Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Have we discussed???

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-16-2007, 08:20 PM   #16
Registered User
 
GusFrerotte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Detroit area
Posts: 4,153
Re: Have we discussed???

Joe Gibbs conservative? Do you not remember the Posse back in the 80's? The running game was the heart of the offense for sure, but our aerial attack was second to none when we had Monk, Clark, and Saunders. We even kicked Bronco ass with those guys and Elway and Co were supposed to be the best. Gibbs isn't conservative, just is too loyal for his own good with regards to keeping Mark as starting QB for too long last year. That is my only gripe against coach. His sticking with MB cost him 3 playoff years in a row possibly, in which his legacy would be even greater than what is was. IF he doesn't improve to at least 9-7 this season, his legacy will probably be tarnished for good. The 80's are fast becoming ancient history and you have an entire generation of younger fans that don't remember being to a Super Bowl, etc. Coach needs to get back to calling the plays and if JC sucks stick another guy in there pronto.
GusFrerotte is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 04-16-2007, 08:33 PM   #17
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,892
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689 View Post
the real reason that we didnt win more games is because we didnt score more points than the opposition did in 11 out of 16 games
Exactly. Sometimes the simplest answer is the best answer
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2007, 08:55 PM   #18
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,227
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
Joe Gibbs conservative? Do you not remember the Posse back in the 80's? The running game was the heart of the offense for sure, but our aerial attack was second to none when we had Monk, Clark, and Saunders. We even kicked Bronco ass with those guys and Elway and Co were supposed to be the best. Gibbs isn't conservative, just is too loyal for his own good with regards to keeping Mark as starting QB for too long last year. That is my only gripe against coach. His sticking with MB cost him 3 playoff years in a row possibly, in which his legacy would be even greater than what is was. IF he doesn't improve to at least 9-7 this season, his legacy will probably be tarnished for good. The 80's are fast becoming ancient history and you have an entire generation of younger fans that don't remember being to a Super Bowl, etc. Coach needs to get back to calling the plays and if JC sucks stick another guy in there pronto.
For the 90th time, this isn't the 80s. He's conservative now, maybe not then, but he is now.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2007, 10:58 PM   #19
Pro Bowl
 
skinsguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Greensboro, North Carolina
Posts: 6,621
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daseal View Post
Where did I say don't run? I think our line and team is built to pound the rock, and I love a solid running game. I don't think running up the middle three times is a good strategy, but we need to run. And right, it has nothing to do with his offensive philosophy, notice I said game management. Gibbs is the one telling these guys roughly how he wants the game to go. If you want to look back since GIbbs has been back it's been the same thing as last year.
Hhhhmmm. Something doesn't quite mesh. Didn't you say Joe Gibbs' problem was that he was ultra conservative and that being ultra conservative doesn't fly anymore? So, wouldn't that in fact be saying that his offensive philosophy cannot work? After all, Gibbs' philosophy is a ball controlled offense. Looking back on last year, the playcalling was all over the page. The offense didn't have an identity. Saunders couldn't decide if this offense was going to be a pass oriented offense or a run oriented. Gibbs let the reigns go last year. Anything we did wrong or right had to do with Saunders calling the plays, not Gibbs telling him which ones to call.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daseal View Post
I'm not blaming Saunders or Gibbs for the offense last year. It takes time to get a new philosophy in and implemented, especially with the type of turn over we have over the typical year. The defense this year was subpar, but since GWilliams has been here he's done nothing but put an amazing product on the field, even before he came here his defenses have often been top 10.
I'm sorry, but exactly who are you blaming? You just said that running up the middle three times in a row isn't good strategy which I definitely agree, but then isn't that blaming the one calling the plays? So, who called the plays? Saunders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daseal View Post
As you said yourself, Gibbs was gone for 11 years. And Joe Gibbs HAD a pass for two years before I really started being critical. Yes, we all know what he did in the 80s, that's great, you know my feeling on that. As far as consistently proven himself? I haven't seen anything of that sort in his latest stint. You're still living in the glory days, look at Gibbs 2.0 for face value, he's not in the top half of NFL coaches right now. Are you saying that the offensive injuries were even close to the defensive ones? I can't see that at all! Greg Williams has one bad year in how many years in the league? Gibbs could win in the 80's, it's still yet to be seen in the 2000's.
Did he not in fact get the Redskins into the playoffs and advance into the playoffs in his second year back with the Redskins? How can you say he hasn't proven anything? Neither one of the last two coaches prior to Gibbs' return was able to do such. It has already been seen that Gibbs can win in this decade, because he went 10-6 in his second year. Daseal, there was way more wrong with this team than what appeared to us when we watched this team on Sundays. Even the fact that Gibbs has been able to squeeze one good season out of the three that he has been here so far shows that he still has it. I don't blame you for being critical and wanting to win now. Heck, we all want to win, but don't you want this team winning on a consistent basis? That takes time to develop.
__________________
Not the same Skinsguy that posts on ES.
skinsguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2007, 11:10 PM   #20
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,227
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
I'm sorry, but exactly who are you blaming? You just said that running up the middle three times in a row isn't good strategy which I definitely agree, but then isn't that blaming the one calling the plays? So, who called the plays? Saunders.
Last year isn't the main gripe I have. I understand we had a new playcaller and it takes time to get that rolling. It's the other years he's been here. And while Saunders calls the plays, is not the head coach in charge of the tempo of the game he wants? Certain types of plays, etc. We did up the middle a lot less last year actually. I want to see the occasional high percentage type throws, the occassional deep pass, or in the very least throwing it to the chains on 3rd down!

Quote:
I don't blame you for being critical and wanting to win now. Heck, we all want to win, but don't you want this team winning on a consistent basis? That takes time to develop.
Actually while I always want to "win" I don't want win now like Gibbs is doing. He is tossing draft picks all over and sending our cap into dire straights. Im curious how much longer we can go with this. I'm ready for a younger coach that could be here longterm, build through the draft, and build the team instead of trying to buy the championship.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2007, 11:25 PM   #21
Impact Rookie
 
Campbell17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Haddonfield, NJ
Age: 20
Posts: 642
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
Originally Posted by hagams View Post
Last year, we lost too many games, and this is something we all know. Since I've joined this site (not that long ago) I have learned and heard just about every reason we didn't pull out more wins last year. One thing I haven't seen discussed is how we couldn't hold on to a lead in the second half, or score/hold the oppenents on key drives. Our discussions have been about free agents, trades, and the draft. I'm pretty concerned about this and I wish I had the figures to back up my thread, but I'm not any good at getting stats together.

Do you think we have addressed these problems? I don't think this is something we can fix just through the draft and free angency alone.
Fixing our team is not oing to be enough. Going down the stretch, we blew a lot of really close games, and we continued to because we more-likely-than-not, lost them. The only two games we hung on in the clutch were HOME aginst our biggest rival, and vs Jacksonville in Week 4, with our only win, close v.s. Houston. We just assumed that we were going to lose. Team chemistry is increibly important, and we need to build confidence. We will be able to becaus of our early season schedule.
__________________
This time instead of some lousy joke, humerous comment, racial slur, or a famous quote, I will write small, and be the bigger person.
Campbell17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2007, 11:46 PM   #22
Impact Rookie
 
Campbell17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Haddonfield, NJ
Age: 20
Posts: 642
Re: Have we discussed???

The one hing the skins have to stop doing in close games is giving up stupid penalties. They cost us tons. We were the NFL's most penalized team.
__________________
This time instead of some lousy joke, humerous comment, racial slur, or a famous quote, I will write small, and be the bigger person.
Campbell17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2007, 02:19 AM   #23
Inactive
 
KLHJ2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: DC Metro Area
Age: 36
Posts: 5,829
Re: Have we discussed???

I think its because teams made better half time adjustments than we did in the games that we dominated in the first half. I blame that on the coordinators. Or should I say Assistant Head Coaches Offense/Defense.
KLHJ2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2007, 04:48 AM   #24
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Have we discussed???

Can we all agree on this point:

No matter what the playcall is, or how conservative it is, we should be able to execute it for a first down a reasonable amount of times...and we certainly didn't execute this year.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2007, 04:56 AM   #25
Inactive
 
KLHJ2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: DC Metro Area
Age: 36
Posts: 5,829
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Can we all agree on this point:

No matter what the playcall is, or how conservative it is, we should be able to execute it for a first down a reasonable amount of times...and we certainly didn't execute this year.
While a well oiled machine will execute the majority of the time, our team just isn't there yet. So in essence there are more issues than originally stated. To sum it up I concur.
KLHJ2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2007, 05:01 AM   #26
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
Originally Posted by angryssg View Post
While a well oiled machine will execute the majority of the time, our team just isn't there yet. So in essence there are more issues than originally stated. To sum it up I concur.
Yeah, we pretty much need to bring our personel to the next level to be a playoff contender.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2007, 05:03 AM   #27
Inactive
 
KLHJ2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: DC Metro Area
Age: 36
Posts: 5,829
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Yeah, we pretty much need to bring our personel to the next level to be a playoff contender.
After watching offenses such as SD and INDY, and then looking at ours, we were lathargic.
KLHJ2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2007, 05:07 AM   #28
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
Originally Posted by angryssg View Post
After watching offenses such as SD and INDY, and then looking at ours, we were lathargic.
Offensively we do a lot of stuff well. We have great YAC receivers and a wonderful QB situation. We have a two headed monster at RB, possibly the leagues' top TE, and an offensive line that is one of the better lines in the league. We just have flaws in the little points of offense that make scoring in the redzone and sustaining drives difficult. We were horrible on 3rd/4th and short last year and at running the ball in the red zone as there are numerous examples. Those things are really critical to being a successful offense, and are not easily fixed.

A talented blocking TE would be a good start though.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2007, 05:10 AM   #29
Inactive
 
KLHJ2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: DC Metro Area
Age: 36
Posts: 5,829
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Offensively we do a lot of stuff well. We have great YAC receivers and a wonderful QB situation. We have a two headed monster at RB, possibly the leagues' top TE, and an offensive line that is one of the better lines in the league. We just have flaws in the little points of offense that make scoring in the redzone and sustaining drives difficult. We were horrible on 3rd/4th and short last year and at running the ball in the red zone as there are numerous examples. Those things are really critical to being a successful offense, and are not easily fixed.

A talented blocking TE would be a good start though.
I dont know about that. Fauria was supposed to be a good blocking TE. I do not know yet how much he really helped.
KLHJ2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2007, 05:20 AM   #30
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Have we discussed???

Quote:
Originally Posted by angryssg View Post
I dont know about that. Fauria was supposed to be a good blocking TE. I do not know yet how much he really helped.
Well, he certainly failed the eyeball test.

Fauria is and was not ever a good blocker. It shouldn't be shocking to us that he sucked at blocking. He was a short range goalline target in his heyday, and that never changed.

I didn't like the signing when we made it, and I'm glad he's gone.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.37006 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25