Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

I can't believe I'm saying this... but are we missing A. Pierce? :frusty:

I was the first to say good riddens, but man, we did not give up big runs last year, and so far three big ones (that screen to Priest today was more of a run than pass).

Also, teams are killing us on the perimeter with sweeps, off-tackle, and toss plays. Could that be because Antonio Pierce was good at reading the play and getting to the play and making the tackle? I would imagine when you give up yards on run plays that are more vertical (east-west) than north-south the linebackers come into play. Our second line of defense seems to be weak from sideline to sideline, i.e. chasing down plays, that was pretty evident on the screen to Holmes today.

Re: I can't belive I'm saying this ...
 

I don't know why our defense is giving up so many big plays without turning the ball over or forcing sacks. Our defense has gone from dominant to just "okay" in a hurry.

Re: I can't belive I'm saying this ... (Should we have kept Pierce)
 

I want some answers.

Re: I can't believe I'm saying this ... (Should we have kept Pierce)
 

Don't forget, missing Shawn Springs has hurt us quite a bit too. We need him back in there, but honestly, I don't believe our defense is going to be as feared as what they were last year. However, look back last week....five 3 and outs forced against Denver's offense. Honestly, would we rather have the DC before Gregg Williams? If so, you're smokin' some strong stuff!

Re: I can't believe I'm saying this ... (Should we have kept Pierce)
 

put arrington in at DE...at least on passing downs

Re: I can't believe I'm saying this ... (Should we have kept Pierce)
 

Look at the list of walking wounded and actual sidelined players, that's why it went wrong today. If we'd had Springs in there instead of The Ade.......

Re: I can't believe I'm saying this ... (Should we have kept Pierce)
 

I dont ever really think its Lamar Marshal being out of postion or anything. I think we are missing Marshal/Arrington on the outside. Holdman is not playing well, in my opinion. I dont need Arringotn in the game, I just need Holdman or whoever our OLB is to start playing better.

Re: I can't believe I'm saying this ... (Should we have kept Pierce)
 

We miss Antonio way more than we miss LaVar.

Re: I can't believe I'm saying this ... (Should we have kept Pierce)
 

We were missing Clark as well weren't we. Plus Noble is out, not that Salave'a isn't a solid replacement, he is.

But when you move Salave'a up to starter then you're pulling some relatively inexperienced player like Boschetti or Killings up the depth chart, and giving them more playing time. Playing time that they might not be quite ready for.

Injuries tend to cause a domino effect

Re: I can't believe I'm saying this ... (Should we have kept Pierce)
 

Right, I had forgotten about Clark! When is he expect back?

Re: I can't believe I'm saying this ... (Should we have kept Pierce)
 

[QUOTE=jhold4th]We miss Antonio way more than we miss LaVar.[/QUOTE]



you got a mouse in your pocket?

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

Just don't bring up Smoot's name.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

We're missing Smoot more than any one of those players. We're weak at CB, we have injuries and we don't have the ever-reliable Smoot.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

We may miss Smoot but only because of injuries.

When Harris and Springs are 100%, it's Fred Who??

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]We may miss Smoot but only because of injuries.

When Harris and Springs are 100%, it's Fred Who??[/QUOTE]

I just hope the two are 100% before New York.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

Pierce chose to leave for something like $300K more. So we did all we could and he just bailed on us. So eff him.

But yeah, it would be better if we had Marshall on the outside, and someone else manning the middle.

I also agree we could use Lavar as a rush end, but I dont want to get flamed for mentioning him. So I wont.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

smoot should have never left, he is on a crappy team now and is in trouble. Smoot never had trouble here.

their AMAZING OUT OF THE PARK GRANDSLAM OFFENSE scored 3 points today...... looks like the vikings can only score when they are on the boat

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

[QUOTE=BigSKINBauer]smoot should have never left, he is on a crappy team now and is in trouble. Smoot never had trouble here.

their AMAZING OUT OF THE PARK GRANDSLAM OFFENSE scored 3 points today...... looks like the vikings can only score when they are on the boat[/QUOTE]


hahaha:laughing-

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

[quote]We may miss Smoot but only because of injuries.

When Harris and Springs are 100%, it's Fred Who??[/quote]

Let's get real here Matty. You and I both know you need more than two starting corners (who by the way have a somewhat long history of not exactly being a reliable for game day.) We should also note that injuries are a part of football, and a big part at that. Teams that don't prepare for them are often sunk extremely quickly.

The difference between Smoot and Pierce was Smoot wanted to stay, and while the numbers on the contracts were similar, the structure of the contracts were immensely different.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]Let's get real here Matty. You and I both know you need more than two starting corners (who by the way have a somewhat long history of not exactly being a reliable for game day.) We should also note that injuries are a part of football, and a big part at that. Teams that don't prepare for them are often sunk extremely quickly.

The difference between Smoot and Pierce was Smoot wanted to stay, and while the numbers on the contracts were similar, the structure of the contracts were immensely different.[/QUOTE]

We've got Harris, Springs and Rogers... not a bad top 3 in my opinion.

Smoot wasn't the best fit in what Williams likes to do, he's just not physical enough. If the Skins really wanted to keep him and/or Pierce they easily could have.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

I disagree that Smooty wasn't physical enough. I think that PRIOR to Williams arrival, Smoot played a little soft. I think that the entire defense gained some swagger throughout last season and Smoot ended up being a great tackler and made some nice hits.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

I do agree though. I like the Springs, Harris and Rogers defensive back field just fine.

Springs is arguably the most vital cog in that whole defense, with Lemar Marshall being a close second.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

If you minus the three big plays from the past two weeks we are shuting O's down. KC is a high powered O but they only scored 14 points and I would take that any day. We held the Bronco's to under 100 yards passing and they had two big plays. I feel some guys have been out of position on a few plays but teams had big plays on us last year.It's all about the turn overs and the lack of turn overs.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

marshall is doing ok but not as good as peirce, holdman is average, and he's missing on some stuff . lavar would help, but williams is calling the shot's. but i believe what we are seeing is a multi layer problem.the linebackers are functioning but are not dominating, the secondary is not up to snuff, rogers is doing well, harris is doing well but jmoh aka toast isn't and number 41 is not doing well. except for taylor we have very little support to the line. if it gets past the line we seem to be having a problem.where was stoudamire yesterday?depth at is issue. there is a weakness on the edge of the d.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

Don't forget here people....the D held the tandem of Johnson and Holmes to less than 90 yards rushing yesterday. In fact, I belive Holmes had less than 40 yds rushing the entire game. The D is still very suspect on the bootleg and screen type action, something they need to fix quick!

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

i think holmes had less than 25

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

18 yards on 14 rushes i believe

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

definitely missing pierce and his sure tackling

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

I think losing smoot is big no matter what people say. He is on a shit team now, but he was great in Williams scheme. There is no doubt in my mind we would be better with him.

As for Pierce leaving I honestly believe Marshall may exceed everyone's potential and be as good if not better then him by seasons end.

I think also that Lavar has exceptional physical skills for the NFL so we should find some way to work him into the games. I cannot except Warick holdman is better. You don't go to Pro Bowls, terrify opposing players while having 4 different D coordinators and not be able to play within a scheme. GW needs to inspire LA to greatness not cross his hands and say he isn't ready. It's unacceptable.

Re: Should we have kept Antonio Pierce?
 

[QUOTE=STPainmaker] You don't go to Pro Bowls, terrify opposing players while having 4 different D coordinators and not be able to play within a scheme. GW needs to inspire LA to greatness not cross his hands and say he isn't ready. It's unacceptable.[/QUOTE]

Man, good post. I totally agree. I think if it is indeed LaVar not being able to fit into GW system, is he inspiring LaVar to greatness? I just don't hear the same level of confidence from Williams when talking about LaVar like you do when you mention Sean Taylor. His face lights up when you mention number 21.