Skins vs. Cowboys game thread

Gmanc711 · 09-28-2004, 12:38 AM

On the bright side, were playing Cleveland next week. If the same team shows up on Sunday, we should win by 30 points.

SUNRA · 09-28-2004, 12:43 AM

Keys to the Redskins loss:

1. Bad officiating.
2. Bad officiating.
3. Bad play calling by Gibbs at the goal line.
4. Bad decision making by Fred Smoot on coverage of Bryant and not bumping Anderson.
5. The Defense gave up crucial 3rd down plays which would have allowed us to have more time with the offense.
6. Now this one pisses me off. The stupid decision by the ex-referee to challenge with one timeout remaining.
7. The decision to call timeout when Sellers was improperly lined up. Brunell should have thrown the ball out of bounds.

Gmanc711 · 09-28-2004, 12:47 AM

Whatever, I have to be up at 6am for School and Work.... I'm gonna kill myself.

That Guy · 09-28-2004, 12:48 AM

0-2 in the division, that sucks, we should be 3-0 right now

... i guess 14-2 is going to have to do...

beg8878 · 09-28-2004, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gmanc711

On the bright side, were playing Cleveland next week. If the same team shows up on Sunday, we should win by 30 points.

Please dont jinx us, I honestly dont know what I 'll do if we lose to cleveland next week....

skinsfanthru&thru · 09-28-2004, 12:57 AM

This would have been a f-ing awesome night for us skins fans if the refs hadn't had a severe case of head up the ass disease. They robbed us of that early fumble on the punt (dude did not have complete control of the ball before the ball popped out again and that ruling was unchallengeable) and the blatant grabbing and pushing by glenn on that "interferance" call against harris. Plus sellers blowing his pre snap positioning and that bad challenge cost us the timeouts needed to have stopped the clock after brunnel and gardner did their best to get us back into the game. To preform pretty well and come so close only to have a simple mistake like wasting an early timeout bite us in the ass totally blows.

personel wise, o-line did a decent job run blocking but brown is looking his age and is gonna get someone hurt. big ups to gardner and brunnel especially after that terrible first quarter. and whats up with all the drops from coles the first 3 weeks? the d played well for 95% of the plays but that blown coverage on the anderson reception and anderson's td toss hurt big time. plus if marcus washington had held his coverage and not bitten on trying to get to teste that 3rd down reception to cambell would have been stopped before the line and the skins would have had gotten the ball right after the 2 minute warning if I remember correctly.

I hate to second guess Gibbs but when we had 1st and goal from the one, instead of the brunnel sneak why wasn't a toss or sweep play run since portis is one of the fastest guys in football he would have a pretty decent chance to beat the defense to the corner.

Overall this was a very positive step forward for the offense especially after last week. I wanted this win so f-ing bad but this has to be one of the few times there's been a lot positive to talk about from the teams play. With sharper clock management, defensive assignments, and hopefully a competent group of zebras, there is a silver lining to the clouds over this loss.

That Guy · 09-28-2004, 01:14 AM

theyy need to brush up on how to not f#$% up a no huddle... that's where all the TOs got burnt...

Hogskin · 09-28-2004, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That Guy

0-2 in the division, that sucks, we should be 3-0 right now

... i guess 14-2 is going to have to do...

I love that attitude, Guy. I'm right with you!!!

dieselhog · 09-28-2004, 07:28 AM

I watched this live in the UK which means I switched off at 5.30am.

At least we now know that Brunell can still play and that Gardner found his game.

D was good for the most part.

There were a lot of positives we went from giving up 7 TO's to none.

You have to start building somewhere. I think we will be back on track next week.

Gmanc711 · 01-18-2005, 03:07 PM

You know, I've been bored the past few days. I dont start school again until next monday, I only have to work Wendsday and Friday this week, so outside of working out, I've been really bored. So I've poped in a few of the games I taped this year ( I stopped taping around the GB Game.)

Anyways, I'm watching the Cowboys/Skins from MNF. The pass interference call (1st) just occured, and I felt inclined to reinterate just how bad of a call that really was. I also wanted to bring into question, if you guys think there should be a rule change concerning reviewing questionable calls. Do you think a coach should be able to challenge a penalty, if , say, its a questionable Personal Foul or Pass Interference penalty, which could really change the outcome of the game? After watching that again, I'm 100% positive it would have been overturned and therefore the difference in the game. I hate to beat a dead horse, but its the offseason, and were all bored, so I was just wondering if its a rule you would like to see adressed this offseason, even if it could come back to bite us in the ass?

Gmanc711 · 01-18-2005, 03:08 PM

You know, I've been bored the past few days. I dont start school again until next monday, I only have to work Wendsday and Friday this week, so outside of working out, I've been really bored. So I've poped in a few of the games I taped this year ( I stopped taping around the GB Game.)

Anyways, I'm watching the Cowboys/Skins from MNF. The pass interference call (1st) just occured, and I felt inclined to reinterate just how bad of a call that really was. I also wanted to bring into question, if you guys think there should be a rule change concerning reviewing questionable calls. Do you think a coach should be able to challenge a penalty, if , say, its a questionable Personal Foul or Pass Interference penalty, which could really change the outcome of the game? After watching that again, I'm 100% positive it would have been overturned and therefore the difference in the game. I hate to beat a dead horse, but its the offseason, and were all bored, so I was just wondering if its a rule you would like to see adressed this offseason, even if it could come back to bite us in the ass?

Quote:

Originally Posted by beg8878

Please dont jinx us, I honestly dont know what I 'll do if we lose to cleveland next week....

btw Beg, since I'm reading some old posts... what exactly did you do?

Daseal · 01-18-2005, 03:34 PM

I think it should. You only have two challenges so it's not like it will prolong the game. These plays will only be challenged if they are sure they'll be overturned, seeing as how it's often an opinion it will be hard to get them overturned. However, I think the biggest two are PI and Down by contact. Those rules need to be examined.

BrudLee · 01-19-2005, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daseal

I think it should. You only have two challenges so it's not like it will prolong the game. These plays will only be challenged if they are sure they'll be overturned, seeing as how it's often an opinion it will be hard to get them overturned. However, I think the biggest two are PI and Down by contact. Those rules need to be examined.

Here's the problem with challenging either of those two. Down by contact is usually a whistle issue. Once the whistle blows, play is over. You can't escape that - the players can't continue to hit after the whistle blows on the chance that the whistle was inadvertant, or injuries will skyrocket.

PI is a bit more thorny. Much like holding (which occurs on every play), some inappropriate contact between the receiver and defender occurs nearly every time. Whether it's a chuck after five yards, or contact before the head is turned, something happens. We have isolated one play out of thousands that happen over the season where pass interference shouldn't have been called; no one - Cowboy, Redskin, or neutral observer disputes that. But if that door is opened for poor calls, is it also going to be opened for no-calls? A bad call like this one happens, but not as frequently as the no-calls.

Gmanc711 · 01-19-2005, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrudLee

Here's the problem with challenging either of those two. Down by contact is usually a whistle issue. Once the whistle blows, play is over. You can't escape that - the players can't continue to hit after the whistle blows on the chance that the whistle was inadvertant, or injuries will skyrocket.

PI is a bit more thorny. Much like holding (which occurs on every play), some inappropriate contact between the receiver and defender occurs nearly every time. Whether it's a chuck after five yards, or contact before the head is turned, something happens. We have isolated one play out of thousands that happen over the season where pass interference shouldn't have been called; no one - Cowboy, Redskin, or neutral observer disputes that. But if that door is opened for poor calls, is it also going to be opened for no-calls? A bad call like this one happens, but not as frequently as the no-calls.

I would have you say you open the door to that as well. You go back to this very game, and there was a no-call on Newman gaurding Gardner, where he grabed his shoulder and it was slight, but it was very obvoius that it was the difference in the ball hitting Gardner's hands (Who knows if he would have caught it, but with the night he had, he probolby would have.), and him not getting there. You see, I think if you stick with the 2 challenge (3 if they are right) rule, this is somthing that wouldnt get out of control. You would only see coaches disputing this on plays that could be the difference in the game (I.e, PI in the endzone.) So I would say you open it up to both. I mean hell, if you want too, I think all penalties should be reviewable. People would be all up in arms and say it slows down the game, but if you keep the 2 challenge rule, they would rarley challenge these things. However, these crappy calls happen, so I think its somthing you have to put in instant replay. I really think it could have made a difference in at least 2, proboly more of our games this season, and all over the league could have changed the outcomes of games.

Officals have to stop deciding games. I get pissed off whenever I see it now, even if its the Eagles/Cowboys, and an officall makes a bullsh*t call against them, I'm just like "WTF, why do these guys get to decide the game".

BrudLee · 01-19-2005, 01:16 PM

But they would still be deciding the games. Just slower.

Say you throw the challenge flag for a PI no-call. Contact was made as the defender was turning around to play the ball, but before he had finished. Is that Pass Interference? Or the defender was playing the ball, but contact was intentional and agressive. By definition, is that Pass Interference? How can the referee determine intent?

Say you are down two scores with three minutes to go. Just heave-ho, and throw the red flag before the missed pass stops bouncing. There was contact somewhere, and you might get your call.

09-28-2004, 12:43 AM	#662
SUNRA The Starter Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 1,680	Keys to the Redskins loss: 1. Bad officiating. 2. Bad officiating. 3. Bad play calling by Gibbs at the goal line. 4. Bad decision making by Fred Smoot on coverage of Bryant and not bumping Anderson. 5. The Defense gave up crucial 3rd down plays which would have allowed us to have more time with the offense. 6. Now this one pisses me off. The stupid decision by the ex-referee to challenge with one timeout remaining. 7. The decision to call timeout when Sellers was improperly lined up. Brunell should have thrown the ball out of bounds. __________________ Redskins Member since 1970

01-18-2005, 03:07 PM	#670
Gmanc711 Thank You, Sean. Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Gaithersburg, MD Age: 40 Posts: 7,506	You know, I've been bored the past few days. I dont start school again until next monday, I only have to work Wendsday and Friday this week, so outside of working out, I've been really bored. So I've poped in a few of the games I taped this year ( I stopped taping around the GB Game.) Anyways, I'm watching the Cowboys/Skins from MNF. The pass interference call (1st) just occured, and I felt inclined to reinterate just how bad of a call that really was. I also wanted to bring into question, if you guys think there should be a rule change concerning reviewing questionable calls. Do you think a coach should be able to challenge a penalty, if , say, its a questionable Personal Foul or Pass Interference penalty, which could really change the outcome of the game? After watching that again, I'm 100% positive it would have been overturned and therefore the difference in the game. I hate to beat a dead horse, but its the offseason, and were all bored, so I was just wondering if its a rule you would like to see adressed this offseason, even if it could come back to bite us in the ass? __________________ #21

01-19-2005, 01:16 PM	#675
BrudLee Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE Posts: 3,494	But they would still be deciding the games. Just slower. Say you throw the challenge flag for a PI no-call. Contact was made as the defender was turning around to play the ball, but before he had finished. Is that Pass Interference? Or the defender was playing the ball, but contact was intentional and agressive. By definition, is that Pass Interference? How can the referee determine intent? Say you are down two scores with three minutes to go. Just heave-ho, and throw the red flag before the missed pass stops bouncing. There was contact somewhere, and you might get your call. __________________ There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too.

09-28-2004, 12:38 AM	#661
Gmanc711 Thank You, Sean. Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Gaithersburg, MD Age: 40 Posts: 7,506	On the bright side, were playing Cleveland next week. If the same team shows up on Sunday, we should win by 30 points.

09-28-2004, 12:47 AM	#663
Gmanc711 Thank You, Sean. Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Gaithersburg, MD Age: 40 Posts: 7,506	Whatever, I have to be up at 6am for School and Work.... I'm gonna kill myself.

09-28-2004, 12:48 AM	#664
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 43 Posts: 17,620	0-2 in the division, that sucks, we should be 3-0 right now ... i guess 14-2 is going to have to do...

09-28-2004, 12:57 AM	#666
skinsfanthru&thru Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Richmond, VA Age: 45 Posts: 3,815	This would have been a f-ing awesome night for us skins fans if the refs hadn't had a severe case of head up the ass disease. They robbed us of that early fumble on the punt (dude did not have complete control of the ball before the ball popped out again and that ruling was unchallengeable) and the blatant grabbing and pushing by glenn on that "interferance" call against harris. Plus sellers blowing his pre snap positioning and that bad challenge cost us the timeouts needed to have stopped the clock after brunnel and gardner did their best to get us back into the game. To preform pretty well and come so close only to have a simple mistake like wasting an early timeout bite us in the ass totally blows. personel wise, o-line did a decent job run blocking but brown is looking his age and is gonna get someone hurt. big ups to gardner and brunnel especially after that terrible first quarter. and whats up with all the drops from coles the first 3 weeks? the d played well for 95% of the plays but that blown coverage on the anderson reception and anderson's td toss hurt big time. plus if marcus washington had held his coverage and not bitten on trying to get to teste that 3rd down reception to cambell would have been stopped before the line and the skins would have had gotten the ball right after the 2 minute warning if I remember correctly. I hate to second guess Gibbs but when we had 1st and goal from the one, instead of the brunnel sneak why wasn't a toss or sweep play run since portis is one of the fastest guys in football he would have a pretty decent chance to beat the defense to the corner. Overall this was a very positive step forward for the offense especially after last week. I wanted this win so f-ing bad but this has to be one of the few times there's been a lot positive to talk about from the teams play. With sharper clock management, defensive assignments, and hopefully a competent group of zebras, there is a silver lining to the clouds over this loss.

09-28-2004, 01:14 AM	#667
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 43 Posts: 17,620	theyy need to brush up on how to not f#$% up a no huddle... that's where all the TOs got burnt...

09-28-2004, 07:28 AM	#669
dieselhog Special Teams Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Bolton, Lancashire Age: 54 Posts: 166	I watched this live in the UK which means I switched off at 5.30am. At least we now know that Brunell can still play and that Gardner found his game. D was good for the most part. There were a lot of positives we went from giving up 7 TO's to none. You have to start building somewhere. I think we will be back on track next week.

01-18-2005, 03:34 PM	#672
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 8,341	I think it should. You only have two challenges so it's not like it will prolong the game. These plays will only be challenged if they are sure they'll be overturned, seeing as how it's often an opinion it will be hard to get them overturned. However, I think the biggest two are PI and Down by contact. Those rules need to be examined.

Skins vs. Cowboys game thread

Locker Room Main Forum