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

cowboykillerzRGiii wrote:

Countertrey wrote:

DEHog wrote:Make no mistake about it, he left this for a reason. He of all people should know the media would jump all over it...not to mention the picture of him cleaning out his locker wearing a blue hat with stars

Whatever... he has handled his benching with nothing but class... even if only to prove that he will not be a disruptive influence on the locker room of a future team. Why would he suddenly decide to get snarky? This is not a stupid man. I know people who try hard to live by this philosophy ( I am not one of them... I have no problem getting even), and RG has declared this lifestyle to be his as well. Yet, despite no clear evidence of bitterness, folks continue to insist on interpreting the hidden agenda behind his actions. I don't know... I think he's been pretty clear, and, unfortunately, naïve in thinking that folks would take him at face value.

Not that it matters... he is done as a 'skin, and will be moving on. I continue to wish him the best, and, should it come to light that the doubters and biters were right, I will be disappointed... and ready to see my team crush him (as I suggested... I have no problem with payback).

In fear of becoming yet ANOTHER groupie... I won't tell you how spot on Awesomness this post is, or that you managed to capture my thoughts (well yours, but I agree with them wholeheartedly) and articulate them beautifuly...

Instead I'll just note that this should not only be the final
post on the matter, but it too aught to close the book on all RGiii discussions until he lands with his next team.

One could only hope!

Well said 'Trey

DarthMonk wrote:ATTENTION SKINSJOCK:

SkinsJock wrote:ref the decision to go against the wind in the 2nd and 4th qtrs ...

Countertrey wrote:So, you'd have preferred that GB got the head start... I can only imagine that would have been worse... but, whatever... you're going to think what you want to think...

IMO the most important time to have the wind (30MPH) would have been before the half and to finish the game

TRUE - we do not know what may have happened but IMO Aaron Rodgers and the Packers were not in sync and started out playing like they had been recently until all of a sudden, the momentum switched and he got comfortable - when I saw that first punt of theirs, I thought OMG - this is going to be bad, what if we need a FG at the half or to win the game - hey, we'll never know but I think I'd rather have started against the wind and played against that mob than the team that suddenly showed up and scored 17 points

NOT a big deal, although at the time I was really pissed ...

GREAT season and the franchise is headed in a good direction

I THINK it works (worked) like this.

Packers win toss. They have 3 options. They can receive, they can choose a direction, or they can defer first choice to the 2nd half. They chose to receive.

Now we have one choice to make - in which direction do we kick to open the game? We chose to go with the wind. We ended the quarter near midfield up 5-0 (should've been 9-0) and then finished the drive with a TD to go up 11-0 (should've been 16-0).

Since GB made the choice they did with the toss we now have 2 options before the 2nd half starts. We can either choose to receive or we can choose the direction to start the 2nd half. We chose to receive meaning GB got to choose the direction for their kickoff.

Several years ago we played the Ginas in the NFC championship before deferring was an option. We won the toss and took the ball (since we could not defer). The Ginas chose a direction.

The Ginas had first choice in the 2nd half and again, chose a direction. Naturally, we then chose to receive.

We NEVER kicked off in that game and the Ginas were going the direction they wanted to open/close both halves. I'm not sure but I think they had it for the 1st and 4th quarters.

DEHog wrote: in The Jets/Pats game the last week of the season. The game went into OT, Pats won the toss and elected to kick. Belichick wanted to defend a certain goal (I believe the great Belichick actually screwed this up not the player) and instructed his player that they wanted to kick and defend that goal. But when he elected to kick, that automatically gave the Jets the ball and their decision on what goal to defend.

SkinsJock wrote:

DEHog wrote: in The Jets/Pats game the last week of the season. The game went into OT, Pats won the toss and elected to kick. Belichick wanted to defend a certain goal (I believe the great Belichick actually screwed this up not the player) and instructed his player that they wanted to kick and defend that goal. But when he elected to kick, that automatically gave the Jets the ball and their decision on what goal to defend.

WRONG ... again!! - I've noticed, you've not been on your game lately ...

Bill Belicheat was on TV and radio after that game and said that he made the decision to kick the ball ONLY because the offense and Tom Brady had not shown (at the end of the game) that they could be effective and he did not want to start OT by having a 3 and out - He ALSO stated that he might not do that again but at the time he thought it was the right decision

SkinsJock wrote:

DEHog wrote: in The Jets/Pats game the last week of the season. The game went into OT, Pats won the toss and elected to kick. Belichick wanted to defend a certain goal (I believe the great Belichick actually screwed this up not the player) and instructed his player that they wanted to kick and defend that goal. But when he elected to kick, that automatically gave the Jets the ball and their decision on what goal to defend.

WRONG ... again!! - I've noticed, you've not been on your game lately ...

Bill Belicheat was on TV and radio after that game and said that he made the decision to kick the ball ONLY because the offense and Tom Brady had not shown (at the end of the game) that they could be effective and he did not want to start OT by having a 3 and out - He ALSO stated that he might not do that again but at the time he thought it was the right decision

wanted to kick and defend that goal

Deadskins wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:

DEHog wrote: in The Jets/Pats game the last week of the season. The game went into OT, Pats won the toss and elected to kick. Belichick wanted to defend a certain goal (I believe the great Belichick actually screwed this up not the player) and instructed his player that they wanted to kick and defend that goal. But when he elected to kick, that automatically gave the Jets the ball and their decision on what goal to defend.

WRONG ... again!! - I've noticed, you've not been on your game lately ...

Bill Belicheat was on TV and radio after that game and said that he made the decision to kick the ball ONLY because the offense and Tom Brady had not shown (at the end of the game) that they could be effective and he did not want to start OT by having a 3 and out - He ALSO stated that he might not do that again but at the time he thought it was the right decision

Yes, but had he chosen the direction instead of kicking, NYJ would obviously choose to receive, and then you get both the wind and you kick. That's where Bill Almighty was stupid.

DEHog wrote:

wanted to kick and defend that goal

Did I not say that??

DarthMonk wrote:

DEHog wrote:

wanted to kick and defend that goal

Did I not say that??

As did Slater. Just saying "We want to defend that goal" would've done the trick.

DEHog wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:Bill Belicheat was on TV and radio after that game and said that he made the decision to kick the ball ONLY because the offense and Tom Brady had not shown (at the end of the game) that they could be effective and he did not want to start OT by having a 3 and out - He ALSO stated that he might not do that again but at the time he thought it was the right decision

Yes, but had he chosen the direction instead of kicking, NYJ would obviously choose to receive, and then you get both the wind and you kick. That's where Bill Almighty was stupid.

That's what he wanted...

He wanted to be stupid?

DEHog wrote:

He wanted to be stupid?

IDK...he wanted to defend a certain goal. As was already said he mess up the wording and told Slater that they wanted to kick and defend that goal...Slater said they wanted to kick, which the ref excepted, by default the Jets recieved and get to choose which goal to defend...What ever the reason he understood he was giving the ball to the Jets first.

Deadskins wrote:Yes, but had he chosen the direction instead of kicking, NYJ would obviously choose to receive, and then you get both the wind and you kick. That's where Bill Almighty was stupid.

SkinsJock wrote:

Deadskins wrote:Yes, but had he chosen the direction instead of kicking, NYJ would obviously choose to receive, and then you get both the wind and you kick. That's where Bill Almighty was stupid.

agreed - you should have heard the interview - it was classic Belicheat, mumbling and fumbling ... made ZERO sense

Deadskins wrote:

DEHog wrote:

He wanted to be stupid?

IDK...he wanted to defend a certain goal. As was already said he mess up the wording and told Slater that they wanted to kick and defend that goal...Slater said they wanted to kick, which the ref excepted, by default the Jets recieved and get to choose which goal to defend...What ever the reason he understood he was giving the ball to the Jets first.

That's fine. But I disagree. I don't think he considered the wind. Based on what he said to the player, "We want to kick," I think he just blew it, and said so at the time. Besides, my response was to SJ's post saying you were wrong, so there's that.

DEHog wrote:If he just wanted to kick…why did an argument ensue with the ref?

markshark84 wrote:Holy s&!^ ---- this is still going on? In our post-season wrap up, we are talking about wind, coin flips, and Belicheck. We didn't lose the game vs. GB because of a f#<&ing coin toss decision. Leave to Skinsjock to screw up a thread.....

SkinsJock wrote:

markshark84 wrote:Holy s&!^ ---- this is still going on? In our post-season wrap up, we are talking about wind, coin flips, and Belicheck. We didn't lose the game vs. GB because of a f#<&ing coin toss decision. Leave to Skinsjock to screw up a thread.....

TYPICAL - one of the haters not getting their facts straight - go back and read my first post in this thread ...

markshark84 wrote:Holy s&!^ ---- this is still going on?????? In our post-season wrap up, we are talking about wind, coin flips, and Belicheck. Awesome. We didn't lose the game vs. GB because of a f#<&ing coin toss decision. Leave to Skinsjock to screw up a thread.....

How about we discuss topics that are actually redskins related? We could discuss season review items such as:
1. Areas of improvement
2. Strengths from the season
3. Break out performers this year
4. Favorite games or plays of the year
5. Overall grading of units (e.g., DL, OL, WRs, RBs, DBs, LBs)

Or we could discuss "moving forward" items like:
6. Potential FA acquisitions
7. Which players may need to restructure their contracts
8. Which players may need to be cut
9. Which players need to be resigned
10. 2016 schedule

Come on, we are a skins forum. This is embarrassing.

Deadskins wrote:

DEHog wrote:If he just wanted to kick…why did an argument ensue with the ref?

Because he also thought he got to choose the direction. I saw the interview with the player too. He said he asked Belichik several times, just to make sure, and the hoodie responded that they wanted to kick every time.

DarthMonk wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

DEHog wrote:If he just wanted to kick…why did an argument ensue with the ref?

Because he also thought he got to choose the direction. I saw the interview with the player too. He said he asked Belichik several times, just to make sure, and the hoodie responded that they wanted to kick every time.

Why did Slater say "that way?"

Deadskins wrote:

DarthMonk wrote:Why did Slater say "that way?"

So, your proposition is that the conversation goes this way:

BB: If we win the toss, we want to kick off, going that way.
Slater: We want to kick off?
BB: Yes, kick off, that way.
Slater: So, I'm supposed to elect to kick off?
BB: Yes, going that way.
Slater: OK coach, you're the boss.

That's still on Bill for not making it clear to someone who is repeatedly trying to confirm that he wants him to elect to kick. Obviously, he doesn't understand the rule. If you want him to choose the side to defend, then you have to expressly make that clear.

DarthMonk wrote: ... I have another theory ...

Brady had taken a few sacks and had been roughed up a lot. He was limping some. They could not run AT ALL and Brady was a measly 22-31 for 231 with multiple hurries and rag-doll knockdowns. So Bill thinks "Screw this. We are gonna kick with the wind. If they drive for a TD and beat us - fine. If we pin them back and make them punt into this wind we might not even need a 1st down to get a FG and win."
"Hey, Slater - if we win the toss tell 'em we wanna kick that way."