Breakdown: Redskins-Eagles

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

Good job, GTripp0012. Must have taken some time and effort to do this analysis. I felt compelled to post this opinion- since the last disagreement with you got a little too heated.

Thanks for the props man.

I thought we kept it pretty civil and I even commented at the time as such. Passion is a good thing on these boards. I don't feel like either of us overstepped our bounds.

[JoeRedskin]

Great read. Thanks!

[sandtrapjack]

All I can say is WOW, that must have taken a tremendous amount of time to breakdown.

Nice work.

[BDBohnzie]

Thanks GTripp. Excellent as always.

Your breakdown over the last 2 weeks of the O-Line makes me wonder how much different the season would be (if at all) if Jansen and/or Thomas was healthy.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Two illegal contact penalties made the defensive effort look a lot worse than it was. These things had nothing to do with the plays, and will not be repeated going down the stretch.

The defensive issues are few and far between, but just schematic and strategic holes that the better offensive teams are exploiting, while the worse offensive teams are missing.

Great breakdown. A couple of thoughts:

The first illegal contact call on Smoot was really iffy... There's far more contact on just about every passing play in NFL, and Smoot was obviously trying to turn and run; not impede the receivers progress. That call set the tone early, because the Eagles scored on that drive and gained momentum. It would've been a different game without that call.

I agree that there are not(at least not before Taylor went out) a ton of issues with the defense, but the one major weakness is glaring. The middle/intermediate area of the field is wide open. London Fletcher is a beast, but it seems like he's responsible for the entire middle area of the defense, from the line of scrimmage to 15 yards deep. Even someone with his ability can't be expected to cover all of that real estate. I'm afraid to see what happens with Taylor out this week...

[SmootSmack]

Nice work Tripp. Must have taken a lot of your time and effort, which leads me to ask..."How are your grades son?"

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Nice work Tripp. Must have taken a lot of your time and effort, which leads me to ask..."How are your grades son?"

Hahaha...oh man. You sound just like my dad!

These milestone posts are getting weirder and weirder for me.

[dmek25]

good read. the one thing you didn't mention was the play-calling. i have been very harsh on Mr Saunders, but for this game i gave him a A+. other then going ultra conservative at the end, and settling for a field goal, the redskins offense had a great flow to it.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by dmek25

good read. the one thing you didn't mention was the play-calling. i have been very harsh on Mr Saunders, but for this game i gave him a A+. other then going ultra conservative at the end, and settling for a field goal, the redskins offense had a great flow to it.

I don't like Al Saunders as a play caller at all. With that said, he does it his way, and we've seen his way work in the past, so I'm not going to go out and say that he needs to be fired or anything.

If I was in charge, I'd do it differently. That doesn't make his way wrong, just in my opinion, more difficult.

I think he's called two pretty solid games in a row, but that's the nature of all play calling. You call some good games, you call some bad games. The overall effect of a play caller in the long run is pretty much null.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I don't like Al Saunders as a play caller at all. With that said, he does it his way, and we've seen his way work in the past, so I'm not going to go out and say that he needs to be fired or anything.

If I was in charge, I'd do it differently. That doesn't make his way wrong, just in my opinion, more difficult.

I think he's called two pretty solid games in a row, but that's the nature of all play calling. You call some good games, you call some bad games. The overall effect of a play caller in the long run is pretty much null.

If Gibbs were not here do you honestly think he would call the game the way he does? Cause this is nothing like what I saw in KC. It was a very up tempo, in and out of the huddle very quickly, vertical passing game. Alot of 3, 4 and 5 wr sets. Protection and time of possesion is not as important to Sanders as is scoring points. He's always on the attack. Personally I like it if you have the O-line to do it. And I know we would not see the jumbo stuff on the goaline!!!!

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

If Gibbs were not here do you honestly think he would call the game the way he does? Cause this is nothing like what I saw in KC. It was a very up tempo, in and out of the huddle very quickly, vertical passing game. Alot of 3, 4 and 5 wr sets. Protection and time of possesion is not as important to Sanders as is scoring points. He's always on the attack. Personally I like it if you have the O-line to do it. And I know we would not see the jumbo stuff on the goaline!!!!

We're in 3 receivers or 4 receivers every freakin play it seems. We also do some jumbo stuff, but that's a Saunders staple too. Ever heard of Jason Dunn? That's the reason that you have. We also motion every freakin play, which Gibbs never did.

It's pretty obviously Saunders' offense these days.

[Gmanc711]

Thanks! Good work! I am going to be watching the offensive line much closer this week, because that is very suprising.

[mheisig]

Thanks Tripp! Awesome work. This analysis is better than anything you can find at any of the "professional" sites. Nobody backs up their in-depth analysis with such solid stats, and all specific to our team.

All the pros will, at best, give you some vague, ambiguous paragraph on the Skins.

Keep it up - looking forward to next week's analysis.

[JWsleep]

Awesome, Tripp. Great work!

(Must have been tough to watch that game again!)

[LaRon + Sean = Hell 4 U]

Great post one of the best I've seen on this site so far.