Page 5 of 10
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:32 pm
by MARINE4LIFE
Portis would not have even got a first down on that play, the ball was thrown to his back shoulder and the defender was closing in on him fast
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:32 pm
by VetSkinsFan
I don't think CP has much on the pitch... he's more of a hand off guy IIRC.
And last time I checked, the offense didn't give up all those points. Indirectly, yes, you can blame the offense, but if you compare the 1st and 2nd 1/2 and NOT blame, at least partially, the defense, then I have a bridge to sell you....
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:35 pm
by brad7686
VetSkinsFan wrote:I don't think CP has much on the pitch... he's more of a hand off guy IIRC.
And last time I checked, the offense didn't give up all those points. Indirectly, yes, you can blame the offense, but if you compare the 1st and 2nd 1/2 and NOT blame, at least partially, the defense, then I have a bridge to sell you....
The defense gave up more points in the second half, yes, but they aren't to blame AT ALL. The giants will probably average about 27 points a game this year. They will probably give up about 34 points per game. How much did the redskins score on their pathetic d? 17? Its their fault completely, and by them i mean gibbs and saunders.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:36 pm
by unter13
our play calling was soft. So guess what guys whenever we have a lead our play calling will be soft. No going for the throat with this team.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:37 pm
by grampi
VetSkinsFan wrote:I don't think CP has much on the pitch... he's more of a hand off guy IIRC.
And last time I checked, the offense didn't give up all those points. Indirectly, yes, you can blame the offense, but if you compare the 1st and 2nd 1/2 and NOT blame, at least partially, the defense, then I have a bridge to sell you....
I think the consensus here is if the offense goes 3 and out as many times as our's did in the 2nd half, the D is going to eventually bend, if not break. If this offense scores 30+ points every week with this defense, we go 14-2.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:38 pm
by VetSkinsFan
I guess the 1st 11 quarters (counting OT) was a fluke then??!!?? I'm not completely defending the D, but compare stats from the halves and justify that to me.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:39 pm
by CanesSkins26
MEZZSKIN wrote:play calling play calling playcalling....Enough already with that...THEY NEED TO EXECUTE WITH MORE CONSISTENCY!!!!!....3 straight 3 and outs is unacceptable....portis drops a huge 3rd down play takes his team off thefield then he fumbles away the ball next possesion.....guys when they ran they went nowhere and nobody was open when they passed....they were beat upfront...hence they did not move the chain ONCE until LATE 4TH.....What doesn everyone think AL SAUNDERS HAS MAGIC PLAYS THAT gets someone open automatically? .....
No ...Football is a game of individual battles and our team on the offense side collectively lost each and every one of those battles hence 3 straight 3 and outs......they tried to run couldnt they tried to pass couldnt....
just a disgusting half of offensive football...and Portis being a straight player that he is took the blame afterwards as the main culprit!...i respect him but he is Villian #1 in this debacle......he dropped a 3rd down pass and fumbled in 3 plays!!!!...terrible....LETS GO BEARS!!!
CP is def not "Villain #1." That's just a stupid statement. He screwed up with the fumble but the Giants didn't score after that turnover. As for the dropped pass you were talking about, it wasn't going to be anywhere near a first down anyway. Sellers dropped a pass today. Betts dropped one. Moss dropped one. Lots of players played poorly and the coaches called a horrible game. Blaming CP as the main reason we lost is an rediculous statement.
As for your statements about the play calling...it's very difficult to execute when your play calling is as predictable as ours was today. The Giants have a mediocre defense with a solid d line and a mediocre secondary that has a rookie starting back there. So instead of throwing the ball down the field to exploit that weakness we predictably ran the ball on first and second down and got ourselves in lots of 3rd and longs. That is not a formula for winning football games.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:39 pm
by MARINE4LIFE
when Saunders was in Kansas city somebody tell me when Holmes or Johnson on ly carried the 14 times with a 14 point lead, seriously you cannot blame that on gibbs becasue he preaches run first hit htem with the playaction, so there fore i have to opu the blame on saunders for not running the ball more and for the people who say we got no where running the ball tonight if you STICK WITH IT IT TIRES THE DEFENSE OUT
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:41 pm
by The Hogster
It was a team loss. The defense gave up an 80 yard TD drive to start the second half. They were well rested, and we allowed them to convert 3 straight 3rd downs.
We called the game in the 2nd half as if we were in the 4th quarter. More trying to run the clock out with 12:40 to go in the 3rd.
The reason why I am most upset at the coaching is that ...with all said and done...we don't have our best RB on the field to get 1 and a half yards.
That is a tough pill to swallow. I would be much less irked if we had given the ball to Portis at least once....he's been our best goaline back since forever...why he's not on the field is a big...mystery...that has me miffed.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:43 pm
by CanesSkins26
MARINE4LIFE wrote:when Saunders was in Kansas city somebody tell me when Holmes or Johnson on ly carried the 14 times with a 14 point lead, seriously you cannot blame that on gibbs becasue he preaches run first hit htem with the playaction, so there fore i have to opu the blame on saunders for not running the ball more and for the people who say we got no where running the ball tonight if you STICK WITH IT IT TIRES THE DEFENSE OUT
We tried running the ball but it didn't work. Portis and Betts had so few carries because we were going three and out bc of the predictable run, run, pass, punt nonsense that we have grown accustomed to seeing the last few seasons.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:45 pm
by MARINE4LIFE
lAST TIME I CHECKED WHEN GIBBS WAS CALLING THE PLAYS WE WENT TO THE PLAYOFFS AND WERE AN INTERCEPTION AWAY (ROGERS) FROM THE NFC CHAMPIONSHIP GAME
SO WE GO OUT AND HIRE SAUNDERS
THATS WORKING OUT GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:46 pm
by grampi
What irks me about this team is they do the same crap game after game. If they get a 7 or 10 point lead, they go ultra-conservative on offense and try to sit on the lead, even if it's only the 3rd quarter. That's not what a great team does. They go for the juggular and put the nails in the coffin. Gibbs seems to have lost the killer instinct.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:47 pm
by Countertrey
VetSkinsFan wrote:I don't think CP has much on the pitch... he's more of a hand off guy IIRC.
And last time I checked, the offense didn't give up all those points. Indirectly, yes, you can blame the offense, but if you compare the 1st and 2nd 1/2 and NOT blame, at least partially, the defense, then I have a bridge to sell you....
The offense cannot go 3 and out repeatedly, and expect the defense to keep up. Half of a solid Defense is keeping them on the bench... and that is entirely up to the Offense.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:48 pm
by tribeofjudah
I think is was the throw back uni.......
Let's never wear those again...........j/k
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:49 pm
by MARINE4LIFE
ANOTHER THING IS YOU CANNOT HAVE A YOUNG QB THROW THE BALL 34 TIMES AND EXPECT TO WIN
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:51 pm
by Fan035
Moss catches a pass at the one yard line - there's plenty of time to get into the endzone. Why is there such bad clock management? Why was the ball spiked? Why wasn't Clinton Portis in for at least one of the runs? Why not try a quarterback option? Too many questions and not enough answers! This is a tough tough loss and a terrible pill to swallow.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:54 pm
by Mursilis
VetSkinsFan wrote:I was just pointing out that it IS possible for a defense oriented team to excel, which seems to be our strong point (until the 2nd 1/2 of the latest game).
But it's rare - the rules favor the offense. It's better to have a good offense than a good defense. Which team won the Super Bowl - the team with the best offense, or the team with the best defense?
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 8:58 pm
by VetSkinsFan
In my example, it was the defense.....
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:01 pm
by brad7686
i think the fact that we couldnt get first downs because we couldnt run led to the lack of running attempts. If they were to space their runs out with the pass, they would get first downs, which would lead to more time of possession, which would lead to more carries for the rb's.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:02 pm
by 30pkabs
[edited. Not written in English. ]
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:03 pm
by Countertrey
No one wins the Superbowl without a solid defense... Indy goes nowhere in the playoffs last year if their defense does not step up at the right time.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:04 pm
by grampi
I smell a troll.
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:06 pm
by VetSkinsFan
I do admit that the O is guilty, but not 100%.
At any rate, I am off to bed. Hopefully I will have reason to smile before I drift off to sleep. TTYL my fellow faithful fans!!
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:06 pm
by redskindave
We need an offense, we just cant score points, awful play calling
Posted: Sun Sep 23, 2007 9:06 pm
by Irn-Bru
30pkabs wrote:when are a wake E GIBBS came back to get the FEDEX SPONSORSH CAR IN NASCAR.
30pkabs, please refer to the site rules about profanity in the forums. Your post has been edited.