Salt for the Wound

[Guest Norv Turner]

To me, the key play in the Dallas game came in the Cowboy's series immediately following our tying TD. If memory serves, we had them in 3rd and short, maybe 3 or 4 to go. We stop them there, you have to think maybe our offense makes some more hay, maybe picks up another 3 or even 7, maybe gives Jimmy Raye and/or Banks the chutzpah to actually look Westbrook's way, maybe sets the whole team to finally believin' ... who knows.

Have to admit, at that moment I was fighting the instinct to let myself think we might actually pull the thing out.

So ... on said 3rd down and short, Carter pitches to Michael Wiley (Michael Wiley?), who proceeds to waltz around right end, where he find nothing but green grass and white lines ahead. The immortal Mr. Wiley gallops happily away on a 50-yard jaunt into Redskin territory, setting up what turned out be a FG. 3 points "only," perhaps, but from where I sit an immeasurably damaging blow to any momentum we had generated, as well as the state of mind on the sidelines.

The point of all this? Today, according to the Post, I find that the Redskins had 10 players on the field on that play.

Yup.

Not to put too fine a point on it ... but this is the kind of thing that causes people to end up posting as Norval the Clown, not to mention a pretty damn good example of the kind of folly that ends up causing a team to lose 9 straight games to a division rival.

I really wish I hadn't found out about this.

*

13 to go.

[TennesseeCarl]

Well, it depends on whether you're a half-empty or half-full guy. During the Clown's Reign, we'd have had too many men on the field, drawing a penalty. This squad, disciplined as it is, avoids the penalty by having too few on the field.

Sheeshh....when will this crud end. What have we done to deserve this?

[SonnyJ]

Oh... My... God!

You're kidding, right?

How on earth does that hap...

Forget it, I can't bear to talk about this...

[Guest Norv Turner]

Wish I was kidding.

Here's the story, for anyone with the stomach for it this morning.

I understand the sentiment, TC, but would just point out that either way, we end up the manure under Jerry Jones' ostrich-skin boot ... again.

Regardless of where we end up this year, once more we are reduced to "wait 'til next year" to exorcise the Dallas curse. I'm getting too old for this sh!t.

*

12 to go.

[TennesseeCarl]

Maybe they can hire some 13 year old kid and at the beginning of each play, he'll yell out, 'Remember...11 men. 11."

It makes you want to cry.

As for that article, Om. Did you notice the quote where Stephen Alexander says he's never been hurt before? Is that correct? I'd swear this kid's been one nagging injury after another since he's been here.

[Guest Norv Turner]

I did notice that, TC. Almost choked on my cranberry muffin.

I guess there are "injuries," and then there are "injuries." All I know is, fairly or unfairly, I've always thought of Alexander as All-Sidelines First Team. Maybe he hasn't had catastrophic injuries that caused him to miss entire seasons, but seems to me the man has been listed as Questionable or Probable in like 90% of the games since he's been drafted.

Kind of a metaphor for the Norv Era; long on promise, a nice guy ... but not much to show for it.

*

7 to go.

[RySkins]

So thats the reason there was so much open room on that play!

You've got to be kidding me! Can't get enough men on the field?

Even so, I still thought we had a guy who could have made the tackle in the backfield.

[Darth Tater]

I don't remember getting caught with too few on the field when Pettibon was DC and he always seemed to be moving guys in and out depending on the situation.

[bulldog]

you mean I have to take the bust of Marty down off my shelf from next to the ones of Lombardi and Gibbs?

hey, what else is new? Blown timeouts, stupid penalties in key situations, confused players that seemingly can't get lined up for punts and nickel packages on defense......

we have run the gamut this season.

the unfortunate thing is by Week 11 you think the team would have corrected these kinds of early season mistakes.

[Guest Norv Turner]

Actually, I would submit that over the past several weeks we've seen a dramatic decrease in that kind of "mental" error around here, and I think that has played a large part in our being able to squeak out wins over legitimate teams while producing very little offensively.

One of the things I was happiest about during the win streak was how solid we looked, comparatively (from where we were in weeks 1 - 5) mistake-free on all 3 units. All teams make the occasional mistake, but we used to make our share plus, seemingly, enough to cover everybody else too. I was seeing the first Redskin team in a long time that wasn't beating itself, and that to me is/was no small thing.

Anyway .... there's no way to know whether the Missing Man Formation on this one particular play was on Marty (beyond it being "his" team and therefore his responsibility), or Kurt (more likely), or on the player himself (my bet). Of course, this being Dallas we're talking about, it was probably because one of our players accidentally got his lip ring stuck to a cheerleaders braces while making time with her between plays, and wouldn't use his "prime cell minutes" to call for help ... or something.

That's the thing that kills me about this one: against Dallas, it's always something.

*

4 to go. Marty, I'm coming home ...

[bulldog]

have to disagree former OM. The Redskins booted two scoring chances against Philly with holding calls on Chris Samuels and on offensive pass interference of all things.

the team just has continued to do things at the worst time to either prevent a win or make each win far more difficult than need be.

Take the Dallas game. Metcalf returns the punt to midfield and finally gives the team some momentum and guess what? A holding call brings it all back.

Then on a key third down, the Redskins only put 10 men on the field and the Cowboys get a 46 yard play off a Wiley run that is designed to get 4 or 5 yards.

Where was the defensive captain that is supposed to count the players before each play?

The Cowboys were not playing no huddle so there was absolutely no excuse for that kind of boneheaded play. The team had a full clock to get set and check the alignment.

Do we need Darrell Green on the bench counting the players to make sure we have the right packages each week (as he did on a play in Philly)?

I think what you are alluding to in your post is the fact that since august and september the Redskins have stopped making mistakes in execution that was leading to 45 point performances by a poor Chiefs team at home and 98 yard kickoff returns as we saw in the preseason games.

So, yes the team is now playing NFL caliber football compared to the touch variety they were playing earlier.

The question is are they playing above average or quality football and are they doing it consistently?

I would submit that the defense over the past 5 or 6 weeks (excepting the Dallas loss Sunday) has played closer to that level,ie to the maximum of their abilities.

The offense has made some big plays but overall has failed to take full advantage of the talent on the roster. A healthy Michael Westbrook should have more than 30 catches at the 11 game mark. Flemister should have more catches the past couple of weeks after being discovered by Kent Graham against Denver.

KiJana Carter should have been used in the offense much earlier on in the season. Instead it took 7 weeks to get him on the field, even though Bennett has shown he has hands of stone coming out of the backfield.

And Banks? Seems to me the coaching staff has gone back the past two weeks to the old WCO dink and dunk routine with Tony, making his primary read that all to favorite 3-4 yard sideline pattern.

I think Jimmy Raye has failed this team as OC. Either that or Marty has prevented him from calling plays that he knows will be more productive than the ones that are being sent in to Banks.

Maybe there is a gag order on Westbrook, not to let him put up a 70 catch, 1,200 yard season for political or financial reasons.

But on the surface it has taken the staff a VERY long time to master the skills of the players on hand and craft a scheme to use them most effectively.

[Guest Norv Turner]

I will respectfully disagree with your disagreement, filibustering bulldog.

You could take any win by any team anywhere and dissect their games, win or lose, and find key penalties and gaffes that either contributed to losses or made wins harder to come by. All I'm saying is that, based on my own observations and gut sense, the Redskins aren't making anywhere near as many of them; nor have they been as crucial and heartrending, as they were both earlier this year and, seemingly, for the last 8 or so. That's all.

I am NOT prepared to say that this team, what with the sea changes in both personnel and mission statement, should have or could have made that transition faster. Wish they had, regret that they didn't ... but there it is.

I think they have done it, for the most part ... with the obvious HUGE exception of the play that started this thread. If we revert to earlier form again on Sunday, I may begin to doubt again ... but as of today I feel a whole lot better about the general on-field professionalism of this team than I have in quite some time.

As for the coaching strategies, that's another subject entirely. That'll have to wait until tomorrow, though, as I'm heading home for the day.

*

3 to go. Oh, baby.

[ by Norv Turner on December 04, 2001.]

[Terry]

Bulldog: "And Banks? Seems to me the coaching staff has gone back the past two weeks to the old WCO dink and dunk routine with Tony, making his primary read that all to favorite 3-4 yard sideline pattern.

I think Jimmy Raye has failed this team as OC. Either that or Marty has prevented him from calling plays that he knows will be more productive than the ones that are being sent in to Banks.

Maybe there is a gag order on Westbrook, not to let him put up a 70 catch, 1,200 yard season for political or financial reasons."

There two consecutive plays during the game that might be instructive here.

The first was a pass along the right sideline to Lockett. Banks didn't look at anyone else on the play, yet it wasn't a quick hitter or timing play. He followed Lockett all the way, to the exclusion of any other receiver.

The second was a deeper pass that also went to Lockett, and was a very nice gain for us. Again, Lockett was the only receiver that Banks followed and was likely the only guy who was gonna get the ball.

So I don't think either was the 3-4 yard dink and dunk WCO pass, although the first was near the sideline.

But Banks locking on to one receiver seems to be a big problem, and may partly explain why he rarely gets a reception if he's forced to scramble and break contact.

My feeling is that Raye is getting the most out of the QB materials he has at hand. He is not calling WCO passes because I haven't seen that much timing and rhythm and I don't see any 3 step drops or less. And he's obviously looking for deep stuff for play action because he's doing a lot of 5 and 7 step drops.

The guys who go to the games say that Westbrook is getting open quite a bit. Sonny was saying the same thing. From what I can see on TV, Westbrook's routes must be reasonably deep because he rarely shows up in the picture. And it didn't take Graham long at all to find Michael.

So I wouldn't be judging Raye until we can get him a QB and then see how this offense is supposed to work. If he can get Grbac a fat contract with the Ravens, then he's gotta be doing something right.

[bulldog]

those were two passing plays in isolation. consider the fact the Redskins had 129 yards passing in three quarters against Dallas with the running game stalled and I will submit to you that the OC and possibly HC were not trying to attack the Cowboys and put up points to take the battle to them.

we were holding back, hoping Quincy Carter or Emmitt Smith was going to fumble the ball or make some other gaffe that would allow us to work with a short field.

There were a couple of drives where the team needed 8 or 9 yards for a first down and ran the receiver wide for a 4 or 5 yard gain.

To me that is stupid football and resembles what got the Redskins in trouble several weeks ago before the recent upswing.

If you will recall the deep passes to Gardner and Westbrook in the Carolina, Giants games got us going as did the Thompson touchdown off the option pass in the Seattle game.

Unfortunately, all that has been forgotten in a return to a more conservative, defensive-oriented system.

As we saw on Sunday we just don't have the horses yet on defense across the board to play that way and stifle people the way the Ravens did last year or the Bucs did in 1999.

We have to help the defense by running the ball and hopefully giving them a lead to work with.

That helps the defense by making teams have to make plays against our real area of strength, our secondary.

[Montilar]

While that definately was a critical blunder, there's one on offense that competes with it in my mind. The patented Tony Banks fumbled snap. If he hasn't yet, he really should copyright it.

After the cowboys went up 10-7 the skins offense had driven down inside the 30 and were looking like they were going to get a TD to go up 14-10. Instead Banks fumbles, bringing up a 3rd and forever. Then Banks takes a sack. Voila! not even a field goal out of it.

That's what killed momentum. If we'd scored, there's no doubt in my mind the skins start stepping up and taking control. Instead the team had it's guts ripped out and picked over by vultures.

[All In]

Montilar,

I believe that was the key series of plays that led to our downfall in the game. We were very close to taking control of the game. I was there you could feel it. All we needed to do was produce some positive yards and kick at least a FG. If we picked up a First Down maybe we could of gotten a TD. BUT then we fumbled and got sacked. That put us in a tough spot, kick the long FG or pooch punt. We put the game on our defense and they got run over again.

I really think Dallas' OLine overmatches our DLine. They beat us. But we had our chance right then and there. The 'skins made a couple of mistakes and the tide turned.

[Pete]

Some good points all around. I agree we sat back waiting for the Boys to screw up, and expected the type of play calling of the first 5 weeks to do it for us.

I also agree with Norvom, that we had eliminated the brain farts for the most part dureing the winning streak, and 10 men on the field kinda hurt. It didn't kill us.

Not seeing the game, I think Montilar hit on it pretty good. I was so up on that series (radio broadcast),and the fumble and sack knocked the life out of me. It has to have the same effect on the players.

------------------

Steal your face right off your head

[markrc99]

i hadn't read terry's post until this morning and had posted something similar last night..and terry's right on the mark when he states that the skins weren't running those quick-strike type of plays..in terms of the 1st half, i agree with terry in respect to banks' setup and his progressions..

i have no idea why banks is viewed as some gawd-awful talent who's hindered in our system..and again i'm leary to aspire to the generic "marty's a dumbo fighting inner demons" type of reasoning..one thing though, i don't think it's wise to gauge westbrook's potential based on what we saw in the bronco gm..for whatever reason, they committed the kitchen sink to stopping davis and went real soft on the corners..as stated by terry at the time..

i haven't looked at the 2nd half but could one of you that are so sure that westbrook is running uncovered thru everybody's secondary, point to the play or plays that makes that obvious?..i'll admit, i never heard this, "westbrook's always open but we just never go to him" type of stuff before this season..

if it's something that's doesn't have anything to do with what's happening on the field, then why wouldn't we at least take advantage of him being so wide open enough to win the gm?..all i know is that it makes no sense that we wouldn't throw the ball to someone wide open all the time, yet start him at WR..?..if it's true i'm not finding it..can someone help me out here?

[bulldog]

I find it very hard to believe that Jason Sehorn and Denard Walker had trouble covering Westbrook down the field but Duane Hawthorne and Mario Edwards played a totally clean game shutting down both Michael and Rod Gardner until near the end of regulation.

Perhaps they did, but I doubt it. And with Darren Woodson playing almost as a linebacker near the line of scrimmage that left one on one matchups downfield.

I don't have a tape copy of the game, but if I did I bet you would find that there were plays where Player X or Y was open and Banks for whatever reason sold out on his primary receiver and failed to glance around and see what other opportunities presented themselves.

He didn't get great protection in the game, but did get decent time on most possessions to survey the field. I am also somewhat surprised that Banks took that late sack with the team driving down at the 30 as some here have mentioned.

With the field position and Conway's range being factors in consideration that third down play should have been called as a quick pass with instructions for Banks to throw the ball out of bounds if his receiver at the first down marker was covered.

You don't take those kinds of sacks that take you out of scoring range.

[SonnyJ]

I can't point to any specific plays, and I can't give you first-hand knowledge of reports, but according to people who were at the game, and from Sonny and Sam in the broadcast booth, Westbrook was open many times, yet no passes were going his way.

No offense, markrc, but you seem to be taking a head-in-the-sand approach on this one. I don't think many people here would classify themselves as Westbrook-apologists, and I seriously doubt Sonny and Sam are. Why would people do this - just to bash Banks? That makes no sense when our eyes can clearly see that he locks onto one receiver at the exclusion of all others. Television replays showed him missing wide-open receivers during the game. Certainly, open receivers are missed occasionally, but a competent QB should be able to find them most of the time, rather than going to a well-covered primary.

Any objective view indicates that Banks has tunnel vision. I suspect your post has more to do with your dislike of Westbrook than any clear reasoning.

[bulldog]

As I have noted before, it will be really interesting to find out in the future exactly what the decision process was in keeping Westbrook on the team for the entire season but then under-utilizing him perhaps to the detriment of the team.

If Marty didn't want Michael to reach some performance incentives then he should have been dealt before the trading deadline.

In public Marty says he is very happy with Michael's work ethic and what he has shown on the field, yet then allows Raye to call perhaps 3 or 4 plays a game for #82?

On a team where the other starting receiver is a rookie and the #3, Lockett, does not have the jump to climb up and assume a #2 role?

Something is definitely wrong here.

Yes, the Broncos were playing off Westbrook and that allowed him to be an easy target for Graham. BUT, you can't tell me that he has been completely shut down by all the other corners the Redskins have faced this season.

30 catches by your leading wide receiver?

heck, there are tight ends with more catches than that.

Let's face it. Right now, if you think the Redskins have a decent and functioning pass offense, please go back and pop in a tape from the 1987 or 1991 Super Bowl games.

Receivers getting open, the line blocking, the runners getting yardage and the quarterbacks hitting the receivers when they clear out and avoiding the killer mistake.

And if you look around there are teams this season in 2001 that make the Redskins look as if their offense is operating in slow motion.

St. Louis, Green Bay, Oakland. Even Jacksonville as evidenced on the Monday Night game has a quarterback that delivers an accurate ball and receivers that get open and are found by the qb and OC when needed to make the play.

Remember Joe Walton? Remember Rod Dowhower? Failed ex-Redskins offensive coordinators. Remember how they came in with a "formula" for being productive and flamed out because the exact talent was never assembled to make their prized strategies work?

We can wait awhile longer but Jimmy Raye seems to be headed down that path.

[markrc99]

sonny, bull

hey i'm only taking issue with the assessment that westbrook is open all the time..i worded that poorly where i'm asking for a single play to justify it..if 82 had been productive throughout his career and we were seeing what we're seeing now, i'd definitely point to his utilization as,at least in part, a concern..but we all agree his productivity hasn't been what it needs to be..i mean,that's why we drafted gardner...

and i noted that i did agree w/terry, that banks' ability to get thru his progressions isn't what it needs to be either..still, even if banks isn't making the right reads, the coaches should be finding a way to take advantage of westbrook being open..if that's in fact, the case, which i can't make any sense of why we wouldn't..and neither has anybody else..

it seems the best reasoning for it is basically political,so to speak..whatever..again, you have to believe westbrook has been shunned his entire career, and i'm not having that..given westbrook's track record, and banks' i'm not buying into any assessment that suggests either or both of them is under/improperly utilized, week in week out..and that's my firm position on the matter!!..until i change my mind..

[bulldog]

if you really believe what you say than the 76 yard touchdown to Westbrook against Sehorn and the Giants was a complete fluke, on the one play where Michael was able to avoid stepping over his own feet and the cornerback got faked out since opening day.

I prefer to believe what I see with my own eyes, which is there are even scrub wide receivers in the NFL, late preseason signees, that have 25 or 30 receptions so far.

So, even though he is not an elite receiver, I choose to believe that the plays I have seen Westbrook and in the last game Flemister wide open downfield are not one time occurrences but rather the expression of something that has happened on and off all season.............

namely, that the Washington quarterbacks since preseason haven't been able to consistently hit the broad side of a barn with the football.

Banks can chuck the ball 70 yards but he can't throw a 15 yard in pattern without tossing it 5 yards over the receiver's head.

As you learn quickly in baseball, a 94 mph fastball is only effective in the majors if you can locate it.

Otherwise you are just a minor leaguer with potential.

And that is what Banks is at 28, a guy with an arm and a hope of something better in the future once it is all "put together".

[SonnyJ]

I don't know how this thread evolved into another Westbrook saga, and I shouldn't bother responding, but here I go...

I realize we won't change your mind, markrc. You probably made your mind up about Westbrook a long time ago.

But to eschew evidence from eyewitnesses (one of whom is a HOF QB) who all declare that Westbrook is often open is absurd. Why he isn't getting the ball is another issue, one that isn't entirely clear.

But we do know this: the one half when Graham was QBing, Westbrook caught nine passes. And he wasn't playing against chump CBs, either. That piece of evidence is pretty damning for Banks. Even Bulldog, who would probably admit to not being a Westbrook admirer, is going against you here.

The bottom line on Westbrook is that he isn't a player who will elevate the play of the QB. On the other hand, team him up with a competent QB, and he can be quite productive, even dangerous.

[bulldog]

first Davis is underutilized and then there is the inevitable "ah-ha" from the coaching staff. Then KiJana Carter is underutilized and there is the inevitable "ah-ha" from the coaching staff.

30 catches for a leading receiver in a year where some receivers have 80 catches already is a joke. I don't care if Westbrook is going to be gone or not, the STAFF chose to keep him for this season heading out of camp. They should be obligated to use him to whatever effect possible.

What bothers me as I noted above is that EVERYONE in the NFL knew Davis was our most valuable offensive weapon coming out of last season.

And it takes Marty until August to admit that "Davis has a lot more speed and acceleration than I thought"???

Didn't this guy make any mental notes on the Redskins games he has been watching for the past two years at ESPN?

1,400 yards and 1,300 yards should be noticeable enough.