View Full Version : The Redskins Suck.
10-21-2007, 04:18 PM
That was the most embarrassing win I've ever seen.
I truly would like to give it back. Al Saunders needs to get the hell out of here or open up the offense right this second. Our playcalling is just pathetic and this has gotten beyond ridiculous.
I take little comfort in saying that at least they're better than the Ravens. That was still a miserable experience and I almost had a heart attack.
This defense is immensely talented but still got too many stupid penalties and is on the field far too long because Saunders doesn't realize that Jason Campbell is his best offensive player and insists on doing 2 yard runs to Portis or Sellers on every first and second down that do absolutely nothing.
Throw the damn ball like a normal NFL team! Use the kid's arm for god's sakes! Stop with the dink, dink, dink, crap!
10-21-2007, 04:19 PM
Funny, the Ravens beat the Cardinals in a similar way earlier this season.
10-22-2007, 01:09 PM
The Redskins deserved to lose yesterday, but, fortunately for them, the Cardinals shot themselves in the foot more than the Redskins did.
In watching the game yesterday, I think the Redskins were trying to go down field, but, because Arizona went into a deep zone sometimes, Campbell had to go to his check down receiver in several instances. That doesn't mean the playcalling should be immune from criticism. On the contrary, the playcalling has been too pedestrian and predictable this year, especially when the Redskins have the lead.
I understand that Joe Gibbs' offensive philosophy is to establish the run. However, I feel that the playcalling yesterday went about it the wrong way. Yesterday's game plan was more run-first and run-often, which is fine if the offensive line is healthy. However, that's not the case. The line is hurting, and, for the most part, they were getting pushed around by the Cardinal's line. It's the coach's responsibility, whether it's Gibbs or Saunders, to adjust to this. They failed to do so.
There are other ways to establish the running game. For instance, given the offensive line's situation, the Redskins may be better served by using the pass to set up the run. Nothing along the lines of throwing forty yard strikes; instead, simple three-step drops, quick inside slants, or some quick out patterns. Passing can set up play action, and, in turn, it can also set up the run. Loosen the defense so you can pound the ball. Granted, this plan would require the Redskins receivers to catch the football.
There are ways to move the ball, even when the line is depleted. However, it seems like the Redskins don't want to deviate from their current formula. They seemed to have opened things up more towards the end of last season, especially compared to this season. In part, I think Campbell had something to do with it. I also think the team's defensive woes played a role as well. Now that the defense is showing its 2004-2005 form, Gibbs/Saunders seem content to play close to the vest, letting things rest with the defense. They got lucky yesterday, but it could come back to haunt them later on this season.
10-22-2007, 02:42 PM
Football is a funny game. A few breaks here and there and they could be 6-0. Conversely, they could also have only 1 or 2 wins now. Last year's team finds a way to lose that game. As ineffective as the offense was, the score should have been much more lopsided. Rogers had a touchdown return if he had any hands at all. The Cardinals kept a scoring drive alive with a questionable taunting call on Fletcher (Who by the way, was all over the field yesterday). The patchwork line kept Campbell from getting killed, but no running game was established. I think they did try some quick hitters to the recievers. Moss caught 2, but couldn't break them open. Randel El had one, made a move, and got a big gain. The best play on offense was Campbell's run for a first down. He was going to give Portis a shovel pass. If he did, Portis would have been blown up. Campbell recognized this, kept it, and went around the end and got the first down. That was a great decision by a "rookie" quarterback and he is showing a lot. That said, if they play the same way against New England, they'll lose by 30. If they play the way they did against Detroit, they may be able to keep it within 14 points. :D
10-22-2007, 03:23 PM
I think it's a result of looking forward to the next opponent. I think they got ahead early, so they decided to play it conservative...saving everything else for next week. Saunders hasn't been afraid to let Campbell throw down field at all this season...until yesterday. They didn't really take any shots (except one to Thrash) all game. They didn't really even look to Cooley. They didn't use Betts much. They didn't use Portis in anything creative. When they did use Sellars, it was only in predictable, up-the-middle runs. I honestly think (or at least I'm trying to convince myself) that Saunders/Gibbs/WhoEverMakesDecisions decided to save up their shots for this coming week.
There is not a whole lot you can do on offense when the offensive line is being manhandled. At least they held on to win the game and I am a lot happier to win than to lose no matter how ugly it was. At least we don't feel as bad as the Eagles fans after what happened to them yesterday.
I know nobody wants to use injuries as an excuse but it's just a fact that this makeshift O line restricts what they can do on offense. It's a damn shame because I think with a healthy line they could have gone deep in the playoffs in the NFC. Now it will be a feat to make the playoffs at all.
10-25-2007, 10:56 PM
Offensive line woes or not, I don't understand why this team decides to play the football version of the four corners whenever they get the lead.
They've lost games they should have won vs the Giants and Packers. Perhaps the gift win against the Cardinals was a little karmic payback...
The only bad thing about London Fletcher's play right now is it is driving up the cost of his game used jerseys...and I want one! (Same # and all...)