The defense may have had a rough game, but when it came down to it, they held NY to field goals rather than touch downs
Look at where those drives where they "held" them to field goals started, and you'll see that it's more appropriate to say that the defense "allowed" them to get into field goal position. Pass plays of 44, 46, and 27 yards ALL in the first half usually results in points, whether they're from a field goal or touchdown.
And to be on the field, they need to convert third downs.
Just saying Brunell did "more" than a defensive back isn't an answer to the question. Brunell was ten shades of ineffective yesterday. Compared to Brunell, Eli looked like a world-beater, and I think we all agree that Eli isn't THAT good.
Compared to Brunell, Eli looked like a world-beater, and I think we all agree that Eli isn't THAT good.
Well, yesterday he WAS that good. Unless, of course, our defense was THAT bad. Which was it? Was our defense that bad, or was Manning that good? According to you, and as you say that we "ALL" agree, that Manning isn't THAT good, then that leaves no other option but our defense was THAT bad.
The defense may have had a rough game, but when it came down to it, they held NY to field goals rather than touch downs
Look at where those drives where they "held" them to field goals started, and you'll see that it's more appropriate to say that the defense "allowed" them to get into field goal position. Pass plays of 44, 46, and 27 yards ALL in the first half usually results in points, whether they're from a field goal or touchdown.
You seem to want me to argue that the defense was perfect or to give up and say the defense is at fault for not holding the Giants to less than 3 points. I'm not going to do either. The defense has it's problems, but if Brunell had "shown up" and played his top game, we would have won. There are a lot of weapons on our offense, and Brunell has games where he is incapable of using them. Those games usually involve some amount of pressure from the opposing defense. But, guess what? Every quarterback is under pressure. Eli completed some terrific passes split seconds before being pummeled by our defense. In a similar situation, Brunell did nothing.
Eli completed some terrific passes split seconds before being pummeled by our defense. In a similar situation, Brunell did nothing.
I thought you suggested that he's not THAT good?
Either way, Brunell didn't play well. But, to compare him to Manning is like comparing Portis to Barber, Holdman to Pierce, Strahan to Carter. It's not a QB vs QB situation. For Manning to be as effective as he was, his receivers had to get open, which they DID. Similarly, for Brunell to be as effective as he should be, our receivers had to get open, which they DIDN'T. For Manning to be as good as he was, his O-line had to protect him, which they did. We didn't register ONE sack. For Brunell to be as good as we would like him to be, our O-line would have to protect him, which they DIDN'T. How many sacks did they have?
We are not as good as we all would like but we are not as bad or in as bad a shape as a lot of us think. We have had some bad games and some very good efforts - IMO we have not played well yet it has been either very good or bad we have not had a average game. This is really not a bad team it just has not played to most of our expectations.
That being said we are in a division that we can (IMO we will) win.
Bledsoe is not going to win many games playing like he did against us and against the iggles yesterday. He did not beat us per se we did not play well enough to win which would not have taken much in that game!
The iggles looked very good against the pukes but that was a very emotional game for them. They are IMO also not that good a team and the last 6 games are going to be too much for them.
The gints are not that good (we played badly ) and at this time are are 2-2 and about to be 2-4. Okay, I thought they would lose this week but they are not winning the next 2 in Atlanta and in Dallass.
We do need to play better football as a team. There were so many troubling parts to our game but it cannot all be put on the QB.
The QB debate should not be about who our QB should be it should be about who is the best QB suited for the job and which one gives the team the best chance to win? We have 3 to pick from and of those 3 Brunell playing well seems to me to be the right choice. I also think that Brunell is who the players want in there right now and they are also pretty close to what is happening on the practice field.
This is not about Campbell not being ready to play. I think Gibbs is very aware of what he has in Campbell. This is about Gibbs not wanting the mistakes that will happen to so many aspects of our offense with Campbell in there.
The QB change might happen soon but I do not see Gibbs doing that until the bye week at the earliest.
I really think that we have a team that has played 1 very good game, 1 good game and 3 games we might have won if we had played a little better as a team.
I am not happy but it is not time to make too many changes.
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
So, why are you mad at me for pointing out that the "fact" does nothing to refute CLL's point?
First of all, this isn't a soap opera! Who the hell said anything about being "mad" at anyone. Don't be so upset, I'm not mad at you!! It takes a lot more than you chiming in with "as if that changes his point" to make me "mad".
The "fact" wasn't intended to refute anyones point, it was merely to highlight that the defense gave up 19 points instead of 16.
So, why are you mad at me for pointing out that the "fact" does nothing to refute CLL's point?
First of all, this isn't a soap opera! Who the hell said anything about being "mad" at anyone. Don't be so upset, I'm not mad at you!! It takes a lot more than you chiming in with "as if that changes his point" to make me "mad".
The "fact" wasn't intended to refute anyones point, it was merely to highlight that the defense gave up 19 points instead of 16.
Once again I apologize, oh master of semantics, for not quite using the right word. I used the word "mad" out of hyperbole. If you had a sense of humor, you would recognize that. Clearly something I said set you off, as you've spent all morning setting up straw man arguments against me.
JPFair wrote:Look at the time of possesion battle, and you'll see that our Offense didn't have much of a chance.
Didn't have time? They had ALLL the time in the world if they could execute. Remeber this is a "ball-control" offense and they can't do that. Brunell still hasnt grasped this system and its evident. He's not pulling the trigger.
What did Moss tell him last week? Throw the ball up and last me/us make plays. Mark did that in OT. He didn't do it this week and didn't do it last week.
Didnt our offense smash the 3rd best defense last week? Didn't the offense lay an egg against on of the worst? Didnt we just make oneo f the worst defenses look like the 3rd best defense?
You're harping about 19 points! 19 is not HIGH! 30 points is a high number. 19 is doable. If our offense had the ability to score this game would have been different. The momentum would have swung in our favor.
JPFair wrote:When they're not on the field, they can't make plays.
Tell me how many chances this offense needs? Do we need to give them the ball 20 times a game for them to score 7 points?
Im not pinning it ALL on the offense but I can't stand how everyone is IGNORING THAT THEY SCORED 3 POINTS OFF OF A BAD CALL! The score should have been 0.
The way I see it, the main issue right now is coaching. Poor decision making, and a lack of urgency seems pretty troubling, and surprising.
Some may argue this point, but I think that we have a little too much arrogance on the part of Williams and his staff. We've let a bunch of solid players leave the past couple of years, but he believes he can just plug anyone in his system and be successful. Fact is, we've declined in defense in each of the past two seasons.....this year, dramatically. Our defensive rank is 21.
Ryan Clark being replaced by Archuleta has been a total bust. Not only has Archuleta had trouble covering everyone, he also has looked flat footed and foolish on several running plays this year, missing tackles that a safety has to make. With Springs and Prioleau out, our secondary is a joke right now. Compounding the matter is Williams backing off of the blitz pressure in an attempt to compensate, but that is making a bad situation worse. That lack of pressure just gives QB's more time to find open guys deeper in their patterns. Hell, we're being waxed for SEVERAL big plays a game! The past two weeks our opponents have scored on almost every possession, at will.
Decisions to line up corners 12 yards off the line on 3rd 3 is inexcuseable. That's just giving away first downs. What that says is our corners can't play man, and our safeties can't help out deep, so here's your guarenteed 5-10 yards on underneath stuff? That's why our 3rd down defense is so pathetic. I think it absolutely necessary that Williams get back to the aggressiveness that makes his defense work, instead of rushing 3 and dropping 8....cuz it ain't helping.
Lastly, our play calling and decision making on offense is very poor too. Kicking the field goal on 4th and 1 last week could have cost us the game, though one could argue either way. This week though, down by 13, and we don't go for it on 4th and 1??? That's inexcuseable play calling....you've got to try to push that in for 7 at that stage, especially the way the defense was giving up ground, and the lack of production on offense to that point. This was a no brainer......and a no guts call.
Overall, I'd like to see a little less humble and gentle, and a little more fire from Gibbs. I'm really tired of this "we just have to fight our way out of this and we're all in this together" crap that's getting very old. This week you can bet he'll convince everyone just how tough a team the Titans are....and I'm afraind our players are going to believe him.
Last week, we won against a good Jacksonville team, and for fans it was an exciting game. But, we had a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter and lost it. We put up a 3 point lead again in the final moments and lost it. We got lucky winning the coin toss, otherwise we'd now be 1 and 4, and burried in the basement of the division after only 5 games!! But you'd think that Gibbs had just won the Super Bowl again the way he talked after the game last week.
Let's be honest here. The Redskins are loaded with talent. We have a starting safety and a corner out. Happens to every team....no excuse for such poor play overall.
We have the highest paid team and the highest paid coaching staff in the NFL. It's time to start demanding the same level of production, especially from this defense that looks pretty miserable right now.
Last week, the Fans were happy, but Gibbs should have been pissed at the way we gave up 3 scores and two leads in the 4th Q with the game on the line.
This week, he should be even more pissed with an offense stacked with talent, and gaining only 86 net yards passing against a Giants secondary that's been playing as bad as ours. That is pathetic, and a mirror of what happened to us last year against the Giants. Yesterday's score could easily have been 35 -3, and we really never challenged the Giants at all.
We're being out coached and out played every week. We're 2-3, with the Titans, Colts, Cowboys, and Eagles comming over the next 4 games. We might be looking at 3-6 with the season over for us just half way through.
If I were Dan Snyder, there would be a staff meeting going on at this very moment, and I'd be chewing some arses.
M. Brunell vs. Giants: 12/22, 109 yds, 0 TDs, 0 INTs, 68 passer rating.
Now yesterday two rookies made thier first NFL starts ever yesterday. I know it's not fair to compare rookies with 0 experience to talented NFL veterans with 14 yrs. experience, but what the heck:
M. Leinart vs. Chiefs: 22/35, 253 yds., 2 TDs, 1 INT, 91.7 passer rating.
B. Gradkowski vs. NO: 20/31, 225 yds., 2 TDs, 1 INT, 94 passer rating.
Yes the Giants scored only 19 points. But they had the ball for 10 more minutes yesterday, and the score could have been much worse. They drove the length of the field on almost every possession!
We are losing the battle of field position big time, and we aren't getting turnovers, and good scoring opportunities from the defense. Rogers missed that int which was right in his hands.....and he's our best corner playing now.
Sometimes, the offense is to blame for keeping the defense on the field too much. In our case, the defense is keeping themselves on the field when they keep allowing 3rd and 15's to be converted.
I don't think anyone is gonna confuse Brunell with Payton Manning, so we can't expect him to carry this team. We need help from the defense. We need a shorter field for him to work with, and we aren't getting it.
We're ranked 12th in offense, and 21st in defense right now. So, we aren't a very good team in either category right now. But we are getting no help at all from the defense.
Bottom line.....this team needs a fire started under their rear ends, but Gibbs looks to be in a coma on the sidelines.....refelected by the coma our players were in yesterday.
The O-line was TERRIBLE, as were the receivers. They didn't get open, so they couldn't make plays.
Really? So when Portis averaged 5.5 yards per carry in the first half that was the offensive line being terrible? Receivers weren't open? That's a joke. Brunell had receivers open all day, he just couldn't get them the ball. Did you see the overthrow that he made that Pierce almost picked off? The line got a lot worse in the second half once we had no choice but to pass but in the first half Brunell had the time and open receivers to make plays and couldn't do it. If Philip Rivers (4th career start), under more pressure and playing against a tougher defense than Brunell, can lead his team on mumerous td drives and throw 2 td's, then how come Brunell cant lead this team with numerous weapons to more than 3 points?
As for your arguments against the defense, I think they are worthless. The D played badly, no doubt. The Giants have a very good offense with as many weapons as we do. But if you had told me before the game that we would hold them 19 points then I would've expected us to easily win the game. Yes time of possesion was in their favor and they had some big plays. But unlike the offense, the defense is missing a key player in Springs and against a passing offense like the Giants its not a surprise that they struggled. And while the defense struggled to get the Giants off the field, they did hold up and held them to field goals and late in the 3rd and 4th gave the offense the opportunity to cut into the lead. The offense, on the other hand, could do nothing to stay on the field. 100 yards passing against the 29th ranked pass defense is PATHETIC.
How many times has the defense stepped up and carried the offense when it was struggling? Too many times to even count. Wouldn't it be nice if the offense could for once do the same for the D?
Regarding the issue of the losses being "blamed" on Brunell, I'll agree that he's probably taking more than his fair share of the heat. The defense has certainly collapsed, and that obviously hasn't helped matters. However, QB is the only position under scrutiny in which a (possibly superior - obviously, that's a point of contention) replacement awaits on the sidelines, doing nothing. You can't say the same about our problems in the secondary. As bad as the DBs have been, they're probably still the best on the roster right now.
I like everyone else am totally shocked at the Redskins team that showed up yesterday. I realize that when things are good, Brunell has everyone's support and they say "see, he is OK", except mine! I watched the game a second time (second dose of bitter oil) and specifically watched Brunell. His passes were flutter passes or so far off the target that any worm in the field had a better chance of catching it.
The defensive secondary is a joke. Wright and Rumpf can cover a corpse about 50% of the time and Achuleta has marginally better cover skills. Rogers spends to much time celebrating when the receiver drops the pass after beating him. I truly fail to understand why the Redskins let the defensive backs go that they did and brought in these three. Rogers seems to have hit his peak and I don't remember Taylors name coming up once.
After rebuilding the Redskins team, it seems to be deteriorating , maybe.......................Gibbs isn't so brilliant the second time around.
The offense did that last week.....remember? The offense gave the defense a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter which lasted 3 minutes. They gave them another 3 point lead which lasted another 60 seconds. They finally won on the third play of overtime.
When you're down by 10 points, or 13, or 16, that takes you out of your running game.......and the defense can then pin their ears back and rush the passer full bore. When you're working with a long field, the defense can load the zones and make it difficult to move the ball in the air.
You say Brunell had time? He had somebody in his face the entire second half. 3 sacks, a couple of knock downs and hurries the rest of the time.
Conversely, we had ZERO sacks, and Manning had all day to throw.
The Giants stopped themselves in the red zone a couple of times or else this would have been a blow out like last year.
I'm not saying the offense didn't look bad. What I'm saying is that there are extenuating circumstances.
Let's call a spade a spade here. The Giants defense never got tired. They were rested all game because we can't buy a three and out with this defense. Time of possession says it all. 35 min to 25 min.....69 plays to 45 plays.
And what's up with this having to re-log on every 2 minutes??? You can't write three lines in a reply without having to copy and re-sign in
M. Brunell vs. Giants: 12/22, 109 yds, 0 TDs, 0 INTs, 68 passer rating.
Now yesterday two rookies made thier first NFL starts ever yesterday. I know it's not fair to compare rookies with 0 experience to talented NFL veterans with 14 yrs. experience, but what the heck:
M. Leinart vs. Chiefs: 22/35, 253 yds., 2 TDs, 1 INT, 91.7 passer rating. B. Gradkowski vs. NO: 20/31, 225 yds., 2 TDs, 1 INT, 94 passer rating.
Roesthlisberger has now played in 3 games - he has completed 53.9% of his passes for 0 TDs and 7 INTs his QB rating is 41.7. The only people who should use stats to support their position are politicians because everyone knows that stats are meaningless. We do not needs stats we need our team to play together and do the basics - tackle, block, catch, and run.
This team is a lot better than what we saw yesterday - no changes in who is on the field - just play with the level of intensity and desire we saw last week. We can beat most teams in the NFL if we just do that and we will win the NFC East.
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
The O-line was TERRIBLE, as were the receivers. They didn't get open, so they couldn't make plays.
Really? So when Portis averaged 5.5 yards per carry in the first half that was the offensive line being terrible? Receivers weren't open? That's a joke. Brunell had receivers open all day, he just couldn't get them the ball. Did you see the overthrow that he made that Pierce almost picked off? The line got a lot worse in the second half once we had no choice but to pass but in the first half Brunell had the time and open receivers to make plays and couldn't do it. If Philip Rivers (4th career start), under more pressure and playing against a tougher defense than Brunell, can lead his team on mumerous td drives and throw 2 td's, then how come Brunell cant lead this team with numerous weapons to more than 3 points?
As for your arguments against the defense, I think they are worthless. The D played badly, no doubt. The Giants have a very good offense with as many weapons as we do. But if you had told me before the game that we would hold them 19 points then I would've expected us to easily win the game. Yes time of possesion was in their favor and they had some big plays. But unlike the offense, the defense is missing a key player in Springs and against a passing offense like the Giants its not a surprise that they struggled. And while the defense struggled to get the Giants off the field, they did hold up and held them to field goals and late in the 3rd and 4th gave the offense the opportunity to cut into the lead. The offense, on the other hand, could do nothing to stay on the field. 100 yards passing against the 29th ranked pass defense is PATHETIC.
How many times has the defense stepped up and carried the offense when it was struggling? Too many times to even count. Wouldn't it be nice if the offense could for once do the same for the D?
You couldnt have said it much better.....as bad as that defense was yesterday, the offense DID NOTHING......and we were still in the game in the 4th quarter even though with good old Mark Brunell under center you kind of new the game was over down 16-3 mid 4th.....
To answer some of these posters.....whoever thinks that the players might tell the media they don;t want Brunell under center is absolutely crazy. So saying that "you hear the players saying they want Brunell as their QB" makes me laugh a little. They aren't gonna call out Brunell. It will never happen. Brunell is not our only problem but he is a MAJOR one.....it sure would be nice to see a young, strong armed, mobile QB (a.k.a #17) managing this offense. We might even be able to get excited about something. And those that say Moss or Randle-El werent open i;d like to see the game films you are watching because none of us could really tell but i have a feeling they were open alot,as they were in both the Dallas and Minnesota games......its a good thing Moss and Lloyd are classy guys or else we'd have a TO situation on our hands.
Bottom line........your opponent scores 19 points, you should at least be in the game, especially against that sorry ass defense.
M. Brunell vs. Giants: 12/22, 109 yds, 0 TDs, 0 INTs, 68 passer rating.
Now yesterday two rookies made thier first NFL starts ever yesterday. I know it's not fair to compare rookies with 0 experience to talented NFL veterans with 14 yrs. experience, but what the heck:
M. Leinart vs. Chiefs: 22/35, 253 yds., 2 TDs, 1 INT, 91.7 passer rating. B. Gradkowski vs. NO: 20/31, 225 yds., 2 TDs, 1 INT, 94 passer rating.
Roesthlisberger has now played in 3 games - he has completed 53.9% of his passes for 0 TDs and 7 INTs his QB rating is 41.7. The only people who should use stats to support their position are politicians because everyone knows that stats are meaningless. We do not needs stats we need our team to play together and do the basics - tackle, block, catch, and run.
This team is a lot better than what we saw yesterday - no changes in who is on the field - just play with the level of intensity and desire we saw last week. We can beat most teams in the NFL if we just do that and we will win the NFC East.
It's a game of stats, decided by the ultimate stat, the score. As for Big Ben (who has one more ring than Brunell, as well as a higher season passer rating the last two years than Brunell ever had), yes, he's in a severe slump; can't argue against that. Being an unhelmeted idiot in the off-season certainly didn't help, but kids will do dumb things like that. I hope he recovers as a player. As for this team, yes, we can in theory beat any team in this league, but so far, we've been one good team (JAX) so far, and lost to 3 teams in our conference and 2 teams in our division. Nothing about that says we'll win the East. I'm not going to say the season is over, but it's approaching crisis time.
Rasheid Davis is the 3rd receiver for the Bears (picked up in the Arena League) and i think he actually pays the Bears to play for them.....he has 8 catches and 2TDs.........our 3rd receiver gets paid 30 million and he has 6 catches and 0TDs thru 5 games.....something is wrong. Its alot deeper than just this bad play. I have a feeling there might be philosophical issues with this whole organization and it is really upsetting when you live and die with this team....someone give me some hope!
Roesthlisberger has now played in 3 games - he has completed 53.9% of his passes for 0 TDs and 7 INTs his QB rating is 41.7. The only people who should use stats to support their position are politicians because everyone knows that stats are meaningless. We do not needs stats we need our team to play together and do the basics - tackle, block, catch, and run.
Big Ben also nearly died this offseason and had his appendix removed recently. What does it say about our qb situation when we have to compare Brunell to a guy that had his head slammed into a moving car and had major surgery recently?
) and at this time are are 2-2 and about to be 2-4. Okay, I thought they would lose this week but they are not winning the next 2 in Atlanta and in Dallass.
