Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

Scoring Defense, that's the stat that counts. Our D has given up few td's.

You need to take GW's scheme into consideration; he's employed the cover 2, bend don't break approach this year & it has been overwhelmingly successful w/2 exceptions, the NE & Dallas games. In the latter, we actually got beat a few times when we blitzed Landry instead of playing cover 2.

This is not a dominant shut down unit, but it's one that teams have a hard time scoring on. The talent level is now mediocre, but not the performance.

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

In case anyone did not see this - here is an article form the Washington Times "Caution Trumps Free Spending"

[url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/SPORTS01/212860805/1005/SPORTS]Caution trumps free spending - - The Washington Times, America's Newspaper[/url]

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

[quote=Paintrain;394851]43 catches, 636 yds, 0 TD.. Which #1 WR is he playing like?

Perhaps David Patten, Bobby Wade, Jeff King, James Jones, Eric Johnson? He trails all of them in receptions, yards and/or TD.. Not to mention he's made virtually no impact in the return game..

Sorry, I'm a huge fan of the guy, but that's a bust.[/quote]

I guess I was referring to the games when we actually had a passing attack.

- ARE's had two 100 yard games.
- Zero TD's, sure. However we all know he was stopped at the goal line at least twice this year. Nobody has a problem giving Portis credit for those rushing TD's.
- The dude has a 14.8 yd/rec average. That puts him in some pretty solid company: Andre Johnson (15.0), Chad Johnson (14.9), Plexico Burress (14.4), Chris Chambers (14.4), Larry Fitzgerald (14.0).
- Number of games in which ARE has caught a pass and averaged LESS than 14 yards per reception? Three. Number of times TO has had this happen? Five. Reggie Wayne? Five. Larry Fitzgerald? Seven. Randy Frickin' Moss? Seven.

The point here is that I don't think ARE can be blamed for our lowly passing game. The entire passing offense is woeful, so I don't see how he can be viewed as anything other than a pleasant surprise rather than a bust.

He's outplaying Santana, who's the WR1 on this team, and would have equal receiving yardage with Cooley had he played the same number of games -- it's not ARE's fault if our playbook nearly always throws to the TE in the red zone.

Only Redskins fans could find a way to see negatives in something like the play of Randle El this year. Good grief.

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

[quote=Bill B;394987]In case anyone did not see this - here is an article form the Washington Times "Caution Trumps Free Spending"

[URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/SPORTS01/212860805/1005/SPORTS"]Caution trumps free spending*-*-*The Washington Times, America's Newspaper[/URL][/quote]

I think we'll see a cautious approach much like last year. First off, we're not in position to be aggressive because of the cap situation, and second and most importantly I think Gibbs has seen that while free agency can be a valuable tool to supplement a roster, it needs to be used wisely.

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

[quote=Mattyk72;394993]I think we'll see a cautious approach much like last year. First off, we're not in position to be aggressive because of the cap situation, and second and most importantly I think Gibbs has seen that while free agency can be a valuable tool to supplement a roster, it needs to be used wisely.[/quote]

I hope your right on this. I think when teams buy the super expensive free agents more often than not it doesn't always pan out like they planned. If I rememeber correctly wasn't everyone expecting the San Francisco 49ers to make the playoffs after they went in an offseason free agent spending splurge this past offseason - boy that worked out well for the Niners didn't it?

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

[QUOTE=dgack;394991]I guess I was referring to the games when we actually had a passing attack.

- ARE's had two 100 yard games.
- Zero TD's, sure. However we all know he was stopped at the goal line at least twice this year. Nobody has a problem giving Portis credit for those rushing TD's.
- The dude has a 14.8 yd/rec average. That puts him in some pretty solid company: Andre Johnson (15.0), Chad Johnson (14.9), Plexico Burress (14.4), Chris Chambers (14.4), Larry Fitzgerald (14.0).
- Number of games in which ARE has caught a pass and averaged LESS than 14 yards per reception? Three. Number of times TO has had this happen? Five. Reggie Wayne? Five. Larry Fitzgerald? Seven. Randy Frickin' Moss? Seven.

The point here is that I don't think ARE can be blamed for our lowly passing game. The entire passing offense is woeful, so I don't see how he can be viewed as anything other than a pleasant surprise rather than a bust.

He's outplaying Santana, who's the WR1 on this team, and would have equal receiving yardage with Cooley had he played the same number of games -- it's not ARE's fault if our playbook nearly always throws to the TE in the red zone.

Only Redskins fans could find a way to see negatives in something like the play of Randle El this year. Good grief.[/QUOTE]

I don't know that anyone blamed him, but he came in as a #3 WR was promoted to a #2 WR and is putting up the production of a low 3A WR.. 0 TD cannot be ignored.. Yes, he was brought down inside the 5 a few times, how many points does close get you in the NFL, I forget.

Now is it scheme? Sure some of that is it. But he was also brought in to make an impact in the return game, improve field position, make big plays-he hasn't done that this year.. He's done much more hop hop hop, spin out of bounds than make postive yards and change field position.

Look, I'm not saying the guy sucks, as I said I am a big fan of him, but on the field, his production is substandard.

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

Just to add my 2 cents in on ARE...

I think we are grossly overpaying ARE for the production that he brings in. I like ARE but his #'s don't support his salary. This is the case w/ alot of redskins and is a big problem that most of us can clearly see. Some of it does have to do w/ the "system" and lack of a passing game but he's getting paid w/ out major production on O or special teams. Its like having a Ferrari in the garage but not having a license to drive it. Not too smart. ARE is talented and i believe could have a 70-80 catch season but not in our current situation. Now who knows? Next year w/ an improved, healthy o line and hopefully improved JC, its a possibility.

I call this a bad use of our resources.

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

Just an addition to my post above but McCardell could play and put up ARE's and he is cheap.

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

[quote=redsk1;395064]Just an addition to my post above but McCardell could play and put up ARE's and he is cheap.[/quote]

Redsk1, I think the Skins have learned this lesson so they will hopefully not repeat it anymore. They let the Bills sign Derrick Dockery for a ludicrous contract but someone at Redskin Park was smart enough to say that is too much. The risks are too great in my opinion to hand over major signing bonuses like they did in that offseason and not tie them to incentives. I hope that the team utilizes more incentives in their bonuses and this in turn will provide the team a little insurance in case the player does not perform up to expected levels.

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

[quote=Bill B;395070]Redsk1, I think the Skins have learned this lesson so they will hopefully not repeat it anymore. They let the Bills sign Derrick Dockery for a ludicrous contract but someone at Redskin Park was smart enough to say that is too much. The risks are too great in my opinion to hand over major signing bonuses like they did in that offseason and not tie them to incentives. I hope that the team utilizes more incentives in their bonuses and this in turn will provide the team a little insurance in case the player does not perform up to expected levels.[/quote]

Agreed, i think so too.

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

[quote=Paintrain;395049]I don't know that anyone blamed him, but he came in as a #3 WR was promoted to a #2 WR and is putting up the production of a low 3A WR.. 0 TD cannot be ignored.. [/quote]

I guess. How's the rest of our dynamite receiving corps doing? You're looking at total yardage and TD's as if that's the only measure of a guy's contributions, and we both know that isn't the case.

You want to say the catches stopped inside the goal line "don't count", that's fine; how many long runs has Portis reeled off for TD's this year?

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;394993]I think we'll see a cautious approach much like last year. First off, we're not in position to be aggressive because of the cap situation, and second and most importantly I think Gibbs has seen that while free agency can be a valuable tool to supplement a roster, it needs to be used wisely.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. The good news we have almost a full draft this year, which will be very well needed.

And of course FA has always been a big part of Joes thinking process on filling holes and IMO it has been effective.

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

I defiantly hope Gibbs signs an extension. I would have to think that any coach in the NFL that had to deal with everything we’ve gone through this year would not have lost this team after ST died. I'm sure Gibbs has learned a lot in his second go around and I think his hard work will start to payoff.

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

[quote=724Skinsfan;394610]Why does it have to be Windows-based?

iGibbs[/quote]

or better still.... Gibbux

Re: Coach Gibbs might consider extending stay.
 

[quote=irish;394975]I guess I am curious why you think they are more than an ordinary NFL D this year. The numbers you show are good but when they need to make a stop on 1 drive at the end of a game they have blown it more than once. The weak O put the team in a position to win and the D (supposedly the strong point of the team) needs to stop the opponent just once and they dont. IMO if this D had played close to what we thought it would be this team would be at least 9-5 and pretty well assured of a playoff spot instead of needing to win and hoping for help.[/quote]

You have to take into account the human aspect of this defense. In the games where they faltered, they were physically exhausted. It was in those games that the offense could not stay on the field. You can't expect any D to be on the field the whole game and pitch a shutout.

I think this past Giants game was the only one, except the Lions game, where they got the 1st downs when they needed them...at the end of the game to kill the clock.