Eagles_Legendz Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 First, the game was as close as I expected it to be--perhaps even a bit closer. The Redskins offer many matchup issues with Philadelphia. Took me about a hour and a half to find where the red lot is, maybe Snyder should put some of his $$ into marking parking lots better? Ramsey played very well I thought, until the interception. I was a bit perplexed by the lack of a downfield attack by Gibbs throughout the whole game. Ramsey obviously has the arm to throw downfield. I was incredibly impressed by the Redskins OLine and a bit confused as to why Johnson never blitzed. Redskins defense played well, as usual. Nothing more to add here. There were questionable calls on both sides: Owens first PI call, also the 15 yard penalty on the Eagles on Portis, seemed at the game he just grabbed his jersey from behind. Pinkston should have drawn another PI when someone on the Redskins got all of his jersey while falling down. Either way, the Eagles got enough calls as well, so I certainly am not going to complain about that. I think Pinkston should be shot for giving up on the one pass early. I think the Redskins are certainly a team on the rise, after how they've played the last four weeks. With some more discipline, they can beat upper echelon teams in this league. This was certainly the most difficult game remaining for the Eagles. There were a lot of Eagles fans as expected. In my section the banter was relatively harmless. There were a few drunk Eagles fans that were obnoxious, and there were a few Redskins fans that were similar. Two Redskins fans were kicked out. You could script what the conversation was going to be before it took place. Seems like conversations between Eagles and Redskins fans always are similar. How many rings, what's your record? And so on. Besides that, the fan interaction was fine, until I was leaving and someone went to steal my hat. Very classy. In summation, I think the Redskins will probably give the Eagles a run for their money the next year. They certainly have a lot of talent and it seems like it's starting to come together. Hopefully Williams will stay next year, so they can experience some form of continuity for the first time in years. I wouldn't be suprised to see them win their next three games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 EL, Trotter got Portis' facemask. I thought it should have been a five-yard penalty, but, it was certainly a facemask penalty. Pinkston ran up into Harris. Harris was in front of Pinkston. There's no way that ever draws a penalty in this league. But, Harris did throw his arm out there nicely . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skns4life Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 the PI on Springs was BS...just like the cowboys game...you guys got way more calls in favor than you...refs sucked again...you stole that one...it'll be better next year!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagles_Legendz Posted December 13, 2004 Author Share Posted December 13, 2004 Originally posted by Art EL, Trotter got Portis' facemask. I thought it should have been a five-yard penalty, but, it was certainly a facemask penalty. Pinkston ran up into Harris. Harris was in front of Pinkston. There's no way that ever draws a penalty in this league. But, Harris did throw his arm out there nicely . They only showed the replay once of the Portis play at the game. It seemed as if he only got his shirt, but I didn't see it on TV, so I'll talk your word for it. I thought the Pinkston pass was clearly intereference. It wouldn't have been at first, because they were both playing the ball, but Harris almost wrapped Pinkston up with his other arm. Either way, most of the Skins penalties seemed self-inflicted. Perhaps a product of coaching. I have to wonder why it takes Gibbs so long to get Ramsey the plays? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 Does anybody think the lack of downfield attack and the lack of Eagles blitzing are related? It seems like the Eagles were dropping their safeties into coverage and the deep routes were double-covered most of the time. We saw it on the INT at the end and even Cooley's catch on the TD drive. Maybe we didn't throw it deep because the defense had it covered? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSteve Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 That was not a PI call EL, lose the eagle glasses:) He had the WR beat and the WR ran into the DB and initiated the contact while the defender held him off. harris had position. And yes, I was at the game as well so I had a perfect view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 That was not PI dude ran over Harris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 EL, The reason the Harris play wasn't PI is because Harris was in front of Pinkston. Harris has the right to make his body as wide as he wants. Pinkston had to go through him to get to the ball. The only thing you MIGHT be able to say is Harris curled his fingers up enough that maybe he induced Pinkston into his arm with a mild hook. But, the plain fact is, Harris has the right to put his arm out and go for the ball. And he really has that right when he's in front of the receiver. You'll never see PI called on a play when the defender has that type of positional advantage. You could even argue it was Pinkston who initiated the contact -- though perhaps not strongly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagles_Legendz Posted December 13, 2004 Author Share Posted December 13, 2004 Originally posted by DjTj Does anybody think the lack of downfield attack and the lack of Eagles blitzing are related? It seems like the Eagles were dropping their safeties into coverage and the deep routes were double-covered most of the time. We saw it on the INT at the end and even Cooley's catch on the TD drive. Maybe we didn't throw it deep because the defense had it covered? Perhaps. The Eagles played a lot of zone it seemed tonight. With how the Redskins offensive line had played coming into the game, I was really suprised that Johnson didn't blitz more often. With the DTs hurt, and Burgess out, the Eagles front four was generating no pressure at all, and giving Ramsey all day to throw the ball. If the Eagles were dropping six guys in coverage every play, why were the Eagles CBs giving the Redskins WRs 5 yard cushions on most plays? Made no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagles_Legendz Posted December 13, 2004 Author Share Posted December 13, 2004 Originally posted by Art EL, The reason the Harris play wasn't PI is because Harris was in front of Pinkston. Harris has the right to make his body as wide as he wants. Pinkston had to go through him to get to the ball. The only thing you MIGHT be able to say is Harris curled his fingers up enough that maybe he induced Pinkston into his arm with a mild hook. But, the plain fact is, Harris has the right to put his arm out and go for the ball. And he really has that right when he's in front of the receiver. You'll never see PI called on a play when the defender has that type of positional advantage. You could even argue it was Pinkston who initiated the contact -- though perhaps not strongly. He certainly has a right to make a play on the ball, it seemed though that while Harris was falling he decided to take Pinkston with him. It's not worth squabbling about though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 The Harris play was more PI than the Owens play so I guess it is a wash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 On that Pinkston/Harris play. To me it seemed like their feet got tangled up and that is initially what caused the two to start falling down, which would be considered incidental contact, and then you can't call what happens as they are falling down, pass interference. Not to mention the ball was not even catchable by Pinkston anyway. If anyone was there to catch it, it would have been Harris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 Originally posted by Eagles_Legendz He certainly has a right to make a play on the ball, it seemed though that while Harris was falling he decided to take Pinkston with him. It's not worth squabbling about though. EL, The only possible PI on the play was for Harris mildly curling his fingers and perhaps pulling Pinkston so he couldn't get away. He probably did pull him down when Pinkston tripped him. Intentionally even. That's smart football. Once you get tripped up like that, pull the guy down. They can't call a penalty since the receiver is behind you and the contact will appear to be initiated from behind. It's like a car accident. If you're in the rear and there's an accident, it's going to be your fault . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagles_Legendz Posted December 13, 2004 Author Share Posted December 13, 2004 Originally posted by Art EL, The only possible PI on the play was for Harris mildly curling his fingers and perhaps pulling Pinkston so he couldn't get away. He probably did pull him down when Pinkston tripped him. Intentionally even. That's smart football. Once you get tripped up like that, pull the guy down. They can't call a penalty since the receiver is behind you and the contact will appear to be initiated from behind. It's like a car accident. If you're in the rear and there's an accident, it's going to be your fault . That's a good example. Like I said, I'm not going to spend tonight debating that call. I think Redskins fans have a lot to be proud of tonight. They played very well, and I would say that if I had to choose a team not to play in the NFC playoffs at this point, it would probably be the Redskins, and that is a sign of a team turning the corner. The Eagles can physically and from a talent perspective outclass most teams in the NFC, and I credit Washington for playing a good game. They should win their next three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinMac Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 Originally posted by Art EL, Harris was in front of Pinkston. There's no way that ever draws a penalty in this league. Unless the Redskins are playing the Cowboys on Monday night. Then it is PI all night long on the defense. Well, at least it was on that one infamous play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herrmag Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 Funny. I feel exactlly like you do EL, but there are many Skins fans on this board that don't see that. Go figure :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RySkins Posted December 13, 2004 Share Posted December 13, 2004 Skins might be 4-9, but I don't feel near the despair I've felt as most of our other recent seasons were winding down. This team plays as hard as any team in the league and I actually don't think its the worst thing in the world for this team to play a few games with no pressure of any possible playoff implications. The Skins played the Eagles much better than any other team in the conference had, and that was not all due to a bad game by the Eagles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.