Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?

Paintrain · 11-14-2006, 01:56 PM

For weeks we've been hearing MB and Gibbs repeatedly say they can't go deep because opposing defenses have played cover 2 or a 2 deep safety shell so the dump offs were 'taking what was available'. Everyone knows the way to beat a cover 2 is throwing to the deep middle or corner routes, 2 routes Brunell didn't have the arm strength or confidence to throw. With JC taking the reins should we see more of those throws against that coverage?

hesscl34 · 11-14-2006, 01:59 PM

Sure we'll see more throws against coverage, and we'll see a lot more interceptions too.

JoeRedskin · 11-14-2006, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hesscl34

Sure we'll see more throws against coverage, and we'll see a lot more interceptions too.

What happened to "Go Skins!!" and the positive spin?

hesscl34 · 11-14-2006, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

What happened to "Go Skins!!" and the positive spin?

Because REALITY is that now that MB is benched we have NO shot at the playoffs. This is all going to be about getting JC ready for next year, and I understand that. But it still blows for this year.

freddyg12 · 11-14-2006, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hesscl34

Because REALITY is that now that MB is benched we have NO shot at the playoffs. This is all going to be about getting JC ready for next year, and I understand that. But it still blows for this year.

I hate to sound blindly optimistic, but look at the nfc, the division schedule & we have a chance. granted, it will take winning 6 of 7 at least, but its still a chance. the D has started to gell, since that stallworth td, & just maybe JC is good enough to get the O to score 17 - 20 a game. Other teams are flailing too in the nfc. We're only 3 games out of 1st & 2 back from the cowpokes, who also happen to be 1-3 in the div.
What if we win 2 in a row, are 5-6 (sound familiar?) and the div. leader is 6-5? Is it still over?

VTSkins897 · 11-14-2006, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freddyg12

I hate to sound blindly optimistic, but look at the nfc, the division schedule & we have a chance. granted, it will take winning 6 of 7 at least, but its still a chance. the D has started to gell, since that stallworth td, & just maybe JC is good enough to get the O to score 17 - 20 a game. Other teams are flailing too in the nfc. We're only 3 games out of 1st & 2 back from the cowpokes, who also happen to be 1-3 in the div.
What if we win 2 in a row, are 5-6 (sound familiar?) and the div. leader is 6-5? Is it still over?

im with you. id rather watch the games hopefully than just giving up. it's not like any of us are playing. i'll still enjoy every game.

vaoutlaws2006 · 11-17-2006, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freddyg12

I hate to sound blindly optimistic, but look at the nfc, the division schedule & we have a chance. granted, it will take winning 6 of 7 at least, but its still a chance. the D has started to gell, since that stallworth td, & just maybe JC is good enough to get the O to score 17 - 20 a game. Other teams are flailing too in the nfc. We're only 3 games out of 1st & 2 back from the cowpokes, who also happen to be 1-3 in the div.
What if we win 2 in a row, are 5-6 (sound familiar?) and the div. leader is 6-5? Is it still over?

gotta love the optimism. with no cp thats going to be a stretch. but adding JC to the mix who supposedly can make all the throws..i guess you never know. as the cliche goes...any given sunday. but my god we will need alot of those "any given sunday's"

TheMalcolmConnection · 11-14-2006, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hesscl34

Because REALITY is that now that MB is benched we have NO shot at the playoffs. This is all going to be about getting JC ready for next year, and I understand that. But it still blows for this year.

Is it because Brunell is benched or because CAMPBELL is starting? Honestly, this is the PERFECT time to put in Campbell. On the road, against a traditionally tame stadium, against a struggling team, is as favorable an environment you could ask for. If he plays well and gets his NFL legs under him, he returns home for a three game homestand in which the Redskins (still mathematically alive) will prove to us if they're up for another miracle finish or not.

hesscl34 · 11-14-2006, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Is it because Brunell is benched or because CAMPBELL is starting? Honestly, this is the PERFECT time to put in Campbell. On the road, against a traditionally tame stadium, against a struggling team, is as favorable an environment you could ask for. If he plays well and gets his NFL legs under him, he returns home for a three game homestand in which the Redskins (still mathematically alive) will prove to us if they're up for another miracle finish or not.

Traditinoally tame stadium??? Have you ever been there? Dude, it is NOT tame. That place is serious!

wilsowilso · 11-14-2006, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hesscl34

Because REALITY is that now that MB is benched we have NO shot at the playoffs. This is all going to be about getting JC ready for next year, and I understand that. But it still blows for this year.

This is the one move we could make that gives us just a little bit of hope to go 7 and 0. Very unlikely, but now at least in the rest of our games the cover 2 won't mean an automatic loss. The safties on the other team can't smoke weed at halftime anymore and now we get to see if Saunders system can work around here.

illdefined · 11-14-2006, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paintrain

For weeks we've been hearing MB and Gibbs repeatedly say they can't go deep because opposing defenses have played cover 2 or a 2 deep safety shell so the dump offs were 'taking what was available'. Everyone knows the way to beat a cover 2 is throwing to the deep middle or corner routes, 2 routes Brunell didn't have the arm strength or confidence to throw. With JC taking the reins should we see more of those throws against that coverage?

THAT, sir...is the plan.

can you tell i'm happy?

i'm sure Moss, Lloyd, ARE and Cooley are too. prolly not Betts tho.

hurrykaine · 11-14-2006, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by illdefined

THAT, sir...is the plan.

can you tell i'm happy?

i'm sure Moss, Lloyd, ARE and Cooley are too. prolly not Betts tho.

hahhahhahahahahahaha...yea, I'm sure Betts, Sellers, etc. are mighty pi$$ed at the demise of the dink and dunk offense.

Beemnseven · 11-14-2006, 02:04 PM

Yeah, it seems like the Redskins are the only team in the NFL who's offense is completely ineffective when the opponent is in a Cover 2.

mheisig · 11-14-2006, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Yeah, it seems like the Redskins are the only team in the NFL who's offense is completely ineffective when the opponent is in a Cover 2.

The Colts had no problem lighting up the Cover 2 on a regular basis. The middle of the field is nice and vulnerable.

EternalEnigma21 · 11-14-2006, 02:23 PM

it looks like hess is more of a brunell fan than a skins fan...

11-14-2006, 01:56 PM	#1
Paintrain Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL Age: 54 Posts: 5,006	Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse? For weeks we've been hearing MB and Gibbs repeatedly say they can't go deep because opposing defenses have played cover 2 or a 2 deep safety shell so the dump offs were 'taking what was available'. Everyone knows the way to beat a cover 2 is throwing to the deep middle or corner routes, 2 routes Brunell didn't have the arm strength or confidence to throw. With JC taking the reins should we see more of those throws against that coverage? __________________ Paintrain's Redskins Fandom 1981-2014 I'm not dead but this team is dead to me...but now that McCloughan is here they may have new life! Jay Gruden = Zorny McSpurrier Kirk Cousins = Next Grossman

11-14-2006, 01:59 PM	#2
hesscl34 Registered User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Germantown, MD Posts: 2,782	Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse? Sure we'll see more throws against coverage, and we'll see a lot more interceptions too.

11-14-2006, 02:04 PM	#13
Beemnseven Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Virginia Beach Age: 50 Posts: 5,311	Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse? Yeah, it seems like the Redskins are the only team in the NFL who's offense is completely ineffective when the opponent is in a Cover 2.

11-14-2006, 02:23 PM	#15
EternalEnigma21 Assistant Regional Mod Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Carbondale CO Age: 44 Posts: 2,958	Re: Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse? it looks like hess is more of a brunell fan than a skins fan... __________________ I am the brute squad.

Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?

Locker Room Main Forum