Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1040017]On both of those I would say RG3 threw the ball too damn hard.[/quote]

Yeah he had to make quick throws but they were accurate and those guys get paid to catch the ball.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1040020]Bottom line is this staff needs to go. Tired of seeing the same old mistakes week in and week out. Sloppy stupid football doesn't cut it.[/quote]


As i've said a bunch before, if we finish below .500 MS should go, that would mean 3 of 4 years he has finished w a bad record. That just doesn't cut it.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=donofriose;1040022][B]The only problem I have with the offense is how the offensive line is currently performing, how it was developed, and how it was assembled. [/B]

They really need to stop filling in free agents on the line and try to draft some and develop them with the Redskins system.

Kyle S. has used Reed, Garcon, and Morris very well. He is not Sean Payton of play calling but let us not act like he is the main source of the problems.

I believe the Redskins are 3-6 because the OLine loses their battles, and the defensive front loses their battle.[/quote]
Seriously?!?! The O-line, while not perfect was #5 in sacks allowed and the team is in the top 5 running the ball coming into last night.

So far the team has drafted almost an entire line (T. Williams, LeReibus, Gettis, Compton). Now development of those players can be discussed but using draft picks on O-linemen is about 15th on the list of what's wrong with this team.

[quote=SKINSFAN69]Bottom line is this staff needs to go. Tired of seeing the same old mistakes week in and week out. Sloppy stupid football doesn't cut it.[/quote]
As a poster before mentioned, these problems aren't new. These same problems have occurred since, honestly, Schottenheimer left. Those issues happened with Spurrier, Gibbs II, Zorn and Shanny. It's organizational. The issues stem from a cultural lack of accountability throughout the Redskins franchise.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=sandtrapjack;1039948]The fade to Moss was by design. Everyone knew that on 4th down at the goal line that there was going to be double coverage on Garcon and Reed. Moss had one catch all game and they knew he would be the only one in man coverage.[/quote]

But there wasn't double coverage on Reed and Garcon on 4th down in that situation. In fact Reed was singled up with a LB, beat him immediately off the line, and was wide open in the middle of the endzone. If everyone knew it, everyone was wrong. That everyone including those who make the calls, and those who are paid to execute them. Moreover on the 3 previous plays the blitz was evident, every receiver was in single coverage, and the middle of the field was wide open every time. We tried to run one rub route on a slant to Garcon, but RG mistimed the pass and released the ball too early with no discernible pressure.

The offense and playcalling are as much to blame as the defense. And good teams score as many points as they need to win, and in most cases far exceed that.

This argument that some phantom number of points is enough to beat a particular team on a particular day therefore alleviating the offensive coaching staff of any accountability is a straw man fallacy.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Was listening to ESPN DALLAS this morning and they basically were saying as long as Snyder owns the team it will always be a circus for instance now it's the name issue and RG3's knee , team never being able to consistently win under DS.. ETC.. Kinda hard to argue it though

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=DirtBagZ;1039996]Sorry disagree, there has been a lack of pass rush, and collapsing the pocket and this has been a hallmark of Redskins teams for a long time. Kerrigan is a decent player, probably the best on the front seven, just not an elite pass rusher. Orako is serviceable, if he was better player he would make plays, for whatever reason he does not make the play. Coaching can make a difference but the bottom line is, the players don't execute and they don't make plays. Further there is a chronic lack of discipline and a tendency to make boneheaded 15 yd penalties that have a knack of allowing the other team to score. This has happened repeatedly this season, and was a major issue last night.[/quote]

So your fix is to do what exactly? Burn through the entire defense, change the whole coaching staff, and do all this without a number one draft pick this offseason? Wow, sounds like a plan to me!

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=fanarchist;1040028]But there wasn't double coverage on Reed and Garcon on 4th down in that situation. In fact Reed was singled up with a LB, beat him immediately off the line, and was wide open in the middle of the endzone. If everyone knew it, everyone was wrong. That everyone including those who make the calls, and those who are paid to execute them. Moreover on the 3 previous plays the blitz was evident, every receiver was in single coverage, and the middle of the field was wide open every time. We tried to run one rub route on a slant to Garcon, but RG mistimed the pass and released the ball too early with no discernible pressure.

The offense and playcalling are as much to blame as the defense. And good teams score as many points as they need to win, and in most cases far exceed that. This argument that some phantom number of points is enough to beat a particular team is a straw man fallacy.[/quote]
All points you made are correct. I guess my wording was confusing. In a short yardage 4th and goal, if the play call is a fade, the QB does not have time to read through his progressions. If you look at the play again, RG3 had his eyes on that back pylon the whole time and did not even look at anyone else but Moss. It's a 2 step drop then lob it at the pylon. If he goes through his progressions, a fade does not work. My point is, that the 'Skins coaching staff was anticipating double coverage on the 2 receivers that were killing the Vikes all night. But that did not happen.

During the time out the play called was fade to Moss. There was no secondary or check down receivers.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Paintrain;1040027]Seriously?!?! The O-line, while not perfect was #5 in sacks allowed and the team is in the top 5 running the ball coming into last night.

So far the team has drafted almost an entire line (T. Williams, LeReibus, Gettis, Compton). Now development of those players can be discussed but using draft picks on O-linemen is about 15th on the list of what's wrong with this team.
[/quote]

Only one of those players starts. A sixth round pick and a 5th round pick mainly used for depth is not my idea of developing a lineman. They obviously emphasized skill players over offensive linemen, Trent Williams being the exception.

Just by watching the game yesterday, you can see Morris being hit in the backfield, while still getting positive yards, and obviously RG3 has been hit a lot this year.

I just do not think this offensive line has played well as unit and if you look at the good offensive lines from around the league, those teams drafted those players and developed them, something the redskins have failed to do.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;1040029]Was listening to ESPN DALLAS this morning and they basically were saying as long as Snyder owns the team it will always be a circus for instance now it's the name issue and RG3's knee , team never being able to consistently win under DS.. ETC.. Kinda hard to argue it though[/quote]

Yea I think the only way the Skins win under Snyder is if he hires a Jimmy Johnson kind of coach. Might be a terrible person to be around but he knew how to win. Also was not afraid to confront Jones which I think Snyder needs

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;1040029]Was listening to ESPN DALLAS this morning and they basically were saying as long as Snyder owns the team it will always be a circus for instance now it's the name issue and RG3's knee , team never being able to consistently win under DS.. ETC.. Kinda hard to argue it though[/quote]

They need to look in the fucking mirror. You should call in and asked about their managment example: their cap issue, their hiring of monte Kiffen a fucking disaster, and Jason Garrett. Shanny > Garrett all day long. Garrett is a horrible coach. But yeah they win the division this year 8-8, 9-7 the typical idiot dallas fan will be talking about how great Garrett is.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Chico23231;1040035]They need to look in the fucking mirror. You should call in and asked about their managment example: their cap issue, their hiring of monte Kiffen a fucking disaster, and Jason Garrett. Shanny > Garrett all day long. Garrett is a horrible coach. But yeah they win the division this year 8-8, 9-7 the typical idiot dallas fan will be talking about how great Garrett is.[/quote]


They said dallas is basically in the same boat but skins fans were calling in and basically saying it's time to clean house so it's not just on the WP it's everywhere lol.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=donofriose;1040033]Yea I think the only way the Skins win under Snyder is if he hires a Jimmy Johnson kind of coach. Might be a terrible person to be around but he knew how to win. Also was not afraid to confront Jones which I think Snyder needs[/quote]


Problem is who is that? Saban? Yuck Stoops? No

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=sandtrapjack;1040031]All points you made are correct. I guess my wording was confusing. In a short yardage 4th and goal, if the play call is a fade, the QB does not have time to read through his progressions. If you look at the play again, RG3 had his eyes on that back pylon the whole time and did not even look at anyone else but Moss. It's a 2 step drop then lob it at the pylon. If he goes through his progressions, a fade does not work. My point is, that the 'Skins coaching staff was anticipating double coverage on the 2 receivers that were killing the Vikes all night. But that did not happen.

During the time out the play called was fade to Moss. There was no secondary or check down receivers.[/quote]

thats theyre play weve hit on that route a few times to santana. he hung on if you didnt notice but it was good defense could have even been a pass interference. its a 3 step drop and boom what are you talking about? checkdown? our defense lost that. tony likes to turn it over in those situations. too much overanalysis of that last clutch play.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Stephen A Smith slamming the play calling of Shanahan on First Take. Looks like most everyone think s it is a problem. But our defense and Chris Chester lost that game last night.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

$36M is a lot of money

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=sandtrapjack;1040031]All points you made are correct. I guess my wording was confusing. In a short yardage 4th and goal, if the play call is a fade, the QB does not have time to read through his progressions. If you look at the play again, RG3 had his eyes on that back pylon the whole time and did not even look at anyone else but Moss. It's a 2 step drop then lob it at the pylon. If he goes through his progressions, a fade does not work. My point is, that the 'Skins coaching staff was anticipating double coverage on the 2 receivers that were killing the Vikes all night. But that did not happen.

During the time out the play called was fade to Moss. There was no secondary or check down receivers.[/quote]

I agree completely. It was a single read for Griff, and no other option. Which leads directly to the question why the shortsightedness of the play caller? Why only a single read? They anticipated strong pressure, a blitz perhaps, maybe 6 man pressure, because you'd assume most offensive lines(not saying ours necessarily) are expected to hold up against a single blitzer. If you make that assumption that leaves only one player capable of being double covered. So by design, they decide a half fade/corner route kind of pass to the smallest receiver on the field into the short side of the endzone is the highest percentage play in that position. It just doesn't jive. I understand people saying Tana has made that play in the past, but based on that specific situation it is not your highest percentage play. That I have to put on the coaches. Mainly Kyle's, (unless it's Mike who has redzone and 3rd down duties, I doubt it though) clutch situational playcalling ineptitude.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Here is a nice article on Redskins Special Teams from cbssports.com:

By Ryan Wilson | CBSSports.com November 8, 2013 11:53 am ET

"[B]In news that will surprise no one, the Redskins have the NFL's worst special teams unit.[/B] [I](my bolding)[/I] Mediocre returns, shoddy coverage and blocked punts and field goals tend to do that. And now, after Thursday night's game against the Vikings, we can add 'failed fake punt' to the mix.

Of course, the Redskins' futility is such that they couldn't even properly pull that off; there was an false-start penalty on the play. This negated punter Sav Rocca's 'pass to nowhere' ...

But Washington's special teams being what it is still found a way to mess this up. The ensuing punt led to a 20-yard Vikings return that also benefited from a Redskins 15-yard personal foul penalty.

[B]To recap: Redskins failed fake punt saved by Redskins false start but the subsequent 46-yard punt netted just 16 yards because of the 20-yard Vikings' return coupled with a Redskins personal-foul penalty.[/B] ([I]my bolding)[/I] In case you're wondering, Rocca wasn't actually supposed to throw that pass. He was, you know, supposed to punt it."

[I]I'd like to add that, from the replay, it looks like the play would have worked had it been called because Niles Paul would have been looking for the ball. That is, it would have worked if there hadn't been a procedure penalty against the Skins prior to the play. So maybe the play that wasn't called should have been called even though it wouldn't have counted if it had worked.

I have been following the Redskins since my childhood in the late 1950's and I can attest that the Redskins Special Teams this season are the worst, by far, that I have ever seen.[/I]

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Joke

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=los panda;1040045]$36M is a lot of money[/quote]

1/2 of that is a lot of money too. the thing is, do we trust shanny to use that money? I'm starting to seriously question his ability to judge talent, other than that of a running back.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

I don't think it's worthwhile to nitpick at specific plays, players, or play-calls at this point. The problems here are way bigger. Looking at last night's game you see several themes or reoccurring problems from this season, last season, and even the whole Shanahan tenure:

1) Horrible defense. If there's one overarching theme if Mike's time in DC it is just terrible, terrible defense. Despite spending considerable resources in draft and FA to rebuild/remold this D into a 3-4 it's just a garbage unit.

2) Lousy discipline/preparedness among both players and coaches. This covers the penalties and missed assignments among players and horrible clock management. Having no timeouts (in a close game) in the last few minutes and long delays between plays is just inexcusable. It's an embarrassment to pro football.

3) Incomplete games/effort. The defense sucked all game, and offense really sucked in the 2nd half, adding just 3 points against a defense basically as bad as ours.

4) Offensive line that sucks in pass protection.

5) Lack of intensity/motivation, with few exceptions.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=The Goat;1040054]I don't think it's worthwhile to nitpick at specific plays, players, or play-calls at this point. The problems here are way bigger. Looking at last night's game you see several themes or reoccurring problems from this season, last season, and even the whole Shanahan tenure:

1) Horrible defense. If there's one overarching theme if Mike's time in DC it is just terrible, terrible defense. Despite spending considerable resources in draft and FA to rebuild/remold this D into a 3-4 it's just a garbage unit.

2) Lousy discipline/preparedness among both players and coaches. This covers the penalties and missed assignments among players and horrible clock management. Having no timeouts (in a close game) in the last few minutes and long delays between plays is just inexcusable. It's an embarrassment to pro football.

3) Incomplete games/effort. The defense sucked all game, and offense really sucked in the 2nd half, adding just 3 points against a defense basically as bad as ours.

4) Offensive line that sucks in pass protection.

5) Lack of intensity/motivation, with few exceptions.[/quote]


which is y we are a 3-6 football team

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Please someone give me the arguement why Burns should continue as coach of Special Teams?

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=The Goat;1040054]I don't think it's worthwhile to nitpick at specific plays, players, or play-calls at this point. The problems here are way bigger. Looking at last night's game you see several themes or reoccurring problems from this season, last season, and even the whole Shanahan tenure:

1) Horrible defense. If there's one overarching theme if Mike's time in DC it is just terrible, terrible defense. Despite spending considerable resources in draft and FA to rebuild/remold this D into a 3-4 it's just a garbage unit.

2) Lousy discipline/preparedness among both players and coaches. This covers the penalties and missed assignments among players and horrible clock management. Having no timeouts (in a close game) in the last few minutes and long delays between plays is just inexcusable. It's an embarrassment to pro football.

3) Incomplete games/effort. The defense sucked all game, and offense really sucked in the 2nd half, adding just 3 points against a defense basically as bad as ours.

4) Offensive line that sucks in pass protection.

5) Lack of intensity/motivation, with few exceptions.[/quote]

6) The worst ST's in the league.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;1040056]which is y we are a 3-6 football team[/quote]

A lot of it is still overrall arrogance and cockiness too. They don't realize they are a subpar football team. Garcon stupidly insists on spinning the ball on the ground like some Jr. high school kid on every catch, whether it's a big play or a four-yard gain. But then he drops crucial ones when it counts. They take the same idiotic penalties over and over, as if they think they won't get nailed the next time around.

It's just arrogance and stupidity and that oozes from the head coach on down the rest of the tree.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;1040029]Was listening to ESPN DALLAS this morning and they basically were saying as long as Snyder owns the team it will always be a circus for instance now it's the name issue and RG3's knee , team never being able to consistently win under DS.. ETC.. Kinda hard to argue it though[/quote]

They have their own issues down there and should probably STFU about all that...what have they done lately?

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Sonny9TD;1040041]Stephen A Smith slamming the play calling of Shanahan on First Take. Looks like most everyone think s it is a problem. But our defense and Chris Chester lost that game last night.[/quote]

Stephen A is a tool, and doesn't equate to "everyone".

Defense

Defense

Defense

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;1040056]which is y we are a 3-6 football team[/quote]

No intention of arguing with you, I'm tired of seeing folks around here nitpicking each other, when we all know it's because the TEAM sucks lol. But what I want to say about our record, is it's not real.

I heard an analyst talking about how much each team has spent losing over the season, and we're second to last behind Jax with 0 wins. I would put our real record at 1-8. Oakland and Chicago would have been losses if not for a bevy of random injuries (to Oakland's offense and Chicago's defense).

We deserved to win the San Diego game because both offense and defense played a complete game. Outside of that we haven't deserved a win all season long.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Chico23231;1040058]Please someone give me the arguement why Burns should continue as coach of Special Teams?[/quote]

Uh... I bet he's a snappy dresser?

No but really, Burns is turribad.

You'd think there's no way we'd hang onto him after this season, but we held onto Danny Smith forever. You know how the Redskins organization always believes in 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th chances. (And no, I'm not talking about the other coaches)

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1040059]6) Poor field position due to the worst ST's in the league.[/quote]

It wasn't this bad the last four years though. This year, epically bad. So yeah, might as well add it to the list because it indicates overall regression.

This one is the hardest loss to take over the past 2 yrs IMO. Simply because we were Rolling them and were expected to win. Now reality sits back in .

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Chico23231;1040058]Please someone give me the arguement why Burns should continue as coach of Special Teams?[/quote]

He won't be here but it's not all on him.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=The Goat;1040063]No intention of arguing with you, I'm tired of seeing folks around here nitpicking each other, when we all know it's because the TEAM sucks lol. But what I want to say about our record, is it's not real.

I heard an analyst talking about how much each team has spent losing over the season, and we're second to last behind Jax with 0 wins. I would put our real record at 1-8. Oakland and Chicago would have been losses if not for a bevy of random injuries (to Oakland's offense and Chicago's defense).

We deserved to win the San Diego game because both offense and defense played a complete game. Outside of that we haven't deserved a win all season long.[/quote]

Can't agree with you on this because of a number of reasons:

1. There are many NFL games that are decided in the last minute that could go either way.

2. Games are lost as well as won. Detroit tried to lose to us but because Aldrick Robinson dropped a late TD pass we wouldn't let them lose.

3. Teams often play poorly but are not put away by the other team. Then they come back and win on a late score. You don't always have to play a complete game to win.

4. You play your schedule. Injuries happen to all teams and you play against the players who are able to go at the time you are on their schedule.

I should add that I've always agreed with Bill Parcells who said that "you are who your record says you are". So, I say we are a 3-6 team. That's bad enough for me.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Oh how bright the torches get after a loss. Hopefully we win next week so I can see through the brightness.

Garcon dropped a game winning pass
Moss dropped a game winning pass
Reed dropped a game winning pass
RG3 Overthrew by 10 yards Paulsen on a crucial drive
Paulsen dropped a TD
Kerrigan dropped a Game sealing INT

Many more player mistakes. Players make the plays. Vikings made them, and we didn't. That's pretty much the bottom line. Coaches prepare the players to play so I suppose you could lean it on them.

I will admit Haslet seems out of his element coaching the defense. Who would of thought that the DB's would be our strong suit at this point in the year. Morris Maybe?

One play that sticks out to me is :

When we attempted the fake punt. I know it wouldn't of mattered because we were not lined up on the snap, but how does Paul NOT EXPECT A BALL TO BE THROWN HIS WAY? I use to play the wide gunner on the punt team and if NOBODY is lined up over you than you should be screaming for the ball... What? You going to just defend the punt with nobody over top you?

There is a signal in place for when that happens and the play develops. We use to call out Mississippi. Which means "Miss" alignment and the snap would happen and a quick throw.

It just baffles me that players in the PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE fail to recognize things they should of learned in HIGH SCHOOL.

Then again, this could be because of bad special teams coaching. Who know? All I know is i'm a fan and we are 3-6, not 0-6 and we still have a shot because the whole division sucks camel toe. So, I'm hoping we win next week.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;1040026]As i've said a bunch before, if we finish below .500 MS should go, that would mean 3 of 4 years he has finished w a bad record. That just doesn't cut it.[/quote]

We're finishing below 500. There is no way in hell this sloppy ass high school team can finish 500 or better. At this point I've seen enough and I'm sure Snyder has too. We need a change and I would first start with GM. We need a serious hard core GM that lives, eats, sleeps and breathes scouting. If that's the dude they hired from San Diego then so be it. He has a track record of bringing in productive football players.

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1040058]Please someone give me the arguement why Burns should continue as coach of Special Teams?[/QUOTE]

Who do we have on special teams that really stand out?

I think we're seeing now the value of Lorenzo Alexander. And losing Crawford hurt too.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

I haven't seen guys roll over for Vikings like that since berserkers attacked the monastary on Noirmout island in 799 A.D. Haslett stinks!

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Just garbage all around coaching-wise. Our D has been horrible for years -- the entire time we've been a 3-4 defense. No excuses hold water at this point. The entire coaching staff on D has to be held accountable as none of the various moving parts has been working well. Perry Riley has actually regressed this season; the only consistent contributor has been D. Hall. Our D line has been atrocious -- they cannot generate any pass rush at all, and the run-stopping has been hit or miss (literally).

Special teams are a complete disaster -- last night's debacle was not quite as embarassing as the swinging gate, but by 8 year old son said, "Dad, what the heck was that?" I had no answers.

Playcalling was better this week than in the Broncos game, but I still take issue with it. Had Leslie Frasier not inexplicably saved our bacon by using two timeouts to stop the clock, I feel pretty confident we would have lost the game earlier and perhaps not gotten as close to the endzone.

One thing that truly baffles me: our points to yards ratio. We generate more yards for fewer points than any team I can think of. Sometime that happens with turnovers or special teams, but that wasn't true last night.

Skins: 433 yards, 27 points
Viks: 307 yards, 34 points

Against Dallas it was even worse (although our special team breakdowns are a big part of that):

Skins: 433 yards, 16 points
Pukes: 213 yards, 31 points

I think some of it comes down to bad coaching, and in particular bad playcalling at critical junctures -- the times in a game when points are there to be had. To be clear, execution plays a role here too -- even though RGIII had a pretty good game (numbers-wise, one of his best), he was still too locked on his first read (and we had open guys elsewhere), and a number of his passes unnecessarily required tough catches.

It's sad because we had some incredible individual efforts in those games. D. Hall held Dez Bryant to 5 catches, 26 yards. Romo threw for a paltry 170 yards. And we lose by 15 points. I would never have believed it.

Last night, we hold AP to 75 yards on 20 carries (18 of which came on one run). Holding him to less than 100 and less than 4 yards per carry should spell victory. Nope. Not these Redskins.

I am as depressed about the Redskins as I can recall -- mostly because after last season, I thought the team held so much promise. I figured the D would be better -- we didn't lose anyone but a Lorenzo Alexander, and we were getting Merriweather and Orakpo back and drafted some promising rookies. And we lost no one on offense with an offense that was strong last year. But this 3-6 feels a lot worse than last year's 3-6. By a mile.

Thank goodness we have 10 days before the Eagles game -- I need a break from this. And a drink.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=calia;1040077]Just garbage all around coaching-wise. Our D has been horrible for years -- the entire time we've been a 3-4 defense. No excuses hold water at this point. The entire coaching staff on D has to be held accountable as none of the various moving parts has been working well. Perry Riley has actually regressed this season; the only consistent contributor has been D. Hall. Our D line has been atrocious -- they cannot generate any pass rush at all, and the run-stopping has been hit or miss (literally).

Special teams are a complete disaster -- last night's debacle was not quite as embarassing as the swinging gate, but by 8 year old son said, "Dad, what the heck was that?" I had no answers.

Playcalling was better this week than in the Broncos game, but I still take issue with it. Had Leslie Frasier not inexplicably saved our bacon by using two timeouts to stop the clock, I feel pretty confident we would have lost the game earlier and perhaps not gotten as close to the endzone.

One thing that truly baffles me: our points to yards ratio. We generate more yards for fewer points than any team I can think of. Sometime that happens with turnovers or special teams, but that wasn't true last night.

Skins: 433 yards, 27 points
Viks: 307 yards, 34 points

Against Dallas it was even worse (although our special team breakdowns are a big part of that):

Skins: 433 yards, 16 points
Pukes: 213 yards, 31 points

I think some of it comes down to bad coaching, and in particular bad playcalling at critical junctures -- the times in a game when points are there to be had. To be clear, execution plays a role here too -- even though RGIII had a pretty good game (numbers-wise, one of his best), he was still too locked on his first read (and we had open guys elsewhere), and a number of his passes unnecessarily required tough catches.

It's sad because we had some incredible individual efforts in those games. D. Hall held Dez Bryant to 5 catches, 26 yards. Romo threw for a paltry 170 yards. And we lose by 15 points. I would never have believed it.

Last night, we hold AP to 75 yards on 20 carries (18 of which came on one run). Holding him to less than 100 and less than 4 yards per carry should spell victory. Nope. Not these Redskins.

[B] I am as depressed about the Redskins as I can recall -- mostly because after last season, I thought the team held so much promise. I figured the D would be better -- we didn't lose anyone but a Lorenzo Alexander, and we were getting Merriweather and Orakpo back and drafted some promising rookies. And we lost no one on offense with an offense that was strong last year. But this 3-6 feels a lot worse than last year's 3-6. By a mile.[/B]

Thank goodness we have 10 days before the Eagles game -- I need a break from this. And a drink.[/quote]

I just said the same basically, it's a joke that we lost to MIN last night, we don't deserve to win the east now not that we were anyway. Last year we had an excuse for 3-6, it was a Rookie QB, this yr no excuses we just suck plain and simple and I think MS is getting to the point of just being worn down by it all. Looking at him on the sidelines he just looks done, I would not be shocked to see him walk after the season.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040075]Who do we have on special teams that really stand out?

I think we're seeing now the value of Lorenzo Alexander. And losing Crawford hurt too.[/quote]

I thought Paul could ball? I thought we had the best depth in years? I see way too many peanalties on teams and I see our coverage teams amazingly poor. Crawford hurt, but we drafted guys with supposid skills like Thompson. I see a complete clusterfuck of a miscommunication last night, and another game where we had 2 blocked kicks. This drop off is unacceptable.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

This team is an $110 million operation by cap dollars. If you truly believe an additional $18 million makes this a playoff team, you may be a sucker.