Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

WT: One blitz too many for Redskins


RichmondRedskin88

Recommended Posts

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/sep/27/one-blitz-too-many/

Regardless of whether you believe DeAngelo Hall’s profane rant following the Washington Redskins‘ 18-16 loss to Dallas on Monday night was an acceptable manifestation of passion or an unprofessional outburst, perhaps he was right about one thing.

Hall fumed after Cowboys receiver Dez Bryant set up the game-winning field goal by converting an improbable third-and-21 on a 30-yard gain with 2 minutes, 20 seconds remaining and the Redskins protecting a one-point lead.

The Redskins, for the third straight play, showed an eight-man front with defensive backs isolated on receivers and no safety help. The defense known as Cover Zero can be high-risk, high-reward. Washington experienced both sides of that at different points, but it was burned on the third consecutive play it ran it on Dallas’ final drive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and if they backed off and Romo sits to pee connects on a 15 yard pass and then converts the 4th and 6, EVERYONE would whine why didn't Haslett blitz again to force Romo sits to pee into a quick throw or an up for grabs play like before.

At best, the execution of the blitz could be critiqued and the players on the field blamed (or credit the Cowboys), but the call and philosophy was sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the way Haslett called the game.... The 3rd and 21 call to me was his only questionable call. But if you listin to what the player have to say about it, they are saying the play wasnt exicuted correctly, and that they should have gotten to Romo sits to pee..... But there is nothing they can do about it now but move on, so thats what I am gonna do as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was pretty angry too. I thought we should have laid a couple of guys back just to cover. We've been burned too many times over the last 40 years I've watched the Skins-Cowboys games. They just have an uncanny knack to do the miraculous in those situations. Even the ball seems to always bounce right for the Girls.

In hindsight however, I'm not as miffed as I was Monday night. That's one of those "heroes, or the goats" type deals. We could have just as easily been the heroes. Time to move on to the Lams ... We have a chance to annihilate the Girls again. later this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That 8 man front/blitz was responsible for the Landry FF & the Barnes INT... The Skins have been great defensively on 3rd all year. Haslett was over aggressive & can you blame him with Romo sits to pee ailing all game ? They left a TE back & picked up the blitz, giving Romo sits to pee enough time to roll right & find Bryant. I have no problem with Haslett playing the % and going with an all out blitz that had worked all night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goddamn it, can you people not figure it out? The Cowboys kept guys in to block because they KNEW the blitz was coming. They MADE THE ADJUSTMENT and thus they protected everything. Romo sits to pee had tons of time to make the big play.

3 times in a row. Do you even call the same play three times in a row in Madden? No. And it doesn't have to be prevent. It could be a cover 2, Cover 1, zone blitz, one-side overload blitz.

---------- Post added September-28th-2011 at 08:50 PM ----------

That 8 man front/blitz was responsible for the Landry FF & the Barnes INT... The Skins have been great defensively on 3rd all year. Haslett was over aggressive & can you blame him with Romo sits to pee ailing all game ? They left a TE back & picked up the blitz, giving Romo sits to pee enough time to roll right & find Bryant. I have no problem with Haslett playing the % and going with an all out blitz that had worked all night.

No, you're not playing the percentages correct. Learn something about conditional probabitiliy. The probability of A given B is not necessarily the same as the probability of A. P(success|play is known by the opponent) is FAR lower than the P(success|play is not known by the opponent).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goddamn it, can you people not figure it out? The Cowboys kept guys in to block because they KNEW the blitz was coming. They MADE THE ADJUSTMENT and thus they protected everything. Romo sits to pee had tons of time to make the big play.

3 times in a row. Do you even call the same play three times in a row in Madden? No. And it doesn't have to be prevent. It could be a cover 2, Cover 1, zone blitz, one-side overload blitz.

---------- Post added September-28th-2011 at 08:50 PM ----------

No, you're not playing the percentages correct. Learn something about conditional probabitiliy. The probability of A given B is not necessarily the same as the probability of A. P(success|play is known by the opponent) is FAR lower than the P(success|play is not known by the opponent).

Would you like some cheese with that whine ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and if they backed off and Romo sits to pee connects on a 15 yard pass and then converts the 4th and 6, EVERYONE would whine why didn't Haslett blitz again to force Romo sits to pee into a quick throw or an up for grabs play like before.

At best, the execution of the blitz could be critiqued and the players on the field blamed (or credit the Cowboys), but the call and philosophy was sound.

This can't be, someone that can think clearly and analyze things..... *bows down*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and if they backed off and Romo sits to pee connects on a 15 yard pass and then converts the 4th and 6, EVERYONE would whine why didn't Haslett blitz again to force Romo sits to pee into a quick throw or an up for grabs play like before.

At best, the execution of the blitz could be critiqued and the players on the field blamed (or credit the Cowboys), but the call and philosophy was sound.

Agree wit this! And if the execution was there, he'd been a hero.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will take Haslett's over-agressiveness over Greg Blache's ultra-superconservative defenses any day of the week.

Yea, I agree with this.. I was also miffed at the call (at the time) but remembering back to all those damn prevent defense situations just begging for a blitz.. Cant blame Has for that one.. Took the gamble and lost.. Stuff happens..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea, I agree with this.. I was also miffed at the call (at the time) but remembering back to all those damn prevent defense situations just begging for a blitz.. Cant blame Has for that one.. Took the gamble and lost.. Stuff happens..

Blache also employed idoitic blitz packages that were easy to read. Haslett's play is similar to the 48 yard screen pass to Derrick Ward in 2008 where a cover-0 was beat. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you play poker and show your hand, how likely is it you're going to win? Grasp that concept first.

Football isn't poker. However, grasp this concept first. If you show your hand in Poker you win or lose & if you show your hand in football you win or lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Football isn't poker. However, grasp this concept first. If you show your hand in Poker you win or lose & if you show your hand in football you win or lose.

In the sense that you ask the dealer to deal you your hand face-up while everyone else has their hand hidden.

Oh, how about this. Osama tells everyone that all the logsitics in how he's going to attack some buildings. It's much easier to stop. Or is it not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the sense that you ask the dealer to deal you your hand face-up while everyone else has their hand hidden.

Oh, how about this. Osama tells everyone that all the logsitics in how he's going to attack some buildings. It's much easier to stop. Or is it not?

Your theory is flawed because Dallas saw them lining up in the 8 man front numerous times & couldn't do much of anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your theory is flawed because Dallas saw them lining up in the 8 man front numerous times & couldn't do much of anything.

That's because they employed the wrong strategy, their center screwed the pooch, they failed to execute, or their coordinator was thinking that we would call something else. The Cowboys finally employed the correct one on the third and 21 and the players didn't screw up. The blitz pickup was almost perfect and Romo sits to pee just had to roll to the right in order to make sure Fletch could not get there in time. The two prior play calls tipped off the Dallas QB and coaches on which protection scheme to use. They would have to be complete retards to not have at least a basic understanding of the blitz being sent to them and figure out someway to neutralize the play.

Actually, on the play with the bad snap from Costa, the Cowboys did a fairly good job picking up the rushers on that play as well. Kerrigan was the only one even near Romo sits to pee. No one else was there.

Football is a game where every strategy is breakable if you put the players in the correct positions. The point is that the consecutive identical playcalls is what led to the ultimate failure of the 3rd and 21 play, not simply that they've seen the play plenty of times. The reason is simple, the playcaller needs to mainly concern himself with beating that play or a fake of that play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haslett added unnecessary risk by blitzing. It was a bad call regardless of the outcome because:

Haslett's blitz made an interception that we didn't need more likely; it made the sack which we didn't need more likely; but it also made the first down attempt, which was crucial, more likely to succeed.

The outcome NEVER determines whether it was a good call or a bad one. A good call increases the probability of winning. A bad call diminishes the probability of winning. Haslett's call diminished our chances of winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and if they backed off and Romo sits to pee connects on a 15 yard pass and then converts the 4th and 6, EVERYONE would whine why didn't Haslett blitz again to force Romo sits to pee into a quick throw or an up for grabs play like before.

.

Backed Downed? Nobody would have had a problem with them blitzing both linebackers.

And this will be the only game against the cowpokes that we will get away with blitzing 8 numerous times since it is probable the other two starting WRs are going to play the game at Fed Ex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and if they backed off and Romo sits to pee connects on a 15 yard pass and then converts the 4th and 6, EVERYONE would whine why didn't Haslett blitz again to force Romo sits to pee into a quick throw or an up for grabs play like before.

At best, the execution of the blitz could be critiqued and the players on the field blamed (or credit the Cowboys), but the call and philosophy was sound.

No because we probably would have blitzed. Why would you blitz 8 freakin people though? Doesnt make any sense. Even professional madden players (like myself) wouldnt do that ****

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The facts remain the same here. No defender beat the man in front of him and got to Homo. Bryant made a move and got away from DHall and they finished the drive with a score. When we are ahead we give up drives and when we are behind we fail. The culture is changing but not overnight. The game was on the road and we played them till the final minute. We have a better team this year but will still lose games and be frustrated. Hell even New England lost on the road. There are only 3 undefeated teams left just 3 games into the season. Relax and HTTR !!!

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...