Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs Seahawks)

I didn't mind the call. It was open, we just didn't execute it. He should have caught it.

If we had ran down the middle and gotten stuffed then people would be crying for some other play.

and I think its safe to say that if JZ then had gone for it on 4th and somehow gotten stuffed, the questions would be Why not kick the field goal. I truthfully do not envy a head coach's job!

My point is that we can convert on 3rd and inches in so many different ways. Why put it on Sellers to make that catch? He's a blocking fullback. We were in the red zone, and only had inches to go. There are so many other plays that would have had a higher probability of success in that situation. If it was 2nd down, then okay. I would have rather seen a dive, trap or sneak -- all of which have a higher likelihood of success. Bad play call, IMO, considering it cost us 4 points.

Why not?

We've had great success with that play action flip to Sellers in the past. The guy generally is pretty reliable when it comes to those. I don't see the problem with the call, just the drop on Sellers' part.

If Campbell had gotten off a decent pass, Sellers would have caught it with no problem. I like Zorn on that particular call because he isn't predictable. Remember when we used to lose every close game, but this season we're winning most of them? Starting with Norv and on up until Zorn, we could dominate a game but lose it on a stupid play. Even Joe Gibbs looked lost on Sundays, and I'm a big Joe Gibbs fan. Zorn knows what's going on and has us winning.

I guess hitting him in the hands wasn't good enough?

Yeah it wasn't picture perfect, but that's a throw he has to catch. You can't put that on Campbell.

I totally agree with the call, Sellers was wide open and should have made the catch! I would hope that in the future other teams will bite on the Sellers fake, and throw it to Cooley, he needs some TDs

we won the game against a seattle team that has had our number the past couple of years but they suck this year.We can beat the giants next week but we will need some turnovers by eli and a solid game from cambell

Why not?

We've had great success with that play action flip to Sellers in the past. The guy generally is pretty reliable when it comes to those. I don't see the problem with the call, just the drop on Sellers' part.

I agree, we have had great success on that play. I like the play too. It was just too big of a play. In those "big play" situations, I believe we should run plays which have the highest percentage of success. Now, our history shows that is a good percentage play, but Sellers is due to drop one here and there. Well, he did, and the whole time I was thinking, "You've got to catch that, but I can't be mad you didn't -- that's not your forte." If Moss or Cooley dropped one in the hands on that play, I'd be pissed -- pass catching is their primary responsibility. Sellers' primary responsibility is blocking. Same reason I can't be too upset if a play breaks down due to a poor block from Moss. Know what I mean?

I agree, we have had great success on that play. I like the play too. It was just too big of a play. In those "big play" situations, I believe we should run plays which have the highest percentage of success. Now, our history shows that is a good percentage play, but Sellers is due to drop one here and there. Well, he did, and the whole time I was thinking, "You've got to catch that, but I can't be mad you didn't -- that's not your forte." If Moss or Cooley dropped one in the hands on that play, I'd be pissed -- pass catching is their primary responsibility. Sellers' primary responsibility is blocking. Same reason I can't be too upset if a play breaks down due to a poor block from Moss. Know what I mean?

No I don't actually, but we'll just agree to disagree. It's not like Sellers is Mr. Stone Hands, he's a capable enough of a receiver to expect him to catch those.

Why not??

We've had great success with that play action flip to Sellers in the past. The guy generally is pretty reliable when it comes to those. I don't see the problem with the call, just the drop on Sellers' part.

Wasn't it last year he had like 7 TDs out of 8 touches in the red zone?

Wasn't it last year he had like 7 TDs out of 8 touches in the red zone?

That was '05. But yeah, that was sweet. He's light on his feet and at 280+ lbs, no one can bring him down on first contact. I love how we're getting him involved and I hope we keep it up. He's one of the best players on our team.

No I don't actually, but we'll just agree to disagree. It's not like Sellers is Mr. Stone Hands, he's a capable enough of a receiver to expect him to catch those.

These were some funny, and a bit enlightening, comments by Zorn about Sellers

"There was a couple times when really Ladell should have been in there, or Clinton should have been in there, like the screen," Zorn said. "Nobody knew I was calling the screen, and all of the sudden I called the screen, and Mike's in there, and everybody's going, "oh no, MIKE's in there!"

“We’re trying to score 40, but it seems like … even on that third-and-one, when we tried to get Mike Sellers the ball. And bless his heart, he tried to handle the ball, but we always talk about, as quarterbacks, to running backs and tight ends, you’ve got to keep the ball in the core. And what I mean by that is, don’t put the ball so above his head, like he has to actually extend his arms, because it’s tough. They don’t get to catch a lot of balls like that. We’re always trying to put the ball here, at his face or at his shoulders.”