***Official*** Washington Redskins 2014 Thread (In-Season) (1 Viewer)

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Did any of you find the hypocrisy of the Chiefs game interesting?

I'm confused how your team catches so much flack for the name yet other teams are allowed to parade around in war dress and do the Florida State tomahawk chop song on a national televised game.

 

[MikeApf]

Did any of you find the hypocrisy of the Chiefs game interesting?

I'm confused how your team catches so much flack for the name yet other teams are allowed to parade around in war dress and do the Florida State tomahawk chop song on a national televised game.

I noticed that. What is crazy is that Tomohawk Chop is the most "stereotypical" gesture that is done. Yet Redskins fans are villified by the media and embarrassed on The Daily Show for being racist.

I get the fact that opponents of the name change are saying "Redskins" is a slur and "Chiefs" is not, but as you point out re: the warpaint, chop, etc., words do not stand in a vacuum but always exist in a context. This is one of PCs big problems is often failure to see this context.

Though, I have to say, if Amanda Blackhorse had her way, I believe she would make the Chiefs change their name as well. I think, actually, when push came to shove, she would change all of them.

Most fans and the media though tend to like to focus on the Redskins. Like Mike Florio at PFT. He's OBSESSED with the Redskins and gives the Chiefs a pass. It's really annoying.

 

[RGIII HTTR]

Did any of you find the hypocrisy of the Chiefs game interesting?

I'm confused how your team catches so much flack for the name yet other teams are allowed to parade around in war dress and do the Florida State tomahawk chop song on a national televised game.

Politics and bandwagoning...its "in" to go against the team and the name at this point. Hard to know what people really feel opposed to just taking a side bcuz they think they should. I've always found the whole tomahawk chop stuff to be much more over the top that anything else. TO be honest, very tired of the talk about it, but doubt it goes away anytime soon either.

 

[MikeApf]

Just heard from a contact in DC that the FCC is going to forbid use of the word Redskins on tv.

Looks like there's some truth to it - http://www.cnbc.com/id/102037057

Just a matter of time now.

This is crazy.

Some of the language and "inappropriate" content that I see allowed on TV.

Some of the misleading or outright untrue advertisements that are allowed on TV.

But let's prevent the name "Redskins"

FCC is a politically sensitive agency that sways the direction of the popular political winds, but that has no definitive moral core.

Parents of children we should be generally concerned at how rudderless we are in terms of having a moral compass. And no, I am not a Conservative Republican Fundamentalist. I am more of a moderate but even I see the need for some sort of stability in how we think about these things...

 

[Brunell4MVP]

The name is vilified because Dan Snyder is a schmuck and everyone wants a piece of him. If a better person owned the team there wouldn't be a bandwagon to get rid of it.

Let's be honest... a few Washington Post writers gave merit to this campaign a few years ago. In reality they wanted to get back at Snyder for several reasons, the first being the lack of access they had when he took over the team. It's taken a few years for their campaign to get national attention, but it was easy to jump on the ship to bash Danny. So the attention has just gotten deeper and deeper.

Dan's next move will be to rename the team, get a Super Bowl out of it, and say the name means a new era in DC football. Here come your Washington Generals, who will also still suck as long as the team resides in Eastern Maryland while practicing in damn near West Virginia while being owned by a bad person.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Just heard from a contact in DC that the FCC is going to forbid use of the word Redskins on tv.

Looks like there's some truth to it - http://www.cnbc.com/id/102037057

Just a matter of time now.

Makes no sense to me. And where does it stop?

If we're going to change everything in this country that a small minority are offended by, we're screwed.

The FCC thing is silly and I suspect will go away. But let's knock it off with this "small minority" nonsense. It's ridiculous to describe the number of Native Americans offended by this as a "small minority." It's offensive to a lot of them- enough that there's tons of Native Americans organizations and leaders calling for a change. Hell, Snyder had to make up a fake chief in order to find someone willing to go on camera and support the name. Read the wikipedia entry on the name controversy and compare the section on Native American support to the one on Native American opposition and you'll see that the opposition is overwhelming. It's not a "small minority" by any stretch of the imagination.

If you're OK with using a name that a huge number of Native Americans oppose, so be it. I can't argue with that. But stop lying to yourself.

 

[dhockster]

Various things from PFT.

The Redskins saw their pass defense torn apart by the Giants last week and they’ve made a move in hopes of shoring up their secondary on Monday.

PFT has learned, via a league source, that the team has signed safety Jamarca Sanford. Sanford started 41 games in Minnesota over the past three seasons, recording 216 tackles, two interceptions and seven forced fumbles for the Vikings. He was placed on injured reserve by the Vikings at the end of the preseason and then released off of IR early in September.

Washington has given up nine touchdown passes in the first four games, so there’s room for improvement and likely a chance for Sanford to move into a prominent position if the team believes he can provide it.

The Redskins announced that they have signed Sanford and added that cornerback Richard Crawford will also be added to the roster.

Crawford looked totally lost this preseason.

This is 2013 pass defense all over again.

Totally agree. It's like they have the same defensive coordinator from last year. Oh, wait.....

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

I'm the last guy who should be defending your DC, but he's not working with much.

DHall was head and shoulders your best DB, and his last two years were phenomenal if you actually payed attention, but how wise was it to lean so heavily on the health of a 32+ y/o corner? I like Amerson as a project but you've got nobody else.

I fault the GM. This team needed more Oline and far less WR help. Hindsight being 50/50 , I simply can't believe they didn't bolster a porous line to protect their young QBs.

 

[Brunell4MVP]

The Cleveland Indians mascot and Aunt Jemima logo would seem to me to be more offensive. If they called it the Washington Whiteskins and put a picture of some bumbling fatass redneck on their jersey you wouldn't hear me complaining. Some people just need things to ##### about.

 

[steelers1080]

With the 3rd pick in the 2015 draft the Washington Redskins select...

I have a sinking feeling we could hear that next year. Our O-line is god awful and our defensive backfield is a joke. This team needs a 2-3 year rebuild, only after that can Gruden be judged imho.

 

[MikeApf]

I'm the last guy who should be defending your DC, but he's not working with much.

DHall was head and shoulders your best DB, and his last two years were phenomenal if you actually payed attention, but how wise was it to lean so heavily on the health of a 32+ y/o corner? I like Amerson as a project but you've got nobody else.

I fault the GM. This team needed more Oline and far less WR help. Hindsight being 50/50 , I simply can't believe they didn't bolster a porous line to protect their young QBs.

Local Skins fans were barking about Oline help for YEARS and team did nothing. It goes back many, many years, even before Shanahan. They did a good job picking up Williams but beyond that the guys are ok but not great. Shanahan did a good job assembling B-rate talent that fit his zone blocking scheme and they were actually successful at doing that. But particularly in pass protection, they just don't have the talent.

Truthfully, the Redskins probably need to either pick RGIII or Cousins to hang their hat on, then trade the other for a pick to become an offensive lineman.

 

[MikeApf]

With the 3rd pick in the 2015 draft the Washington Redskins select...

I have a sinking feeling we could hear that next year. Our O-line is god awful and our defensive backfield is a joke. This team needs a 2-3 year rebuild, only after that can Gruden be judged imho.

I just hope that Snyder gives him the time. As you say, hard to judge the guy totally if the talent is simply lacking. You have to be able to judge him on how well he can coach up the talent that he does have...and the team needs to play hard for him not give up when they are losing. Motivating the team to keep fighting and preparing them the best you can is something he should be held accountable for, but that's going to take Snyder and Allen being able to judge beyond Ws and Ls...

 

[MikeApf]

If they called it the Washington Whiteskins and put a picture of some bumbling fatass redneck on their jersey you wouldn't hear me complaining.

To the contrary, I would probably apply for the job of team mascot!

 

[TobiasFunke]

If they called it the Washington Whiteskins and put a picture of some bumbling fatass redneck on their jersey you wouldn't hear me complaining.

To the contrary, I would probably apply for the job of team mascot!

Like I said if you're cool with offending them there's not much I can say about that. Just as long as Skins fans aren't lying to themselves that it's some "small minority" of Native Americans or a bunch of white liberals who think it's offensive.

Now back to our regularly scheduled confusion about how Jim Haslett still has a football job.

 

[MikeApf]

If they called it the Washington Whiteskins and put a picture of some bumbling fatass redneck on their jersey you wouldn't hear me complaining.

To the contrary, I would probably apply for the job of team mascot!

Like I said if you're cool with offending them there's not much I can say about that. Just as long as Skins fans aren't lying to themselves that it's some "small minority" of Native Americans or a bunch of white liberals who think it's offensive.

Now back to our regularly scheduled confusion about how Jim Haslett still has a football job.

I'm willing to believe that a number of Native Americans are offended by the name.

I am also willing to believe that a lot of things are offensive to people that we do not change. For instance, many people are offended by all the sex and violence on TV and yet while we *somewhat* regulate it, we certainly do not prevent it to the degree that a LARGE number of people want it prevented. Properly, we give those offended people the choice to either watch that programming or watch something else.

I actually agree with you that we should stop fooling ourselves that only 3-4 Nat Amer are offended. By the same token, we should also stop fooling ourselves that our society is truly based on a utopian goal of only allowing speech that offends no one -- or even that that is an ideal goal. Stop fooling ourselves into thinking that there isn't like a million other offensive things out there that we allow to be aired on the basis of either business interests or freedom of speech.

In other matters -- Haslett is no genious, but he has an awful lack of talent in the secondary...

 

[dhockster]

I'm the last guy who should be defending your DC, but he's not working with much.

DHall was head and shoulders your best DB, and his last two years were phenomenal if you actually payed attention, but how wise was it to lean so heavily on the health of a 32+ y/o corner? I like Amerson as a project but you've got nobody else.

I fault the GM. This team needed more Oline and far less WR help. Hindsight being 50/50 , I simply can't believe they didn't bolster a porous line to protect their young QBs.

Agree with the lack of talent on defense. Also contend that Jim Haslett is a bad defensive coordinator. Those two are not mutually exclusive.

 

[TobiasFunke]

If they called it the Washington Whiteskins and put a picture of some bumbling fatass redneck on their jersey you wouldn't hear me complaining.

To the contrary, I would probably apply for the job of team mascot!

Like I said if you're cool with offending them there's not much I can say about that. Just as long as Skins fans aren't lying to themselves that it's some "small minority" of Native Americans or a bunch of white liberals who think it's offensive.

Now back to our regularly scheduled confusion about how Jim Haslett still has a football job.

I'm willing to believe that a number of Native Americans are offended by the name.

I am also willing to believe that a lot of things are offensive to people that we do not change. For instance, many people are offended by all the sex and violence on TV and yet while we *somewhat* regulate it, we certainly do not prevent it to the degree that a LARGE number of people want it prevented. Properly, we give those offended people the choice to either watch that programming or watch something else.

I actually agree with you that we should stop fooling ourselves that only 3-4 Nat Amer are offended. By the same token, we should also stop fooling ourselves that our society is truly based on a utopian goal of only allowing speech that offends no one -- or even that that is an ideal goal. Stop fooling ourselves into thinking that there isn't like a million other offensive things out there that we allow to be aired on the basis of either business interests or freedom of speech.

In other matters -- Haslett is no genious, but he has an awful lack of talent in the secondary...

I would never ever suggest that Snyder should be forced to change the name by law. It's a question of doing what's right, which is why I say if you're cool with the name offending Native Americans, or if the name is so important to you that you're willing to live with that, I can't really argue with it. All I can do is disagree. The only people I'll argue with are the ones who think that it doesn't really offend very many people.

On the other thing- the secondary problem is a long-running thing, as is Haslett's tenure. I assume Haslett has a prominent seat at the table when personnel decisions are made so I hold him partially accountable for the lack of talent as well as the poor results.

 

[thayman]

Tobias please don't bring the changing the name drama to this thread. You've got your own thread for that in the FFA

 

[TobiasFunke]

Tobias please don't bring the changing the name drama to this thread. You've got your own thread for that in the FFA

There were seven posts on it in this thread before mine in the last 24 hours. I don't believe I've ever posted on the name drama in here except in reply to other posts and I never will.

 

[Archer]

When the Redskins were winning SBs in the 80s and early 90s and Cooke owned the team was anyone offended by the name? Serious question as I can't remember as single negative word about it back then....

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

When the Redskins were winning SBs in the 80s and early 90s and Cooke owned the team was anyone offended by the name? Serious question as I can't remember as single negative word about it back then....

This has popped up from time to time over the past several decades but never reached the fervor pitch it has this time around.

 

[PinkydaPimp]

Looks like Niles Paul has passed concussion protocol and plans to play this weekend.

 

[Archer]

good news, but I'd like to see Reed cleared as well.

 

[MikeApf]

Looks like Niles Paul has passed concussion protocol and plans to play this weekend.

That is awesome news. Reed is apparently practicing again as well. We need all the weapons we can deploy Monday night.

 

[fatness]

Agree with the lack of talent on defense. Also contend that Jim Haslett is a bad defensive coordinator. Those two are not mutually exclusive.

Bruce Allen is not doing a very good job with personnel. That coincides with his track record before coming here.

Jim Haslett is not doing a very good job coaching defense. That coincides with his track record before coming here.

Each is in his 5th year.

Shanahan sucked, and had to go. But the 2 guys mentioned above suck also.

 

[TxBuckeye]

Have to love reading the Start 'em/Sit 'em articles and seeing them all say the starts of the week are the opponents QB, WR and Def. And your own QB and WRs are all sit 'ems. At least they did say you have to play Morris.

 

[fatness]

I get tired of reading things like this. I like Trent Williams, and there's nothing inherently wrong with what he's saying.

“Can we beat them? Yeah,” Williams said, nonchalantly. “At the end of the day, they’re not robots. They’re human beings and nobody’s perfect. Nobody plays perfect every Sunday. They have been beaten before. It’s not like they’re unstoppable. They’re a great team, no doubt about it, but anything is possible in the NFL.”

But I get tired of reading it. If your team is any good at all, you don't need to say anything like that.

Same with the preseason talk of great personnel, winning attitude, playoff possibilities, etc. If your team is any good, you don't need to talk about any of that crap.

 

[TxBuckeye]

He should probably spend more time worrying about, you know, if he's actually going to even be playing or not. Maybe talk about that.

 

[fatness]

And if the team was any good we'd be spending our time talking about how Garcon is such a good run blocker, how Polumbus is such a bad pass blocker, how Kerrigan and Orakpo have forgotten all the new moves they learned in preseason and gone back to just bullrushing, how well Keenan Robinson is playing, how bad Perry Riley and Biggers looked, how this playcall set up that one, etc.

Instead it's trivial stuff like Griffin-vs-Cousins, the team name, and other things that have little or nothing to do with how exactly 16 different 60-minute games are played this season.

 

[dgreen]

I'm guessing Trent was just answering a question. I agree it's a problem that the players are even being asked questions like, "Can you beat Seattle?", or whatever the question was. But, he was just answering a question. A very insulting question, BTW, for any NFL team. Not sure what else he's supposed to do. Not answering the question would lead to an endless string of articles and talk radio minutes focusing on 500 different theories about why he didn't answer the question.

And I'm not sure tons of time would be spent on analyzing on-field play if the Redskins were good. If the Redskins were 4-0, I think most of the media talk would be how awesome everyone is, even if they aren't. Gruden would be "the next Gibbs", Orakpo would be "the next LT" and there would be questions like "Can Seattle beat us?"

In general, I think the media is very poor at analyzing on-field play. I think they are much more interested in questions like "Can you beat Seattle?" or "Should Colt McCoy get a shot?" or any other questions that are really shallow or can lead to controversy. Maybe it exists in the media in every city, but I like to say that the DC sports media is more focused on being the next Woodward and Bernstein than really taking a hard analytical look at whether Kirk Cousins is a better QB than Robert Griffin III. That would require actually knowing stuff about football rather than just knowing stuff about journalism. It's rare to find someone who is great at both.

Most of the good, in-depth discussions of on-field performance take place on freelance blogs, message boards like ours, and geeky stat sites. Keim is obviously good and I like his work. I'm actually shocked, in a good way, that he hasn't changed what he does over the years. But, he's the exception to the endless list of sports journalists who spend 99% of their time looking to catch a player make a mistake in their words or actions so they can reach some grand conclusions about all of humanity.

/rant

 

[MikeApf]

I'm guessing Trent was just answering a question. I agree it's a problem that the players are even being asked questions like, "Can you beat Seattle?", or whatever the question was. But, he was just answering a question. A very insulting question, BTW, for any NFL team. Not sure what else he's supposed to do. Not answering the question would lead to an endless string of articles and talk radio minutes focusing on 500 different theories about why he didn't answer the question.

Plus, look at the actual quote: "They’re a great team, no doubt about it, but anything is possible in the NFL.”

"Anything is possible" -- that's hardly a cocky statement. As you say, what is he suppose to say. As an athlete, you have to go into every game feeling you can defeat your opponent. Otherwise, you shouldn't be playing.

It really does look like he was just answering the question and then the media will go off and run with it like he's "predicting victory." Again, I went on PFT and their headline was something like, "Trent Williams says Washington can beat Seattle." Then the trolls come out and act like he's running his mouth.

But think...what is the alternative to the answer: "No, we can't." OK, then you say the team has given up, run with that.

How about: "No comment." OK, then media says, "Obviously he thinks they'll lose, otherwise he would have answered.

etc.

Media / fan gotchas -- ask a loaded question, no matter what the response, jump on it and make it an issue.

I agree that the media is generally very poor at covering football in a substantial way. That's really the problem, not Trent.

 

[MikeApf]

OK, let me try something different here. Unlike Trent Williams, we are all just assuming that the Redskins have no chance Monday night. And, that may well be the case. They are -- and should be -- huge underdogs going into this game.

WIth that said, you still have to go into the game trying to win and even thinking that you can win. That said, serious question -- what would the Redskins need to do to win this game? Is there a particular game plan that they should employ? Are there keys to victory? Of course, we could say, "if Russell Wilson, Richard Sherman, Marshawn Lynch, and Percy Harvin all get injured.." but assuming nothing crazy like that happens.

You guys are football smart...I'd be curious to hear what you think about this...

 

[dgreen]

Well, the obvious starting point is turnovers. And, that will appy to the whole team, but we should probably focus on Cousins. He can't have one of his high turnover games. I think they have to play it safe in the passing game. Punting won't necessarily be a bad thing. Having said that, I do think they need to take some deep shots. Everything can't be within 10 yards of the LOS. That makes it way too easy for an already good D. Maybe some max protect with 2 guys going deep and hope to hit one or two during the game. I can't imagine screens will be all that affective because of Seattle's speed and, I assume, defensive discipline.

Can we get a good running game going? I'd like to see more read option with Cousins. I think he can get some decent yardage and maybe some first downs because there's little expectation that he'll keep the ball. He did a good job on one keeper last week. Since I doubt that will be a staple of their offense with Cousins, they have to do well in more traditional run plays. Seattle's a smaller defense, right? Tons of speed, but on the lighter side? Go jumbo a lot and just pound it for 3 yards at a time? However, our TEs are pretty banged up so not sure if we can go jumbo unless we use an addition OL in a TE spot.

No idea what to do defensively. Maybe just do what they've been doing and focus on the run. I guess you have to try to stop that first.

 

[MattFancy]

OK, let me try something different here. Unlike Trent Williams, we are all just assuming that the Redskins have no chance Monday night. And, that may well be the case. They are -- and should be -- huge underdogs going into this game.

WIth that said, you still have to go into the game trying to win and even thinking that you can win. That said, serious question -- what would the Redskins need to do to win this game? Is there a particular game plan that they should employ? Are there keys to victory? Of course, we could say, "if Russell Wilson, Richard Sherman, Marshawn Lynch, and Percy Harvin all get injured.." but assuming nothing crazy like that happens.

You guys are football smart...I'd be curious to hear what you think about this...

1. Limit turnovers. If Kirk throws multiple INTs again, it's going to be ugly.

2. Move WRs around. Sherman sticks to one side of the field, so keep moving DJax, Garcon and Roberts around to create good matchups.

3. Let Morris run the ball 20+ times - seems like a given as long as game flow allows

4. Spy on Wilson - can't let him break contain back there. He's not a runner like RG3, but he can get outside the pocket and make big plays

5. Double Percy Harvin. None of their other WRs scare me. If Percy gets into the open field, he's going to break a big one

6. Work in a short passing game like in Houston. Seattle is going to bring tons of pressure so Kirk has to be quick with his release. Can't be waiting for routes to develop.

7. Special teams has to play, you know, special teams

 

[dgreen]

6. Work in a short passing game like in Houston. Seattle is going to bring tons of pressure so Kirk has to be quick with his release. Can't be waiting for routes to develop.

Having said that, I do think they need to take some deep shots. Everything can't be within 10 yards of the LOS. That makes it way too easy for an already good D.

Hmm...

I agree Seattle will get pressure and you can't wait for certain routes to develop. But, I don't think we can do like Houston again because many of those shorter routes didn't move the chains.

I don't think every deep route has to take tons of time to develop. Sure, a post-corner or out-and-up or anything with a double move is going to take time. But, just sending Jackson on a fly doesn't take a lot of time and Kirk should be able to get the ball off even when there's a good pass rush. Make your dropback and release immediately. Add in some max protect and I have no doubt they should be able to get off some deeper attempts. I'm not saying they'll necessarily hit on it, but have to try it multiple times, IMO. That can help some shorter routes lead to good YAC. Screw completion % and go for deeper stuff between runs.

Disclaimer: I'm not an expert.

 

[MattFancy]

6. Work in a short passing game like in Houston. Seattle is going to bring tons of pressure so Kirk has to be quick with his release. Can't be waiting for routes to develop.

Having said that, I do think they need to take some deep shots. Everything can't be within 10 yards of the LOS. That makes it way too easy for an already good D.

Hmm...

I agree Seattle will get pressure and you can't wait for certain routes to develop. But, I don't think we can do like Houston again because many of those shorter routes didn't move the chains.

I don't think every deep route has to take tons of time to develop. Sure, a post-corner or out-and-up or anything with a double move is going to take time. But, just sending Jackson on a fly doesn't take a lot of time and Kirk should be able to get the ball off even when there's a good pass rush. Make your dropback and release immediately. Add in some max protect and I have no doubt they should be able to get off some deeper attempts. I'm not saying they'll necessarily hit on it, but have to try it multiple times, IMO. That can help some shorter routes lead to good YAC. Screw completion % and go for deeper stuff between runs.

Disclaimer: I'm not an expert.

I see what you're saying, but maybe it's not necessarily short routes, but short drop backs. I don't think Cousins is going to have time to have 5 and 7 step drops. He's gotta take 3 step drops and the ball has to be out quick.

 

[RGIII HTTR]

This will b classic...a game where we are supposed to lose big time and we'll squeak it out. Then errdody will think we are beter than we are and we'll lose to teams like TB or TEN handily.

 

[Ted Mullins]

I could see them coming out and trying to play keep away and dominate time of possession like the Chargers did - I'd imagine at least a few teams try that vs the Seahawks this season. Would need to be successful running the ball to stay on schedule and would need to be able to count on Kirk to convert 3rd downs.

Those days are long gone but the Skins offense actually looked awesome vs the Seahawks in the 2012 playoffs for a few drives before RG3 got hurt. Maybe I am off here but watching the way Manning and other QBs have struggled vs the Seahawks, I feel like QBs being able to threaten downfield and also being able to run are a major help. Seems like it's hard to beat them if you rely heavily on short/intermediate passing...secondary too good/tackle too well.

Sorta O/T but Seahawks play the Eagles later this year, I will be really intrigued to see that matchup if the Eagles get some olinemen healthy and get it together.

 

[Hurl Bruce]

Anyone have an idea of what the Niles Paul and Jordan Reed dynamic will be once Reed is healthy? Considering grabbing Reed as a backup.

 

[fatness]

Anyone have an idea of what the Niles Paul and Jordan Reed dynamic will be once Reed is healthy? Considering grabbing Reed as a backup.

For a few, fleeting moments Reed will play more than Paul. Then Reed will get hurt again.

 

[fatness]

With Haslett as defensive coordinator and Cousins as QB I don't think they have much chance at beating Seattle.

There is a point in almost every game where the opposing offense figures out what Haslett has the defense doing, and that offense adjusts. Haslett never does. We've heard it time and again --- "once we figured out what they were doing it got easier for us, and they didn't adjust". Some teams figure it out mid-game; some early in the game.

Seattle often starts slow in games, then gradually grinds the other team down and pulls ahead. Cousins usually starts fast, and fades. It looks like a terrible combination for a Skins win.

To win they need 0 turnovers, at least 30 rushing attempts (which will mean they're getting enough first downs to sustain drives), and for their LB's and DB's to return from bizarro land and actually cover receivers. They're not going to stop Lynch, and they're not going to pressure Wilson a lot.

 

[Archer]

fatness why post that crap, seriously? Do you hope he gets hurt? you are a Skins fan right??? <_<

 

[fatness]

fatness why post that crap, seriously? Do you hope he gets hurt? you are a Skins fan right??? <_<

I'm not sure what you're talking about, Archer. Reed gets hurt a lot, and misses multiple games when he's hurt. That's been his track record here. I think it's going to keep happening. I said nothing about hoping he'd get hurt.

Why don't you answer the guy whose question I answered?

 

[MikeApf]

Good insights here guys. I've been racking my brain trying to think of how we can pull this one off. Can't say that I have any great ideas...I guess if I did, I'd have Haslett's job.

Anyway, I do like the suggestions that we have to run and control the clock, if at all possible...shorten the game up. Everyone talks about Seattle's defense so much that you forget they have become quite prolific on office and can score quickly, particularly with Harvin. So I'd say, try to run, get in 3rd and short, then convert third down. Don't try to throw downfield too much (though you will have to take a few shots). I think we've seen who Kirk is...when he is pressured, he makes mistakes. Not ideal. So you got to get him in situations where he goes back and quickly gets rid of it. I understand LOB is gonna make the tackle on short passes; that's why i say you have to run it well and get in 3rd and short.

Defensively, have to commit to stopping the run. Yeah, Wilson and Harvin *may* beat us, but Lynch *will definitely* beat us if we let him lose. Sometimes you have to pick you poison. I say, stack it up front to stop the run and then hang on for dear life. Harvin is going to get his shots, but you just have to hope the patched together secondary can make enough plays to hang on. Wilson has done a real good job getting the ball out of his hands quickly this year, so I'm not expecting a ton of sacks, but we can try to contain him...may have to put a spy on him as well.

Special Teams has to just keep from giving up the big play. I'm not asking for a kick return for a TD, just tackle the other team that's all.

We HAVE to win the turnover battle.

That's all I got. It's a really tall order and probably not likely. But, it will be interesting to see what this team can do.

 

[Swing 51]

Special Teams has to just keep from giving up the big play. I'm not asking for a kick return for a TD, just tackle the other team that's all.

So obvious and sad its almost funny reading it

and

 

[Sebowski]

OK, let me try something different here. Unlike Trent Williams, we are all just assuming that the Redskins have no chance Monday night. And, that may well be the case. They are -- and should be -- huge underdogs going into this game.

WIth that said, you still have to go into the game trying to win and even thinking that you can win. That said, serious question -- what would the Redskins need to do to win this game? Is there a particular game plan that they should employ? Are there keys to victory? Of course, we could say, "if Russell Wilson, Richard Sherman, Marshawn Lynch, and Percy Harvin all get injured.." but assuming nothing crazy like that happens.

You guys are football smart...I'd be curious to hear what you think about this...

The last time Seattle was god and we played them in the playoffs they lost their best player Shuan Alexander in the first quarter and I'm pretty sure we had a a lead on them and we just let their fullback run all over us instead.

Moral of the story? Anything can happen, and that's all we have going for us. They beat its 9 out of 10, but we only play once. Who likes to gamble?

HTTR

 

[PinkydaPimp]

This will b classic...a game where we are supposed to lose big time and we'll squeak it out. Then errdody will think we are beter than we are and we'll lose to teams like TB or TEN handily.

hahaha sadly that is classic redskins. i dont think its out of the question that we win. Especially if we can stop the run and knowing that we have had plenty of time to prepare.

 

[RGIII HTTR]

This will b classic...a game where we are supposed to lose big time and we'll squeak it out. Then errdody will think we are beter than we are and we'll lose to teams like TB or TEN handily.

hahaha sadly that is classic redskins. i dont think its out of the question that we win. Especially if we can stop the run and knowing that we have had plenty of time to prepare.

Some how prepared and Haslett don't seem to mix. I guess in fariness, they are prepared, but have trouble adjusting. That said, I it sure enough is not out of the realm that 'Skins shut down the run and make Wilson beat them. I like the chances then and that depends on what kind of Kirk Cousins is coming to the game. As easily as I say that, I can see us getting beat handily too.

 

[hammerva]

So apparently the new rumor is that SuperBob will be playing against the Cowboys on Oct 27th before the bye week. Yeah because rushing from a serious injury has been a great idea in the past.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000405168/article/redskins-planning-for-rgiiis-return-vs-cowboys

 

[TxBuckeye]

How many blow out losses before they determine Haslett IS the problem and get rid of him? I'm still befuddled as to how he kept his job after last season.