D.C. Examiner: Zorn's job in jeopardy? (not so fast he's coming back)

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

The team has not quit!!! We have too many high character guys on this team to say stupid crap like that.

So we have lots of "high character guys" who just plain suck?

They mailed it in today. I don't see why people find that statement so appalling.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

So we have lots of "high character guys" who just plain suck?

They mailed it in today. I don't see why people find that statement so appalling.

Because it's false.

Outside of that, you might be onto something.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Because it's false.

Outside of that, you might be onto something.

Dude, get real. The Skins were completely flat in the first quarter. They started fighting in the second quarter. But you could tell after Cooley fumbled the defense was not emotionally up, and they came out and got ran up on by Cedric Benson.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Dude, get real. The Skins were completely flat in the first quarter. They started fighting in the second quarter. But you could tell after Cooley fumbled the defense was not emotionally up, and they came out and got ran up on by Cedric Benson.

Did you even know that the Lions were up two TDs on the Bucs this year in the first quarter?

Here's the point: you can't assume that the team coming out flat is because of any coaching issue. Sometimes, the opponent just capitalizes on the sudden change opportunity. The sample size isn't big enough to claim a conclusive evidence.

I'm glad Cedric Benson almost got 3.5 yards per carry against us and thusly we can assume that someone wasn't trying.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Did you even know that the Lions were up two TDs on the Bucs this year in the first quarter?

Here's the point: you can't assume that the team coming out flat is because of any coaching issue. Sometimes, the opponent just capitalizes on the sudden change opportunity. The sample size isn't big enough to claim a conclusive evidence.

I'm glad Cedric Benson almost got 3.5 yards per carry against us and thusly we can assume that someone wasn't trying.

Or we can simply look at the results of the game, see that the we were outscored by a team that had no business outscoring us and can thusly assume that our players didn't give it their all today.

It's not as difficult as you desparately want to make it.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Did you even know that the Lions were up two TDs on the Bucs this year in the first quarter?

Here's the point: you can't assume that the team coming out flat is because of any coaching issue. Sometimes, the opponent just capitalizes on the sudden change opportunity. The sample size isn't big enough to claim a conclusive evidence.

I'm glad Cedric Benson almost got 3.5 yards per carry against us and thusly we can assume that someone wasn't trying.

There you go again. If you're going to pump stats at me you're going to need to improve your analytical thinking.

Go back and read my post. I said we came out flat in the first quarter and got ran up on, and then we started fighting in the second quarter. So don't throw Benson's FULL GAME line at me.

In the first quarter, he ran for 41 yards on 7 carries, for nearly a 6 yard average. Then the Redskins started shutting him down, allowing only 32 yards on 14 carries the rest of the way. So what, the Redskins forgot how to defend the run in the first quarter and suddenly remembered in the second?? No, they didn't get their heads in the game early enough, and got run over.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

There you go again. If you're going to pump stats at me you're going to need to improve your analytical thinking.

Go back and read my post. I said we came out flat in the first quarter and got ran up on, and then we started fighting in the second quarter. So don't throw Benson's FULL GAME line at me.

In the first quarter, he ran for 41 yards on 7 carries, for nearly a 6 yard average. Then the Redskins started shutting him down, allowing only 32 yards on 14 carries the rest of the way.

If you're right though, what you are saying is that we should have shut Benson down in the first quarter, and he should have rushed for two yards per attempt, or whatever he did the rest of the way (32/14).

But a lot of times, the only difference between the five carries you want to discuss and the rest of his line is a minor tweak or two that Blache had to make, and not because of coming out flat.

I mean, yeah, the first quarter is when we really struggled to handle their offense. Given. Obviously. You're asserting that they came out flat, which I don't totally disagree with, but also that they should be immune to coming out flat? I think?

Why should this team be immune to bad plays in the first quarter, prior to adjustments being made?

So what, the Redskins forgot how to defend the run in the first quarter and suddenly remembered in the second?? No, they didn't get their heads in the game early enough, and got run over.

Is it okay if both of these things sound about equally implausible and nominal? How can you assert something that isn't disprovable?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If you're right though, what you are saying is that we should have shut Benson down in the first quarter, and he should have rushed for two yards per attempt, or whatever he did the rest of the way (32/14).

But a lot of times, the only difference between the five carries you want to discuss and the rest of his line is a minor tweak or two that Blache had to make, and not because of coming out flat.

I mean, yeah, the first quarter is when we really struggled to handle their offense. Given. Obviously. You're asserting that they came out flat, which I don't totally disagree with, but also that they should be immune to coming out flat? I think?

Why should this team be immune to bad plays in the first quarter, prior to adjustments being made?

I agree it was probably a combination. And if there is one thing I'm on the same page with you on, it is Blache. He is slow to make adjustments, and the primary evidence of this is the lack of presnap movements directed by London Fletcher. Under GW, Fletcher was moving guys all over the place, making adjustments based on the formation and personnel. This never happens under Blache. Blache waits to see a few plays before he begins adjusting, and by then it's often too late; it probably contributed to our early game deficit this week.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Is it okay if both of these things sound about equally implausible and nominal? How can you assert something that isn't disprovable?

Because it's an opinion based on what I saw on TV today. There are no stats to measure effort. I simply saw 11 guys lined up on defense, but failing to attack the line of scrimmage with vigor. I didn't see guys flying to the ball, and I didn't see guys taking on pulling blockers willingly.

Should we expect that the team should never come out flat at any time during the season? No, that's unrealistic. But is it unreasonable to expect them to get up for a December game when they're 7-6 and in the playoff hunt? Not at all. A Joe Gibbs Redskin team may not have won this game, we don't know that for sure. But I can promise you they would not have come out flat.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Because it's false.

Outside of that, you might be onto something.

Yep, falling to the Bengals with a playoff berth hanging in the balance was actually a Herculean effort.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

So we have lots of "high character guys" who just plain suck?

They mailed it in today. I don't see why people find that statement so appalling.

I wouldn't say they suck. They're just not as good as we all think they are.