Zorn Quote

[Sarge]

"We were in the game the whole way, but it was frustrating, especially early in the first half," Zorn said. "I was beside myself not being able to move the ball."

What planet does Jim Zorn live on? Watching the Tivo version last night (For as long as I could stand it) we were out of the game from about 5 minutes in the first quarter on.

Is he really this disconnected? I mean, I can see say the standard crap like "We fought hard", " We were competative ", even "What we do works". But "We were in the game the whole way"?

Dude............

 

[Blondie]

After the great first run by CP, I don't think the Skins were in the game. JC seemed confused......so in reality.......he looked the same as always.

 

[Sisyphus]

Watching the Zorn and Blache interviews apparently there is little to be concerned about.

 

[riggins44]

Watching the Zorn and Blache interviews apparently there is little to be concerned about.

I'm hoping this was for the media, but this week will be old fashioned butt whipping by the coaches behind closed doors.

Campbell to me seemed to be pressing instead of playing the game.

 

[riggins44]

I thought we scripted the first 15 plays? Find it hard to believe the reverse to ARE was scripted. To me just too much trickery for first game.

Other than we couldn't tackle, pass, or run the ball...pretty good game.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

We were out of it as soon as Zorn dialed up that crappy ARE trick play after the huge Portis run. Sucked all the momentum out of an offense that was just starting to get moving. Most horrible playcall I've ever seen...keep RUNNING the ball - this is the NFC BEAST!!

 

[Sarge]

We were out of it as soon as Zorn dialed up that crappy ARE trick play after the huge Portis run. Sucked all the momentum out of an offense that was just starting to get moving. Most horrible playcall I've ever seen...keep RUNNING the ball - this is the NFC BEAST!!

I posted a Mike Wise article that addresses this very thing. What the hell was Zorn thinking?

 

[Larry Brown #43]

I suppose in terms of the score we were in the game most of the way, but that doesn't mean we were competitive.

So Zorn was frustrated that we couldn't move the ball?

Say what you will about JC -- yeah, he probably isn't the long-term answer -- but he DOES have a strong arm and mobility. He's got two obvisous tools in his arsenal, yet he uses neither.

Zorn doesn't seem to allow JC to throw when we desperately need to move the ball through the air, and JC refuses to run even when he has a chance to move the chains with his feet.

Is JC not running because he's trying to prove he's a pocket passer? Is he being told not to run by Zorn? Or is he just not recognizing quickly enough when he should run?

The play in the New England game that JC made to run for the TD was beautiful. He's got the ability to make that kind of play. But for some reason he just won't do it when we need him to.

Remember how Chase would extend drives in the preseason by running for first downs? Clearly Chase isn't the runner that JC is, but Chase seemed to have a knack for knowing exactly when to tuck the ball and go. That's at least as important as the mobility itself.

The Giants seemed to allow JC room to run because they knew he wouldn't take them up on the offer.

And the fact that we couldn't take advantage of a banged-up Giants secondary tells me we either don't have the personnel to compete, or Zorn simply doesn't trust JC to throw the ball. He's got to either trust him or bench him. Throw the ball into the end zone, and if it's picked, it's picked. I'd almost prefer that we take shots and throw picks than settle for field goals. When we settle for field goals, we lose. We've proven that over the past several years.

 

[servumtuum]

And the fact that we couldn't take advantage of a banged-up Giants secondary tells me we either don't have the personnel to compete, or Zorn simply doesn't trust JC to throw the ball. He's got to either trust him or bench him. Throw the ball into the end zone, and if it's picked, it's picked. I'd almost prefer that we take shots and throw picks than settle for field goals. When we settle for field goals, we lose. We've proven that over the past several years.

The Skins looked, well..."predictable"-you knew who was going to carry the ball, you knew who the passes were going to be aimed at-the Giants never had to wonder, never had to be "uncertain" never had to have their defense be "confused" or unsure of what they were going to have to face from play to play. Always, Moss as the first option-no wonder they covered the crap out of him-they knew that 80-90% of the time he was the target. Variety, and confusion keeps a defense off-balance and that is precisely what the Skins didn't show.

 

[Yusuf06]

And the fact that we couldn't take advantage of a banged-up Giants secondary tells me we either don't have the personnel to compete, or Zorn simply doesn't trust JC to throw the ball. He's got to either trust him or bench him. Throw the ball into the end zone, and if it's picked, it's picked. I'd almost prefer that we take shots and throw picks than settle for field goals. When we settle for field goals, we lose. We've proven that over the past several years.

I also wonder if Zorn is still in ultra-conservative mode because he doesn't trust the OL. I'm a big beliver that you should trust your people and let them prove you wrong. That goes for JC as well.

I'd much rather we asked our guys to perform. If they can't or don't, then you pull back on things with the knowledge that you have a weakness that needs to be addressed in the upcoming offseason.

 

[Pappas]

After the great first run by CP, I don't think the Skins were in the game. JC seemed confused......so in reality.......he looked the same as always.

You nailed it again dear.

 

[Boone]

Not to parse words, but obviously he's referring to the score with that statement. In reality, had we decided to start playing at some point, we were never 'out of the game'. Given their domination on the lines, the truth is that the Giants should have put us away in the 2nd half. They couldn't. So, although we as fans may feel we were never a realistic threat to steal this game, the truth is, it was far from out of reach. And if we'd somehow won ugly off a couple Eli picks, we'd all be minimizing how bad we looked.

Ultimately, I'm not sure what 'in the game' means anyway. If you come back successfully and win, I guess you were 'in the game'. If you don't, I guess you weren't

 

[Henry]

Not to parse words, but obviously he's referring to the score with that statement. In reality, had we decided to start playing at some point, we were never 'out of the game'. Given their domination on the lines, the truth is that the Giants should have put us away in the 2nd half. They couldn't. So, although we as fans may feel we were never a realistic threat to steal this game, the truth is, it was far from out of reach. And if we'd somehow won ugly off a couple Eli picks, we'd all be minimizing how bad we looked.

I guess that makes sense, but considering that we have consistently lost to the Giants in games where the score did not indicate the level of domination the Giants enjoyed (16-7, 19-3 and 23-7 immediately come to mind) I'm not sure I agree we were ever really in that game.

 

[Boone]

I agree with your overall assessment Henry - I'm just trying to draw a distinction between the highly subjective 'we were never in the game' and the reality that points decide games, and from that factual vantage point, we were indisputably 'in the game' at several points.

Up until us not being that is

Now if we're saying we had no business being in that game, or that our play was so bad we didn't deserve to be in the game, I'd have to agree. But we were definitely in the game.

 

[servumtuum]

I agree with your overall assessment Henry - I'm just trying to draw a distinction between the highly subjective 'we were never in the game' and the reality that points decide games, and from that factual vantage point, we were indisputably 'in the game' at several points.

Up until us not being that is

Now if we're saying we had no business being in that game, or that our play was so bad we didn't deserve to be in the game, I'd have to agree. But we were definitely in the game.

Good point, Boone, Take the Bills/Patriots-the Bills basically outplayed the Pats and "looked" like they just about had things locked down-until Brady did one of his patented "I'm going to a level you won't believe" 2 minute two td explosions to win it. Bottom line-it didn't look like it should have been a Patriot win-but it was.

The Skins didn't, on the surface, look like they should have been within three td's of the Giants-but they were. I still believe that something hidden in the numbers, some variables buried in the videos, some serendipitous combination of efforts being done by the Skins were making it more difficult for the Giants to win big than the individual "stand-out" efforts, both positive and negative would have led one to believe. It isn't always the dramatic, or even noticeable things that are affecting what's happening on the field-but a combination of multiple tiny things happening in concert that can have an effect that is difficult to individually detect and/or measure but shows up in the final outcome.

The Brady thing is different, when I think about it tho'. Three minutes to go and down by two tds turns Brady into the most dangerous QB you could imagine.

 

[Henry]

did you leave out this last game where we brought it to within 6 with 1:30 left?

not ideal conditions but we had a chance.

My point here is that way the Giants regularly beat us is by grinding us down and stomping on us, not by running up the score. And that's exactly what they did again.

I also left out a game we actually WON. And I left out a game we dominated for a half (24-17 loss in '07.) But those types of games are exceptions. Had we lost in a manner similar to those, and we were not so beat down the entire game that a two score lead seemed insurmountable, I'd be more inclined to join the 'it's only week one' chorus.

But it's not only week one. It's 1993-2008. It's a team that's won the division once in 17 years.

Now I understand that we got a bad draw for week one. And I also understand there's always next week. And it is absolutely possible that we'll go a tear, win the division and make some noise in the playoffs. But given the (better part of) the past two decades, I need the Redskins to actually do it before I believe they will. Don't tell me we were in a game 'the whole way' when we clearly were not. That's right up there with 'we competed' and 'what we do works.'

Just win the damn game already.

... ok, rant over. I'm done talking about this stinker of a game. Hopefully we'll show more promise against the Rams.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Actually, I'm of the opinion that week 1 was the perfect time to go to NY and lay a butt-whooping on the Giants. The GMen are clearly the better team, and week 1 is what I like to call "the week of upsets." Buffalo over New England and Oakland over San Diego are prime examples - they just couldn't hold on. Houston over Dallas a few years ago is a great example.

Anyway, we came out flat, with no fire or emotion, and got steamrolled as Henry said. Yes, we brought it back to within 6 in the last 1:30, but none of that matters, really.

 

[Aston Gambino]

Anyway, we came out flat, with no fire or emotion, and got steamrolled as Henry said.

Watched the replay again last night, and I agree. We were pretty flat, emotionally. And although hindsight is 20/20, I'd still say the play calling in that game, at least on the offense side, was questionable at best.

Aside from their two touchdowns, which were both clearly the fault of the players, I'd put this loss squarely on Zorn. We didn't look prepared, mentally or psychologically, there were little to no adjustments in terms of strategy and play calling (run left for 2, anyone?), and I'm still waiting to hear why didn't attack their depleted secondary.

On the scoreboard, we were still in it, but only because of two 4th down stands that kept the game from becoming a complete blowout.

I can't wait to see how Dallas attacks this defense.