Props to the coaching staff:

I would say the playcalling was a lot more creative today. We saw CP lining up behind Rabach on a few occasions and running sweeps. We saw Sellers getting the ball downfield. We saw more counters in the running game. We saw CP lining up at fullback and Sellers at halfback and then motioning Portis from the fullback position. We saw more slants, especially the one on 4th down that kept a drive alive. I don't know if I've seen any of this stuff til today. And it sure kept Det. off balance
Much better argument.
Not more aggressive at all (a screen to Lloyd is not more aggressive than CP off tackle). However, I would say that I think it was more creative. The Miami game was also creative. Do we only see this with extra time available for gameplanning?
Of course, had to be creative with all the key injuries.

I would say the playcalling was a lot more creative today. We saw CP lining up behind Rabach on a few occasions and running sweeps. We saw Sellers getting the ball downfield. We saw more counters in the running game. We saw CP lining up at fullback and Sellers at halfback and then motioning Portis from the fullback position. We saw more slants, especially the one on 4th down that kept a drive alive. I don't know if I've seen any of this stuff til today. And it sure kept Det. off balance

I concur

The slants and deep-ins were a good addition. But we hit them. That's two things--better pass protection (no sacks, right?) and better execution by both JC and the WRs. And that let them get into a rhythm, stay on the field, and open the play book.

(And the Detroit D is not the gints D. And we exploited it as we should have. Very well called game, and very well-managed by JC. Looked like a vet out there.)

I too agree with Skins69. We were much more creative and kept the defense guessing.

On that first snap to CP, Rabach said that was a botched snap and never actually intended for Portis

I think we've gradually see the Redskins try different things, as Campbell has grown more comfortable. Nothing drastic, but a gradual growth. I wonder though if some of the reasoning behind today's "trick" formations and plays was to mask the absence of Moss today? Would they have been more direct in their approach with Moss in, and even ARE in the 2nd half?

But see I don't call having Portis run the ball out of shotgun "trick" plays. That is good creative playcalling. We should still run that stuff when Moss comes back. When you split the Qb out away from the formation it gives the offense an extra blocker.

I really didn't see anything drastically different from the Giants game, the key today was we made some big plays, kept drives going, and converted 3rd downs. This play calling crap is so overrated.

Not true, I saw some trickery...twice they did a direct snap, they threw the damn ball on first and second down, and they ran the ball to the right, used Sellers quite a bit and in the goal line. They used Cooley as a decoy all game long, threw quick slats quite a bit.

Yes, we made plays but the game plan was most certainly not comparable to the Giants game plan.

Not true, I saw some trickery...twice they did a direct snap, they threw the damn ball on first and second down, and they ran the ball to the right, used Sellers quite a bit and in the goal line. They used Cooley as a decoy all game long, threw quick slats quite a bit.

Yes, we made plays but the game plan was most certainly not comparable to the Giants game plan.

Actually they ran the ball mostly to the left to avoid our "reconstructed" right side of our offensive line. Not saying that didn't run to the right at all, but I noticed most of our runs were to Chris Samuel's side, which was to the left.

Not true, I saw some trickery...twice they did a direct snap, they threw the damn ball on first and second down, and they ran the ball to the right, used Sellers quite a bit and in the goal line. They used Cooley as a decoy all game long, threw quick slats quite a bit.

Yes, we made plays but the game plan was most certainly not comparable to the Giants game plan.

But apart from the direct snap, we threw on first down last game, ran the ball to the right last game, and we probably wouldn't have used Sellers as much if not for injuries to Moss and El

Not much to be said here, pretty simple. OUTSTANDING COACHING & GAMEPLAN!

There's a chicken and the egg thing here--by converting 3rd downs, they had more plays, and thus more chances to try the trickery. 3rd down efficeincy really allows both the QB and the O coordinator to get in a rhythm.

But no doubt they had more going on in the playcalling. Still, for those calling for a shoot-out type offense, what you saw here was, dare I say it, REDSKINS FOOTBALL. And that means BALL CONTROL. When Gibbs teams are playing well, that's what you see. Look, it's still a work in progress, but when it clicks (and we saw some sweet drives today), you may well get the best of BOTH Saunders and Gibbs. Ball control with creative playcalling, converting in the red zone, and hitting the big play (we didn't take shots deep today--that was both by design, given the D, and due to JC reading things properly). And if the D keeps playing even remotely like this, look out.

But it's one game. Just as losing to NY didn't mean the end of the season, this doesn't mean SB-time. What we want is steady progress, and the ability to learn from our mistakes. We saw that today, so props to the coaches and to the players (the lord blessed us with a great bunch of guys...).