Shaming The Devil

The NFL screwed up yesterday in the Bucs vs Redskins game.

To compound matters they lied about screwing up.

And in fact the media helped them try to pull a fast one on the fans.

Well, you know me. I'm calling bullshit.

At the end of the game the Redskins were driving on the Bucs and got the ball down to the 12. I know it was at the 12 for several reasons. For one the line judge was standing right on the 12 looking down the line to see if anybody was lined up offsides. For two the ball was lined up on the 12. And for three the official scorer listed the ball as being on the 12 on the play by play viewable on nfl.com.

Now I'm no math major but that means the Redskins would have had to get to the 2 yardline or beyond for a first down. Well instead they completed a pass down to about the 3, and this is where it gets wacky.

The scoreboard, one sideline set of sticks and the Fox broadcast all had the next play as 2nd and 1. On the other side of the field however one set of sticks had the play as 1st and goal. How did this happen?

Well for some odd reason the people on that side of the field put the yard marker for a first down on the 3 instead of the 2 and instead of actually measuring the yardage after the catch on 1st down the officials just decided it "looked like" a first down. Now the thing of it is everything would have been fine had they just called for the chains for a measurement. It would have shown that somebody screwed up in putting the marker on the 3 instead of the 2 and it would in fact have been 2nd and 1.

Instead an official just pronounced it a 1st down albeit VERY quietly.

Notice on the play by play that the only way the official scorer can cover for the officials is to indeed list the ball as being on the 2. But it wasn't on the two. AND THAT WAS THE POINT! If you recorded the game its quite obvious that the ball is on the 3 at best and not close to the 2. Its at least a full 2 yards from the 2. But if the official scorer doesn't list it at the 2 then they are admitting that it wasn't a first down.

Technically the Redskins didn't get a 5th down. What they got was 5 opportunities when according to the yardage they should have only had 4. I don't know if their play calling would have changed had they been aware that they didn't have a 1st and goal but that doesn't change the fact that the officials screwed up that spot.

But what's most discouraging about the whole fiasco is that once the NFL saw that Fox had pointed this out and they went into spin mode, most of the media just repeated what they were told instead of checking it out for themselves. And in fact several were kind of cavalier about it, blaming all of the confusion on the Fox broadcast instead of the refs.

Well at least one journalist, AP writer Joseph White Jr. (no relation) saw the same thing I saw and tweeted this:

Watching replay, I see how #Redskins got "5th down": Chains only measured 9 yds for 1st down. (12-yd line to 3-yd line)

See the only way the explanation possibly works is if the ball was spotted on the 13 or further away. The mere fact that the NFL's own scorer listed the 12 as the spot before the supposed 1st down destroys the NFL's own explanation.

In the end the Bucs still won and for that we are all thankful, but I hope the journalists who so enthusiastically put out the NFL's version of events last night take a second look and question the NFL further about this. If not they really aren't doing their job in my opinion.

You Mean To Say He Has A Point?!

In an article ranking NFL defensive lines Jason Cole gets this right:

9. Washington Redskins: You can pretty much guarantee the Redskins will move down in the rankings between now and the start of the season because there’s about as much chance of tackle Albert Haynesworth(notes) opening the season in Washington as BP exec Tony Hayward has of taking up residency in Louisiana. That’s a pretty sad fact because if Haynesworth would get on board and coach Mike Shanahan would get over this idea of having Haynesworth play nose tackle, the Redskins line could be pretty good. Really, though, the Redskins would be better off scrapping the 3-4 altogether and playing 4-3. That’s their strength given their personnel and that would allow Haynesworth to line up next to Maake Kemoeatu(notes) in what would be a fearsome tackle combo. The addition of versatile Vonnie Holliday(notes) was a nice move, too.

See how easy it is to give actual analysis of the situation when you don't focus on how much money somebody is making or if people are calling them fat?

Of course the question now becomes will anyone start noticing these analyses of the Redskins that are starting to trickle through or will they just continue to mindlessly bash Haynesworth without ever taking a step back and taking a macro look at the situation?
On another note I will point out that I totally disagree with Cole's assessment about the Buccaneers' defensive ends as I firmly believe that rather than being a placeholder, Stylez White will have double digit sacks this year and be dominant at right end. But hey, being ranked #18 is pretty good considering the way he starts off his analysis.

If You're Going To Call Someone Out, Go All The Way

I ran across a blog post about the Redskins that is probably not all that important in the grand scheme of things but I wanted to point out something interesting that happened inside of it.

The topic was Albert Haynesworth, or rather the topic was Rod Woodson and Solomon Wilcox calling Albert Haynesworth out on the NFL Network. Now this is pretty common place these days and I won't wade into the merits of those who think he is wrong for sitting out the offseason program and those who think he is well within his rights to do so. But I do want to examine something Wilcox said and then the blogger, Dan Steinberg's, fact check of it.

Solomon Wilcox made this claim:

"Can I just say this?" Wilcots requested. "Go back and play the soundbites at his press conference when he signed his contract. He said, 'I'm here to do whatever the Redskins need me to do to win.' Now they need him to play a zero technique, and he's kind of changing his game a little bit. But he did cash the check."

I could go all day arguing over whether Haynesworth taking the money means he should do whatever the team asks of him but instead Id like to focus on whether or not he actually said he would do "whatever the Redskins need me to do to win."

Steinberg took a look back at Haynesworth's presser and found these quotes.

"After talking to the coaches, I didn't talk about any money, I was talking to the coaches and seeing ˜How are you going to use me?' Regardless of the money, I wanted to see how they were going to use me, so I wouldn't just go someplace and be another guy. I wanted to be that same player, that dominant guy, and if you're going to use me that way, that's where I want to go....

"If you look at my game, I'm a player that goes straight forward. I'm a disruptive player, I take on the double-team, I free up other guys, and that's what I want to play like. I want to be able to attack my guy, make plays, and everybody to make plays off me. So that's what I want to do. I want to do the same thing I did in Tennessee, but now I'm surrounded by a star-studded cast in my defense here.

Now unless there is a part of Haynesworth's presser where he contradicted himself its pretty clear that from this section of what he said that how he would be used within the defense was a primary driver of where he would sign. Now Haynesworth could have just been blowing smoke, but what he said is what he said. It appears that Solomon Wilcox totally pulled that "whatever the Redskins need me to do" quote out of his ass and made it up out of whole cloth. Since Steinberg himself was the one performing the fact check on the quote I would have thought he would have used it to blast Wilcox and call him out. I was wrong.

Want to know what came after the quotes?

So that's at least part of what he said. Either way, Haynesworth's camp is sure losing this PR war.

Excuse me but uhmmm WHAT THE FUCK?!

Why go through the trouble of digging up the quotes to fact check Wilcox if you aren't going to point out that it refutes what Wilcox said? Especially when the words Wilcox attributed to Haynesworth seemed to only serve the purpose to try to make his refusal to give the Redskins new 3-4 scheme a try just that more egregious?

I can understand that maybe Steinberg was worried that by pushing back too hard he might be seen as defending Haynesworth but really it would just be him doing his job. If he is going to go through the trouble of fact checking Wilcox and in fact finding information that shows what Wilcox said was false, he can't then just back off and leave it to the reader to decide who was right and who was wrong. No matter if people are on Haynesworth's side or the Redskins' side of this argument some things are set out in black and white and if a member of the media lies or misspeaks its up to other members of the media to point that out. Just the same way that if Haynesworth lied about something pertaining to Solomon Wilcox or Rod Woodson I would expect the media to call him out as well. That, to me, is all a part of the job.

I just wish someone would start doing it...

The Curious Case Of The Redskins' Defense

In the last few months the Washington Redskins have made a lot of noise. They hired a future Hall Of Fame guy in former Denver Broncos head coach Mike Shanahan. They signed several big name former stars like Larry Johnson. They executed a blockbuster trade inside their own division for future Hall Of Fame quarterback Donovan McNabb and they own the 4th pick in this year's NFL Draft.

But not all of the noise has been positive. The guy they signed last year to be their franchise defensive player, Albert Haynesworth, has been in the news also for the wrong reasons. After signing a $100 million dollar contract last year and failing to live up to admittedly unreal expectations, Haynesworth came out and publicly disagreed with the Redskins' decision to switch to a 3-4 defense. Not only that, he vowed to stay away from voluntary activities and show up only to mandatory offseason practices, seemingly trying to force Washington to trade him.

Now there has been no shortage of sports pundits knocking him for this move. I admit its hard to feel empathy for a guy who just recently received an almost $20 million dollar roster bonus. But his point at the time is that he has never played nose tackle in a 3-4 and it wasn't something he felt comfortable trying to learn. I know most people would say for that amount of money he should be willing to learn how to drive the team bus. But considering the fact that the NFL truly IS a business there are also reasons to understand why he wasn't happy about the move. Yes he is getting paid an ungodly amount of money, but he also cares about his legacy. Just a few years ago he was being mentioned as a candidate for MVP of the whole league for his strong play with the Tennessee Titans and its highly likely that making a drastic move from a 3 technique to a head up nose tackle would further erode public opinion about his abilities.

I could go into a long dissertation about the pros and cons of him moving to nose tackle but that's not what this post is about. You see I happened to look at the Redskins' roster the other day and my interest was piqued. People have spent so much time knocking Haynesworth for his obstinacy and so much time focused on the holes that Washington needs to feel on their offensive line, that it seems nobody stopped to wonder just how switching to a 3-4 defense would affect a defense that was good enough to be ranked 10th in the league last year without much help from their offense.

Anthony Bryant

Phillip Daniels

Kedric Golston

Maake Kemoeatu

Anthony Montgomery

Greg Peterson

Are you familiar with any of the names on that list? Well if you are a Redskins fan you better get acquainted in a hurry because aside from Haynesworth those are ALL the guys on the current roster who are candidates to be the starting interior linemen in a 3-4 formation this year for the Redskins.

Know how many of them have played in a 3-4 defense in the last 3 years?

0

And through out their offseason spending spree the Redskins declined to being in even one guy who is experienced in playing in a 3-4 to at least help show the other guys the ropes.

To be sure it's not just a problem with the interior linemen. Two of the best performers last year for Washington, linebacker London Fletcher and defensive end Andre Carter, seemed to be poorly suited to a 3-4 defense. Yes, 2nd year player Brian Orakpo seems to be a perfect fit as a rush linebacker but as you look through the Redskins' roster who else seems to be a prototypical 3-4 defender?

But wait, its not just the players either.

Jim Haslett was hired to run the defense for Shanahan and as far as I can tell Haslett hasn't run a 3-4 defense since 1999 when he was the defensive coordinator for a Pittsburgh Steelers team that went 6-10. In the years since he has has stints as a defensive coordinator in both New Orleans and St Louis and in both of those stops he ran a 4-3. Now I'm not saying he can't do it, but its not exactly what you would think of as his forte.

So what gives?

Mike Shanahan never wasn't a 3-4 guy when he was a head coach out in Denver. His defenses consistently ran a 4-3 and generally were very good at it. I realize that lots of teams are transitioning to a 3-4 now for whatever reason but I would also remind people that both teams in this season's Superbowl ran a 4-3 and for that matter 3 of the final 4 teams ran a 4-3.

I readily admit that I personally prefer a 4-3 defense having played in that scheme most of my career, but by the same token I am a defensive scholar and with the right personnel I also know the havoc you can create with a 3-4. In this case however it would seem that the Redskins have round pieces that they are trying to stuff into square holes.

And lest you believe that the Redskins will use the draft to give their defense the extreme make over treatment, I would remind you that they only have 4 picks in the whole draft at the moment with no 2nd nor 3rd round pick at all.

At the moment Washington is in many ways blessed to have Haynesworth causing such a ruckus over playing nose tackle. It gives sports pundits a target to throw darts at and keeps them distracted. But what will happen after the draft is over and the smoke has cleared and Haynesworth is either traded or welcomed back into the fold? What happens when other people start noticing the obvious deficiencies I have just exposed? What happens if or when the Redskins take the field next year and instead of their offense being the weak link, its their once stout defense that can't stop anybody?

All I can say is stay tuned....

*Update: It turns out the Redskins made a big splash free agent signing yesterday signing former Ravens, Texans, Saints, Seahawks and Jets defensive lineman Howard Green to compete for the nose tackle position. FINALLY, a guy who has actually played in a 3-4, now the sky's the limit

If you aren't sure, yes that's sarcasm oozing through this update. You might think that the Redskins signing a guy to compete for a starting job off of a mini-camp tryout would be a HUGE red flag for the rest of the media to take notice of the state of their defense.

Guess we shall see...

The Eagles Are Effing Crazy!

When the news came across the wire last night that the Eagles had traded their franchise quarterback, Donovan McNabb, to their division rivals, the Washington Redskins, I felt sure it was a late April Fools prank. Surely the Eagles organization couldn't have been so brazen as to jettison a guy who had been so critical to their success over the last decade, to a team right up the road from them.....could they?

Well it turns out they could and they did.

After having a night to think on it I believe its time for me to throw around all the reasons I think this moves shows that the Eagles are effing crazy.

1. This move strengthens a division foe: There is no way you can deny that having Donovan McNabb on the roster immediately improves the Redskins' offense. Considering that over the last few years some commentators, not me however, have said that the only thing holding the Skins back was the erratic play of their quarterback Jason Campbell, those same pundits would now have to consider that hole filled.

Not only that but with new head coach Mike Shanahan running the show, you know Donovan will have something he never really had in Philly, a game plan that emphasises running the ball and takes the pressure off of him, literally as well as figuratively. I know some folks question the Skins signing Larry Johnson and Willie Parker to go along with incumbent Clinton Portis, but I would remind those people that Shanahan has historically done more with guys who were a lot less talented. As for the folks who will point to the offensive line as a weakness, I would remind them that

A) The Redskins didn't even have to send the Eagles their first round pick for McNabb so they are still picking #4 in a few weeks and will probably select a big time left tackle with that selection. And

B) The zone blocking scheme that Shanahan prefers doesn't require a bunch of Pro Bowlers to be successful. I asked a question last night for anybody to name the other 4 offensive lineman other than March Schlereth who blocked for Terrell Davis in Denver when he ran for 2000 yards. Several people answered but collectively they only came up with one other name, Tony Jones. Trust me, there's a reason for that and I believe Shanahan will be able to duplicate some of the things he has done in the past in DC this year.

Don't forget the impact that McNabb tends to have on wide receivers too. This is a guy who went to the Superbowl throwing to Freddie Mitchell and Todd Pinkston. Imagine how he might be able to reenergize Santana Moss's career and the connection he might have with Devin Thomas. And that isn't even to speak of Chris Cooley who is already a damned good tight end in his own right. That talent combined with Shanahan's offensive scheme could be a deadly combination.

Oh and as a reminder, the Redskins defense is VERY talented so if they get an offense that can actually score points.....


2. Because the Eagles traded him inside the division, this decision will be scrutinized heavily at least twice a year for as long as he remains in Washington: See its one thing to feel like its time to move on as a franchise, its another to have that decision on full display during the season. If the Eagles had traded McNabb to the Raiders then even if he had a great year it would have been pretty easy to not even notice what with Oakland being all the way cross country and not even being in the same conference. But with trading him to the Skins, fans will get to decide if the Eagles brass were geniuses or dumbasses twice a year. And don't think for a second that McNabb isn't going to try to make a statement in those games. After years of never being fully embraced in Philly even with all of the accomplishments and accolades he garnered, this will be his time to show that team and those fans EXACTLY what they are missing.

Simply put, if the Eagles lose twice to the Skins next year and McNabb decisively outplays his likely replacement in Kevin Kolb both games, is there a way that somebody in the front office doesn't get fired?

I don't think so.

One last note, by trading McNabb in the division then he gets the added benefit of seeing the same defenses and defenders he has seen over the course of his career, along with the defenders and defenses he has played against every week in practice.

3. I said likely starter Kevin Kolb a minute ago because there is one other issue that this trade created that a lot of people aren't focusing on, a quarterback controversy: Now it was pretty apparent last year that Michael Vick was itching to play more. But out of respect for McNabb and the fact that he helped get him the job in Philly Vick kept mum for the most part. But now, with McNabb gone, I can't see a scenario where Vick is happy being a backup to Kolb. Better yet, I can't see a scenario where Vick is quiet about being unhappy being a backup to Kolb. Out of all of the quarterbacks the Eagles could have traded, they got rid of the one guy who might leave a void that creates a divided locker room.

Understand this, there are already guys in the Eagles locker room who feel like either Vick should be the starter or it should be an open competition. Andy Reid coming out and naming Kolb the starter without him having earned it probably will rub some of them the wrong way. So what do you think will happen if training camp starts and Vick out plays Kolb? Even if its only for a few days or for a few big plays. And remember, because starters get limited reps in the preseason it will be relatively easy for Vick to outshine Kolb numbers wise. Will the Eagles then hand the reigns over to Vick potentially pissing off they guy who they believe is their long term answer at quarterback? Or will they stick with Kolb come hell or high water and have the locker room imploding?

Whatever the outcome somebody won't be happy and with two guys who are starting caliber that is pretty much just asking for fireworks.

Now maybe the Eagles are in full rebuilding mode. You can certainly make the case that they are considering how many starters they have lost either by trading them away or releasing them since the season ended. But the timing seems to be off on this one. At the point where they finally get the offensive weapons that McNabb has always coveted is the time when they decide to just give up and start over? And in the process help a division rival get better?

Nothing about this trade makes any rational sense but of course with football you have to let it all play itself out on the field. Still I gotta say that on paper right now, considering how much worse the Eagles look versus how much better the Redskins look, I gotta say the Eagles are effing crazy for trading McNabb.

It is what it is.

Ether

Jason Campbell went in on Clinton Portis in the Washington Post after Portis questioned his leadership skills on his radio show earlier in the day. I have to say that I damn near stood up and applauded after reading Campbell's response. You could tell he had probably been holding in a lot of what he said about Portis for a long time and he let it all come out tonight. If Portis is as tight with Redskins owner Dan Snyder as Campbell and several others say then Campbell probably talked his way out of town this evening. But I bet he will be thinking on his way out the door, "Damn, that was worth it!"

Informed of Portis's comments, Campbell, selected one of six team captains by teammates the last two seasons, called out Portis for putting himself above the team and, in his opinion, an overall lack of professionalism Portis has exhibited in Campbell's five seasons in Washington.

"How is he going to say I'm not a leader?" Campbell said in a lengthy telephone interview. "I mean, that's just not true. To me, that's somebody who shows that they don't know what a real leader is. A leader is not someone who leads by the wrong example. A leader is someone who is trying to do the right thing and trying to lead by example, and not just [being] about themselves. There's a reason guys get selected as captains, and there's a reason guys don't get selected as captains. Obviously, he doesn't have the respect of the locker room to be a captain. For someone to try to take a shot at me at the end of the season, after they haven't even been around, only speaks about their character anyways."

"There have been a lot of things I could have come out and said. But I never went out of my way to make those things known. I never wanted those things to leave the locker room because it's no one else's business. And for those things to be said, questioning my character and questioning my leadership, I think that's not the way to go, especially when you're supposed to be a team guy. Is that being a good teammate? If that's the case, why is no one questioning my leadership and everyone is questioning his work ethic?"

snip

"How's he [going to] question anything when for those four or five weeks before he was on IR [the season-ending injured-reserve list], he never even came around. He wasn't with us. He was never at practice. Who does he think was holding the offense together? He should go ask the coaches and the players if he wants to know. But he wasn't around to do that. He doesn't know anything about leadership."

Campbell said he was disappointed about airing private team matters in public, and especially frustrated that Portis would verbally attack him with the Redskins preparing to make a long-anticipated announcement that former Denver Broncos coach Mike Shanahan has been hired as their next head coach.

"You've got guys out there working their butts off, guys out there practicing and doing everything they need to do to prepare for Sundays, and you see him over there getting special treatment," Campbell said of Portis. "What does that say about him? I go out, I get beat down on Sundays, and I still have to go out and practice and get ready for games. And that's what your supposed to do."

I have to say, I could never root for the Redskins, but I am definitely a Jason Campbell fan now.

False Equivalence

Since the New York Yankees won their 27th World Series on Wednesday night, by far the most of any Major League Baseball team, there have been many many conversations about how their level of spending gives them an unfair advantage. Now to me this is an obvious truth. The fact that every single year the Yankees have the ability to look around the league and cherry pick the best guys off other teams with the enticement of big money simply can't be disputed. Now that is not a guarantee of success, but it definitely makes it a lot more likely.

I am not saying this diminishes their achievements in anyway, I am just saying that you can't over look what is staring you right in the face. If they don't have Mark Texiera or C. C. Sabathia, their two big free agent signings in the last offseason, do they win the championship this year? I highly doubt it. Still under the current rules they are working under there is nothing untoward about what they have done. It makes sense for them to put the best team together than money can buy because that is the way Major League Baseball is now set up.

But all of a sudden Yankee fans are offended by people pointing this fact out. And one of their biggest fall back arguments seems to be "Yeah well if it was that easy why aren't the Washington Redskins winning the Superbowl?" This is a patently ridiculous argument but you will actually hear sports pundits on the radio and see them on TV and in print actually repeating it. Not only are the NFL and Major League Baseball just two different animals in general, but the Redskins in particular are exactly the wrong team to use in comparison.

See with baseball you can literally run your team like you are a fantasy owner if you have enough money. Because there are only about 15 or so guys on a roster and because there is no salary cap you can literally pay to have all stars at every position on the field. When you look at what the Yankees have done over the years that is basically exactly what they have done.

In the NFL by contrast you generally can only sign but so many big name players from other teams because of the constraints of the salary cap. So of the 22 starters on offense and defense you might be able to pluck two or maybe three at the most pro bowl type players away from other teams to try to make a run at a championship.

But there is also the matter of team chemistry and this is the biggest difference in the two sports. With 53 guys on an NFL roster there are going to be challenges to keep everyone on the same page. You have to mesh a lot of different attitudes and a lot of different egos into one common mindset to try to get the job done. With much fewer players on a MLB roster you don't have have the same level of cohesiveness. Besides that when there is a problem its a lot easier to get with one guy or two guys to address it than having to police a bunch of guys on a NFL team.

A related major difference is how you deal with a free agent "bust". See for the Yankees and other MLB teams with big revenues, if they sign a guy that doesn't produce then they either trade him, cut him, and or pay another guy to replace him. In the NFL on the other hand if you sign a big time free agent and they don't work out then you are screwed for at least a few years because of the constraints of the salary cap. That means that the guy pretty much HAS to play for the first couple of years of their contract at least and it also means that if there is a personality conflict then the team just has to deal with it. That means coaches can be undermined and game plans can be hurt because of one guy who can't be cut or traded.

With the Redskins however the problem is actually that their owner Dan Snyder DOES try to run his ball club like a Major League Baseball franchise. He truly believes that any problem on a football field can be fixed if you just throw money at it. Just look at his teams over the years. The most recognizable guys generally are people that he took from another team. Best player on offense this year is probably Clinton Portis who came from where? Denver. Best player on defense this year has probably been London Fletcher, who came from where? Buffalo.

Year after year after year Snyder, instead of focusing on building his teams from the ground up through the draft and player development, just looks on the list of free agents from other teams and starts licking his chops. That is the exactly WRONG way to run an NFL franchise and its why his teams will not win a championship. In the NFL you can't have a bunch of mercenaries coming to your team every year and expect to have long term success. That is just too much turnover and too much turmoil and nobody ever gets to stay long enough to establish themselves as a leader and for the team to establish an identity.

Now I know people compare Snyder many times to Jerry Jones down in Dallas, but that is a patently ridiculous comparison when you get beyond the bluster. Look back and those Cowboys teams that won Superbowls. Where did the overwhelming majority of the talent come from?

Homegrown, that's where.

Troy Aikman, Michael Irvin, Emmitt Smith, Moose Johnson, the offensive line, Tony Tolbert, Ken Norton, Larry Brown, and the list goes on and on. Yeah he brought in some guys to get them over the hump, but the heart of the team were guys they drafted and coached up to Pro Bowl status. Hell look at the Cowboys even now. Tony Romo, Marion Barber, Miles Austin, DeMarcus Ware, Jay Ratliff, Terrance Newman and again the list goes on and on.

Now try to think of a starter, not even necessarily a Pro Bowler, other than Chris Cooley that Snyder has drafted and had thrive over the last 5 years.

The point is you don't build an NFL winner in the same way that you build a MLB winner. When you look at the teams that win Superbowls year in and year out a substantial part of their team is always, and I mean ALWAYS home grown. And before anybody starts hollering about the New England Patriots let me throw some names out, Teddy Bruschi, Lawyer Milloy, Tom Brady, Troy Brown, Assante Samuel, Richard Seymour, Willie McGinest, again the list goes on and on.

That is the anti thesis of what you will find with perennial MLB World Series champs or contenders. For them its all about finding guys off other teams to bring in as center pieces for their team to help them bring home the title.

Again I am not hating on the Yankees for that, hell more power to them, I am just saying we have to be honest about it.

It is what it is.

Bucs Films Review: Washington Redskins Week 4

I am going to change up the format a little today. Let's go with The Good, The Bad and The Ugly...

The Good

I thought Josh Johnson had helluva first game as the starting quarterback of the Bucs. He threw the ball well for the most part and he made things happen with his legs. He also was a good in game manager, taking timeouts when players seemed confused before the snap. He did have that one interception and that was definitely a bad read, but one of the most impressive things, I thought, was that he didn't try to force the ball other than that throw. The truth is he put us in position to win the game several times and the touchdown pass he threw to Antonio Bryant was a thing of beauty. If I had one complaint its that at times he seemed conflicted about whether to take off running or not. I think at this stage of the game with the team not having much to lose I would much rather see him use his legs than not even if he might not hit a guy 10 yards down field or so. He is electrifying when he gets in the open field and he has me excited about the rest of the year.

Gaines Adams had a great game after being virtually nonexistent the first 3 weeks. He started the game being a part of the first three stops on defense and he continued to play well through out. He had a sack as well as a fumble recover and he knocked down a pass on 3rd down. He also made some really nice plays in the run game, in particular a tackle for a loss he had on Clinton Portis after he beat the tight end blocking with with a quick hands move inside. Having said all that I still wish they would keep the guy on the right side. On a day when he actually had his pass rush working he never got to face the guy he got a sack on, Chris Samuels, on any third and long. That to me is just nonesensical and hopefully at some point the Bucs figure that out. I would say why not put Greg White inside like he was as a pass rusher his first year with the Bucs when he first made a splash. Then you allow Jimmy Wilkerson to keep working his guy on the outside as well.

Aqib Talib finally lived up to the hype he built up over the last year. His three interceptions should have been enough for us to win that game hands down. He did get beat on a double move by Santana Moss but hell that happens to all corners. What matters is that he put our offense in great field position but unfortunately they weren't always able to capitalize on it.

Sean Mahan actually played a lot better than I expected. I was worried all week that Albert Haynesworth would end up exploiting him and live in our backfield. But the truth is for the most part Mahan handled Haynesworth and at the least stayed between him and the ball. His pass protection was also a lot better this game than I have ever seen him do on a Bucs uniform.

Geno Hayes showed up big time. He was coming down hill most of the game and had several tackles for a loss and really good open field tackles. At times he still looks a little hesitant but it appears the light is finally going off for the guy. If he keeps that up it should put a lot of pressure on teams to have to convert on third and long rather than third and short. He still needs some work in pass coverage though which was apparent on the touchdown toss to Chris Cooley.

The Bad

Jerramy Stevens is just awful as a blocker and I think its time that he gets pushed out of that role. Kellen Winslow Jr is our starter and our pass catching tight end anyway so why not use John Gilmore (who decleated rookie Brian Arakpo on a crack back block) as the blocking tight end and just use Stevens as a second pass catching tight end. At the moment it appears that Stevens is getting playing time off his reputation and unfortunately a reputation doesn't open holes for our running backs.

Jeremy Trueblood has to fix his penalty problem and fast. We do not have enough talent on this team to over come 1st and 15 several times a game. This is a problem he has had since he came into the league but it appears its about to get to an epidemic level. The coaches have to get this corrected in practice before it ends up costing us a game.

There were some coaching decisions that were real head scratchers to me. First on two big third downs in the second half Jim Bates decided to go with a three man defensive line. This after the line gave the Redskins fits in the first half and harrassed Jason Campbell into several bad throws. The result was that on a 3rd and 11 Jason Campbell scrambled for a first down. And on the other play Clinton Portis barely fell down a yard short of the first down. This seemed to be an obvious example of "guruism" at its worse. Bates decided that it was important to show that he had more calls in his playbook and he put he defense at a disadvantage. Most of the time its best to go with what got you there and hopefully he realizes that going forward.

Raheem Morris made two decisions that I will never understand. From the 4 yard line with the offense moving the ball well he decided to kick a field goal on the road and down 7 points late in the fourth quarter. Mind you our kicker had been atrocious for most of the game but we also have several good red zone options including Jerramy Stevens on a jump ball and Michael Clayton working the back of the endzone. By kicking a field goal in that situation Morris sent a message to the team of being too careful in my opinion.

The other decision was putting Clifton Smith in for the most important drive of the game. Its not just that Smith fumbled away the game, although that for damn sure didn't help. Its also that we have an underused Earnest Graham on the team who would be perfect for that role. He is a great receiver out of the backfield, a great blocker in blitz pickup, and on that last play he would have gotten the first down with ease and probably kept the ball in his hands. I know Coach Morris said its Smith's role to be the two minute back, but

A) That doesn't seem to be entirely true since Graham started off the two minute drill drive right before the half. And..

B) Whoever made that decision about having Smith be the two minute drill back should probably change that rotation IMMEDIATELY!

To this day I can't understand why Graham isn't being used more in the offense anyway. I understand why they moved him down the depth chart so as not to make one of the other backs have to run down on kickoffs and punts. But the guy is a weapon and for the most part we are just leaving him on the sideline.

The Ugly

I know the Bucs have already cut kicker Mike Nugent but it all goes back to karma. We had a perfectly good kicker here in Matt Bryant but the Bucs had to engage in a pissing contest. The guy was hurt during the preseason and instead of affording him the respect he had earned over his years here, they decided to make an example out of him because he didn't kick in a preaseason game. A PRESEASON GAME! I don't even know who it is they picked up but I would imagine the kicking game will continue to suffer this year precisely because of the bad karma that decision has wrought.

Live Blogging The Bucs vs Redskins Week 4

New Redskins Logo

(via)