The only two Good Decisions Jim Zorn Made vs St. Louis

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Going it for it was kind of stupid cause a fg could've won the game. I think you've gotta kick it there. But fine, if you want to go for it then have some damn variety in your run game. Everyone knew where the ball was going. I honestly think we need to try the wildcat w/ Betts and Portis. We need to do something, anything at this point to try and score more points.

really a fg there would have won the game. so did we lose because we didn't kick the fg?

[budw38]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

really a fg there would have won the game. so did we lose because we didn't kick the fg?

LOL , nice CRR . I just heard the NFL is considering giving the Rams a (W) and the Skins a (L) , because a fg ,,,, " would " have won the game . The only thing I would have done different had I been Zorn , I would have told the guys , " we are going for it " , if we fail , you are to report to Redskins Park @ 6 am for your wind sprints . We won the game 1-1 -0 , even an ugly win is a win

[SmootSmack]

I found this interesting.

Zorn's job security questioned on his radio show - Redskins 360 - Washington Times

(On second fourth-down call late in game): "I had three timeouts so I wanted to use one there and take a breath and think about the situation. We felt like we could get the first down and picked out what I felt was the best play, running right behind Chris Samuels. What happened on the line of scrimmage, our offensive line decided to block it out a little more instead of more downhill and it strung the play out. It was a very frustrating play to watch because had we blocked it differently – and it’s their choice – it might have been a different outcome. If I was to look back on that call, I would call the same play."

And then there's this.

Redskins Insider - What I Think: The Zorn Installment

Here's what happened: On fourth and less than one at the 2-yard line late in the fourth quarter, Zorn called a run to the left side. Portis lost two yards, stirring boos in the crowd, and the Rams took over at the 4-yard line trailing, 9-7, with 1 minute 55 seconds remaining in the game.

After four passes fell incomplete, the Redskins regained the ball and ran out the clock for their first victory. Again, though, Zorn's play and Campbell's decision to stick with the call despite the Rams having overloaded that side on defense, appeared to be another example of Zorn's lack of trust in Campbell in the red zone.

Here's what I think: I spoke with several people in the organization about this, because I was perplexed about the decision to stick with that play when I noticed what the Rams were doing defensively.

On that play, Zorn instructed Campbell to run the play he called, several sources said. Despite what some people believe, Campbell does have the authority to change plays, even in the red zone, and he does at times. The deep pass down the right sideline to Malcolm Kelly to open the game stemmed from a call Campbell adjusted at the line of scrimmage.

But there are times Zorn wants to run the play he calls -- and that was one such occasion. Now, here's the rest of the story: the blocking assignments were messed up on the play. Center Casey Rabach made the correct call based on what the Redskins practiced that week, sources said, but someone else made an incorrect call after Rabach. The result was that the play was stretched, which was not Zorn's intention.

So who messed up? Upon quick glance it looks like both Dockery and Davis could have been the culprits

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

And then there's this.

Redskins Insider - What I Think: The Zorn Installment

This is the biggest problem I have in the article, "Several people have told me Snyder was prepared to fire Zorn if the Redskins had lost to the Philadelphia Eagles in Week 16 at FedEx last season. They won."

If this is true, then LDS shoulders a significant portion of blame here. This is absurd! If I'm Zorn, I'm saying F it. I'm opening up the offense and letting the players either sink-or-swim. If I'm potentially getting axed, I'm going down swinging, while also auditioning for an OC job somewhere else.

I hope this is BS, because if not, Snyder learned nothing from Gibbs and my many defenses of Snyder & the FO have been in vain.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

This is the biggest problem I have in the article, "Several people have told me Snyder was prepared to fire Zorn if the Redskins had lost to the Philadelphia Eagles in Week 16 at FedEx last season. They won."

If this is true, then LDS shoulders a significant portion of blame here. This is absurd! If I'm Zorn, I'm saying F it. I'm opening up the offense and letting the players either sink-or-swim. If I'm potentially getting axed, I'm going down swinging, while also auditioning for an OC job somewhere else.

I hope this is BS, because if not, Snyder learned nothing from Gibbs and my many defenses of Snyder & the FO have been in vain.

What's the issue here? That Snyder would have fired Zorn at the end of the year had they lost to the Eagles?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

What's the issue here? That Snyder would have fired Zorn at the end of the year had they lost to the Eagles?

Yes. I don't think you fire Zorn based on the outcome of one game, that's "rediculous". If you've seen enough and your football people, (hopefully not just Cerrato) are saying this guys not gonna cut it, a W or L in a meaningless game shouldn't make the difference.

That being said, what a horrible message this sends to coaches around the league. DS already bagged Shotty for Spurrier (and we saw how that worked out). Everyone knew he worshipped Gibbs and wouldn't fire him if he was 0-16 in consecutive years. But Gibbs aside, the buzz would be that he's back to the coaching carousel. Less than 12 months prior to the Eagles game Snyder & Cerrato were saying Zorn was going to be a "great coach in this league". Now after a great start and then some OL injuries tank the second half of the season, you're ready to can the guy. This either says the Skins FO has absolutely ZERO football knowledge and should've never hired Zorn or they're just as fickle as a majority of "die hard Skins fans". Either way, it's not a way to run a successful franchise.

For the record, my opinion is Zorn should have at least all of this year before a determination is made on his status in the off-season (or right after the last game if the team completely collapses and he's a primary culprit).

We are going into the third game of the season 1-1, which is exactly where most expected us to be.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Yes. I don't think you fire Zorn based on the outcome of one game, that's "rediculous". If you've seen enough and your football people, (hopefully not just Cerrato) are saying this guys not gonna cut it, a W or L in a meaningless game shouldn't make the difference.

That being said, what a horrible message this sends to coaches around the league. DS already bagged Shotty for Spurrier (and we saw how that worked out). Everyone knew he worshipped Gibbs and wouldn't fire him if he was 0-16 in consecutive years. But Gibbs aside, the buzz would be that he's back to the coaching carousel. Less than 12 months prior to the Eagles game Snyder & Cerrato were saying Zorn was going to be a "great coach in this league". Now after a great start and then some OL injuries tank the second half of the season, you're ready to can the guy. This either says the Skins FO has absolutely ZERO football knowledge and should've never hired Zorn or they're just as fickle as a majority of "die hard Skins fans". Either way, it's not a way to run a successful franchise.

For the record, my opinion is Zorn should have at least all of this year before a determination is made on his status in the off-season (or right after the last game if the team completely collapses and he's a primary culprit).

We are going into the third game of the season 1-1, which is exactly where most expected us to be.

Great post Sammy! Can anyone imagine Pittsburgh acting this way? Why can't we be like Pitt and some of the other successful franchises? Here's your answer. I agree, Zorn should be given the whole year and to not do so would just show that DS is just as much a knee-jerk owner as he was when he first bought this team. I can't believe we even talk about this after the 2nd game of the season and a 1-1 record. Would he be fired because we lost to the Giants or because the victory over the Rams wasn't pretty enough? There is a saying, don't quit before the miracle happens, it seems like we always do. I hope we have a big win in Detroit and can put it to rest for awhile at least.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Yes. I don't think you fire Zorn based on the outcome of one game, that's "rediculous". If you've seen enough and your football people, (hopefully not just Cerrato) are saying this guys not gonna cut it, a W or L in a meaningless game shouldn't make the difference.

That being said, what a horrible message this sends to coaches around the league. DS already bagged Shotty for Spurrier (and we saw how that worked out). Everyone knew he worshipped Gibbs and wouldn't fire him if he was 0-16 in consecutive years. But Gibbs aside, the buzz would be that he's back to the coaching carousel. Less than 12 months prior to the Eagles game Snyder & Cerrato were saying Zorn was going to be a "great coach in this league". Now after a great start and then some OL injuries tank the second half of the season, you're ready to can the guy. This either says the Skins FO has absolutely ZERO football knowledge and should've never hired Zorn or they're just as fickle as a majority of "die hard Skins fans". Either way, it's not a way to run a successful franchise.

For the record, my opinion is Zorn should have at least all of this year before a determination is made on his status in the off-season (or right after the last game if the team completely collapses and he's a primary culprit).

We are going into the third game of the season 1-1, which is exactly where most expected us to be.

Got it. Don't think it was necessarily based on one game, that just would have been the turning point. I'll just repost what I posted last year prior to the Eagles game (save myself the time of typing it over)

http://www.thewarpath.net/512906-post303.html

http://www.thewarpath.net/509904-post25.html (seeing Cowher happening a bit more now though)

http://www.thewarpath.net/509951-post49.html (I believe this remains an issue)

http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-l...tml#post509960

What does that all mean? He shouldn't have been hired as the head coach in the first place, in my opinion, but he was and I'd like to see him be successful as our head coach. But there were serious locker room problems last year. I've been a bit out of the loop so far this season so I don't know if much has improved. But, as I mentioned in my smack down, as much as I would hate another change if a change is what is needed (hopefully not until the end of the year) then I say we just make it. Why prolong the inevitable?

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

And then there's this.

Redskins Insider - What I Think: The Zorn Installment

The bit about Danny Smith having to physically stop Z from calling a timeout is just laughable, and Z's excuse is even worse. His view of the 25 second clock was obscured by a pile of players?? Please.

I agree with SS33. Let it all hang out. Just say "eff it" Zorn. Let 'er rip so to speak. Our defense is damn good, and they've proven it time and again. You've got to average more than 16 points a game to keep your job, and the current playcalling isn't going to get us there offensively.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by GMScud

The bit about Danny Smith having to physically stop Z from calling a timeout is just laughable, and Z's excuse is even worse. His view of the 25 second clock was obscured by a pile of players?? Please.

I agree with SS33. Let it all hang out. Just say "eff it" Zorn. Let 'er rip so to speak. Our defense is damn good, and they've proven it time and again. You've got to average more than 16 points a game to keep your job, and the current playcalling isn't going to get us there offensively.

Here's something else that just popped into my head. Who's up in the box on the headset with Zorn? Why is the Special Teams coach needing to tell Zorn to not call the TO. One of the guys up top should've been in his ear way before Smith had to restrain him. Still his mistake, but help from the eye-in-the-sky never hurt.

[Lotus]

Funny. We won the game yet the discussion on every thread is about Zorn's getting fired.

[44Deezel]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Funny. We won the game yet the discussion on every thread is about Zorn's getting fired.

Why is that funny? He was brought here to fix an Offense that was bad and now it's worse. He's had 18 games and his performance is trending down... getting worse each game. Plus, there were reports that Snyder would have fired Zorn if he could have traded for Cutler. On top of that, we're dealing with an owner who fired a coach mid-way through the season with a winning record. We may have won, but style points matter at this point. If it's feasible that he would have been fired for losing to the Rams, it's not a stretch to think he should be fired for only beating them by a score of 9-7.