Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Knicks Beat Lakers With Familiar Strategy

Recap: Redskins vs Rams: Redskins Need a New Play-Caller

Another one of those games where a win feels like a loss. Redskins Nation seems to be split into two camps "a win is a win" and "this team can't blow out the Rams...time to call Shanahan." I'm in the middle.  I do think it is time to strip Zorn of his play-calling. Am I the only one that thinks Zorn would be a great flag-football play-caller? Third and 5 in the red zone and you have Clinton Portis throwing the ball? When that play came into Jason Campbell, I can't imagine what his first reaction must have been. Do you think Zorn has a play in his playbook where the TE does a post over the middle...stops...does five jumping jacks (to freeze the safeties)...then goes deep?

I just don't get it. We drafted all these WRs to be our red zone guys, and we have Clinton Portis throwing the ball. At least TRY a fade. Pump fakes are a great tool to freeze a corner....didn't see any of those. I also question going for it on 4th up TWO points with two minutes to go in the game. How about kick the field goal and force the Rams to score a TD...something they're not very good at! At this point, the Redskins are 2nd to last in most points scored in the season...last place being St. Louis of course. Watching the game I feel as if Zorn is calling the plays to save his job.

Zorn thinking to himself: "Crap. I need to score a TD. Let's wow Mr. Snyder with this one...."

Washington Drive Summaries
START QTR POSS. YARD PLAYS YARDS RESULT
15:00 1 01:18 WAS 25 3 9 Punt
11:16 1 06:19 WAS 14 13 83 Field Goal
13:55 2 05:57 WAS 26 13 64 Field Goal
03:56 2 02:44 WAS 22 9 48 Fumble
13:55 3 07:28 WAS 21 14 74 Field Goal
12:55 4 02:04 WAS 6 3 -3 Punt
09:15 4 07:20 WAS 20 15 76 Downs
01:32 4 01:32 WAS 4 3 -9 End of Game

The Redskins offense is not going to blow any teams out, and we need to come to grips with that. The players took offense to the post-game booing, but what they need to realize is that false expectations have been set. All the interviews out of training camp were that the red shirts were going to step up this year, yet for a second straight game, they were playing hide and seek.

Continue reading this post >>

Star-divide

The defense was also suppose to be a turnover powerhouse with the additions of DeAngelo Hall and Albert Haynesworth, yet they are playing to their competition. The defense certainly is better, but we've been brain-washed to believe QBs will be leaving on stretchers and our defense will be scoring 2 touchdowns a game. Let's be real, the Redskins were not the best 4th defense last year. How can you be the fourth best defense and rank almost last in the league in both turnovers and sacks? The Skins defense is currently ranked tied for 22nd with 2.0 sacks. What we need to remember is that we came into this season with a lot of hopes:

- Laron Landry would have a break out season
- Devin Thomas, Malcolm Kelly, and Fred Davis will make huge contributions
- Defense would be getting loads of sacks and multiple turnovers per game
- Campbell would step up being his his 2nd year in the system
- Zorn will be more comfortable in his 2nd year

All these were suppose to happen, and so far none of them have. We expected them to, but they're not, and of course Redskins fans are impatient as the best of them, which is going to result in a rain of boos. I've always made fun of Snyder for his knee-jerk decisions, so I want to be careful that I'm not doing the same when saying "Zorn needs to be stripped of play-calling." However, we need to remember that this is year two and major mistakes are being made. The coach should never be the one to cost a game, but I certainly feel like this is the case each week with several plays or poor clock management.

Zorn and Campbell did do some things right. If Mike Sellers and Devin Thomas catch those touchdown passes, we're all high-fiving and beer-bonging the Redskins kool-aid. Dropped passes happen though, and it's over-coming mistakes that make the difference. Sherman Smith, a former teammate of Zorn in Seattle, does not have a lot of experience as a play-caller either. Before joining the Redskins, Smith was a running backs coach with the Titans for twelve years.  The Redskins need someone with experience either calling the plays or mentoring Zorn.

Looking at all these long, extended drives and time of possession statistics, it's baffling there were zero touchdowns scored. Everyone here on Hogs Haven, myself included, bashed all the outside power rankings where the Skins were ranked in the bottom ten. Looks like they might just be right. They're certainly closer. The fact the Skins can have lots of extended drives is encouraging. And one last point, I think by the end of the season we are going to look back at this game and say the Rams are a much better team than we thought. Spagnuolo made adjustments after the Seattle game, and the Rams played noticeably better.

Team Statistics
  STL WAS 
  First Downs 14 21 
    Passing 9 14 
    Rushing 3
    Penalty 2
  Third Down Efficiency 6-12 7-15 
  Fourth Down Efficiency 0-1 1-2 
  TOTAL NET YARDS 245 362 
    Total Plays 50 70 
    Average Gain Per Play 4.9 5.2 
  NET YARDS RUSHING 126 125 
    Rushes 21 33 
    Average Per Rush 6.0 3.8 
  NET YARDS PASSING 119 237 
    Completions-Attempts 15-28 23-36 
    Yards Per Pass Play 4.1 6.4 
    Times Sacked 1
    Yards Lost to Sacks 6
    Had Intercepted 0
  PUNTS 4 2 
    Average Punt 43.3 48.0 
  PENALTIES 6 5 
    Penalty Yards 45 35 
  FUMBLES 2 2 
    Fumbles Lost 1
  TIME OF POSSESSION 25:07 34:53


Poll
Should Zorn be stripped of play-calling?
Yes, but let Sherman Smith handle the play calling
140 votes
Yes, but we need to bring in an experienced Offenisve Coordinator
750 votes
No, he'll learn and will be fine
227 votes

1117 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 101 comments  |  1 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Ok, a Win is a Win but
also question going for it on 4th up TWO points with two minutes to go in the game. How about kick the field goal and force the Rams to score a TD…something they’re not very good at it! At this point, the Redskins are 2nd to last in most points scored in the season…last place being St. Louis of course. Watching the game I feel as if Zorn is calling the plays to save his job.

Kevin, coaching for his job I could handle, but he was coaching out of fear, not for his job but for losing.
A game called based on a fear of losing, the team will lose more often than not, or you’ll end up 8-8-Good call by the way. It’s like playing a prevent defense all the time when choosing what offensive calls to play. Yes, Zorn runs gadget plays which is his unique style but the plays are called only when he considers it safe, and not an issue with causing the loss.
ARE option pass 2nd play of game 1, if it fails as it did what was the harm in winning or losing the game none, except that same mentality breeds within the team and everyone plays withou passion because everything is safe and medium.
I spent a good time watching a passionate team beat a better New England team on Sunday, in 2008 I watched a passionnate team beat the Eagles and score points, as long as the Redskins stay medium and play call to not lose then every game will be close and every win will not feel like a win because they play to the level of the competition.
Zorn can learn, but a change may be something which would allow him to learn. It saddens me to think of changes, changes with a new coaching staff because overall the Redskins as an organization seem to be finally “building” and spending wisely, here’s to a win and an internal change to the play calling to continue to build a dynasty.

by dr WNC on Sep 21, 2009 10:24 AM EDT reply actions  

yea...

The team is building slowly in the right direction. No more changes are needed, I just think it would be really beneficial for Zorn to have an experienced OC in his headset. Veteran OC’s are also great at breaking down film given their history of game-planning against all these coaches in the past.

Yes, Zorn runs gadget plays which is his unique style but the plays are called only when he considers it safe

As for the gadget play, when has ARE ever run a true reverse? I can’t recall. Anytime he’s in the back-field with the ball he’s throwing….so it seems to be a bad gadget play to run.

by Kevin Ewoldt on Sep 21, 2009 10:32 AM EDT up reply actions  

Reverses are not safe

-Fumble the handoff
Play action, is not safe: again fumble the handoff.
Long passes down the middle, not safe could get intercepted.
Kicking a field goal to give the team a 5 point cushion, not safe the other team could run back the kickoff or get great starting field position
Calling plays which protect Campbells ankle: safe

I’ve mentioned in other streams a consultant like Holmgren to help with the play calling and understanding of game management.

by dr WNC on Sep 21, 2009 10:41 AM EDT up reply actions  

Offensively speaking what makes you say that?
The team is building slowly in the right direction.

by smutsboy1 on Sep 21, 2009 12:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

The fact that the Redskins actually have draft picks

Before they traded them away, now they’re using them. Orakpo, Jarmon. I say it is “slow” building b/c the youth high round draft picks are not performing. Plus, the OLine needs some major work.

by Kevin Ewoldt on Sep 21, 2009 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

I mean, we have our picks as of right now

and that’s only b/c the Cutler and Sanchez trades didn’t go through.

If we don’t resign JC, who knows what QB we might try to trade for.

I’m not predicting doom, I’m just nowhere near saying that Snyder has turned a corner.

by smutsboy1 on Sep 21, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Peyton Manning

Is a free agent at the end of this season from what I have heard…

by Kurtstack on Sep 21, 2009 7:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

Don't forget about the poor special teams play.

They could have easily had a 60 yard return and he within striking distance with 1:30. That said, why a stupid screen with 2 – 6’4" Wr and a blazing hot Cooley……. Hmmmmm

by brettpedigo on Sep 21, 2009 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

I thought he made the correct call in going for it.

A blocked FG and we are screwed. We make the FG and a TD could still beat us. We fail and they have to go 97 yds. He put the O to the test and they failed. Of course, even my unborn baby new it was CP to the left. That part of the call I will never understand. We had some decent yds off the left and some stuffs. Sellers should have plowed into JC’s back to push him right or left of center. Game over.

by Scott E on Sep 21, 2009 12:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

Blocked FGs are a rarity

We basically decided to give the Rams TWO options to beat us (TD or FG), instead of just one.

by VA_Skin on Sep 21, 2009 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

I Concur

The more I look at the numbers, the harder it is to disagree. We need some play calling skill.

Zorn has done a good job of coaching up Campbell, but I guess he isn’t capable of coordinating an offense.

Are there any good OC’s on the market?

by DCtoAustralia on Sep 21, 2009 10:43 AM EDT reply actions  

I don't even think it's a problem of coordinating

He’s got a really good variety of plays in his playbook, he just struggles with the playcalling. Honestly, if he can’t figure that out, I wouldn’t be mad to see him demoted to OC and Holmgren brought in as the head coach. That way we wouldn’t have to teach the team yet another new offense and Zorn could focus more on working with Campbell and take some time to learn a bit about playcalling.

"One-on-one? You can't." -Gilbert Arenas
JC Bandwagon all day!

by kseandoyle on Sep 21, 2009 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions  

Let's be clear though...

Stripping him of his play-calling means essentially firing him. He was hired as the offensive coordinator and elevated to head coach as the play-caller. So if you strip him of calling the plays of the offense HE brought and installed, you are saying, “See ya!” (in my opinion)
After two weeks of this, I am by far not going to launch a Jim Zorn defense. But I feel like we are kind of stuck with this organizational structure for more than just two weeks. I do think he had the worst day of anyone on the Skins’ sideline yesterday.

Kevin, to be clear, I am not saying, “Give Zorn more time”…I am saying that the chaos caused by a shake-up on the sideline right now would be too detrimental. Which leaves us in the position of being forced to give Zorn more time. The good news is that we have some teams coming up that we can compete with and you’d think we would either:
a) improve what is happening; or
b) the Zorn issue will take care of itself if we can’t get out of this upcoming stretch without a greater level of succuss.

by Sugar on Sep 21, 2009 10:58 AM EDT reply actions  

I don’t know, if we’re going to reduce the solutions to basically weighing the risk of potential chaos by calling in a new o-coordinator vs. the zorn problem fixing itself vs. the positive risk of the potentially better team we could be with a better offensive play-caller, I think the risk of chaos is relatively low on this team because the O players seem uninspired and don’t appear to put a lot of stock in what Zorn has to offer on offense, and shaking things up on uninspired teams usually carries a greater positive risk of something good happening than spontaneous combustion out of the blue.

by Grand Tanyon Sturtze on Sep 21, 2009 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions  

That I'm not sure of

I’d like to hear the pro/con arguments of those sides on the msg board, but I do think the question should be who should we bring in before the status-quo gets messier

by Grand Tanyon Sturtze on Sep 21, 2009 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

What about Holmgrem?

He’s said that he wants to get back into coaching, or at least back into the NFL. I’m not sure he’d be willing to be the offensive play caller but it could be an option. Obviously Zorn and Holmgrem were in Seattle for years together so would Zorn feel upset or slighted if Holmgrem were brought in or would he actually feel relieved and excited that a familiar face (maybe a friend?) would be on his staff. While we’re all talking about this, what’s the likelihood of anyone being brought in, or the possibility of Zorn giving up the offensive playcalling?

I’m not sure who ran the offense in Seattle when Holmgrem was there (maybe Holmgrem? Maybe the playcaller’s still there) but I always liked it. It was the closest thing to the 49ers WCO offense with Montana IMO. Does anyone know who called the offense in Seattle?

by bigrm18 on Sep 21, 2009 11:31 AM EDT up reply actions  

Holmgren did.

The OC worked in more of an advisory/support role than anything else (just like with us).

by VA_Skin on Sep 21, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's not a firing...

However, if the players don’t have trust in Zorn then there’s going to be major problems, and that’s the road we’re heading down. The players can’t be defending him….Portis whistle-blowed for a reason last year. When you take the ball out of your QBs hands in key situations and the play fails….players are going to lose trust in you, especially after they spent all off-season backing Campbell.

by Kevin Ewoldt on Sep 21, 2009 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions  

+1

They backed Campbell under the assumption that the coaching staff was doing the same. It probably created great team unity. But if they think Zorn doesn’t trust Campbell as much as they do, they’ll be lobbying Snyder and Cerrato for a change.

"One-on-one? You can't." -Gilbert Arenas
JC Bandwagon all day!

by kseandoyle on Sep 21, 2009 11:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

Bootleg

I’d like to see a bootleg or some form of a playaction roll-out where Campbell has the option to run for the pylon or hit cooley in the back of the endzone or Kelly in the corner. It puts a lot of pressure on the secondary. I know it’s not going to happen, but I would be thrilled just to see a bootleg in the redzone.

by Kurtstack on Sep 21, 2009 7:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

I agree

I think Zorn has done an excellent job coaching up Campbell, but I think he is in way over his head as a coach in the NFC East. Yes, people were calling for Coughlin’s head before he won the Superbowl, but with the exception of Andy Reid (and I think that is a big exception, working as a QB coach with Green Bay at that time, with Favre, I think speaks volumes more than working as the QB coach with Seattle. He just looks like he’s learning on the job, and I don’t think that cuts it in the NFC East. As a caveat I’m not fickle and going to boo the team, but Jim Zorn looks way in over his head outside of the QB coach niche. It’s sad, our defense is effective, but not in a very inspiring way, it is only 2 games in, but we can stop the run, we’re okay against the pass, we’re still not a defense that creates turnovers (i’m ducking because insecure greg blache might bite my head off for that one), and our offense is widely and rightly criticized as the most unimaginative in the league. I think Shanahan would be terrific and actually create some noise, something we need because we have too many good players, including the QB, to be this ineffectual.

by Grand Tanyon Sturtze on Sep 21, 2009 10:59 AM EDT reply actions   2 recs

We do have too many good players

And unfortunately, we also have too many older players that don’t have years and years to mess around while Zorn tries to find his way.

by VA_Skin on Sep 21, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

OK

I know I have probably aggravated some with my doom and gloom, but I have to agree with Kevin here, somewhat at least. The thing is, Zorn seems pretty capable at calling plays between the 20’s. But when he gets into the red zone, he locks up. I have no idea what it is, but it needs to be corrected before we go back to the big leagues. So maybe Sherm Smith taking over wouldn’t be a bad thing. It would still be Zorn’s offense, and the plays that he installs in the game plan. But maybe having someone who doesn’t have a million other responsibilities pick the plays would be the way to go here. It just seems like Zorn has no idea which plays to pick. I heard some of his postgame comments this morning, and he STILL didn’t sound sure of himself. And the fact that Danny Smith had to save him from himself is a little disconcerting as well. But, to me, the most telling sign is his interview with Sonny. I’d say Sonny knows a thing or two about playing QB. On short notice this is the best I could come up with for those comments:

Sonny started off telling Zorn if he were quarterback he’d have called a timeout rather than run that option pass to Portis, because coaches only call that play in that situation if they have no faith in their quarterback.

Funny, but the end of that statement is exactly what I was thinking while watching the game yesterday.

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 11:25 AM EDT reply actions  

It really sucks that he doesn't trust Campbell

or at least is calling the game that way. But as far as Zorn having a million other responsibilities, I don’t think that is the case. This is Zorn’s offense, and he will go down with the ship. If you take play calling away from him, there is no point keeping him on the sidelines. And no matter how you cut it, firing a coach after two games when you are 1-1 is asinine. There are plenty of plays that we know to be in the playbook yet haven’t even seen executed in the redzone. They will come.

I’ve said this a couple places, but I think Zorn’s big problem was that he is working under the assumption that we are still a power running team. When you have bro bowlers at RB, FB, and LT thats not a bad place to start from. And we were running very well outside the redzone, so trying to punch it in is not absolutely reprehensible. Unfortunately, we are not a power running team anymore, which means Zorn will be turning to Campbell more going forward if he has any sense. If we get to the Philly game still struggling with the same things, a move will probably be made. Until then, calm down.

by Boo. on Sep 21, 2009 11:38 AM EDT up reply actions  

speaking of the Philly game

muhahahaha

I'm to young to Die Danny...don't make me do it tomorrow....

by Rekka on Sep 21, 2009 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions  

A contrary theory

I think the CP-Zorn rift is bigger than we realized. I wonder if CP is just hooked on running that pitch to the left and Zorn allows that to influence his play calling. Zorn was telling on the fourth and one, CP, “You want it with the game on the line, you go for it and we’ll see…” A weak theory, perhaps. But it kind of explains some things that when they happened, seemed…well….inexplicable.

by Scott E on Sep 21, 2009 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions  

b/c everything gets harder in the redzone

it’s where the men are separated from the boys, the good offenses from the middling ones.

But when he gets into the red zone, he locks up.

by smutsboy1 on Sep 21, 2009 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

What bothered me most

was that drive you referenced with Clinton Portis throwing on 3rd down. Campbell got them into scoring territory and, all of a sudden the ball was taken out of his hands. On that drive, Campbell had only one incompletion and had completions of 18 and 24 yards (really big for the types of plays Zorn likes to call). Then we get to the 7. CP run, left end, no gain. It’s cool. Sometimes things don’t work out. Now you give it back to CP behind the right guard (you know, the one who we just lost for the season again). 2 yards. Ouch. You took a risk going back to the run and it didn’t pay off. Now you have to get it in the endzone or settle for 3 again. So you call a pass. Nice change of pace. But wait. Portis is the one passing. Are you really telling me that Clinton Portis is the only person you trust in the red zone? If he’s not running, it’s because he’s passing. You have one of the most accurate passers in the league, a guy you claimed to be backing this offseason when the front office tried to get rid of him. And you make him the middle man for an all-Portis series of downs. If it worked, I wouldn’t be questioning this as much. But it would still make me wonder why Zorn isn’t trusting Campbell.
In my opinion, the first 8 weeks of last season, it was Campbell who made the entire offense and new coaching staff look so good. He was give opportunities to stretch the field and it paid off. Now he’s rarely given that opportunity, and dropped passes on his few opportunities to aim at the end zone are really hurting things.
Should Zorn be stripped of play-calling duties? Not yet. But he’d better call his buddy Mr. Holmgren and get some advice on how to save his career. Because the next move by Snyder, as I see it, could very well be to bring in one of these future hall of fame coaches as a consultant. And if that guy decides at the end of the year he’s got the itch, Zorn will be demoted or just plain fired.

"One-on-one? You can't." -Gilbert Arenas
JC Bandwagon all day!

by kseandoyle on Sep 21, 2009 11:47 AM EDT reply actions  

a

repetitively recurring revolving theme

Campbell got them into scoring territory and, all of a sudden the ball was taken out of his hands

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yea

there’s some serious trust issues on this team right now. I keep wondering, “what’s Zorn been told behind the scenes?” Maybe he’s been told that Campbell is, no matter what, on his way out. But I also wonder what actually went on this summer. Did Zorn support the attempt to move Campbell without ever saying so publicly or to the players? Maybe his meeting with Campbell in the aftermath of the Cutler deal was just for appearances. Who knows? But his actions this week don’t mesh with his words last summer.

"One-on-one? You can't." -Gilbert Arenas
JC Bandwagon all day!

by kseandoyle on Sep 21, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

I do not feel good about next week at ALL!!!!

I think we are the team that ends that dubious drought. Agree?

by brettpedigo on Sep 21, 2009 12:06 PM EDT reply actions  

totally agree

My friends and I were actually hoping/expecting the Skins blew the Rams out…b/c we wanted to bet DET this coming week. Who knows what the line will be now.

This is not a quote I like to see:

“I am very pleased with how much we are progressing,” Zorn said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/20/AR2009092002697_2.html?sid=ST2009092002988

by Kevin Ewoldt on Sep 21, 2009 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

This is by

A coach with no clue or a coach overly sensitive about protecting a bunch of pansies and their egos. I’m just sayin’

by Scott E on Sep 21, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

In his postgame

Zorn immediately took the blame on himself for the redzone playcalling. He didn’t say “execute” or “medium” once. Thats progress there. lol.

Seriously though, it is so much easier for a single coach to adjust his approach to the game after watching the film and talking with his assistants than it is to improve the performance of the players. If you blow up the system there is no progress. Only starting over. Again. Its not a good decision and it will not happen.

by Boo. on Sep 21, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

I agree

but WILL he adjust? I haven’t seen it yet. I sure as hell hope he does, cuz I don’t really wanna start over either.

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

How do I prepare for the humiliation?

Really. Aren’t we 35-3 all time against this team, and until the late 90’s didn’t we win EVERY Game at home? How can I drive to work with a paper bag over my head?

by brettpedigo on Sep 21, 2009 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

That said...

It will be all the sweeter when we FINALLY do reach the promise land for the fourth time!!!!

by brettpedigo on Sep 21, 2009 8:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

The worst feeling in the world....

…is being scared about playing the Lions next week.

We have a good team with some decent talent and lots of high expectations.

So lets be realistic. Excuses like such as “They’re a pro team too”, “They’re not just going to roll over”, “Play calling blah blah”, “The streak had to end sometime…” are barely acceptable for a win over the Rams.

If we lose to the Lions, Zorn is gone by Monday. That would be the only possibility. The backlash from the fans/players/rest of the league/Snyder would be too great.

I’m going to be having nightmares Saturday.

by DCtoAustralia on Sep 21, 2009 10:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

And 3rd Down D

Wh the hell are we always in man coverage. Hall sucks. Sorry, but he does. they do not get the heat and the corners are always burned on easy routs. I know it is blasphemous, but we need to start over on both sides of the ball. We could be the #1 D with better calls.

by brettpedigo on Sep 21, 2009 12:10 PM EDT reply actions  

Another queit day for Landry?

Seems Horton’s name is always called. Landry finished with 1 tackle.

by Kevin Ewoldt on Sep 21, 2009 12:14 PM EDT reply actions  

They probably gameplanned away from Landry

I think Horton being more prevalent is a product of Horton being a playmaker. He does not cease to impress me every down.

by Boo. on Sep 21, 2009 12:20 PM EDT up reply actions  

Everyone game plans against Taylor/Reed/Troy Pol

yet, they make plays every down it seems. Even the older guys like Darren Shaper are ball hawking.

by Kevin Ewoldt on Sep 21, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

he's playing out of position in a non-playmaking role

if he was playing where he should be, at SS, he’d be elite already, IMO

as it is, we’re utilizing his elite speed to simply play deeeeeeeeeeeeeep-TD preventing safety.

by smutsboy1 on Sep 21, 2009 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

this coupled with

our corners starting the play in a different time zone than the receivers they’re “guarding.” Remember when CB’s used to jam WR’ off the line? I do. It was last week, when Webster shut down Moss.

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

lol…funny but factual.

it is common on 3rd and short to see them start 10 yards back from the line

unbelievably stupid too

by les boulez bomber on Sep 21, 2009 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

FS is the more play-making role

Strong Safety is the one responsible for covering the run game. Free Safety covers the passing game. We saw what happened week one last year when Landry went against a runner. He’s better at the passing game — shading the #1 WR, covering a man who shakes a CB, crossing the field to where the ball is going once the QB lets go. All the complaints I keep hearing about Landry are the same complaints people had about Sean Taylor his first 3 years in the league (too focused on the big hits, stupid penalties, playing too deep). The fact is that our defense asks a FS to play deep and basically cover the entire field. Only guys with great football instincts (Taylor, Landry) can ever play in that system, and it takes some time to master it. The Redskins basically have a 10 man defense and a 1 man watchdog lol

"One-on-one? You can't." -Gilbert Arenas
JC Bandwagon all day!

by kseandoyle on Sep 21, 2009 6:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

mostly agree

but FS in our system isn’t play-making, unfortunately.

by smutsboy1 on Sep 22, 2009 9:18 AM EDT up reply actions  

Landry missed SJax at the line on the 58 yard run. He came flying in a got juked big time.

by liger99 on Sep 21, 2009 1:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

he took the wrong angle but i can not tell if it was the only one offered to him. he was too deep in the wrong lane to start.

by les boulez bomber on Sep 21, 2009 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

To tell the truth...

I actually believe that for most of the game, the play calling was better than last week. I really liked the throw to Sellers at the goal line. We ran right and up the middle more, some deeper pass routes. It was just the goal line meltdowns (and turnovers) that made it so frustrating.

by Scott E on Sep 21, 2009 12:14 PM EDT reply actions  

Zorn

Some were saying the pass to Devin Thomas was thrown way too hard by JC…was that the case? I couldn’t tell from my vantage point.

by Kevin Ewoldt on Sep 21, 2009 12:34 PM EDT reply actions  

Yea I had a good angle and it did have some mustard on it

But he still should of caught it.

If we lose this week to Detroit, does Zorn have a job monday?

by Parks Smith on Sep 21, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

was DT being covered enought that it NEEDED to be lasered in there?

I'm to young to Die Danny...don't make me do it tomorrow....

by Rekka on Sep 21, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yea pretty much, he had to have some zip on it. An NFL WR should of caught that ball.

by Parks Smith on Sep 21, 2009 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

that's what I thought

DT messed up

I'm to young to Die Danny...don't make me do it tomorrow....

by Rekka on Sep 21, 2009 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

The Lions have lost 19 straight games and have a rookie QB. The Skins have the talent to easily win this game. If the coach can’t find a way to win, then he has no business being in the nfc east. Snyder will fire him.

by liger99 on Sep 21, 2009 1:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

One bright spot...

The special teams did a great job. Avg. 48 yds/punt. Rams were constantly starting inside their own 20. Kickoff coverage was really good. Soooo…OK we still look like the team to give the Lions a break in their 19 game tradition.

by Scott E on Sep 21, 2009 12:47 PM EDT reply actions  

so you agree

DANNY SMITH should be our coach!!

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

Hunter’s first punt was awful it just got a lot of roll.

by Parks Smith on Sep 21, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

on the play calling

I think at the very least Zorn should give Sherman Smith every third offensive series to call the plays. It will give the offense a different set of eyes and hopefully shake things up a bit.

by fatpickle on Sep 21, 2009 12:57 PM EDT reply actions  

another inexperienced play-caller isn't going to help, IMO

Look up I-95N if you want to see how it should be done with a rookie head coach:

give him a veteran OC.

by smutsboy1 on Sep 21, 2009 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

agree

completely. But, as was said before, it’s too late for that. Bringing in someone from the outside completely undermines JZ, which would probably have an affect on the team as a whole. So the best option is to utilize someone Zorn trusts, knows his offense, but can offer a change up.

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

2010

In 2010, we’ll have a new QB and a new Head Coach… Wash, Rinse, Repeat….

Can anybody tell me how many head coaches and QBs the Redskins have had since 1999?

by Kurtstack on Sep 21, 2009 1:17 PM EDT reply actions  

I believe since 1992

We’re like top 2 or 3 in number of QBs started, along with stellar offensive franchises like the Chicago Bears, who recently got their first franchise QB in team history.

(and he may turn out to suck anyway)

by smutsboy1 on Sep 21, 2009 1:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

the REAL answer?

a plethora of QB’s, but the same amount of HEAD COACHES as since ’94.

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

zorn is the 6th coach, and campbell is the 5th qb…including 99.

by grandpa grouse on Sep 21, 2009 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

good reference website

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/was/

Since 1999 we’ve had Robiskie, Turner, Schottenheimer, Spurrier (ugh), Gibbs and now Zorn for HC’s.

For QB we’ve had Brad Johnson, Banks, Ramsey, Brunell, and Campbell.

Combining the 2 we’ve had 7 different HC + QB combinations.

yeah, it’s crazy.

by ZakInOmaha on Sep 21, 2009 2:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

there are a lot of QBs missing from that list

Jeff George, Shane Matthews, Weuerrffullll, Jr Hasselbeck, Collins

by smutsboy1 on Sep 21, 2009 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

Trent Green

I believe Sage Rosenfels even played in a game or too. And Todd Husak.

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 2:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

yeah right,

but look at the guys who have been productive AFTER they left here – Brad Johnson, Rich Gannon, Trent Green. No, they weren’t HOFers, but each went to a Superbowl, 2 played in one, and one won it.

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 8:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

not quite

While I missed quite a few guys who played a game or two, none of them were really the long term plan like JC has been. Technically you also left out Rodney Peete, and Gibran Hamdon (I don’t even remember him). Green was before 1999, which is what the question stated. And if you really want all the statistics the pro-football reference website is a great resource.

Regardless the point that we’ve had way too many HC/QB combinations is on target.

The real problem is the ownership & FO (or lack of 1). Everything else is making do and that doesn’t build a quality team.

by ZakInOmaha on Sep 22, 2009 9:19 AM EDT up reply actions  

i really think the JC and JZ fingerpointing is counterproductive and completely misses the point.

the redskins need a real front office that can assemble a balanced team consistently without salary cap shennanigans that force the team to blow up and start over every five years.

VC has done a good job if the game were played 7 on 7. But it is not, and the team has gaping holes that get exploited week in and week out with enough superstars to pull out 5-9 wins per year.

They are going no where because they have too much invested in receivers, ignored the line, and dont really know what they have a QB. Oh yeah, they offered one player who is not a top 3 QB upto 100mm with at least 40mm guaranteed. That is just dumb, lousy management— all players get hurt and miss time. the giants who just dominated us and won a superbowl recently spent about the same amount of money on three very good players. its a perfect case study on why some teams consistently are winning and others consistently breaking hearts.

Temper your expectations- the problem is at the very top of the organization. i dont care how bad people think dan wants to win- he does not care enough to fix his glaring flaws. so dont expect much- 7 wins this year.

by les boulez bomber on Sep 21, 2009 3:09 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

+1,000,000,000,000,000,000

concise and deadly accurate.

(posted in the wrong place below)

by smutsboy1 on Sep 21, 2009 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

I agree completely

but since DaNapolean and his pocket-boy Vinny aren’t going anywhere, we’re gonna need a HC that can win DESPITE the front offarce. I hope Zorn turns out to be that guy.

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 4:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

so accurate

not. Well sort of. Ownership is key to a good franchise, but coaching and player performance plays a pretty huge role as well, so if we’re talking good ownership (which is essentially, what people talk about when they refer to ‘the front office’) vs. good coaching + player performance, i think it’s a moot argument. And it’s unnecessarily distracting from the things we can fix. Unless you have any ideas how we can can the owner and get a new one. I’m guessing you don’t have a solution in that regard, because it’s not a constructive nor realistic argument.

And you’re missing the forest from the trees. Yes, we have an aging and perennially injured O-line. Yes, we drafted 2 WR’s & a TE when we might have, in hindsight, made better picks. We also have one of the best, most punishing DL’s in the NFL, we have some premier defensive personnel, one of the top-10 RBs in the country, we have a Pro Bowl TE, one of the best No. 2 WR’s in Moss despite the fact that our offense is unimaginative and ineffectual + he has to play as a No. 1 & face the other team’s best & usually most physical CBs, and we have some nice depth in the secondary. So to just say that the team is going no-where solely by virtue of the admitted & well-chronicled miscues we expect from Snyder and Co. every now and then, totally misses the point. We have some great players, but they are being embarrassingly under-utilized, and the blame for that falls squarely on the coaches’ shoulders.

by Grand Tanyon Sturtze on Sep 21, 2009 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

Simply saying “Our team sucks because Danny boy sucks, temper your expectations, we don’t have the players to do jack because it’s all ownership’s fault,” isn’t a very solution-oriented stance. We have plenty of great players on both sides of the ball, but the team looks and plays uninspired and the game-calling has been widely & correctly criticized as woefully bad. It would be awesome to have the Rooneys in ownership instead of Snyder, but we have to work with what we have as fans, and for all the shortsighted decisions in the past, this year’s team has some great players, and we need someone calling a game that will maximize their potential, not undermine it to the point that the Rockies and DBacks are outscoring our offense

by Grand Tanyon Sturtze on Sep 21, 2009 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

actually, the front office is the forrest, and water runs downhill. I will say it again differently but as straightforward as possible. We have a below average offensive line. That is not the coaches fault, nor the players fault. It is the front office that provides the players, period. You can not coach up what you do not have.

prove me wrong! i will admit as much if the redskins can make it even to the conference finals. in fact, the skins have not been in the CONFERENCE finals since the 1991 season- that is 18 years ago! 2 teams make it and 14 teams watch….or 1 out of 7 chance to make it…14%….each and every year. so mathmatically speaking, we should have at least 2 appearances. we are statistically and significantly below par over a long period of time.

During those 18 years, we have had 7 different coaches, notably norv turner (6yrs), joe gibbs (3) and marty schottenheimer (1)—-all of whom are better than average coaches. in fact, here they are and their win %:

pettibone- .250%
turner- .454% (dan snyder era starts midway)
robiskie- .333%
schottenheimer- .500%
spurrier- .375%
gibbs- .469%
zorn- .500%

snyder has had 6 coaches in 12 years, and possibly counting. so yes, it all points to the top of the organization as the ROOT of the problem. even vince lombardi could not win with our O-line.

of course we have some great players. how do you think i got seven wins this year, and we might even start 5-1.

but you quoted me as saying, "Our team sucks because Danny boy sucks, temper your expectations, we don’t have the players to do jack because it’s all ownership’s fault," which I never said. And I disagree with your conclusion on whether it is not even a solution-oriented stance. It is absolutely the starting point for a solution. The first step is to identify the root problem, which is the front office. Some people still mistakenly believe all we need is a better coach and QB, and it is off to the races. Or we need a better O-line.

You miss the point because VC will fix the line by weakening something else. And then all we will need is a middle linebacker or a receiver or a running back. There will always be something with these guys because they have proven they do not know what they are doing. they have virtually ignored a below average offensive line for at least 5 years. that is a problem no coach can fix.

But just to be clear, I am not calling for new ownership. It is not anywhere in any of my posts. I am trying to force you to think about things differently in the hopes that enough voices can be heard to reach Dan Snyder so he hires a legitimate GM and front office to take over the responsibilities in assembling and fielding a consistently competitive football team. And that he recognizes the limits of his skill set and sits back, smokes cigars and look like a genius for hiring the right people to get the job done.
  

by les boulez bomber on Sep 21, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

you lost me

at

notably norv turner ….all of whom are better than average coaches.

I don’t care if his winning percentage was %.999, he will NEVER be a good coach in my book. His chalk-board squealy voice still haunts my nightmares. I get glorious satisfaction watching San Diego under perform every year with one of the league’s best rosters because their dumbass owners failed to read the writing on the wall with Turner. That guy single-handedly brought own this proud franchise LONG BEFORE lil Danny Snyder entered the picture. AND he ruined the promising career of Reggie Brooks.

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 8:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

lol…I know it pained me to write it. But the fact is that he has been a head coach for 12 years in the NFL. So it is a little hard to not acknowledge it as meaningful. I would not hire him personally. He and Marty are in the same boat, IMHO, they coach not to lose and will never win the big one unless they have overwhelming talent.

18 years, a losing record, no meaningful playoff wins, 7 coaches, and a similar number of quarterbacks….the problem is the front office.

Ironically, we could not sign a decent quarterback if we had one without blowing up the team….which they will be forced to do in the next couple of years anyways!

by les boulez bomber on Sep 22, 2009 7:14 AM EDT up reply actions  

Marty & Norv are nothing alike

Norv Turner has inherited teams with talent and run them into the ground while Marty has gone to teams without much talent and built them up. Before Marty arrived at the Chiefs they had 1 winning season out of the last 6 with a record of 38-56-2 for those years. In the 6 years prior to Marty at San Diego they were 31-65. Both were absolutely terrible teams. Even the Browns were only 47-50 when he took over there (in mid season) which is hardly a team with loaded talent. meanwhile Turner took over a team that had gone to the Super Bowl 2 years earlier and promptly ran them (us) into the ground. In San Diego he took over a team with a 14-2 record and made them mediocre. You really don’t need to be that good to win the AFC West division.

Sadly it’s true that Marty could never win the big one but he was a far better coach than Turner and he built teams up, not ran them into the ground so to me they are nothing alike.

Never win the big one? Well since we haven’t been to the big one in 18 years I’m a lot more focused on consistently having a winning record so we can actually get into the playoffs. Quite frankly a Marty type of coach, as in someone who can build a team, would be a good solution for this team.

But that doesn’t solve the FO and ownership problems.

To me the real ownership problem is that he hired his buddy and won’t create a real FO. If Danny were to do that I’d be just fine with his ownership. So that is relatively easy to fix and I hope he realizes it…SOON!

by ZakInOmaha on Sep 22, 2009 9:38 AM EDT up reply actions  

Wait
even vince lombardi could not win with our O-line

Mike Tomlin won the Super Bowl, just last year, with one of the worst O-lines imaginable. Worse than ours? Yes.

"One-on-one? You can't." -Gilbert Arenas
JC Bandwagon all day!

by kseandoyle on Sep 22, 2009 1:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

that's an exception, not the rule

an extreme exception.

winning with a bad OL is extremely difficult and unlikely.

by smutsboy1 on Sep 22, 2009 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

The players took offense to the post-game booing,

I think the issue is more than expectations. Ten years of poor management is a long time for people to support getting ripped off on concessions, parking, ticket pricing, etc.
Cooley himself had a very good game, but he doesn’t understand the fans perspective.
Before the Steel Curtain, the Steelers didn’t have great success. The Cardinals stunk up the joint before leaving St. Louis. The Skins were not that good during Otto Graham’s time.

Cooley made reference to burger flippers, but someone with that kind of income could not afford Fedex. The comment was very out of touch.

by Jefferson1935 on Sep 21, 2009 3:33 PM EDT reply actions  

everyone involved needs to understand that it was fans venting frustration

if anyone wasn’t frustrated at the end of yesterday’s game, you weren’t paying attention.

I was at the game, and didn’t boo at the end b/c the kneeldown is the best play you can possibly see your team run. But I perfectly understood the frustration.

Cooley and every other Redskin should too.

by smutsboy1 on Sep 21, 2009 3:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

our inept offense

They are all saying Zorn…I agree he is one of the problems, but, has anyone looked at Mr.
Campbell?……Everyone says he is 23 for 35, 245 yards…..etc…….do you know that yards don’t win games, points do. And he can’t put them on the board. We have steady, not great, Todd Collins on the bench. He has outplayed Campbell in the preseason for the past 2 years and still he sits on the bench. Why not give Collins the nod one time and see what happens??……..Or does Snyder has too much money invested in Campbell. If that is the case and he wants a Super Bowl, bite the bullet and go with Collins.

by samspad on Sep 21, 2009 8:44 PM EDT reply actions  

Oh boy

I thought this discussion died with the preseason. Did Campbell drop those two passes for TD’s? Did he call the Portis pass debacle? If he needs to be benched than o does Portis, because Campbell only had 4 chances in the red zone, while Portis had many more.

Why not give Collins the nod one time and see what happens??

Do you think Collins would have run for those 2 first downs? Not a chance. His best days are behind him NEVER CAME!! If you don’t like Campbell, fine. But his play has not been our biggest problem these last 2 games. Period.

by CJHutch on Sep 21, 2009 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think ...

the fade pattern basically sums up the whole discussion of what is wrong. The fade I’m talking about is the one to ARE where he drew the interference flag that was picked up. I have a few issues with this play. First, the pass is a fade to El instead of Kelly/Thomas/MM. Zorn needs to get the right palyers on the field for a fade route. Second, Zorn needs to call pass plays where the receivers are in the endzone where they can make plays….only two play calls where JC throws into the endzone. The td pass to cooley last week was great, let’s see more of that…it will open things up more the dink-and-dunk passes and the run game. I want to see our receivers get a chance to make plays. The last issue on the fade pass is that JC needs needs to take some risk and throw the ball where only our guy can get it. All he had to do was not throw the ball into the stands and we are first and goal from the one. That was typical of JC where he does not throw the ball into seams or challenging our guys to make a play.

by liger99 on Sep 21, 2009 10:12 PM EDT reply actions  

well I guess we're all armchair GM's

if we look back to last year’s draft, many folks would have liked to have seen one of those picks used to an OL slot, instead it went to Davis, who was labelled as can’t miss. The problem is, the personnel that were drafted are not making their impact on the field. I think everyone wouldn’t be pissed off if the young guys were producing, the problem is, they aren’t. Hence they get labelled as busts and the FO still has holes to fill. Did we need the TE David, no, it was penny wise and pound foolish to go draft him, but in hindsight, who do they have behind Cooley, is TE Depth any less an issue than OL depth. The problem is, we got bit where the Depth isn’t (again) and the guyys picked up to provide said depth, aka Rinehart, aren’t producing.

I see it as a pick your poison, or the NFL Murphey Law, you’ll always get dinged where you can least afford it, or the corollary is, you have depth, so get ready to lose one of your stars. The thing is, other teams don’t seem to have this issue, the problem with the ’Skins is that we lock up too many guys on long term contracts and the organization is still old school. Other organizations, like the Giants, the Steelers, the Pats, the Ravens, sorry they let guys walk and replace them with all of those supplemental draft picks and play the game that way. The ’Skins could stand to move to that philosophy, the problem is, selling it to the masses who felt that they have waited long enough to expect a winner to be delivered.

Answers, good luck, we can theorize all we wish, but we don’t own the team, all we can do is either love ’em or leave ’em.

That being said, I still have hope for this year.

I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused....

by piratedan7 on Sep 22, 2009 1:44 AM EDT reply actions  

well said!

consistently poor teams lose their fan bases. and dan is a businessman first.

he will come around one day. that is where my hope lies.

by les boulez bomber on Sep 22, 2009 7:18 AM EDT reply actions  

I'm with you

Winning teams make money and Dan likes to do that so I think there’s a good chance he’ll eventually establish a FO.

I’ve been a Redskins fan since the late 70’s and I’m not going anywhere.

by ZakInOmaha on Sep 22, 2009 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Media Requests please email hogshaven@gmail.com

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Arnold-schwarzenegger-kindergarten-cop_small
Trading Up Is Not The Solution. Here's why.
Super_47_small
I Ran Into Jim Haslett and We Talked QB Draft, Manning, Trading Up
Images_small
SB Nation 2012 NFL Mock Draft

Recent FanPosts

Small
Best Team for Jason Campbell?
Small
Peyton Manning...
Small
Where's your cut off
Small
Some clarity on Peyton's injury
Small
General Manager Me
Small
So here's the thing about Peyton Manning...
Small
Trading Back
Paterno_tribute_small
How Stupid Giants Fans Are

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Superbowl_small Kevin Ewoldt

Riggins_small Ken Meringolo

Editors

Fb_small Parks Smith

Chalkboard_football-opt403x300o00s403x300_small UkRedskin

Washington_redskins_helmet_small Redskins News

Authors

Badshirt2__2__small fatpickle

Paterno_tribute_small Tiller56

Small Steve Shoup

Defaukt_small HTTR4LIFE

Hh_small Ronnie Adkins