Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

We didn't lose because of Cam, Luke, or Coaching


TN05

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, TN05 said:

We lost because we made mistakes early. That's it. You don't win against Alex Smith when you go down 17-0. Alex Smith doesn't make mistakes that let you come back very often. The fact of the matter is, if DJ Moore doesn't fumble twice we win, and we nearly won even with that.

We had three turnovers and only allowed 23 points. That's not bad. We had three drives in the second half and scored on two of them and nearly on the third. That's about as good as you can get. The sky isn't falling. We just have to stop turning the ball over.

Does this mean there's no issues with coaching or performance? Of course not. We should have went for it on fourth and one. We should have been more aggressive early. Eric Reid shouldn't have blown coverage. Curtis Samuel and CJ Anderson should have had more time. But that's not why we lost: we lost because of turnovers. And that's fixable.

Turnovers happen, some times in bunches.  Great teams overcome them.  We didn't yesterday, against a less than average team.  The talent is there.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, RumHam said:

I love when the "understanding" and acceptance posts come a day after a L.

I find that no one ever talks about understanding and acceptance when they are 'winning'.

BTW, did you look at these forums after our win over the Giants?

There are detractors on this forum win or loose..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yeah, the turnovers were the main culprit. But our defense's inability to get off the field meant our offense had little opportunity to answer or get in a rhythm. They spent the majority of the game on the sidelines. Then for some reason when we got in the redzone late with plenty of time and two timeouts we were focused only on the endzone and not on moving the sticks, whether that was Cam, the play calling, or a combo of both.

I'm sure Rivera loved the Redskins philosophy. Basically what he wants to do every week. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    Earlier in Cam's career, we were like 1-16 when we had a single TO. But for some reason. Because we almost won yesterday, after having 3 TOs, it is worse case scenario? You folks are a hoot.

 

    95% of teams lose when committing 3 TOs. But all hellz breaks loose because we lost in that exact same instance.

 

    It is really difficult to win on the road in the NFL. 

 

    But rabble, rabble. fire everyone. Let's start that rebuild. Because evidently. Panther fans deserve better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with everything you said.  You recognized that there were multiple contributing factors, i.e. coaching and player performance issues also, but pointed out that the 3 turnover were the major factors. Yeah if we score and win on the last drive, we would have over come the turnovers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you win or lose for lots of reasons...

but we most definitely could of won with better play from Cam or play calling on that final series at the goal.  2 low percentage throws to the back corner back to back was simply.....dumb.  We had 2 timeouts and time. 

that matters.  That is why you have a big time QB.  For when you are in position late to win.  A million plays gets you to where you get in a game.  They all matter.   I can live with not winning.  Hard to swallow what Carolina opted to down there with the game on the line and not complain IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But... I need to blame this on just Ron Rivera so I can justify my irrationally hating a coach who has been in the top 5 for overall wins over the last 5 years!!!!!

(goes on to ignore everything and hone in on not going for it on 4th down when the score is 0-0 and it was the first possession of the game)

#huddlegonnahuddle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the game is as close as this one was, everything you did wrong is the reason you lost. DJ Moore hanging on to the football would have won this game. Better pass protection would have won this game. A more accurate pass from Newton to CMC in the end zone would have won this game. The defense not jumping offsides on a couple key third downs probably would have won this game. And, yes, better decisions from the coaching staff would have won this game. I'm no doom-and-gloomer, nor am I on the fire Rivera train, but he deserves criticism for his poor choices in this game just as Moore deserves to be criticized for fumbling twice.

Going for it on 4th and 1 is a better choice than punting unless you're backed up deep in your own end of the field. That's not an opinion; it's a statistical fact that better outcomes are generate more often by going for it. And it's just as true on the first possession of the game as it is on the last possession of the game (in fact, it's more true at the beginning of the game because there are some late-game time/score scenarios that can tip the scales towards punting). This also wasn't Rivera's only bad decision of the day. By deciding to just run it up the middle twice when we got the ball back with almost 2 minutes left in the first half, Rivera not only wasted another possession but also handed the ball back to Washington in scoring range. We were very lucky they didn't get another FG at the end of the half. When you voluntarily give up on possessions, you leave your players with less margin for error and magnify the impact of their mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I complete disagree. Who is available is extremely relevant. If you have a couple of players you would be happy with and you can still get them if you trade back, you should do that in a heartbeat. Being afraid that people will lowball you next year is an odd stance. Then you just say no next year, problem solved. In this particular draft you can get a very good player at 46. But to each their own.
    • I don't think so.  Watson really screwed them up.  I see something happening, but do not know what.  Cousins could be had in a trade--but they liked Flacco when he played there.  If it were me, I would not spend the #2 pick on Sanders.  I would go after a tier 2 qb because I think Will Howard is going to start in the NFL soon, and I think Ewers was rated very high at the beginning of the year--he knows adversity and he beat out a Manning while taking Texas to 2 playoff appearances.  I am not good at picking QBs, but I think Howard's run pass option and his accuracy is going to help someone.  Stay in Ohio and play for the Browns behind Flacco--
    • After Cam at #1, there are three or four elite players and there could be a trade--If I am the Giants and I am needed a winning season badly and I have several needs, I might trade out and pick up mid first and an extra second rounder, including a QB--while nobody is going to move up to #3 for Sanders, they might for Carter or Hunter.  If the Giants then move back, Sanders could still be in play.  That could be the trade in the top 3.  New England wants Campbell and I get that; Jacksonville at #5 could move back if someone wants Graham or Jeanty.  But barring some trade, the top 4 are probably locked in. So it could be 2 hours into the draft before we get any surprises. Nice list, by the way--you nailed it.
×
×
  • Create New...