Execution Sucks!
 

Figured I'd try my best to even out the Joe Gibbs witch hunt threads. The reason why we're 3-7 right now is for many reasons and to say it's sloely Joe Gibbs is just completely wrong. We've had injuries...our top players out for most if not all the season; Brunell has been a dissappointment...our receivers have been inconsistant...execution overall has not been consistant. Yes Joe Gibbs play calling hasn't been golden all the time...ya know this is his first season back in 12 years...what do you expect? He's working out the kinks. Its' trial and error for him right now and some of the errors make him look pathetic, while some of the positives make him look like a genius.

Its not one thing that has made us 3-7, it's many things, but its things that can be corrected by next season...Gibbs said he's going to find out who are Redskins players and who are not...Maybe he thought all along of this season being a rebuilding season. Maybe it's possible that the play calling right now is merely just an audtion?? Whatever it is, Gibbs isn't the problem.

#1 Gibbs was the guy who went after Brunell so hard. Doesn't he share in the blame for that?

#2 Most of our injuries have affected our defense and our defense is ranked #2 whereas our offense is ranked #31 (in scoring).

#3 Jon Jansen was the only starter out on offense until today (when Thomas got hurt).

#4 If the players aren't executing, as head coach, doesn't Gibbs get some of the blame for that?

#5 Gibbs isn't the sole reason for our record, but he's the head coach. He picked his staff, he chose our roster (i.e. Brunell), and he coaches the players. To absolve him of blame is just wrong.

LOL so much for that

1 post and we're back on pushing the blame on Gibbs.

To absolve blame Gibbs of blame is wrong, I agree. To place the blame soley on him is wong as well. Theres gotta be some middle ground here. Maybe were not as patient as we are telling others (media) to be. Gibbs is obviously struggling finding a offense. I think he just has to relize that in todays NFL, we cant just play everything safe. We have to gamble, which will pay off and hurt us at the same time. In some situations, it will be the difference for a win, in others a loss. We cant play like we did today ( playcalling) and expect to win. All of the blame isnt on him, and people would be crazy to say it is, but some of it absolutley falls on him.

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]LOL so much for that

1 post and we're back on pushing the blame on Gibbs.[/QUOTE]

Why would we blame Gibbs? It's not like he's the head coach or anything. :rolleyes:

PS-You guys jumped on me in my thread so it was only fair for me to come into yours. :food-smil

Gibbs picks his players yet there is only one name mentioned..nobody has mentioned Portis, Sean Taylor, Griffin, Springs....new players that have been positive for us. Ramsey sucked in the preseason and Brunell played better...it came down to Brunell not doing his job in the regular season...that falls on Brunell....again EXECUTION. If the players aren't executing, how can you blame the coach? Why is it Gibbs' fault that Ramsey over throws a wide open Coles down the field?

Certainly Gibbs isn't the sole reason and yeah he's made some mistakes and some bad play calling and he'll tell you that himself. Yet, it gets rather unbelieveable when we blame the coaches on execution...they are not the ones playing on the field.

ugh how many times do I have to say Gibbs deserves some criticism?

I'd just like to see a more even argument here. Seems like we're piling on Gibbs and overlooking what the players are doing, or not doing to be more specific.

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]ugh how many times do I have to say Gibbs deserves some criticism?

I'd just like to see a more even argument here. Seems like we're piling on Gibbs and overlooking what the players are doing, or not doing to be more specific.[/QUOTE]

Matty, why can't you admit that Gibbs deserves some of the criticism. :lol:

I completely agree with your assessment ramseyfan. I would also add that its not just that the play calling has been at times spotty, but it was today completely inexplicable. i think it was ambrose bierce who said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, and that's my attitude towards Gibbs' stubborn playcalling. Playaction passes on first down were sitting there for us to take, especially early, and we kept just plugging Portis up the middle, as if he's Jerome Bettis.

And what hurts me most is the lack of improvement on offense. I thought ramsey did well and made alot of throws that brunell certainly would not have, but there is a larger problem in gameplanning that persists. Also, someone needs to tell Gibbs that third and three is not a running down in today's NFL. How many times this year have we been stuffed in that situation.

Gibbs started 0-5 his first year but rapidly improved after that. We started 1-4, and yet seem no better offensively then we were against Tampa Bay. For me the sparkle of those three past Lombardi trophies has faded, and my attitude is now show me. show me you can move the ball. show me you can adjust your gameplan to what the defense gives you. show me you understand the nuances of todays game.

I'm not trying to lead any witchhunt. I'm just being objective.

He has said that...

[QUOTE=skinsguy]He has said that...[/QUOTE]

I was joking.

[QUOTE=djnemo65]
Gibbs started 0-5 his first year but rapidly improved after that. We started 1-4, and yet seem no better offensively then we were against Tampa Bay.
I'm not trying to lead any witchhunt. I'm just being objective.[/QUOTE]

Its a fair assessment..we haven't hit a hot streak in this season like that season and may not....however look at the players he had that year...There are no Art Monks or John Riggins on this team.

Seems like people's expectations were maybe a bit too high today, especially considering the QB change we were all desperately calling for.

Remember that before this week Ramsey saw very little time with the 1st unit. As a result, the playcalling was scaled back today to keep things easy for him.

Did anyone really think we were going to come out guns blazin with Ramsey?

Yes the playcalling was very conservative, but we've seen what happens when Ramsey takes more chances. I thought the gameplan was set up to keep Ramsey out of bad situations, build up his confidence and let him make a big play or two.

Unfortunately with a conservative, scaled back attack like we saw today, there's a very small margin for error. And when you have numerous penalties and mental mistakes, that's going to really put a dent in that conservative gameplan.

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]ugh how many times do I have to say Gibbs deserves some criticism?

I'd just like to see a more even argument here. Seems like we're piling on Gibbs and overlooking what the players are doing, or not doing to be more specific.[/QUOTE]

I think we owe Gibbs the same level of scrutiny we gave Spurrier, and we excoriated him for these same things the last two years. Now that its Gibbs it doesn't make sense to suddenly blame the players.

We all agree that the players, at least on paper, are good. so who do you blame when good playes don't perform?

I agree that Gibbs kept it pretty conservative to keep Ramsey's confidence up. That was a good move. I just didn't expect to see him call plays THAT conservative.

[QUOTE=skinsguy]Its a fair assessment..we haven't hit a hot streak in this season like that season and may not....however look at the players he had that year...There are no Art Monks or John Riggins on this team.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, but we have Portis and Coles. Whethere they are as good as riggins and monk is debatable, but i think improvement from week to week is a reasonable expectation.

[QUOTE=skinsguy]Its a fair assessment..we haven't hit a hot streak in this season like that season and may not....however look at the players he had that year...There are no Art Monks or John Riggins on this team.[/QUOTE]

Portis, Coles, Gardner, Samuels, etc. they're junk.

Come on. We've got one of the best rosters in the league.

Arrrrrgghhhh, so Gibbs' play calling was a good move for the most part? Dagonnit RF you are confusing person to figure out! :laughing2

Matty just echoed pretty much what I said on the *cough cough* "Hey Joe Gibbs...New Playbook" in that Gibbs kept the play calling conservative to save Ramsey's neck and hopefully his confidence while giving him a few options to go long. True, the short passes are not as exciting, but hey the more of those Ramsey completes the more confidence he builds and the more comfortable he gets. I think it was a pretty good move. :coach:

[QUOTE=Ramseyfan]Portis, Coles, Gardner, Samuels, etc. they're junk.

Come on. We've got one of the best rosters in the league.[/QUOTE]

Then they need to start executing as such. How many drops have we seen from these receivers this year? I think Portis IS our offense, but even he has dropped many passes. Samuels has been the only consistant I've noticed.

Everyone seems to have a different take on why the offense stinks - mental mistakes, stupid penalties, poor execution, bad playcalling, too conservative.

The one constant in all of this is the coach and his staff. They decided who they wanted on the team (e.g. Brunell), they evaluated the talent and supposedly designed the offense around that talent, they decide who will start, they call the plays . . .

It's also very true that they aren't the ones on the field executing the plays.

But when things are as wrong as they are now with our offense, the coaches have to take a great deal of the blame. When any organization is failing (as our offense is), the responsibility must rest squarely with the top of the organization. This is true no matter what you do for a living.

Top management makes decision and, if those decision prove to be wrong, they must redirect their thinking and change what they are doing. To keep repeating what is obviously not working will only result in more of the same.

For his sake, as well as for the sake of all of us Skins fans, I hope and pray that Coach Gibbs has the foresight and courage to make the major changes in offensive philosophy that I feel are necessary if we are to be successful.

Skinsguy,

I never said that Gibbs shouldn't have been conservative. I said I never expected it to be THAT conservative. It's a matter of degrees.

He gave Ramsey plays to go downfield...but he has to hit those guys and those guys have to get open downfield on a consistant basis too. I don't really think the play calling was overly conservative and I think it will become less conservative each week to bring Ramsey along slowly and to keep his confidence up. If Ramsey is going to be our guy, then he needs to be playing top notch football by the end of this season and take that into next year.

[QUOTE=skinsguy]Then they need to start executing as such. How many drops have we seen from these receivers this year? I think Portis IS our offense, but even he has dropped many passes. Samuels has been the only consistant I've noticed.[/QUOTE]

Coles has one BAD game. I'm not sure if you ever knew this, but he played with a dislocated finger after getting whacked by Roy Williams. If you think Coles is inconsistent then your standards are WAY too high.

Portis had one dropped pass tonight. Again, if that is really bad, I think your standards are too high.

Gardner is the only guy on the team who had too many drops. Nevertheless, Ramsey completed something like 60+% of his passes so its not like the recievers were dropping everything coming their way.

[QUOTE=skinsguy]He gave Ramsey plays to go downfield...but he has to hit those guys and those guys have to get open downfield on a consistant basis too. I don't really think the play calling was overly conservative and I think it will become less conservative each week to bring Ramsey along slowly and to keep his confidence up. If Ramsey is going to be our guy, then he needs to be playing top notch football by the end of this season and take that into next year.[/QUOTE]

Skinsguy,

Are you serious when you say the playcalling wasn't overly conservative? Is there anyone who will second that opinion?

I don't really care if no one seconds that opinion..that is my opinion. The conservative play calling got us down the field in the first half just fine and kept the Eagles' O off the field. Wouldn't you want the Eagles' O off the field as much as possible?

I did want the Eagles O off the field, but I'd also like a side of points to go along with that dish.

[QUOTE]but there is a larger problem in gameplanning that persists. Also, someone needs to tell Gibbs that third and three is not a running down in today's NFL. How many times this year have we been stuffed in that situation.[/QUOTE]

3rd and 3, or 4th and 3 inches! :frusty: :laughing2

[QUOTE=Ramseyfan]I did want the Eagles O off the field, but I'd also like a side of points to go along with that dish.[/QUOTE]


Sure we all do, and when Portis starts ripping off 60+ yard runs on a consistant bases and when Ramsey starts throwing accurate passes downfield on a consistant bases and when the receivers catch the ball on a consistant bases then you'll have a side of points to go along with your dish.

Ramsey completed what 63% of his passes?

Maybe Portis isn't ripping off 60+ yards because: (1) no one rips off 60+ yards on a consistent basis, (2) Gibbs' offense is so predictable and has no deep threat that Portis is getting stuffed on every run.

Our recieving corps is one of the best in the league.

[QUOTE=Ramseyfan]Ramsey completed what 63% of his passes?

(2) Gibbs' offense is so predictable and has no deep threat that Portis is getting stuffed on every run.

Our recieving corps is one of the best in the league.[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry, but I don't think our receiving corps is nearly the best in the league. They haven't played like it this year. They have been inconsistant. They have made some good plays, but they've dropped alot of passes.

Why do you think Ramsey completed 63% of his passes? The majority of those passes were short passes.

We might not have the best WR corps in the league, but please man, we are better then the Bills...., Arizona, Cincy, and the Giants.....those teams look like freaking offensive machines compared to us....

Is this thread about the offenses execution? Because if it is im in favor of it! :laughing2

John Mckay you had to love him!

[QUOTE=offiss]Is this thread about the offenses execution? Because if it is im in favor of it! :laughing2

John Mckay you had to love him![/QUOTE]

LOL. that's great

[quote=skinsguy]I don't really care if no one seconds that opinion..that is my opinion. The conservative play calling got us down the field in the first half just fine and kept the Eagles' O off the field. Wouldn't you want the Eagles' O off the field as much as possible?[/quote]

actually iggles penalties kept that drive alive ;)

seriously, if you think players need to play perfect games and never drop balls ever, than its time for a reality check... no RB consistantly hits 60+ yarders... the better speed backs might get 5-6 of those in a season... but we have no deep threat to get portis past the line and into open field to work.

Since we have nothing to lose, gibbs should seriously experiment, try deep passing, try shotgun, try 5 WR sets, try anything he can so we don't suck so horribly next year...

[QUOTE=Ramseyfan]Portis, Coles, Gardner, Samuels, etc. they're junk.

Come on. We've got one of the best rosters in the league.[/QUOTE

I wouldn't say best. More like overpaid.....

gortiz:

When Arizona has both Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin on the active roster, their WR corps is much better than the Skins. Boldin is better than ANYONE on the Skins' roster and Fitzgerald is certainly as good as Coles and maybe better.


Would anyone trade the Skins' WRs even-up for the ones on the Colts? If the Skins are so talented, someone might actually think that they'd rather keep the Skins' contingent. That would be a BAD move. Same with the Rams, and the Vikings and the Eagles and the Seahawks and the Patriots and the Chiefs - - and maybe even a few others.


Folks:

Is is POSSIBLE that the game plan to throw the ball short and to throw it quickly was created as a means to keep the Eagles from blitzing the bejeepers out of Patrick Ramsey? You may have noticed that the Eagles blitzed less than half as often as they typically do; maybe that was the offensive game plan's intent???

The players on the field need to be accountable and responsible for yesterday's loss. The score was 14-6 and it was first and goal at the Eagles' ten yardline. Get a TD there and even without a two point conversion, the Skins are in the game. The next sequence of events includes three penalties and two dropped passes. The game plan didn't do that; the coaching staff didn't do that. And then there was a missed field goal.

So onto the field comes the defense. Remember, this is the unit that everyone is raving about now because of its statistical ranking in terms of yards allowed. What the Skins need here is a turnover or at the very least a "three-and-out". Was I hallucinating when I saw the Eagles march down the field and get a TD on a drive of about 65 yards? The game was OVER then and there. And the offensive game plan had nothing to do with that.

By the way, when you talk about "execution", you need also to recognize that there are certain plays and certain times of the game where execution matters more than at other times. Yesterday, the Skins' defense put the Eagles in 15 third down situations. Then they gave up the first down 9 times. That was not the game plan's fault...

Sportscurmudgeon hit the nail on the head with his comments, EXCELLENT post!!! Let me ask one simple question are we better off with Gibbs today then any of the previous coaches. While this is not a over night fix we have been in every game this year unlike years past. Our offense will come around one game this year or next year then watch out. I refuse to blame refs or injuries for our issues as these happen every year to every team. Our defense has been hit the hardest but still keep on comming. The offense take stime to actually learn the plays and know how to adjust at the line. Peyton Manning is showing what he can do but he has been with his O-coordinator for a long time. So unfortunatly patience should be our virtue here.

I can't buy that anology, reason? They did have players up on the line of scrimmage how many of those quick reciever screen's did they just mis picking off? We just threw it out before they could really get up field, regardless if their bringing the blitz package you look for 1 on 1 matchup's downfield, and hit draw's and screen's, if they don't we should be able to run, and throw short passes but to say we had a short passing game yesterday is an understatment we threw 80% of our passes parallel to the line of scrimmage so we didn't have any kind of passing game plan IMO, obviously whatever Gibb's intent it wasen't working, our offensive game plan did affect us late in the game, against a team like philli you have to control the ball and keep there offense off the field, how demoralizing do you think it is for a defense to have to constantly look at an offense that no matter what can't score a TD? Eventually your going to start feeling no matter what you do your going to lose because you can't score, this offense makes the Raven's look like a juggernaut, if the game plan is to throw short and it's not working you have to change that's football, it's all about adjusting we were going to lose the way we were going you have to take your shot's down field, it almost look's like to me that Gibb's would rather lose and have no turnover's, than win with a couple of INT's, I feel I am still watching SS coach this team all we can do is WR screen's

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]gortiz:

When Arizona has both Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin on the active roster, their WR corps is much better than the Skins. Boldin is better than ANYONE on the Skins' roster and Fitzgerald is certainly as good as Coles and maybe better.


Would anyone trade the Skins' WRs even-up for the ones on the Colts? If the Skins are so talented, someone might actually think that they'd rather keep the Skins' contingent. That would be a BAD move. Same with the Rams, and the Vikings and the Eagles and the Seahawks and the Patriots and the Chiefs - - and maybe even a few others.
[/QUOTE]

The Seahawks? Talk about dropped balls, Robinson and Jackson drop more than any other duo in the league.

The Chiefs, you've got to be freaking kidding me. Watch out Pro-Bowlers, Johnnie Morton might join your ranks one day.

The Eagles have a horrible WR corps - Pinkston and Mitchell were complete busts until TO came to Philly.

The Vikings and Rams do have better wideouts than the 'Skins, but then again who can match up against Moss, or Holt & Bruce?

The Patriots don't necessarily have better wideouts, they've got one of the best QBs in the league who could make our grandparents look good.

I don't think I heard a single person say before the season that we needed to upgrade our WR corps, everyone was saying how deep and awesome that unit is.

[QUOTE=Ramseyfan]The Seahawks? Talk about dropped balls, Robinson and Jackson drop more than any other duo in the league.

The Chiefs, you've got to be freaking kidding me. Watch out Pro-Bowlers, Johnnie Morton might join your ranks one day.

The Eagles have a horrible WR corps - Pinkston and Mitchell were complete busts until TO came to Philly.

The Vikings and Rams do have better wideouts than the 'Skins, but then again who can match up against Moss, or Holt & Bruce?

The Patriots don't necessarily have better wideouts, they've got one of the best QBs in the league who could make our grandparents look good.

I don't think I heard a single person say before the season that we needed to upgrade our WR corps, everyone was saying how deep and awesome that unit is.[/QUOTE]

I agree 100% RF, and I'm happy with our receiver corps.