Redskins Vs. Vikings Post-Game Thread

[Fios]

Let's be cooperative and post everything else here.

If you want to start a thread, fine, please avoid giving instructions. You aren't a moderator, we've had this discussion repeatedly.

[welch]

I suggest everyone ignore the predictions.

[LOSTHOG]

I think I was most impressed tonight with our patchwork line wearing down the Vikes front four. Half of CP's yards came on our last scoring drive. I love it when we play shove it down their throat (and it works)

[welch]

Yo ho ho!!!!!

[LOSTHOG]

Another think I have noticed is we continue to get the ball to Caldwell 4 or 5 times a game. He seems to have pretty good hands. I hope we keep him.

[Charm City Sports]

Happy holidays everyone!!

I am getting some sleep.

WE WANT DALLAS!!

WE WANT DALLAS!!

WE WANT DALLAS!!

[CanesSkins26]

Another think I have noticed is we continue to get the ball to Caldwell 4 or 5 times a game. He seems to have pretty good hands. I hope we keep him.

I'd still like to see us sign/draft a #1 or #2 caliber receiver with some size to compliment Moss, but Caldwell has been very impressive lately so I hope that we keep him.

[RedskinjXd]

i live in new jersey.... flight from newark to seattle is 6 and half hours. ouch! better get into the playoffs and win that one... a flight to dallas may be shorter.

[SkinsFreak]

Great offensive and defensive game plans, great coaching and great execution by the team. The Redskins came to play last night. Nice win, boys.

Edit: BTW, I made a point to watch Stephon Heyer last week against Strahan and again this week. Talk about a diamond in the rough. For an undrafted rookie, Bugel has got that kid playing like a seasoned vet.

Great job, Stephon.

[gushogs]

Just got up, vereeeeeeery happy and I don't know if been said before, but the guy who saw the 12th man on the vikes D on the fumble play should be awarded a medal.

Merry christmas everybody.

HaiL,

GUS

[DarthMonk]

We ran on 'em and we stopped 'em.

DarthMonk

[LOSTHOG]

Another think I have noticed is we continue to get the ball to Caldwell 4 or 5 times a game. He seems to have pretty good hands. I hope we keep him.

I'd still like to see us sign/draft a #1 or #2 caliber receiver with some size to compliment Moss, but Caldwell has been very impressive lately so I hope that we keep him.

I would like to see Mix in the passing game a little. He is paying dividends on special teams. If he has the hands to match his size we may already have the big WR we want.

[welch]

Hey

I think the "no-acount" Redskins beat the all-all-star Vikings!!!!
Golly, could the TV/radio experts ever be wrong?

Scalp 'em, swamp 'em
We will take 'em
Big score

Read 'em, weep 'em
Touchdown
We want heap more

I've been singing the old version (minus the "fight for old Dixie", which doesn't even scan, aside for being a code word for something we'd like to forget.)[/quote]

[NodakPaul]

Congrats on the win guys. I think Tarvaris Jackson should be given the game ball - because he basically game the game to you in the first half. Don't expect Dallas to give you three easy turnovers right off the bat like that next week.

As far as the AP who comment, first his nickname is AD , and second, he only touched the ball 9 times. It's tough to run the ball consistently when you are down by 25 thanks largely to turnovers.

Anyway, a win is still a win, and Washington deserved it more than the Vikes did on Sunday. Good luck against Dallas, although I will be pulling for a Skins loss...

[Chris Luva Luva]

I'm sorry but T-Jack is not a NFL Quarterback... Minny better get that position solidified or risk squandering good years of a potential GOAT RB.

[Deadskins]

Congrats on the win guys. I think Tarvaris Jackson should be given the game ball - because he basically game the game to you in the first half. Don't expect Dallas to give you three easy turnovers right off the bat like that next week.

As far as the AP who comment, first his nickname is AD , and second, he only touched the ball 9 times. It's tough to run the ball consistently when you are down by 25 thanks largely to turnovers.

Anyway, a win is still a win, and Washington deserved it more than the Vikes did on Sunday. Good luck against Dallas, although I will be pulling for a Skins loss...

Let's be honest, the Skins didn't score their points off turnovers. We wound up with a safety after the Smoot interception and then went on a 65-yard drive following the free kick. Most of our points were scored after sustained drives that ate the clock, tired the Vikings' D, quieted the crowd, and demoralized your sidelines.

[Countertrey]

Great game! I'd like to know who pulled that 12 man challenge out of their kiester. That was the "play" of the game!

I'm thinking either Saunders, or whoever is the Quality Control coach. Both are in the booth...

Woo hoo! I called it!... from USAToday: Inside Slant

Offensive quality control coach Bill Khayat caught the Vikings with 12 men on the field when Todd Collins lost the snap in rushing to get the next play off before Minnesota could challenge Santana Moss' catch.

Excellent job, Coach Khayat! Hope he got a game ball!

[NodakPaul]

Congrats on the win guys. I think Tarvaris Jackson should be given the game ball - because he basically game the game to you in the first half. Don't expect Dallas to give you three easy turnovers right off the bat like that next week.

As far as the AP who comment, first his nickname is AD , and second, he only touched the ball 9 times. It's tough to run the ball consistently when you are down by 25 thanks largely to turnovers.

Anyway, a win is still a win, and Washington deserved it more than the Vikes did on Sunday. Good luck against Dallas, although I will be pulling for a Skins loss...

Let's be honest, the Skins didn't score their points off turnovers. We wound up with a safety after the Smoot interception and then went on a 65-yard drive following the free kick. Most of our points were scored after sustained drives that ate the clock, tired the Vikings' D, quieted the crowd, and demoralized your sidelines.

First Redskins score: Safety. Field position set up by Smoot's INT
Second Redskins score: TD immediately after the safety. Because of the INT and safety, the Vikings defense has been on the field for all but 37 seconds of the game so far...
Third Redskins score: TD following Spring's Interception
Fourth Redskins score: TD following an 80 yard, sustained drive - the first one NOT related directly to a turnover.

With that we enter halftime 22-0. To say that the first three scores were not the direct result of turnovers is silly. The fourth can be argued to be indirectly related because the Vikings offense kept putting the Vikings D back on the field.

If you want to be honest, admit that the three turnovers in the first quarter and a half had as much to do with the Vikings loss as anything else...

[Fios]

Congrats on the win guys. I think Tarvaris Jackson should be given the game ball - because he basically game the game to you in the first half. Don't expect Dallas to give you three easy turnovers right off the bat like that next week.

As far as the AP who comment, first his nickname is AD , and second, he only touched the ball 9 times. It's tough to run the ball consistently when you are down by 25 thanks largely to turnovers.

Anyway, a win is still a win, and Washington deserved it more than the Vikes did on Sunday. Good luck against Dallas, although I will be pulling for a Skins loss...

Let's be honest, the Skins didn't score their points off turnovers. We wound up with a safety after the Smoot interception and then went on a 65-yard drive following the free kick. Most of our points were scored after sustained drives that ate the clock, tired the Vikings' D, quieted the crowd, and demoralized your sidelines.

First Redskins score: Safety. Field position set up by Smoot's INT
Second Redskins score: TD immediately after the safety. Because of the INT and safety, the Vikings defense has been on the field for all but 37 seconds of the game so far...
Third Redskins score: TD following Spring's Interception
Fourth Redskins score: TD following an 80 yard, sustained drive - the first one NOT related directly to a turnover.

With that we enter halftime 22-0. To say that the first three scores were not the direct result of turnovers is silly. The fourth can be argued to be indirectly related because the Vikings offense kept putting the Vikings D back on the field.

If you want to be honest, admit that the three turnovers in the first quarter and a half had as much to do with the Vikings loss as anything else...

The safety was set up by the Vikings inability to advance the ball out of the endzone, the turnover didn't help their cause but they should have been able to run enough plays to gain a bit of punting room. Thus to say it and the subsequent touchdown were the result of a turnover is not accurate. The turnover didn't help but it's not as simple as saying the turnover led to Redskins scores. It also smacks of "well, we beat ourselves" which simply was not true in this case. The Redskins offense had scoring drives of 68, 80, 48 and 75 yards.

[REDEEMEDSKIN]

Did you call the onside kick? I sure as hell didn't and I would think I know a thing or two about football.

I don't know as much about football, and I called the onsides kick. Ask welch; he was next to me.

I thought of Brad Childress coming from the Andy Reid coaching tree, and Reid does that stuff frequently.

I even wondered why the PRO coaches didn't stop to think about the possibility of the onsides kick.

Oh well, they made up for it with the stuff of Peterson (who?) on 4th-and-1.

[NodakPaul]

Congrats on the win guys. I think Tarvaris Jackson should be given the game ball - because he basically game the game to you in the first half. Don't expect Dallas to give you three easy turnovers right off the bat like that next week.

As far as the AP who comment, first his nickname is AD , and second, he only touched the ball 9 times. It's tough to run the ball consistently when you are down by 25 thanks largely to turnovers.

Anyway, a win is still a win, and Washington deserved it more than the Vikes did on Sunday. Good luck against Dallas, although I will be pulling for a Skins loss...

Let's be honest, the Skins didn't score their points off turnovers. We wound up with a safety after the Smoot interception and then went on a 65-yard drive following the free kick. Most of our points were scored after sustained drives that ate the clock, tired the Vikings' D, quieted the crowd, and demoralized your sidelines.

First Redskins score: Safety. Field position set up by Smoot's INT
Second Redskins score: TD immediately after the safety. Because of the INT and safety, the Vikings defense has been on the field for all but 37 seconds of the game so far...
Third Redskins score: TD following Spring's Interception
Fourth Redskins score: TD following an 80 yard, sustained drive - the first one NOT related directly to a turnover.

With that we enter halftime 22-0. To say that the first three scores were not the direct result of turnovers is silly. The fourth can be argued to be indirectly related because the Vikings offense kept putting the Vikings D back on the field.

If you want to be honest, admit that the three turnovers in the first quarter and a half had as much to do with the Vikings loss as anything else...

The safety was set up by the Vikings inability to advance the ball out of the endzone, the turnover didn't help their cause but they should have been able to run enough plays to gain a bit of punting room. Thus to say it and the subsequent touchdown were the result of a turnover is not accurate. The turnover didn't help but it's not as simple as saying the turnover led to Redskins scores. It also smacks of "well, we beat ourselves" which simply was not true in this case. The Redskins offense had scoring drives of 68, 80, 48 and 75 yards.

I can concede the TD after the safety, but I still believe that the INT by Smoot set up the field position for the safety.

As far as the "well, we beat ourselves" attitude - I do think the Vikings beat themselves. Do you really not believe that three turnovers early in the game contributes to the loss. Both of TJack's INTs were the result of horrible decisions, not amazing defensive plays. And Shank's fumble was just incompetence on his part.

The Skins fielded the better team on Sunday, to be sure. But to think that the play on the part of the Skins offense is the sole reason for the win is ridiculous. If the Vikings offense would have completed even one drive in the first half and kept their defense off from the field, it could have been a different game. Look at the second half. Again, the Skins were playing well, but the Vikings also cut down on mistakes, and the second half score reflected it.

[Chris Luva Luva]

[I can concede the TD after the safety, but I still believe that the INT by Smoot set up the field position for the safety.

IMO a bogus call by the refs set up your safety. IMHO there was inconclusive evidence. There is a section of video where Sellers is blocked from view due to other players... And then you see at a later point that the ball didn't break the plane... There was no way of being 100% sure that the ball did NOT break the plane when he was being obscured by the other players. Is it likely that he broke the plane? That is certainly debatable BUT there was NOT CONCLUSIVE evidence to overturn what the judge saw.

IMO, you got some help from the Zebras and they actually made it worse for you.

[NodakPaul]

[I can concede the TD after the safety, but I still believe that the INT by Smoot set up the field position for the safety.

IMO a bogus call by the refs set up your safety. IMHO there was inconclusive evidence. There is a section of video where Sellers is blocked from view due to other players... And then you see at a later point that the ball didn't break the plane... There was no way of being 100% sure that the ball did NOT break the plane when he was being obscured by the other players. Is it likely that he broke the plane? That is certainly debatable BUT there was NOT CONCLUSIVE evidence to overturn what the judge saw.

IMO, you got some help from the Zebras and they actually made it worse for you.

I am not debating the TD reversal. I am saying that Minnesota's turnovers contributed to the Redskins' offensive success in the first half. Hell, I would have rather taken the TD given the outcome. It would have taken two of the redskins points off from the board - and for field position sake I would have rather had a kick off after a TD than a free kick after a safety.

Your view actually supports my belief - that Smoot's INT set up both the safety and the subsequent TD.

[Chris Luva Luva]

Your view actually supports my belief - that Smoot's INT set up both the safety and the subsequent TD.

Maybe it does, I'm half sleep anyway. Fios! Help us!

[Fios]

Again, the INTs obviously had an impact but the Vikings got outplayed, on both sides of the ball. The notion that removing those INTs equals a potential win for Minnesota is far fetched. The Vikings offense had 14 drives, three of them resulted in scores and we can throw out the last one (as well as Minny's last drive and the one toward the end of the first half) for obvious reasons. For fun we'll subtract the INTs as well which leaves the Vikings with 10 drives that resulted in 210 yards and 14 points. Over four quarters. The Redskins, on the other hand, had 12 drives and we can subtract the last one. In 11 drives the offense managed 341 yards and 30 points, 10 of those points came on second-half drives that ate up over 10 minutes of clock. The Vikings defense did not demonstrate, at any point, that they could reliably keep the Redskins offense in-check.