***OFFICIAL*** Washington Redskins 2011 Season Thread (1 Viewer)

'MikeApf said:

I'll probably watch

Click to expand...

A man walks into a bar with a dachshund under his arm. The dog is wearing a Washington Redskins jersey, helmet and has Redskins pompoms. The bartender says, "Hey! No pets allowed in here! You'll have to leave!" The man begs him, "Look, I'm desperate! We're both big Redskin fans, my TV is broken and this is the only place where we can see the game!" After securing a promise that the dog would behave, and warning the man that they would be thrown out if there was any trouble, the bartender allows them to stay in the bar and watch the game. The game begins with the Redskins receiving the kickoff. They march downfield, get stopped at the 30 yard line and they kick a field goal. With that, the dog jumps up on the bar and begins walking up and down the bar giving everyone a high-five! The bartender says, "Wow! That is the most amazing thing I've ever seen! What does the dog do if the Redskins score a touchdown?" The man replied, "I don't know. I've only had him for three years!"

Click to expand...

'Dexter Manley said:

Arizona game was frustrating. Skins should have blown them out, but obviously made too many mistakes. The silver lining was that they were resilient enough to come back and win. A win is a win so I'm still happy. Also, there's no way they would have won this type of game last season. As for the Dallas game, I'm puzzled at how dallas is 6 point favorites. Doesn't make sense. I don't think the line should be higher than 3.Key to this game for the Skins is going to be pass pro. I expect Dallas to come after Grossman early and often. If the pass pro holds up, Grossman should tear up their secondary. Establishing a running game would definitely make things easier, but the cowgirls run defense has been stellar thus far. We'll see just how good the Washington oline is on Monday night.OTOH, Skins defense should put the kibosh on the Dallas running game. Everyone expects Romo to play hurt, but I'm not so sure. I actually think Kitna@100% gives them a better chance to win this game than a hurt Romo. If Romo does play, I think there's a good chance the Skins will knock him out of the game, but that won't necessarily be a good thing, imo. This is a huge game for the Skins. A win on Monday puts them at 3-0 and 2-0 in the division, with either the Eagles or Giants at 2-1 behind them.

Click to expand...

'Bankerguy said:

How is your pass protection so far this year?

Click to expand...

'dgreen said:

'Bankerguy said:

How is your pass protection so far this year?

Click to expand...

It's been pretty inconsistent so far. They can go a few drives where Grossman has tons of time and they can march right down field. Then they'll have a couple drives where he has no time and the best case scenario is a punt.

Click to expand...

'Bankerguy said:

'dgreen said:

'Bankerguy said:

How is your pass protection so far this year?

Click to expand...

It's been pretty inconsistent so far. They can go a few drives where Grossman has tons of time and they can march right down field. Then they'll have a couple drives where he has no time and the best case scenario is a punt.

Click to expand...

Its early in the year but we leading the league in sacks. Might be something to watch in how you guys protect Rex.

Click to expand...

In the Cowboys’ two games, Ware already has four sacks and is well on his way to a sixth consecutive double-digit season. Once again when the Redskins play Dallas, Ware will be Priority A in pass protection.

“He’s freakishly athletic, long, explosive and has a nose for the ball,” Redskins left guard Kory Lichtensteiger said. “But I think we have a good plan for all their guys.”

Said left tackle Trent Williams: “As football players, you evolve every year and on film, it looks like he’s gotten better.”

Click to expand...

Cowboys and Redskins: Hail Victory!A look back at the Dallas-Washington rivalryBy Marc TracyPOSTED SEPTEMBER 26, 2011 Al Messerschmidt/Getty ImagesFACEBOOKTWITTERPRINTE-MAILI have a theory as to what the National Football League's greatest rivalry is, but I need to know what the NFL itself would say. So I call NFL Network's Mike Lombardi and ask him. Lombardi possesses an unmatched system of alliances (he has worked for everyone from Bill Walsh to Bill Belichick), an ability to seamlessly do-si-do between the executive and press boxes, and an uncanny penchant for spouting the smartest strain of the moment's conventional wisdom. In short, Lombardi is the David Gergen of the NFL. His answer will be definitive. He pauses for quite some time. Finally, he comes out with it:"Dallas-Washington."Ernie Accorsi, who served as the general manager for the New York Giants from 1998 to 2007, agrees. "I have to admit that that rivalry was probably the best one," he says. "It just had some spirit to it. And they" — the Dallas Cowboys and the Washington Redskins — "were fortunate to play in big games and be Super Bowl contenders at the same time.""Like any rivalry, it ebbs and flows," adds Greg Aiello, the current NFL spokesperson, who worked for the Cowboys for more than a decade. "It continues to be a great rivalry because of the history and the tradition there. It's like Army-Navy — it's so well ingrained, every time they play it takes on some kind of heightened interest."Ebbs and flows all right. Dallas and Washington meet tonight to play their 15th Monday Night Football game each having won exactly two playoff games in the past 15 years. How would you convince someone that these teams — and not, say, the New England Patriots and the New York Jets, or the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Baltimore Ravens — constitute the greatest rivalry, even today? First, you'd cite the 13 Super Bowls and 18 postmerger conference championships the two teams have appeared in. You'd make a cynical reference to Forbes' ranking the two teams the two most valuable NFL franchises five years running. But, as with a discussion of a quarterback, you'd quickly find your way to the intangibles: the rabid fan bases; the two teams' massive spheres of influence, which do not reside tidily within the same region, nearly connected by one road (I-95 for Jets-Pats, I-376 for Steelers-Ravens), but stretch across the better part of the continent; even the fact that their uniforms have largely stayed the same throughout the years.Oh, and the names. "The rivalry goes beyond football," Hall of Fame Cowboys wide receiver Michael Irvin tells me. "It goes back to what we've seen on TV, what we've watched, what we were told. We watched Cowboys and Indians!"This goes back eons," Irvin adds. "Eons!"When George Preston Marshall moved the Boston Braves to D.C. in 1937, the legendarily racist owner rechristened them the Redskins and declared them the team of the South.1 The star quarterback, Slingin' Sammy Baugh, was a parody of a Texan good ol' boy. The Skins barnstormed throughout the region, which was then bereft of professional teams, in preseasons, and owned extensive broadcast rights. Their fight song proclaimed their allegiance: "Hail to the Redskins," it went, "hail victory, braves on the warpath, fight for ol' Dixie!"2The peculiarity of Marshall's institution explains why he was the most vociferous opponent of making the Cowboys an NFL expansion team in 1960. You know the story: In the late 1950s, oil heir Lamar Hunt wanted his own NFL team, but the league refused to expand and the Chicago Cardinals' Bidwill family refused to sell. So Hunt tracked down seven other rich guys and founded the American Football League. The NFL responded by trying to create new teams, beginning with one to compete with Hunt's team, the Dallas Texans.But Marshall was against expansion, which required unanimity among the owners. Enter, believe it or not, "Hail to the Redskins." Bandleader Barnee Breeskin, the composer, held the rights to the tune. He disliked Marshall. When Breeskin learned that Marshall was blocking the NFL's Dallas franchise, Breeskin offered prospective owner Clint Murchison Jr., the song. Compounding matters, Marshall's wife had helped write the lyrics. Accounts differ over whether the future Cowboys owner ever literally owned "Hail to the Redskins," but he certainly used this leverage to strike a bargain with Marshall: I'll give you back your song if you let me have my team. The Cowboys debuted in 1960 — the same year as the AFL (Hunt's Texans soon moved to Kansas City and became the Chiefs). In their first season, they were helmed by ex-Skins quarterback Eddie LeBaron.The rivalry received its biggest boost when the Redskins hired George Allen3 as their coach and de facto general manager for the 1971 season. "Not only did the Redskins get good," Accorsi says, "but Allen was a colorful guy. And the Cowboys were kings." Longtime Washington Post sportswriter Thomas Boswell explains, "To me it's the rivalry that George Allen created and fueled and just adored. It appealed to his adolescent spirit of skullduggery. He wanted to psych up his own players and psych out the Cowboys because they were so icy and superior." (Speaking of icy, rumor has it that Allen would turn off the hot water in the visitor's locker room whenever Dallas came to town.) The Redskins' Joe Gibbs — the coach who won the franchise its three Super Bowls — loved the rivalry, too, according to Boswell, because it gave him two games a year when he didn't need to worry about motivation. The Cowboys' ever-fedora'd Tom Landry tended to look down on Allen's arriviste affectations, though he was not above cashing in after Jones fired him following the 1988 season, shooting a Comfort Inn ad instructing, "Mamas, don't let your babies grow up to be … Redskins."The metaphorical soil was fertile: East Coast versus Sun Belt; politics versus oil; America's capital versus America's Team; suits versus boots; centralized government versus self-sovereignty — the Stars and Stripes versus the Lone Star. "The Cowboys always wanted a duel at dawn, 20 paces," Boswell tells me. "Gentlemen. Pressed uniforms. They did it by 50-yard runs and deep bombs. The Skins wanted a brawl — they would gouge you, ground it out."What's your favorite Cowboys-Redskins game? To a certain crowd, it's like asking what your favorite Lennon/McCartney song is: It first depends on whether you prefer John or Paul. Irvin notes, "There is no favorite — ever." The first classic came in 1965, when paunchy-but-deadly-accurate Redskins QB Sonny Jurgensen threw three touchdowns and rushed for a fourth, leading the Skins to 21 fourth-quarter points and a 34-31 comeback victory. There was the Ken Houston Game on a 1973 Monday Night Football, in which the Redskins scored all their points in the final four minutes and Skins safety Houston stopped Walt Garrison on the goal line on a last-minute fourth down. Then the next year, there was the Clint Longley Game, in which the eponymous rookie came in for the injured Staubach and led America's Team to victory on Thanksgiving ("I thought it would kill my father," Boswell recalls). In 1983, there was the Cowboys' overcoming a 20-3 halftime deficit to win 31-30, in Washington — on the season-opening Monday Night Football. Even beyond the Glory Years, there was the 1999 season-opener (and Dan Snyder's first game as owner), which the Cowboys won in overtime, as well as the 2005 Monday Night game that saw two fourth-quarter Mark Brunell bombs to Santana Moss for a 14-13 Redskins win. You could even throw in the Cowboys' 13-3 win at Washington in 1989 — the sole bright spot in a 1-15 season."The best football game I ever saw was December of 1979. Dallas won right at the end," says Brad Sham, longtime voice of the Dallas Cowboys. "I don't know how many Hall of Famers were on the field that day. The Redskins seemed to be able to score real easy, the Cowboys had to work for everything they got." In a back-and-forth game with playoff implications, the Redskins sat pretty, up 34-28 with less than two minutes left, needing short yardage for a game-clinching first down. Instead, Larry Cole tackled Hall of Fame Redskins running back John Riggins for a loss; the Redskins punted; and Roger Staubach — in his second-to-last game ever — led the Cowboys 75 yards down the field, without timeouts, for a game-winning touchdown.Boswell's favorite game is the first NFC Championship, on New Year's Eve 1972, which the Redskins won, 26-3. "There had been a huge period where there had not been any success for the Redskins — since World War II," he explains. "The Cowboys were fully entrenched. And Allen brings in the Over-the-Hill Gang, and targets the Cowboys specifically: constantly talked about how much he hated them, accused them of cheating, of spying on the Redskins' practices."The "knockout punch," according to Boswell, was a long bomb from Billy Kilmer up the sideline to Charley Taylor. "We had a photographer, **** Darcey," he tells me. "He was so close to the team that he knew they had practiced that particular play, and he had asked them to tip him off. We're in the press box. We see Darcey running like crazy — this skinny guy carrying all this equipment, running from midfield to the end zone — to get in position — and it produced one of the greatest action sports photos ever."Joe Theismann's favorite, unsurprisingly, is the second Cowboys-Redskins championship game, in January 1983, in which Theismann took the Redskins to their second Super Bowl (and the first they won). Dexter Manley injured Danny White, Staubach's successor, on a sack; the game was clinched when Darryl Grant tipped a pass, caught it, and high-stepped into the end zone. "It had five or six rows of aluminum seats," Theismann recalls of Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium. "At the end of the game the fans were pounding their feet, and the ground beneath my feet shook." (Talking to Theismann on the phone is slightly surreal; you keep waiting for NFL Films' basso profundo John Facenda to interrupt you.)Irvin's favorite Cowboys-Redskins game was Tom Landry's last, in 1988. "I was walking in, thinking, 'Is Darrell Green coming in?'" he reflects, referring to the Skins' Hall of Fame cornerback. "I was thinking, 'I gotta beat Darrell Green. He's the baddest man in the world. If I can beat Darrell Green, that means I'm the baddest man in the world!'" Irvin scored three touchdowns that day.Of course, this is distracting you from the two problems with calling this the greatest rivalry ever. The first is that the Cowboys are a unique franchise, arguably the most successful since their inception and inarguably the most popular. They have a rivalry with the Steelers, too, with whom they have contested a remarkable three Super Bowls, and with the San Francisco 49ers, with whom they have gone head-to-head in four conference championships. And they have played almost exactly as many games against the Giants and the Philadelphia Eagles (and plenty against the St. Louis/Phoenix/Arizona Cardinals, who were in the East until 2002).But this is easily dispensed with. Every Yankees needs its Red Sox, and indeed, for the Redskins, the rivalry has always been aspirational. "You knew how good they were," Theismann tells me. "You went out there to earn their respect and beat 'em. Because if you beat the Cowboys, you were good." Referring to the Connecticut Avenue power deli where then-Redskins owner Jack Kent Cooke kept the team's Lombardi Trophies, Aiello remembers, "Every year, it was Dallas Week, and Duke Ziebert's was buzzing." There's no better example of this dynamic than Snyder: The diminutive Washington owner, more De Gaulle than Napoleon,4 openly sees Jones' successful reconjuring of the Cowboys' Glory Years as a model.For the Cowboys, by contrast, the rivalry is not quite this big a deal. "There are more potent rivalries for Cowboy fans at the moment, particularly with the Eagles," Sham argues. "When one of those teams is particularly good, Cowboys fans will pay attention. When it's not so much the case, Cowboys fans are more ho-hum." (He adds: "Older fans would, I think, very much say that the Redskins are the no. 1 rival, and that [they] will always be.") Still, the Redskins' two-a-years leaves the Steelers and Niners rivalries in the dust. Starting with Allen — whose son Bruce is the current Skins GM — Washington got under Dallas' skin more than any other team. As Accorsi noted, the Skins happened to be great at the same time as Dallas and more often than the Giants. As for Philly — they can call me when they win a Super Bowl.The second problem is that the Redskins' mediocrity over the past 20 years and the Cowboys' mere sufficiency over the past 15 have, one could say, made the rivalry dormant, if not defunct. As Theismann puts it, "What we've seen over the last 10 or 15 years is more of a carryover." But that has hardly mattered. Sure, their overall record stands at a rather lopsided 60-40-2 in the Cowboys' favor, but that's nearly identical to, say, Michigan-Ohio State's 57-44-6. In particular, Allen and RFK lent the rivalry that alma-matrian flair. "RFK, that and Green Bay, have been the two NFL stadiums that are collegiate," says Accorsi. "As much as I hated to go in there with teams I had, particularly the Giants, it was a sensational atmosphere." Thinking of Dallas-Washington as a college rivalry that has outgrown its amateur clothes is useful — it, too, is something that is eternal because it is between two institutions that will stand for certain values over the long haul, not just whoever happens to own and play for them at any given moment.Rivalries based on players, such as those that exist prominently in the National Basketball Association, are inherently weaker and less stable than rivalries between institutions. Last week, NBC scheduled Eagles-Atlanta Falcons for its prime-time game and got nearly twice as many viewers as the Emmys, no doubt in part for the drama of Michael Vick returning to his former home. But what if, for example, last night NBC had scheduled, say, a game whose drama depended mainly on a single player competing in that game, and — hypothetically — that player did not play because, I dunno, he has needed multiple surgeries on, let's say, his neck? "Pete Rozelle said at one point that it's good for the league if the Cowboys are going well," Aiello recalls. "He wasn't rooting for the Cowboys, he was just stating the obvious. I think he'd probably say the same for the Redskins, Pittsburgh, Green Bay — those types of teams. When they're going good, it's good for the league."Moreover, in a league dominated by parity, you can't count on a currently good rivalry to last forever, or even for more than a few years. Rather, you need the structure of the divisions, and the added bonus of historically justified aura. "By '72, the key elements were in place," Michael MacCambridge tells me — "one unified league, growing presence in prime time, more national games." Cowboys-Redskins was not only Steelers-Ravens for 20 years, it was Steelers-Ravens for the 20 years that mattered.Knowing he grew up in the D.C. area (as did I), I tell Boswell that the Redskins and the rivalry were imparted to me by my father, a lifelong Washingtonian, and that among my earlier memories is Super Bowl XXVI, during which my parents had friends over to watch the Skins dominate the Buffalo Bills. "I remember, the year the Redskins beat Denver so badly in the Super Bowl, my son was like a year old," Boswell tells me. "For some reason, I wasn't covering it. And I remember this woman, who is now the chief of staff at the Smithsonian — Doug Williams throws yet another touchdown pass, and she stands up and spikes a football in my living room." He adds, "My son has grown up with all this mythology. And it's part of the anger over all these years at Snyder. They don't just resent having it lost for them, but for their sons."In the end, rivalries are barely connected to contemporary reality — like everything else we pass on from generation to generation. To argue that a rivalry's declined relevance weakens the rivalry is to misunderstand what rivalries are. Like a fourth-generation Irish-American whose favorite holiday is St. Patrick's Day, an adherent of the Redskins-Cowboys rivalry sees his second-order attachment strengthen as the first-order attachment withers away. In the place of a contingent, instrumental affiliation is an unqualified expressive one. "The Pats and the Jets," Theismann muses. "Pittsburgh and Baltimore. I don't know whether they will go generations deep like the Cowboys-Redskins rivalry has. And until the generations have been completely wiped out, there will always be a need for this kind of a rivalry."

Click to expand...

'TeddyKGB said:

Haslett

Click to expand...

'thayman said:

'TeddyKGB said:

Haslett

Click to expand...

I don't place this losss on Haslett. The defense put the offense in some great positions to score early on and they didn't capitalize on it.

Click to expand...

'TeddyKGB said:

The offense has its own problems, and teams was less than stellar again. Ugly game, bad loss.

Click to expand...

The easy thing to do is go overboard and rip everyone in sight. But you knew before this game that: Rex Grossman was a flawed quarterback; the Redskins do not have a complete roster; they give up big plays on defense. And that’s what they are exiting the game too. Nothing changed about the outlook for them; they just reminded everyone that they’re far from a finished product. Are you surprised? Through three games they have the feel of a 7-9, 8-8 type team. Which is what many predicted before the season.

Click to expand...

'Sidewinder16 said:

Hopefully, game 16 will show improvements over game 3.

Click to expand...

'Sidewinder16 said:

'TeddyKGB said:

The offense has its own problems, and teams was less than stellar again. Ugly game, bad loss.

Click to expand...

Is this not what was expected? 3-0 would have been nice, but is that really the expectation for this team? A month ago, many football fans would have put the 'Skins at 0-3 right now, maybe 1-2 at best. Once we get over the fact that we lost to Dallas, the fact that they were a 2-minute drill away from being 3-0 should have 'Skins fans relatively happy. It's not like they were playing a cupcake last night.Don't let a 2-0 start unnecessarily alter the perception of what this team is, especially the offense. This is still an average (at best), 8-8 team. The OL is still far from great and the middling QB is still going to make some poor throws. That's not going to keep a team undefeated for very long. So far, they are still improved over last season. Hopefully, game 16 will show improvements over game 3.

Click to expand...

'TeddyKGB said:

No doubt this team has any number of fatal flaws, but I'd rather steal wins now and get good later.

Click to expand...

'Sidewinder16 said:

if one of those bad Dallas snaps bounces just a little bit differently

Click to expand...

'dgreen said:

But, one problem I see is that I think they've regressed each week. Not a huge drop, but I think they were better in week 1 than week 2 and better in week 2 than they were in week 3.

Click to expand...

'dgreen said:

Next week is big in the sense that I'd hope they don't take another step back in their play.

Click to expand...

'Sidewinder16 said:

I guess this is all I'm getting at. I think they've already stolen 2 wins, and came very, very close to stealing a third last night.

I mean think about all the things that could have just gone a little different last night and caused a very different outcome. Stuff like, if Rocca decides not to eat fried chicken before going out to hold for a FG, if the officiating is not completely horrendous, if one of those bad Dallas snaps bounces just a little bit differently, if Orakpo drinks some more Gatorade pre-game so he doesn't have to take a trip to the locker room mid-game, if Armstrong (their main deep threat) doesn't get hurt, if the players wore (or changed to earlier) more appropriate cleats so they wouldn't be slipping and sliding every play, etc., etc.

Last night was a pretty crazy game, that could have gone the 'Skins way, quite literally, had the ball bounced a little different.

Click to expand...

'scoobygang said:

I thought the Skins played "OK", but I don't think they were unlucky to lose the game. And I don't think the "stole" the wins against New York and Arizona. I think they've won two games where they were the better team and lost one game where they were (marginally) the worse team.

Click to expand...

'dgreen said:

Sounds like Landry is playing tonight.

Click to expand...

'TeddyKGB said:

'thayman said:

'TeddyKGB said:

Haslett

Click to expand...

I don't place this losss on Haslett. The defense put the offense in some great positions to score early on and they didn't capitalize on it.

Click to expand...

It wasn't a banner night for the offense. But leaving no safety help on 3rd and 21...man. Send six. I can't blame the defense on a night it holds the Cowboys out of the end zone, but I do question the call there. The offense has its own problems, and teams was less than stellar again. Ugly game, bad loss.

Click to expand...

'TobiasFunke said:

I haven't been able to keep up on the postgame coverage ... has Haslett offered an explanation for that call yet?

Click to expand...

'dgreen said:

'TobiasFunke said:

I haven't been able to keep up on the postgame coverage ... has Haslett offered an explanation for that call yet?

Click to expand...

I didn't think it was a horrible decision to send the house. Get quick pressure, force a quick throw, make a quick tackle, put opponent in 4th and long. The bad parts were that 1) it was pretty predictable (allowing Romo the chance a counter move), 2) they overloaded one side (allowing Romo an escape to the other side), and 3) that all those guys failed to provide any real pressure.

Click to expand...

'dgreen said:

'TobiasFunke said:

I haven't been able to keep up on the postgame coverage ... has Haslett offered an explanation for that call yet?

Click to expand...

I didn't think it was a horrible decision to send the house. Get quick pressure, force a quick throw, make a quick tackle, put opponent in 4th and long. The bad parts were that 1) it was pretty predictable (allowing Romo the chance a counter move), 2) they overloaded one side (allowing Romo an escape to the other side), and 3) that all those guys failed to provide any real pressure.

Click to expand...

'dgreen said:

'TobiasFunke said:

I haven't been able to keep up on the postgame coverage ... has Haslett offered an explanation for that call yet?

Click to expand...

I didn't think it was a horrible decision to send the house. Get quick pressure, force a quick throw, make a quick tackle, put opponent in 4th and long. The bad parts were that 1) it was pretty predictable (allowing Romo the chance a counter move), 2) they overloaded one side (allowing Romo an escape to the other side), and 3) that all those guys failed to provide any real pressure.

Click to expand...

'Marvelous said:

'dgreen said:

'TobiasFunke said:

I haven't been able to keep up on the postgame coverage ... has Haslett offered an explanation for that call yet?

Click to expand...

I didn't think it was a horrible decision to send the house. Get quick pressure, force a quick throw, make a quick tackle, put opponent in 4th and long. The bad parts were that 1) it was pretty predictable (allowing Romo the chance a counter move), 2) they overloaded one side (allowing Romo an escape to the other side), and 3) that all those guys failed to provide any real pressure.

Click to expand...

The real issue is the execution of they play, not the defensive play call. If you rush that many people, you can't have your DBs covering the receivers for 4 seconds. Someone will get open in that time. If they rushed 4 people and gave Romo 10 seconds to find a reciever, it would also not be a good result.

Click to expand...

'dgreen said:

'TobiasFunke said:

I haven't been able to keep up on the postgame coverage ... has Haslett offered an explanation for that call yet?

Click to expand...

I didn't think it was a horrible decision to send the house. Get quick pressure, force a quick throw, make a quick tackle, put opponent in 4th and long. The bad parts were that 1) it was pretty predictable (allowing Romo the chance a counter move), 2) they overloaded one side (allowing Romo an escape to the other side), and 3) that all those guys failed to provide any real pressure.

Click to expand...

Did I like the call? Looking back (which is very easy to do the day after), I don’t have any issues with it. Haslett is a pressure-based coach and he wanted to end the game. The Redskins did a poor job on their contain rush principles on the edge of the defense (which allowed Romo and Bryant to buy time), but I want to play for a coach that trusts his secondary when the game is one the line.

Click to expand...

“After talking to [Haslett] I definitely understood where he was coming from. As opposed to sitting back and letting those guys pick us apart he wanted pressure. He didn’t feel we were getting there with four or five guys and not hitting [Tony] Romo like we wanted to. He wanted to get the ball out of his hand as quick as possible…. You know, if I’m on Madden I would have did the same thing.”

Click to expand...

'Sidewinder16 said:

John Keim - Hall Backpedals on Comments:

“After talking to [Haslett] I definitely understood where he was coming from. As opposed to sitting back and letting those guys pick us apart he wanted pressure. He didn’t feel we were getting there with four or five guys and not hitting [Tony] Romo like we wanted to. He wanted to get the ball out of his hand as quick as possible…. You know, if I’m on Madden I would have did the same thing.”

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

"I don’t understand how I could simulate his snap count," Bowen said. "Am I supposed to memorize the colors and the numbers he’s saying? Honestly, I lost a lot of respect for Costa. Just be a man and tell the truth. If that was the case, if we were making snap counts, how come no other offensive linemen jumped offsides? It makes no sense because he’s lying. He needs to be a man and stands by his word. Everybody respects a man who could tell the truth.

Click to expand...

Bowen said even if he wanted to simulate a snap count, it would negatively affect his play.

"I don’t know how you can do it," he said. "You’re so zoned out, trying to concentrate on your technique, what you have to do that play. And to give a fake snap count, you may make your guys jump offsides. There’s no point in even doing that."

Click to expand...

'Eastwood said:

This Redskins team is close. Yeah, we could use a QB upgrade and WR upgrade, but I think both lines, the RBs, the TEs, even the P and K are all MUCH improved. I was pissed they lost, but I love the direction the team is moving. We aren't old, we are keeping our picks (and acquired several extra) and I think the team believes in the coaching staff 100%. Dallas got very lucky last night and most of their fans know it. *but I can admit it would have likely been much more dominated by them if Austin and Dez were both 100%*

Click to expand...

So I was kind of sick of hearing about Tony Romo’s heroism by the end of Monday night. And you were sort of sick of hearing about it, unless you’re a Cowboys fan, in which case you hate me. And you know who else thought it was too much? Brian Orakpo.

“To me they blown it way out of proportion,” the linebacker said on ESPN 980’s John Thompson Show on Tuesday. “I mean, they tried to make it seem like the guy was hospitalized the night before the game, just so we could build it up if they was to win the game — oh he’s a courageous player to go out there and play. The guy was playing just like Tony Romo, running around, making throws. He got hit throughout the whole game and still getting up. I mean, it was blown way out of proportion, but it is what it is.”

Orakpo also shared your frustration and amazement at the way all those crazy snap mistakes wound up in Romo’s arms, unless you’re a Cowboys fan, in which case you believe he’s uniquely skilled at scooping up bouncing balls.

“I mean, Romo got some type of lucky charm in his back pocket,” Orakpo said. “Because it seemed like every time the ball was on the floor, he was able to scoop it up, not fumbling one time, scoop it up and pick it up and try to at least make a play. Very unfortunate for us. I mean, I’m so disappointed in the outcome. We left a lot on the table. We could have easily won that game.”

Oh, and Orakpo also had no problem with DeAngelo Hall’s profanity-laced postgame remarks, saying he and the cornerback had talked over the defensive issues on the plane ride home.

“D-Hall’s good,” Orakpo said. “We actually was talking about the game and stuff afterward on the plane. Everybody’s talking, just trying to get everybody’s head back straight. The only negative thing about being a professional athlete, when you lose the game, they stick a camera right in your face, right after you lose. And I mean, no holds barred after that.

“I mean, I don’t blame him,” Orakpo continued. “He’s angry, he’s upset, and all the sudden they’re asking you all kind of ridiculous questions, and you’re gonna say something that you wish you could take back. And he knows he wish he could take it back, but I don’t blame him. He’s already a hothead, so why would you put a camera in his face? They got what they deserved. I love playing with him. I’ve got his back, any day of the week; we’ve all got his back.”

Orakpo said his second-half absences were due to full-body cramps, and that he had never experienced the sort of humidity and lack of air movement like there was in Cowboys Stadium Sunday night. And he wasn’t very happy with the final score of the game.

“It’s very disappointing, man,” Orakpo said. “We left those guys off the hook. We left a lot on the table, but we’re 2-1, we’ve still got a long season, we’ll see those guys again....

“We’re angry. We’re very angry, the players and the coaches,” he later said. “We’re so happy that it’s a short week because we can’t wait to get back out there on Sunday and perform, because we left that game out there. We could have easily won that game, and we’re just very very angry, very very hungry to get back out there. And whoever’s up next — I don’t even care who it is, I think they said we’ve got the Rams going to St. Louis — and it really don’t matter who we play, we’re really gonna go out there and finish it off right....We’re very angry about the situation, and we can’t wait to play again.”

Click to expand...

'Bankerguy said:

Tough loss for you guys and I think either fan base would be a bit angry after losing that game. It was a very sloppy game on both teams part. It was a typical Cowboys/Redskins game.I'm glad to see both teams escape without any additional major injuries that I'm aware of.Good luck, talk to you guys closer to round two in your house.

Click to expand...

'TobiasFunke said:

I haven't been able to keep up on the postgame coverage ... has Haslett offered an explanation for that call yet?

Click to expand...

But for Haslett, that call was just one of many made in a game in which he thought his defense played spectacularly, holding Dallas without a touchdown. The very same max blitz Haslett called on that play resulted, earlier in the night, in an interception by cornerback Kevin Barnes and a forced fumble from safety LaRon Landry. Two weeks earlier, it had resulted in a tipped pass for outside linebacker Ryan Kerrigan, a play Kerrigan turned into a touchdown. In fact, Haslett said in his first remarks since the Dallas game, he had called the defense nine times in the season’s first three games before the third-and-21 play.

“We won nine of them and lost one,” he said. “It’s a great defense. It really is.”

Click to expand...

'Sidewinder16 said:

'TobiasFunke said:

I haven't been able to keep up on the postgame coverage ... has Haslett offered an explanation for that call yet?

Click to expand...

It was "Coordinator Thursday" yesterday. Barry Svrluga's story on Haslett's response:

But for Haslett, that call was just one of many made in a game in which he thought his defense played spectacularly, holding Dallas without a touchdown. The very same max blitz Haslett called on that play resulted, earlier in the night, in an interception by cornerback Kevin Barnes and a forced fumble from safety LaRon Landry. Two weeks earlier, it had resulted in a tipped pass for outside linebacker Ryan Kerrigan, a play Kerrigan turned into a touchdown. In fact, Haslett said in his first remarks since the Dallas game, he had called the defense nine times in the season’s first three games before the third-and-21 play.

“We won nine of them and lost one,” he said. “It’s a great defense. It really is.”

Click to expand...

John Keim has been talking for a couple of weeks now about how Haslett is a "high risk, high reward" type of play caller. Sometimes those plays pay big dividends, and sometimes they burn you. It's something we'll have to live with as long as Haslett is DC. Personally, I don't have a big problem with it. If I have any issue with the play call, it's mainly to do with the timing of it. The plays mentioned, where that call payed off in turnovers, weren't in "clutch" situations, like the 3rd-and-21 was last week. I, personally, would have called something more conservative (you know, like when I'm on Madden ). But that's a lot of MMQB-ing. I can see and understand why, in the heat of the game, a coach like that would call a play like that.

Click to expand...