There's no way for a fan to know this unless he / she is on the inside. The only discrepancy we've heard is that Portis talked about Gibbs calling a play in one situation.
Assuming that Gibbs and Saunders are in a disagreement, in my opinion, is the assertion that has the burden of proof. I don't think that it's a clear matter, by any means
Check out Saunders' comments about the Jags game. He wanted to go on 4th and 1 and Gibbs overruled and decided to kick. I've seen atleast 75% of the Chiefs games the past few seasons and based on those games it's my belief that if it was truely up to him Saunders would've gone for it today. Thrown in last week's comments and I'm almost certain that Gibbs made that call. I also dont think that Saunders would've thrown on 3rd and 1 if he wasn't planning on having another shot on 4th down.
Irn-Bru wrote:I wanted to write about the defense, but I see that this thread has gotten a little packed with emotions.
4th and 1, down by 13, 3rd quarter. . .in field goal range. Your offense hasn't been clicking too much but is starting to show signs of potency. And here's a chance to make the score 16-6 with a full quarter of football to play.
Let's gather our senses before becoming too judgemental here.
"Coward" and Gibbs in the same sentence. . .
Gibbs or Saunders called the 3rd and 1 as a playaction. It's exactly the kind of play where you're a genius if it works but murdered by the media and fans if you don't.
The kick gave us a chance to take away something from that drive. Unlucky for us, it doesn't go through.
Of course, if Gibbs / Saunders go for it on 4th and 1, and don't make it (say, the run gets stuffed). . .people murder him anyway. "It was only the 3rd quarter!! Take the points and gather your bearings for the last 15 minutes!"
Gibbs is going to take the full force of criticism for what amounted to the ball not bouncing in our direction; that's the kind of man that he is.
I mean, man. . .guess I can't say that I didn't expect to see something outrageous on THN (we did lose, after all ). . .but "coward"?
I agree that coward is WAY too strong a word, and insulting a man of the caliber of Joe Gibbs. Still, I hated the call. At that point, you needed a TD - getting a FG would still leave it a 2-score deficit, and given how poor the offense was looking, I would've prefered to close the gap a little more by going for the TD. Plus, the momentum shift would've been huge. But hindsight is always 20/20.
And if that's because Joe Gibbs hasn't truly given up the offence, then I'd have a problem with it too.
But if we really think that the problem here is a call on fourth and one, instead of the fact that we had a fourth and one situation instead of first and ten, then I don't really know how to help you guys. I think you're fixating your anger on one simplistic target, instead of the issues that actually got us to that point in the first place. Why were we losing so badly at that point in the first place? I'm thinking poor o-line play, I'm thinking poor coverage downfield, I'm thinking poor qb play and a lack of production at wr. I'm certainly not getting hung up on one single call on fourth down.
Well the thing is that we weren't losing that badly at that point. We were down 16-3. If we convert on 4th and score a td on that drive we are a td away from taking the lead. It puts more pressure on them to make some more plays on offense and maybe gives the defense a spark. Even if we dont end up with a td there it atleast would've given our d 2 or 3 more minutes on the bench to rest up. The decision was cowardly and to me looked like whoever made that call had given up on trying to win the game.
Ok, so it was 16-3, and we weren't losing badly? We lost 19-3 in the end - so it wasn't a bad loss, because it's only three points worse than when we weren't losing "that badly"?
I'm really not sure whether I'm arguing with you or not at this point. It's tiredness, I'm sure. I will definitely go to bed soon. Just as soon as I can ease this overwhelming urge to go out and pick a fight with a very short and weedy ginger kid.
Irn-Bru wrote:I wanted to write about the defense, but I see that this thread has gotten a little packed with emotions.
4th and 1, down by 13, 3rd quarter. . .in field goal range. Your offense hasn't been clicking too much but is starting to show signs of potency. And here's a chance to make the score 16-6 with a full quarter of football to play.
Let's gather our senses before becoming too judgemental here.
"Coward" and Gibbs in the same sentence. . .
Gibbs or Saunders called the 3rd and 1 as a playaction. It's exactly the kind of play where you're a genius if it works but murdered by the media and fans if you don't.
The kick gave us a chance to take away something from that drive. Unlucky for us, it doesn't go through.
Of course, if Gibbs / Saunders go for it on 4th and 1, and don't make it (say, the run gets stuffed). . .people murder him anyway. "It was only the 3rd quarter!! Take the points and gather your bearings for the last 15 minutes!"
Gibbs is going to take the full force of criticism for what amounted to the ball not bouncing in our direction; that's the kind of man that he is.
I mean, man. . .guess I can't say that I didn't expect to see something outrageous on THN (we did lose, after all ). . .but "coward"?
I agree that coward is WAY too strong a word, and insulting a man of the caliber of Joe Gibbs. Still, I hated the call. At that point, you needed a TD - getting a FG would still leave it a 2-score deficit, and given how poor the offense was looking, I would've prefered to close the gap a little more by going for the TD. Plus, the momentum shift would've been huge. But hindsight is always 20/20.
it wasn't hindsight for me. the moment he sent the FG unit on the team i screamed "WHAT!???? we're giving up. game over!" it would never even have occurred to me to not go for it.
Im tired of hearing about how the players feel. Im tired of hearing how booing hurt their feelings. They get paid TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARSSSSSSS, screw your feelings.
I dont have fans cheering me on at work but I get the job done.
Im tired of hearing about how the players feel. Im tired of hearing how booing hurt their feelings. They get paid TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARSSSSSSS, screw your feelings.
I dont have fans cheering me on at work but I get the job done.
I was thinking the same thing. Couldn't have said it any better. I'll gladly take the millions and the booing.
im brand new here so hopefully this gets thru... ok why on 3rd and 1 trailing by 13 points .... do we not put tj duckett in the game and try twice forthe 1st down makes no sense to me... i know he was not active the prwvious 2 weeks but i noticed he was dressed in uniform this week... so we on 3rd and 1 give to portis he doesnt get it ... and then we kick a field goal? anyone wanna explain their opinions on that sequence of plays to me?
Champsturf wrote:Because we didn't bring him here to use him We just wanted to give away more draft picks....it just makes that day in April go by so much quicker
Speaking of odd plays called....what was that goofy inverted option play to randle el? Why on Earth pitch it to the guy closer to the defense rather than just throw it away? We know he can throw it away. That play just looked awful.
I never noticed before, but Mark Brunell is probably the worst actor in NFL history.
He sells the playaction worse than anyone I have ever seen. Has anyone else noticed this?
"Guess [Ryan Kerrigan] really does have a good motor. And is relentless. And never quits on a play. And just keeps coming. And probably eats Wheaties and drinks Apple Pie smoothies and shaves with Valvoline." -Dan Steinberg DC Sports Bog
wow, how quick the tides turn. last week brunell is the toast of the town and now, hes getting the boo birds. Lets just face the facts here. We got beat in all phases of the game. My biggest disappointment was in the defense though. 19 points does not seem like much, but when you give up drives that like, you deserve to lose. Our offense wasn't great, but they didn't blow the game with fumbles and penalties
Worst play by a Redskins secondary ever since I can remember watching our team play. Wright was lost, Rogers could wear sticky tape on his hands, Rumph got run over, Taylor was not there, Archuleta got blocked, and on and on and on.
Pathetic secondary. One can not have a good defense with only the front seven playing well.
The good thing is that it is OVER. We will welcome them back at home as we did last year.
Daniel Snyder has defined incompetence, failure and greed to true Washington Redskins fans for over a decade and a half. Stay away from football operations !!!
I was worried about this game right after the Giants got waxed by the Seahawks.
They had a chip on their shoulder, they played at home, and they had an extra week to prepare. That's not a good combination.
We better get used to it, because we play the Colts in two weeks after their bye next week. (At least they didn't lose to the Titans, although they may be embarrassed that it was even close!)
The best part about that game is that its over.....i just can't understand how a defense can be as good as we were last year and be as bad as we are this year. Its mindboggling because this defense is bad. But i can tell you this....Mark Brunell will not lead ANY team to a super bowl at this stage of his career. He will have a good game every once in a while but you cannot count on him when we really need exceptional play....he cannot move in the pocket and just doesnt have it anymore. I dont even think he played THAT bad today....the rush was heavy all day and he was on his toes all day.....but i just have that awful feeling in the pit of my stomach that we have no chance of going anywhere with this guy leading us. Its very depressing.
Can u all imagine what Peyton Manning will do against this secondary? And i think they have a bye week before as well. Please tell me their bye week is not next week.
jru37726 wrote:Can u all imagine what Peyton Manning will do against this secondary? And i think they have a bye week before as well. Please tell me their bye week is not next week.
). . .but "coward"?
