Analasis!

I disagree that Portis does not fit our scheme, if you watch the first drive he was killing the giants. Then tim lewis said enough with this, were stacking the box. What we need to do then was chalange them wit deep balls, and Brunnel can't throw the deep ball. I don't understand our offense right now, with all the short passes. Lets throw the ball downfield. Gibbs is going to conservative. The other this I dont' get is where is the slant route in our offense? Its probably the best route in football and i have not seen it run once yet. Does anybody remeber from Gibbs first term if they used the slant route at all?


I happened to miss the 1st drive, unfortunatly, Gibb's was not a big slant guy, he primarly uses the come back routes, that's how he used to set up the big pass play's, when he know's he has defender's trying to jump that route, he then start's pump faking for the big play.

Ramsey has to be givin an opportunity to get comfortable, all the great's throw INT's early in their career's, why? Because they are play maker's, and until their knowledge and comfort level reaches their competitive nature, that will happen. In Ramsey's defense, 1 INT looked to be Cole's not peeling off the defender, that can happen to the best of them, the second he shouldn't even been in that position, Gardner burned everyone with the drop on the goal line, to bad Rod you'll never see an easier TD again, the last was defiently bone headed, but it did look like it slipped off his hand, with the amount of drop's no wonder Ramsey feel's the need to try and force a big play.

I look to see McCant's taking over for gardner any time now, Gibb's in his defense hasen't been able to follow Gardner's career like the rest of us, this game should pretty much indoctrinate him.

You know Offiss, what seems to be one of many problems with Ramsey is having a plan B when the primary receiver isn't in the right place to catch the ball. Ramsey didn't even look to see if Coles was jammed, he just let it go. He's got to have plan A(primrary receiver, plan B (2# receiver) and plan C (throw the ball away.) If this is drilled into him he will be more comfortable in the pocket.

The Carter catch on the sidelines... he definitely only had one foot in... however, it was with 1:55 left in the 2nd QTR, a booth challenge... the G-Women got to the line quick and the play wasn't brought back. That was a big play too.


Good point Hail forgot about the 2 minute rule............

Defense was good, overall, though NO SACKS and NO TOs

they had 2 sacks.. .springs and Salave'a...
i want to see mccants in gardners shoes... or jacobs...
taylor had some rookie issues today too, but he didn't get burned like some others :(

my shopping list:
1-2 good DEs
coverage SS
QB with brains and an arm
another top ten type WR wouldn't hurt either... gardner sucks

you know, if we went for FGs, we could have caught up... with 5 TOs, thats what we should have started doing... hindsight, who knows... just a thought.

you know, if we went for FGs, we could have caught up... with 5 TOs, thats what we should have started doing... hindsight, who knows... just a thought.

thats no way for a football team to play. especially an NFC east team. especially one run by Joe Gibbs. plus you forget Hall was hurt anyway.

thats no way for a football team to play. especially an NFC east team. especially one run by Joe Gibbs. plus you forget Hall was hurt anyway.

nope, i'm pretty sure i remember hall was hurt... but playing that way couldn't have gone any worse than what actually happened... 7 TOs is no way for ANY team to play.

We played like crap offensivley. There is nothing we could have done besides not turning the ball over that would have changed the course of the game.

This isn't baseball but, what happened to the changeup? I guess I was wrong when I hinted that the 'Skins hadn't showed much of the offensive playbook. I understand that we're all about protecting the quarterback first but, the Giants figured out pretty quickly that we were limited to just a few formations and anyone sent in motion wasn't a potential down the field threat. Besides the pass to Sellers and the TD throw to Cooley, the only other 'surprise' play was on 3rd and 23 and we gave it to Portis on the draw. Charles Mann (radio show) hinted that Portis isn't a RB suited for the running play(s) coined by Gibbs' offense. And I somewhat agree. But you would think we would implement some of 'Denver's plays' in which Portis had so much success. Questions. Are the WRs lined up 'tight' too often? Why not motion Cooley or Portis or both as wideouts more often? This can easily be done without having mutiple WR sets and without abandoning the running game.
The reason we lost the game is an obvious one. And I like to use an analogy here. It's like tennis. You have forced turnovers and unforced turnovers. There were some great hustle plays made by the Giants' defense. And then there were 'gifts'. Ramsey would've been dressed for the occasion wearing a Santa suit. Ax this bum before he loses any more trade value!

we had SO many chances in the fourth quarter! even a fumble recovery on a kickoff. our defense has developed into a CLUTCH unit, something we can count on when we absolutely need it and in the 4th quarter. but they cant be expected to score.

our offense, on the other hand. damn, seeing Coles drop a pass and Portis fumble really is an absolute heart breaker. who CAN we rely on??