The Folsom Point: Coffee and a Cold Shower
by thatguyben on Sep 28, 2010 11:00 PM EDT
Email
Print
It is a simple multiple choice question: Do you see the loss to the Rams as a canary in the coal mine the Redskins are headed down a long path to a bad season kind of loss? Or do you see it as an acceptable part of the sausage making of a good football team? Because I thought I knew and now I do not.
In three games we went from hope inspiring win to productive loss to OMG THE REDSKINS ARE AWFUL! Two full days of coverage into this week's loss and some themes are emerging, let us review them and see if they really apply.
First, this was a tough loss, the Redskins gave up play after play and never put the game away defensively. If you go and look at the Gamebook (PDF) and check out the Rams ten longest plays from scrimmage, there were no knockout punches, just a steady stream of jabs that kept the chains moving, three of the top five of those gainers would have had different outcomes if Kareem Moore had not whiffed, if DeAngelo Hall had not fallen down and if DeAngelo had covered Mark Clayton's inside move, it strikes me that DeAngelo's boast last week of wanting to cover opponents' top receiver was ill advised.
Offensively there was no rhythm to go with some questionable personnel calls. With or without Anthony Armstrong is it time to see if Devin Thomas can play a little? This somehow reminds me of former Redskins receiver Desmond Howard's situation in Green Bay in 1996, while the guy was tearing up the kickoff return game there was no way Mike Holmgren would let Brett Favre throw it to Desmond on a dare, the guy just could not run a route. Whatever the case may be with Devin, the team could have used another viable option out there.
There are deeper questions that emerged this week.
Is Kory Lichtensteiger that much of an upgrade at left guard over Derrick Dockery? And I am asking because I cannot really tell the difference. It seems as though we should have worked through this in camp, the shuffling and the starting, the box score says Derrick played but I never saw him so it must have been Kory all the way. I understand if the team is trying to find the right combination or legitimately develop a rotation to give the most players game experience, unless there is something about Derrick or Kory that you are seeing and I am not then it seems like coach Shanahan is treating the left guard position like it is still preseason.
What happened at the tailback position? I thought Keiland Williams was the number two guy and Ryan Torain number three, I admit here that I thought Ryan was a better player in preseason, the team kept Keiland on the roster and stashed Ryan on the practice squad. Keiland now has no carries in three games while Ryan has seven in one, if Ryan is the better option for the team then why wait two games? Is Clinton Portis hurt or will he always fall down now to protect the ball?
Is the team too old to compete? We know the Redskins are the oldest team in the league, with both starting receivers over 30 and an offensive line with three starters over 30, unless you count Kory over Derrick in which case that means two. In the defensive front seven there are four regular contributors at 30 or over and two at 35 or over. Santana Moss is tearing it up, the offensive line is an upgrade from last season and the defense had no problem in the the first two games putting pressure on the quarterback. Honestly it does not seem to me that age is really the issue.
Is the defensive scheme wrong for the team? I will grant you that Andre Carter should not be in pass coverage, shame on any coordinator that puts him there, he should be rushing the passer on every play, beyond that is the 3-4 really such a bad option for this team? The Redskins are giving up more yards per game than any team in the league, yet held the Cowboys to one touchdown and were within a couple individual mistakes of beating the high flying Texans. There was little pressure Sunday on Sam Bradford but plenty on Matt Schaub the week before. Washington is not on track for a top ten defense, something the team has enjoyed consistently over most of the past decade. Are we still in the adjustment period or is the personnel all wrong?
Does Kyle Shanahan + Donovan McNabb = Andy Reid + Donovan McNabb? A good friend and Eagles fan told me not long after Dono's trade here that I was going to learn first hand why the Eagles ran the pass heavy offense they did for Dono's eleven seasons there, because having that arm and that mobility in and out of the pocket is like a drug, that with Donovan under center all offensive coordinators believe they can pass their way out of danger. In the Rams game after drawing to within one point at halftime the Redskins proceeded to run the ball only five times in the second half and the alleged second string tailback never got a carry. What about this famous Mike Shanahan commitment to the running game, is that gone now that Kyle is in charge? Is it a work in progress? Or does the demand to try and win each week mean the Redskins will run it a few times in the first half then start chucking it to try and catch up?
I have insisted from the beginning of this new era of team management that new real actual general manager Bruce Allen and head coach Mike Shanahan were playing with house money this year, that the simple act of putting the team's future in the hands of accomplished football professionals entitled the team to a freebie year, whether that year was 3-13, 5-11 or 7-9, the idea that future years would pay off meant Redskins fans would suffer whatever this year brought. Was I wrong?
=====
Ben Folsom is going to Philadelphia in a number five jersey next week and is edtor of The Curly R, a blog covering the Redskins and the NFL since 2006. The Folsom Point appears Tuesdays on Hogs Haven.
28 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Exactly, and
you seem to have said it a few time or question it a few times but it seems to me the Redskins Coaching staff is less about “game planning” to win and more about “game planning” to still see "What in the hell they got, what they need and who are viable players for “R U in”" Seems this year is not about “R U in” but more on figure what they got and a plan on how to fix it…Enjoy the game!
honest response
Didn’t they do that in training camp & pre-season? I think we just don’t have as much talent as we thought we had.
I agree with both of you
There is something to be said for trying to get the right chemistry or right combination of players, it is something else to treat the first quarter of the season like an extended training camp.
I cannot be the only one that spotted Torain as a better runner than Williams, why did it take the geniuses in Ashburn two weeks to figure that out? And if Brandon Banks was such a sparkplug that he made the roster, why did they not re sign him to the practice squad when they promoted Ryan? After a full offseason and camp the team should have a better handle on the talent it has.
=====Curly R: The Redskins Blog=====
Did you not consider the thought that maybe the reason Williams was on the team before Torain was b/c he could play fullback in a pinch?
Ben
Appreciate your article, it was a nice read.
I wan’t to comment on Licht at LG. I don’t know if he’s that much better than Dock just yet; it’s only 3 games into the season, but I will tell you this; Rams or not, we were able to run the ball with him in there. Could just be coinincidence. Either way, we seemed to get on track with the running game.
Now, if memory serves me correctly, wasn’t Kory a C in college? Hummmmmmmm? Maybe a replacement for Rabach in the future????
Casey, not Hicks, Licht or Dock seems to be the problem right now on our offensive line. I don’t thinl anything will happen this season with him, but the staff surely needs to look at upgrading this position in the off-season. Maybe that second rounder can be used to find a C, or maybe free agency will open up some options there. Either way, I don’t know if I can live through another season with Rabach at C. Maybe Cook, with his size, can handle the position in 2011(given he shows improvement while on the PS). I know in today’s game, the C position needs to be a guy who has the quickness to ghet to the cutoff block in the zone scheme, but who also has the bulk and power to handle 300+ pound nose tackles. Cook was a dominate C in college; hopefully that will transition to the pro game.
I think it was RVA who made the point about the O’Dowd kid from USC. Although I am against taking an interior linemen with our first pick(I believe we need to add youth at WR,RB or QB) I wouldn’t be all too upset if we chose O’Dowd to be our future C. He could have been a 1st rounder if he had chosen to come out last year, and he is sure to be a good C in the league, in the mold of Mangold, just more athletic.
Don't ever let failure get you down. Remember, a very successful major league hitter failes 70% of the time.
Licht is listed as the backup C
So maybe he is being groomed with playing time, I agree Casey has been a dwindling resource for several seasons now and a weakness at C would definitely spill over into the G spots. We need a new C, no question about that.
Again with the theme that player shuffling is part of finding chemistry, if Licht is the better at LG than Dock, how did it take this long to figure out? The team did run the ball better in the first half, but then quit on it in the second half down only one point. If a left guard can run block and no one is there to call the play, does it happen?
=====Curly R: The Redskins Blog=====
Great choice of words(LOL)
would definitely spill over into the G spots
Sorry, the inner child in me came out.
Don't ever let failure get you down. Remember, a very successful major league hitter failes 70% of the time.
Thank God you aren't the personnel guy Tiller
are you really already advocating for wasting our top pick on a QB? At this point it almost certainly needs to be DL most likely NT if we’re doing this 3-4 thing though another O-lineman would be equally justifiable. The WR and RB moves are only slightly less stupid.
by SkinsOsTerps on Sep 29, 2010 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions
QB only if it's a true franchise QB
And the default evaluation result for all college QB’s is that they aren’t a NFL franchise QB.
Doesn’t it relly all depend on what the draft class is like? If it’s loaded with OL and slim on others then doesn’t it makes sense to grab a few OL? But then what if we have a 6-10th overall pick and the OL class is awful so there’s only 1 or 2 guys worth taking and meanwhile the RB class is deep, wouldn’t it make sense to grab a good RB?
To me the personnel guy has to balance out needs with the best players available because if you go strictly on need you end up with sub par telent in the long run.
Excellent point 4Life
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
FWIW, this draft is weak on OT’s, and very heavy on WR’s(if the juniors who are expected to come out actually do). The draft is also quite good in interior linemen, and could be a good QB class, again depending on the JR’s(Luck and Mallett are both studs)
Don't ever let failure get you down. Remember, a very successful major league hitter failes 70% of the time.
We don't know what the future holds for McNabb
and even if he signs for us for 2-3 more years, we will need to find his replacement sooner rather than later.
I think aFan4Life put it best. We have to wait and see who is going to enter the draft, and where we will be picking.
I do however believe we can pick up some valuable FA interior O-Linemen to help upgrade.
Don't ever let failure get you down. Remember, a very successful major league hitter failes 70% of the time.
ALL TOO TRUE
All of us TALK about how the ‘Skins should “build through the draft”….but deep down inside, I think we still somehow expect them to win with what they already have.
I’m as guilty as anyone on that count!
It’s the same disease the whole society has… WE WANT WHAT WE WANT RIGHT AWAY…which makes us, in a word, IDIOTS.
A young 4-12 team that’s been down for a few years CAN become a 10-6 team “overnight” because it has had two or three years of picking players in the first few slots of each round. Sooner or later, that talent matures and a good team emerges.
An OLD 4-12 team that’s been in the middle of the pack has less of a chance to turn things around and an OLD 4-12 team that trades away large numbers of its picks and instead signs OLD free agents has even less of a chance. Guess which one the ’Skins are.
I was predicting a 6 and 10 season
So patience wins wise is not my problem.
I get upset with this team when they show up for games flat and unprepared and/or mail it in in the second half. I saw plenty of that the last two years and I really didn’t expect to see any of it this season… This is why this last game really pisses me off
The world looks mighty different when you're peeking out your belly button
by Skins Fan '77 on Sep 29, 2010 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Just win (in a few years time), baby!
As you mentioned, it’s difficult to know exactly what to make of the Skins right now. Granted, they were abysmal against the Rams but, conversely, there were plenty of positives to be taken from the first two games. Were the player and coaching deficiencies evident in St Louis evidence of a deep rooted malaise or just a (very) bad day at the office?
This Jekyll and Hyde unpredictability is highlighted by the fact that we don’t know which Redskins will turn up in Philly. Nothing would surprise me. However, such are the flaws on the Redskins right now that to beat the Eagles, Colts, Packers et al the Skins need to be decidedly greater than the sum of their parts and that’s just not possible on a consistent basis.
I have insisted from the beginning of this new era of team management that new real actual general manager Bruce Allen and head coach Mike Shanahan were playing with house money this year, that the simple act of putting the team’s future in the hands of accomplished football professionals entitled the team to a freebie year, whether that year was 3-13, 5-11 or 7-9, the idea that future years would pay off meant Redskins fans would suffer whatever this year brought. Was I wrong?
No, you’re not wrong. Before the start of the season, when we’re all binge drinking on the Kool-Aid, I think the general consensus amongst Redskins fans was that we’d finish somewhere between 7-9 and 9-7. Whilst acknowledging the coaching and GM upgrade, we accepted that this season represented the first steps in a major rebuild of the Washington Redskins. Of course, through Shanahan and Allen’s actions and statements, this season has been given the shiny veneer of a win-now philosophy and that’s the way it has to be, for both players and fans alike. But it really is about the long term.
I see parallels with football (soccer) where it’s an oft-stated view that a manager (head coach) generally needs three years for the chance to succeed and to make his mark. However, in this age of immediate gratification and under an intense media glare, he rarely gets given this time and at the first sign of struggle the manager is often fired – sometimes somewhat ludicrously, after just half a dozen or so games into his tenure.
We, as fans, buy completely into this win-now mentality. It’s only natural given our heavy financial and emotional investment into our team game after game, season after season. Coupled with a decade of failure and repeated false dawns, it’s a big ask to display the sort of patience that would test a Buddhist monk, particularly as non of us have the foresight to know if our patience will be rewarded or not.
As much of a bitter pill as it will be to swallow yet another losing season (if that is indeed the case this year) I can accept it because I still believe that Shanahan, at some point, will return the Redskins to a position where we’re a major player again. Only it might take a few years….
by English Redskin on Sep 29, 2010 8:11 AM EDT reply actions
The Donald Perspective
Why reinvent the wheel right?
“Don’t do or say things you would not like to see on the front page of The Washington Post. " – that one is for you Clinton.
“Don’t speak ill of your predecessors or successors. You didn’t walk in their shoes.” ahhh, who know Rumsy had such foresight on the whole Donovan thing?
“I don’t do quagmires.” – Gonna need to get Shanny on message here
“If in doubt, don’t. If still in doubt, do what’s right.” – Like we told Andy, RUN the effing ball
“If the staff lacks policy guidance against which to test decisions, their decisions will be random.” – and they will pas, pass, pass
“It is easier to get into something than to get out of it.” – yikes, not sure if this applies more to Vick or McNabb
“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.” – how could I leave this out? Now we just have to agree on what we know
by Wilbert Montgomery on Sep 29, 2010 8:24 AM EDT reply actions
wait until the end of the season to discuss Vick
Lot’s of QB’s have had a good stretch of 3 to 4 games (Derek Anderson anyone?) and then when teams plan for them they stink it up. That’s what I expect out of Vick. He’s a great athlete but a mediocre QB as you can see from his poor completion %. The strategy that finally made him reveal his true colors when he was in Atlanta was that teams would take away the run and force him to pass. That’s what we need to do against him. It means a controlled rush that takes away running lanes.
Agreed - sort of
I agree that we have a bad sample size for Vick against some pretty poor competition – sans 2Qs against Green Bay. What we can say is that he is not playing like he did in Atlanta. His best days in Atlanta came close to the QB rating he is putting-up in consecutive games in Philly. He is matching or beating his career highs in passing yards every game. He is hanging in the pocket, eyes down field, almost to a determent. His approach to the game is different. We need to see if he can maintain this approach but, if he can, I think we’ll need to toss-out the Atlanta days in our reassessment of who Vick is as a QB.
by Wilbert Montgomery on Sep 29, 2010 10:12 AM EDT up reply actions
I'd rather stick with McNabb and groom a young QB
Vick isn’t exactly young amymore either, he’s only 4 years younger than McNabb.
That Was the Plan...
… but how many years can you go with that plan before you hand the keys over to the kid? Obviously Andy and Joe gave us their answer. I’m a McNabb fan but am very intrigued by Kolb. Honestly, I hate Vick. However, as long as Vick keeps playing smart, solid football, Andy looks like a genius. As soon as he gets busted pulling tubes with Marcus, Andy looks like a Dolt. I have to believe the later will come at some point.
by Wilbert Montgomery on Sep 29, 2010 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions
interesting post
Q: “Do you see the loss to the Rams as a canary in the coal mine the Redskins are headed down a long path to a bad season kind of loss? Or do you see it as an acceptable part of the sausage making of a good football team?”
A: It’s part of the sausage making. The hard truth is that our talent level was really low because VC had no idea how to identify talent or how to build a team. Now we have to make up for years of mismanagement. I thought last year was a good off season with 2 OT’s and some other OL brought in but 1 year isn’t enough to fix years of mismanagement.
DT
As far as DT goes, I’d like to see him start so the whining about him not being given a chance will end. I have no idea what’s going on with him but I had spending a relatively valuable draft pick and ending up with nothing so he needs to get a shot. Or maybe he looks terrible in practice so the coaches don’t trust him. At some point a player has to earn his coach’s trust. So do it DT – there’s no crying in football!
LG
As far as LG goes, they do seem like a toss up in which case I would start the guy who best fits the future schemes (zone blocking) or who is younger. Kory is 5 years younger so I’d go with him. But it’s not like we don’t need depth – we are in no position to let any competent (or semi-competent) OL go.
AGE
It’s never the age, it’s the mileage. CP is very high mileage while Moss isn’t. Speed tends to drop as a player gets older so age can be a problem (it even happened to Jerry Rice eventually) but I don’t think age is our #1 issue, it’s talent level. We have a few really good players but we also have some stinkers and very little depth.
Last Week
I thinkt the Rams coaches did a better job of preparing their team. Not to give our players an out because they did execute poorly but still the coaching advantage went to the Rams. Shanahan and his staff have been around the NFL long enough to know better than to assume a win.
3-4 defense
As we have discussed many times before, the key to the 3-4 is the NT and we don’t have 1. Would it really have hurt us to play 1 more year in the 4-3 while we have 4-3 personnel and then switched to a 3-4 next year after they bring in a true NT? I don’t think so.
McNabb
Does Kyle Shanahan + Donovan McNabb = Andy Reid + Donovan McNabb? I don’t know but I hope not. Another possibility is that our RB corps is so poor that McNabb passing is just a better option than CP falling down.
Team Management
I think we do have a real GM but it takes time to clean up the mess that Snyder and VC created. The real problem seems to be that we all expected too much from 1 year of proper management and we over estimated our talent level.
You didn't mention one thing...
Perhaps the Skins were just plain outcoached? Spagnolo was a phenomenal defensive coach with the Giants and it showed Sunday. Schurmer (sp) the offensive coordinator called the game of his life taking the weaknesses he saw in our defense and keeping Bradford upright and clean with quick passes that negated the blitzes and runs that have been the achilles heel of our defense this season so far. So the outcome was predictable. The Cowpies never ran the ball enough even though they were having success with it. The Texans got contained in their running game to an extent but in doing so the Redskins left the secondary in deep doo doo. Let’s face it this defense is new and just not that good…yet. Is this defense a square peg in a round hole? So far it looks like it.
they were definitely out coached
And I think Bradford is not a regular rookie QB. I wonder if he’ll be able to stay healthy.
On one running play in the 2nd half that was a long gainer, McIntosh was held as the runner was near him (the guy's arm was
wrapped around him). This sustained a Rams’ drive that resulted in a TD. In a situation like that you can’t blame the defensive player, but stuff like that adds up in a game.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- 10 to watch at the scouting combine: The offense
- Wisconsin state assembly passes resolution declaring 12/12/12 as ‘Aaron Rodgers Day’
- Training Day: Working with the quarterbacks, and not breathing
- Tom Martinez, Tom Brady’s mentor, dead at 66
- Brady Quinn apologizes for Tebow remarks, claims an ‘inaccurate portrayal’
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
