Page 1 of 1

We could have lost by 3, if not for Joe's boldness.

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 5:55 pm
by REDEEMEDSKIN
The two-point conversion in the 3rd quarter not only tied up the team, and shifted momentum squrely to the Skins, but it also contributed to the heart-wrenching loss to the Sucs -- the result could have easily been 36-33.
I, for one, thought it was too early in the game to go for 2, but the Skins were able to convert. The team was playing to win, and that play alone got the Sucs on their heels.

This of course, followed the other bright spot of the game, the 7-yard TD pass to Mike Sellers, who showed great awareness by releasing into the flat when Brunell was forced to scramble.

In short, despite the disappointing loss on account of the refs, the Skins proved that they belong with the big boys of the leagues, and are a team that's a few adjustments away from getting it all together.

We know what we need to do from here on out: control the clock, not turnover the ball, and play solid defense.

We managed to punch the #1 defense in the mouth, and I take that as a positive sign that this team will be a force to reckon with come playoff time.

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 6:12 pm
by SkinzCanes
The team was playing to win


The thing that pissed me off that most about this game was that we were playing to win for the majority of the game but when it mattered in crunch time Gibbs got conservative and played not to lose. Joe made bold calls by going for 2 early and by going for it on 4th down in the 4th quarter. But on our last possesion he tightened up and called three straight up the middle running plays against a defense that was expecting us to run. I mean their entire defense was sitting on the line and after a 6 yard gain on first we couldn't gain 2 yards on two plays. As bad as the defense was, if we get a first down there the game would have been over. It was simply the wrong time to go conservative.

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 6:29 pm
by REDEEMEDSKIN
SkinzCanes wrote:
The team was playing to win


The thing that pissed me off that most about this game was that we were playing to win for the majority of the game but when it mattered in crunch time Gibbs got conservative and played not to lose. Joe made bold calls by going for 2 early and by going for it on 4th down in the 4th quarter. But on our last possesion he tightened up and called three straight up the middle running plays against a defense that was expecting us to run. I mean their entire defense was sitting on the line and after a 6 yard gain on first we couldn't gain 2 yards on two plays. As bad as the defense was, if we get a first down there the game would have been over. It was simply the wrong time to go conservative.

If WE were the ones trailing 35-28, then I can totally see Joe rolling the dice and going for it. But, I think the conservative attempt was the right way to go. Plus, it's not like the plays were designed to only gain 8 yds. The players needed to execute, and they did not.

Conversely, on OUR 2-point conversion, we were trailing, and the two-pointer gave us a chance to take the momentum, which we did. The players executed properly, and Joe looked like a genius. Unfortunately, things didn't go our way on that final defensive series. We live to play another day.

Another bright spot: NO MAJOR INJURIES OCURRED IN YESTERDAY'S PHYSICAL GAME. My 2 cents

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 6:51 pm
by hatsOFF2gibbs
If we don't beat the Chargers at home, I don't know if we'll make it to the playoffs. I was expecting a win against the Bucs, win against the Raiders, and a loss to the Chargers. Now we really have to step up our game and make sure we don't make stupid stupid mistakes. Did anyone notice those two INTs were on hitch passes?? The defense knew JGibbs' favorite passing play is the hitch and they capitalized. Got to give them props for that. I don't understand why we don't go for it all like other teams do. How come we don't have Santana run down the sideline and grab ones like in the Dallas game? Why is it that we always go for the big plays when we're desperate?? Screw it if he's unable to catch it....at least we'll open the defense up! I just don't understand JGibbs' play calling.
I've had many angry posts in the past against JGibbs but have ultimately found out that he was correct. I was so mad when he said Brunell was the starter, but he turned out to be right. I just hope JGibbs is right in his play calling for the next six or seven weeks in the season. We need to get into the playoffs. We have it all we just need to cut out this turnover crap and start winning some critical games ahead.
If we beat the Chargers and at LEAST 2 of the last divisional games we MIGHT have a chance to get in. It's going to be tough to get in with 10-6 since we lost to Tampa.
It's time to show if we're really up to it. We need to play some SOLID football and stop these darn fumbles by Brunell if we want to have a chance to get in the postseason.

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 7:19 pm
by HailSkins94
We will have to win the division I believe. I doubt we will get a wildcard.

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:02 pm
by aswas71788
Gibbs did what Gibbs has always done. Get conservative and run a power play between the tackle and guard. Even in his first stint here, that is what he did. Watch from here on out and see if the play called for short yardage isn't between the tackle and guard. Unfortunately, Portis is not Riggins and cannot slam his way for a couple yards. No insult meant to Portis, he is a great back and I am glad he is a Redskin but for that play, Sellers should have been the back.

But then hindsight is perfect.

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:03 pm
by Redskin in Canada
HailSkins94 wrote:We will have to win the division I believe. I doubt we will get a wildcard.

Too early to tell either way. Playoff spots will be decided in the last week or two of the season.

This is the tightest race for playoff spots I have ever witnessed in the NFC.

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:10 pm
by ejay183
Why did the NFC get so much better when we get better?

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:17 pm
by HailSkins94
ejay183 wrote:Why did the NFC get so much better when we get better?


Everyone was a little tired of Filthy...

Re: We could have lost by 3, if not for Joe's boldness.

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:24 pm
by SkinsHead56
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:In short, despite the disappointing loss on account of the refs, the Skins proved that they belong with the big boys of the leagues, and are a team that's a few adjustments away from getting it all together.

We know what we need to do from here on out: control the clock, not turnover the ball, and play solid defense.


I agree, save the point of the refs beating the Skins. Chris Simms beat the Skins, on two long plays, one for a TD the other set up a TD. I also say the Skins beat themselves with the good ol' turnover margin of minus 2. I also agree with what the Skins need to do, this past Sunday they only acomplished one of the three keys.

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 9:38 pm
by hatsOFF2gibbs
aswas71788 wrote:Gibbs did what Gibbs has always done. Get conservative and run a power play between the tackle and guard. Even in his first stint here, that is what he did. Watch from here on out and see if the play called for short yardage isn't between the tackle and guard. Unfortunately, Portis is not Riggins and cannot slam his way for a couple yards. No insult meant to Portis, he is a great back and I am glad he is a Redskin but for that play, Sellers should have been the back.

But then hindsight is perfect.

They should've used Betts over Sellars and Portis. Sellars is probably good for 4th and inches or 4th and 1, Betts is good for short yardage, and Portis is a good 1st and 2nd and SOMETIMES a good 3rd down back.
They should've used Betts...I'm pretty sure he'd rumble down and get those two yards and end the game.
Nevertheless, CP had a great game and I don't blame the loss on him.

Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:14 am
by redskindave
I picked yes, matter of fact theres no doubt in my mind, Redskins will make the playoffs!