[QUOTE=Daseal]Jebus: I thought that strip may have cost him the tackle on an experienced back. I also disagree anyone would make that pick. He had to gain a lot of ground to get there on time, and the lateral though not accurate was the right idea. 20 seconds left in the half a TD there would have put them back into the game.[/QUOTE]

I know where you're coming from on the strip. My first reaction was the same, that it cost him some on the tackle. But when they showed it on the reply, Jackson went right down. I don't whether it's because Taylor's so strong that even with the attempted strip he can still knock a player straight to the ground, or whether he just strips with the right technique. You're probably right, though, that we should withhold judgment until we see how that works on experienced backs (although Taylor has made quite a few tackles during the preseason and always goes for the strip, and I haven't seen a back shed one of his tackles yet).

As for the INT, don't get me wrong, I'm happy he made it--especially because we've had a lot of players drop easy picks they should have made. I just didn't think that was as impressive as some of the other ones on his already substantial highlight reel.

I still disagree with the lateral. You're right about the idea. But, if I remember correctly, he was going down when he pitched it, and he almost sent it into our own endzone. A fumble that was recovered for a Rams touchdown would have been as devastating (and more likely) as a Redskins touchdown would have been inspiring.

[QUOTE=RedskinPete]Some of the blame has to go to the offense....You have to score points and run time off the clock! You CAN'T LET A TEAM LIKE THE RAMS stay on the field that amount of time! They will score! I think Chris C said it best that Smoot looked tried after being run all over the place. It was like a track meet and Ramsey and the O didn't give them time to think much less change things on the side line! In the NFL it's Time of Possesion! If you have the ball you win much more if you don't! :soapbox:[/QUOTE]

hmmmmmmmmmm. I sure thought that is the same thing I was saying in the post you responded to. (problem was Ramsey, would have been different with Brunell in there, we left most of our offense behind closed doors, the DB's are going to be fine). Of course you are at an advantage if you control time of possession. But the loss is not what mattered, anyway. I was responding to guys that were in panic mode about our DB's. Again, they will be fine.

[QUOTE=Daseal]Jebus: I thought that strip may have cost him the tackle on an experienced back. I also disagree anyone would make that pick. He had to gain a lot of ground to get there on time, and the lateral though not accurate was the right idea. 20 seconds left in the half a TD there would have put them back into the game.
[/QUOTE] Daseal once again you have restored my faith with your lack of football knowledge. The interception was great, I think everyone would agree that his make up speed tp cover the opposite side of the field is amazing especially considerring he looks like a linebacker. But saying the lateral was the correct thing to do as there was only 20 seconds left in the half. Wow that is totaly wrong. HE pitched back from the 15 yard line, does saftey or a touchedown come to your thoguhts. Ill advised play and clearly a rookie mistake. If the Redskins were thinking of trying to score with 20 seconds do you rember what the next play after the interception was? KNEEL DOWN PLAY. Wake up dude!!!

CRT3: It was obvious if they didn't gain field position from that interception that it would be a kneel down give up play. I understand the dangers involved with the lateral, but with 20 seconds left in a losing pre-season bought why not try to change morale to your team?

When he tossed the ball I cringed, but you said yourself in your post that: "If the Redskins were thinking of trying to score with 20 seconds" They obviously have no shot at a score from the 15 yard line. However your own 40-45 yard line you can complete one solid pass, take a time out, and get 3 points out of the ordeal. I don't have game footage in front of me, but if I remember correctly there were very few St. Louis players around the other defensive player, and had the pass been slightly more accurate we might be calling that the turning point in the game. What I'm saying in the long run is I don't think it mattered that much. It could have been a great play for them, it could have turned into nothing, but like with every play there's a slight chance it could have turned around. Wouldn't have been any worse than what would have happened if we had Bowen or Lott in instead of Taylor.

[QUOTE=smootsmack]I don't think the Rams were very vanilla yesterday though, not when they had Isaac Bruce throwing a pass

And none of our expected front 7 starters on defense played past the first quarter. Plus the Rams still had Holt in there late in the game going up obstensibly Ralph Brown, but really a zone defense

I wasn't at all pleased with last night's performance because I'm a fan and want to see the team do well always but I'm not concerned.[/QUOTE]

Agreed..and as mention by the fox crew calling the game, the Rams had been embarrassed in KC the previous week and played with a chip on their shoulders

They arent as good as they showed and you guys sure arent as bad as you showed either

On the play Brown got burned, you guys sold out on a blitz and put a 4th CB on a premier WR...if Williams doesnt learn from that..well..morre power to you guys

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Does anyone doubt that Holt would have seen some doubles had this been a regular season game. Don't get me wrong the guy is a great WR, top 3 in the league, but he was running wide ass open in single coverage. That kinda stuff doesn't happen in the regular season.[/QUOTE]

Almost certainly - Saw an interview with Greg Williams on Comcast Sports Net - he fended off comments about the sucky performance saying basically that it was his plan to intensively test the secondary (starters as well as 2nd & 3rd stringers). Of course, the secondary got mauled, but I bet it gave the coaching staff a clearer picture of who's capable of playing and who's not. I for one am not high on Ralph Brown - hope Rufus Brown makes the cut instead of him. Jimoh will certainly be gone, whew!

Could be wrong here, but part of the plan may have even been to hold back on the pass rush (on 1st and 2nd downs) and leave the secondary to hold fort by themselves. Starting DEs such as Upshaw and Wynn left the game in the 1st quarter itself. Gibbs had no interest in trying to win the game as was obvious in the 3rd quarter when Brunell came in and the play calling was still conservative - no long bombs, sweeps or anything of the kind.

About Ramsey - agree with most that he needs to sit back and learn from Brunell - accuracy has never been one of Ramsey's strengths, and he still has too many miscommunications with his receivers for a starting qb . Its certainly been a humbling experience for him and being a back up will aid his development as a qb.

On another note, a pity, but it seems like Rock will be cut - he's pretty ineffective as a runner - Betts played only 2 sets of downs and showed the coaches why he's a better back.

I think the staff loves Rock's heart and may keep him around.

everyone knows betts is a better back, but HE DOESN'T PLAY, that's been the big kicker thus far... wasn't holt in into the 3rd quarter? jeez.

"holding back" on the pass rush? you kidding? we blitzed aLOT. and Bulger was only sacked once. what about the time we sent 9 guys at him. no one got there the whole game. the Rams devastated Oline easily kept our Dline at bay, and Griffin was playing.

I agree, ILL, and we still have a STRONG need for a quality pass-rusher at DE.

[QUOTE=illdefined]"holding back" on the pass rush? you kidding? we blitzed aLOT. and Bulger was only sacked once. what about the time we sent 9 guys at him. no one got there the whole game. the Rams devastated Oline easily kept our Dline at bay, and Griffin was playing.[/QUOTE]

That was on a 3rd down and goal. I'm talking about holding back on 1st and 2nd downs, as I stated earlier. As for no one getting there the whole game, that's not true - when our starting DEs were on the field, Wynn had a sack for a 5yd loss on Bulger. I didn't see Marcus Washington playing end like in the Miami game - which is why I thought they were indeed holding back.

Before I get lynched by people critical of our pass rush (or lack thereof), let me clarify one thing - the reason I think they held back on the 1st and 2nd down pass rush is the following:

I think the coaching staff has a good idea of who can play on the D-line and at Linebacker from training camp and the first 3 preseason games. However, in the secondary, they don't know enough (besides taylor, springs and smoot) in terms of who can really make plays and who can't. Hence, they needed to be severely tested, and what better testing ground for the secondary than against the Rams.

i expressly mentioned that one sack we got. and Washington is a LB, and thus not part of the Dline. the front four got no penetration by itself vs that weak Oline, as there was next to no pressure on Bulger and no running plays broken up in the backfield.

Williams held back his advanced blitzes sure (note that a blitz by definition means someone OTHER than the Dline) but there's no way Williams told the DLine to 'go half ass' on the guy in front of them. schemes and stunts aside, our guys got pushed around man for man.

[QUOTE=That Guy]hasselbeck sucks shane :P remember last year, he came in, posted a 0.0 rating at dallas? that was MH ;) I still believe ramsey is better, but brunell has the job now for sure. mcollough still didn't impress me (though no one did this game, and they left holt in a long long time)... brown, jimoh, bowen all got stomped... taylor at least got another int... why wasn't holt double teamed?

it looked like they game planned us and were trying to win vs testing players, but that doesn't mean we didn't get blown over...[/QUOTE]

Hasselbeck doesn't suck. Look at what he was able to do against Miami after Ramsey went down. Hasselbeck may not be as talented but I'll take experience over talent right now. We have been waiting to develop players for the last five years and it's time we see some results right now damn it!

Hasslebeck dosent sucks. I'd take him over every thrid stringer in the leauge, and alot of the second stringers. Hes not better than Brunell or Ramsey, but hes a good qb. He may be doing it against scrubs this year, but he did it against some good players last season. Hes not great, but he surley dosent suck.

you are right he doesnt suck, but he is really inconsistent. hell have a good game, but makes too many stupid throws. def. a spectacular 3rd stringer tho.

I think maybe we should send Hasselbeck to Europe and let him get in a rhythm.

i was saying the hasselbeck sucks compared to 1st stringers and a bunch of second stringers, but more importantly, i don't think he's nearly as good as ramsey (i don't think shane or SUNRA like ramsey at all ;)). it was a drop off last year with him starting... I DO think he beats out just about any third stringer, and europe would be a great place for him, i imagine he'd do really well there and it'd make him a better player.

[QUOTE=Daseal]I think maybe we should send Hasselbeck to Europe and let him get in a rhythm.[/QUOTE]

We already sent Hamdan to Europe. Hasselbeck definitely stays and learns Gibb's system to the T. He develops on the sidelines watching Brunell and if Ramsey can get his head out of his ass he might become a leader of this team and not just a player with a lot of talent.

[QUOTE=illdefined]Griffin was playing.[/QUOTE]

He only played in the 1st quarter. As I remeber the game I belive they didn't score a TD until midway through the 2nd quarter. Things didn't get ugly until alot of the 1st team was on the sidelines and we had starters placed throughout the Defense.

It was interesting to see the new rule in affect concerning no contact with the receiver after five yards. It's defininitely going to work for the WR's who can't separate from their defender. I just hope Smoot and Springs play better than what they showed against the Rams.

[QUOTE=Dana87]He only played in the 1st quarter. As I remeber the game I belive they didn't score a TD until midway through the 2nd quarter. Things didn't get ugly until alot of the 1st team was on the sidelines and we had starters placed throughout the Defense.[/QUOTE]

i remember seeing Griffin into the second quarter. and the Rams offensive line is supposed to be a shambles. sure hope Griffin steps up and that Daniels can add alot when he finally comes.

C. Griffin player the entire first half. The first team was on the field a long time due to a three and out offense. Hopefully Samules will be back soon.

Bottom line the rams and the Skins wanted different things fronm the game friday night. The Rams wanted a morral booster weather that was the players or the coaches and they got it. We wanted to evaluate players before first cut down this weekend and stayed with match ups that illustrated individuals skills rather than planning a game to beat the Rams.

End of the night though I still think it was the Rams who were more sucessful acheiving thier goals. It wil be interesting to see what happens next week in the final preseason game in against the Falcons. Is it going to be a boost to lift the team or a final audition for the fringe players.

Gentlemen:

The Defensive line stunk out the joint. They gave up 150 yards on the ground to a team that was missing its TWO starting OTs. [BTW it looks as if Turley may be out for the year in STL.] The Rams averaged 4.2 yards per rush. That folks will get you beat 3 times out of 4.

Redskins were also missing their TWO starting OTs so how did their running game fare? Sixty two yards on twenty two carries is less than three yards a carry.

The fact that there is even a discussion about whether or not Griffin played says something about the impact he made while he was in the game.
For the record, no matter how long he played or did not play, he recorded zero tackles and zero assists on tackles for his tenure on the field. Pardon me for not being impressed!

Pass defense was weak too. It looked as if people were sleepwaking out there. The Rams got 284 yards on 17 completions. That is an average of almost 17 yards per catch. That is waaaay too much!

Rock Cartwright had 5 carries. His longest carry was 1 yard; his net yardage for the game was minus-1 yard. Can anyone spell, "Special Teams"?

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]Gentlemen:

The Defensive line stunk out the joint. They gave up 150 yards on the ground to a team that was missing its TWO starting OTs. [BTW it looks as if Turley may be out for the year in STL.] The Rams averaged 4.2 yards per rush. That folks will get you beat 3 times out of 4.

Redskins were also missing their TWO starting OTs so how did their running game fare? Sixty two yards on twenty two carries is less than three yards a carry.

The fact that there is even a discussion about whether or not Griffin played says something about the impact he made while he was in the game.
For the record, no matter how long he played or did not play, he recorded zero tackles and zero assists on tackles for his tenure on the field. Pardon me for not being impressed!

Pass defense was weak too. It looked as if people were sleepwaking out there. The Rams got 284 yards on 17 completions. That is an average of almost 17 yards per catch. That is waaaay too much!

Rock Cartwright had 5 carries. His longest carry was 1 yard; his net yardage for the game was minus-1 yard. Can anyone spell, "Special Teams"?[/QUOTE]

A little(?) overreaction here. Yeah, they had a rough game. But total yards in a preseason game is totally meaningless. It always includes at least a half of 2nd and 3rd strings, several of whom are about to be dropped from the team. And the other half typically has subs coming in that normally won't. And, of course, much of the defensive strategy is not even being used in the FIRST half. They are expreimenting with strategies, plays, and personnel throughout the game. I've been crying out for them to add one good pass rusher - they still have that need. But the situation is not anywhere near as bad as you paint it. If they win the next game everyone will then go back to the euphoria there was after game two - which was just as much an overreaction. Try to level out, guys - it's PRESEASON. Not nearly as much an indicator as it may seem. Try to remember Spurrier's fantastic preseason...

Smoot certainly got smoked...............is anyone missing Champ Bailey already.........
But it's hard to judge the defense with Arrington and others sitting out..............\

And the running game as been unimpressive.......did Jansen's injury set us back a season or do we just need some more time.....???????

Hogskin:

I agree that the specific numbers in a preseason game are not very important but the magnitudes are important.

When you give up 4.2 yards per carry - most of it to a rookie RB going behind an OL that was called "makeshift" about half a dozen times during the game - that is BAD news.

When your pass defense gives up an average of 17 yards per completion that is not good - unless you were trying out Tiny Tim and Goldilocks at cornerback that evening.

Pretend this was a real game for a moment. Which defensive lineman would you think might get a nomination for "Defensive Player of the Week"? Did any of them even look good? Notice I did not ask if any of them looked outstanding...

there was no pass rush to support the CBs, and the rams offense was on the field too long... holt vs champ, holts gonna win plenty... williams was testing to see how well players could do man coverage on an elite receiver, i don't think he'd EVER leave holt in single coverage for 3 entire quarters in a game that counted...

Curmudgeon, you are still doing exactly the same thing. You quote numbers that are based on a combination of first, second, and third strings, including play of guys that are already dropped today. Maybe they did get 4.2 yards per carry. What does that mean? Faulk was the starter. He got less than 3 yards per carry. I don't put significance on that either, but it demonstrates what I mean. Now go back a couple years. How many passing yards did we get in EVERY preseason game? What was the passing yardage? As we found out when the games started for real, it had a-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y no significance. All you can really glean from these games are an idea about INDIVIDUALS' performances. The defense as a group, or the defensive backs as a group, or the DL as a group can be made to look much better or worse than they are by the play of non-regulars at those or other positions on either team. And most of the plays they are using are NOT the plays that will be the bread and butter plays during the season. Coaches don't even try to get that kind of info from the games. They assess individuals, and they assess plays and play combinations they are testing. And plays that look like horrible failures to US, may look great to them (or vice-versa) because of the way they intend to use them later, or because of wrinkles they will add.

All I'm saying is that you can not make those blanket statements this time of year with any degree of accuracy at all. THe strong up and down emotions here after preseason wins and losses is really surprising to me.

Breaking down numbers in the preseason is a waste of time. Stats never tell the whole truth, especially in the preseason.

I just came across this article in this morning's Times. It says it very well.

[URL=http://washingtontimes.com/sports/20040831-120001-4182r.htm]

Arizona went 4-0 in preseason last year, put up good numbers...And that resulted in how many wins? Plus all the huge numbers spurrier put up in preseason, what did that prove.

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Breaking down numbers in the preseason is a waste of time. Stats never tell the whole truth, especially in the preseason.[/QUOTE]

Except in Madden!

lol. it doesnt seem to matter as much this year.