A Giant Disappointment [Archive] - Page 3 - Commanders Post at The Warpath

mike340

10-13-2006, 05:36 PM

Don't worry Hess. Bad playcalling. Offensive growing pains.

Saunders is a bright guy. He will find a way to right personnel involved at the right times in a few more weeks. This one came down to bad playcalling. I felt he tried to force his gameplan to work on the Giants, rather than take what the Giants were giving. (For example, I felt the Giants were trying to cover up top, but he kept on trying up there anyway rather than a cutback on a deep route.)

They will also (hopefully) figure out how to get the plays in in time. (In the first half, they were always getting the play off with 1-3 seconds left on the play clock until finally Brunell needed to take a time out. You could see on his face he was furious.) Another easily solved problem.

As far as the OLine goes...they've got the same people as last year, nobody's been (too) nicked up, so all things being equal, they should play at the same level as last year. (Being 49 myself, I don't believe being just one year older has a huge impact on level of play, at least for their age.) But they've been using a new playbook, and Saunders hasn't always used them to the best of their abilities. If I recall correctly, they had very few BAD games last year, so I don't expect many (any?) once they get the playbook down.

Portis should be Portis and the receiving corps is greatly improved, so I see them taking off once we've figured out how to use them and the OLine (and Portis) are protecting Brunell.

Brunell. The subject of trillions of words on this board. Can be very good and also very bad. He threw a pass in 2004 that was so bad (the one that looked like a duck shot in mid-air) that I couldn't bear to watch the games (radio OK) for 4 weeks. Then the Dallas game last year. Arizona last year. A number of weak games this year, but also the record against the Titans and also the Jags game (2nd that week in QB rating.) I think he will do just fine if we get some defense. We didn't get him to be a great QB. He was brought in to be a solid QB. By this I mean he's not going to show up a lot in the highlight reels. Not for long bombs, not for interceptions. His job is to get it into the hands of his playmakers without making mistakes and let them do the rest. Occasionally he will be asked to deliver the ball in a tight spot (the game-winning TD against Jacksonville) but his main goal is to complete passes to open receivers and avoid interceptions. This is one of the reasons he's throwing a lot outside the hash marks. When the offense gets confident on the playbook and the OLine does its usual job, I expect Brunell to have 1 or 2 bad games the rest of the year, which is his norm when not injured.

If we can figure out how to use Duckett we should be able to exchange a lot of FGs for TDs.

As far as the defense goes, I think Springs changes everything. Rogers has "unlearned" what he knew because he knows he's not ready to cover a #1 receiver, and is thus playing scared. As a result he's not keeping his head. But he was fine physically and mentally covering the #2 guy, and I don't expect that to change this year. Taylor can't be used optimally now, nor can AA, ...) In addition, Williams is playing the defense defensively (sorry) out of necessity, but I expect that to change when Springs comes back in. He should allow them to attack (DB blitzes :-)) and not suffer the consequences they have so far in the season.

I am disturbed that they've already lost 2 games by more than a TD when they lost only 1 by more than a TD during the regular season last year.

So we should probably go 1-1 in the next 2 games. Then each of the remaining games we have a good shot at winning (just like the last 6 last year). (We just blew the Oakland game, otherwise it would have been a 6-game winning streak at the end of the season.) At least we do if we have the playbook figured out by the Dallas game and we don't lose "essential" personnel.

I guess since I've used the term, I should come up with an initial list of "essential personnel":
Essential personnel:
Brunell (can't change effectively with this playbook, and whoever replaces him will probably throw more picks, and the RBs, WRs, TEs are really the guys to get the yds.)
Portis
Moss
Springs
Taylor
maybe more on D (your input invited)

We should survive if one big-name receiver goes down, so long as its not Moss.
I hope we survive if we lose someone from the OLine.
I hope we survive if we lose Washington.
I hope we survive if we lose Rogers. (I expect him back to form vs #2s)

Your input invited. Main idea: don't give up the ship. We have enough good people in place to have a very good year, even with the start we've had. We have to be no worse than 1-1 in our next two games and must have the kinks worked out by the Dallas game.

Sorry for the long post, but we've got to get Hess on the positive side of things again. :-)

Sheesh... :( I'm still going to say I have hope, but that just sucks.


	Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum > A Giant Disappointment PDA A Giant Disappointment Pages : 1 2 [3] Hog1 10-13-2006, 11:31 AM We felt like we could let Pierce go, as Denver knew they could let Portis go. We do a good job building LB's. As Matty stated, we have all the pieces. The consistency will come...................hopefully................li ke............this week. I think I must add.........what a F.... brainless, classless, ninny, to act like that, when he was "brand X" before he got Greg-atized. Ergo, the reason he now is a Giant? Total Jackassery!!!!!!!!! dmek25 10-13-2006, 03:28 PM i agree that marshall is every bit as good as pierce. but, if pierce stays, then marshall starts on the outside with marcus washington. this would be one helluva playmaking starting linebackers. then the skins could throw holdman in the trash were he belongs Giantone 10-13-2006, 04:50 PM And that's a point that needed to be made. Pierce constantly shoots off at the fucking mouth about how he always needs to get "back" at the Redskins. Get back at them for what? Actually this year Pierce was pretty quite ,last year was last year. TheMalcolmConnection 10-13-2006, 04:55 PM I could drag up numerous articles from THIS year. He never shuts his trap. mike340 10-13-2006, 05:36 PM Don't worry Hess. Bad playcalling. Offensive growing pains. Saunders is a bright guy. He will find a way to right personnel involved at the right times in a few more weeks. This one came down to bad playcalling. I felt he tried to force his gameplan to work on the Giants, rather than take what the Giants were giving. (For example, I felt the Giants were trying to cover up top, but he kept on trying up there anyway rather than a cutback on a deep route.) They will also (hopefully) figure out how to get the plays in in time. (In the first half, they were always getting the play off with 1-3 seconds left on the play clock until finally Brunell needed to take a time out. You could see on his face he was furious.) Another easily solved problem. As far as the OLine goes...they've got the same people as last year, nobody's been (too) nicked up, so all things being equal, they should play at the same level as last year. (Being 49 myself, I don't believe being just one year older has a huge impact on level of play, at least for their age.) But they've been using a new playbook, and Saunders hasn't always used them to the best of their abilities. If I recall correctly, they had very few BAD games last year, so I don't expect many (any?) once they get the playbook down. Portis should be Portis and the receiving corps is greatly improved, so I see them taking off once we've figured out how to use them and the OLine (and Portis) are protecting Brunell. Brunell. The subject of trillions of words on this board. Can be very good and also very bad. He threw a pass in 2004 that was so bad (the one that looked like a duck shot in mid-air) that I couldn't bear to watch the games (radio OK) for 4 weeks. Then the Dallas game last year. Arizona last year. A number of weak games this year, but also the record against the Titans and also the Jags game (2nd that week in QB rating.) I think he will do just fine if we get some defense. We didn't get him to be a great QB. He was brought in to be a solid QB. By this I mean he's not going to show up a lot in the highlight reels. Not for long bombs, not for interceptions. His job is to get it into the hands of his playmakers without making mistakes and let them do the rest. Occasionally he will be asked to deliver the ball in a tight spot (the game-winning TD against Jacksonville) but his main goal is to complete passes to open receivers and avoid interceptions. This is one of the reasons he's throwing a lot outside the hash marks. When the offense gets confident on the playbook and the OLine does its usual job, I expect Brunell to have 1 or 2 bad games the rest of the year, which is his norm when not injured. If we can figure out how to use Duckett we should be able to exchange a lot of FGs for TDs. As far as the defense goes, I think Springs changes everything. Rogers has "unlearned" what he knew because he knows he's not ready to cover a #1 receiver, and is thus playing scared. As a result he's not keeping his head. But he was fine physically and mentally covering the #2 guy, and I don't expect that to change this year. Taylor can't be used optimally now, nor can AA, ...) In addition, Williams is playing the defense defensively (sorry) out of necessity, but I expect that to change when Springs comes back in. He should allow them to attack (DB blitzes :-)) and not suffer the consequences they have so far in the season. I am disturbed that they've already lost 2 games by more than a TD when they lost only 1 by more than a TD during the regular season last year. So we should probably go 1-1 in the next 2 games. Then each of the remaining games we have a good shot at winning (just like the last 6 last year). (We just blew the Oakland game, otherwise it would have been a 6-game winning streak at the end of the season.) At least we do if we have the playbook figured out by the Dallas game and we don't lose "essential" personnel. I guess since I've used the term, I should come up with an initial list of "essential personnel": Essential personnel: Brunell (can't change effectively with this playbook, and whoever replaces him will probably throw more picks, and the RBs, WRs, TEs are really the guys to get the yds.) Portis Moss Springs Taylor maybe more on D (your input invited) We should survive if one big-name receiver goes down, so long as its not Moss. I hope we survive if we lose someone from the OLine. I hope we survive if we lose Washington. I hope we survive if we lose Rogers. (I expect him back to form vs #2s) Your input invited. Main idea: don't give up the ship. We have enough good people in place to have a very good year, even with the start we've had. We have to be no worse than 1-1 in our next two games and must have the kinks worked out by the Dallas game. Sorry for the long post, but we've got to get Hess on the positive side of things again. :-) Sheesh... :( I'm still going to say I have hope, but that just sucks. Beemnseven 10-13-2006, 05:45 PM ... Andre Carter has shown flashes ... He has? With that one sack he has through five games? I don't think he's even getting 'hurries'. steveo395 10-13-2006, 06:05 PM He has? With that one sack he has through five games? I don't think he's even getting 'hurries'. dwight freeney doesn't even have a sack this year yet...be patient...he was a linebacker last year Giantone 10-13-2006, 10:02 PM I could drag up numerous articles from THIS year. He never shuts his trap. Your riight the articles are from this year but quote him from last year thats all I'm saying. hesscl34 10-14-2006, 12:40 AM Your riight the articles are from this year but quote him from last year thats all I'm saying. Dude, don't you have your own team to worry about???? You've been around here for far too long.... Come back on 12/30. I have tickets to that game... and I'm sure it will be pay back time... Beemnseven 10-15-2006, 10:29 PM dwight freeney doesn't even have a sack this year yet...be patient...he was a linebacker last year The difference being Freeney's 50 sacks over the previous 4 seasons to Carter's total of 32 over 5 seasons. But whatever, Carter got himself another one today. Yippee.