JLC Rant/Rip on Playcalling

[GhettoDogAllStars]

I read somewhere that the Giants converted something like seven 3rd downs in the second half, and all but one was 3rd and 5 or longer.

When you are leading 17-3 at halftime, coaching is easy. You rely on your defense, and you run clock. The coaches did just that. The defense let us down this time.

Bottom line: our defense lost this game for us. Plain and simple.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

I read somewhere that the Giants converted something like seven 3rd downs in the second half, and all but one was 3rd and 5 or longer.

When you are leading 17-3 at halftime, coaching is easy. You rely on your defense, and you run clock. The coaches did just that. The defense let us down this time.

Bottom line: our defense lost this game for us. Plain and simple.

I couldn't disagree more. Our offense couldn't get a first down if their life depended on it in the 2nd half. Like Rock Cartwright said after the game, "If you can't give your defense a minute to rest, something is eventually gonna break." That's exactly what happened. We moved the ball well in the first half and the D had little problem stopping the Giants, getting pressure on Eli, and forcing turnovers.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by GMScud

I couldn't disagree more. Our offense couldn't get a first down if their life depended on it in the 2nd half. Like Rock Cartwright said after the game, "If you can't give your defense a minute to rest, something is eventually gonna break." That's exactly what happened. We moved the ball well in the first half and the D had little problem stopping the Giants, getting pressure on Eli, and forcing turnovers.

So you would blame the terrible 3rd down defense on the offense's failure to move the ball in the second half? Is the defense in any way responsible for giving up so many 3rd down conversions?

I blame the loss on the 3rd down conversions. We had them in 3rd and long several times, and we couldn't stop them. I blame defense for the inability to stop the Giants on 3rd down. Therefore, I blame the loss on the defense.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

So you would blame the terrible 3rd down defense on the offense's failure to move the ball in the second half? Is the defense in any way responsible for giving up so many 3rd down conversions?

I blame the loss on the 3rd down conversions. We had them in 3rd and long several times, and we couldn't stop them. I blame defense for the inability to stop the Giants on 3rd down. Therefore, I blame the loss on the defense.

How was the 3rd down defense in the first half when the offense was actually moving the ball and spelling the D? Exactly. The D was on the field for 21+ minutes in the second half. Unacceptable. The D has been great on 3rd down for 10 outta 12 quarters this year. Our offense is mediocre at best, averaging 17.7pts a game. We had 82 rushing yards in this one. But sure, it was the defense's fault.

[warriorzpath]

The game went downhill for the redskins in the second half for 3 reasons -
(1) Campbell lost his rhythm (and only got it back in the final series)
(2) The Giants came out after the half and concentrated on stuffing the run. After taking away the Redskins running game, they started to focus on getting to Jason Campbell.
(3) The Giants offense gained rhythm (probably because they often were able to get the ball back quickly after the Redskins offense sputtered, see#1)

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by GMScud

How was the 3rd down defense in the first half when the offense was actually moving the ball and spelling the D? Exactly. The D was on the field for 21+ minutes in the second half. Unacceptable. The D has been great on 3rd down for 10 outta 12 quarters this year. Our offense is mediocre at best, averaging 17.7pts a game. We had 82 rushing yards in this one. But sure, it was the defense's fault.

I know what you mean, and I agree that our offense should share some of the blame. However, defense HAS to make stops on 3rd and long. I am of the opinion that there are NO legitimate excuses for giving up 3rd and long -- ever.

Also, I think that 4 offensive plays are enough time for the defense to rest. Any more than that is just gravy. I think the defense was tired because they couldn't make stops on 3rd and long, and the Giants were able to sustain long drives -- not because the offense was stale.

To say that the defense couldn't do their job because they need more than 4 offensive plays to rest is a poor excuse. Imagine Greg Williams saying, "Well we sucked on defense, but it's not their fault. We simply can't play good defense after 3 and outs, and that is just the way it goes. Anytime we go 3 and out, expect to give up a score."

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

I know what you mean, and I agree that our offense should share some of the blame. However, defense HAS to make stops on 3rd and long. I am of the opinion that there are NO legitimate excuses for giving up 3rd and long -- ever.

Also, I think that 4 offensive plays are enough time for the defense to rest. Any more than that is just gravy. I think the defense was tired because they couldn't make stops on 3rd and long, and the Giants were able to sustain long drives -- not because the offense was stale.

To say that the defense couldn't do their job because they need more than 4 offensive plays to rest is a poor excuse. Imagine Greg Williams saying, "Well we sucked on defense, but it's not their fault. We simply can't play good defense after 3 and outs, and that is just the way it goes. Anytime we go 3 and out, expect to give up a score."

I'm not saying the D was perfect. But to say the blame lies squarely on them is just wrong, IMO.

[GMScud]

Bottom line, we play an absolutely MISERABLE defense week 5 vs. Detroit, and we have great film to watch from that Eagles game yesterday on just how to exploit it. If we don't score 28 points I'm gonna be pissed. I want to see JC have at least a pair of TD passes in that one. We gotta come out and pound them. I mean POUND them. I wanna see something a la that San Fran game in 2005...

[FRPLG]

I'd say his logic behind "40 is the magic number " is faulty. The reason we didn't get to 40 was because they were loaded up for our short game so we basically produced nothing and thus had less offensive plays. The 40 rushes is ideal when taken in context as a function of our total plays. We'd have ended up with 40 if we would have stretched the field a bit I think and kept the ball more.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I'd say his logic behind "40 is the magic number " is faulty. The reason we didn't get to 40 was because they were loaded up for our short game so we basically produced nothing and thus had less offensive plays. The 40 rushes is ideal when taken in context as a function of our total plays. We'd have ended up with 40 if we would have stretched the field a bit I think and kept the ball more.

Totally agree. When he said 40, I stopped reading the article.

The number of rushes, as with the number of pass attempts, have to be taken into consideration.

[WillH]

Originally Posted by RobH4413

Well, potentially running the ball more could have burnt the clock down... rested a worn defense, and changed the dynamics of the game.

It's all pure speculation of course, and if you don't execute it doesn't matter, but in general, running the ball with a 14 point lead makes more sense than passing as much as we did, especially if you're the Washington Redskins.

I was saying in my post that our game plan could have been influenced by Jason's prior success, and the Giants prior futility. Why not design a game plan attacking a weak Giants secondary? That's what we all expected wasn't it? A blow out.

The only problem was that since the Giants changed their defense around, this provided a window, aided by our ineptitude to convert first downs and hold onto the ball, that the Giants capitalized on. We couldn't run that offense, plain and simple. Our o-line couldn't hold up, Jason played inconsistent, and we were stifled.

On top of it all, the type of futility we suffered was the worst kind. Not only did we lose the ball, but we preserved the clock.

The Giants then downright beat us. They sustained several long and efficient (converting countless 3rd downs) touchdown drives. Our defense got torched all the way up the field, and no thank to our offense...had to go right back out there almost instantly.

But we saw the game, we know what happened... and we wouldn't be Redskins fans if weren't masochistic enough to relive the pain and talk about it for two weeks.

Rob, you made some good points. I honestly believe that if we had sustained one long drive, even one that ended with a field goal, we probably would have won that game. Because the D could have rested, and they would have had less time to catch up. And yes running the ball more could potentially have helped sustain such a drive.

As far as throwing the ball to try and "take the kill shot" being a bad decision, I would have to disagree. (I don't know if that was the point you were trying to make). I think that is something we have to learn to do as a team, we need to put opponents away. Do you remember those two pass plays in a row to Moss that were seemingly miscommunications? WTF was that? Could that have been due to Saunders trying things they don't know well enough yet? If so, things are not looking good for our O. We really need JC and our wr's to get on the same page, and if it took us looking pathetic this week to learn what we're doing wrong, so be it.

After this week Im not very optimistic about this season. We've had two wins against two suspect teams, and a loss to a floundering div rival. And on top of that the Cowboys look formidable. We need to take some chances if we are gonna have any chance this year. Maybe we tried to last night, but the O is just not on the same page. Either way, I hope Joe picks up the pieces from this pathetic loss and turns this team around. I know his teams play well in December, but we're gonna have to win a few right out of the bye to even be in contention.

[itvnetop]

I think JLC may be right. We should be calling more runs- but after this game, it's obvious that the run calling may not fit the current personnel. Losing Thomas meant less effective pulling. I saw some positive things with the misdirection pitch-outs in the first half.

[T.O.Killa]

I am sick of JLC ripping into Joe Gibbs. If he had made the sweep he would have been a genious. The only problem I have is the fact they threww away a down. Hopefully they work on clock management.

[Gmanc711]

Originally Posted by T.O.Killa

I am sick of JLC ripping into Joe Gibbs. If he had made the sweep he would have been a genious. The only problem I have is the fact they threww away a down. Hopefully they work on clock management.

If If If If If...theres a lot of If's...but not too many Did's that went right in that second half...when guys deserved to get ripped, they should. Joe isnt the only guy who deserves blame, thats for sure, but I think he's a peice to that puzzle.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Gmanc711

If If If If If...theres a lot of If's...but not too many Did's that went right in that second half...when guys deserved to get ripped, they should. Joe isnt the only guy who deserves blame, thats for sure, but I think he's a peice to that puzzle.

I'll second this.