Redskins-Lions Game Reviews

[GTripp0012]

Defense first:

It's hard to find a way to logically blame a defense for where on the field the opponent takes over against it. You can blame a team's offense or it's special teams unit, but blaming the defense for where drives against a defense start isn't logically sound in most cases. For the Redskins in this game, giving up 31 offensive points to the Lions is probably not a great effort for a team that has done so well in limiting points this year relative to the opportunities an offense has had to score points. Still 31 points to the Lions?

The most prominent reason for Detroit's offensive explosion, outside of the fact that Detroit is averaging 26 PPG this year, best in the NFC, is that every one of the Lions 5 scoring drives started on the Redskins' end of the 50. That's it right there. The field position game was actually more in favor of the Lions that even that makes it sound, but the Redskins defense created two more big turnovers to stem the tide a little bit.

The culprits here were the normally reliable Redskins coverage teams (Anthony Armstrong had one really bad coverage breakdown), as well as the consistently unreliable offense. Those units combined to give the Lions 7 different drives that began on the Detroit 48 or closer to the end zone. Matthew Stafford may have thrown four TDs in this game, but some of those were really thrown by the return units.

So with their backs against the wall all day, the Redskins defense performed pretty darn well. Ultimately, in the fourth quarter, when the Redskins made a man-coverage adjustment and started putting Matthew Stafford on the spot, they just didn't have a solution to cover the normally unreliable Calvin Johnson. Johnson took over this game to finish with 9 catches for 101 receiving yards, and three touchdowns. Johnson was targeted 17 times, with two of those targets (both completions) called back by holds. If we ignore that Stafford got those throws off due to illegal activity in the backfield, Johnson caught 11 of 17 passes for 139 yards, which falls into "gamebreaker" status.

Johnson drew DeAngelo Hall 12 times, LaRon Landry 4 times, and Carlos Rogers once. Landry and Rogers combined for 2 of the 6 incompletions, with Hall getting the other four, one of which was an interception. Hall was the only one to draw Johnson in a man coverage assignment (Kareem Moore drew him once on a man switch, and Haslett's gamble paid off -- Stafford never diagnosed it). In the first half, Hall won decisively (3 of 6 completions, but just 45 receiving yards and 1 TD for those efforts, plus Hall picked Stafford). In the second half, Johnson dominated this match-up, adding another TD to go with a 5 for 6 half for 51 yards. 7 of the 8 completions went for first downs.

In the course of the game, Hall didn't beat Johnson nor did Johnson beat Hall. However, when Johnson was winning in the second half, Stafford was clearly more comfortable leading the offense. What Stafford was not on this day was accurate, not even in the slightest. Stafford completed 58% of his passes in this game, but threw underneath 10 yards most of the time. While Stafford missed his targets by multiple feet even standing 10 yards away from him, the Redskins played a style of aggressive zone and man coverage that I had not seen from them on film prior to this game. This makes me excited for the second half of the season. The Redskins defensed Stafford's short throws, rather than letting him dink and dunk to the outside uncontested as we've seen from them in the past.

The route the Redskins still can not defend is the dig (square in) route against cover two and cover three, mostly because the safeties just aren't good enough in coverage to break on that route and make the play. The corner's keep outside leverage as they are taught, and it's not their pass to defend. DeAngelo Hall gives way too much space on deeper out routes still. I can excuse the completions against him on the dig routes because he has outside leverage on the receiver and needs help from the safeties. On the out routes, his help is the sideline which he simply does not use. Carlos Rogers and particularly Phillip Buchanon do not display this problem on out routes, as it seems to be exclusive to Hall. None of our safeties show any ability to get to the dig route in time to defense it, though Landry might get there once in a while. I expect teams to keep running it against us to get between 12 and 20 yards without it being too contested.

Sunday's Defensive Scheme

If Jim Haslett had it to do over again, I suspect he would have sent Brian Orakpo after the quarterback more than he did. Orakpo did not rush much in the first three quarters, as the Redskins tried to match up against three receivers by splitting the distance with underneath players like Landry and Alexander, but Orakpo as well. This allowed him to give Matt Stafford fits with the blitz, and the blitz worked well when the Redskins timed it well. When it wasn't timed up well, Stafford beat it.

Color commentator Tim Ryan gave LT Jeff Backus some love for slowing down Orakpo in this one, but he probably came in prepared to face Orakpo a lot more than he actually saw him. Orakpo's first pressure came on the go-ahead TD drive for the Lions in the fourth quarter. Haslett was right to believe that Stafford's accuracy issues would allow him to be judicious with his pressure schemes and basically pace the first half by playing conservatively and trying to give Stafford as many looks as possible. He won that gamble and things worked out well, but what we saw when push came to shove after the McNabb INT is that, contrary to the gameplan coming in, he turned Orakpo loose after Stafford on every play.

I don't necessarily disagree that it's good to have a game where Orakpo plays some coverage assignments and Adam Carriker and Andre Carter get to set the edges in a defensive package that plays four defensive lineman (Haynesworth, Carriker, Carter/Alexander, Golston/Holliday) in passing downs. The four linemen came at the expense of a nickel package, as Buchanon stayed on the bench for a lot of the 3 WR sets (this was new this game), and the Redskins used Orakpo to split the difference with the slot receivers when Alexander was on the bench.

Ultimately, I don't think Haslett believes this to be the optimal use of his personnel because Orakpo is the fifth rusher instead of the "X" backer in the pressure schemes. When Orakpo rushes from the 5 man pressure scheme, he has to stay outside, and that limits his effectiveness. The Redskins hit Stafford plenty in this game out of these schemes, but the holds and the sacks came out of the rush packages the Redskins have been using all year: Orakpo and Haynesworth on the same side, Carter on the backside wreaking havoc. That's our best pass rushing unit, though it's nice to see we're trying other things to see what we can do.

Individuals in the Front Seven

There's a number of guys I want to talk about here. Brian Orakpo did not play well in this game. He's not an aware player in coverage, and he doesn't set the edge well against the run when you put a body (of any size) on him. Orakpo is a pure pass rusher, not yet a complete football player. That was exposed this week when Orakpo was asked to do other things than go after the passer. He's better at most things, however, than Rocky McIntosh, who is really just a disappointing player at this point in his career. He's a big weakness right in the middle of the defense. Rocky usually makes a bunch of fundamental errors in gap discipline and play diagnosis, and he's undisciplined trying to make plays in space. There are far too many good LBs on this team (Orakpo, Alexander, Carter, Fletcher, Blades, and possibly Riley) to continue putting McIntosh out there. With him, it's not just a 3-4 issue, it's an issue of being a linebacker at the professional level. He simply hasn't developed, and at age 28 now, I can't imagine he'll be back in the future.

On the other hand, we've had a pleasant surprise at the nose tackle position of all places on the defense. The last two weeks, vs. Chicago and Detroit, Ma'ake Kemoeatu has flashed at times and dominated at others on the interior. Remember, that he's coming off that Achilies tear from last season, and he had played straight from the OTA's through the preseason and into the regular season while never sitting. Albert Haynesworth's emergence and playing three consecutive teams with base three receiver offenses has put us in the nickel and dime formations most of the time. That means with some down time in the games, Kemoeatu hasn't really had to play a large role since back in Week 3 in St. Louis, when he still looked hurt and unable to anchor at the point of attack. The Kemo who has played against the Bears (limited snaps) and against the Lions is a completely different player, and the one who we thought we had when we signed him. He made his impact known -- mostly in the opponents backfield.

It's time that we switch the roles of Vonnie Holliday and Kedric Golston. Right now, an ineffective Golston is backed up in the 3-4 by an ineffective Phillip Daniels. Last year, Vonnie Holliday was one of the best 3-4 linemen in the league last year for the Denver Broncos, and he's the best option to start at RDE in the 3-4. Golston plays well on the interior in that 4 man front Haslett uses in the nickel, and he plays the same role Holliday does, spelling him in that package when we're in it for a bunch of snaps in a role. I don't think Golston is better than Holliday in that role, but I know Holliday would be better than Golston playing the DL in the 3-4. That would make Carriker-Kemoeatu-Holliday our best option on the DL in the 3-4 front, with Haynesworth and Golston on the interior in a four man front.

Looking around

I think this is a good defense. I really do. I think it's played like a good defense and is improving every week. This was not a weak offensive unit we played, and I thought the Redskins defense exceeded expecations in this game as a whole, with only a few exceptions on the individual level.

I hadn't seen the speed in the reads that a majority of the players on this defense played with in this game. Guys like Fletcher, and Buchanon, and Landry, and Kareem Moore, and DHall flew around and made plays while the Lions specifically avoided targeting Carlos Rogers in the slot until the very last 4th down play. That the coverage guys stepped up the level of play was impressive.

I think I may have overrated the pass rush ability of this unit. Even on plays where Orakpo is allowed to get after the quarterback, the consistency in the rush varies greatly from drive to drive. I charted the Redskins with four pressures in the first three quarters. While Stafford went to the ground on all of those plays, and couldn't get completely comfortable, the Redskins ended up waiting until Stafford was comfortable to try to pressure him into a mistake. The four man pass rush doesn't always get there, and taking Brian Orakpo out of it makes it a below average rush. That's one of many reasons the Redskins' sack rate has declined so much from last year, even as forced mistakes by our opponents are at an all-time high.

The Redskins have 10 interceptions and forced just as many fumbles. That's one fewer interception than sacks by the Redskins team not credited to Brian Orakpo. 7 sacks for Orakpo could be so much more at the rate he's being held, but Albert Haynesworth now ranks second on the team in sacks with 2.0. He has been inactive for 3/7 of the season. Ended drives by turnovers has worked fantastic, but ending drives by third down sack is something that the Redskins have the personnel for, and absolutely can improve on in their games after the bye.

[GTripp0012]

Now, Offense:

At the end of 141 plays of charting (boy, was this a long one), I can safely conclude that one thing the Redskins did wrong against the Lions was that they did not run the football enough. Speaking just of designed runs, Ryan Torain had all 8 in the first half, and Keiland Williams had all 6 in the second half. The leading rusher in the game was Donovan McNabb, who had no designed runs called for him. A couple of designed runs turned into sight-adjust passes in the slot to Moss, maybe two or three in total.

Normally, when you run the ball this often, it's because the game situations prevented you from running it. But that's not the case here, as the Redskins ran only 6 plays between their last lead in the game and trailing by two scores and being more or less out of it. The first 55 playcalls of the game came with a lead or with a deficit of one score or less (and after trailing 7-0 for a drive, that largest deficit was 14-13 in the 3rd quarter). Fewer than 20 called runs in a game this close is poor offensive balance, especially when the Redskins lack any layers in their passing attack.

It seems to me that making the quarterback hand-off would be a nice intermediary step between running your entire gameplan through him and putting him on the bench for ineffectiveness, but I suppose I am where I am for a reason.

There were strategic reasons not to run the football here, namely, that the Lions interior defensive line wasn't handled all day by the Redskins interior offensive line. However, one week ago against Chicago, we were able to get on their stars with the same personnel we had this week and threw the kitchen sink at them in terms of different ways to attack a defense on the ground. This game, the Redskins ran once in their first 8 plays. Way to set the tone, guys.

All day long, the defensive edge players of the Lions were either on strict upfield attack of the quarterback from a wide position, or they were tighter in a more conventional front to run stunts at the Redskins offensive line. They were not going to let us have our bootleg passing game. Kyle Shanahan was unable to adjust to that simple gameplan from Jim Schwartz and Gunther Cunningham, but the Redskins also had a problem with McNabb in the pocket. McNabb doesn't always stay in the pocket when the protection is there. When Jason Campbell was at his worst last season (around October), he had the same issue: the Redskins OL blew some protections, but they could give strong protection and he'd still move around as if there was pressure on him. McNabb has that problem right now, but instead of running around inside the pocket, McNabb likes to flush to the outside and try to make a play. He's putting incredible pressure on himself to make difficult throws when the receivers don't quite have the scramble drill down yet. These desperation plays are greatly contributing to Chris Cooley's struggles as a receiver this year.

So while the Lions were able to consistently and decisively win the battle at the line of scrimmage, the Redskins were able to give a quarterback room to operate most of the day. I don't think any of the sacks McNabb took in this game were on him with the exception of the two times he tripped and fell down. The Redskins missed assignments all day long, in every quarter.

The Lions had a mismatch with Ndamukong Suh no matter where he lined up, because the scheme Jim Schwartz allows is all about Suh getting opportunities. It's an aggressive 4-man gap attack-first scheme, but here's how the Lions free up Suh to do his worst: they let him rush in the B gap on both sides where he was either the responsibility of Artis Hicks or Trent Williams based on how the Redskins matched their protections. The Lions, intelligently, make sure that the rest of their defensive linemen don't rush in the gaps next to Suh, so Suh is free, if he needs to, to leave his gap and beat his assignment to the other side. That makes Suh unblockable without a double team.

The problem for the Redskins were that they couldn't control Kyle Vanden Bosch, and because they couldn't handle Vanden Bosch, anytime they doubled Suh, it resulted in disaster. If Trent Williams neutralizes Vanden Bosch the next time they play, the Redskins only will allow the handful of pressures to Suh, which won't be enough to win the game.

As it turned out, it shouldn't have been enough. The Redskins should have started protecting with six and seven guys earlier than they did, because if they had put the film of the Giants game vs. the Lions, they would have noticed that the Giants made that same adjustment by the third drive of the game. They didn't need to max protect it, but they needed to stop sending the backs into stupid pass patterns where they had to get the ball because the defense had a free run on McNabb. When the backs stayed in, McNabb had plenty of time to make plays, plays he didn't always make. When the backs tried to get into routes, they usually missed some obvious help situations where they could have saved their quarterback. Aside from one or two protections that were stupidly called, those was the problem with protection in this game: 1) Trent Williams needed to play better, and 2) the backs needed to commit to helping their quarterback out instead of hanging him out. That's it.

Donovan McNabb's timing is terrible. He's late on any play that requires more than a three step drop. He lets the defensive pass rush dictate the timing of the play. He's underthrowing most of his deep passes. I'm mildly concerned about declining arm strength, as he really needs to get his body into a throw to get it out in front of his receiver. Sometimes, he'll throw to a receiver who has already completed his route. It's not like he's getting to these reads late, these aren't even routes that require anticipation. These are usually just longer routes where the ball needs to come out in a reasonable amount of time. McNabb might not be able to control the rate at which he gets sacked, but if getting sacked or pressured is the issue, he could always speed up his execution so that things work on time. I do think McNabb's timing is contributing to the protection woes, but with that said, beat is still beat. McNabb is late AND the offensive protection is getting beat. No QB should be getting sacked 7% of the time in this offense, alas, McNabb is. One or the other could play better, and sacks would cease to be an issue.

By the time Grossman was playing, the Redskins had gotten away from what had been working in the passing game in the middle two quarters. Neither of the two Grossman drives featured a tight end chipping or a back staying in against the four man rush of the Lions. So naturally, Grossman didn't do any better than McNabb under the same conditions, what did you expect?

I think Rex Grossman could have made a bunch of the plays McNabb missed in this game and the last game, but when you play Grossman, you have game-changing errors because he's not particularly accurate and fumbles a lot and forces throws that have no business of being made in the first place. In other words, every mistake McNabb made in the first and fourth quarters is a staple of how Rex Grossman has played in his career.

Individual Offensive Linemen

A few players on the OL played well. We got good production in this game out of the LG position with Lichtensteiger and out of the RT position with both Stephon Heyer and Jammal Brown. I already mentioned that Trent Williams did not play well, and while you'll account for the fact that Artis Hicks was in a huge mismatch most of this game and needed help, he still likely underachieved even those low expectations. Rabach was terrible. Hogs are dirty. Soup is wet. The backs were more of a hinderence on the offense than a help, and it wouldn't have taken too much more patience for Torain and Williams to be assets in pass protection. Fred Davis handled Vanden Bosch a few times on upfield rushes and arguably was a stronger match-up than Trent Williams was.

Some of our protection schemes were just too flawed to give the passer a chance, namely a couple of play action schemes where the back off PA was responsible for a gap on the backside in protection. Sure, Portis can get across the backfield and stick a linebacker at full speed, but I'm not sure how many other backs in this league can. The Lions weren't buying our play action plays, and were instead daring us to run the ball. All those plays actually lost was timing with the receivers.

Mike Sellers really deserves some credit for improvement in the way he's seeing his assignments in this running game. He still plays too much for a team that throws as much as this team does, but when we run, Sellers is now opening up lanes instead of falling down in the backfield. From where I'm from, this is an improvement. Chris Cooley, Santana Moss, and Anthony Armstrong continue to be great pieces in the rushing attack, with Moss now taking on a role in picking up safeties and edge setters inside the box. I can't overstate how useful that is. It would be even more useful if the team ever ran the ball.

Skill Players not named McNabb or Grossman

The team is clearly averse to running the ball with Keiland Williams, but I think he's a better runner than Torain. Torain ran poorly in this game, not using his blocks and only offering a couple of the hard runs that he has become known for. Torain, I'm convinced, is not more than a no. 2 RB off the bench, and right now, I think he's stretched into a role he can't completely handle. Kudos to him for stepping in for an injury to Portis and carrying the load at a level that Willie Parker or Larry Johnson could not, but I happen to think Williams might be better.

McNabb got the ball in Anthony Armstrong's hands deep twice on two Detroit coverage breakdowns. Armstrong's emergence means that Moss rarely goes deep anymore. Moss is a big target in the three step drop passing attack, as he has a good rapport with McNabb, and Moss can quickly help erase long yardage situations in early downs. That's something he's good at.

Some of the Redskins best offensive plays came after holding penalties. The Redskins did a good job of getting that penalty yardage right back without wasting anything but a first down play. Of course, that put the team in second and long, but the simple solution to that is to not get any penalties, or at least as many as the Redskins did in this game. Way too much shooting oneself in the foot.

Generally Speaking

This offense does a number of things well, but fewer things well than it once did. The Redskins can still create opportunities down the field. They aren't converting those opportunities as they were earlier in the season because McNabb isn't playing as well as he was earlier in the season. This is evident by the increase in turnover rate in the last three games. McNabb now has 8 INTs (lets drop that to 7 to omit the GB hail mary at the end of regulation), and 4 fumbles, which he has been fortunate to have recovered. That's 11 turnovers in just over 300 touches.

One of the places McNabb was getting that value from in the past was that he himself wasn't turning the ball over. His first Redskins INT came in the Rams game. He had two "game" interceptions in the first five games. In the last three games, he has five, plus one more dropped interception (three) than he had in the first five games (two). All of his fumbles have occured in the last three games. That's an alarming turnover rate, from best in the league to among the worst quicker than you can say "Mark Sanchez."

Now McNabb's only value to an NFL offense the way he is playing was evident in this game: he found Anthony Armstrong deep twice, and he had a scramble for 36 yards, and he's still a danger to defenses from outside the pocket. That's three or four big plays a game versus about the same number of crushing mistakes, and in between, the passing game is a complete waste of our time.

It's not time to replace Donovan McNabb as quarterback of the Redskins, but it's time to lean on the 4.5 yard per rush average of our running backs over the Cutler-esque 6.3 AYPA of our QB. Ultimately, the Redskins are just a little below average as a passing football team, but the trend is in the wrong direction. To take the optimist's perspective on the matter: the bye came at a very good time. To take the pessimist's perspective: this offense can't and won't compete unless #26 is back there making sure the passing operation runs well.

[freddyg12]

Great job as always & thanks much!

I was wondering what your take on Lichtensteiger v. dockery is? I know you've said that Licht. gets blown up in pass pro, which seems obvious so often. But you also said that he makes good adjustments in protection schemes picking up blitzes.

I really felt after the last 3 weeks that if this is going to be a pass first offense (as you note above) then Dock should get back in. Also, seems the success running has been on the right side more than the left this year.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

Great job as always & thanks much!

I was wondering what your take on Lichtensteiger v. dockery is? I know you've said that Licht. gets blown up in pass pro, which seems obvious so often. But you also said that he makes good adjustments in protection schemes picking up blitzes.

I really felt after the last 3 weeks that if this is going to be a pass first offense (as you note above) then Dock should get back in. Also, seems the success running has been on the right side more than the left this year.

Neither Dockery nor Lichtensteiger is much of a run blocker. I compared Lichtensteiger to Pete Kendall earlier in the year because they are very stylistically similar. Kendall, however, was a great player in making those really difficult reach blocks that guards sometimes have to make. Lichtensteiger is adequate at best.

Lichtensteiger is playing because as the coaches thought the rushing attack would develop, he offers far more scheme diversity than Dockery does. You can do so much more with Lichtensteiger in the game in terms of pulls, traps, reaches, cuts, and screens (particularly screens). The problem is, by and large, we don't really do enough of these things to justify telling Derrick Dockery "you don't fit this scheme". Theoretically, he wouldn't fit the scheme, but the scheme more often than not is "try not to screw this up."

I think Dockery is a good pass protector for a left guard. I also think Kory is a pretty good pass protector. There's no question that Kory has blown as many blocks in 6 starts as Dockery blew all of last year. He's younger and has never really had consistent playing time at the NFL level. But I think Trent Williams gets more out of working with Lichtensteiger about how this offensive scheme wants to diversify its protections, and I think that at his peak development, Kory Lichtensteiger is going to be a leader on an NFL interior line, and a centerpiece on the line.

Right now, he's a guy struggling through his first starting assignment in the NFL. And it's hard to not see Derrick Dockery offering more value at that position right now. But while Casey Rabach and Artis Hicks have limited future value on the Redskins, I think Lichtensteiger has some.

[freddyg12]

thanks! great summary. I always liked Dock & was happy he came back here, disappointed he lost his job, especially when I see DT's coming through so quickly to McNabb.

btw, I can't believe that no one else has posted on this thread!

[GTripp0012]

One controversial thing I want to point out is that I think the Rams would have benefited more from drafting Ndamukong Suh first overall than Sam Bradford. I don't think they are ever going to look back and wish they hadn't taken Bradford. But where Bradford projects as a standard level franchise quarterback, Suh looks like a once in a lifetime defensive lineman.

Ndamukong Suh is ALREADY the best 4-3 defensive tackle in all of football. The scary part: he's 23.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

One controversial thing I want to point out is that I think the Rams would have benefited more from drafting Ndamukong Suh first overall than Sam Bradford. I don't think they are ever going to look back and wish they hadn't taken Bradford. But where Bradford projects as a standard level franchise quarterback, Suh looks like a once in a lifetime defensive lineman.

Ndamukong Suh is ALREADY the best 4-3 defensive tackle in all of football. The scary part: he's 23.

But, but he's a Lion. He must suck. There past history is proof.

:FIREdevil:cheeky-sm

Seriously, I feel vindicated for being scared he would wreck us.

[30gut]

Another good review GT
and i again agree

o I would like to see Tana go vertical every once in awhile though

o The play calling is Mike Martz-weird especially when we were leading-
why don't we run the ball more?

o I too get the feeling that they don't have faith in Keiland running the ball despite his apparent ability which i thought was evident in pre-season

o McNabb's rhythm is off but its been off for awhile and i think the onus is on Kyle to get him in rhtythm (which might explain why Kyle called so many passes to start the game-but i haven't downloaded this game yet but i don't recall whether they were quick rhythm passes and my memory tells me they were slow developing bootleg-pay-action passes which everyone seems to blitz since the Eagles game)

o it appears the boot-leg as a means of escaping the pass rush isn't working- i would like to see more sprint out or dash out you know remove the play-action and the turning away from the rush just have Mc5 sprint to the edge and throw ala Culter in Denver

o Kyle and McNabb have to get together and develop a better understanding of when McNabb should take the check down and when to press the issue
-Even if it mean Kyle needs to design and call plays that force McNabb to get rid of the ball short
Up until now i've never understood why any coach would call a play like 'all hitch' where every receiver runs a quick hitch but Kyle needs to get Mc5 to hit the quick passes when its the best option and imo with our OL its gonna be the right decision more often then not

Defense

o why don't we play tighter near in the RZ especially inside the 10?
Why don't we play more tight man more often in general?

[skinster]

I dont agree when you said that Hall and Johnson didn't beat each other in the first half or the rest of the game. 1st half stats of 45 yds for 1 td doubled is 90 yds for 2tds, which are great numbers. But in defense of your point, it seemed to me like Johnson's TD's came on un-defendable throws. It seemed like the scheme we played made those throws impossible to cover, which is more of a knock on the scheme, not deangelo.
Also I wanted to ask, is it possible to move Dock over to the right? Hicks is TRASH!

[mlmdub130]

awesome break down, this was the first game i haven't watched in the past seven years. does anyone know when they are replaying it on nfl replay, nfl.com it says 1 am tomorrow morning when i set it up on directv it didn't say what game it was in the description in the online guide. just want to make sure i can watch it i forgot to dvr the game

[Chico23231]

Offensive game planning and execution was just horrible by Kyle Shanny. Poor, poor job starting with him, then Oline, then McNabb. I think the TEs, WRs, and RBs are playing the best with the talent they have...

We should be getting better as the season goes on and we are not especially with the QB and Oline play.

3 down is just atrocious...simply horrible. Im sorry but the second half of last season we played better on offense and thats not saying much. The last 3 games (1-2) we easily could have loss all 3 and im putting it all on Kyle, McNabb and the O line. Defense has played relatively fine, they keep us in the game.

[backrow]

Tripp, your'e assessment is better than any of the talking heads on TV or the fat fingers in printed articles. You are a little to complicated for me, maybe I'm getting it, maybe I'm too old to understand, but it's all good.

I don't agree wholeheartedly on the O-line. I think the problems all start with Heyer, Hicks, Heyer, Lictensteinenbergeresqquezinstine, Heyer, Rabach, and Heyer, and will not end until we get someone else. (Read NFL Draft 2011). And I forgot to mention that I really do not like Heyer. Rabach is a close, very close second to Heyer. Over half this line is not NFL caliber.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by backrow

Tripp, your'e assessment is better than any of the talking heads on TV or the fat fingers in printed articles. You are a little to complicated for me, maybe I'm getting it, maybe I'm too old to understand, but it's all good.

I don't agree wholeheartedly on the O-line. I think the problems all start with Heyer, Hicks, Heyer, Lictensteinenbergeresqquezinstine, Heyer, Rabach, and Heyer, and will not end until we get someone else. (Read NFL Draft 2011). And I forgot to mention that I really do not like Heyer. Rabach is a close, very close second to Heyer. Over half this line is not NFL caliber.

Bottomline is Heyer, Hicks, Lickinwhater would not be starters on 95% of other teams period.

Rabach clearly is and has been an issue in the past, and probably would be considered a below average center by scouts.

Our Oline is clearly the weakness of this team and will continue to be until we add better talent specifically in the interior. Jamal Brown not being healthy has hurt us a great deal.

[GTripp0012]

I think the OL is a problem. I also think it's far and above what we witnessed last year. Part of that is because Rabach is playing better (more because of an epically bad 2009, 2008, and 2007), part of it is because there's an actual interest in playing guys who fit an ideal scheme rather than just playing the best five players we could acquire without putting in actual effort. Most of it is because Artis Hicks, if nothing else, has started all 8 games at RG. At this time last year, we had 4 different RGs already. Number 5 was a game away.

McNabb has fairly decent protection, which is to say that protection is not the 1a problem with this offense. I don't think we protect at a level sufficient enough to facilitate an elite passing or rushing offense. I do think we got dominated on the line of scrimmage by the Lions. But I think the OL has outperformed the RBs and QBs on offense this year.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't fix the problems and try to upgrade at C and RG, and expect Trent Williams to bounce back from a game where he clearly didn't handle KVB as he was expected to. We need more out of the OL than we got vs. the Lions. This comes a week after Julius Peppers and Israel Idonije went nuts against us. There is room to improve.

But even if there is no immediate improvement, the offensive skill players need to play better and produce more. They are the ones not producing any touchdowns. They are the underachievers on this unit.

I fear that we've let McNabb take so many hits (forget sacks) to this point that we're seeing indirect effects of that pressure in his play. But the quantity of hits on McNabb isn't occurring because of poor OL play, it's occurring because the scheme requires the QB to make plays under duress and frankly, far too often.

You could argue that improving the front five might make it easier and more sensible to run the football, and that running the football would result in fewer hits on McNabb. That's all true. But it's also a chicken or egg argument. We throw too much so McNabb gets hit a lot and then he doesn't produce because he's getting hit too much. Or we have to throw as much as we do because that's where our offensive capabilities are and we're losing that capability because we don't have any balance in our offense. Pick your explanation. We just have to change something.

[GTripp0012]

In essence, you have the inconsistencies in protection throwing off McNabb's timing in the offense, and you have McNabb's timing throwing off the consistency in the protection.

I think the easiest way out of this circle of offensive death is to rely on the running backs for improved protection (namely, don't release, McNabb doesn't even see the RBs anyway unless there's a protection breakdown...usually caused by a back releasing too early), and improved running. Unless the RBs raise their level of play, the lack of continuity between McNabb and the OL is destined to continue.