Recap: Vikings @ Redskins quick hits

by Skin Patrol on Sep 11, 2006 11:56 PM EDT in Recaps Comment 8 comments

A very disapointing game for the Washington Redskins who dropped their home opener 19-16.

What went right -- The preseason speculation about our offense should end despite the fact that we had a mediocre full-game effort. The Redskins capably moved the ball on four out of ten scoring drives. Obviously we could've moved the ball better throughout the game, but the catastrophic predictions have been overcome. This offense is at least capable of attacking the field.

Clinton Portis played and that's good news. He also rushed for 4 yards per carry and found the endzone. At 100% vs. Dallas we will hope for a big game, as he had to share half his carries with a fairly unimpressive Ladell Betts. TJ Duckett did not carry the football.

What went horribly, horribly wrong -- The Vikings won.

Mike Rumph has done nothing to convince me that he is a serviceable backup CB. I do not think we can consistently win games with him starting in our secondary. He gave up two deep plays, including a touchdown, where he straight up was beat. On 3rd and 7 in the first quarter he gives up a 46 yard rececption to Troy Williamson. That is totally unacceptable. On 3rd and 7, Troy Williamson should not get behind Rumph for that many yards. And then Rumph let Robinson get behind him for the 20 yard TD reception in the 3rd quarter.

Derrick Frost was horribly inconsistent, though did improve as the game went on. I hated him in the first half and... didn't hate him (I guess) in the second. Our punting/kicking situation is absolutely unsettled. Our punt coverage unit was also unimpressive.

Winning teams do not settle for 3 field goals in the redzone. We have got to be better than one for four in our opponent's territory.

I'd love to hear our readers' thoughts on what went wrong and how we can improve in week 2. Frankly I'm too shocked/frustrated/intoxicated to really address it all now. Expect a more comprehensive review to follow tommorrow.

0 recs | Comment 8 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Rundown on tonight

The Good:

DT Golston had some moments, which is good the D Line has some depth.

The offense looked like an NFL offense.

Portis played. He also scored. Huge victory.

ARE showed why he is a dangerous player whenever he touches the ball.

The Bad:

First, the loss. At home. In the opener. On MNF.

The was hardly any pressure on Johnson, especially when there were on 3-4 rushers. One, I repeat 1, sack the whole game.

The defensive backfield. Rumph, yes, but also the penalties on Taylor as well as 3rd down conversions (8 of 16, 50%) a lot of which were longer than 6 yards. You work hard on first and second down, you have to get off the field a lot more than half the time.

On the other side, the Skins were a paultry 4 for 12, or 33%, on 3rd down.

John Hall, shaky all night, missed the game tying kick.

The Ugly:

2 of the 3 leading tacklers were the starting safeties. In the defense Williams runs, the linebackers should make most of the plays. Marshall led with 9 tackles but still...

Frost. Need I say more?

Punt and kick coverage. See above.

An injury with exactly 0 seconds off the clock to a key special teams and defensive veteran. (By the way, any one have an official update on his condition?)

Overall:

All in all, a very bad showing.

Take nothing away from the Vikes, they are a very solid team. They proved they can run the ball and pass effectively, especially on Play Action. Their Defense made plays when they had too, got off the field on 3rd down. Their kicker made his pressure kick (yes, from a much shorter distance but 3 points are 3 points.)

by TexSkins on Sep 12, 2006 1:57 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

About their 3rd downs...

Converted 3rd downs:

Drive 1 - 3rd and 9, 3rd and 7, 3rd and Goal (from the 4)

Drive 2 - 3rd and 4

Drive 7 - 3rd and 7, 3rd and 9, 3rd and 5 (20 yard TD)

Drive 8 - 3rd and 3

Drive 9 - 3rd and 9

Drive 10 - 3rd and 10

Precious time and field position lost. Seven 3rd downs of 5+ yards converted.

by TexSkins on Sep 12, 2006 2:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Almost all of them....

...to the slot receiver in the middle of the field.

It's like they said, "Let's keep running this play on 3rd down until they show us they can defend it." And we never did.

by zknower on Sep 12, 2006 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

official update on prioleau:

he's out for the rest of the season with a torn ACL.

by redskins4adam on Sep 13, 2006 5:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the scoop

I've done a write up on the main page but credited you with the scoop. Thanks for your help!

by Skin Patrol on Sep 13, 2006 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The passing game

Ok so I was a little nervous when the first pass out of the box was a WR screen. Except for the long pass to Santana on the legal re-entry from the sideline, I don't really remember Brunell going downfield much.

If they are planning on running the middle and using screens to set up a longer passing game, they need to be able to complete those passes, or else opposing teams will stack the box and just dare Brunell to throw.

=====The Curly R: Blogging the Redskins=====

by thatguyben on Sep 12, 2006 10:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs

That seemed like the part of our

offense that clicked the most. We ran the short passes very well and it helped Brunell early in the game avoiding some blitzes. What confused me is that, if it works so well then, why didn't it work later in the game when we were in the redzone? They brought a lot of pressure on us when we were close to the endzone, yet it didn't seem like Brunell had any screen options. Result? A few throw aways and incomplete passes that were short of the first down line anyways. Settle for a field goal.

I thought we ran the ball well when Portis was in. He had 4 yards a carry. Obviously I would've liked more down the field throws, but I thought the offense at times looked impressive and creative. Up until we reached the redzone, that is.

by Skin Patrol on Sep 12, 2006 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs