IT's NOT JOE GIBBS FAULT

SKIN1106 · Post by **SKIN1106** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:11 pm

To all those that bleed burgundy & gold this last win hurt us, but we must not blame our coach.
The play calling has not been at its best, but look at the talent we have. For ex. Robert Royal dropps 3
This means he takes up a roster spot, but can't get the job done. Don't worry guys he won't be here next year(contract year). Let's see our punter, our center to name a few all made bad plays. I know are play calling is not the best in the world, but what can we expect from these sorry players.
The bottom line is all those player related decisions that are previous coaching, front office have made brought us to this. There is only soooooooooooooo much our coach can do with the players we have. Last year we had L. Coles and we didn't open up because we didn't have the players. This year we only have #1 wide receiver...let's face it we don't have the talent to enhance our offense.

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:20 pm

That would make sense if we were incapable of moving the ball and scoring points during quarters 1-3, but Gibbs has to stay aggressive for 4 quarters. When we are down by 10, our offense is open and efficient. When we are up by ten our offense gets TOOO predictable and conservative.

The saying is "playing not to lose". Gibbs doesn't have the talent to do that and he must realize that right now. We can't line up man on man and just dominate with the run game when the other team is expecting the run. He has to stay aggressive and score points. The way he is coaching in the 4th quarter has lead to quick 3 and outs..why? Because he is lining up in a double TE set with 1 receiver and running into the teeth of a defense for no gains on 1st and 2nd down. Then on 3rd and long, teams are pressuring us into an errant throw or a sack.

He is doing this over and over and over and over again and defenses are too good to get beat by that. So in his attempts to run out the clock, he is essentially giving the other team more possessions and opportunities b/c that only works when you are getting 1st downs.

fan4life28 · Post by **fan4life28** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:31 pm

I'm gonna agree with the hogster on this one. Way too conservative play calling when we have the lead. If I knew what type of play we were going to run, then the chargers sure as hell knew what type of play we were going to run. Gibbs has to keep being agressive throughout the game, even when we have a lead.

gibbsfan · Post by **gibbsfan** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 12:47 pm

i guess you and i see the samething here.it gets to a point where the defenses with get on cooley and moss and nobody else makes a play when we need them too.we need more playmakers on offense and defense.

what we have aint enough.we need more c griffin,s and more santana,s out there.

riggofan · Post by **riggofan** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:10 pm

I'm glad somebody else brought up the "playing not to lose" thing. Watching Brunell throw that ball away on third and 2 really pounded that home for me.

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:24 pm

Somebody give Gibbs these lyrics from the fight song!!

Run or pass or score- we want a lot more!
Beat ‘em Swamp ‘em Touchdown- let the points soar!
Fight on, fight on, till you have won,

That says it best. Gibbs is not coaching Redskin Football for 4 quarters. Right now we are fighting on "till we have a lead" then playing possum.

patjam77 · Post by **patjam77** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 1:38 pm

has anyone even seen anything that could be called an audible either? i'm all for bringing in mike martz when he gets canned to run this offense.

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:34 pm

patjam77 wrote:has anyone even seen anything that could be called an audible either? i'm all for bringing in mike martz when he gets canned to run this offense.

Now THERE'S something that had not crossed my mind. Interesting....

Get well soon, Mike.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 pm

patjam77 wrote:has anyone even seen anything that could be called an audible either? i'm all for bringing in mike martz when he gets canned to run this offense.

Amazing - I was thinking the same thing! And you know Martz is done in St. Louis - the front office politics have gotten poisonous there.

Still, one thing about Martz sticks with me - that Super Bowl vs. the Pats was some of the dumbest playcalling I've ever seen. When it was abundantly clear that NE was keying off the pass by sending in nickel packages most downs on defense, he still stuck with the pass when it wasn't working, and he had a healthy Marshall Faulk in the backfield (back when he was still a major threat). Faulk was averaging over 4 yards per carry, but Martz only ran 14 run plays the entire game (vs. 44 passes), and we all know who won that one. Still, that was a while ago, and hopefully Martz has learned since then.

patjam77 · Post by **patjam77** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:42 pm

Mursilis wrote:
patjam77 wrote:has anyone even seen anything that could be called an audible either? i'm all for bringing in mike martz when he gets canned to run this offense.

Amazing - I was thinking the same thing! And you know Martz is done in St. Louis - the front office politics have gotten poisonous there.

Still, one thing about Martz sticks with me - that Super Bowl vs. the Pats was some of the dumbest playcalling I've ever seen. When it was abundantly clear that NE was keying off the pass by sending in nickel packages most downs on defense, he still stuck with the pass when it wasn't working, and he had a healthy Marshall Faulk in the backfield (back when he was still a major threat). Faulk was averaging over 4 yards per carry, but Martz only ran 14 run plays the entire game (vs. 44 passes), and we all know who won that one. Still, that was a while ago, and hopefully Martz has learned since then.

i'll agree with you but he has an offensive mind for MODERN football. bring him in and let's see what can happen... IT CAN'T GET ANY WORSE.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:45 pm

patjam77 wrote:
Mursilis wrote:
patjam77 wrote:has anyone even seen anything that could be called an audible either? i'm all for bringing in mike martz when he gets canned to run this offense.

Amazing - I was thinking the same thing! And you know Martz is done in St. Louis - the front office politics have gotten poisonous there.

Still, one thing about Martz sticks with me - that Super Bowl vs. the Pats was some of the dumbest playcalling I've ever seen. When it was abundantly clear that NE was keying off the pass by sending in nickel packages most downs on defense, he still stuck with the pass when it wasn't working, and he had a healthy Marshall Faulk in the backfield (back when he was still a major threat). Faulk was averaging over 4 yards per carry, but Martz only ran 14 run plays the entire game (vs. 44 passes), and we all know who won that one. Still, that was a while ago, and hopefully Martz has learned since then.

i'll agree with you but he has an offensive mind for MODERN football. bring him in and let's see what can happen... IT CAN'T GET ANY WORSE.

True that! I think adding Martz would be a plus. While the defense has had a few break-downs this year, it's abundantly clear the offense is the area needing the most improvement.

SkinsFanInHawai'i · Post by **SkinsFanInHawai'i** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:55 pm

Yeah let's put another new system in on Offense.
There is nothing wrong with the O (as Hogster pointed out) in quarters 1-3 we can get down the field.
I don't think there would be anything wrong with the play calling if our running game could ever become dominant.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 3:19 pm

SkinsFanInHawai'i wrote:Yeah let's put another new system in on Offense.
There is nothing wrong with the O (as Hogster pointed out) in quarters 1-3 we can get down the field.
I don't think there would be anything wrong with the play calling if our running game could ever become dominant.

I'd beg to differ; other than the 49ers game, which doesn't count because they are awful, and the Bucs game, when the offense actually put some points on the board vs. a decent defense, the offense has been weak the last two years. And I mean throughout all 4 quarters; when was the last time the offense put a team away before the 4th quarter even started? Heck, we were the last offense in the league to score 1 TD! It took 8 quarters of football to get into the endzone - that's not an offense which has played well in any quarter.

joebagadonuts · Post by **joebagadonuts** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 3:40 pm

patjam77 wrote:has anyone even seen anything that could be called an audible either?

i noticed brunell audible out of a play or two when the chargers showed blitz this past weekend.

UK Skins Fan · Post by **UK Skins Fan** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 3:57 pm

I bet Joe Gibbs is thinking that it is HIS fault. That's why he'll sort this thing out, because nobody is above getting the blame.

patjam77 · Post by **patjam77** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:13 pm

joebagadonuts wrote:
patjam77 wrote:has anyone even seen anything that could be called an audible either?

i noticed brunell audible out of a play or two when the chargers showed blitz this past weekend.

all i remember was the skins having the ball with like 4 minutes to go and they called a run behind thomas and jansen and as soon as the ball was snapped the defense went right to that hole... NO ONE is flloed by this offense.

patjam77 · Post by **patjam77** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:14 pm

SkinsFanInHawai'i wrote:Yeah let's put another new system in on Offense.
There is nothing wrong with the O (as Hogster pointed out) in quarters 1-3 we can get down the field.
I don't think there would be anything wrong with the play calling if our running game could ever become dominant.

there is a ton wrong with this offense... the last year and a half, what do they avg.? 14 ,15 points a game?

all the chargers did yesterday was double up moss and then poof!! no passing game... the system needs to be revamped... it isnt working.

DarthMonk · Post by **DarthMonk** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:42 pm

The Hogster wrote:That would make sense if we were incapable of moving the ball and scoring points during quarters 1-3, but Gibbs has to stay aggressive for 4 quarters. When we are down by 10, our offense is open and efficient. When we are up by ten our offense gets TOOO predictable and conservative.

The saying is "playing not to lose". Gibbs doesn't have the talent to do that and he must realize that right now. We can't line up man on man and just dominate with the run game when the other team is expecting the run. He has to stay aggressive and score points. The way he is coaching in the 4th quarter has lead to quick 3 and outs..why? Because he is lining up in a double TE set with 1 receiver and running into the teeth of a defense for no gains on 1st and 2nd down. Then on 3rd and long, teams are pressuring us into an errant throw or a sack.

He is doing this over and over and over and over again and defenses are too good to get beat by that. So in his attempts to run out the clock, he is essentially giving the other team more possessions and opportunities b/c that only works when you are getting 1st downs.

Good lord! Is this the same guy I was arguing with 2 weeks ago?? Right on dude.

DarthMonk · Post by **DarthMonk** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 4:51 pm

patjam77 wrote:has anyone even seen anything that could be called an audible either? i'm all for bringing in mike martz when he gets canned to run this offense.

Please God, no. Remember Martz crawling into a shell a few years back and playing for overtime when he was inside the 20 with tons of time on the clock? Him, of all people, doing the conservative choke. No thanks. Gibbs has some problems that need fixin' but in spite of my problems with him I think (hope) he'll fix 'em.

Conservative is OK, just not ultra-conservative.

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 5:08 pm

DarthMonk wrote:
The Hogster wrote:That would make sense if we were incapable of moving the ball and scoring points during quarters 1-3, but Gibbs has to stay aggressive for 4 quarters. When we are down by 10, our offense is open and efficient. When we are up by ten our offense gets TOOO predictable and conservative.

The saying is "playing not to lose". Gibbs doesn't have the talent to do that and he must realize that right now. We can't line up man on man and just dominate with the run game when the other team is expecting the run. He has to stay aggressive and score points. The way he is coaching in the 4th quarter has lead to quick 3 and outs..why? Because he is lining up in a double TE set with 1 receiver and running into the teeth of a defense for no gains on 1st and 2nd down. Then on 3rd and long, teams are pressuring us into an errant throw or a sack.

He is doing this over and over and over and over again and defenses are too good to get beat by that. So in his attempts to run out the clock, he is essentially giving the other team more possessions and opportunities b/c that only works when you are getting 1st downs.

Good lord! Is this the same guy I was arguing with 2 weeks ago?? Right on dude.

Yep..I must admit that you were right. If we correct those mistakes after the Bucs game...7-4 right now..and in first place.

I didn't think Gibbs would not change it up in the 4th quarter 3 weeks in a row.

REDEEMEDSKIN · Post by **REDEEMEDSKIN** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 5:17 pm

Hogster wrote:I didn't think Gibbs would not change it up in the 4th quarter 3 weeks in a row.

True, but, did you honestly think our defense could not hold a lead 3 weeks in a row, either? Just wondering.

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 5:30 pm

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:
Hogster wrote:I didn't think Gibbs would not change it up in the 4th quarter 3 weeks in a row.

True, but, did you honestly think our defense could not hold a lead 3 weeks in a row, either? Just wondering.

NO Defense in the league, except maybe the Bears can hold a team when the offense is basically going 3 and out on every possession. The defense gets tired and offenses are too good to get completely stuffed. It's a team game, if we are not moving the chains on O the Defense can't hold up being on the field for over half of the game.

We talked about turnovers, well we were +3 and still lost. Offense has to at least convert some first downs in order to keep the defense effective. Its no video game out there, these guys get tired.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:11 pm

The Hogster wrote:
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:
Hogster wrote:I didn't think Gibbs would not change it up in the 4th quarter 3 weeks in a row.

True, but, did you honestly think our defense could not hold a lead 3 weeks in a row, either? Just wondering.

NO Defense in the league, except maybe the Bears can hold a team when the offense is basically going 3 and out on every possession. The defense gets tired and offenses are too good to get completely stuffed. It's a team game, if we are not moving the chains on O the Defense can't hold up being on the field for over half of the game.

We talked about turnovers, well we were +3 and still lost. Offense has to at least convert some first downs in order to keep the defense effective. Its no video game out there, these guys get tired.

Not to mention the fact that (IMHO) the rules are weighted to favor offenses, not defenses. The best way to stop an offense is to keep it off the field with your offense, and the best way to protect a lead is to expand it. I think the last three weeks have shown that being too conservative will burn you.

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:15 pm

It almost burned us against Seattle, we did the same conservative BS and darn near lost the game.

You can't call your self an NFL team when you are scared to run the plays in your playbook. Look at the Chargers...they played to win...yes they threw an int late in the game, but their agressiveness paid off in the long run.

We were basically passive in the final 17 minutes...it was frustrating to watch.

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Tue Nov 29, 2005 12:31 am

The Hogster wrote:
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:
Hogster wrote:I didn't think Gibbs would not change it up in the 4th quarter 3 weeks in a row.

True, but, did you honestly think our defense could not hold a lead 3 weeks in a row, either? Just wondering.

NO Defense in the league, except maybe the Bears can hold a team when the offense is basically going 3 and out on every possession. The defense gets tired and offenses are too good to get completely stuffed. It's a team game, if we are not moving the chains on O the Defense can't hold up being on the field for over half of the game.

We talked about turnovers, well we were +3 and still lost. Offense has to at least convert some first downs in order to keep the defense effective. Its no video game out there, these guys get tired.

I agree with you on the matter of having a balanced team. Gibbs should not get the blame though its not his fault Rabach pulled a penalty. I dont think hes actually calling the plays either. We could really use a offensive cordinater though. Use gibbs system just have someone call the right plays at the right time you know. But I really am not a fan of Brunell though Ill cheer and hope he does well bite I have to bite my tounge watchn. Im hoping Campbell is the next coming of Doug Williams.