Problems with the Defense, IMHO

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

That they beat us with 16 points speaks poorly of our offense, not our defense.

I see. So with the score tied, and 5:41 left to play in the game, it doesn't speak poorly of the defense when they allowed an 11-play drive, using up all but one minute and twelve seconds, and giving up the game winning points?

You'll have to explain that one to me.

[sniks]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I see. So with the score tied, and 5:41 left to play in the game, it doesn't speak poorly of the defense when they allowed an 11-play drive, using up all but one minute and twelve seconds, and giving up the game winning points?

You'll have to explain that one to me.

not sure what the average is in the nfl ,but it cant be much less than 16 pts.Thats not a bad effort.No tds on offense is horrible against a twenty something ranked def.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I see. So with the score tied, and 5:41 left to play in the game, it doesn't speak poorly of the defense when they allowed an 11-play drive, using up all but one minute and twelve seconds, and giving up the game winning points?

You'll have to explain that one to me.

Just so this is clear, you are going to analyze how well a defense played based on one drive? Okay, well I'm just going to have to differ with you. Perhaps I was watching another game but it was our offense that lost the game, not the defense.

Oh yeah, by the way, our defense scored more points than our offense.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

Just so this is clear, you are going to analyze how well a defense played based on one drive? Okay, well I'm just going to have to differ with you. Perhaps I was watching another game but it was our offense that lost the game, not the defense.

Oh yeah, by the way, our defense scored more points than our offense. Point, set, match.

No, there were other drives one can point to that disproves the Redskin defense 'stood strong' at the end of the game -- for instance, the 87 yard drive at the start of the fourth quarter which began at Oakland's 6 yard line. That drive led to the tying score. Lots of Warpathers conveniently remember only the goal line stand, but the Raiders didn't need a touchdown to win the game. All they needed was a field goal. Pin the blame on whoever you want, Ramseyfan. The fact is, when the Redskins were ahead, the defense allowed 13 points and crumbled -- just like they did last week against Tampa Bay.

You seem to associate my criticism of the defense with excuses for the offense. I've made no such excuses. I just haven't started in with the offense yet.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

No, there were other drives one can point to that disproves the Redskin defense 'stood strong' at the end of the game -- for instance, the 87 yard drive at the start of the fourth quarter which began at Oakland's 6 yard line. That drive led to the tying score. Lots of Warpathers conveniently remember only the goal line stand, but the Raiders didn't need a touchdown to win the game. All they needed was a field goal. Pin the blame on whoever you want, Ramseyfan. The fact is, when the Redskins were ahead, the defense allowed 13 points and crumbled -- just like they did last week against Tampa Bay.

You seem to associate my criticism of the defense with excuses for the offense. I've made no such excuses. I just haven't started in with the offense yet.

You're right. The defense made some big mistakes, particularly in terms of pass defense. I just feel the offense was even worse than the defense. Sorry about misinterpreting your posts. I thought you were ignoring the offense's poor performance.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

You're right. The defense made some big mistakes, particularly in terms of pass defense. I just feel the offense was even worse than the defense. Sorry about misinterpreting your posts. I thought you were ignoring the offense's poor performance.

I agree, outside of the Giants game, this was the offense's worst performance. What's disturbing is that this was at home, against a ho-hum Raider defense. The turnover factor is starting to sound like a broken record, but I'll keep playing it -- a minus 3 ratio every game will turn you into a bad team very quick, and it truly is a wonder how this team was ever 3-0 losing the turnover battle early on.

To me, Brunell appeared to have adequate time to throw the ball, but receivers, particularly Jacobs, were simply not getting open. And I don't know what happened to Santana Moss. Towards the end, Gibbs kept calling fly patterns to Jacobs when you'd think they'd be going to Moss who's been money since week one. So I don't know what the problem was there. Cooley was quiet too.

It also appeared that Gibbs gave up on running the ball. With a slim lead heading into the fourth quarter, the last person you'd think would give up on the run is Joe Gibbs, but he did. That took a crucial element of Gibbs' passing attack, the play-action, completely out of the game.

The way I see it, either one of two things happened today. Gibbs' playcalling, Brunell's passing, Portis' fumbles and receivers not getting open account for "just one of those days," or, and I hope this isn't the case -- someone has cracked what has so far been a troubling offensive puzzle: Contain Clinton Portis, do your best to shut down Santana Moss, wait for the fumbles, and you can beat the Washington Redskins.