FRPLG
11-01-2005, 01:12 PM
We also abandoned the run very quickly in the game and that makes rushing the passer that much easier. We had 34 passes to 14 rushing plays and alot of the passes came from the shot gun a dead give away that we were going to pass. I would like to see us hand off the ball some from the shot gun to keep the D guessing if we are going to pass or run. It was just a bad game from coaching to the players and that happens. What will be the most telling is how we come out and play Philly. Everyone can say how bad our lines are but before that game we were ranked pretty high on both sides of the ball. Lets just hope that was one bad game and not a trend. At half time I was thinking OK Gibbs will get things fixed and I thought that fumble on the first play realy hurt our team to get some momentum back on our side. I think if we could have come out and had a scoring drive the game would have been alot closer.
I don't remember us abandoning the run. When everything is so ineffective you don't get many plays to do much. I can't imagine we had run more than 11 or 12 offensive plays before we were down by 16. It isn't abandoning the run when nothing is working. Its called sucking and not being able effectively establish and execute a game plan. Who knows maybe the game plan called for a higher percentage of passing plays. It didn't seem at all like they just decided to screw running and throw the ball all day when it wasn't necessary.
BDBohnzie
11-01-2005, 03:35 PM
It's hard to remember abandoning the run, when all the Skins did was go 3 and out all afternoon. The Skins had 5 drives (out of 14) where it went more than 3 plays. 8 punts, 2 fumbles, an interception, and 2 turnover on downs.
The receivers weren't getting open because essentially you have anywhere from 3-5 guys being covered by 6-7 players. The Giants ran a zone slanted towards Moss's side of the field, and since that's the only person Brunell seems to throw it to, we were effectively stopped. There were several times on replay, they showed someone being wide open.
I would compare it to playing someone in Madden, who all he does is throw long passes to one key receiver. Once you run nickel and dime zones towards that side of the field, the offense falls to squat.
offiss
11-01-2005, 04:15 PM
Our O-line is horrible, the reason we lost on Sunday is that the Giants were able to rush 4 and get pressure on the Brunell/Ramsey while dropping 7 into coverage. How can 5 lineman + a running back not block only 4 guys, it doesnt make sense. I saw a few times when WRs were wide open but the QB had no time to even find them, let alone throw it in their direction. On the other side of the ball, our 4 D-lineman cannot create any pressure, so we are forced to blitz a corner or LB, that is why Harris looked so bad and out of position. The line coaches on both sides of the ball should be embarrased, these lineman for the most part are hand picked by the line coaches, so they are the ones to blame, not that there isnt enough blame to go around for that poor JV showing on sunday.
I would cut our defensive coaches some slack, lets face it they have had no opportunity to draft or sign any kind of serious talent other than Griffen on the line, and he's not really a pass rusher, for the most part they have been doing a great job with very little, but you can only get by on cunning and guile for so long eventually you have to have talent.
Our offensive line is another story, a lot of high draft picks and big money free agents.
skinsguy
11-01-2005, 04:21 PM
Alot of those sacks were coverage sacks. If the secondary has your receivers blanketed, then eventually, your QB is either going to be forced to throw the ball away, or get sacked.
That Guy
11-02-2005, 01:42 AM
the rolls got predictable maybe, brunell basically only throws to one side...
Luxorreb
11-02-2005, 07:17 AM
Trade Bucs QB Ramsey for DE Rice.
Atleast that's what I'd attempt to do in Madden and throw in Royal.
Luxorreb
11-02-2005, 07:18 AM
Commish would never allow it. :cheers
dmek25
11-02-2005, 07:23 AM
joisey boy how can you say the skins did not have a chance to sign any free agent d lineman or draft any?was drafting j cambell a necessity?all he is going to do is sit on the bench all year.if the skins front office thought they really needed him,then p ramsey should have been dealt for a d lineman
Williams has a say in his personnel so I think it's unfair to say they haven't had the chance to make any additions.
We layed pretty low as far as defensive acquisitions went this offseason. Perhaps Williams was confident with the group he had, or perhaps there just wasn't anybody out there that he viewed as an improvement.
Either way, if he wanted someone bad enough, I find it hard to believe they wouldn't have pursued that player.
Carlos Rogers anyone? I'm sure Williams played a pretty big part in this decision.
firstdown
11-02-2005, 09:35 AM
joisey boy how can you say the skins did not have a chance to sign any free agent d lineman or draft any?was drafting j cambell a necessity?all he is going to do is sit on the bench all year.if the skins front office thought they really needed him,then p ramsey should have been dealt for a d linemanAt the time we drafted Campbell Brunell could only throw the ball ten yards and Ramsey was turning the ball over to much. At the time we had to have a plan B and that was Campbell. If Brunell and Ramsey were not effective this year we had to have another QB we could start to get developed and ready for 2006.