Redskins offense that bad? or Dallas's defense is that good?

[Irn-Bru]

I think I read somewhere that the second fade was an option audibled by Mcnabb. A run may have been the first call.....

Yeah the report is that it was his hot route, which he turned to when he saw a blitzer approaching.

[CanesSkins26]

Those dropped balls in the endzone were an issue. With that, we would have had 20; if all else was equal. I was disappointed in Armstrong's performance. I thought he could be one of those diamond in the rough types; he still could, but I am not as confident in this after a poor performance against Dallas.

20 against the Cowboys isn't a bad number -- much better than the 6 and 0 points we put up on them last year.... It is just nice to see a QB that can lead and have confidence in.

Only the first was a drop. The second was a great play by Jenkins.

[crazyhorse1]

it also doesnt help that CP is 500 years old and is lacking some of that young guy quickness

I actually thought that he showed a pretty good burst and good quickness the few times that the line actually opened up some running lanes.

Yeah, and another way to tell that CP was doing well was to watch Larry Johnson try to run when he gave Portis a spell. Huge difference between the two.

If Kyle had given either of them a shot instead of going to Armstrong on back to back calls, that last play of the game might not have happened. Back to back runs and .....

I think I read somewhere that the second fade was an option audibled by Mcnabb. A run may have been the first call.....

I don't fault Armstrong for missing that first catch (the second wasn't a miss). It was a tough catch and would have been dropped now and then by anyone. I think we'll see some good things from him and Thomas, so am not too worried about WR's. Galloway, however, needs to be on the bench. Things won't get better until that happens.

That said, I think people are missing obvious negatives. Our OL really is weak and won't get better. Neither Doc nor Rabach are adequate, and each of the others (including Williams) is suspect, with only Williams having an upside. That, and lack of 1st class RB's, means weak running game. which will be a problem all year. Defense is just as flawed. Our two outside linebackers don't tackle in space or close on ball carriers quickly enough, plus two of our three DL are terribly weak. We should not be committed to the 3-4 and will suffer for it. Landry was great, but a SS should not be the guy making all the tackles. We cannot expect to win if we cannot stop the run (which it appears we cannot), especially if we are weak offensively, which we are.

Face it. We were lucky to beat the Cowboys. Stats do count, at least as indicators of strength and weakness; without penalties and other ludicrous breaks, we would have been soundly beaten.

On offence, we should install Thomas or Armstrong at once at WR in place
of Galloway and begin using ey and Davis at the same time. On defense, we should go back to the 4-3, which would give us two excellent ends and a Haynesworth making plays, as well as three linebackers who can make tackles in space.

Reality check: if Campbell were still playing QB for us and had the same game McNabb had, we would be calling for his head, talking about how he can't score in the red zone, bitching about how he misses long passes, faulting his leadership, etc. Plus, we would add a new charge: failure to complete fifty percent of his passes. Double standard, anyone?

[KazooSkinsFan]

Face it. We were lucky to beat the Cowboys

Face it. We beat the Cowboys

[USAFSkinFan]

Amen... One week at a time...one way or another this team will look a lot different (better) by the end of the season... as opposed to the last two seasons...

[langleyparkjoe]

Face it. We were lucky to beat the Cowboys

Face it. We beat the Cowboys

[SKINFAN]

Face it. We were lucky to beat the Cowboys

Face it. We beat the Cowboys

+1

[TincoSkin]

it also doesnt help that CP is 500 years old and is lacking some of that young guy quickness

I actually thought that he showed a pretty good burst and good quickness the few times that the line actually opened up some running lanes.

Yeah, and another way to tell that CP was doing well was to watch Larry Johnson try to run when he gave Portis a spell. Huge difference between the two.

while CP is indeed still an effective NFL running back comparing him to LJ is unfair. LJ has been washed up for a while now; only an effective back up now...

I hope CP can get back to his glory days but the fact remains, he is not the young gun he once was. If he is to be compared to someone i would compare him to mcnabb. Both guys are in the final third of their repective careers and are still a power to be respected. And i hope both have a season to remember.

[Deadskins]

Those dropped balls in the endzone were an issue

The first was just an ugly drop. I agree he should have caught the second, but he was interfered with

There should have been at least one pass iterference call on those two passes.. Then we would have had 1st and goal at the one, and probably would have run the ball in.

[Deadskins]

Face it. We were lucky to beat the Cowboys

Face it, the Cowpies were lucky to even be in the game at the end.

[cowboykillerzRGiii]

Face it. We were lucky to beat the Cowboys

Face it, the Cowpies were lucky to even be in the game at the end.

I agree completely. Two set of downs first and goal and we left with one field goal. Easily coulda been 14 or at least ten. Three or even six is just unlucky for us. ey was open on the second Armstrong option. I guarantee the shanys are emphasizing redzone and goalline Offense this week

[Countertrey]

CH:

Double standard, anyone?

How so? McNabb has something that Campbell has not... a history as a winner. A history as a legitimate leader. A history as a decisive playmaker. A history as a conference champion. A history as quick thinker.

Apples and oranges.

[KazooSkinsFan]

CH:

Double standard, anyone?

How so? McNabb has something that Campbell has not... a history as a winner. A history as a legitimate leader. A history as a decisive playmaker. A history as a conference champion. A history as quick thinker.

Apples and oranges.

I agree, and even though he didn't close out the deal and needs to get more productive, McNabb looked so much more comfortable then JC ever did and McNabb had two pre-season games versus years as a starter. We are a D lead team, McNabb just needs to be solid, we're going to be fine.

[1niksder]

Reality check: if Campbell were still playing QB for us and had the same game McNabb had, we would be calling for his head, talking about how he can't score in the red zone, bitching about how he misses long passes, faulting his leadership, etc. Plus, we would add a new charge: failure to complete fifty percent of his passes. Double standard, anyone?

Leave JC out of this... he's got enough trouble in Oakland trying to hold on to his head

[chiefhog44]

it also doesnt help that CP is 500 years old and is lacking some of that young guy quickness

I actually thought that he showed a pretty good burst and good quickness the few times that the line actually opened up some running lanes.

Yeah, and another way to tell that CP was doing well was to watch Larry Johnson try to run when he gave Portis a spell. Huge difference between the two.

If Kyle had given either of them a shot instead of going to Armstrong on back to back calls, that last play of the game might not have happened. Back to back runs and .....

I think I read somewhere that the second fade was an option audibled by Mcnabb. A run may have been the first call.....

That said, I think people are missing obvious negatives. Our OL really is weak and won't get better. Neither Doc nor Rabach are adequate, and each of the others (including Williams) is suspect, with only Williams having an upside. That, and lack of 1st class RB's, means weak running game. which will be a problem all year. Defense is just as flawed. Our two outside linebackers don't tackle in space or close on ball carriers quickly enough, plus two of our three DL are terribly weak. We should not be committed to the 3-4 and will suffer for it. Landry was great, but a SS should not be the guy making all the tackles. We cannot expect to win if we cannot stop the run (which it appears we cannot), especially if we are weak offensively, which we are.


Reality check: if Campbell were still playing QB for us and had the same game McNabb had, we would be calling for his head, talking about how he can't score in the red zone, bitching about how he misses long passes, faulting his leadership, etc. Plus, we would add a new charge: failure to complete fifty percent of his passes. Double standard, anyone?

Agree about Rabach and Doc. Doc won't be starting by the end of the year though, and Williams is not suspect and neither is Brown. every time Brown was in the game, we had good drives...not so with Heyer. It made a huge difference.

I hate to combat your statement on Campbell, because I don't want this to turn into a 17 page Campbell argument, but here goes... First off, no way Campbell has this game. He would have been sacked at least twice and probably fumbled once. That is for sure. I haven't seen a Skins QB avoid some of that kind of pressure since.....hum...still thinking...over 20 years ago. Secondly, IF he had the game McNabb had in stats, I WOULD have been all over him, because he has had that kind of game his ENTIRE career, and I am sick of it. McNabb has had ONE full game in this system and has a history of being a GREAT QB. Campbell didn't have receivers drop passes on him. He just flat missed them. There were six passes I can think of that were flat dropped. Moss (1), Sellers (2), Armstrong (3). There may have been more, but 21-32 aint that bad for missing two weeks and playing your first game in a new system and coming out with a win against the Cowboys on the first go.

[KazooSkinsFan]

I hate to combat your statement on Campbell, because I don't want this to turn into a 17 page Campbell argument, but here goes... First off, no way Campbell has this game. He would have been sacked at least twice and probably fumbled once. That is for sure. I haven't seen a Skins QB avoid some of that kind of pressure since.....hum...still thinking...over 20 years ago. Secondly, IF he had the game McNabb had in stats, I WOULD have been all over him, because he has had that kind of game his ENTIRE career, and I am sick of it. McNabb has had ONE full game in this system and has a history of being a GREAT QB. Campbell didn't have receivers drop passes on him. He just flat missed them. There were six passes I can think of that were flat dropped. Moss (1), Sellers (2), Armstrong (3). There may have been more, but 21-32 aint that bad for missing two weeks and playing your first game in a new system and coming out with a win against the Cowboys on the first go.

Totally agree. McNabb looked like a guy who was close and not quite in sync with guys he had hardly played with but were getting there. JC showed no matter how many years he played he wasn't going to get it.

[1niksder]

Throwing a fade to a guy that's under 6'
This pass should have been caught and this pass...
Is not a pass JC can make

[Bucket]

Look at the ball placement on that throw.. Man, Armstong makes this catch is it's not his first game imo..

I know I would feel crazy nervous if i'm playing Dallas my first game, and a fade route to me is called. lol

[langleyparkjoe]

Throwing a fade to a guy that's under 6'
This pass should have been caught and this pass...
Is not a pass JC can make

So that's what a fade to a Redskins WR looks like????

Awesome!

[VetSkinsFan]

Thomas shoulda been under that fade IMO... hopefully we'll see it later in the season (or this week).

[SkinsJock]

Dallas has a good defense and our offense needs to improve. The O line is improved, but need to get more used to playing together and Trent's good but needs to get more experience. Better then last year though. McNabb was already as comfortable with the receivers in one game as JC was over several seasons, so they'll get better. Unfortunately our receivers are a problem still as we still only have two, Moss and ey. Deadskins, note I said "receivers" not "wide receivers." RB is an area of concern too. We have depth but no one looked good running. Dallas has good run D and CP improved in the second half so there's some hope, but it wasn't heartening and LJ didn't do much at all.

^^^ What he said - not that I agree with much that Kaz spouts out, I think this is pretty close

I'm not taking too much from the first game - the pukes made a ton of mistakes both on the field and coaching - we looked OK but I think we all agree that there was a lot of improvement

I'm looking forward to seeing our run D this week - I have no idea why the pukes stopped running the ball last week


we could very easily be 2-0 - that is HUGE

[SkinsJock]

In that picture it looks like the defender's left hand is touching the receiver before the ball is caught

I seem to remember that I felt on 1 of those 2 plays they could have called pass interference - it was not a terrible call to not call it but it could have gone our way

THEN AGAIN - the pass could/should have been caught

we're a lot better on offense - and that's a good thing

[SKINFAN]

CH:

Double standard, anyone?

How so? McNabb has something that Campbell has not... a history as a winner. A history as a legitimate leader. A history as a decisive playmaker. A history as a conference champion. A history as quick thinker.

Apples and oranges.

Really, Double standard....McNabb extended plays, got rid of the ball when he had to, stepped up in the pocket to avoid a def. lineman, throws LOW to Tana so he doesn't get killed after the catch, just generally ALERT in the pocket. When was the last time we had a QB that was like that. Also, our O line didn't do that good but we still won the game.

[VetSkinsFan]

In that picture it looks like the defender's left hand is touching the receiver before the ball is caught

I seem to remember that I felt on 1 of those 2 plays they could have called pass interference - it was not a terrible call to not call it but it could have gone our way

THEN AGAIN - the pass could/should have been caught

we're a lot better on offense - and that's a good thing

As long as they don't interfere, it's not pass interference. They've got to be doing something to interfere with the receiver's attempt to catch the ball. This IS a contact sport after all...

[KazooSkinsFan]

As long as they don't interfere, it's not pass interference. They've got to be doing something to interfere with the receiver's attempt to catch the ball. This IS a contact sport after all...

I thought the first was clean and the second was clear pass interference. But I didn't see the play from more then a couple angles and it can be deceiving.