Post Game Thoughts

T_Section224 · November 07, 2005, 09:21:16 AM

Quote from: rjs246 on November 07, 2005, 09:16:20 AMIf they lose to the Cowboys this week, it's season over.

i would agree with that.

MadMarchHare · November 07, 2005, 09:41:45 AM

SB is all that mattered. This season is over. No one on this team can even perform fundamental functions like tackling or catching. The coaching staff has lost it's farging mind. How many zero yard passes did we throw on 3rd and long? I won't be surprised if we lose on Monday, and we will be eviscerated at the Meadowlands.
SB is an impossibility, playoffs are unlikely. Regardless of how "zesty" anyone feels the NFC is.

I'll still watch every play for the rest of the year, though. I'm a lemming.

ice grillin you · November 07, 2005, 10:10:29 AM

3rd down conversions, one of the biggest things I look at, were not good on offense. And the defense couldn't stop the taterskins from converting.

yes yes and yes...the game was lost on 3rd downs...end of story

rjs246 · November 07, 2005, 10:16:00 AM

The game was lost because no one on defense could farging tackle. Our front seven is farging miserable.

ice grillin you · November 07, 2005, 10:20:24 AM

that goes without saying...there are no playmakers in that front seven

but as far as this specific game they lost it on 3rd downs...they just couldnt make a stop when they needed to

BigEd76 · November 07, 2005, 10:28:46 AM

Not only are they bad in stopping 3rd down conversions, but they can't convert their own. It's something like 25%....

Cerevant · November 07, 2005, 10:31:16 AM

Quote from: rjs246 on November 07, 2005, 10:16:00 AM
The game was lost because no one on defense could farging tackle. Our front seven is farging miserable.

The taterskins scored 17 points. You can't blame the game on the defense for losing the game when the opponent scores 17 points, unless you want to blame them for not bailing the offense out. Still, I was not thrilled with the tackling, and I think there were too many cases where the secondary was trying to get the INT rather than stopping the play. I think Lito has completely given up on coverage, he thinks he's a receiver out there. I wasn't too thrilled with Brown whiffing on an INT attempt with the receiver behind him and no safety help. Back to basics guys - forget about the turnovers, let's try stopping the first downs, eh?

Andy needs to get more creative with using Westbrook - he is not a between-the-tackles up the gut runner. I was extremely frustrated by his diving into the line of scrimmage - it didn't look like he was getting hit, he was just diving into the pile. We're not going to see a middle running game until they slow down the blitz. Again, there needs to be some draws, delays and pitches to Westbrook to catch the defense overpursuing.

We need to have LJ get well soon. I think the Smith injury did more damage than anything else. Well, except the farging bonehead end-of-half bullshtein from Donovan...but that would have only given us the chance to win at the end of the game instead of tie.

SunMo · November 07, 2005, 10:31:55 AM

Westbrook not being in the game at the end is indefensible. Even if you buy the protection excuse, you can have Gordon in the game to block and send Westbrook out in the play. I would rather have Westbrook out there to catch a pass than Lewis or McMullen.

MadMarchHare · November 07, 2005, 10:35:19 AM

I understand your point, C, but come on. The Birds have to farging tackle. Giving up 3rd and 17 to a guy with all the moves of a steamroller is absurd. It's Chris farging Cooley for christ sake, not Barry Sanders. Inexcusable.

rjs246 · November 07, 2005, 10:36:54 AM

Quote from: MadMarchHare on November 07, 2005, 10:35:19 AM
I understand your point, C, but come on. The Birds have to farging tackle. Giving up 3rd and 17 to a guy with all the moves of a steamroller is absurd. It's Chris farging Cooley for christ sake, not Barry Sanders. Inexcusable.

My point exactly.

MadMarchHare · November 07, 2005, 10:38:07 AM

It's why I know they're done. They have completely abandoned all the fundamentals of football, esp. on defense. The Skins only scored 17 because they SUCK! It certainly wasn't from anything the defense did.

MDS · November 07, 2005, 11:46:07 AM

i was just thinking about this. look at our schedule the rest of the way. 3 division home games, home to green bay, at arizona. right there that should be 5 wins. think the other 3 (seattle, at rams and at gints) are not pushovers, but if we got 2-1 or even 1-2, that gives us a reasonable shot at the division and definatley a playoff spot. I wouldnt be surpirsed to see the eagles go 7-1 or even run the table. the hard part of the schedule is over. no, this team isnt good enough to win the bowl. but weve got some easy games coming up. maybe seattle and atlanta fall off, we get a 2 seed or something. anything can happen. lets not throw a spazz yet. or, at least, lets beat dallas.

PoopyfaceMcGee · November 07, 2005, 11:48:56 AM

Beating Dallas could save hope for the playoffs, but this team is not a Super Bowl contender.

MDS · November 07, 2005, 11:53:23 AM

but the nfc isnt good. theres still 8 games left. no, they are not even close to being good enough to win the bowl. but who scares you in the nfc? we make the bowl, anything can happen.

PoopyfaceMcGee · November 07, 2005, 11:57:04 AM

Quote from: MDS on November 07, 2005, 11:53:23 AM
1. no, they are not even close to being good enough to win the bowl.
2. we make the bowl, anything can happen.

Those two statements contradict each other.

Who scares me in the NFC? Hmmm... let's see. Atlanta, New York, Dallas, Washington, Carolina, and maybe even Chicago. I don't know how you could think this team could make a run through the playoffs. They can't run block, and they can't defend the pass. Even if they show some improvement, it will have to be drastic.

Like I've said, they can change my mind with convincing performances (and the wins to go with them) the next two weeks. But losing to the taterskins made going 2-0 the next two weeks a necessity, and not a luxury.