The 4th and Goal pass to LoAlexander [Archive]

Redskinmayhem

11-04-2008, 07:42 AM

WTF kind of play call was that? I realize Zorn was going for the element of surprise but you don't call that play with only 1 shot at the goal line. you call it on a 2nd or 3rd down play after a dive play from the 1. What gives?

Zorn blew that call. That one is on him.

shally

11-04-2008, 07:50 AM

[QUOTE=Redskinmayhem;1164396]WTF kind of play call was that? I realize Zorn was going for the element of surprise but you don't call that play with only 1 shot at the goal line. you call it on a 2nd or 3rd down play after a dive play from the 1. What gives?

that one gets filed under "WTF were they thinking ?

i doubt we ever see that call again.. just a caser of trying to be too cute. as well as having too much respect for the pittsburgh defense, and not enough confidence in our offensive line

JsMaViSd

11-04-2008, 07:55 AM

yea, stupid call

chrisbcbu

11-04-2008, 08:05 AM

That pass wasnt designed to go to Alexander, looks like he was the 2nd option.

Once the ball was snapped it looked like a running play had no chance, they covered the gap extremely well and they also had a player go airborne to cover the top. We would not have scored running the ball. Zorn made the right call to do a rollout to Cooley, but he was covered very well. Campbell saw an opening for Alexander so he made the throw and almost fit it in. I still think he should have tried to make the throw to cooley.

SkinsKY

11-04-2008, 08:09 AM

[quote=Redskinmayhem;1164396]WTF kind of play call was that? I realize Zorn was going for the element of surprise but you don't call that play with only 1 shot at the goal line. you call it on a 2nd or 3rd down play after a dive play from the 1. What gives?

that one gets filed under "WTF were they thinking ?

i doubt we ever see that call again.. just a caser of trying to be too cute. as well as having too much respect for the pittsburgh defense, and not enough confidence in our offensive lineCooley was the primary on that play. Campbell looked for him, but the blitzing LB or CB didn't give a lane for him. If JC steps up, I think he could still get it to him. There were enough terrible play calls this game, that I'm not really going to single this one out.

BigCountry

11-04-2008, 08:14 AM

When those worked he was a genius.

Hrabanmaur

11-04-2008, 08:14 AM

On a less-disciplined defense, this is not a bad play. Against the Steelers #1 D, this was clearly a mistake.

BurgundyNGold

11-04-2008, 09:21 AM

I'm more pissed at JC for not seeing leading his primary (Cooley), who had a step or two on the defender.

Biggie

11-04-2008, 09:30 AM

I'm more pissed at JC for not seeing leading his primary (Cooley), who had a step or two on the defender.
I saw that. Aggravating, to say the least.

chrisbcbu

11-04-2008, 09:42 AM

I'm more pissed at JC for not seeing leading his primary (Cooley), who had a step or two on the defender.

He had a defender in his throwing lane. I do not think he COULD see him over the defender.

LATrueRedskin

11-04-2008, 09:48 AM

Yeah, Alexander definately wasn't the primary target on the play, it was Cooley all the way. Pittsburgh had good coverage on the play, but Cooley was a step open it looked like. Gotta give Dick Lebeau credit, he manhandled our offense last night.

JasonCampbell

11-04-2008, 09:49 AM

shally

11-04-2008, 09:49 AM

either way, it is hard to figure why alexander would even be an option down there. it isnt as if he has ever been a pass receiving threat..

chrisbcbu

11-04-2008, 09:53 AM

BurgundyNGold

11-04-2008, 09:54 AM

I don't care if Alexander wasn't the primary target...why was he a target at all?
It was a tackle eligible play. I don't have a problem with the call, as it was misdirection. I just would have preferred to have done more misdirection throughout the game against an obviously aggressive defense.

shally

11-04-2008, 09:55 AM

I think as fast as that guy was charging Campbell he should have done a pump fake. i think he would have gone airborne.

Then again our offense was not very good last night. They manhandled our OL. Jansen was terrible yesterday.

their defenders were NOT fooled by much of anything.. the way they got after JC, they werent having any of our fakes.. great defense, is all i can say

BurgundyNGold

11-04-2008, 09:58 AM

their defenders were fooled by much of anything.. the way they got after JC, they werent having any of our fakes.. great defense, is all i can say
There was one particular Redskins run play yesterday where I just said "Whoa!" because the Steelers DL effectively reestablished the LOS about 3 or 4 yards in the backfield. Our OL just got dominated in the trenches last night, as evidenced by the pass play on 4th and 1 from the goal line. Any other night and we likely would have tried to run that in.

SkinsfaninNJ

11-04-2008, 10:14 AM

There was one particular Redskins run play yesterday where I just said "Whoa!" because the Steelers DL effectively reestablished the LOS about 3 or 4 yards in the backfield. Our OL just got dominated in the trenches last night, as evidenced by the pass play on 4th and 1 from the goal line. Any other night and we likely would have tried to run that in.

Hampton had a really good night. I thought after the job we did on Shaun Rogers, we could do an equally good job against Hampton.

BurgundyNGold

11-04-2008, 10:20 AM

Hampton had a really good night. I thought after the job we did on Shaun Rogers, we could do an equally good job against Hampton.
I hope that's the case. I hate to think that our team is wearing down and that the bye week might not be enough for us to get our charge back up.

NamVet4

11-04-2008, 10:23 AM

WTF kind of play call was that? .

An obvious rookie coach mistake at a critical time....

I realize Zorn was going for the element of surprise but you don't call that play with only 1 shot at the goal line. you call it on a 2nd or 3rd down play after a dive play from the 1. What gives?

Zorn blew that call. That one is on him.

The "surprise" was that Dick LeBeau saw that coming.... Any one who studied film on Our Beloved Team knew that Captain Chaos has been the preferred target in the red zone over the last couple of years. Attempting a disguise with tackle eligible was not enough to fool the "old man"

BurgundyNGold

11-04-2008, 10:26 AM

An obvious rookie coach mistake at a critical time....

The "surprise" was that Dick LeBeau saw that coming.... Any one who studied film on Our Beloved Team knew that Captain Chaos has been the preferred target in the red zone over the last couple of years. Attempting a disguise with tackle eligible was not enough to fool the "old man"
Agreed. The fact that Sellers wasn't in the backfield tipped our hand. Ironically, if Sellers was in the backfield, he would have been an ideal target on a pass.

colkurtz

11-04-2008, 10:37 AM

Running a trick play shows we weren't confident that Portis could get that 1/2 yard.

There were three DB near Alexanader, so they weren't fooled.

hail2skins

11-04-2008, 10:37 AM

I thought it was a good call. Hard to run on Pittsburgh down there and it gives the QB options. Cooley was late getting started or it looked as though he slipped or stombled. I don't think it was a bad call at all on 4th down. If he had run it instead, this thread would probably be saying why didn't Zorn give the QB options? Why did he try to run on the #1 defense?

smoak

11-04-2008, 11:02 AM

This team was putrid, but I am not going to single out that play... Zorn has a lot of work to do b/c if you lose the nextr game you are in jepardy of letting the season get away.

shally

11-04-2008, 11:13 AM

Hampton had a really good night. I thought after the job we did on Shaun Rogers, we could do an equally good job against Hampton.

hampton is a legitimate pro bowl level player. he doesnt take plays or games off. he is consistent. he is a real LOAD

colkurtz

11-04-2008, 11:24 AM

This team was putrid, but I am not going to single out that play... Zorn has a lot of work to do b/c if you lose the nextr game you are in jepardy of letting the season get away.

We are a good team playing a team the next level higher. We've won some close games which got ppl excited that we had 'arrived'. We simply have too many holes in key areas of our game [like a legitimate, no blitz, pass rush]. W/o Moss we have no WR threat.

give_portis_the_rock

11-04-2008, 01:21 PM

I didnt care much at the time, because although we still had some time on the clock, we had just one timeout. I didnt think we could win, although getting into the endzone would have been nice.

Then this morning I checked my fantasy team. I lost by 2 points. If we had just given it to Portis he might have scored. And Portis is on my team. :(

LATrueRedskin

11-04-2008, 01:25 PM

hail2skins

11-04-2008, 01:29 PM

What I still don't understand is: Why don't we hand the ball to Sellers in that situation? Has he shown that he can't get a push into the endzone? If so, I must have missed the memo, because that guy is a force and I think the probability is high that he and gain a yard.Haven't seen Sellers get the ball much in the backfield this season. In situations like that, just line Alexander up in front of him as the lead blocker and pound away.

JasonCampbell

11-04-2008, 01:56 PM

Sellers has been pretty ineffective as a Redskin in short yardage running. He's best as a blocker and receiver out of the back field.

BurgundyNGold

11-04-2008, 02:03 PM

Sellers has been pretty ineffective as a Redskin in short yardage running. He's best as a blocker and receiver out of the back field.
I'd like to see Sellers get short yardage carries from 7 yards deep. Giving him the ball from 4 yards deep as an up back doesn't really give him and his 280 pound frame much chance to get a head of steam up before hitting the LOS.

JasonCampbell

11-04-2008, 02:05 PM

I'd like to see Sellers get short yardage carries from 7 yards deep. Giving him the ball from 4 yards deep as an up back doesn't really give him and his 280 pound frame much chance to get a head of steam up before hitting the LOS.

Yeah, I agree. If we had a backup fullback, I'd be all for Sellers lining up as RB and getting a chance to get moving.

silverspring

11-04-2008, 02:08 PM

It is easy to criticize a play call that doesn't succeed. Considering that alexander wasn't the first option i don't have a problem with the call. Until last night i would have advocated to run the ball, but our o-line couldn't get a push against that defense so what other option do we have.

jtovb2005

11-04-2008, 02:19 PM

Not sure if it was brought up some where else but on 4th down here should we have gone for the FG? I think so. We needed 17 at that point so a FG was in the equation.

give_portis_the_rock

11-04-2008, 02:24 PM

Not sure if it was brought up some where else but on 4th down here should we have gone for the FG? I think so. We needed 17 at that point so a FG was in the equation.

Yeah but we had one timeout
We would then have to score TWO touchdowns (as opposed to a touchdown and a field goal) with what, 7 minutes remaining? Nah I agree with the call to go for it, I just would have preferred a run.

Dept_of_Defense

11-04-2008, 02:52 PM

Redskinmayhem

11-04-2008, 03:16 PM

Cooley definitely had a step on the defender, but with the blitzer in his way it would've been hard to lead him........Is it just me or does anyone else want to see LeBeau's ID? There's no way that guy's 70 freakin years old.

I didn't see that Cooley was the 1st read on that play but I guess you guys say he was. Still, Cooley is a play maker, LoAlex is not. Chuck the ball up to Cooley and see if he can make the play. Now, if there's a blitzer in JCamp's face, then so be it. Still though, I would've loved to see us pound it in with a running play.

We pay our lineman good money...they should be made to earn it.

jtovb2005

11-04-2008, 04:17 PM

Yeah but we had one timeout
We would then have to score TWO touchdowns (as opposed to a touchdown and a field goal) with what, 7 minutes remaining? Nah I agree with the call to go for it, I just would have preferred a run.

Yea, I guess your right. Actually at that point with one timeout and the way the offense was playing I didn't have much confidence we could get 17 with that much time left. We just did not answer the Steller TD's with anything at all. Just not a pretty picture.

jtovb2005

11-04-2008, 04:20 PM

I didn't see that Cooley was the 1st read on that play but I guess you guys say he was. Still, Cooley is a play maker, LoAlex is not. Chuck the ball up to Cooley and see if he can make the play. Now, if there's a blitzer in JCamp's face, then so be it. Still though, I would've loved to see us pound it in with a running play.

We pay our lineman good money...they should be made to earn it.

JC said he was. I don't think he really had a blitzer in his face. Problem was he had 2 people to make a play other than himself running. Cooley looked like he was covered and Alexander did look open for a bit. KC was running out of time to make the play.

One thing I could not tell was the pass delected or dropped. I was at the game and my eyes are not what they were at night anymore.

shally

11-04-2008, 06:25 PM

GoodGameSkins

11-04-2008, 09:37 PM

Thank goodness our pass rush was on fire last night because Cooley was getting good separation all night, and had Townsend beat on that 4th down. Easy TD if only Campbell had another second. Troy is weird sometimes - vaulting over the LOS just so that he can lay on the turf with his face in the dirt... what good does that do again?

skinsfan36

11-04-2008, 11:06 PM

jc said campbell was the first read but when this play happened i had an akh moment and said zorn should be tested for meth for thinking that would work

guess88

11-05-2008, 01:12 AM

I'd like to see Sellers get short yardage carries from 7 yards deep. Giving him the ball from 4 yards deep as an up back doesn't really give him and his 280 pound frame much chance to get a head of steam up before hitting the LOS.

I think the problem now is that since Portis is already a tough runner, why not use him for what he's good at, and keep Sellers doing what he's best at? Though catching D's by surprise with a FB run could be good, I wonder with our personnel if that'd just be making it more difficult than it'd need to be. I mean hell, a nice short yardage package with Yoder, Cooley, Davis, Sellers and Portis should be unstoppable. Or you'd think.

Redskinmayhem

11-05-2008, 08:16 AM

I'd like to see a short yardage package w/ LoAlex in front of Sellers as a FB and Sellers w/ a running start from the TB position.

BurgundyNGold

11-05-2008, 10:12 AM

I think the problem now is that since Portis is already a tough runner, why not use him for what he's good at, and keep Sellers doing what he's best at? Though catching D's by surprise with a FB run could be good, I wonder with our personnel if that'd just be making it more difficult than it'd need to be. I mean hell, a nice short yardage package with Yoder, Cooley, Davis, Sellers and Portis should be unstoppable. Or you'd think.
280 pounds of aggresive caveman with a head of steam is a lot harder to stop when you need a yard or two than a 220 lb guy.

Meatsnack

11-05-2008, 11:28 AM

On the Redskins Postgame Live Campbell said that they had Cooley bracketed with two guys, so he checked down out of double coverage, saw that Alexander had three guys around him but his only play at that point was to try to force the ball into a crease. Campbeel said that the run action was designed to pull the LB normally assigned to Cooley down onto the LOS but the guy was disciplined and stayed on Cooley. Win for Pittsburg.

This is a case of Dick LeBeau winning the play call battle with Zorn rather than Campbell choking away an opportunity. Campbell has been coached to make safe decisions and trust his checkdowns and that is exactly what he did. The play call is questionable but I think Zorn was slightly panicked by all the things that weren't working.

As for Sellers as a short yardage back, he sucks at it. He has always sucked at it because he runs towards tacklers rather than towards the crease to the goalline. Marcus allen was 198 pounds and probably the best short yardage back of all time because he consistently found the little crease needed to get that critical yard. Even Riggins, about as good at converting 3rd and goal/3rd and short as anyone ever, got all those scores by slamming between bodies rather than trying to go through them. Donnie Warren claims Riggins played at about 265#, and even John, running behind his pads better than Sellers ever will, couldn't make living trying to step through a D-lineman's ribcage.