Very disappointing Call Playing...could have cost us game!!!

redrock-skins · 11-07-2004, 09:18 PM

I don't think the playcalling was that bad down the stretch. Detroit could not do anything against our D and everytime Brunell drops back, I have to hold my breath. After the blocked punt, all we had to do was "not F up!"

bedlamVR · 11-08-2004, 02:30 AM

Exactly we won didn't we? Had Brunell thrown a TD one of the recivers cough up a fumble or even if Portis had on a sweap or delay then we would have lost. Sure it is conservative the play callinging but it sealed the win.

illdefined · 11-08-2004, 02:44 AM

k, let me be the first to say it. move Portis into the QB spot and have another TE to block in Brunell's place. Portis can run AND throw form the snap. not much form, but he caught Coles right in stride in the corner of the endzone, something Brunell hasn't done all year!

JWsleep · 11-08-2004, 02:57 AM

The fourth quarter showed me that Gibbs does not trust Brunnell at all. Look, this is good playcalling if you've got no passing game. Gibbs has clearly recognized this, and he's trying to win without the pass (which is pretty incredible given Gibbs Air-Coryell pedigree).

Which of course begs the question: couldn't Ramsey do at least this? Is he so bad in practice that Gibbs is afraid to start him? Is he so fragile that Gibbs is saving him until the o-line becomes the Hogs, mark II? I say give the kid a shot. He won't have to do much given our D and Portis, but at least we'll begin to learn if we've got a good QB there, or if we have to look to the draft or free agency again.

offiss · 11-08-2004, 04:39 AM

Gibb's has alway's gone to the running game with a lead in the second half, with the way our D is playing I was all for it, but there is a bigger reason I was all for it, I didn't want Brunell throwing incomplete passes stopping the clock, or giving up a big play to the defense as he has been prone to do, let's face it the guy is not going to get better just look at his body language out there, he can't step up into the pocket or step into a throw, he drop's back not looking for reciever's but looking for on rushing lineman, you can see in his footwork and body language that he is preparing himself to move backward's in anticipation of a defender breaking through instead of focusing on reciever's down field, he then will throw off his back foot falling backward's and that is why his ball's keep riding high, the guy mentally is done, he is big time happy feet.

redsk1 · 11-08-2004, 03:31 PM

The playcalling worked today and we picked up a win. However, its just not going to be enough against other teams. We are going to have to pass the ball or other team will stack up the line just like the Lions did when they figured out we were not going to pass in the 4th qtr. I did watch Comcast after the game and B. Mitch was as "mindboggled" as we are. You are not going to win many games by throwing for 58 yards.

SkinsRock · 11-08-2004, 05:53 PM

I understand running the ball to a) run out the clock, and b) keep Brunell from making a mistake, but three 3 and outs in a row by running 9 straight running plays is a little too much. The whole thing about running to run out the clock, is that you need to KEEP THE BALL! And this is done by getting first downs, so one or two high percentage passes would have at least opened things up a little and helped us keep the ball.
It worked this time and we won, so I'm happy, but against teams like Philly, the Giants, Minnesota, etc., giving the ball back to their offense like that is just asking for it..

Daseal · 11-08-2004, 06:38 PM

Play action could have gotten someone so open even Brunell could have gotten it to him.

Also, it's not so much running the ball that bothered me as how we ran the ball. Up the middle, behind a fullback. How about letting Portis hit the hole like he did before. Make some first downs. Another TD and we wouldn't of had to worry about one mistake.

That Guy · 11-08-2004, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUNRA

Now if you think Ramsey can play in this atmosphere with no sacks, fumbles or INT's your'e kidding yourself.

i disagree and would like to say that if you think ramsey could possibly be worse than brunell, you're definately kidding yourself.

Quote:

Run the ball, run time off the clock and leave it up to one of the best defenses in the league. Sounds boring but that's the formula for winning with the way this passing game is going.

we switched the running game to pounding out 1 yarders instead of what was actually working earlier in the game though... we should have at least tried for 1st downs...

i don't see how ANYONE can justify starting a QB that's had FOUR sub 100 yard games... thats 4 of 8, not 16... we're only halfway done.

11-08-2004, 02:57 AM	#34
JWsleep Propane and propane accessories Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Houston, TX Age: 55 Posts: 4,717	The fourth quarter showed me that Gibbs does not trust Brunnell at all. Look, this is good playcalling if you've got no passing game. Gibbs has clearly recognized this, and he's trying to win without the pass (which is pretty incredible given Gibbs Air-Coryell pedigree). Which of course begs the question: couldn't Ramsey do at least this? Is he so bad in practice that Gibbs is afraid to start him? Is he so fragile that Gibbs is saving him until the o-line becomes the Hogs, mark II? I say give the kid a shot. He won't have to do much given our D and Portis, but at least we'll begin to learn if we've got a good QB there, or if we have to look to the draft or free agency again. __________________ Hail from Houston!

11-07-2004, 09:18 PM	#31
redrock-skins Impact Rookie Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Seattle Posts: 783	I don't think the playcalling was that bad down the stretch. Detroit could not do anything against our D and everytime Brunell drops back, I have to hold my breath. After the blocked punt, all we had to do was "not F up!"

11-08-2004, 02:30 AM	#32
bedlamVR Special Teams Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 389	Exactly we won didn't we? Had Brunell thrown a TD one of the recivers cough up a fumble or even if Portis had on a sweap or delay then we would have lost. Sure it is conservative the play callinging but it sealed the win.

11-08-2004, 02:44 AM	#33
illdefined Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: nyc Age: 48 Posts: 2,631	k, let me be the first to say it. move Portis into the QB spot and have another TE to block in Brunell's place. Portis can run AND throw form the snap. not much form, but he caught Coles right in stride in the corner of the endzone, something Brunell hasn't done all year!

11-08-2004, 04:39 AM	#35
offiss Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ] Age: 60 Posts: 3,097	Gibb's has alway's gone to the running game with a lead in the second half, with the way our D is playing I was all for it, but there is a bigger reason I was all for it, I didn't want Brunell throwing incomplete passes stopping the clock, or giving up a big play to the defense as he has been prone to do, let's face it the guy is not going to get better just look at his body language out there, he can't step up into the pocket or step into a throw, he drop's back not looking for reciever's but looking for on rushing lineman, you can see in his footwork and body language that he is preparing himself to move backward's in anticipation of a defender breaking through instead of focusing on reciever's down field, he then will throw off his back foot falling backward's and that is why his ball's keep riding high, the guy mentally is done, he is big time happy feet.

11-08-2004, 03:31 PM	#36
redsk1 The Starter Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,351	The playcalling worked today and we picked up a win. However, its just not going to be enough against other teams. We are going to have to pass the ball or other team will stack up the line just like the Lions did when they figured out we were not going to pass in the 4th qtr. I did watch Comcast after the game and B. Mitch was as "mindboggled" as we are. You are not going to win many games by throwing for 58 yards.

11-08-2004, 05:53 PM	#37
SkinsRock Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Crofton, MD Age: 55 Posts: 907	I understand running the ball to a) run out the clock, and b) keep Brunell from making a mistake, but three 3 and outs in a row by running 9 straight running plays is a little too much. The whole thing about running to run out the clock, is that you need to KEEP THE BALL! And this is done by getting first downs, so one or two high percentage passes would have at least opened things up a little and helped us keep the ball. It worked this time and we won, so I'm happy, but against teams like Philly, the Giants, Minnesota, etc., giving the ball back to their offense like that is just asking for it..

11-08-2004, 06:38 PM	#38
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 41 Posts: 8,341	Play action could have gotten someone so open even Brunell could have gotten it to him. Also, it's not so much running the ball that bothered me as how we ran the ball. Up the middle, behind a fullback. How about letting Portis hit the hole like he did before. Make some first downs. Another TD and we wouldn't of had to worry about one mistake.

Very disappointing Call Playing...could have cost us game!!!

Locker Room Main Forum