Gibbs called the final 4 plays...(No he didn't)

[SmootSmack]

How about "Gibbs to Betts: I have a better idea. Why don't you trip short of the goal line? Make the Giants feel good about themselves? Think you can do that?"

or "Please Don't Take a Turn to Negative Town"

[mcarey032]

I agree with that statement about close games. I guess since gibbs is more than likely not going to finish here, then I would say that he is going to be conservative in order to see if he gets a couple of lucky breaks that can get us some victories, but it is not a way I would like to see us play.

[hurrykaine]

my beef isn't with the playcalling during the last set of goalline downs - its with the playcalling in the 3rd quarter and early 4th quarter. To go 5 consecutive 3 and outs is inexcusable.

[MTK]

Not sure why people aren't getting this but they had to spike the ball in order to get the different personnel package in for the goal line. Spiking the ball was the least of our problems during that series.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Not sure why people aren't getting this but they had to spike the ball in order to get the different personnel package in for the goal line. Spiking the ball was the least of our problems during that series.

That makes sense. I was a tad inebriated by that point in the 4th quarter and I've been pretty much working non-stop the past few days. Didn't occur to me that was the case. But that's still no excuse for rushing that all-important 4th down play. We could have taken 10 seconds longer and maybe squeezed out that extra half-yard. Oh wel. Coulda woulda shoulda.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Not sure why people aren't getting this but they had to spike the ball in order to get the different personnel package in for the goal line. Spiking the ball was the least of our problems during that series.

We had them on their heals and by spiking the ball we allowed them to bring in their goal line team which won the game for them. I know hine sight is 20/20 but if JC would have run up and did a QB sneak we would have scored and easy TD. If you have the game on film look at that play and the Giants only had a few men right on the line and everyone else was off the line making that an easy play. My seats were looking right down the goal line and I knew they where going to punch it in and he drops back and spikes the ball. Oh well !

[GiantsSuck703]

Originally Posted by firstdown

We had them on their heals and by spiking the ball we allowed them to bring in their goal line team which won the game for them. I know hine sight is 20/20 but if JC would have run up and did a QB sneak we would have scored and easy TD. If you have the game on film look at that play and the Giants only had a few men right on the line and everyone else was off the line making that an easy play. My seats were looking right down the goal line and I knew they where going to punch it in and he drops back and spikes the ball. Oh well !

Very True

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Not sure why people aren't getting this but they had to spike the ball in order to get the different personnel package in for the goal line. Spiking the ball was the least of our problems during that series.

But w/ a minute left there was plenty of time to call a play at the line. Throw a pass in the end zone. That way if we score then no need to bring in the jumbo package. If it's incomplete then bring in the jumbo casue the clock stops. Wasting a down with that much time was just silly. Don't you think?

[skinsfan_nn]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

But w/ a minute left there was plenty of time to call a play at the line. Throw a pass in the end zone. That way if we score then no need to bring in the jumbo package. If it's incomplete then bring in the jumbo casue the clock stops. Wasting a down with that much time was just silly. Don't you think?

Being a Monday morning QB is easy if all worked this thread would not exist and we would be sitting 3-0 then reality sets in.

With that said I do agree. After a quick strike, go at it again, no need on 1st to spike the ball with that much clock, try to hit the corner of the end zone to CC if he doesn't connect nothing lost. The defense more than likely would have been unprepared, then setup a jumbo package with plenty of time, and give the damn ball to BIG MIKE OR CP. LB GREAT asset but use the high percentage back at the goal line.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Not sure why people aren't getting this but they had to spike the ball in order to get the different personnel package in for the goal line. Spiking the ball was the least of our problems during that series.

I heard that and know that is the case but I think its a terrible waste of a down. I cant belive the team could not have run a play with the guys on the field at the time and scored. I just cant believe having an extra WR on the field instead another TE would have made much difference.

[MTK]

I agree there was no need to rush the last play, but I think that's due to having a young QB in there.

[GiantsSuck703]

I have never liked the pick up of Al Saunders, it just never seemed like a good idea. Look at the divisions he coached in NFC west, and AFC west, they are mostly finesse divisions. The NFC east is more of a smashmouth division, Saunders seems to try to many gimmick plays rather than impose this offenses will on other teams. Its not like the talent isnt there, he just mis-uses it. I dont care if Gibbs called the last 4 plays, Saunders called all the others building up to it, he doesnt seem to mind putting his defense in a bind at all. I guess a big sign to not pick up Saunders was when his own team wouldnt give him an interview to be the head coach, if he was that talented of a coach he would have been retained in KC, plain and simple.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by GiantsSuck703

I have never liked the pick up of Al Saunders, it just never seemed like a good idea. Look at the divisions he coached in NFC west, and AFC west, they are mostly finesse divisions. The NFC east is more of a smashmouth division, Saunders seems to try to many gimmick plays rather than impose this offenses will on other teams. Its not like the talent isnt there, he just mis-uses it. I dont care if Gibbs called the last 4 plays, Saunders called all the others building up to it, he doesnt seem to mind putting his defense in a bind at all. I guess a big sign to not pick up Saunders was when his own team wouldnt give him an interview to be the head coach, if he was that talented of a coach he would have been retained in KC, plain and simple.

I myself do not think it was the play calling as much as JC not finding the open WR. I saw 7 to 8 plays where Moss, Cooley, and/or El were wide open and he did not throw the ball there way and thats what I saw while at the game. When I got home my neighbor said on TV it was clear that JC was starring down his WR's and that would account for the guys I saw wide open.

[GiantsSuck703]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I myself do not think it was the play calling as much as JC not finding the open WR. I saw 7 to 8 plays where Moss, Cooley, and/or El were wide open and he did not throw the ball there way and thats what I saw while at the game. When I got home my neighbor said on TV it was clear that JC was starring down his WR's and that would account for the guys I saw wide open.

This could be true, but if your able to (tiVo) go back and look at the game, look how many calls on first down were wasted, gimmick plays and just stupid short screen passes.

[BrunellMVP?]

From JLC,
"Anyway, we all know the Redskins have choked away their fair share of games since this staff took over in 2004. So I got to thinking how they stood up with other teams, and well, as in the overall W/L record the last 15 years or so, their company ain't pretty.

According to Elias, since 2004 the Redskins have 11 losses when leading at the half, which puts them ... worst in the NFL. Oakland (11) and Houston (10) are the only other teams with double-digit loss totals when leading at the half since Gibbs came back to the NFL.

Overall, Washington is a mediocre 15-11 in 26 games when leading at the half since 2004.

The Redskins used to be the team that got a lead and battered opponents like no one else in the game; now it's the opposite. The rosters aren't nearly as good, the front office not nearly as sound, and say what you will of ownership, game-day coaching decisions, etc.as you consider what this stat means, and what it points to. "