Skip to content

Need to Know: Around Redskins Park—Jones looking forward to seeing “big brother” Morris

Sep 16, 2016, 5:17 AM EDT


Here is what you need to know on this Friday, September 16, two days before the Washington Redskins host the Dallas Cowboys.


Today’s schedule: Practice 11:55 Jay Gruden and Sean McVay news conferences and player availability after practice approx. 1:30 p.m.

Days until: Browns @ Redskins 16; Redskins @ Ravens 23; Eagles @ Redskins 30

Around Redskins Park

—Fans and players who were here last year all have respect for Alfred Morris. But Matt Jones, who came in as a rookie last year, has a special bond with the former Redskins running back. “He’s like a big brother to me, helped me a lot,” he said. “He taught me how to be a man on and off the field. I’ll be happy to see him out there playing against him, against a guy who taught me a lot.” The Redskins hope that seeing his mentor will help gets Jones going; he needs to gain some traction and get his season underway.

—I’d like to add one more number to the Jay Gruden isn’t really pass happy pile before I put it to bed. Some of the push back I got centered around him supposedly padding the rushing stats by running a lot in the fourth quarter when they were trailing. So I ran the numbers. In the 34 games that Gruden has been here the Redskins have run in the fourth quarter while trailing by more than one score (deficit of 9 or more) all of 33 times. So of the 860 rushing attempts in the Gruden era 3.8 percent have been throwaway plays in desperation situations. That is not significant.

—With 53 fairly healthy players the decision on who will be inactive on Sunday will be a tough one for Gruden and company. The only two easy ones to figure are QB Nate Sudfeld and G Arie Kouandjio. With only eight offensive linemen on the roster they have to leave a backup tackle (Ty Nsekhe) and backup interior lineman (Spencer Long), leaving Kouandjio as the only extra lineman. Wide receiver Rashad Ross’ kickoff return skills are unlikely to be needed with Dan Bailey able to pound the ball out of the end zone.

—On defense, they had Anthony Lanier down against Pittsburgh and they went with five active defensive linemen. I think the undrafted rookie sits again. Since signing Cullen Jenkins the probably will have him active for a sixth DL in the rotation against Dallas’ we need to find three other defensive players who will sit. S Duke Ihenacho and CB Kendall Fuller were down last week so they should sit this week. The other inactive defender? I’ll take a guess at LB Terence Garvin, although they might keep him up for special teams and sit someone else.

—It looks like Joe Barry is catching some flak for his comment that he “felt really good” about the defensive game plan against the Steelers and that now, after the fact, he still does. I do think that the Redskins could have had more bracketing coverage on Antonio Brown. But they did on the first touchdown pass to him, according to DeAngelo Hall, who admitted that he was late getting over to help. The second one came on third and three. That was not an obvious passing situation for the Steelers but perhaps Breeland should have had some help. Still, it took a perfect pass to beat Breeland’s coverage. Bottom line, they gave up 38 points and any game plan that has that as a result should at least be thoroughly reexamined.

Tandler on Twitter

In case you missed it 

  1. abanig - Sep 16, 2016 at 5:33 AM

    Inactive for me would be:

    1. David Bruton & 2. Dashaun Phillips in favor of Ihenachho and Kendall Fuller

    3. Josh Doctson in favor of Rashad Ross. I’d have Ross return punts also

    4. Willie Lanier, I agree about Jenkins
    5. Nate Sudfeld
    6. Arie Kouandjio
    7. Deshazor Everett

    I like both Garvin and Everett as special teamers, but I like Garvin more.

    • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 10:29 AM

      Zero chance Bruton and Philips are on the inactive list. Maybe Ihenacho and/or Fuller get off the list and get some snaps and replace, Blackmon, Everette or Toler. Blackmon and Everette had zero defensive snaps and Toler just two. Blackmon and Everette were active on special teams. Toler, not so much.

      • abanig - Sep 16, 2016 at 10:40 AM

        Bruton and Phillips played like they didn’t know the defense and Bruton is not as sound of a tackler as Ihenacho is. I honestly don’t know if I’ve ever seen Ihenacho miss a tackle and Bruton missed 3 Monday night.

        My other point is that Toler, Dunbar or Fuller should replace Phillips as the 3rd corner m. They have to do something there because Phillips looked lost. I’d rather see Fuller out there making a few mistakes and learning rather than see a 3 year pro like Phillips play like he never had one day at practice the past two years, we just can’t have that.

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 10:51 AM

          Here’s the thing. Bruton played 66 out of 68 snaps; Philips 46. Dunbar, Blackmon, and Everette were all active yet played as many defensive snaps as you and I. Toler just two. Two things could be at work here: 1) those guys don’t know Bruton’s and Philips’ responsibilities and couldn’t be counted on to fill in and/or 2) they were brought up for other packages (3rd and long) that the game just didn’t call for. It is reasonable to believe that Ihenacho and Fuller (him I doubt) will see they field because of the play of Bruton and Philips but wholesale changes are not likely. Duke and Fuller would replace Dunbar and Everette and then get some snaps.

        • abanig - Sep 16, 2016 at 11:08 AM

          I get what you’re saying but we can’t have guys constantly make mental mistakes on the field and miss tackles they should be making.

          Dunbar, Blackmon and Everett and their defensive snaps are kind of irrelevant to my point.

          My point is that Bruton and Phillips didn’t get the job done at their position.

          How long before we make whole sale changes in our defensive backfield to fix this issue?

          We all know Ihenacho, Dunbar and Toler can play in this league and Fuller has more upside than all of our DBs except for Breeland.

          We made changes on the DL already by signing Jenkins back because the DL didn’t get the job done on Monday night.

          I don’t think status quo in the secondary is a good thing, especially when we have other talented Dbs with more experience that were either inactive or didn’t see any defensive snaps.

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 11:17 AM

          What did I say about status quo? The DL isn’t making wholesale changes. They brought in a veteran who would’ve made the team had Spencer Long not been injured on cut down day. Fuller right now sucks. He his burnt toast waiting to happen — upside aside. I have no problem sitting him.

          Ihenacho hopefully will play but like I started this conversation — there is ZERO chance Bruton is then inactive. Why would he be? Made some mistakes? Let’s suppose his mistakes were enough for Bruton to lose his job. Hooray then but how many plays before Duke gets injured? Bruton would have to be active in case of that possibility.

        • abanig - Sep 16, 2016 at 1:20 PM

          Wouldn’t surprise me if Phillips is cut during the season sometime unless he really improves. Next week he has Beasley and then Cruz. If he still sucks against them then there’s no point in keeping him when we have Blackmon, Toler, Dunbar and Fuller who could all take his job and we wouldn’t miss a beat and may even get improvement.

          We do that and maybe we can sign another DL like Melton, Coples or Knighton

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 1:44 PM

          Sounds like you play too much Madden. Philips and ALL of the corners aren’t keeping the Redskins from signing any d-linemen. Philips has been the number one slot corner since early in OTAs despite trying Fuller there, all of Toler’s experience, and all of Dunbars snaps in THIS defense last season. It’s just like when Leigh Torrance was the slot corner. You’d think there were better options on the team but there just weren’t. But if you want to have a knee-jerk reaction to one game against a prolific opponent, that’s your prerogative. Too bad about Kyshoen Jarrett because he won the position last year even though he was a safety.

          Off topic, I’ve been meaning to give you props on your Ziggy Hood call early on. Made me a fan in the preseason but didn’t have a good game against Pittsburgh. The biggest surprise to me is the disappearance of RJF. Here are the DL’s snap counts from Monday (out of 68):

          50 Baker
          40 Hood
          28 Golston
          22 RJG
          18 Reyes

          The rest of the front seven:
          68 Compton
          60 Kerrigan
          59 Smith
          51 Foster
          18 Cravens (who knows where he was)
          15 Murphy
          2 Bates

          Not much of a rotation. Perhaps that had something to do with the tempo or more to do with the formations. May be a blueprint for how to attack the ‘skins. As bad as PotRoast was, his presence at least had defenses try to beat us a different way. The offense has to score to get teams to try to catch up a different way.

        • abanig - Sep 16, 2016 at 1:56 PM

          I’ve never played Madden in my life except maybe once at my cousins house who’s 10 years younger than me.

          For me, I’ve seen both Toler and Dunbar play better than Phillips even in the preseason. I realize Phillps won the job, but sometimes there are practice players” and “gamers.” Maybe Phillips is a guy who looks great in practice and coaches love what he’s showing them all offseason but when the lights come on he’s not quite as good.

          This would be like the opposite of Brandon Lloyd who Joe Gibbs didn’t play because he didn’t practice well and when we let him go all he did was go on to be a good to great WR everywhere else he played.

          The reason Cooley thinks RJF didn’t play much is because he wasn’t being affective at all. I think Cooley gave him one of the worst grades of the DL and surprisingly enough Reyes had the second highest score behind Baker, so don’t be surprised if Reyes has like 10 more snaps or something.

          Another problem we had with our run defense was the OLBs didn’t play the run well, they often got blocked by the Pitt TEs rather easily, which just can’t happen. Put that on top of the missed tackles by Breeland and Bruton and all of a sudden you’ve given up 171 yards to Deangelo Williams. :(

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:16 PM

          With RJF, he had been slipping down the depth chart before this game. So perhaps the coaches know something. Brandon Lloyd took another three years to get good again after leaving the ‘skins. There’s zero reason to be so hasty with Philips and you must know that he doesn’t play the same position as Toler or Dunbar. Bringing those guys in would put Breeland in the slot and leave Toler/Dunbar on the outside. How would’ve that looked had they been matched up with Brown? Fuller isn’t ready and may not be this year. Philips gets at least three games at Monday’s level before he’s replaced.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:47 PM

          Can you guys give me a quick run down of why Cooley grades RJF so low? He was a huge disappointment for me but I had a hard time figuring out why his performance was so bad.

          Would also be curious to hear what he said about Reyes. The guy didn’t play a ton but he got penetration on a couple plays. He’s in no danger of becoming an all pro but I didn’t think he was awful either.

          Really, we have to get better run support from the edge. Smith kind of just stops running and watches the play the second he sees someone is blocking him on a run play. And I might be Kerrigan’s biggest fan but he can’t allow TEs to handle him like that.

          The whole team seemed asleep. We know they’re better than they played. I can’t jump to too many conclusions based off that game. It just seemed like they thought they would show up and play great without fighting for it. Like they read too many press clippings, congratulated themselves too much and were coddled too much in the offseason/preseason. Compton said something similar, which made me happy. At least they realize it.

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:55 PM

          I’ll have to dig for it. Maybe later in the day.

        • abanig - Sep 16, 2016 at 3:08 PM

          Considering Rogers is in the slot every time for the steelers, they would have looked just fine.

          The reason I’m hasty on Phillips is because he’s in a virtual tie with Bruton as our worst defender on Monday night and in each case we have better options

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 3:23 PM

          Better options? Says what? A guy who gets injured on contact, a rookie, a converted wide receiver, and a vet that is last on everyone’s roster? If anyone of these guys won their position, I’d be preaching the same prudence. This off with their heads approach is simply absurd.

        • abanig - Sep 16, 2016 at 7:35 PM

          That’s fine, we’ll see what happens. I have little hope in Phillips I do think Blackmon, Toler and Dunbar could do a better job. Blackmon was pretty solid last year as our #2 and he has experience in the slot, Toler has experience everywhere and Dunbar is more experienced than he was last year and last year he had success covering some of the NFL’s best wide receivers.

          As for Ihenacho, I’m not going to predict everyone’s injuries every year if you want to have at it.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 17, 2016 at 3:23 AM

          I’m not into predicting injuries either. I hate the term “injury prone” because it’s used WAY too much. But there are a couple players who have earned it. And Ihenacho is a little different to predict than other players because his injuries are a result of the way he plays. Very similar to RG3. You know RG3 is going to get hurt because he run like Cam but isn’t built like Cam. Ihenacho tries to tackle like Kam (Chancellor) but isn’t built like Kam.

          Im honestly perplexed as to why he’s even still on the team. He’s unusable. We are a nickel team and he can’t cover. We’re in year 2 of a 5 year rebuild, meaning we’re supposed to be acquiring and developing young talent who’s part of our future plans and he’s a mediocre strong safety who can’t cover and gets injured when he tackles people… What am I missing guys? Usually you need a better or equal option before you cut someone but anyone is equal to Ihenacho because he’s unplayable.

        • abanig - Sep 17, 2016 at 10:08 AM

          The problem we have is Bruton can’t cover either. So since that’s the case, why not start the better guy in run support and better tackler so we don’t give up 5 yards a carry.

          They can always take Ihenacho out when it’s obvious passing situations and put Blackmon in to have another safety in with Hall that can cover.

          As for the injury prone thing, he can’t control it, so they might as well play him and not even think about the injured he had. I seriously doubt that’s why he was inactive. IMO that’s totally a fan perspective just trying to come up with a reason. If the coaches were that worried about it, he wouldn’t be on the team at all.

          My problem with Bruton is more he had mental mistakes and particularly in the second half he was loafing. Ihenacho may not quite be as good in covertly as Bruton but you’ll never see him loafing.

          They need a guy who’s going to hit and tackle running backs like a linebacker, not a guy who’s going to whiff on a running back at the 5 yard line and allow a touchdown.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 17, 2016 at 2:44 PM

          And, I don’t mean this to sound offensive, but I think you’re taking a total fan perspective that Ihenacho is better than Bruton in any way. There’s a reason Bruton started and Ihenacho wasn’t even active as his backup. I understand he had a couple bad plays, but he had some good plays too. I haven’t seen a lot of Bruton. But from what I have seen, he doesn’t have anywhere close to the issues Ihenacho has in coverage.

          Denver cut this guy in the middle of his rookie contract man. Teams don’t do that to good players. They’ve been having to release guys for cap issues and I’m pretty sure Elway would have loved to have some guys making pennies on rookie deals. But he’s not good. So Elway just cut his losses instead of hanging on too long. And it’s not like they had a first round pick or stud free agent come in to bump him off the roster.

          We haven’t seen enough of Bruton to make any kind of statements about him being good or bad. Players do have bad games and can bounce back. One game isn’t a trend. Same for Phillips. But we did get a good look at Ihenacho in Denevr and then some in Washington. Maybe he improved, but from IR? I doubt it. And I’m not saying he’s unplayable because of injuries. I’m saying that because he can’t cover, at all. And there’s no such thing as an obvious running down in the NFL anymore. Guys must be able to cover or else they don’t even belong on a roster. Barry’s defense relies heavily on hybrid and 3 down players. Can’t be subbing safties like that. We will show our hand and the no huddle will kill us.

        • abanig - Sep 17, 2016 at 3:23 PM

          Denver cut Ihenacho because they signed TJ Ward and Bruton beat him out in 2014.

          Bruton had more than a few bad plays. I’d say he had a few good plays and one great play. There’s a reason why Norman wanted to rip his head off on the sidelines and that’s because he kept screwing up.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 17, 2016 at 5:31 PM

          Right, Bruton beat him out…. On two separate teams.

        • abanig - Sep 17, 2016 at 6:18 PM

          For now…

        • abanig - Sep 17, 2016 at 2:20 PM

          You guys are overreacting to Ihenacho’s injuries. In 2014 he fractured his heel, I don’t think that was an injury they happened because of contact.

          It appears that people should have had Toler behind Phillips. From what I’ve seen, Phillips is not a better player.

          Here’s to hoping he improves.

        • bangkokben - Sep 17, 2016 at 2:57 PM

          He fractured his foot in 2014 and wrist in 2015 in very little contact. That sounds like someone who is brittle — Tony Romo-esque. Maybe they were just flukes. Again, I have no problem with having him play SS but Bruton wouldn’t be inactive because there is too much probability that Ihenacho will be injured before the game is over.

          As for what you’ve seen, that is the problem. What you’ve seen is limited to what is on your TV screen when you’ve been watching — which is pretty much the same for all for us. So you want to make changes based on the >1% of what has actually occurred. I’m not saying that you can never come to that conclusion but one game and few quarters in pre-season is super limited.

        • abanig - Sep 17, 2016 at 3:10 PM

          Well he actually fractured his heel, I’m not sure if it was a contact injury or not, that’s all I’m saying.

          See, the whole “we aren’t going to play him because he may get injured just doesn’t pass the smell test.” The coaches can’t be thinking that way, otherwise he wouldn’t be on the team. It’s a waste of a roster spot if you’re not going to play a guy because you’re afraid to play him.

          It’s not just what I’ve seen bang. It’s what Cooley saw, and Cooley wanted coaches film of the game and the all 22. So it’s not exactly accurate that I’m just going off of what I saw when I watched the game live and rewatched it the next day.

        • bangkokben - Sep 17, 2016 at 3:17 PM

          Your quotes are a misinterpretation of what has been said. He’s not playing because he’s not better. What’s the difference if its a heel or foot? The last I checked the heel was part of the foot. It was two broken bones in VERY limited contact in two consecutive years. Redskins’ fans that are against him starting know the injury history. The guy makes Chris Thompson look like Cal Ripken. Who knows what the coaches think? He ain’t playing.

        • abanig - Sep 17, 2016 at 3:25 PM

          So why is Ihenacho even on the team? I just can’t believe that he’s on the team and the coaches think that way. If they thought that way, Ihenacho would have been cut and they would have kept one of the young OLBs or Ioannidis on the roster instead of Ihenacho.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 17, 2016 at 5:38 PM

          Exactly! I asked this earlier in the summer too. Why is he even on the team? He would have been a good safety 20 years ago but he doesn’t fit the modern NFL and can’t stay healthy. I have no idea why they’re keeping him around. I assume Jarrette’s injury has something to do with it. They probably planned on cutting Ihenacho after camp and then Jarrette’s injury put a damper in those plans.

          He’s not a terrible depth guy but he’s not a starter. I know that much. If you don’t like Bruton you don’t like Bruton. I don’t love him either. But that doesn’t mean Ihenacho is the answer or a better player. We might just have to accept that Bruton is the best we’re going to get for 2016. Talk to Scot if you don’t like that. I wanted Reggie Nelson but apparently we’re not into signing older players. You know, like Vernon Davis and Cullen Jenkins.

        • abanig - Sep 17, 2016 at 6:18 PM

          I wanted Reggie Nelson also, but they’re moving Hall into that role and Blackmon that’s why Nelson wasn’t signed.

          Now if only they could find a safety who’s solid at tackling around the line of scrimmage….

          I think they have one, and it ain’t the guy who started Monday night from what I’ve seen thus far and in the preseason.

          I don’t really understand why you think Bruton is an upgrade in coverage. Have you seen him try to cover a TE? He hugs the guy at about 5 yards away and gets penalties called on him. That’s not good. Lol

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 17, 2016 at 6:59 PM

          Nelson is a clear upgrade over Blackmon though. I’m not real high on Blackmon.

          And I’m not saying Bruton is far and away better than Ihenacho in coverage. I’m saying I haven’t seen enough from him yet to draw any conclusions. And I don’t think you have either because he’s barely played. I couldn’t give you an analysis of his coverage ability if you held a gun to my head. He just hasn’t played enough. So I’m not going to call for his head after one game. One game isn’t enough to learn anything about anyone. If we were going to bench people based off one game then Smith belongs on the bench too.

          What I do know is that Ihenacho is bad in coverage. Like, really really bad. I have seen enough to know that. Now, a lot of that is based off his days in Denver. Maybe he’s improved and maybe he could come in and surprise me. But I haven’t seen or heard anything since he’s been in Washington to make me think that.

          I just see calling for Inenacho to play because Bruton isn’t playing well like calling for McCoy to start because Cousins isn’t playing well. Even if Cousins is stinking the place up, we know McCoy isn’t the answer. McCoy may have his moments but we know he’s not the answer. If you’ve seen me make posts around here you know I’m not one to go around saying players should get cut. I think Inenacho and Ross are the only two players over ever said I didn’t want on the roster anymore. That’s how little I think of him.

        • abanig - Sep 17, 2016 at 7:38 PM

          Just watched the coaches show on channel w/ Cooley & Gruden going over game tape. On the play where Kerrigan forced the fumble, thank god he did because Bruton left Antonio Brown open by about 5 yards in between he and Norman. I’m sure there are other examples Cooley wouldn’t just have him and Phillips as two of our 3 worst defenders including RJF just because.

          Ihenacho was pretty bad ass last year for two games and this preseason vs the run. I guess it’s a case of what you don’t know may be better than what you know.

          We’ll find out soon enough

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 17, 2016 at 9:44 PM

          I don’t doubt any of that. But, again, it’s just one game. Not enough information.

        • abanig - Sep 18, 2016 at 1:17 PM

          Yeah, Phillips sucks

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 18, 2016 at 2:24 PM

          I’m starting to lean your way in this. I can’t sayfor sure until I go back and rewatch every play. But based off 3 halves of football, Phillips is not very high on my list.

        • abanig - Sep 18, 2016 at 4:48 PM

          He hasn’t been within 5 yards of his assignment all year. He’s trash.

          I’d rather see Fuller be out there and learning, I guarantee he can’t be worse and would most likely be a little bit better.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 18, 2016 at 5:16 PM

          I think I would like to see a couple shake ups on defense. But I’m trying not to overreact too soon after a loss. Gotta go back and rewatch some stuff for sure. But, as of now, I don’t feel like defense played that bad or lost the game for us. Basically if Cousins plays better we win that game.

        • abanig - Sep 18, 2016 at 5:32 PM

          It’s plain as day that the main issues on the backend are Phillips and Bruton unless you want to throw Breeland in there also but I don’t advocate benching him.

          Portis just said on ESPN 980 that he likes what Cravens is doing but they need him on the field more. He said he wished they would have just started him at SS to start the season and have him take his lumps as the season goes on.

          This is very similar to what I’ve been saying about Fuller also. It can’t be longer than a month before Cravens and Fuller are starting if Bruton and Phillips don’t step their game up.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 18, 2016 at 6:47 PM

          I’m cool with that. Let’s get our higher draft picks some reps. I didn’t really notice a lot of bad plays from Bruton, but I wasn’t watching him a lot. I usually focus on the lines when I watch a game. Which reminds me, I think Trent Murphy needs to see the field more. He needs to be allowed to rush the passer and stop the run. Don’t care for him much in coverage but he was getting it done out there today.

        • abanig - Sep 19, 2016 at 8:38 AM

          Bruton is supposed to cover TEs and help with slot receivers and running backs. TEs when offenses are in traditional pro sets and slot receivers when they are 4/5 wide.

          The TEs and Beasley murdered the redskins all day long. Bruton and Phillips are the main culprits. Neither one of them can cover a slot WR within 5 yards and Bruton was getting smoked by the TEs. Later in the game DHall drew Witten in the redzone and DHall nearly had an int.

          If Hall makes that play then the Alfed Morris TD never happens. He was so close, either way it was great D by Hall.

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 1:51 PM

          Sounds like you play too much Madden. Philips and ALL of the corners aren’t keeping the Redskins from signing any d-linemen. Philips has been the number one slot corner since early in OTAs despite trying Fuller there, all of Toler’s experience, and all of Dunbars snaps in THIS defense last season. It’s just like when Leigh Torrance was the slot corner. You’d think there were better options on the team but there just weren’t. But if you want to have a knee-jerk reaction to one game against a prolific opponent, that’s your prerogative. Too bad about Kyshoen Jarrett because he won the position last year even though he was a safety.

          Off topic, I’ve been meaning to give you props on your Ziggy Hood call early on. Made me a fan in the preseason but didn’t have a good game against Pittsburgh. The biggest surprise to me is the disappearance of RJF. Here are the DL’s snap counts from Monday (out of 68):

          50 Baker
          40 Hood
          28 Golston
          22 RJG
          18 Reyes

          The rest of the front seven:
          68 Compton
          60 Kerrigan
          59 Smith
          51 Foster
          18 Cravens (who knows where he was)
          15 Murphy
          2 Bates

          Not much of a rotation. Perhaps that had something to do with the tempo or more to do with the formations. May be a blueprint for how to attack the ‘skins. As bad as PotRoast was, his presence at least had defenses try to beat us a different way. The offense has to score to get teams to try to win a different way.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 12:39 PM

          But Ihenacho is AWFUL in coverage. A complete liability. Yeah, he’s a good tackler. But the way he tackles is also why he gets hurt so often.

          I think the main point is that taking someone from the starting strong safety spot one week to inactive the next is pretty extreme and unlikely to happen.

        • abanig - Sep 16, 2016 at 1:18 PM

          Bruton seems to be bad at both. He was lost in coverage and he missed 3 tackles.

          Our run defense sucks. IMO we should be really worried about that and one way to fix it is to start Ihenacho because he plays like a linebacker.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:08 PM

          Well that’s a pretty fair point. Ihenacho should help in run D. That is until he gets hurt after two tackles ;)

          But Bruton had some good plays too. You can’t just take those missed tackles in a vacuum. Gotta look at the whole picture. And if you think Bruton is bad in coverage, just wait until Ihenacho is on the field. He may as well not even be there.

          One game isn’t enough to draw any conclusions about any players. Bruton maybe had some bad plays in the first game of the season but that doesn’t erase the whole camp where he earned the job. It also doesn’t mean he won’t play better next week. It’s way, way too early to make wholesale changes like that. To go from starter to inactive is just an extreme response to a very small sample.

  2. redskins12thman - Sep 16, 2016 at 5:59 AM

    The Redskins became a piñata because they were one of only a couple teams that seemed unprepared / were not competitive in their opening day match (see also Rams); they only have themselves to blame. This needs to change, and I believe it will change against the Cowboys.

    Al Morris is pure class, but after a warm welcome and thank you in pre-game warm-ups, it should be all business. The Redskins must force the Cowboys to pass and ask Norman, Breeland, Hall to lead effort to shut down Dez, Witten, Beasley and Williams. Just like the Redskins had to make someone other than Brown or Williams beat them in the Steelers game, the Redskins cannot allow Elliott, Morris or Prescott as a runner to beat them. If the Cowboys are able to run against the Redskins, it will be a sad state of affairs.

    Your point Rich that the Redskins best run defense will be scoring so much that the opponent chooses not to run seems both accurate and a risky proposition; in this scenario, the Redskins may have to gamble on 4th down when in field goal situations — going for 7 instead of 3; I wouldn’t do this on the first scoring opportunity but in subsequent ones, the Redskins may need to take this risk … seems very un-Gruden like to me.

    I agree with your inactive list of Sudfeld, Kouandjio, Ross, Lanier and Garvin (due to illness being the only reason). I don’t think Ihenacho sits this week (Bruton and Phillips played poorly at times against the Steelers and need to have Ihenacho and Fuller as an option; if Fuller does not play it will be a sign that the Redskins don’t have confidence in him yet). I think it will be another CB — while Dunbar is a solid contributor to Special Teams, he may be the odd many out (slight chance it is Toler but I would think the Redskins want Toler as insurance). Joining Dunbar, I’ll guess is Baker or Reyes, whomever is less healthy to contribute.

    • redskins12thman - Sep 16, 2016 at 6:13 AM

      Obviously (but probably should have explicitly stated), in most scenarios a less healthy Baker will contribute more than a 100% Reyes, so Baker would really have to be unable to play for him to sit and I hope this is not the case.

    • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 11:00 AM

      Good points about 4th down. They do need to be more aggressive and it is un-Gruden-like. Imagine they did decide to go for it on 4th and 1 last week on the opening drive and made it. Could’ve eliminated that tentative mindset from the start. Instead, you have to play tight all night. What’s the worse that can happen? Down seven nothing and you’re playing from behind but maybe now you have a team that says to itself lets win this instead of a group of men more concerned with not losing. Pittsburgh had the swagger. New England would’ve done the same thing.

      As for the inactives, no way Baker or Reyes are inactive. They signed another d-linemen because they need them to play — especially against Dallas. I’ve got your five plus Fuller and Everette. My guess is the Redskins were debating as to who might likely get injured Hall or Bruton and rightly sided with Hall therefore keeping Everette over Ihenacho. This week they switch. No knock on Fuller — he simply isn’t ready in man coverage yet. They need him to be from the slot. I think Philips plays better this week.

      • chimps000 - Sep 16, 2016 at 12:09 PM

        totally agree- I couldn’t believe gruden punted from the steelers 40
        on 4th and 1. It’s like he didn’t understand the only way the redskins are going to win games this year is with their offense putting up a lot
        of points- especially in games against high powered offenses.

    • redskins12thman - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:26 PM

      Spaight (concussion symptoms — too bad) and Reyes have already been ruled out for Sunday’s game; looks like Sudfeld, Kouandjio so need three more. I’m wondering if Redskins want more than one deep threat, but will say Ross is out for now. With Reyes out, and Jenkins groin a concern, Lanier might be active. For last spot, I’ll say Dunbar. If Lanier is active, perhaps Fuller doesn’t play either.

      Garvin is looking healthy.

      • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:38 PM

        Ross being inactive is no loss. He really only contributes as a kick returner and that role has significantly less value with the new rules. We have one of the best deep threats in the game. Ross is fast, but he’s not a deep threat because he’s terrible. He’s just a threat to run really fast.

        Might as well get Lanier dressed and see if he can play a couple snaps. Why not?

        I don’t think Fuller is going to be ready to play this season. But especially not this early. That’s asking a lot of a rookie CB. Does anybody want Fuller, who has probably never played this kind of zone in his life, to matchup with Victor Cruz on Sunday? I sure don’t.

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:44 PM

          Right in agreement with you, Trey. As for the kick-off rules, is it just me or does there seem to be a directive from above to continue to kick it deep? Pittsburgh only had 40% touchbacks last year yet only had one return against them Monday. Of course Belicheck isn’t complying and pinned Arizona within the ten a couple of times.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 4:33 PM

          Yeah I’m not sure about that. I thought NE and Pittsburgh would be the two teams, if any, to try pouch kicks. Pre season was no indication because teams try different things or don’t show their hand there.

          I have a hard time believing that Godell (or one of his cronies) would try and tell a team what to do. But if the owners got together and decided that it’s best for the long-term stability of the league, then maybe.

          But kick returners just don’t have the same value anymore. Not unless more team try to pin the returner back. And Ross isn’t a good punt returner. I’ll take Doctson in a limited roll over Ross because Doctson brings a different element even if it’s just go routs and corner fades.

      • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:40 PM

        That sucks for Spaight.


      • redskins12thman - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:46 PM

        Gruden says Cravens’ hip flexor makes him TBD.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 4:34 PM

          That’s an issue that can linger too. I know from personal experience there.

  3. garg8050 - Sep 16, 2016 at 6:43 AM

    Doctson won’t be inactive; he’ll probably play even more snaps this week. Reyes should be inactive every week but he’s Barry’s guy so that won’t happen unless he’s hurt. I don’t think Phillips or Bruton played that poorly to be inactivated, at least not after one week. I suspect the inactives will be the same as last week, except for the one additional player to allow Jenkins to be on the active 46…could be Reyes if he’s not healthy, otherwise could be Garvin or Everett.

    • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:41 PM

      You know, Reyes wasn’t great but he wasn’t awful either. If you took the names and numbers off the jerseys I think a lot of fans would be complaining about different players.

      Scherff did not have an especially good game and neither did Smith. Smith had a couple flash plays but he gave up really easy vs. the run. If our alleged star plays actually played like stars then maybe we do quite a bit better.

      • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:53 PM

        I kind of said something similar earlier in the week. Had Breeland, Kerrigan, and Cousins, brought their A games perhaps were on the other side of the ledger.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 4:36 PM

          I don’t think Baker played especially well either. Both of our points being that if the stars play like stars the whole team should improve.

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 7:06 PM

          That was the thing in 2013, a lot folks other than #10 played poorly or less than the season before. Fred Davis, Logan Paulsen, and Josh Morgan. Paulsen and Morgan seemed like players on the rise while the expectations were that Davis would return to form. Instead all three had pretty much maxed out.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 17, 2016 at 3:02 AM

          I foolishly thought Fred Davis was going to turn into a really good TE. Basically like what we have with Reed now. Looking back, I still see the potential but I also see how that wasn’t the wisest of assumptions. But remember him in 2012? When he was actually on the field him and RG3 made some plays. Say what you will about how all that turned out but 2012 was a very exciting year.

  4. redskins12thman - Sep 16, 2016 at 7:29 AM

    Both Mikes on “Mike & Mike” pick the Cowboys to beat the Redskins. I hope they are both wrong. I believe the Redskins can and will win this game.

    • sidepull - Sep 16, 2016 at 8:02 AM

      I just want to see the Redskins not beat themselves.

      Gruden not overthinking a 4th and 1 or a 4th and 6
      Cuz being accurate, extending plays, some play action.
      Getting 7 in the redzone instead of 3
      Knock off all the stupid drive killing penalties.
      Joe Barry ….I have no answer for that.

      Redskins just handle your business Its Dallas.

  5. colorofmyskinz - Sep 16, 2016 at 8:00 AM

    Barry needs to be accountable and hopefully change something because his defense was about the worst in the league.

    I appreciate the Kumbaya, but we lost and we need to win.

    This week is CODE RED, 2 weeks into the season. We lost by the largest point differential in the league by s huge margin. I hope the practices this week had a much different intensity. That is what I would like to hear about. Was it just business as usual with cool music playing and 2-hand-touch flag football, or were they focused.

    i cannot believe Bruton is starting. Inhencho should be. Even Cooley said it.

    I would be bringing in a new DLine guy every week until we see a change in performance. The front DLine 6 were horrible.

    Really hope to see a different team this week. That Monday night reminded me too much of the last 2 decades, had zero resemblance of last year.

    Hail is all I got. No HTTR until I see a W.

    • John - Sep 16, 2016 at 10:56 AM

      Hard to buy into the defense of his game plan, but then again, he doesn’t have a whole lot to work with. They can’t stop the run or the pass and get no pressure without blitzing.

    • John - Sep 16, 2016 at 10:59 AM

      Bringing in a new DLine guy weekly just brings another “Joe average”. Any diamonds in the rough have all ready been snatched up long ago.

      • colorofmyskinz - Sep 16, 2016 at 11:36 AM

        I agree somewhat. If this is what it takes to instill some level of accountability on or defensive front to try harder, then do it to send message if anything. They sent a message by bringing in a 35 year old. I hope they don’t have to do it weekly and that puts a flame under their rear. It is one thing to bring average talent. It is another to bring in hungry average talent looking to prove themselves. I am not convinced our 6 DLine in the roster are nothing but below average any way. I would rather have below average talent and very hungry, than average that are just trying to finish a game. That is what I saw. A below average group that packed it up in the beginning of the third quarter with the look of I give up. I would rather have below average playing 60 minutes with something to prove like Lanier, vs average that thinks it is ok to play 30 minutes and call it a day.

  6. chimps000 - Sep 16, 2016 at 8:48 AM

    Joe Barry’s defense of his game plan was hard to follow- he seemed to be saying that it’s hard on your defense when you have a stud CB “travel” with an opposing stud wideout. That may or may not be the case, and I don’t think you have to do that every game, but the steelers were missing their number 2 and 3 WR, and josh Norman was an all pro CB, while breeland is inconsistent at times like all young players. And Norman is very quick, while breeland is long and not as quick, and obviously Antonio brown is super quick. This was the perfect situation to have Norman “travel” with brown.

    And excellent coaches throughout the league over many years have at times coached exactly that scheme that Barry says is so hard on your other players.

    In Barry’s defense, regardless of scheme the skins don’t have much talent on defense, and talent trumps scheme any day.

    • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 11:22 AM

      Both Trent Dilfer and Matt Hasslebeck were defending Barry right after the game. You spend the whole offseason establishing your defense — which for the Redskins was to have the corners play a side of the field allowing the other DBs to properly align. You don’t spend the whole year preparing for one thing and then come week one switch it. There nothing wrong with THAT part of the defense. If Breeland makes plays we’re talking about having two shut down corners. There seemed to be a bunch of chatter here before the season how great Breeland is.

      • chimps000 - Sep 16, 2016 at 12:01 PM

        The best defensive coaches- belichick- teach and coach multiple schemes, throughout the offseason, and during the week. They have great roster turnover every year like every single team in the NFL. Joe Barry has an all pro corner and an up and coming (hopefully- he had an awful game 1) young corner in breeland. Barry certainly could have taught and prepared a package with Norman “traveling” with an opposing teams best wr. This idea that it’s so hard to coach and puts too much stress on other players is ridiculous. It’s been done by multiple coaches over the years in specific situations.

        His plan A was not working. Breeland looked terrible. There was very little pressure on Ben. There were no significant adjustments made.

        I expect breeland to play better, we have seen him play better. The hallmark of good coaching is being able to adapt your personal super special “scheme” based on opponent, situation, and your own personnel. I mean if you were
        the Seahawks of 3 years ago, sure you had so much talent across
        the board you could just stick with your basic cover 3
        with little trickery and be successful. The skins have
        poor talent on defense, and a good coach maximizes his strengths and minimizes his weaknesses.

        Bart Scott had some good points to make.

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 12:32 PM

          I’ve got no problem with it. Their guy made plays; ours didn’t. It was one game. More concerning is the run defense and lack of pressure.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 12:56 PM

          Chimps: You make such a good point about Bellichick and different schemes based on the week. The best coaches in the NFL evaluate their opponents and change their scheme accordingly. They don’t just stick with one scheme. Bellichick doesn’t run a 3-4 or a 4-3. He runs whatever works for that week.

          But I fully and completely disagree that Breeland looked awful. He played some tight coverage. And there was more than one time Hall was supposed to be over top but wasn’t. Most QB/WR combos couldn’t make those plays against the type of coverage Breeland provided. He has a great game against almost every team out there. But Ben and AB are the single best QB/WR duo in the league, they’re both on their way to the HOF, and they’re both playing the best football of their life.

        • ET - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:23 PM

          I’m with Trey on this. Adjustments and wrinkles in the defensive scheme would be most welcome. Those could happen across every position group.

          I also think Breeland played reasonably well. I don’t have a problem with the decision not to have Norman shadow AB, but I do think Breeland should’ve had better support from Hall.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 3:29 PM

          Reading more in depth about how Bellichick runs his team really opened my eyes to football in a new way. It limits your team to just have one scheme. It’s almost juvenile and ignorant to say “we’re a 3-4 team therefore were going to run 3-4 against these guys even though it’s a bad matchup.” Bellichick, from his own mouth, said he doesn’t run a 3-4 or a 4-3. He just does whatever he thinks is going to work. He does the same on offense too. And he’s allowed that offensive flexibility because he runs the Erhaedt Perkins instead of the ridiculous west coast. But that’s another story.

          Barry needs to gameplan for each opponent. Not just come up with one and stick with it. I really don’t mind that our corners didn’t travel either. But I do mind if Barry thought a different plan would work better but didn’t try it. And Hall has to get into position.

          What’s lost from this game is it wasn’t even close to AB’s best performance. He’s had dozens of better games. So, the plan and Breeland didn’t completely fail. If the idea is to shut down AB and Ben or bust, then it’s going to be bust for every defense every week. We limited Antonio Brown for Antonio Brown without a pass rush, run defense, or a run game on our side. That’s not too shabby guys. If you have to blame someone for this loss, don’t look Breeland’s way.

        • chimps000 - Sep 16, 2016 at 5:03 PM

          Trey I agree that Breeland was often close to Antonio Brown… but he also didn’t make plays on the ball when he was close, so he might as well have been 7 yards off. I am sure he will rebound and play better.

          Also, you are right that D Hall looked late to help more than once, and overall he did not look good. Supposedly we have this really talented secondary, but outside of Norman, it didn’t show up. I just think Norman looks like a real playmaker, and on defense he is probably the only legit playmaker we have- lets maximize his skills and put him in the best position to have an impact on the game. Against pittsburgh, that would have meant putting him on Antonio Brown- Im sure he would have been beaten some, but I also am sure he would have won some of those battles.

      • COSSkinsFan - Sep 16, 2016 at 1:39 PM

        I also don’t think bree had a bad game. He got beat but was a split second away from an interception on AB’s first td. On a play where he was expecting help from Hall and he was late. If that play was made we are talking about him having a 2 interception night, giving up a td and about 100 yards to AB. The coverage was good it just got beat by the perfect throw.

        • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 1:46 PM

          Three INTs if he catches the rocket that ricocheted off his chest for Rogers TD. Then he’s defensive player of the week and the narrative is different. It’s a lot of scapegoating for a bad loss instead of looking at the opportunities to change the game.

        • COSSkinsFan - Sep 16, 2016 at 8:50 PM

          Agreed Bangkok Ben, funny how those near misses can change a player from goat to super star. Those plays wouldve been huge. Honestly before the game I had no problem with Bree or Norman on AB, but figured the plan would be to try to give them help. He only caught what 138 balls last year? Bree is still up and coming and has kept himself under the radar. He was a key to us winning the division last year. I hope all this negativity doesn’t affect Bree. I think by the end of his rookie contract he will be our best corner.

  7. redskins12thman - Sep 16, 2016 at 12:31 PM

    Cooley says the Cowboys will try to do the opposite of the Steelers and will take away short passes to force intermediate and long-throws. He expects a receiver to be open 15-20 yards down the middle of the field; this will be good for Reed, Crowder, Davis as well as any receiver doing a crossing route. In addition where we have a bunch formation, Cooley expects the lone wideout on the other side of the field to face one-on-one coverage and that could be tested. We’ll see if Cooley is correct on this.

    I’m still perplexed how Cousins didn’t take advantage of what the Steelers were “allowing” as I thought that would appeal to the Redskins. We are counting on Cousins to do better against the Cowboys.

    • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:10 PM

      Cousins did “take advantage of what the Steelers were “allowing.”’ He just didn’t do it consistently or perfectly (interception to Shazier, a couple of bad throws, a couple of late reads) and when the team had to get 20 yards for a first down, there wasn’t enough to take. Those holding penalties in the RUN game hampered the passing game. Cousins was 20 for 28 for 237 yards and a pick through 3 quarters. 8.46 yards per attempt. The problem was that Kirk wasn’t sharp on Pittsburgh’s side of the field coupled with the first and forevers.

      • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:24 PM

        Yeah Cousins was trying to go where he was supposed to go but many of his more critical passes were off target. I didn’t see many bad decesions though outside of the obvious INTs.

        We got a good look at what a mobile QB brings to an offense even when they don’t run. Wilson, Cam, Luck, Rogers, Smith, Kap, RG3, Taylore, Mariota, etc., etc. They never face coverage like that because the opposing defense will always leave a guy to spy the QB even after he sees the O-line go into pass protection. Because a mobile QB would have gashed those 8 man zones for 10 yards at a time. I believe we must build in POST snap run options into our passing plays if the regular run game isn’t going to work. A ton of screens to Jones/ Thompson would probably work just fine too. But I would prefer they be behind our linemen for blocking.

        The only thing Cousins could have done better in many of those situations was pull the ball down and run himself or hit the receiver more accurately. But there wasn’t always someone open.

    • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:16 PM

      Um, no disrespect to Cooley but I think he’s completely wrong there. What possible reason would the Cowboys have for taking away the short pass and making themselves more vulnerable to long passes?

      The Steelers set the blueprint for how to shut down Washington’s offense on every play. It hinges around the fact that we can’t run the ball. So the defense rushes 3 or 4 and sits back in a soft zone. Those underneath routs are taken away (to a point) in this kinds of zone coverages too. Teams will be moronic not to follow that plan. Either make the Redskins best you with their run game (which many around here don’t believe we could do against even 0 defenders); or make them beat you by throwing into a 7-8 man zone. Good luck with that Washington.

      I’ll be shocked if Dallas doesn’t play some form of cover 2 most of the game. I think we win this game but I’ll really bet we win if they’re playing man on our WRs and focusing on underneath routs.

      • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:24 PM

        I haven’t listened too it yet but I’d suspect it has something to do with how poor Dallas was against the run. I do think the Steelers set the blueprint and even Cooley said that yesterday. Perhaps Dallas doesn’t have the personnel or because of their 4-3 or because they tried that the last game of the season and got picked apart in a half against Cousins. I don’t know but I’d think they would do the same as Pittsburgh and try to make the Redskins run.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 3:09 PM

          I do too.

          And you’re correct, they’re a little less flexible with the 4-3.

      • redskins12thman - Sep 16, 2016 at 2:43 PM

        This is what I got from Cooley’s last hour today (10-11am). It’s not the Cowboys are going to be intentionally leaving themselves vulnerable, but they are going to use more defensive players to cover first 15 yards. We can see what Cowboys actually do in less than 48 hours, but if you listen to Cooley, let me know if you have a different interpretation.

        Cooley said that we have three receivers grouped on one side and a sole receiver on the other side, he would expect the single receiver to be marked by a single DB.

        If we continue to play catch-up, we will abandon the running game; that’s what we hope to do to other teams all season: 0-1 so far.

        • Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 3:08 PM

          Let me just throw this out there, I’ll be shocked if we’re not 1-1 in about 48 hours. We have a better roster top to bottom than the current Cowboys. If we lose, it’s because of what’s going on between the ears of our players. They should be completely embarrassed and humbled after Monday and be out for blood on Sunday.

          That being said, the blueprint to beat the Redskins is exactly what Ben just said. Force them to run the ball. Part of that plan includes covering passes of 15 or shorter. When I hear “short” I generally think of like 5 yards or less. Which I know isn’t what most people think, I just forget.

          If the Cowboys want to give any of our guys 1-on-1 then we should send them a thank-you card after the game. Those zone schemes work because they cover the entire area, long and short. There’s a few ways to attack them. 1) Spread the defenders both vertically and horizontally. Zones break down when there’s too much space between defenders. So use 4 WR sets or 3 WRs with 2 TEs going out for passes. Or 1 TE and split the RB out. 2) Seam routes. Which can be incorporated into spreading them out too. Run Desean and Crowder right on the boundaries between two defender’s zone so it confuses them and hopefully forces a coverage breakdown. 3) Run the ball. Force them to stack the box and get your receivers better coverage. Either with called runs/draws or with options.

          The QB has to be very accurate with 1 and 2. NFL QBs have to be accurate anway, but especially with that kind of stuff. So, a lot of it depends on Cousins. If he’s on, and our receivers are on, then we can succede. But we still have to run the ball semi competently. Using all 3 is the best way.

        • redskins12thman - Sep 16, 2016 at 8:55 PM

          Trey, That’s what Cooley was saying: that Cowboys would be covering passes of 15 yards or shorter quite closely, so there would be some opportunities in 15-20 yard range and beyond for Redskins (assuming Cousins can deliver accurate balls there).

  8. Trey Gregory - Sep 16, 2016 at 4:01 PM

    Rich: Any word on if Kelley is likely to get any action vs. Dallas?

    • bangkokben - Sep 16, 2016 at 7:21 PM

      The way I see it, Kelley gets on the field if Jones is hurt or messes up multiple times. The other way is if the Redskins are winning in a rout. {From my keyboard to God’s ears.} FYI, Thompson had 39 of 58 snaps; Jones 19. Kelley didn’t even get a special teams snap.

      • Trey Gregory - Sep 17, 2016 at 3:14 AM

        That’s kind of my point in asking. I didn’t want to ask a super obvious question like: “Hey Rich why didn’t Kelley get a single snap?” “Well Trey Because Kelley is an undrafted rookie who never touched a NFL field in a real game and we were playing a SB contender.”

        But, if they werent happy with the production from Jones then why not try a change of pace and see what happens? I mean, how different does that game look if Kelley comes in when it’s 7-6, breaks for a 20 yard run, and then rushes for 150 on the night? I understand that’s wishful thinking, but it’s worth a carry or two to see.

        I don’t understand why RBs are viewed so different than QBs. Some QBs can start right away and do great (Wilson, Luck, Roethilsberger) while others need time to develop and then play great (Brady, Rogers, Steve Young). Why can’t the same be true for RBs? Maybe Jones is more of a Brady and, there’s a chance, that Kelley is more of a Wilson. I’m not trying to sound naive, but give the guy a carry and let’s see what happens.

        I know you don’t view the run game as important as I do, but I think you would agree that we would have been better off with a better run game. I don’t believe this offense can truly take flight and reach its potential until it gets at least a competent run game going. So trying the same thing over and over then quitting when it doesn’t work isn’t good enough for me.

        • bangkokben - Sep 17, 2016 at 5:41 AM

          As down on the run game as I am and even though I think the game plan was to throw more than run, I don’t think the intention was to run as infrequently as they did but the game situations dictated it (the defense couldn’t get off the field, its ineffectiveness in a small sample, playing from behind, etc.) I think going into the game they had envisioned the snap count between Jones and Thompson being flipped and if that was the case Kelley would’ve got a few snaps. Considering the game flow, it didn’t surprise me that Kelley was basically inactive. Last year, I was surprised that Jones got as much snaps as he did. They just seemed to be enamored with Jones, that he’s going to have to totally fail to lose snaps. I think the coaches think the problems in the running game are getting everyone in sync more than the back not hitting holes, breaking tackles, or making guys miss.I’m also pretty sure that they don’t view it the same as me — a holding call waiting to happen.

          Yes, I agree a penalty free running game would help this offense. For now, that is all I want.

        • chimps000 - Sep 17, 2016 at 11:42 AM

          Trey, I couldnt agree more- why not give Kelly some carries, give him a chance to show something. Jones wasn’t awful against pittsburgh, but he is not playing well enough to keep Kelly seated on the bench in concrete. I don’t care that he was a 3rd round draft pick.

    • redskins12thman - Sep 16, 2016 at 8:52 PM

      Gruden did say he was going to try and get Kelley some carries against the Cowboys.

  9. greed - Sep 16, 2016 at 10:04 PM

    I too have a list of defensive players who need to be replaced but im going to wait until after the Giants game before i pull out my pitchfork, same with the running game and offensive playcalling

  10. Skulb - Sep 17, 2016 at 2:04 AM

    Just get rid of the drive killing penalties and the offense will look a lot better right away. The defense was messy on Monday though, and I’m not quite sure what to think of them right now. Even Kerrigan was awful and he really really needs to stop being awful. I can understand accept Bruton and Phillips struggling in their first game for the team, but Kerrigan is supposed to be the reliable one. Also not impressed with Hall in this game, and give him at least some of the blame for what happened with Breeland on Brown.

    Still, win on Sunday and all is well again. Archives

Follow Us On Twitter