Jump to content

Featured Replies

Just now, jsb235 said:

If you want your blood to boil, try watching our final second down play on the drive that resulted in the missed field goal.

It was a pitch to Boston Scott and he had a ton of room. WFT had one chance to stop us, a corner, and we had Peters out there in perfect position to block him. And then he just ran right by him. Didn't make any effort. The corner didn't make any move. JP just blew by him. If he makes that block the play goes for at least 10 yards and we get points that drive.

The crap thing about the loss is that the guys making all the money on the top of the roster lost a game that the guys making no money on the bottom of the roster tried so hard to win. 

Is that the same drive Wentz took an unnecessary sack that took us from what a 40 yard FG attempt to a 53 yarder Jake ended up missing??? 

  • Replies 89.6k
  • Views 2.3m
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

Posted Images

  • Author
2 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

If you want your blood to boil, try watching our final second down play on the drive that resulted in the missed field goal.

It was a pitch to Boston Scott and he had a ton of room. WFT had one chance to stop us, a corner, and we had Peters out there in perfect position to block him. And then he just ran right by him. Didn't make any effort. The corner didn't make any move. JP just blew by him. If he makes that block the play goes for at least 10 yards and we get points that drive.

The crap thing about the loss is that the guys making all the money on the top of the roster lost a game that the guys making no money on the bottom of the roster tried so hard to win. 

Scott had a few very noticeable opportunities to cut up field and go north south....but he tried to go outside. The hole was there. Gotta trust it and hit your mark.

  • Author
Just now, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Is that the same drive Wentz took an unnecessary sack that took us from what a 40 yard FG attempt to a 53 yarder Jake ended up missing??? 

That goes to the combination of errors. Kelce put it well. Watch his interview. Every player did their part to screw up just enough.

1 minute ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

Is that the same drive Wentz took an unnecessary sack that took us from what a 40 yard FG attempt to a 53 yarder Jake ended up missing??? 

Yup. Wentz had Goedert on the next play but didn't throw the ball. Just a really bad day for him.

  • Author

Kelce got bullrushed back so bad ...it blew up a crucial play. It wasn’t like he gave up some ground. He went back quicker than Mills in his backpedal.

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

That goes to the combination of errors. Kelce put it well. Watch his interview. Every player did their part to screw up just enough.

By all means but at the end of the day it’s on Wentz to not take that sack or minimize it know the situation... Something you expect from a young QB Wentz is going into year 5 can’t make those mistakes 

  • Author
1 minute ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

By all means but at the end of the day it’s on Wentz to not take that sack or minimize it know the situation... Something you expect from a young QB Wentz is going into year 5 can’t make those mistakes 

I wouldn’t disagree that. He clearly got rattled.

  • Author

My point is just about who didn’t make a big mistake?  Up and down the whole team. Everybody took their turns. I’ll include coaches with that.

  • Author

I think that was Wentz’s worst game as a pro. I hope he can shake that off.

6 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Kelce got bullrushed back so bad ...it blew up a crucial play. It wasn’t like he gave up some ground. He went back quicker than Mills in his backpedal.

Yup, Kelce had two horrible plays that cost us yardage on running plays. The one where he got bullrushed and then another where he had a LB in is sights on a sweep and then turned and blocked a guy who was never going to get to the ballcarrier.

If you asked me two identify the two former pro bowlers on our line based solely on the tape from that game, Kelce and Peters would be my last two guesses.

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

My point is just about who didn’t make a big mistake?  Up and down the whole team. Everybody took their turns. I’ll include coaches with that.

We all knew the Ol played terrible and all expected the youngster on the right side to struggle. And we could go down the list of al the players mistakes.

None of them are making franchise QB money though. Wentz I thought could have avoided at least 2-3 of the sacks he took.

It been a problem with Wentz since the start of his career. It’s also what makes his special at times. But he has to learn when to try and fight to keep plays alive and when to fight another down is my biggest point.

Its first down no reason to take a sack throw it away let it be 2nd and 10 instead of 2nd and 15-20

I’m also curious as to where the plays are that just gets Wentz settled and back in a rhythm. 
 

We used to have things back in 2017 plays that Wentz just liked we put him under center let him drop back because he liked it.

Maybe Wentz has new plays he likes and stuff but seems like we should definitely just have plays that maybe they don’t go far or gain much but easy completion get We to feeling good again etc.

So apparently we are working out Devonte Freeman next week 

Here's another completely screwed up thing that we did. On four consecutive plays inside the 10 the Redskins ran the ball. Edwards made the stops on first and second down (and his play on Haskins on first down was pretty fantastic.) Singleton helped with the stop on third down (Jackson made a great play.) On the next play, fourth and one, we don't have either Singleton or Edwards on the field.

Instead, on perhaps the most pivotal play of the game, we have Mills, Slay, Robey-Coleman, Avery and Gerry on one side of the field.

They blocked Avery with a wide receiver, which is just embarrassing for him. Robey-Coleman should have made the play as well. He was unblocked but just couldn't bring down the runner, because he's tiny.

Obviously we were down to Avery and Sweat at DE, so we didn't have an option (though I would have put Jackson at DE.) But Gerry didn't make the play despite getting blocked by a wr. Avery didn't make the play. Robey-Coleman didn't make the play.

And Edwards and Singleton, who both made plays on that driver, were on the bench. 

5 hours ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

I also put a ton of blame on the coaches and Wentz for not adjusting and picking up blitzes. At some point we had to counter it and we never did.

Yeah... the point was exactly at the time you got the ball back under 2 minutes in the half with a 17-0 lead  ... the counter would have been running the ball.  Didn't need to be real effective, just enough to put the thought in their head that we might actually do the common sense thing and run the ball with that big of a lead and their offense looking brutal.   There is no pass rush on a run play. 

7 hours ago, joemas6 said:

So if you were the Rams... your game plan would be to bull rush Peters and Seumalo?    You wouldn't bull rush our C/RG and use more speed on the other side? 

Won't matter much we are vulnerable both places.I would try them both,left side they can take out Wentz,right side will stuff the run

Anyone that has a knack for the bar biz,where I live is the place to go.No decent bars here.it's a gold mine waiting to happen(I'm too old now or I would do it)

4 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

It was nice to see us start early at least. That has been a huge problem since our Super season. That reflects a quality game plan. That fosters some hope. Now we have to also make the adjustments. We have to adjust to what they are doing....but also needed to find the chinks in their armor.

Quality game plans last for 1/2.Then you have to adjust to their "assumed" adjustments.playing 30 won't get it done

2 hours ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

The defense was consistently put in bad spots. 0 points allowed when WFT started in there territory. All of the points came when they had short fields because of terrible O play turnovers, turnover on downs etc. 

 

WFT for us =WTF

2 hours ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

But the turnovers are on Wentz not Doug. I agree he could have helped more by calling a different game at that point but Wentz has to do a better of recognising the situation. 

Hard to know.I believe Wentz has the ability to audible at the LOS,so did he????

2 hours ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

The defense was consistently put in bad spots. 0 points allowed when WFT started in there territory. All of the points came when they had short fields because of terrible O play turnovers, turnover on downs etc. 

 

But our D failed to put them in bad spots

1 hour ago, Bleedinggreen93 said:

So apparently we are working out Devonte Freeman next week 

Been saying to add him for awhile now(if you remember).even if 1/2 goes down we still have a running game.I like Scott,but it's alot easier to game plan 1 RB than it is 2.Once you know 1 RB's moves and weaknesses,it's easier to defend

34-24 LA 😞 You can bet the "here's how you rattle Wentz" film is on every D players phone about now

I forced myself to watch the last 1/4 of the Browns game. Cincy is awful on run D. SO many missed tackles.They simply did what Joe said and ran the ball down their throats.So there is a plan if we get past this game -ugh.The Browns tandem chewed them a new one.This is why I want Freeman.We shall see how the Sanders/Scott tandem performs,still having Freeman is a good idea IMO

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

But our D failed to put them in bad spots

Yes when they were averaging 1:17 rest from getting off the field and the O failing. D was gassed and the O wasn’t helping any didn’t even make Washington have to drive 

1 hour ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

But our D failed to put them in bad spots

I will agree though D could have made more plays sure but hardly there fault either 

9 hours ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I think that was Wentz’s worst game as a pro. I hope he can shake that off.

Seattle last year

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.