Jump to content
mar29020

PFF week 1 notes/ratings

Recommended Posts

MikeT14    22
7 minutes ago, Dashing202 said:

Yea dude lol we kept trying a lot until the 3rd q we couldn't run the ball well . 

Thankfully I see us doing better next week I hate to say it I wish we kept Kelly for one reason and that's blocking .

 

our running backs couldn't block.

Kelley and Thompson had a combined 13 carries. I don't know if we even ran the ball once in the 4th. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
turtle28    78

Snap counts. I still think Thompson needs more snaps than Kelley, Thompson should be the featured back. 

Doctson and Galette I expect to have more of a role as the season progresses. I don't think they trust Doctson just yet and he has been dealing with the hamstring injury.

Then, Galette needs more snaps but they don't want to overwork him right now, which I understand but we really need to see a pass rushing package of Kerrigan or Smith at 5-Tech with Galette and Kerrigan or Smith as the OLBs. We need to see these 3 on the field together.

Im disappointed in Everret, but let's keep in mind it was his first start and he is developing into a safety. He was a corner in college and there's more development needed for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dashing202    36

You know guys just cause we lost week 1 doesn't mean we can't win games . If the D consistently plays that way we can beat teams .. the eagles D could be top ten this year and other than Seattle and KC and the Giants we aren't playing elite defenses .

 

☺️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dashing202    36
2 minutes ago, MikeT14 said:

Kelley and Thompson had a combined 13 carries. I don't know if we even ran the ball once in the 4th. 

They weren't getting any yards and the eagles out 7 in the box . If we had a little time in the pocket we probably get moreplays off .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
turtle28    78
3 minutes ago, MikeT14 said:

Kelley and Thompson had a combined 13 carries. I don't know if we even ran the ball once in the 4th. 

Huge problem, particularly in the redzone. If we had run it a few more times, then we'd have the play action pass working and tim would take pressure of Kirk if feeling he needs to be perfect, which is always hard, but especially hard with 2 new starting WRs and a slot reciever and TE that missed virtually all of camp.

 

Edited by turtle28

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
turtle28    78
2 minutes ago, Dashing202 said:

You know guys just cause we lost week 1 doesn't mean we can't win games . If the D consistently plays that way we can beat teams .. the eagles D could be top ten this year and other than Seattle and KC and the Giants we aren't playing elite defenses .

 

☺️

Dash, we love ya buddy but you were wrong about Grant's targets - his last target was w/in the first min of the 4th q - and we didn't run the ball much in the second half at all, especially in the 4th quarter. We keep putting too much in the hands of Kirk, and while he's a good qb most of the time and even great sometimes, he's not elite and we need to stop asking him to play like an elite qb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeT14    22
3 minutes ago, turtle28 said:

Huge problem, particularly in the redzone. If we had run it a few more times, then we'd have the play action pass working and tim would take pressure of Kirk if feeling he needs to be perfect, which is always hard, but especially hard with 2 new starting WRs and a slot reciever and TE that missed virtually all of camp.

 

Right. LOL at passing 3 straight times out of the 1 yard line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dashing202    36

turtle Grant sucks he had one big play which was the screen . For someone that's been in the NFL for 4 years I expect much more . Pryor I can understand he still made plays ans this is his second year at wideout .

 

grant shouldn't start I rather have Maurice Harris over Grant .

 

now I might be the only one who thinks that but Grant sucks . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lavar703    156

Not playing Thompson as the starting back is silly. He's clearly the most talented guy and we refuse to run the ball so he fits the offense much better than Kelley. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, lavar703 said:

Not playing Thompson as the starting back is silly. He's clearly the most talented guy and we refuse to run the ball so he fits the offense much better than Kelley. 

Exactly.  Just go with the New England approach and treat Thompson like they do James White.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, turtle28 said:

Im disappointed in Everret, but let's keep in mind it was his first start and he is developing into a safety. He was a corner in college and there's more development needed for him.

I still can't believe we're trying to convert a former corner into a strong safety. 9_9

Cravens really screwed us over.  If only Landon Collins had lasted until our pick in the 2nd round...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lavar703    156
22 minutes ago, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

I still can't believe we're trying to convert a former corner into a strong safety. 9_9

Cravens really screwed us over.  If only Landon Collins had lasted until our pick in the 2nd round...

Or we just traded up to get him like the Giants did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Woz    188
1 hour ago, Dashing202 said:

Yea dude lol we kept trying a lot until the 3rd q we couldn't run the ball well . 

Thankfully I see us doing better next week I hate to say it I wish we kept Kelly for one reason and that's blocking .

 

our running backs couldn't block.

Pass:Rush distribution by quarter (scrambles and sacks will be listed as pass attempts; defined QB runs are rushes; ignoring special teams plays)

  • 1Q
    • 1st drive (0-0) = 6 plays, 4 passes, 2 rushes
    • 2nd drive (0-7) = 5 plays, 4 passes, 1 rush
    • 3rd drive (0-7) = 3 plays, 2 passes, 1 rush  [plus 1 pass attempt that was called back due to holding]
    • TOTAL = 14 plays, 10 passes, 4 rushes => 71.4% pass [if you include the one nullified by penalty, 15 -> 11:4 => 73.3%]
  • 2Q
    • 1st drive (0-13) = 6 plays, 2 passes, 4 rushes
    • 2nd drive (7-13) = 8 plays, 6 passes, 2 rushes
    • TOTAL = 14 plays, 8 passes, 6 rushes => 57.1%
  • 3Q
    • 1st drive (14-19) = 15 plays, 12 passes, 3 rushes (incl. Cousins designed run) [plus 1 pass attempt (a sack) that was called back to due defensive holding]
    • TOTAL = 15 plays, 12 passes, 3 rushes => 80.0% [if you include the one nullified by penalty, 16 -> 13:3 => 81.3%]
  • 4Q
    • 1st drive (17-19) = 7 plays, 6 passes, 1 rush
    • 2nd drive (17-19) = 3 plays, 3 passes, 0 rush
    • 3rd drive (17-22) = 2 plays, 2 passes, 0 rush
    • 4th drive (17-30) = 6 plays, 6 passes, 0 rush
    • TOTAL = 18 plays, 17 passes, 1 rush => 94.4%

On only one drive did the Redskins have more rushing attempts than passes, and other than the last desperation drive, that was the only drive where you could argue for a pass heavy load. That first drive of the second quarter also comprised 28.6% of our planned rushes for the entire game, and is the only reason we had any quarter that was less than 70% pass:rush ratio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, lavar703 said:

Or we just traded up to get him like the Giants did. 

Yea, you can't really predict that would happen though if you were McCloughan.

Edited by HTTRG3Dynasty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lavar703    156
33 minutes ago, HTTRG3Dynasty said:

Yea, you can't really predict that would happen though if you were McCloughan.

Very true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×