The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Chris Luva Luva wrote:If we play like this every week...if we play with that type of intensity...we'll win many games.

There isn't a better pick me up for a team that's headed into Green Bay next week. I sense a flood of interceptions coming for this team.

I watched the game last night, and when the GB offense was going, Favre was just dropping back and throwing really quick hitters. It actually worries me, because our corners plays off the wideouts...meaning those plays should be open all day long against us.

First I would like to say that the rest of the league should thank GW for giving them a good tape to go on for grounding the Lions air assault. It is apparent GW has taken somewhat of a bend and don't break attitude this year. I haven't seen a lot of blitzes rather just good d-line play with excellent coverage. How many times have we seen Taylor or Landry coming on a blitz this year?? I think GW has adapted his defense because the offenses in this league have learned how to beat an attacking style defense. I could be all wrong but that is how I see it.

I think from what I saw last night in the Packer game is when Favre gets rushed and on the move, he still makes boneheaded plays. I think we match up well as far as our secondary goes and they really don't have a run game. Yes, I am already looking ahead. Don't get me wrong. The win against the Lions was fun to watch and enjoy but I am excited about what this team can do. I have always been excited about what Campbell can do if they just took the handcuffs off of him and we saw that yesterday. Now lets hope we can follow this game with another good offensive performance now that the coaching staff has seen what he is capable of doing.

Guys, I need to watch the game again but I heard that JC audibled quite a bit throughout the game.

If true, I think that's a huge factor as to why we won.

If he did audible, it's prolly coz sellers kept tugging on him...

Also noteworthy... Our kicking game gremlins are coming alive again... Sushi missed another one.

That game was an absolute thing of beauty. My daughters watched the game with me and we had a blast.

After all the crap the Skins d-line and secondary have taken over the past year, having that game topped off with a Rogers pick-6 and a Carter sack at the end was just beautiful.

Along with many of you, I had a sneaky suspicion we were going to see a different offensive attack after the bye week. And I think we've only seen the tip of the iceberg with regard to play calling. (How about JC spread out wide and Portis taking the direct snap.)

JC and the boys proved a lot yesterday and that should garner much confidence from the coaches. The players themselves will have earned some respect and will also have gained some much needed confidence.

I was really impressed with the defense and Williams' game plan. I don't give a rats behind what a select few have said about Gregg in the past, that man is a great coach and he can stay in Washington as long as he wants, as far as I'm concerned.

SKINFAN wrote:Also noteworthy... Our kicking game gremlins are coming alive again... Sushi missed another one.

Oh come on... noteworthy?

He missed from 48 yards, not 28, and it's just his second miss this season.

Not many kickers go the entire season without missing a few... and if the misses are from 48 and not 28, then I don't know how on earth it's all that noteworthy. I'd like the kicker to kick every one, but I'd like world peace too...

He got right back on the bike and kicked his only other opportunity, and his kickoffs were good. Not to mention that the missed field goal would have been good from 58, had he not shanked it. It could have been the hold, or wind conditions... or it could have just been a bad kick.

I'll drop him a line this week and maybe he can answer the question for us.

Irregardless, in my personal opinion, it's a reach to find the kicking game in any type of trouble after missing one 48 yard field goal. Man we've had many kickers in the last decade that we wouldn't even let them TRY from 48.

PulpExposure wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:If we play like this every week...if we play with that type of intensity...we'll win many games.

There isn't a better pick me up for a team that's headed into Green Bay next week. I sense a flood of interceptions coming for this team.

I watched the game last night, and when the GB offense was going, Favre was just dropping back and throwing really quick hitters. It actually worries me, because our corners plays off the wideouts...meaning those plays should be open all day long against us.

Have no fear.... Greg Williams is here........

BossHog wrote:

SKINFAN wrote:Also noteworthy... Our kicking game gremlins are coming alive again... Sushi missed another one.

Oh come on... noteworthy?

He missed from 48 yards, not 28, and it's just his second miss this season.

Not many kickers go the entire season without missing a few... and if the misses are from 48 and not 28, then I don't know how on earth it's all that noteworthy. I'd like the kicker to kick every one, but I'd like world peace too...

He got right back on the bike and kicked his only other opportunity, and his kickoffs were good. Not to mention that the missed field goal would have been good from 58, had he not shanked it. It could have been the hold, or wind conditions... or it could have just been a bad kick.

I'll drop him a line this week and maybe he can answer the question for us.

Irregardless, in my personal opinion, it's a reach to find the kicking game in any type of trouble after missing one 48 yard field goal. Man we've had many kickers in the last decade that we wouldn't even let them TRY from 48.

There you go..... Way to defend your fellow Canadian (I think???)
Nicely done, and yes, Suisham is rock solid.
Peace.....

PulpExposure wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:If we play like this every week...if we play with that type of intensity...we'll win many games.

There isn't a better pick me up for a team that's headed into Green Bay next week. I sense a flood of interceptions coming for this team.

I watched the game last night, and when the GB offense was going, Favre was just dropping back and throwing really quick hitters. It actually worries me, because our corners plays off the wideouts...meaning those plays should be open all day long against us.

I know how you feel. But I don't think we'll see the same defensive schemes from week to week.

So far we've seen Williams tailor the schemes to the offenses we are playing. In the first two games, against the Dol's and the Eagles, the corners were in press-coverage and it worked nicely.

The Packers like to throw the quick slants a lot, but you can drop or spread the LB's out wide to defend that play by filling the throwing lane. I'm not saying we'll definitely shut down those quick hitters, but Williams will most likely tweak the scheme accordingly.

BossHog wrote:

SKINFAN wrote:Also noteworthy... Our kicking game gremlins are coming alive again... Sushi missed another one.

Oh come on... noteworthy?

He missed from 48 yards, not 28, and it's just his second miss this season.

Not many kickers go the entire season without missing a few... and if the misses are from 48 and not 28, then I don't know how on earth it's all that noteworthy. I'd like the kicker to kick every one, but I'd like world peace too...

He got right back on the bike and kicked his only other opportunity, and his kickoffs were good. Not to mention that the missed field goal would have been good from 58, had he not shanked it. It could have been the hold, or wind conditions... or it could have just been a bad kick.

I'll drop him a line this week and maybe he can answer the question for us.

Irregardless, in my personal opinion, it's a reach to find the kicking game in any type of trouble after missing one 48 yard field goal. Man we've had many kickers in the last decade that we wouldn't even let them TRY from 48.

I agreed with all of this, except the highlighted....wow . I too was thinking how anyone could be knocking the kicking game. It was a freaking 48 yarder, sheesh.

Champsturf wrote:I agreed with all of this, except the highlighted....wow .

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean ?!?!?!?

BossHog wrote:

Champsturf wrote:I agreed with all of this, except the highlighted....wow .

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean ?!?!?!?

You know, Boss. Irregardless. That is to say regardless of regardless. Or is that regardless of regard? Or is that regard of regardless? It's one of those.

Anyway, the Redskins have had so many kickers who have missed two or more field goal attempts in a single game that nobody should be complaining about a miss that meant nothing to the outcome of the game.

I still don't understand the 'wow' factor. Irregardless may be used less often, but both are acceptable. I would have thought that Americans would LOVE an American derivative of a word... hence the choice opted for.

You'll forgive me if I don't fall over apologizing to a board that thinks 'I could care less' means something, that 'are' and 'our' are synonymous, and we could throw in any number of 'rediculous' ones like then vs than as well.

BossHog wrote:I still don't understand the 'wow' factor. Irregardless may be used less often, but both are acceptable. I would have thought that Americans would LOVE an American derivative of a word... hence the choice opted for.

You'll forgive me if I don't fall over apologizing to a board that thinks 'I could care less' means something, that 'are' and 'our' are synonymous, and we could throw in any number of 'rediculous' ones like then vs than as well.

I believe the generally accepted forms in our oh so educated nation
are regardless, disregarding, without regard for. Of course, we prove time and time again that the only true knowledge is in knowing that we know nothing, and Americans, as a rule, don't know that. I followed your post. And I could care less. Much less.

If you do happen to e-mail S.S., let him know a large number of us hope he sticks around for a long time.

If you do happen to e-mail S.S., let him know a large number of us hope he sticks around for a long time.

And, ask him to start lobbying (ala Mike Sellars) for a shot at a 65 yarder!

I think the reason why we won this game boils down to two things: an offensive game plan that called for much more play action on first down than usual (breaking a bad tendency we were in), and a quarterback talented enough to execute it. This kept the Lions defense off-balance because they were clearly expecting us to run on first down, and in fact I believe that all of our first down runs in the first half, and most of the game for that matter, were pretty well stuffed. Successful short play action passes on first down kept our offense on the field, and theirs off. We wore down their defense, and their high powered offense was kept off the field so much they never did what they should have done: be patient and exploit our defense for short runs and passes.

None of this is to give less than full credit to GW's defense, but they're always good so long as they're not kept on the field too long. They shut down the Giants for a half but after that I think they were played out. Our offense dominated time of possession in the first half in the Lions game, and I think that really made our defense strong enough to dominate later in the game.

BossHog wrote:I still don't understand the 'wow' factor. Irregardless may be used less often, but both are acceptable. I would have thought that Americans would LOVE an American derivative of a word... hence the choice opted for.

You'll forgive me if I don't fall over apologizing to a board that thinks 'I could care less' means something, that 'are' and 'our' are synonymous, and we could throw in any number of 'rediculous' ones like then vs than as well.

Well, I never even considered an apology, as there is no reason to do so. I just wondered why you would use such a word when you generalize this entire board as being a little slow (I'm, putting words in your mouth here) by a lot of incorrect grammar.

I guess I'm being a little sensitive after wading my way through portis2skinz', or whatever his name is, posts. I apologize. While I'm apologizing, any luck figuring out why I still can't PM? I know you're busy, now that the season is upon us, but you don't seem any less so during the NFL's offseason. I'm just hoping.....Thanks

old-timer wrote:I think the reason why we won this game boils down to two things: an offensive game plan that called for much more play action on first down than usual (breaking a bad tendency we were in), and a quarterback talented enough to execute it. This kept the Lions defense off-balance because they were clearly expecting us to run on first down, and in fact I believe that all of our first down runs in the first half, and most of the game for that matter, were pretty well stuffed. Successful short play action passes on first down kept our offense on the field, and theirs off. We wore down their defense, and their high powered offense was kept off the field so much they never did what they should have done: be patient and exploit our defense for short runs and passes.

None of this is to give less than full credit to GW's defense, but they're always good so long as they're not kept on the field too long. They shut down the Giants for a half but after that I think they were played out. Our offense dominated time of possession in the first half in the Lions game, and I think that really made our defense strong enough to dominate later in the game.

Good analysis. I would like to add that they also made progress using Sellars correctly. Our goal line and short yardage game has the potential to be excellent-- assuming current appreciation of the big guy is shared by the coaches.

BossHog wrote:I still don't understand the 'wow' factor. Irregardless may be used less often, but both are acceptable.

Actually, "irregardless" is not even a word. It is a combination of irrespective and regardless.

Back on topic, it was readily apparent we had two weeks to prepare for this game. A solid spanking all around.

JSPB22 wrote:

BossHog wrote:I still don't understand the 'wow' factor. Irregardless may be used less often, but both are acceptable.

Actually, "irregardless" is not even a word. It is a combination of irrespective and regardless.

Back on topic, it was readily apparent we had two weeks to prepare for this game. A solid spanking all around.

You are correct sir!

Actually, you are incorrect. What defines a word in the English language is commonality of usage. Words which are found in the dictionary are placed there as a result of being found numerous times in print. A copy of any decent unabridged dictionary will have hundreds of slang euphemisms, gross mispronounciations, and other errors which have become words.

Is this an English class or a message board? Who gives a rats...?

Back on topic... what a complete game. I think they scored in every way possible, both offensively and defensively; td's, field goals, a safety and a pick-6. Man, that was beautiful.

Agree. Lots of tackle eligible for heavier packages even on the passing plays. I really loved the changes we have in the play-calling. KUDOS!!!

SkinsFreak wrote::roll: Is this an English class or a message board? Who gives a rats...?

Back on topic... what a complete game. I think they scored in every way possible, both offensively and defensively; td's, field goals, a safety and a pick-6. Man, that was beautiful.

Somebody must give a rats behind based upon the number of posts. The point is that Americans know a lot less than we think we do.

And, on the topic of the game ... what you said.