Would you rather be 0-2

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I would say that scoring 9 points when you fail to get in the end zone 4 times from inside the 10 and 5 times from inside the 20 is, by it's very definition, close. I actually don't think putting it any other way would describe it better.

Awful playcalling aside, let's assume perfect offensive execution. Dream scenario, but lets say DT catches his TD, and Sellers catches his. Red Zone playcalling is not one iota better but we score 20 points instead of 9 (assuption -- Suisham makes a FG on that last drive). We win a 20-7 blowout.

I'd say that we didn't miss by much. There's not much St. Louis can say that "if we had just did this one thing, we would have beaten them". Yeah, convert that 4th quarter fumble into a TD, and they might have won, but that also would have required them to score the third TD of the year against our defense, which they proved they didn't have the firepower to do.

That's a borderline retarded statement. We win by 2 points and the other team who fumbled inside their own 10 is supposed to walk away thinking they had zero chance to win the game? The team that scored the only TD of the game? Meanwhile, the Giants man-handle the Skins last week and everyone talks about how they were only 4 or 5 plays away from winning the game.

So in the Rams locker room there was a conversation that went like this,

Rams player 1 - "Man, we should have won that game. If only we didn't fumble that ball away."

Rams player 2 - "Oh hells no! Don't you know that was the Redskins Defense out there. No one, and I mean no one scores on them. They LET us march down the field on them only to run down the clock. They knew they could get a fumble whenever they wanted. And don't even think for one second we could have kicked a field goal and won 10-9. They would have blocked it and returned it for a TD. Best Defense of all time! I said ALL TIME."

Rams player 1 - "Oh"