![]() |
|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#23 | |
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,766
|
Re: 49ers vs. Redskins Game Day Thread
Quote:
Regressed? No, I don't think so. I think it has more to do with putting rainbow sprinkles on crap. You can dress it up make it look real good, you can add flavoring or spray it with whatever scent suits your fancy, but in the end it's still crap. Yes we have serious issue's with the OL. Their not giving all day protection for the QB to make his reads, but because of that then the QB needs to speed up his reads. The OC needs to call plays that will not take all day for the WR's to get to their positions to catch the ball. If a play is needed that will take a longer period to develope then roll the damn QB out. But in any event the QB needs to be accurate and what do we have? Beck who can throw deep w/o accuracy, taking too long holding on to the ball, and making bad decisions. or Grossman who is "slightly" more accurate on the short to intermediate routes, reads the defense better, gets rid of the ball quicker, but can't throw the deep ball and can't scramble away from pressure. Not to mention we don't have any decent WR's. The draft will need to be more offensive players this yr vs. defensive. QB, WR, OL. Then there is a need at CB and FS. I will gladly say that sadly I was wrong about our win loss record. It is blatently apparent that either other teams have figured out what the Skins are limited to doing and are stopping it or the Skins are just really bad scematic wise. I'm sure it's just me but for some reason it looks like this team has a different bunch of plays each week. I know someone will say that's what is supposed to happen but I'm wondering if the players are still trying to learn a play book. Hopefully not a 700 page playbook. lol. But as I said I could be totally wrong. Maybe it's more the plays are the same and the defenses are knowing what is coming and are stopping it. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|