mattered (in fact better to give the offense some red zone). He was just trying to make a move even though he had a clear shot to the corner.

Is it possible he was trying to take a dive so the offense could have a possession? And then had to take it to the house after flacco's fail tackling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reeeaaally find that hard to believe. when Hall cuts back, he's already practically past Flacco AND he has a lead blocker. The fact that you're so sure that this was the reason is kinda hilarious to me.

If I was so sure,I wouldn't have said probably. With D-Hall,there's always a chance for something else. That you're so serious about something like this,(along with others),is hilarious to me. But,this is one reason why we call it Extreme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I was so sure,I wouldn't have said probably. With D-Hall,there's always a chance for something else. That you're so serious about something like this,(along with others),is hilarious to me. But,this is one reason why we call it Extreme.

you know what, screw D Hall for scoring a TD.

bring back carlos. at least he won't cut back after he intercepts the ball!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just watched this again, at about 0:24 Haslett looks pissed, glances at Shanny twice like "uh oh", Shanny looks mad too (although its hard to tell).

Possibly:

a. they are both mad at d hall

b. d hall was supposed to give the offense a possession

c. theyre mad about something we didnt notice

or some combination. I am fascinated by this now, I must know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just watched this again, at about 0:24 Haslett looks pissed, glances at Shanny twice like "uh oh", Shanny looks mad too (although its hard to tell).

Possibly:

a. they are both mad at d hall

b. d hall was supposed to give the offense a possession

c. theyre mad about something we didnt notice

or some combination. I am fascinated by this now, I must know.

I think it's pretty obvious what happened with all the evidence we've got.

1- DHall intercepts the ball, has a clear opening to the endzone that is obviously visible to him as it's in plain sight, decides to cutback for no apparent reason, almost gets tackled, but makes it there anyway.

2- Haslett and Shanny both look livid on the sideline, clearly angry about something.

3- DHall later confirms catching grief about cutting back from the coaches and players in an interview with Kelli Johnson right after the game. He mentions that the only reason he did it was because he wanted to "dance into the endzone, get my Prime Time on".

I'm not sure exactly what the question is here, or why this has been blown way out of proportion by people on both sides of this argument. Sure, DHall scored a TD and that is awesome, period, however, it's not mind-numbingly stupid for someone to question why he did it for no apparent reason, almost giving up an easy TD in the process. Those saying he's totally worthless because of it are extremists as are those calling everyone questioning it (or even calling it wrong, as it was and as confirmed by the entire Redskins sideline) foolish or incessant complainers.

I don't like anyone bashing any of our players, and yet, I could see why this thread was made as I was pretty angry when I saw DHall cutback for no apparent reason. It's not bashing, it's a legitimate gripe and most people "complaining" about it aren't saying anything about DHall overall, just that play.

If Grossman or Beck throw an ill-advised interception after playing solidly all game, is it ok for us to discuss that one play, question why they threw that ball and be frustrated with it? Or does that automatically mean we hate the guy and everything he's about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's look at the OP:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV8i4fEeqdg

This might be a stupid thread but i've been really wondering. He was outrunning everybody and had a cleared out path striaght to the end zone. He still got in but made himself work harder lol. I don't understand.

Anyone care to explain?

The guy in no way bashes DHall, only wonders what the heck he was thinking there since it was clearly a bad move. Yet, he gets a **** storm for even posing the question. Heck, the guy put an "lol" in there to make it light. Those who say he was making a big deal out of it are the ones making a big deal out of it.

I think this thread just needs to be closed. The bickering is mindless and has no justification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a legit question, apparently D-Hall himself answered it. It's easily understandable to comment since any big play and chance for points goes farther in this league and can be the difference between a playoff team and not.

As far as people blowing it out of proportion one way or another, or questioning people's football knowledge, enjoy it, this site has become just that, a place to comment on these things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The better question is why wasn't Flacco flagged for a horse collar on DHall. Is a horse collar not a horse collar if the ball carrier manages to get out of it and keep going, or is it merely because a QB can do pretty much whatever they want?

Probably should've been called but yeah, QB's can pretty much do whatever they want. If Flacco had been injured on the play maybe Hall would be deserving of a fine as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's pretty obvious what happened with all the evidence we've got.

1- DHall intercepts the ball, has a clear opening to the endzone that is obviously visible to him as it's in plain sight, decides to cutback for no apparent reason, almost gets tackled, but makes it there anyway.

2- Haslett and Shanny both look livid on the sideline, clearly angry about something.

3- DHall later confirms catching grief about cutting back from the coaches and players in an interview with Kelli Johnson right after the game. He mentions that the only reason he did it was because he wanted to "dance into the endzone, get my Prime Time on".

I'm not sure exactly what the question is here, or why this has been blown way out of proportion by people on both sides of this argument. Sure, DHall scored a TD and that is awesome, period, however, it's not mind-numbingly stupid for someone to question why he did it for no apparent reason, almost giving up an easy TD in the process. Those saying he's totally worthless because of it are extremists as are those calling everyone questioning it (or even calling it wrong, as it was and as confirmed by the entire Redskins sideline) foolish or incessant complainers.

I don't like anyone bashing any of our players, and yet, I could see why this thread was made as I was pretty angry when I saw DHall cutback for no apparent reason. It's not bashing, it's a legitimate gripe and most people "complaining" about it aren't saying anything about DHall overall, just that play.

If Grossman or Beck throw an ill-advised interception after playing solidly all game, is it ok for us to discuss that one play, question why they threw that ball and be frustrated with it? Or does that automatically mean we hate the guy and everything he's about?

It is "mind-numbingly stupid" that you and others go to the extent you have on a play that resulted in six.

You comparing a QB that makes a play that results in a negative outcome that gives the other team the ball to D hall's positive play (cutback or no cutback) is even more "mind-numbingly stupid."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that Hall cut back because he believed that he might not make it to the end zone even with the blocker. You and I have this view of the field that makes it look so easy but at field level it doesn't look that easy. So remember we might think that it was a stupid move but look at it from on the field view especially if you have played football before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you are correct

---------- Post added August-29th-2011 at 09:41 AM ----------

if you look, right after he catches the ball, he looks back and sees boldin there. i think he was thinking boldin was coming up from his left faster than he was, when, in reality, he had him beat.

you are correct

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He should have just run it straight in. Cutbacks are the move to make sometimes (Reggie Bush does this very well), but Hall didn't need to cutback. It nearly cost him a TD. Contrast that with Hightower's run. When he was running for the end zone, he just ran straight, which is what he should've done. No cutting back, putting your shoulder into the defender, or diving in necessary for that run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...