![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 726
|
Re: team hard to take
I like everyone here am heartbroken, upset, frustrated, angry, furious, and am desperateky in need of answers....
I have none, but I will post a few comments based on what I've read here... First- I agree that its inexcusible for gibbs not to know that calling a second time out is not allowed. No ifs, ands, or buts, he needs to know the rules, he's paid to know the rules. He knows this... Second- when its third down and 8 and another first down wins the game, you don't call a running play that gives an NFL team the ball with a minute left trailing by less than a field goal. Gutless. Third- the fans that cheered during the moment of silence were reponding to people that yelled "we love you sean". Still inappropriate, but their hearts were in the right place. Forth- I think the biggest thing that gets me is that every week I get amped up (because if we could only play a complete game- we'd make the playoffs and likely do damage) only to watch us crumble under a littany of gaffs usually reserved for steve martin movies. How we continue to torture our fans with sloppy uninspired play is mind boggling. We've been fooled 6 times this year, what does that say about us? Fifth- I love jason cambell. He is no doubt our future and he gives me hope, but there is no question that he chokes up a bit in the red zone. This will get better with time. Seventh- the reality is, we have now lost 4 in row, our coaches continue to make mental mistake and attempt to sit on leads, our line is beat up (randy we need you buddy) and our best player just died (we miss ST. 21). Bottomline is that our playoff chances are grim.
__________________
in writing these daily letters and trying to make them interesting it is always possible that some sentiment may occur which has not received the severe and deliberate scrutiny and reconsideration which should attach to a State Paper. - Churchill |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: warren co ,NJ
Age: 61
Posts: 67
|
Re: team hard to take
yes "buried" not intentional bad term to use under the circumstances
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
JUST LIVIN
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: houston,tx
Age: 64
Posts: 4,935
|
Re: team hard to take
Quote:
__________________
Make The Redskins Great Again |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Asheville, NC
Age: 39
Posts: 48
|
Re: team hard to take
Let's grant Joe the option of finishing his contract, if he so chooses. He's the one who truly believes in Jason, commands the respect of every player and has brought respectability back to the franchise in terms of attracting free agents and not sacrificing draft picks. Granted, some of his FAs have been busts and most picks have yet to make an impact. This doesn't mean you jump ship and overhaul, when there is a committed, determined HC with a plan in place. Many fans will argue Gibbs' coaching hasn't solved very much the last few seasons, but that's evidenced only in the fine print of the W/L record. What Joe has done is brought in the pieces necessary to play his style of ball: power running. Whether or not Portis epitomizes the hard-nosed grunt of a back Gibbs prefers is up for debate, but the other cogs of the offense, such as the big offensive line (when healthy), Cooley, the short-to-medium yardage possession tight end, and Sellers, the bowling ball fullback, certainly were meant to support a running philosophy. It was thought that Brunell would have enough of an arm to toss it deep to what are, let's face it, little more than downfield-only threat Moss, and that Campbell now would continue to fill that role, but in a much more lively and effective way than Brunell.
I think the "boogeyman" on the coaching squad is Saunders. If you take into account the makeup of this team, which lacks explosive playmakers and improvisational open-field players, Saunders is not a good fit. I think when Gibbs addresses the matter of whether or not the Skins are capable of making a big play, he has to insist "yes, they are" in a nod to Saunders (Joe wouldn't really want to publicly ruffle the feathers of a millionaire assistant, now would he?). Yes, Joe makes the crucial decisions during games, but is it him who calls the offensive plays anymore? No. Everyone has been remarking it is Gibbs' conservative play-calling that has been the albatross of the offense, but when you are equipped with players that are manufactured to run hard and run often, how does a team put up big stats and blow away opponents? In summary, it's one or the other that needs to go: Gibbs and his preferred offensive players, or Saunders and his preferred, but as yet unrealized, explosive, speedy playmakers. It would be a lot easier for the Skins to stick with Gibbs and the current cast of characters (with some rushing attack-oriented picks in the '08 draft and free agent signings of a similar nature) for next season than to let Saunders or a new coach take over, which would require an offensive overhaul consistent with the philosophy of that new leader. This is not excusing the lapses in discipline among the players and frequent poor judgment by Gibbs in his second stint; rather, it is talking straight about what this team was designed to do, and why it is failing at the present (thanks Saunders). |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|