What's The Real Problem?

You guys love Thrash though. Remember? Gibbs should no longer bank on Hall's veteran status. He can't make FGs over 40yds. Rogers is a keeper. There's no doubt about that.


Wilbon ripped him a new one in today's Post. I was really steamed about Rogers dancing after the WR for the Vikes dropped the ball.

we never gave the running game a chance to establish tempo on O
the calls were mainly edge plays & we passed a lot on 1st down. I know Saunders likes to keep defenses guessing, but any o line wants to run block 1st & it builds their confidence over the course. vikes ran even when they didn't avg. 3+
I guess its a matter of adjusting to this O, we'll be rusty early on.
On D, we need springs!

The only thing that really bothered me, is that you could tell by the end of the game that if the Vikings got the ball one more time when it was 16-16 that they would score. The Skins D could not stop them from moving the ball. While they only averaged less than 3 YPC, the Vikings stuck with it, and the Skins could not get any penetration to stop Chester Taylor for a loss. Brad Johnson made every throw on 3rd down. If he is the 40th highest paid QB in the league, like they mentioned last night, how good would the Skins be with him under center?

Our secondary desperately needs Shawn Springs out there. With our nickel back probably gone for the year, d-back depth is lagging. Rogers is clearly not a #1 cover guy, and Archuleta couldn't cover a paper plate with a comforter. Vikes went 9 for 17 on 3rd down. Several of those at crucial times.

Brunell, while not making any mistakes, had a fair game. He didn't do anything spectacular, and didn't lead the team into the endzone when inside the 10 THREE times! Play calling or not, he's a veteran QB who's been there before. Put the damn ball into the end zone. Period.

the real problem is not lack of talent but.

on offense: the thick saunders playbook
on defense: over confidence and lack of effort on the D line

With all the comments thus far, it's obvious we can not just pick one problem. There were a slew!
This is how I saw it: (in no particular order)
1- Horrible play calling on both sides of the ball. Why did we not try to open up the field by throwing downfield? We have Moss, a burner, Lloyd, the guy that can jump and has the "size", and Randle El to create, yet we never even looked at Lloyd and limited Moss to screens. On the D side, we made the Vikes O line look like all pro's. Partly play calling, partly...
2- No defensive penetration. Brad had all day to throw the ball. The linebackers had no sense of urgency, and the DE's didn't create any opportunities.
3- The 700 page playbook. If Brunell was "wishing the day was over", that lack of confidence will trickle down. Brunell was not that good. If you watched downfield, often times a receiver was open and Brunell never saw him. Brunell looked confused.
4- Poor kicking game. I'm not the type to blame the loss on such a thing, but watching Hall's previous kicks, I was even nervous about him hitting an extra point. He kicks one ugly ball. When Randel El did not get to that first down marker, I knew we lost cause Hall would have missed that field goal 4 out of 5 times.
5- Most importantly, we could not stop the 3rd down conversions!!!!! We let the freakin Vikes run or pass at will on 3rd downs! We were lucky to lose by only 3 thanks to Williamson sucking. He dropped that easy TD on the most perfect pass anyone has seen in years, and, humorously, dropping a pass with the deflection of his helmet!
6- Injuries. The loss of Springs was noticably significant, and we need Portis to run the ball 20 times. I like Betts, but he's no Portis.
7- Why OH WHY don't we use Randel El for kickoffs? If he can punt return, he can kick return. Our KR game is horrendous.

There were some other issues, but those were the biggies.

The defense allowed 19 points, 86 rushing yards, and 223 passing yards. While not fantastic stats, and though they didn't meet my expectations of them, objectively speaking they were not "Swiss Cheese" or otherwise horrible. I think we've been a little spoiled by Williams' defense the past few years. The did a decent job, even if they couldn't seal the deal.

The offense also played decent, but couldn't seal the deal. Yeah they moved the ball and I was encouraged, but they didn't score 7 points when it counted.

The problem is that we didn't do anything to perfection. Both sides of the ball came up short.

I agree that the offense couldn't seal the deal in the red zone, and did mention that, but I don't agree that the defense did their job -- although I will say allowing the Viking's great field position for much of the game didn't help matters. Still, if we were spoiled by great defenses under Williams the past two seasons --- AND considering that any changes we made on defense was supposed to have been upgrades, that leads me to believe that the defense was a dissappointment last night.

Still, if we were spoiled by great defenses under Williams the past two seasons --- AND considering that any changes we made on defense was supposed to have been upgrades, that leads me to believe that the defense was a dissappointment last night.

No question they were a disappointment. I have just been trying to look at things objectively and without reference to our expectations. The defense disappointed us because they were medicore when we expected them to be great. Conversely, the offense encouraged many of us because it was mediocre when we expected it to be sub-par. So, while the defense might have been a disappointment, the units performed at about the same level.

Bottom Line: WE WERE OUTCOACHED!?
p.s. lord give me an O-line

Who expected it to be subpar?Not me I expected alot more than that.Saunders, randle El , Lylod millions of dollars later same result as last year CANT SCORE POINTS.