Congratulations Joe Gibbs.
 

As many people know I've been quite critical of Joe Gibbs thus far. I will admit he called a great game today and I feel a team that was beat up on defense was something this offense needed to gain some confidence. He called a great game with balance and mixture of pass and run. Looks like he actually trusts Ramsey to go down field.

I really want to see how we play the Eagles, but certainly looking up. I'm impressed and hope we can do nearly this well every week!

Good job Joe Gibbs. Continue to prove me wrong!

I agree the playcalling was a nice mix today, but I'm going to continue with my opinion that the execution is what really made things work today and made the playcalling look sharp. As a coach you can call a great game, but if the players don't execute it doesn't matter what you call.

Ramsey was very accurate and made great decisions, Portis had some great second effort runs and the WR's held on to the ball.

Nice shoutout, Daseal. But you shouldn't be surprised. Once the run game clicked, Gibbs could open his playbook. And we controlled the ball, something Brunnel couldn't do. Gibbs knows what he's doing. It just takes time for it all to come together. And look, next week, we'll probably regress some. The jints suck, and the iggles are the best team in the NFC. So let's keep it steady and keep fighting. Rome wasn't built in a day.

Matty - I feel Pittsburgh was more execution than play-calling. However before that I strongly disagree.

I don't think we did anything radically different today.

We ran the ball and had a short, controlled passing game. That's what we've been trying to do all year, the difference is when your QB is 19/22, your backs combine for over 200 yards and the WR's catch the ball, all of a sudden the playcalling looks a heck of a lot better.

When you're executing, moving the chains and have the time of possession edge, it allows you to open things up a bit and get more creative. When your going 3 and out it's tough to dig deep in to the playbook when you can't even execute the basics.

Playcalling and execution go hand in hand. You can't have one without the other.

Just my 2 cents.

oh, and we played the Giants at home, and not the Steelers in Pittsburgh, or Philly in Philly. It helps.

What felt really good about this game was the fact that we scored almost all of our points from long, sustained drives. A vintage Gibbs team is one that lines up and, even though the other team knows what is coming, can't stop it. Thats what Gibbs and the Skins did today. They just said: If you give us three downs, we can get 10 yards all day long. And they did!

Great game all around. It must make the Skins defense fell good to see the offense finally play 4 quarters!

My biggest fear is we'll either run too much or throw too much. There were games where granted Portis was playing great ball, but we needed to put the safeties out some. I feel we started off opening up the pass with the run, but after the half we opened up the run with our pass. Something we've needed.

Matty, Execution is important. However, if you're not getting plays that work onto the field then many are dead from the get-go. Either way, it was a great game today and I hope he can keep it up. Obviously we won't score like this on better teams, but if we can control the ball and keep it moving some our defense can contain anyone.

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I don't think we did anything radically different today.

We ran the ball and had a short, controlled passing game. That's what we've been trying to do all year, the difference is when your QB is 19/22, your backs combine for over 200 yards and the WR's catch the ball, all of a sudden the playcalling looks a heck of a lot better.

When you're executing, moving the chains and have the time of possession edge, it allows you to open things up a bit and get more creative. When your going 3 and out it's tough to dig deep in to the playbook when you can't even execute the basics.

Playcalling and execution go hand in hand. You can't have one without the other.

Just my 2 cents.[/QUOTE]
Spot on assessment, MattyK. My sentiments exactly. And to further support my ranting from earlier today and yesterday, how many times was Ramsey sacked today and how many ground yds did our offense generate? The O-Line performed the [b]best[/b] that I've ever seen them all year and I think that made all the difference in the world to our offense.

I agree more with Dasel (suprise, suprise). I think against Pittsburgh it was more execution than playcalling. However, against Philedalphia and Cincy specifically, I thought the playcalling was very suspect. I just think today we had a more balanced attack, and the way we set up every single play we ran, was very impressive. The way everyone was biting on Ramsey's fakes were a testiment to the playcalling. Although Mattys statment of Execution and Playcaling go hand in hand, is absolutley correct as well. The Eagles game we did have good execution, but just poor calling (IMO), the Steelers game we had good play calling, poor execution(IMO). Today, it was friggin beautiful. Everything went together. It was great to watch!!

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I don't think we did anything radically different today.

We ran the ball and had a short, controlled passing game. That's what we've been trying to do all year, the difference is when your QB is 19/22, your backs combine for over 200 yards and the WR's catch the ball, all of a sudden the playcalling looks a heck of a lot better.

When you're executing, moving the chains and have the time of possession edge, it allows you to open things up a bit and get more creative. When your going 3 and out it's tough to dig deep in to the playbook when you can't even execute the basics.

Playcalling and execution go hand in hand. You can't have one without the other.

Just my 2 cents.[/QUOTE]


:iamwithst seriously, I totally agree with what Matty is saying.

In terms of playcalling there were a lot of 3 WR sets as well as a couple of 4 receiver (including a trips left) formations. I liked everything about the offense today and I think they just came as a group and stepped it up. That's the Redskins I remember!
HTTR

My biggest fear is we'll either run too much or throw too much. There were games where granted Portis was playing great ball, but we needed to put the safeties out some. I feel we started off opening up the pass with the run, but after the half we opened up the run with our pass. Something we've needed.

Matty, Execution is important. However, if you're not getting plays that work onto the field then many are dead from the get-go. Either way, it was a great game today and I hope he can keep it up. Obviously we won't score like this on better teams, but if we can control the ball and keep it moving some our defense can contain anyone.

It was a combo of great play-calling, great execution, determination, sure-handedness, and just plain old pride that made the difference. I'm not really sure what counted the most. I'm just so glad that this offense showed that it can move, hold onto the ball for long drives and SCORE!!!

It sure was fun to watch this game. I can't wait until next week. This game will give the Skins some much-needed confidence. Couple that with the Eagles possibly looking past us and we may come away with a win.

Hats off to Gibbs, Portis, Ramsey, the O-Line, Coles, the entire defense (as usual), Hall and Tupa. This looked like the Skins of days gone by. Trying not to read too much into this, but very happy nonetheless. I was most pleased with Ramsey's play because it's critical to our future that he develop his confidence and game-sense. Today was the best I've seen him play as a Skin.

I said it earlier in the game thread that we really have to give Ramsey some credit here, he's turned himself from a gunslinger always looking downfield for the big play, to a game manager who is checking down, making the smart and accurate throw, and keeping the chains moving. He's become a different QB overnight.

It's really a testament to his intelligence and determination. He's worked hard to get to this point, and considering how bad he looked in the preseason it's even more remarkable.

Now I know it was against a struggling team and hey, that's how you expect to perform against a team like that. It was still encouraging to see him playing so well for 4 quarters.

Matty, I think it's also a testament to the coaching staff for showing patience with him and helping him develop solid QB skills

I knew they would win when this was the 1st game all year I didn't watch. Sorry guys, I'll be watching next week.

I have to agree with what Matty says as I have doen throughout the year it all comes to execution. When you are going three and out every time you will not see the extenct of the play calling/ As one of the giants players said

"we knew exactly what was comming every down but we just couldn't stop them"

We may not see anything next week it is the Eagles after all but the thing which give me a glimmer of hope and the thing I really don't like about the Eagles this year is up until the third/forth quater we were in the Eagles game but then when the Eagles had the game won they decisded to run the score up, like they did with Green Bay, like they did with the Giants etc. etc. It is almost as if they are insecure about something...

Congratulations to Coach Gibbs and the rest of the coaches and players this week. Well coached, well played outing. I think it's funny that just a few days ago this website was overrun with gibbs bashing and/or player bashing. Ofcourse trying to find a guilty party at any cost. No more bashing. If ya people wanna ride a band wagon go to Baltimore, Pittsburgh, New England, Phili or ATL. Washington under Gibbs is the rebirth of a dynasty and it takes hard work to build such a thing. Look at the abovementioned teams! Ease up on the coach. Putting in 6-7 20 hr days a week at 64 probably ain't a whole lot of fun, but when it all works it must be quite satisfying even at 4-8 and still mathematically alive in the wildcard race. Beat Phili and we'll prove to ourselves and the entire league that we're here to stay around for awhile. I've always held the utmost respect for Gibbs and Williams and the rest of the staff. I'm now starting to believe in the players on the field as well. As a life long fan and season tick holder its a great thing to be able to witness. Winning squelches all bashing ain't it funny how that works?!?!

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I don't think we did anything radically different today.

We ran the ball and had a short, controlled passing game. That's what we've been trying to do all year, the difference is when your QB is 19/22, your backs combine for over 200 yards and the WR's catch the ball, all of a sudden the playcalling looks a heck of a lot better.

When you're executing, moving the chains and have the time of possession edge, it allows you to open things up a bit and get more creative. When your going 3 and out it's tough to dig deep in to the playbook when you can't even execute the basics.

Playcalling and execution go hand in hand. You can't have one without the other.

Just my 2 cents.[/QUOTE]

I'd say on the surface we didn't do too much different today but our running game certainly was not the same type of attack we had been implementing. Interesting to note we went to more modern plays that Portis seems to excel with. We didn't run too many counters and the shifting and motion was toned down some. Basically they let Portis just do his thing rather than making him wait for holes. I think Thomas made a huge differnece today since he is our most athletic lineman. Anytime they pulled a guard it was him and it was alway left. Think about it Samules seals inside while dockery pushes downfield. At the same time Thomas whips around the outside and lays into whoever is in the way. That's two pro bowlers on the left side at that point with a real good run blcoker in Dockery. We should have been running this type of stuff all year in hindsight. They play calling was slightly different though than in the past weeks.

I think we finally got to see how Joe Gibb's offense really works when players execute like they're supposed to do! Also, by players executing, it certainly makes the playcalling look alot more balanced...which it was! I realize the nah-sayers will down play this game saying that the Giants' defense was without three quarters of their defense...but ya know our offense hasn't done as well against worse defenses this year..obviously.

I hope at least this week, the performance will put to rest the talks about Joe Gibbs needing an offensive coordinator. I believe he's more than capable of calling a good ball controlled game...and this game was an example of when players execute the way they're expected to, the offense works like a charm! To add on execution, once receivers were CATCHING the ball, and Portis and Betts running successfully, Gibbs was able to go deeper into the play book and show us some formations that some here had questioned why we didn't use (more than two wide receiver formations.)

We've been waiting for at least one breakout game all year to give us confidence and something to build on and we got it yesterday! And Ramsey showed us he can be a pretty decent manager of the game! I dont' expect us to light it up against the Eagles like we did against the Giants, but I do expect this offense to play with a little more confidence and I expect this team to give the Eagles fits this coming week.

It's taken longer than some of us expected for the team to come around, and injuries certainly have played a part in holding back the development of the offense, but it looks like guys are finally settling in to the offense.

The plays in this offense aren't complicated, but what does complicate things is the constant shuffling of personnel and of course the motion and shifting.

It takes time for players to get in to the flow of a system like this, but once they do we saw how effective it can be.

Yesterday was vintage Redskins, it was a lot of fun to watch, it really took me back, I felt like I was 16 again!

I think that Gibbs underestimates the younger players on the team. I mean he brought Brunell in to manage the game and because he felt more comfortable with a veteran running his offense. But if you think about how players look at the game now as to when Gibbs was here his first time. I mean there is not alot of players that come out of college and dont take the NFL seriously. Ramsey is a young QB, but you can tell that when he does play he leaves it all out on the field. Where as when Brunell was playing it always seemed that when he was comming off the field he looked like he soulda tried to do something else.

I do think that we would be better in the records if Ramsey either started the season or came off the bench sooner. I mean after 3 games he looks good, and he keeps improving!!!

BRING ON THE EAGLES!!!!!!!

[quote]Gibbs was able to go deeper into the play book and show us some formations that some here had questioned why we didn't use (more than two wide receiver formations.)
[/quote] Tell me again why we didn't use them earlier? As I said in another thread go 4 WRs, spread out the D and do some run and pass plays out of that. It worked well. That's just saying playcalling changed, much for the better. I enjoyed it.

Playcalling has CHANGED. The plays have changed slightly, but more importantly the order they were called in. Some of the games I watched the calls were uninspired. Watching us run it up the middle three times to no avail is painfull. Gibbs had me guessing what he was doing with the ball. I couldn't have asked for better play-calling than we had last week. I loved seeing a balance, I loved seeing Portis run like he's built to, I loved to see virtually mistake free football. We played a great game, and like matty I was extremely pleased in what I was seeing.

That being said, I hope this can stay constant. I've seen us zone block, play great, then abandon it. I saw a lot more motion and personel groupings than I normally did, and I would like to see Jacobs get a real shot this week, I think he can really bring the speed we're lacking with Coles injury.

That being said, mistakes were cut down tremendously. WRs made the catches, Cooley played amazing, and the O line really set up some nasty blocks. It was a great game, but I think it's silly to say play-calling hasn't changed at all. It has, and I feel that made about 50% of the difference along with the players dedication to this season no matter where they are. It speaks volumes about Gibbs that these notorious quitters are still right behind him. I've never questioned Gibbs as a leader of men, just a playcaller.

[QUOTE=Daseal]Tell me again why we didn't use them earlier? As I said in another thread go 4 WRs, spread out the D and do some run and pass plays out of that. It worked well. That's just saying playcalling changed, much for the better. I enjoyed it.

Playcalling has CHANGED. The plays have changed slightly, but more importantly the order they were called in. Some of the games I watched the calls were uninspired. Watching us run it up the middle three times to no avail is painfull. Gibbs had me guessing what he was doing with the ball. I couldn't have asked for better play-calling than we had last week. I loved seeing a balance, I loved seeing Portis run like he's built to, I loved to see virtually mistake free football. We played a great game, and like matty I was extremely pleased in what I was seeing.

That being said, I hope this can stay constant. I've seen us zone block, play great, then abandon it. I saw a lot more motion and personel groupings than I normally did, and I would like to see Jacobs get a real shot this week, I think he can really bring the speed we're lacking with Coles injury.

That being said, mistakes were cut down tremendously. WRs made the catches, Cooley played amazing, and the O line really set up some nasty blocks. It was a great game, but I think it's silly to say play-calling hasn't changed at all. It has, and I feel that made about 50% of the difference along with the players dedication to this season no matter where they are. It speaks volumes about Gibbs that these notorious quitters are still right behind him. I've never questioned Gibbs as a leader of men, just a playcaller.[/QUOTE]

We have used more than two wide receiver sets. However, when the passing game is not working, the only thing the defense has to do is shut down the running game, and so they did that by putting 8 and 9 guys up on the line to limit the running game. Therefore, putting in a 4 wide receiver set is useless unless the receivers are willing to catch the ball.

The play calling hasn't changed. The only reason why it appears that way is because players executed much better than previously. Even a blind person could see that the receivers' performance was like night and day compared to earlier performances. When the receivers are not catching the ball, Gibbs has to try to go to more of a running game. Unfortunately, when the run game is being stuffed....then you're up the creek!

So, other teams will leave 1-2 receivers wide open? Doubt it.

[QUOTE=Daseal]So, other teams will leave 1-2 receivers wide open? Doubt it.[/QUOTE]


I'm not sure you know what your getting at, but my point is quite simple. We executed extremely well yesterday, which means that opens the playbook wide open for us. With successful execution = better playcalling. When a team isn't executing, the playcalling is limited.

Skinsguy, that's true. However, your players get in a funk when you don't trust them. If they went 4 wide more often then we could have spread the D out and let Portis run, and just a few decent completions, which aren't out of Ramsey's range but simply WERENT CALLED could have been able to make the safeties honest. A key game was the Philly game, we could have stretched them downfield some but we went downfield very few times. I hope to see a change this week.

[quote]8 and 9 guys up on the line to limit the running game. Therefore, putting in a 4 wide receiver set is useless unless the receivers are willing to catch the ball.[/quote]
If they put 8 guys in the box, that means you have three guys left for coverage so someone has to respect that #4 receiver. If nothing else that opens it up for Portis. If this wasn't Gibbs, would you be trying to make the same argument?

speaking of congratulating Joe Gibbs, our friend Len Pastabelly was nice enough to mention good ol Gibbie (we all know Zackmills :Smoker: was really Pasquarelli) on his column today...

"Congratulations, and, yeah, I'm being sarcastic, to the Redskins for finally scoring more than 18 (points). Maybe (Joe) Gibbs will realize that he should have gone to (quarterback Patrick) Ramsey a lot earlier in the season, huh?"


Sad to say but in a way he's right about going with Ramsey earlier...

Certainly its true that if we could have went 4 wide and got some decent completed passes downfield it would keep the defense honest. HOWEVER, if the receivers are not catching the ball, then its no sense in going with something that obviously isn't working. It worked yesterday because we EXECUTED!!! Its pretty much plain and simple.

I think you're trying to sway the argument way out in left field or either trying to argue for the sake of argument. Its obvious (for anybody who actually has been watching the games) that defenses were moving up more guys to stop the run because they didn't respect our pass. When we did pass...the receivers dropped the ball. IF our receivers had been consistant all along, then anything would have worked for us because defenses would have to shutdown a well balanced offense....example YESTERDAY.

Yeah, I kind of figured you'd turn this into a Gibbs worshipping argument. Regardless of who the coach is, I don't care if its you coaching, without execution, playcalling doesn't work..and the better the execution, the better and easier the playcalling seems....the deeper you can go into your playbook. If you only have 50% and less of your offense working, going with pass plays when passing is the weak point is stupid.

[QUOTE=Redskins_P]speaking of congratulating Joe Gibbs, our friend Len Pastabelly was nice enough to mention good ol Gibbie (we all know Zackmills :Smoker: was really Pasquarelli) on his column today...

"Congratulations, and, yeah, I'm being sarcastic, to the Redskins for finally scoring more than 18 (points). Maybe (Joe) Gibbs will realize that he should have gone to (quarterback Patrick) Ramsey a lot earlier in the season, huh?"


Sad to say but in a way he's right about going with Ramsey earlier...[/QUOTE]

That was in Lenny P's article but that wasn't his line. He was referring to "Comments on the weekend's games from an AFC personnel director, an AFC pro scout and a retired coach"

First of all, we often haven't given a 4WR set a chance, meaning we have no idea if it would work. It's on Gibbs if the receivers aren't catching it to put a McCants or a Jacobs in to cause a spark. Light a fire under Gardner and Coles. Gibbs also hasn't given them a ton of chances to go downfield and try for the ball. I'm not saying go for the homerun, but a 7-14 yard pass can really help. Especially if it's over the middle we know Ramsey can hit that fairly consistantly, because he did it last year. The fact is the safeties aren't going anywhere when we throw 20 screen passes in one game.

I love how everyone said OH PLAYCALLING IS AWFUL just weeks ago, yet I'm the only person brave enough to stand by my statement there. Last week, playcalling was great, I've admitted that and that's the reason for this thread. However, before that I feel most of the blame went on Gibbs. Why do you blame Spurrier for the line not blocking? I mean, had they executed Ramsey would have had plenty of time? Right? Oh? That argument doesn't make sense? Hrm. Why not?

Multiple WR sets were instrumental in our win over the Giants, and I feel they could have helped us win in previous weeks. I don't want it every down, I want a nice balance, 8 out of 10 balls our WRs were catching, so I don't buy that whole they couldn't catch a cold type attitude. Rod dropped some easy ones, but he's made the most spectacular and some clutch catches on our team.

[QUOTE=Daseal]Multiple WR sets were instrumental in our win over the Giants, and I feel they could have helped us win in previous weeks. I don't want it every down, I want a nice balance, 8 out of 10 balls our WRs were catching, so I don't buy that whole they couldn't catch a cold type attitude. Rod dropped some easy ones, but he's made the most spectacular and some clutch catches on our team.[/QUOTE]

Instrumental in our win was a quarterback who could throw the ball 10 yards down the field faster then if it had been sent by the post office.

[QUOTE=smootsmack]That was in Lenny P's article but that wasn't his line. He was referring to "Comments on the weekend's games from an AFC personnel director, an AFC pro scout and a retired coach"[/QUOTE]


Oh my bad.....still sounds like something he would say though..

[QUOTE=Daseal]I love how everyone said OH PLAYCALLING IS AWFUL just weeks ago, yet I'm the only person brave enough to stand by my statement there. Last week, playcalling was great, I've admitted that and that's the reason for this thread. However, before that I feel most of the blame went on Gibbs. Why do you blame Spurrier for the line not blocking? I mean, had they executed Ramsey would have had plenty of time? Right? Oh? That argument doesn't make sense? Hrm. Why not?

Multiple WR sets were instrumental in our win over the Giants, and I feel they could have helped us win in previous weeks. I don't want it every down, I want a nice balance, 8 out of 10 balls our WRs were catching, so I don't buy that whole they couldn't catch a cold type attitude. Rod dropped some easy ones, but he's made the most spectacular and some clutch catches on our team.[/QUOTE]


Well, I for one never said that the play calling in recent weeks was awful, I actually defended the playcalling, so that argument doesn't apply. If you stick by your opinion that the play calling has been bad then that is your perogative. Would've, could've, should've's about last season doesn't mean a hill of beans for this season. Plain and simple, Steve Spurrier couldn't cut it in the NFL and he quit. He admitted he wasn't ready for the NFL and doesn't want to come back. His system failed. HOWEVER, I did back Steve Spurrier and his offense while he was in Washington. I kept positive and felt at the time that maybe his system wasn't THAT bad...we just needed to change a couple things...add tight ends for pass protection for one thing. BUT, he wasn't willing to see it through and thereby conceding that his system doesn't work in the NFL.

I back Joe Gibbs and what he's doing for this team completely, because he's coached at this level and has been successful at this level before. I back him because of his dedication to the team, the respect that the players have given him and the respect he's given back to the players. His team believes in him and have bought into Gibbs' philosophy and its starting to payoff.

We haven't been explosive or powerful on offense because we've had to see what works and what doesn't. We have had to work through inconsistancy, injuries, and a tough schedule. The plays that were in the Giants game are plays that we have seen before. The only difference is, the passing was accurate and the receivers were making the catches. In recent weeks we have seen the development of Ladell Betts into a pretty good running back. We're just now finding out who can make the plays and who's out there for the paycheck.

I dont' agree with everything Gibbs has done this season. I felt we needed to go with Patrick Ramsey earlier in the season...however at least we know that if Ramsey gets into a slump or has a couple bad games, he's not going to get yanked!

Whether you agree with this or not really doesn't matter much to me, but this system has developed slower than expected and we've had some setbacks...BUT it is starting to develop and we're starting to see how this offense can be successful when the parts execute as expected. With this fact, THEN we can mix in more deep threat plays. Believe or not, Gibbs pays attention to every detail and there are reasons why we see some plays more than others...but believe or not, this is the NFL this isn't Madden football for the playstation.

I guess Bellicheck's system doesn't work in the NFL either? I mean, he did worse in Cleveland than Spurrier did in Washington. Right? I think it's impossible to say if someone's system works or not without giving them proper time to implement it. I was equally mad with Spurrier at times last year as I am now, but like I've said all along every coach gets 3 years in my book. Does this mean I'm not allowed to criticize them for three years? Don't think so. Joe Gibbs had called the most conservative and timid games I think I have ever seen in the NFL and didn't have the balls to send it downfield at all. You cannot tell me that his playcalling before recent was timid and practically horrible.

If you look at my posts you'll see that I've said multiple times I think he'll turn it around. Not just in this thread but multiple others. You can also find me saying that it doesn't matter what I say about him because he's his own toughest critic. There's no doubt that the players respect him, but as Ive said before I haven't ever questioned that aspect of Joe GIbbs.

We've had to see what works and what doesn't eh? Did it take anyone on this board 8 weeks to realize Brunell doesn't work? Once we zoneblocked and started breaking off gains of 6-8 yards seemingly every play against a good front 4 in the Lions game then abandonned it next game fall in that category? Does abandoning the pass ever going to improve it? Goal line playcalling where we run three times up the middle and kick a field goal is not good playcalling. Sorry. We don't seem to have the ability to run it right up the gut in the redzone, we should try once, but never three times. We have seen many of the plays in the Giants game, the important thing about playcalling is the order they come in. Michael Wilbon, one of my favorite sports writter, has spent time in locker rooms. He said early in the season other teams knew what Joe Gibbs was doing, that's NOT good playcalling. Ladell Betts has always been a good runner, he's just gotten injured after week two. I still think he's going to be traded for a late round pick, but that's just my guess.

I agree with the last two paragraphs except I believe that we need to mix deep threat plays in even when we aren't completing them. At least it will make the coordinator think that only one of those could cause some real damage. One deep ball being caught is all it would take. It's not like Portis can run effectively with 9 guys in the box anyhow.

Skinsguy, an added bonus. You've been somewhat rude this entire time and completely unrelenting to concede your point at all. I started this thread saying that Joe Gibbs did a great job this week, and I admitted that he did an amazing job and said hope he can keep it up. You keep referring to Madden and other things. No one on this board is a coach, including you. Madden will probably be the closest anyone comes. As a fan, I have the right and ability to say what I feel the problem with the team is. If you take that away from fans all the Monday morning talk gets really old. Now, I'm not alone in my criticism of Gibbs' playcalling. The balance and timing of his plays this week were what won the game, not the plays themselves. I feel that helped, but he had balance which he's kind of avoided. He said we had to abandon the run getting down by 10 points in the first half once. 10 points is not exactly a lot of points. Even Greg Williams has shown frustration on the sidelines with the way Gibbs has managed a game. I guess he's too used to playing his madden and doesn't know football from his ass in the wall. Also, Portis and Ramsey talked to Gibbs about putting in more passing plays, they said it would help both of them be more successfull. That has to say something too.

JoeRedskin: That was the 3rd week we had that QB. =p

This is my last post on this topic. It was meant to be a congratulations post and me showing some optimism for Joe Gibbs, but you've ruined that.

[QUOTE=Daseal]No one on this board is a coach.[/QUOTE]

Actually back in the day I used to coach kids in hockey and NY_Skinsfan coaches kids in soccer. :D


[QUOTE=Daseal]Also, Portis and Ramsey talked to Gibbs about putting in more passing plays, they said it would help both of them be more successfull. That has to say something too.[/QUOTE]

Possibly, but according to today's Washington Post: "The Redskins (4-8) are 4-0 when Portis gets 100 yards or more; they are undefeated when running plays outnumber passing plays"

[QUOTE=Daseal]
Skinsguy, an added bonus. You've been somewhat rude this entire time and completely unrelenting to concede your point at all.[/QUOTE]


Thanks I'll take that as a compliment!

And as an added bonus for you...don't talk about not being able to provide your point of view while asking someone to concede theirs. Of course I'm going to be unrelenting on my point of view. I happen to think I'm absolutely right! I could be, I may not be...and you've been just as guilty. But ya know, I don't care. I'm sure you'll have people who agree with you (well alot of the youngins') I'm sure I might have at least one to agree with me....and if they don't, that's okay to! But, instead of wasting time being critical of the team, I'm going to just sit back and enjoy having the opportunity to watch them on television win or lose.

Speaking of predictable playcalling...

[url]http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/story/259867p-222564c.html[/url]

[QUOTE]With the Giants sliding into oblivion for the second straight season, it sure looks like (Offensive Coordinator John) Hufnagel is being set up as the first scapegoat of the season. Tight end Jeremy Shockey thinks his red-zone play calling is predictable. Barber called his offensive scheme "routine." Amani Toomer said it sure seemed like the Redskins defense knew what was coming on Sunday. Several other offensive players agree.[/QUOTE]

More on Gibbs' Playcalling
 

From NFL.com's Tuesday Morning Quarterback: [url]http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/7973142[/url]

[QUOTE]To start his return season, Professor Dumbledore (Joe Gibbs) had the Redskins run the same plays as in the team's 1980s golden years. In the opener against City of Tampa, rushing plays involved lots of pulls and traps; the old counter-deuce and counter-trey, where two or three offside linemen pulled in unison, resurfaced. In the opener, Clinton Portis ran for 148 yards and Washington won. But then the Skins lost and Portis looked blah in Week 2. The Redskins abandoned their old golden-days plays and went to the sort of quick cut-blocks that Portis ran behind at Denver. Week in, week out, the whole team has looked blah using rushing actions that aren't the favorites of Gibbs and his braintrust. Sunday, the Redskins returned to their old system -- lots of wide plays with line pulls, including the counter-trey, and Portis again ran for 148 yards in a Washington win. Coach Gibbs, just use your old system! Nobody could stop it 20 years ago, and rest assured, players haven't gotten any smarter since then. [/QUOTE]