O line

[TaylorsNotGuilty]

Im a bit worried about the line. Did dallas have a good D-line or is ours bad. Six sacks is unaceptable. Glover manhandled Rabach. Anybody else notice this?

[gortiz]

wow, did glover put a number on Rabach?

Parcells coach team are good, I mean, I'm not surprised they got to us, 5 plus sacks is disturbing though

[MTK]

5 sacks is never a good thing, but yes, Dallas does have a great d-line and they are very deep and physical.

I think they're going to give a lot of offensive lines trouble this year.

[hurrykaine]

I'm happy with Samuels though - a great last ditch effort to keep Ware from getting to Brunell on the 70yd TD pass. And of course, with Jansen playing through injury. R. Thomas is always solid, but even he got called for a false start the other night (can't remember if Thomas has ever been offsides as a redskin before that time).

The guy who really needs to step it up is Dockery.

[MTK]

I saw Rabach get absolutely blown up on a few occasions where it looked like he was going to get pushed back into Brunell before he even finished dropping back.

I haven't gone back and watched the game yet again though, so I can't commment on Dockery.

Seemed like a lot of the pressure came on blitzes, but then again they did manage to bring heat with just their front line, and that was a concern.

I agree, Samuels did a great job, he's back in a big way.

[firstdown]

I was a little concerned about or protection as well. Dallas rotated their D line the entire game which had to help with temps at around 95 degrees.

[skins052bgr8]

I said it before if you look at the game it is not the abilities of our offense poor performance more than it was penalties that killed drives and the Cowboys just got after us and put us in a lot of 3rd and longs with sacks just by looking at the play-by-play. We would have been in position on nearly every possesion to convert 3rd and short if it was not for several holding penalties and sacks. If we can cut those out the personnel are capable to move us down the field to include Brunell. The O line did play a major part in us not sustaining drives in this game rather than the QB or playcalling. Not to mention several moves/scrambles by Brunell to avoid having 10 sacks and making big plays. Seeing the team overcome and pick up the rush to make the key plays does show promise and if we continue to get better to make plays during the blitz teams will cut back on them, but right now that is what teams are going to do to stop us.

[Hog1]

I'm sure Bugel hasn't slept since

[FRPLG]

Honestly I felt like most of their pressure came on LB stunts and safety blitzes. They did get 2.5 sack from their line (Ellis-1, Canty-1, Spears-.5) but the rest came from LBs. I know on at least two that they were coverage sacks where brunell had no where to throw the ball and just took the sack. Rabach got manhandled a little but Glover was crazy quick off the snap a bunch of times and that is real difficult to block when you're snapping and getting blown up at the same time. All in all I felt like with the quality of their front 7 and the amount of gimmicks used to pressure the QB they held up good enough. I was more concerned with out inability to pressure Bledsoe even a little bit with our front 4. We need Arrington back 100% to take some pressure of those front 4.

[Gmanc711]

To be honest, I thought on quite a few of Brunells sacks, that he had adequate time. I counted once that he had 6 seconds, which lets face it, is a lightyear of time in the NFL. Now while hte line didnt play great, I dont think they played " 6 sacks " bad. Ya know?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Gmanc711

To be honest, I thought on quite a few of Brunells sacks, that he had adequate time. I counted once that he had 6 seconds, which lets face it, is a lightyear of time in the NFL. Now while hte line didnt play great, I dont think they played " 6 sacks " bad. Ya know?

You have to factor in the coverage on some of sacks those too.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

You have to factor in the coverage on some of sacks those too.

Yeah, to me it looked like there was really no one open. One time they pointed that out actually. However, on a full-on blitz then someone must have been left open right? Or at the least in one-on-one coverage.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Yeah, to me it looked like there was really no one open. One time they pointed that out actually. However, on a full-on blitz then someone must have been left open right? Or at the least in one-on-one coverage.

well there's only 11 on their side too right?

are Santana and Patten not fast enough to break single coverage? or is Brunell waiting till they're TOO open to throw the ball to them and not check down? the eternal question.

if all those Blitzes were done by the LBs, why wasn't Cooley getting more balls in the middle instead of Portis in the flat?

and can we please lose the WR screen? or at least keep it to once a game.

[SmootSmack]

I think Patten has been a bit of a disappointment so far. I haven't really seen him get separation the way he did in the preseason.

And it seemed like Brunell was looking to Robert Royal before he thought of Cooley.

[Gmanc711]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

You have to factor in the coverage on some of sacks those too.

Oh absolutley. It wasent a knock on Brunell as much as it was a defending of the oline.