Brave Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Well, considering the way Kolb threw the ball the rest of the way after taking that hit, that play made a big difference, but not necessarily so much because of the clock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Weird I thought Gano's field goal won the game for the 'Skins...? Haha just kidding. However I do think this game shows why the NFL brand of football is a game of inches. If somehow Gano pushes that field goal wide, no one would be talking about how our offense put up almost 500 yards of offense. Or how our defense for second week in a row shut down the majority of would-be 3rd down conversions attempted by The Cardinals. Nope, it would be all about how bad Rex Grossman was in the first quarter, how awful D Hall is etc etc etc...... This era of the NFL is so week to week. Just cause you look good one week against one team, it doesn't mean much for the following week. Every game is it's own entity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsInFebruary Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 FACT: the added time as a result of the quick strike by the cardinals allowed the redskins to come back. case closed. ??? We wouldn't have needed the added time if they hadn't scored. Facepalm of the year.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskindan07 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 All's well that ends well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsInFebruary Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I thought the TD was disgusting myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted September 19, 2011 Author Share Posted September 19, 2011 ??? We wouldn't have needed the added time if they hadn't scored. Facepalm of the year.... but they did score. lol. i love when you guys are actually bringing up hypotheticals but the fact is that their score allow the redskins to drive the ball twice down the field in the 7:55 left on the clock after their score Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky52Mc Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 ??? We wouldn't have needed the added time if they hadn't scored. Facepalm of the year.... I see your argument here and I actually agree of course. You don't let them score, you take the ball back and you score, that's what football is. But he is right in that a fact remains here. The Redskins had enough time to score twice from that quick strike instead of having to wait for Arizona to finish their drive. You can't claim they would have killed clock, because they took a strike deep. They weren't looking for a field goal. This is actually a pointless thread all in all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SBboundbaby Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 pointless. i do this in madden all the time! lets me run up offensive yards. hummmmmm LOL sbb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 but they did score. lol. i love when you guys are actually bringing up hypotheticals but the fact is that their score allow the redskins to drive the ball twice down the field in the 7:55 left on the clock after their score ??...The whole premise of this thread is BASED on a hypothetical ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted September 19, 2011 Author Share Posted September 19, 2011 ??...The whole premise of this thread is BASED on a hypothetical ... how cali? that bomb still left 755 on the clock. lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zazzaro703 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 But if the Skins stop them and get the ball back with say 5-6 minutes... we are only down one point and have plenty of time? I see what you are saying by saying if they HAD to score, quick strike was the best way. But who says they HAD to score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsInFebruary Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 I guess the OP was trying to say it was better they score a TD quickly rather than after a long drive, which of course I'd agree with.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted September 20, 2011 Author Share Posted September 20, 2011 I guess the OP was trying to say it was better they score a TD quickly rather than after a long drive, which of course I'd agree with.... thats all i am trying to say silly lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsInFebruary Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 "if the redskins defense allows for the cardinals to march down the field and score the TD" Oops you did say that; my apologies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 how cali? that bomb still left 755 on the clock. lol. The hypothetical is that we wouldn't have had enough time to mount two scoring drives if the Cards had not scored quickly. That's not fact, that's simply another hypothetical, no different than the ones that were being ridiculed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.