D.C. Examiner: Zorn's job in jeopardy? (not so fast he's coming back)

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

There you go again. If you're going to pump stats at me you're going to need to improve your analytical thinking.

Go back and read my post. I said we came out flat in the first quarter and got ran up on, and then we started fighting in the second quarter. So don't throw Benson's FULL GAME line at me.

In the first quarter, he ran for 41 yards on 7 carries, for nearly a 6 yard average. Then the Redskins started shutting him down, allowing only 32 yards on 14 carries the rest of the way.

If you're right though, what you are saying is that we should have shut Benson down in the first quarter, and he should have rushed for two yards per attempt, or whatever he did the rest of the way (32/14).

But a lot of times, the only difference between the five carries you want to discuss and the rest of his line is a minor tweak or two that Blache had to make, and not because of coming out flat.

I mean, yeah, the first quarter is when we really struggled to handle their offense. Given. Obviously. You're asserting that they came out flat, which I don't totally disagree with, but also that they should be immune to coming out flat? I think?

Why should this team be immune to bad plays in the first quarter, prior to adjustments being made?

So what, the Redskins forgot how to defend the run in the first quarter and suddenly remembered in the second?? No, they didn't get their heads in the game early enough, and got run over.

Is it okay if both of these things sound about equally implausible and nominal? How can you assert something that isn't disprovable?