Redskins Raiders Post Game Assessments

[RandyHolt]

Just now, GhostofAlvinWalton said:

 

The 1985 Bears were ranked 7th in total yards on Offense...try again

 

 

Sure thing! Glad to help dig a deeper hole for myself after wins. Wouldn't you agree the number of plays they ran was off the charts, with a monster defense giving them the ball over and over (too lazy to look it up).  I would suggest yards per play would need to be reviewed.

 

Isn't this mostly what he was known for? Well, that and injuries.

 

 

[RandyHolt]

17 minutes ago, GhostofAlvinWalton said:

 

I was wondering if I was imagining that...it appeared to be a 4 down linemen and 3 LBs look all night.

 

 

In one of the other threads I saw that we were in the 3-4 all of 4 plays. I think we had 48 snaps on D. Sure, Oakland's personnel packages had some say in that.  But when a defense is only in a 3-4 less than 10% of the time, I question if we should even be called a hybrid.

 

All teams run nickel and dime yet that does not make them "hybrid". I feel confident in saying all teams change their fronts if even for a few plays a game. Maybe we will see KC with 1DL on Monday night to counter "The Thompson Effect". That does not change who they are nor what D they run. 

 

Common sense to me says the one we use most is what we should be called. Like in hockey on the road, you are forced to put out your line first. What do we put out? The modern nickel - I call it the 2-4-5. It gets our best 11 on the field. 

[GhostofAlvinWalton]

19 hours ago, skinny21 said:

Anyone else wanna weigh in on this?  Who played/looked worse - Kirk vs the Eagles or Carr vs the 'Skins?

 

If anyone actually watched both games it's pretty obvious that Kirk was wildly inaccurate (for him) and had a worse game due to his own issues (not due to outside influences - OL, WRs, etc). But both QBs did have those outside issues effect them and had bad games...I would say that Carr had less of a chance due to the Skins playing very good defense. I don't remember Carr leaving many plays on the field like Kirk did.

[RandyHolt]

21 hours ago, skinny21 said:

In an interview on 980 (IIRC) Nicholson said that they are interchangeable, but that Swearinger was playing in the box a bit more (than Nicholson)...  

 

I had meant to thank you for sharing this. I read in another thread that Nicholson has seized the SS job. I had thought he was playing almost free exclusively, because that is where I saw his big plays. And, Swearinger presumed at strong in his (monster hit on their punk RB). I predict Montae will be at FS for our first snap Monday. 

 

Swearinger certainly comes across as a strong to me but I am thrilled both can play both. Masking coverages always seems a priority to DCs and this certainly helps out Greg 'go get em' Manusky.

[Saeth29]

6 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Oakland as a team played terrible but David Carr was downright horrible.

 

I'll only jump in to add this:

 

My wife watched the game with me and she even said "It seems like the Raiders quarterback just doesn't care", and said that at least our guy always seems to be trying.  She also mentioned Carr has serial killer eyes, but that's another thread topic.

[GhostofAlvinWalton]

44 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

Sure thing! Glad to help dig a deeper hole for myself after wins. Wouldn't you agree the number of plays they ran was off the charts, with a monster defense giving them the ball over and over (too lazy to look it up).  I would suggest yards per play would need to be reviewed.

 

Isn't this mostly what he was known for? Well, that and injuries.

 

 

 

First, yes McMahon is mostly remembered for the headband and seemingly always being injured...but he was a pretty good player in his day. Injuries really limited him and ruined his career. 

 

Now back to trying to throw dirt on you in your hole you keep digging...

 

Total plays they were 10th.

 

Yards per play they were 5th

 

Turnovers they were 25th of 28 teams back then.  Only had 31...29 (CIN) was the lowest in '85.

 

1st downs they were 6th

 

Total Rushing yards they were 1st by a decent margin over #2 (WAS)

 

Scoring Offense they were 2nd (avg 28.5 pts/g on offense)

 

 

The '85 Bears were a complete football team that had an unbelievable defense that overshadowed a top ten offense.  

 

P.S. I live in Chicago now and I hear about the '85 Bears on a regular basis...you know...because the Bears have basically stunk ever since then (Although most here think the "86 Bears defense was better but the offense wasn't nearly as good as '85). 

 

 

[lavar1156]

NFL.com has us at like #7 in their power rankings. I was a little surprised.

[RandyHolt]

5 minutes ago, GhostofAlvinWalton said:

The '85 Bears were a complete football team that had an unbelievable defense that overshadowed a top ten offense.  

 

Nice job digging up the stats, and throwing the dirt on me in my hole! Hey we are all on the same team here. 

 

You are right.  Walter Payton is one of the greatest of all time and had a big hand in that offense. Don't forget about Matt 'The Original Suh' Suhey! Hilgenberg, BORTZ!

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/chi/1985_roster.htm

 

 

[TouchdownSkin]

On 9/26/2017 at 11:51 AM, skinny21 said:

It's funny that I find myself thinking Manusky called a hell of a game, and 'all he did' was let his guys play.  No blitzes all game.  He just challenged his guys and they embraced it.  A Gibbsian 'super smart', minimalist game plan.  

 

All of that said, I don't know how much he mixed up coverages to throw Carr off, but (continuing the debate above) I never felt that Carr looked confused or lost... just frustrated that almost nothing worked.  I don't recall seeing many plays where I thought he missed open guys, threw the ball poorly or looked particularly rattled.  Defense just shut it all down.  

 

It's like challenging them to just beat their man....which they did.  How many times was Carr's OL pushed into him...quite a bit.  Whatever it was, it worked and I loved seeing them swarm to the ball, not wait for it to come to them.  I loathe anything resembling prevent defense.

[Burgold]

16 minutes ago, lavar1156 said:

NFL.com has us at like #7 in their power rankings. I was a little surprised.

That rating seems based on two things:

1) the belief that the Raiders are an elite team... and we crushed them. 

2) The Eagles are actually a pretty good team and so our loss to the wasn't that bad a thing. 

 

We'll get a more comprehensive answer after KC, but I don't know how long it'll take before we know what this team's about. 

 

[NickyJ]

49 minutes ago, Saeth29 said:

I'll only jump in to add this:

 

My wife watched the game with me and she even said "It seems like the Raiders quarterback just doesn't care", and said that at least our guy always seems to be trying.  She also mentioned Carr has serial killer eyes, but that's another thread topic.

As bad as Carr looked, "doesn't care" isn't the description I'd give him. "Overwhelmingly frustrated" would be closer to the mark. When his jaw wasn't sagging in disbelief at how closely we covered his receivers, he was giving Shanny death-glares at the receivers that dropped the rest.

[Art]

On 9/26/2017 at 2:19 PM, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

You realize I could make the exact same argument, with specifics as well, about Carr's game too right? But why bother?  The facts show that I am correct here but by all means don't ever let facts get in the way of a good rant.  

 

 

Except...you couldn't.   You couldn't say Carr threw high or wild or missed open guys.   I've watched the coaches film for it too.   There wasn't much (two plays) where he had guys I'd probably have thrown to instead of who he did.   Against us at least.   His first interception was a touchdown but for the fact Nicholson came over and made a play.   His second interception was a perfect ball but our defensive player made a play.   Kirk's crushing interception against the Eagles was KIRK making a bad throw.   There IS a difference.   It's not a strong throw into coverage which MAY be a bad decision.   It was a TERRIBLE throw into bad coverage, which is not something professional QBs do much.   Carr didn't once against us.

 

The facts do not show you are "correct".   The facts are Carr didn't throw one terrible ball against us.   One that was so wild as to be impossible to even conceive of being caught.   Cousins threw 10 of those against the Eagles.   Go watch.   That's a HUGE difference.

[Warhead36]

7 hours ago, Burgold said:

That rating seems based on two things:

1) the belief that the Raiders are an elite team... and we crushed them. 

2) The Eagles are actually a pretty good team and so our loss to the wasn't that bad a thing. 

 

We'll get a more comprehensive answer after KC, but I don't know how long it'll take before we know what this team's about. 

 

I also think the Rams are pretty good. They have a nice offensive trio in Goff, Gurley, and Watkins, an improved OL, and an elite DL.

[Bigmuss1]

Rewatched the Sunday night me, if the Raiders didn't have the best punter in the league game/score would have been a lot more lopsided. 

[Darth Tater]

2 hours ago, Art said:

 

Except...you couldn't.   You couldn't say Carr threw high or wild or missed open guys.   I've watched the coaches film for it too.   There wasn't much (two plays) where he had guys I'd probably have thrown to instead of who he did.   Against us at least.   His first interception was a touchdown but for the fact Nicholson came over and made a play.   His second interception was a perfect ball but our defensive player made a play.   Kirk's crushing interception against the Eagles was KIRK making a bad throw.   There IS a difference.   It's not a strong throw into coverage which MAY be a bad decision.   It was a TERRIBLE throw into bad coverage, which is not something professional QBs do much.   Carr didn't once against us.

 

The facts do not show you are "correct".   The facts are Carr didn't throw one terrible ball against us.   One that was so wild as to be impossible to even conceive of being caught.   Cousins threw 10 of those against the Eagles.   Go watch.   That's a HUGE difference.

Have to agree.  If Kirk's interception against the Eagles had been accurate, that was 6.

 

Thing about the Eagles game that is scary is that we were that bad throw and a missed tackle away from winning that one 24-15 (well, they probably have to go for the TD on that last FG.  Conversely, if Montrae doesn't make that play, the Raiders are up 7-0 and the whole feel of the game might have changed.  The Iggs also picked up a key 24 yard gain off a short pass while the Raiders were just not getting any YAC.  I think the difference between a good defense and a bad one is usually just the good ones make plays.

[Darrell Green Fan]

11 hours ago, Art said:

 

Except...you couldn't.   You couldn't say Carr threw high or wild or missed open guys.   I've watched the coaches film for it too.   There wasn't much (two plays) where he had guys I'd probably have thrown to instead of who he did.   Against us at least.   His first interception was a touchdown but for the fact Nicholson came over and made a play.   His second interception was a perfect ball but our defensive player made a play.   Kirk's crushing interception against the Eagles was KIRK making a bad throw.   There IS a difference.   It's not a strong throw into coverage which MAY be a bad decision.   It was a TERRIBLE throw into bad coverage, which is not something professional QBs do much.   Carr didn't once against us.

 

The facts do not show you are "correct".   The facts are Carr didn't throw one terrible ball against us.   One that was so wild as to be impossible to even conceive of being caught.   Cousins threw 10 of those against the Eagles.   Go watch.   That's a HUGE difference.

 

As I said I'm really done with this topic. I'll close by addressing all of these points. Again.  As I said  Nicholson did not "come out of nowhere"  He correctly read the play and adjusted however when the camera showed the ball (a split second after it was released) Nicholson was no more than 7 yards away.  He did not cover 20 yards like Darrell Green.  On a pass that high that was simply throwing into coverage. His second throw was right into coverage as well, alll Fuller did was turn around and the ball was right there.  Good coverage but a poor decision.  Kirk's crushing interception came with an Eagles player right in his face.  Why are posters only crediting the Redskins defense and not giving Philly any credit for forcing Kirk's poor play?  That is complete nonsense.   

 

The facts do show I am right.  The ratings were developed by people far smarter than you and I.  And the numbers are not close, that should end the discussion right there.

 

.  Missing a guy by 3 feet or throwing it too high so it bounces off his finger tips is the same thing guys, a miss is a miss but you somehow want to grade the bad passes.  A bad pass is a bad pass and throwing behind the runner on a swing pass on third down, giving him no chance, is no different than missing an open receiver by a yard.  . 

 

Derek Carr failed to move his team the entire night. When the game was slipping away in the 3rd quarter 2 straight poor passes on 3rd down killed their chance at a comeback.. By the 4th quarter down 3 scores they threw in the towel and threw dump offs, that is nothing short of embarrassing. 

[Art]

5 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

As I said I'm really done with this topic. I'll close by addressing all of these points. Again.  As I said  Nicholson did not "come out of nowhere"  He correctly read the play and adjusted however when the camera showed the ball (a split second after it was released) Nicholson was no more than 7 yards away.  He did not cover 20 yards like Darrell Green.  On a pass that high that was simply throwing into coverage. His second throw was right into coverage as well, alll Fuller did was turn around and the ball was right there.  Good coverage but a poor decision.  Kirk's crushing interception came with an Eagles player right in his face.  Why are posters only crediting the Redskins defense and not giving Philly any credit for forcing Kirk's poor play?  That is complete nonsense.   

 

The facts do show I am right.  The ratings were developed by people far smarter than you and I.  And the numbers are not close, that should end the discussion right there.

 

.  Missing a guy by 3 feet or throwing it too high so it bounces off his finger tips is the same thing guys, a miss is a miss but you somehow want to grade the bad passes.  A bad pass is a bad pass and throwing behind the runner on a swing pass on third down, giving him no chance, is no different than missing an open receiver by a yard.  . 

 

Derek Carr failed to move his team the entire night. When the game was slipping away in the 3rd quarter 2 straight poor passes on 3rd down killed their chance at a comeback.. By the 4th quarter down 3 scores they threw in the towel and threw dump offs, that is nothing short of embarrassing. 

So, again, and this shouldn't be hard for you.

 

Do you have EYES.

 

No one said Montae came out of no where.   He made a good play on a ball that, if not for his play, is a touchdown.   Is that a bad decision by Carr?  Maybe.   Was the touchdown from Cousins to Doctson a bad decision?   Maybe.   In both cases it worked out in our favor.   That ball is perfectly thrown.   That doesn't mean it had the arc you seem to need, or the velocity.   It means that receiver catches the ball if no one gets in the way.   THAT is where Carr did demonstrably better than Cousins against Philly.

 

Carr didn't throw one erratic pass.   Not one.   Kirk missed throws almost by the dozen against Philly.

 

Philly's defense was less stiff than ours against the Raiders, which is not a slight on Philly as few defenses perform as well as ours did against the Raiders, including OUR OWN almost all of the time.   Is there ANY question that statistically Cousins had a better game against Philly than Carr did against us?   Nope.   No one has suggested otherwise.   The suggestion, one you have yet to actually speak to, is Cousins made terrible throws, repeatedly, against Philly.   Not bad decisions.   Terrible throws.    THAT is where Carr did visually and clearly better than Cousins AND most QBs do.   Cousins has weird starts to his seasons.

 

But, if Carr is our QB against Philly, we win.   If the sole judgment is actual proximity of ball to receiver hands.    

[Darrell Green Fan]

4 hours ago, Art said:

So, again, and this shouldn't be hard for you.

 

Do you have EYES.

 

No one said Montae came out of no where.   He made a good play on a ball that, if not for his play, is a touchdown.   Is that a bad decision by Carr?  Maybe.   Was the touchdown from Cousins to Doctson a bad decision?   Maybe.   In both cases it worked out in our favor.   That ball is perfectly thrown.   That doesn't mean it had the arc you seem to need, or the velocity.   It means that receiver catches the ball if no one gets in the way.   THAT is where Carr did demonstrably better than Cousins against Philly.

 

Carr didn't throw one erratic pass.   Not one.   Kirk missed throws almost by the dozen against Philly.

 

Philly's defense was less stiff than ours against the Raiders, which is not a slight on Philly as few defenses perform as well as ours did against the Raiders, including OUR OWN almost all of the time.   Is there ANY question that statistically Cousins had a better game against Philly than Carr did against us?   Nope.   No one has suggested otherwise.   The suggestion, one you have yet to actually speak to, is Cousins made terrible throws, repeatedly, against Philly.   Not bad decisions.   Terrible throws.    THAT is where Carr did visually and clearly better than Cousins AND most QBs do.   Cousins has weird starts to his seasons.

 

But, if Carr is our QB against Philly, we win.   If the sole judgment is actual proximity of ball to receiver hands.    

 

Jeez let it go already.  I have no interest in debating this anymore, especially with a poster so salty.  And yes using caps to ask if I have EYES is salty.

 

I see it differently and the numbers back my position. Again the proximity of the misses is kind of weird way to look at it.  An incompletion is an incompletion.  If you see it differently that's fine.  We'll just disagree.  .   

[UKskins]

Just to add something else into the mix - Gruden confirmed Zach Brown was making the calls against Oakland according to Burgundy Blog. Lock him up - the dude is awesome and about to turn 28. He got some years left in the tank. First legit ILB we've had since Fletch and the dude has London's smarts as well. He is a massive piece of the future of this defense.

 

Burgundy Blog‏Verified account @BurgundyBlog

Following

More

Gruden confirmed ZBrown was making the calls in W3. Pay that man.

[Fresh8686]

Did anyone else notice that on Thompsons big 3rd and 19 run in the third quarter they had Trent at guard and Nsekehe at left tackle? I loved that the coaches were making moves like that and it paid off. 

[Tarpon75]

On 28/09/2017 at 7:33 PM, Fresh8686 said:

Did anyone else notice that on Thompsons big 3rd and 19 run in the third quarter they had Trent at guard and Nsekehe at left tackle? I loved that the coaches were making moves like that and it paid off. 

 They did that because Lauvo had to go out for a few plays when he was banged up. Nsekehe  got injured during that time.

[Die Hard]

On 9/27/2017 at 8:04 PM, Bigmuss1 said:

Rewatched the Sunday night me, if the Raiders didn't have the best punter in the league game/score would have been a lot more lopsided. 

 

Seriously. That was the most impressive performance of punting I've ever witnessed. Our returners were packpeddling about 10-15 yards on every attempt.

 

[redskinss]

On 9/28/2017 at 7:33 PM, Fresh8686 said:

Did anyone else notice that on Thompsons big 3rd and 19 run in the third quarter they had Trent at guard and Nsekehe at left tackle? I loved that the coaches were making moves like that and it paid off. 

Yes,  I love that we can shift our left tackle to guard and still run a screen that sends most of the line downfield to block. 

That's versatility at it's best.