Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Zorn: Missed FG affects 'all of us'

Redskins Coach Jim Zorn today explained the reasoning behind the release of place kicker Shaun Suisham and signing of Graham Gano, who "clearly had the strongest leg" in kicking tryouts at Redskins Park, on ESPN's 980's "The Jim Zorn Show."

Gano won the Lou Groza award at Florida State and kicked most recently for Las Vegas of the UFL. After the UFL season ended, he tried out last week for the New York Giants. Before the 2009 season, Gano was in training camp with the Baltimore Ravens; his deal with the Redskins is for three years with one guaranteed.

"It looks like he's got some potential," Zorn said. "All these kickers kind of make their circuit on tryouts and he's been doing that, trying to stay in shape, so we're going to give him an opportunity this year and move Shaun."

The Redskins made the move two days after Suisham's missed chip-shot field goal contributed to a 33-30 overtime loss to the New Orleans Saints at FedEx Field. With 1 minute, 56 remaining in regulation, the Redskins lined up for a 23-yard field-goal attempt that would have increased their lead to 10 points. The ball sailed wide right.

"We played for that field goal," Zorn said. "And we were all assured, and I believe Shaun was assured, that, you know, that ball was gonna go through with that 23-yard field goal. And yet it didn't. It does affect all of us."

Suisham also missed two field goals (from 39 and 50 yards) in a 7-6 loss to the Dallas Cowboys on Nov. 22. Suisham made his first 12 field-goal attempts after holding off Dave Rayner in a kicking competition during camp and has converted 18 of 21 (85.7 percent) overall.

During his news conference Monday, Zorn revealed that the Redskins would conduct tryouts but played down the sense of urgency to replace Suisham. But "the kickers that we brought in were good and this guy has some real talent," Zorn said. "Now, we'll see. The exciting part for him is now he gets a real opportunity here to kick in live situations. He's got a strong leg, Graham does, and yet now there's some things that we've got to teach."

Special teams coordinator Danny Smith will work closely with Gano as the Redskins prepare to play the Oakland Raiders on Sunday at Oakland. "Danny's going to be working overtime," Zorn said. "There's a lot of things involved with timing, with rhythm.
And then we've let a good kicker go down the road.

"Shaun has performed very well. I'm sure when I talk to him ... I know he'll just be, you know, upset, and he should be. But then yet there's an accountability there. We'll all end up being accountable for our season. No question about it."

By Jason Reid and Rick Maese  |  December 8, 2009; 1:28 PM ET
Categories:  Jason Reid  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Redskins dump Suisham, sign Gano
Next: Portis placed on IR list

Comments

"...and I LOVE PIKE."


So where does Colt fit into all of this?

You remember Colt Brennan, don't you?

Where does he fit into a world where Campbell gets resigned?

Back up?

Then why draft a guy with a top pick when you can snag a d-back or lineman?

Again: Campbell's status with the team effects a whole lot of other issues.

I'd try to sign him ASAP.

Posted by: MistaMoe | December 8, 2009 10:54 AM


I agree Moe

Posted by: mhartz1 | December 8, 2009 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Suisham is vested for termination pay, so the Redskins owe him the remaining balance on his contract, assuming he is not claimed off waivers. Suisham has a salary of $1.01 million, according to a league source familiar with his contract, and still is owed about $238,000.


Money well spent...

Posted by: rich20ssu | December 8, 2009 1:42 PM | Report abuse

TheCork wasn't this the game to see if he could recover? Since he missed a 39 yarder in Dallas. So, the answer is no he can't recover.

Posted by: jm220 | December 8, 2009 1:40 PM

Posted by: jm220 | December 8, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

We played for that field goal," Zorn said.

Problem #1. They should have played for a TD, and had FG as the secondary objective. Like when you play to WIN, as opposed to playing, "not to lose".......

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | December 8, 2009 1:44 PM | Report abuse

Tony Dungy said he would have cut him right on the spot, I guess he has a fantasy football knee jerk reaction as well.

Get that crap out of here, I doubt Snyder had anything to do with this Vinny and Zorn made this call.

Posted by: Flounder21 | December 8, 2009 1:44 PM | Report abuse

I think alot of what we are going to do in the off season revolves around JC.

I am not sure he wants to be here anymore, but who knows what JC is thinking, I think if we can re-sign right now with an incentive laden deal, I would do it in a heart beat.

If he goes, we need to think of something else to look at...I dont think Colt is it, IMO.

I personally think JC is capable of playing like last week, every week...he needs to string them together for his own confidence.

Spiller is my pick in the 1st round, someone that can do alot for us right away...RB/ 3rd down back/ PR - BINGO.

Posted by: mhartz1 | December 8, 2009 1:45 PM | Report abuse

"We'll all end up being accountable for our season. No question about it."

-Jim Zorn

Translation: "I am in the process of cleaning out my office and hope to be completely moved out by January 4th."

Posted by: mattylight | December 8, 2009 1:46 PM | Report abuse

"We'll all end up being accountable for our season. No question about it."

I can think of two people who won't be held accountable, unluckily.

Posted by: sopplayer | December 8, 2009 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I like Spiller a ton for a game changing back. With that being said, the Skins are looking at a top ten pick and he looks to be a mid 1st round talent due to his lack of size. IF we could somehow trade back and acquire more picks, he would be very attractive around 15 or so.

Posted by: rich20ssu | December 8, 2009 1:47 PM | Report abuse

"We played for that field goal," Zorn said. "And we were all assured, and I believe Shaun was assured, that, you know, that ball was gonna go through with that 23-yard field goal. And yet it didn't. It does affect all of us."

----------------------------

No way should SS have missed that field goal at extra point range.

But there is the problem. They should have played for the TD instead of the FG. Bad coaching put SS in a position to show what he is.

Should have let JC try to win the game based on his performance in that game.

Zorn should be next to go.

Posted by: Curzon417 | December 8, 2009 1:47 PM | Report abuse

"Shaun has performed very well. I'm sure when I talk to him ... I know he'll just be, you know, upset, and he should be. But then yet there's an accountability there. We'll all end up being accountable for our season. No question about it."
_____
That's right and at 3-9 and 5-17 there last 22 games Zorn is accountable so goodbye to you too.. I'm glad he'll know the reason why. And Campbell also 5-17.. no clutch comebacks... so long also...

Posted by: sovine08 | December 8, 2009 1:47 PM | Report abuse

You must make kicks from the 5 yard line!!!!! This move will ultimately help the team.

Posted by: jtrob_1 | December 8, 2009 1:48 PM | Report abuse

and then spend the next 3 selections on the o-line...

Posted by: rich20ssu | December 8, 2009 1:49 PM | Report abuse

All this talk about cutting others along with SS...you don't cut what might get some value in return (trade, picks, comp picks, etc.). Kickers are for the most part interchangeable and change teams all the time.

You can teach this new kid to be more accurate over time, but you can't teach leg strength. Later SS.

BTW, can't wait for the day LL no longer wears burgundy and gold, but we should get something for him.

Posted by: fzone | December 8, 2009 1:51 PM | Report abuse

ACCOUNTABILITY?!! When did THAT idea start for THIS organization?! But I'm all for it! Whoever put this team together...FIRED! Whoever coached this team...FIRED! yeah, accountability sounds more like something winning organizations do. It would be a nice start.

Posted by: DCV1 | December 8, 2009 1:53 PM | Report abuse

I'm totally uneasy with this 'blame Suisham' bandwagon.

Me thinks WAYYYYYYYYY too many fingers are being pointing at Suisham and not nearly enough at others who made bad plays and poor decisions. Zorn, for example made a poor call at the 2:47 mark, causing the FG attempt to occur at the 2 minute mark instead of at the 1:15 mark.

That gave Brees extra clock to work with, meaning the Skins had to defend more of the field. Which meant LL thought it was important to defend against a 15 yard turn-in pattern with over a minute to go. If there is only 20 seconds to go, Landry probably doesn't bite on the double move.

Yes, Suisham missed a clutch kick, but don't forget the other mistakes -- and there were plenty of those.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: TWISI | December 8, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Hey Zorn, wow from a motormouth coach with ONLY 3 pathetic wins (except the Broncos) and 9 losses. Goodness gracious, what a HYPOCRITE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: memyselfI1 | December 8, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse

"We played for that field goal," Zorn said.

Yeah, thanks for that Jim.

Posted by: fzone | December 8, 2009 1:56 PM | Report abuse

"We played for that field goal," Zorn said


Uggghhhhhhhh!!

Posted by: TWISI | December 8, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Can't seem to let this one go.

How many coaches w/1st and goal play for a field goal?

Please hold yourself accountable and stop interfering with game day duties. Just relax your face and watch the two Sherms get it done.

Posted by: Curzon417 | December 8, 2009 1:59 PM | Report abuse

Of course they were playing for a touchdown. That's not what Zorn meant. He meant the entire team had to work in order to get the ball downfield. Even though they came up short of the goal line, they did what they needed to get the ball into chip-shot range.

A kicker has to get the job done under pressure. Especially when the rest of the team set up a gimme for him.

Posted by: smshadowman | December 8, 2009 2:00 PM | Report abuse

Do not forget,


Suisham was notorious for kicking the ball out of bounds. No one is mentioning that; but the guy killed us on kickoffs.

Posted by: duh2mag | December 8, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

"We'll all end up being accountable for our season. No question about it."

I can think of two people who won't be held accountable, unluckily.

Posted by: sopplayer | December 8, 2009 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Actually, that number might be one. Reportedly, VC was told that he would be judged by the Zorn hire. That would suggest that their fates are intertwined, and that if (when) Zorn goes, VC might follow soon afterwards. Not even Snyder can be so blind as to not be able to figure out that VC needs to go. I mean, even a broken clock is right two times per day.

Posted by: rbpalmer | December 8, 2009 2:04 PM | Report abuse

shadow, sorry, I tranlate, "we played for that field goal" and the corresponding play selections, run, run, run, to mean just what JZ said...he played for the field goal. He didn't play for the TD...epic fail...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | December 8, 2009 2:04 PM | Report abuse

It is hard to blame Suisham for the loss

BUT

an NFL kicker should not miss a 23-yard FG ever. No excuse. No way to know if that "cost us the game" though. There was still time on the clock and tried our best to give it away.

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Suisham CHOKED and shanked a chip shot to seal the game for all the world to see. He should have beet cut on the spot. Not the first time either, a short FG would have beaten DALLAZZ, but no, Suisham screws up. Gano = best kicker in college last year. Suisham = worst kicker in pros. A move that HAD to be made.

Posted by: VegasJim | December 8, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

I agree I think Zorn meant he played for the chance at the field goal. Not necessarily that he had FG in his mind.

Matter of symantecs (sp)

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

THANK YOU Curzon417: a Skins fan who PAID ATTENTION to Sunday's game unlike the majority of so-called fans who blasted Suisham instead of Zorn for losing to the Saints.

So to update all the Suisham haters: A TOUCHDOWN was the only score necessary to beat the Saints. 14 points is a bigger and longer lead to ovecome than a measley 10 points lead which the Redskins already blew 3 times during the course of Sunday's game.

So pay attention and direct your vindictiveness towards the right person; Coach Zorn and the lazy 'sit on the lead and blow it' offense.

I sincerely hope Shawn gets on another Redskins opponent and beats the Skins at their own game - an unnecessary field goal with less than 2 minutes left.

Zorn, pack your bags, you're next to go.

Hail to the Redskins.

Posted by: memyselfI1 | December 8, 2009 2:08 PM | Report abuse

kicking is a lrage part a mental game.

I dont think SS was a bad kicker, I just dont think he had the nerves to get it done.

With the Dalls kick (39-yarder) was after that ridiculuos 15 minute conference by the Refs about whether JC17 stepped out before he thre the ball.

SS stood on the field the entire time just thinking about the kick. How many times have you seen a kicker miss after the opposing coach "ices" him.

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

From ESPN Insider:

ON JC

"The idea that Jason Campbell is a poor NFL quarterback is simply wrong. Campbell has career highs in nearly all stats in 2009 and according to FO advanced stats he has been the 17th most valuable quarterback in the league this year, above David Garrard or Donovan McNabb. He's done that despite playing with a bunch of second-year receivers who have been slow to develop, despite the loss of his second-best receiver (Chris Cooley) for much of the year, despite the fact that the offensive line is a wreck and despite the fact that the Redskins switched play-callers in midseason -- after Campbell already had to learn a new offensive system nearly every single year since high school. His biggest problem is that, as a tall pocket quarterback, he desperately needs protection and a dependable outlet receiver, someone to play the role Ben Coates played for Drew Bledsoe. He doesn't have that without Cooley healthy. If he goes to free agency and signs with a team that already has a good line and a stable coaching situation, he will shock people in 2010." -Aaron Schatz

Posted by: mhartz1 | December 8, 2009 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Problem #1. They should have played for a TD, and had FG as the secondary objective. Like when you play to WIN, as opposed to playing, "not to lose".......

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 |

Bean, I didn't mind it as much at the end of the game, I mean that's pretty much a 10 point lead 98% of the time.

The problem was, we ran the same 3 plays at the beginning of the 4th in the same situation, up by 7. Should have gone up by 14 at that point.

Posted by: Rypien11 | December 8, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

We played for that field goal," Zorn said.

Problem #1. They should have played for a TD, and had FG as the secondary objective. Like when you play to WIN, as opposed to playing, "not to lose".......

Posted by: BeantownGreg1

Wrong.

Running 3 times still has a chance to get a TD, has a definite chance to run the clock down, and a 99% chance to go up by 2 scores.

Doing anything else, ie passing one or more downs has a chance to turn over the ball, take less time off the clock, get sacked for a harder field goal, still only be up by 2 scores even if everything goes successfully.

They did the game winning thing here, you're only complaining about it because of a miraculous failure. If SS hadn't choked it would have been "the conservative yet wise, percentage success way to close out the game".

Posted by: REXskins | December 8, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

I also hope that Suisham gets a chance to kick a game-winner against us.

That would make us 4 - 9.

He cant stand the heat. Not only should be be cut, he should be deported back to Canada.

later eh

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Oh my gosh! Now that the Redskins have signed a rookie kicker the season is over! No Superbowl! No playoffs! No winning season! Wait a minute, we weren't going to get those things with Suisham in, either. So, why is everyone in an uproar? The best thing that could happen is they could have found a young kid who is developing and will get better and better - for next year. In case there are some that haven't figured it out yet, the team is now shifting into "next year" mode. I am not saying they are going to roll over, but now is when they are going to make their evaluations of players like Gano, like Rob Jackson, like Lendy Holmes, etc.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | December 8, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Suisham is vested for termination pay, so the Redskins owe him the remaining balance on his contract, assuming he is not claimed off waivers. Suisham has a salary of $1.01 million, according to a league source familiar with his contract, and still is owed about $238,000.


Money well spent...

Posted by: rich20ssu | December 8, 2009 1:42 PM | Report abuse

238,000 dollars is only 29750 $8 beers at Fed Ex. Danny Boy makes that with no problem.

Posted by: FedorEm | December 8, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Wonder how long it will take the new kicker to get warmed up to kicking 13 for 13 before missing one>

Posted by: Xlnt | December 8, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

shadow, sorry, I translate, "we played for that field goal" and the corresponding play selections, run, run, run, to mean just what JZ said...he played for the field goal. He didn't play for the TD...epic fail...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1

That was part of my ZEKE'S UNIQUE piece. In the last 3 games, we had a late drive in each game that could have changed the result. So how did we get to 4th down and a FG attempt each time? Twice, we ran 3 plays and the other game, we ran 2 plays and tried one pass. 8 out of 9 plays were runs and in each case, we got a FG attempt, not a TD.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

LOL..Has Campbell led a 4th qtr comeback? Done anything in the last 2 minutes? Maybe he should have been cut too.

Posted by: Ratzoe | December 8, 2009 2:12 PM | Report abuse

"Me thinks WAYYYYYYYYY too many fingers are being pointing at Suisham and not nearly enough at others who made bad plays and poor decisions. Zorn, for example made a poor call at the 2:47 mark, causing the FG attempt to occur at the 2 minute mark instead of at the 1:15 mark.

That gave Brees extra clock to work with, meaning the Skins had to defend more of the field. Which meant LL thought it was important to defend against a 15 yard turn-in pattern with over a minute to go. If there is only 20 seconds to go, Landry probably doesn't bite on the double move.

Yes, Suisham missed a clutch kick, but don't forget the other mistakes -- and there were plenty of those."

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, but this is ludicrous. The saints had no time-outs. Of course they were going to try to get the ball up the field as quickly as possible! It's better to give up the 15-yard pass than to give up the TD. The goal in that situation is to keep the team out of the endzone. There is NO excuse for Landry's bonehead blown coverage.

However, Landry made several good plas as well, which is the only reason he hasn't been benched indefinitely. People -- including coaches -- make mistakes all the time. You think Bill Belichick hasn't made any mistakes lately? In a kicker's case he really only has one job: make kicks and kick off the ball into the endzone. Suisham was mediocre at the first job, and terrible at the second.

Firing a coach mid-season is disruptive and impractical, as has been discussed ad nauseam by a variety of posters, columnists and writers. Getting rid of a starter on defense who makes plays is wasteful if a trade is possible. By contrast, firing a mediocre kicker is easy and barely disrupts anything. Personnel decisions at kicker almost never affect team chemistry. I don't understand why there's so much griping about this particular move.

Posted by: jcabana | December 8, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

"Yes, Suisham missed a clutch kick, but don't forget the other mistakes -- and there were plenty of those. Posted by: zcezcest1"

Indeed there were. I think over the past few games Suisham developed a formidable case of the yips. Cutting him may be the best thing. He can get another shot somewhere else, where perhaps the pressure isn't so relentless. At least at first.

Posted by: Samson151 | December 8, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

I know it is smart to run 3 running plays at the end of the game, but why not run that bootleg QB scramble with JC again, the stretch play needs to go with Zorn...

Posted by: mhartz1 | December 8, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

mhartz1, that observation makes sense except for the part about changing playcallers during the season.

IMO, the change of playcallers has helped JC. In fact, JC has said a couple of times that this system gives him more time because the calls come in faster.

Change of playcaller (except for when Zorn takes over) has helped not just JC, but the offense immensely.

Posted by: Curzon417 | December 8, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

Was 1st&4 NO4 Rock Cartwright Off Right Tackle to NO3 for 1 yard
Was 2nd&3 NO3 New Orleans Saints timeout.
Was 2nd&3 NO3 Rock Cartwright Off Left Tackle to NO5 for -2 yards
Was 3rd&5 NO5 Rock Cartwright Off Right End to NO4 for 1 yard

When that is your play selection, from the 4 yard line, you are not playing for the TD...thats just bad, bad, bad playcalling...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | December 8, 2009 2:16 PM | Report abuse

I think the fact that their record is what it is and they still cut SS is actually a good thing.

I think it shows they are in it to win. How easy would it have been to keep him on the roster, and just let it play itself out. Good on whoever made the move for realizing that there are still some games to win out there.

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

I think the fact that their record is what it is and they still cut SS is actually a good thing.

I think it shows they are in it to win. How easy would it have been to keep him on the roster, and just let it play itself out. Good on whoever made the move for realizing that there are still some games to win out there.

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Curzon, I agree.

I do think he will light it up somewhere else with a better line. I could see JC going to Carolina and playing pretty well if that OL is healthy...I really dont want to see that, but who knows.

Posted by: mhartz1 | December 8, 2009 2:18 PM | Report abuse

Doing anything else, ie passing one or more downs has a chance to turn over the ball, take less time off the clock, get sacked for a harder field goal, still only be up by 2 scores even if everything goes successfully.

Posted by: REXskins | December 8, 2009 2:12 PM

Except the 3rd down play didn't save you anytime because of the 2 min. warning. A run/pass option with JC rolling out would have been a great call. Remember during JZ 6-2 start last year, he was creative & aggressive in those situations. He's not helping the team when he assumes play calling away from the Sherm2x.

Posted by: TWISI | December 8, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

... But there is the problem. They should have played for the TD instead of the FG. Bad coaching put SS in a position to show what he is. ...

Posted by: Curzon417 | December 8, 2009 1:47 PM

Going for it on 4th and short and up on points worked out well for Belichek a few weeks ago ...

Posted by: dcsween | December 8, 2009 2:21 PM | Report abuse

When that is your play selection, from the 4 yard line, you are not playing for the TD...thats just bad, bad, bad playcalling...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1

Even more so than usual in this game...we had there D on their heels and their beatup secondary confused. We played right into their hands with these calls...no sense of the moment, same as always. Not hard to tell when Z takes over the play calls, is it?
Wait, perhaps this was all part of the plan to get the highest draft pick possible...yeah, that's it!

Posted by: fzone | December 8, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Should Zorn have taken a shot at the end zone? Yes. Should he have ran the ball to the middle of the field so Suisham doesn't line up on the right hash mark? Yes.And thet's why he's got 4 games left as our head coach. But an NFL kicker should be AUTOMATIC inside of 30 yards. No question. He also should NEVER kick off out of bounds and have the courage to put a shoulder into a kick returners thigh. THAT'S ALL HE HAS TO DO!!! No film to study, defenses to read, or cardio to do. No routes or plays to memorize. That said, can anyone out there who's played ball b4 tell me how a hit to the left thigh results in you dropping the ball out of your right arm? Seriously, can anyone explain this to me? Maybe Mr. Sellers if you're out there.

Posted by: vegasskinsfan | December 8, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

This playing for a field goal is ridiculous for a team that is 3-8. So if a pass is picked off in the end zone, we fans bit ch about JC (which we do anyway) but what is the net loss?

A 3-8 team has no business playing conservative. F Zorn!

Posted by: Curzon417 | December 8, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Running 3 times still has a chance to get a TD, has a definite chance to run the clock down, and a 99% chance to go up by 2 scores.

Agreed. Except for when you're down to your 3rd string RB, your 2nd string RT, your 3rd string RG...which if this is the case running 3 times is galactically stupid....made EXPONENTIALLY more stupid, when the QB is playing his best game ever and the opposing D is playing with 3rd, and 4th string qb's....

And as the results bore out...running was NOT the answer....

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | December 8, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

The man was 18 for 21 field goals, and they cut him??? He had improved significantly since last season, as well. Doesn't seem deserved to me.

Posted by: ihave4ducks | December 8, 2009 1:36 PM |

What do you not understand about the fact he directly lost us 2 games this year?

Posted by: 4thFloor | December 8, 2009 2:24 PM | Report abuse

In mid-thread, I'll be the FIRST to say that when things go badly for Gano, this place will start calling him "Guano" ... just because that's how clever you all really are.

Posted by: dcsween | December 8, 2009 2:25 PM | Report abuse

"Shaun has performed very well. I'm sure when I talk to him ... I know he'll just be, you know, upset"

Wait, so Zorn cut Suisham in the media without telling him first?

Posted by: mja712 | December 8, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

We played for that field goal," Zorn said.

Problem #1. They should have played for a TD, and had FG as the secondary objective. Like when you play to WIN, as opposed to playing, "not to lose".......

Posted by: BeantownGreg1

Wrong.

Running 3 times still has a chance to get a TD, has a definite chance to run the clock down, and a 99% chance to go up by 2 scores.

Doing anything else, ie passing one or more downs has a chance to turn over the ball, take less time off the clock, get sacked for a harder field goal, still only be up by 2 scores even if everything goes successfully.

They did the game winning thing here, you're only complaining about it because of a miraculous failure. If SS hadn't choked it would have been "the conservative yet wise, percentage success way to close out the game".

Posted by: REXskins | December 8, 2009 2:12 PM
------------------------------------------
So, you're saying it is better to run six times in a row, even though your passing game was really clicking and getting the job done? I'm sorry, but I don't agree. There was greater than two minutes on the clock which was going to give the other team plenty of time to move the football. Burning off time wasn't going to buy you anything at that point. Maybe the run on third down was right, but first down would have been the right time to call a play action pass. If it wasn't successful, it would have least told the Saints they couldn't crowd the line for the run, because, uh-oh, they are going for the jugular here...

Incidentally, when Zorn decided to run the stretch on third down, why didn't he have his fastest, most productive back of the day in there instead of Cartwright? It should have been Ganther.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | December 8, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Was 1st&4 NO4 Rock Cartwright Off Right Tackle to NO3 for 1 yard
Was 2nd&3 NO3 New Orleans Saints timeout.
Was 2nd&3 NO3 Rock Cartwright Off Left Tackle to NO5 for -2 yards
Was 3rd&5 NO5 Rock Cartwright Off Right End to NO4 for 1 yard

When that is your play selection, from the 4 yard line, you are not playing for the TD...thats just bad, bad, bad playcalling...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1
---------------------------
OR - it's conservative play calling in a situation where conservative play calling wins you the game (usually).

With 2 minutes left, with NO timeouts, do you really see a team go down, score, onside kick, score again? No way. If he had made that field goal it was game over.

If they had given the saints more time by throwing incomplete passes, then kick the FG, they might not have had to onside kick after their next score. And then who knows what would have happened.

They made the right call, it was SS's fault not the coaches, get over it.

Posted by: REXskins | December 8, 2009 2:26 PM | Report abuse

Was 1st&4 NO4 Rock Cartwright Off Right Tackle to NO3 for 1 yard
Was 2nd&3 NO3 New Orleans Saints timeout.
Was 2nd&3 NO3 Rock Cartwright Off Left Tackle to NO5 for -2 yards
Was 3rd&5 NO5 Rock Cartwright Off Right End to NO4 for 1 yard

When that is your play selection, from the 4 yard line, you are not playing for the TD...thats just bad, bad, bad playcalling...

Posted by: BeantownGreg1
-----------------------------------------

This is what I call a 'sit on the lead and blow it offense.'

Now who really is to blame for losing the game, Suisham haters?

Answer; the coach, NOT the place kicker.

Posted by: memyselfI1 | December 8, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

This playing for a field goal is ridiculous for a team that is 3-8. So if a pass is picked off in the end zone, we fans bit ch about JC (which we do anyway) but what is the net loss?

A 3-8 team has no business playing conservative. F Zorn!

Posted by: Curzon417


Preach it preacher!

Posted by: RedDMV | December 8, 2009 2:27 PM | Report abuse

It's just a statement of fact...the deciderers, Dan and Vinny, decidered. No salt added.

Posted by: 4-12 | December 8, 2009 1:37 PM

Snyder did not make the decision. JReid just casualy threw his name in there. It if it took Dan to make the decision, Zorn is really a loser who only wants losers on his team. But the fact is, this is far from Snyder's bidding, but I am sure he applauded the move like I did.....

Posted by: 4thFloor | December 8, 2009 2:28 PM | Report abuse

If they call a pass play and it gets picked off, everyone says "who throws the ball with a lead in the 4th qtr with time winding down?"

NFL 101...you dont throw the ball, you control the clock...your back-up is you are close enough that an NFL kicker can't miss and you still go up two scores.

You dont leave points on the field. If you do, your gone.

Bye bye

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

rex, the decision not to score a TD cost this team the game...spin it anyway you want, but JC was playing LIGHTS OUT, as was DT, to run Rock 3 times into the line, was dumb. Wanna know how I know this??

Because.....wait for it........

THEY LOST THE GAME.

You step on the other teams throat, and you don't let off....EVER..your first objective it to score a TD, you're 2nd, is to kick a FG.

JZ STATED he played for the FG. Now how did that work out for us????

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | December 8, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

"There is NO excuse for Landry's bonehead blown coverage."

Well, technically that's true, and yet... here are a few.

1. Landry's playing the wrong position.
2. The defensive scheme repeatedly left him on an island against fast receivers.
3. The Skins have struggled stopping the run, and Landry has been rushing up to help. You'll note that worked pretty well against New Orleans.

But yeah, he just plain blew a couple.

Posted by: Samson151 | December 8, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

If your going to run 3 straight times at least give the ball to Ganther the best RB on the team right now.

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | December 8, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, but this is ludicrous. The saints had no time-outs. Of course they were going to try to get the ball up the field as quickly as possible! It's better to give up the 15-yard pass than to give up the TD. The goal in that situation is to keep the team out of the endzone. There is NO excuse for Landry's bonehead blown coverage.

Posted by: jcabana

But giving Brees and extra 45 seconds was an incredibly stupid thing to do. With 2:47 left, Zorn needs to let the play clock run down to zero (or 1), run a play that consumes 6-7 seconds (a run wide or QB rollout does that) instead of an up the middle run that consumed 5 seconds. The play clock reset at about 2:42, meaning the Skins had to run a play at about 2:03 -- giving an extra 45 seconds to Brees.

Advance the game 45 seconds and you'll see what I mean. Meacham runs the turn-in at the 30 yard line and the Saints would run their next play with about 1 minute to go. Plenty of time to go 30 yards. You need to defend against that.

Meacham runs the turn-in and the game clock would only have 15 seconds left before Brees can run another play. Very little time left -- so you allow the yards in the middle of the field.

Brees with 1:45 left, no timeouts and 80 yards to go is much more dangerous than Brees with 1:00 left. Thing is, it was easy for Zorn to take the extra 45 seconds off the clock. He didn't and that was a part of the problem.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | December 8, 2009 2:36 PM | Report abuse

While the waiving of Suisham doesn't really bother me, the folks who made the decision do - Snyder and Cerroto. Why is Snyder making football decisions. After all that's been said and written, he still doesn't get it. Our future fortunes will not change! Snyder may own the team but the Redskins belong to us - the fans. He really needs to wake up!

Posted by: harryrainbolt | December 8, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

I was out there Sunday and we were in full celebration mode giving all those Saints fans the "Who Dat NOT undefeated anymore" and then that good for nothing kicker misses a chip shot!! I know that other things led to that loss, but the game was WON if he makes that kick. I've been to many games and the only two that left me as deflated were when the "Boys" came back from 21 pts down and Troy Aikman threw for the winning score in OT and way back in 1990 (I think) when the Skins were running out the clock and Andre Waters stole the ball right out of Gerald Riggs hands and got the winning score. This past Sunday's game is going to stick with me for a LOOOOONG Time!! ... Later Suish!!

Posted by: Monkman63 | December 8, 2009 2:39 PM | Report abuse

The mere idea that Zorn decided to score a field goal instead of a TD is just ridiculuos. When he said play for the FG, he meant playing for the chance to what should have sealed the game.

I agree that a bootleg may have been a better choice though.

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:40 PM | Report abuse

"You step on the other teams throat, and you don't let off....EVER..your first objective it to score a TD, you're 2nd, is to kick a FG."

That's the smashmouth way of looking at it, but a lot of teams have won a lot of games without playing that way.

One problem is that so often, efforts to bang one into the end zone have resulted in a turnover. The other team's gripping and ripping at the ball, and the RB coughs it up before his knee hits. Or the ball bounces off the receiver's shoulder pad and gets picked off by a DB, making his season.

Then the criticism you hear: the coach took too many chances. He had the safe FG, why not diddle some seconds off the clock and kick it?

Because that strategy usually works. You go up another three points, kick off to the opponent, and go into your prevent defense to stop him from scoring until the clock runs out.

Of course, the kicker has to hit the FG.

Posted by: Samson151 | December 8, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

We definitely should consider trading slightly back to get an extra pick or 2, and get CJ Spiller in the first round. This man is the best college football player in the league right now. No one has an impact on the game like he does. Two things people don't realize... the numbers he has put up for his career include being a back up (to James Davis) for 3 years, and this year, with that NCAA record breaking KO return TD's, and record breaking All-Purpose Yards, has all been done w/ him being injured. He has been at 75% this whole year because of turf toe. He would be a huge pick up. He can receive, run, return punts and kicks, and even throw the ball. He's the fastest player in the nation.

With the extra pick, get OL, and go from there...

Posted by: Fallsww | December 8, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

I have seen people post to sit LL30...

Has there been any chatter about that. He definitely is one of the main reasons they lost that game. He fgave up two large pass plays he should have, if nothing else, been closer to.

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

Anyone notice that any time some that talkd with the post is cut it's always Dan who made the cut according to the beat reporters. Yet when someone that doesn't talk with them gets cut you don't hear anything. Mason got cut 3 times I don't ever remember reading that Dan cut Mason. Just something to think about.

Posted by: jm220 | December 8, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

I agree Suisham should be cut. You just have to make 28 yard FGs. If you can't make that, what good are you?

And Zorn was right in kicking the FG to go up by 10. Because if you don't get the TD, you leave it to a 7 point game against a quick scoring team like the Saints. So the logical play was to take the points.

Now LaRon got beat like he stole something on those double moves. The fact that LaRon (who's arguably our best safety) and Rogers (one of our best corners) both got beat on double moves tells me something is wrong with the coaching. If you best students are failing then it's the teacher's fault. And if we don't correct it, teams will keep exploiting it. And no matter how good the offense is, you simply can't win when your defense keeps leaving top WRs wide open.

Posted by: tundey | December 8, 2009 2:45 PM | Report abuse

chey, 'we played for that fg'....

I mean, how can you translate this other than what he said, then combine the 3 plays that were run after getting a 1st down at the 4 yd line......

I don't get this.....I'm really confused....how is this being misconstrued??


Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | December 8, 2009 2:45 PM | Report abuse

Fallsww, how far back can you trade and still get Spiller? If you want Spiller, you may have to get him at the spot we pick from without trading back.

Tough choice to make if Okung is still available. If he is gone, it's easier to draft Spiller or Berry at that position.

[Suh is gone 1st or 2nd]

Posted by: Curzon417 | December 8, 2009 2:46 PM | Report abuse

If he goes to free agency and signs with a team that already has a good line and a stable coaching situation, he will shock people in 2010." -Aaron Schatz

Posted by: mhartz1 | December 8, 2009 2:10 PM |

It is hard figure why ESPN would be so high on Camp. First that fat guy and now Mr. Schitz. But I could see Camp going to a team with a good OL and stable coaching - as a backup. Hah!

Posted by: TubularBells | December 8, 2009 2:46 PM | Report abuse

100% correct JM220!

Posted by: Curzon417 | December 8, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

I'm not in the least bit letting Suisham off the hook but if you're playing for the field goal like Zorn said, wouldn't you want to run the third down play right in the middle of the hash marks so it's a straight shot?

Also, the release of Suisham is purely a reaction to the fans and the media. The skins front office wants to look like they're holding players accountable and the firing of a place kicker is the best way to do this without drastically affecting the team. The day they let Laron ride the pine is the day I'll actually believe they are holding players accountable. This smells like a PR stunt more than anything else.

Posted by: Moose33 | December 8, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Suisham got screwed and the Skins have done it to themselves...now who will kick any better than him even with that miss???

Switch plays and put Suisham's miss earlier in the game and Landry's bonehead play at Suisham's time frame, now who is the goat????

Just because the missed kick came later in the game caused it to be highlighted and the kicker is the victim..well there was more than one dumbo Sunday who should be spotlighted...

Posted by: pentagon40 | December 8, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

So do they cut Campbell and audition qb's becuase he choked and threw an interception at the end of the game when the rest of the team had worked to keep them in it? Or maybe Sellers for fumbling in overtime? Just wondering.

Posted by: Burrasta1 | December 8, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

"While the waiving of Suisham doesn't really bother me, the folks who made the decision do - Snyder and Cerroto"

Are you implying that Zorn should have made this call. He has proven to be a way worse personnel guy than Snyder or Cerrato.

Here is a short summary of Zorn's personnel decision history.

-took forever to IR Cooley.
-Fred Davis and Betts getting no PT until injuries.
-ARE still returns punts
-still hasn't IR'd portis.

Posted by: PortisPocketsStr8 | December 8, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

OR - it's conservative play calling in a situation where conservative play calling wins you the game (usually).

With 2 minutes left, with NO timeouts, do you really see a team go down, score, onside kick, score again? No way. If he had made that field goal it was game over.

If they had given the saints more time by throwing incomplete passes, then kick the FG, they might not have had to onside kick after their next score. And then who knows what would have happened.

They made the right call, it was SS's fault not the coaches, get over it.

Posted by: REXskins
------------------------------------------

You obvisiously don't know NFL football.

1. conservative play has NO PLACE against the high powered Saints offense. You're another fan who didn't pay attention the Skins already BLEW 3 previous 10 points leads that allowed the Saints to tie each time.

2. 2 minutes is a very LONG TIME to come back from 10 points down to win the game. It's called the 2 minutes drill (from the Gibbs-Theismann years); each play depending on the complexity runs an average 7 seconds. Use the sidelines to catch a pass and run out of bounds and spike the ball - this of course if the team has capable recievers like the Saints have. Bingo, score a touchdown which the Saints did after the unnecessary missed FG by Suisham.

Next an onside kick and make sure the kicking team recovers the ball. Move down the field like in #2 and bingo score again. So, it is possible to score 2 TD's within 2 minutes to either force a tie or win the game. 10 points was NOT a safe lead to win the game - not with the incompetent Redskins offense of 09.

Because the 'lazy, sit on the ball and blow it' Redskins offense didn't score a TD, Zorn had no choice but to rely on Suisham. Result he missed.

Saints moved the ball downfield and scored a TOUCHDOWN forcing another tie and another Redskins blown lead, this time only 7 points.

Result OT. Saints kick a FG and win.

Now who really lost the game? Answer; Zorn and his 'sit on the lead and blow it' offense, not Suisham.

Posted by: memyselfI1 | December 8, 2009 2:49 PM | Report abuse

You guys are ANALyzing this way to much. Dude missed a chipshot for gods sake against an undefeated team that would have put them down 10 with no time outs and less than 2 minutes to go. Do teams come from behind in those situations.....RARELY !!!

Posted by: vegasskinsfan | December 8, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

The mere idea that Zorn decided to score a field goal instead of a TD is just ridiculuos. When he said play for the FG, he meant playing for the chance to what should have sealed the game.

I agree that a bootleg may have been a better choice though.

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:40 PM

The problem was the conservative play calling (*cough* ZORN *cough*). Conservative play-calling only gets you punts, FGs, and missed FGs. Not TDs.

Ah...remember overtime? When Sean Payton could have kicked it? But was still trying to go for a TD???????????

There's the difference in thinking by Head Coaches.....

Posted by: 4thFloor | December 8, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

RI: Redskins Coach Jim Zorn today explained the reasoning behind the release of place kicker Shaun Suisham and signing of Graham Gano ...

Leave us hope that Gano can kick the guano out of the ball, espec on KOs.

Posted by: TubularBells | December 8, 2009 2:50 PM | Report abuse

I'll be the FIRST to say that when things go badly for Gano, this place will start calling him "Guano" ... just because that's how clever you all really are.

Posted by: dcsween | December 8, 2009 2:25 PM

Not me. I have more imagination than that. I'm calling him Ganorrhea.

Posted by: League-Source | December 8, 2009 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Bean,

You're talking about the game from a position of pure hindsight. You're saying that their decision was bad when they made it... because the results were bad?

So you're implying that either:

A) it could have been foreseen that Suisam would miss that field goal
or
B) it would have been more likely than not that the Saints could score 10 points in 2 minutes with no timeouts

If you're not implying either of those things, and you can't be, because that's insane - then obviously it makes sense to run the clock down and kick a field goal. Because it's the safest (highest percentage) way to win from that position.

Posted by: REXskins | December 8, 2009 2:51 PM | Report abuse

Looks like Ganther's the starter the rest of the way. Portis to IR.

Posted by: rachel216 | December 8, 2009 2:51 PM | Report abuse

According to Larry Weisman's twitter, Clinton Portis is going to IR...

Posted by: JohnnyRyde | December 8, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

I understand the words he said, I just think there is context missing. Would you say he should have went for it on 4th down?

The last thing you want to do is throw an interception. You wont see too many coaches throwing the ball with a lead in the 4th qtr and time winding down. Especially when you are well within FG range. take the two score lead and be happy.

No coach can account for an NFL kicker that misses such an easy kick.

I live in the future also...so its easy to second guess. Two turnovers also cost us the game. Both went for points.

What I like is that they look like an NFL team again. Freaky things happen, there is no denying it. But they took the best team in NFL to the brink on Sunday...im somewhat content for that

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

What a shame. He was having a strong season and misses a few and gets the axe. The one who should be getting cut is the Red Snapper since he's the one who keeps having bad snaps that disrupt the timing. I snapped for kicks when I played and if the snap is off, everything is off. Plus, when you're so close to the FG post its even harder to compensate for the bad snap. This was the wrong move and Big Red has got to go.

Posted by: dewey69 | December 8, 2009 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Yep CP to the IR. One step closer to being cut in the '10 uncapped year?

Posted by: Predator48 | December 8, 2009 2:53 PM | Report abuse

conservative play has NO PLACE against the high powered Saints offense. You're another fan who didn't pay attention the Skins already BLEW 3 previous 10 points leads that allowed the Saints to tie each time.

We scored the same amount of points, are we high-powered?

Posted by: CheyenneWY | December 8, 2009 2:54 PM | Report abuse

rex, all I'm saying is that playing for the FG cost the team the game. The play calling took the ball out of the teams hottest player that day, so there you go....you can go with a player having a career day, or a 3rd string rb/kr...

I'll go with the guy with the hot hand..

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | December 8, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

memyselfI1:

Wow you make 10 points in 2 minutes sound like a piece of cake!! No matter that they had no timeouts left, and the % of getting an onside kick was 23% in 2004 (fastest stat i could find, it should be down from that now with the new rules).

Reality check, 10 points in 2 minutes with no timeouts is not bloody likely.

Posted by: REXskins | December 8, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

beeps

Posted by: BeantownGreg1 | December 8, 2009 2:56 PM | Report abuse

I understand the words he said, I just think there is context missing. Would you say he should have went for it on 4th down?


====================

It's not the 4th down play that is being questioned. It's 1st, 2nd and 3rd down that are being questioned.

Posted by: Curzon417 | December 8, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

You have a 7pt lead..the other team has no time outs...why would a defensive back in the middle of the field bite for a play allowing a defender to RUN PAST HIM???

Just stay back keeping the offensive player in FRONT of you and defend the goal line...And Suisham is labeled the goat and cut???????????????

Posted by: pentagon40 | December 8, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

I think people are arguing for the sake of arguing regarding LL30.

Get off your high horses people....We are in the age of the salary cap....use your BRAINS!

Posted by: 4thFloor | December 8, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Bean, all I'm saying is the decision to play for the FG did not cost us the game. Suisam cost us the game with that incredibly unpredictable choke.

99% of the time, that is a lights out game over decision to run the clock down and go up by 10, and you know that.

Posted by: REXskins | December 8, 2009 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Portis to IR? Roster spot open. Grab a good lineman off someone's practice squad. Make it a lineman who will someday be a Pro Bowler, and will make the fans of that team hate the GM. Then the owner will fire the GM and will hire Cerrato away from Snyder to appease the fans.

Posted by: League-Source | December 8, 2009 2:58 PM | Report abuse

cheyenneWY

"I agree that a bootleg may have been a better choice though."

A bootleg is a 'sister play'.

You know, it's a play that works because it's an offshoot of another play.

So if on second down the 'stretch' left is stuffed, you fake 'stretch' left (the ball is on the far hash, so you have more yardage), bootleg right, and hit a tight end or receiver dragging across the end zone.

Devin Thomas scored on such a play earlier in the game.

You give the quarterback a 'run/pass' option.

At the end of Sunday's game, it would've been a super dramatic conclusion if Soup would've run through a saints' player to score.

It would've shut up a fanbase that's been mocking him for five years for not being a 'savior'.

And it would've changed the conversation about the end of this redskin season.

Posted by: MistaMoe | December 8, 2009 2:59 PM | Report abuse

memyselfI1:

Wow you make 10 points in 2 minutes sound like a piece of cake!! No matter that they had no timeouts left, and the % of getting an onside kick was 23% in 2004 (fastest stat i could find, it should be down from that now with the new rules).

Reality check, 10 points in 2 minutes with no timeouts is not bloody likely.

Posted by: REXskins

------------------------------------------

I said it is POSSIBLE to pull off. Everything needs to work right too. And yes I knew the Saints had no time outs but they have an extraordinary BETTER and MORE COMPETENT OFFENSE than the pathetic Redskins offense to pull off 10 points within 2 minutes. Heck, the Skins offense could NOT even score a 4 YARDS TD and yet Suisham's getting hell from missing a 23 yard FG. Please.

4 yards is much, much shorter and easier to score a TD then kicking an unncessary 23 yard chipshot FG.

Posted by: memyselfI1 | December 8, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Like it matters...both the Dallas Game and saints...when you leave it up to kickers...nothing good can come....

Zorn is a fraud, Vinny is failure personified. Unless they are canned nothing else maters

Posted by: chrislarry | December 8, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse

conservative play has NO PLACE against the high powered Saints offense. You're another fan who didn't pay attention the Skins already BLEW 3 previous 10 points leads that allowed the Saints to tie each time.

We scored the same amount of points, are we high-powered?

Posted by: CheyenneWY

-------------------------------------------

Hardly. Try anemic, pathetic, incompetent, whatever for most of the season. Check out the total points for of the Saints vs the Skins. Then you've answered your own question.

Posted by: memyselfI1 | December 8, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

Re-sign JC, draft a LT with the 1st pick move 98 to DE, cut Griffith and start Gholston, I may even fire Blatche since he doesn't seem to like to blitz the QB or jam receivers. 2nd pick RB since CP nor any of the other RB's we have have any speed. In free agency pick up a RG since Rhino can't seem to stay healthy and leave Heyer at RT since he seems to play well there.

Posted by: I_95 | December 8, 2009 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Man... I used to like to read RI, but nothing but a bunch of haters... Sheez!

Playing for a FG was the right call. By that I mean RUNNING the ball was the right call. Make them use their timeouts. Run the clock down. Be up two scores with less than 2 min. The RIGHT call...

Now you can argue that maybe on third down, if they knew the play would go past the 2 min warning, try a bootleg option or some pass play... Or try a different running play. That's fine...But going for the sure 3 with 2 scores up and less than 2min to go is the RIGHT way to go.

And as has been said, if JZ calls a pass and JC is sacked and fumbles (or is intercepted in the endzone) ALL of you would be saying "what the hell is he thinking" going for a TD when all he had to do was kneel down three times and kick the sure thing FG and we'd have won... FIRE JZ. ADMIT IT. That's what you'd say!

Posted by: carocanesfan | December 8, 2009 3:16 PM | Report abuse

And don't forget that while the Saints have a great offense, they didn't have a great day until the last drive. The Skins had held them to 16 points on offense prior to the tying drive - the other 7 being from the fumble after the interception.

Yes, they're explosive but take the sure three points, go up by two scores and count on your defense. That was the RIGHT call in every league except Madden...

Posted by: carocanesfan | December 8, 2009 3:21 PM | Report abuse

The politics of this move are really fun to discuss, aren't they?

BOTTOM LINE: The man can't hit a clutch field goal to save his life. Forget about $$ and who else sucks, and who else will be gone at the end of the season. Can the guy hit a clutch field goal? No. So, he can't do the job. Period. End of story. He should go.

Should they play for touchdowns, and not field goals? Sure. But field goals are one of the four ways to score (TD, FG, PAT, safety). FGs aren't shameful, they're a big part of the game. And Suisham obviously has trouble hitting them in important situations. It's good to let him go.

Posted by: BARDC | December 8, 2009 3:24 PM | Report abuse

For all of you saying that we should have played for the TD, i ask you this. When that failed and NO then drives down teh field and scores and we lose the game would you be saying why didn't that idiot kick the field goal, i mean suisham has only missed two kicks all year!!?!! Ya i think so, what a bunch of whining crybabies in here. The FG was the right play, had we made it we would have won the game, but you all somehow think we should have gone for the TD on 4th and a yard...unreal simply UNREAL.

Posted by: skinball77 | December 8, 2009 3:26 PM | Report abuse

good riddance

Posted by: BMACattack | December 8, 2009 3:26 PM | Report abuse

Suisham had to go

Suisham is building a history of FG gaffs WHEN UNDER PRESSURE - the recent Dallas misses, especially the easier miss (first attempt) was far worse than the late 50yard attempt.

Then of course there is Sundays debacle

But FEW will remember the 2007 PLAYOFF game against the Seahawkes. Redskins down 13-0. Redskins score after a long drive. 13-7 (Seahawkes). Next series INTERCEPTION and the Skins go ahead 13-14.

4th Qtr 12:38 remaining in the game - Momentum ALL Redskins - Skins kickoff and RECOVER the ball and drive into FG Range

4th Qtr 11:41 Suisham MISSES 30 yards FG - MOMENTUM KILLER

Redskins fall apart and lose 35-14

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2008010500/2007/POST18/redskins@seahawks#tab:analyze/analyze-channels:cat-post-playbyplay

I wonder what would have happened if Suisham makes that kick to take a 17-13 lead (and scoring 17 points in a row) with only 11 mins in Q4 remaining ???

DESPITE ALL THIS - making Suisham the scapegoat for ALL THE OTHER BONEHEAD PLAYS against the saints - is not the answer either

Interception - re-picked by Saints for TS SECONDS before halftime

Campbells INTERCEPTION

OFFENSIVE HOLDING call when Campbell hit Moss - instead of 2-6 it's now 1-20. Interception by Campbell was a result of Holding Penalty

Landry "Double Move" Blues

Sellers FUMBLE

And on and on and on and on it goes

Suisham had to go BUT THAT IS JUST THE BEGINNING - the Skins Suck from top to bottom !!!

Posted by: tele1 | December 8, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Didn't the turnovers, missed assignments, and missed opportunities affect "all of us" too?

Jim just a little piece of advice: In the future play for touchdowns and settle for a field goals. Well, in the case of the Redskins field goal attempts.

Posted by: BetterOffWithFedorov | December 8, 2009 3:57 PM | Report abuse

"Tough choice to make if Okung is still available. If he is gone, it's easier to draft Spiller or Berry at that position."

I don't know if you can pass up an OT. Trent Williams of Oklahoma looks like a right side sort, which the Skins can certainly use. Bulaga of Iowa is a left tackle and Iowa used to have a good rep for linemen, pre-Robert Gallery. Anthony Davis of Rutgers is a huge Michael Oher type who could wind up at guard. There are some rabid Bruce Campbell fans out there, if you ignore his injury history.

Spiller and Berry are probably better prospects than any of those, but that doesn't mean much when a team has a need like the Skins have.

Posted by: Samson151 | December 8, 2009 4:00 PM | Report abuse

Another note: some scouts are ranking Jake Locker and Sam Bradford ahead of Jimmy Clausen. That I don't see. Locker is the perfect picture of a do-it-all QB, but last I checked, you can't use a photo of your QB during the game. Bradford hurt his shoulder, twice, and that should discourage anybody. Clausen doesn't have a gun, but neither does Tom Brady or for that matter, Drew Brees. He can hit the deep ball, and that's invaluable.

Posted by: Samson151 | December 8, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

"We played for the field goal" says it all. 3 and 8 playing it safe when a show of courage and confidence in these gritty and very tough reserves needed it most as well as the fans. To say Zorn is "soft" is perhaps the understatement of the decade for our Skins and our Fans.

Laron Landry is a fake. A "Fugasse," (hope I spelled that right, to my Italian Brothers and Sisters). We bought his early career "big hits" as a substitute for good, sound play at safety. In this depressing age of "slam Dunks", "chest pounding about nothing," imbarrassing "dances" after routine plays and "big hits on Sports Center", is it any wonder this is tolerated by Franchises looking to fill seats and sell jerseys?

I am impressed by many of these reserves and recent pick ups though they would never have been here unless VC was forced to bring them in and they HAD to play.

Zorn would never have sat down Portis and other non performers without the injuries demanding it.

Posted by: jshavatt | December 8, 2009 4:08 PM | Report abuse

So many people are drinking the Kool Aid. Those of you claiming SS was a bad kicker check your stats.

For 2009, he is 12th in the league based on percentage of total field goals converted, tied for 13th for number of field goals made, tied 15th for number of field goals attempted, tied for 27th for longest FG made (48 yrds). He has gone 5-5 on FG 40-49 yds, 5-6 on 30-39, 8-9 on 20-29, and of course 0-1 50+.

He is last in the league in XP % at 95.2% Carney from NO is a few points above him at 96.2 of course Carney went 50-52 XPs. But Carney and Suisham are 4.8 and 3.8 % worse then Matt Bryant who went 1 for 1 with Atlanta. Meaning that if you miss a XP you sink to the bottom of the stat category. And remember the miss was a block.

Gano I am sure will right the ship. He did go 13 of 16 FG and 20 for 20 in the UFL.

And stop thinking this is some new era of accountability. Snyder needed to act out, just like his berating Norv Turner in the locker room in front of the team. Easy target SS.

This needed to be done now because the Skins are a mere 5 games behind in the conference and they could really get on a roll?


Posted by: Hank4 | December 8, 2009 4:10 PM | Report abuse

call me crazy, but i'm uneasy about letting suisham go.

he's only missed 3 field goals all season. granted, 2 turned out to be very costly.

but, again. did he let the ensuing touchdown to tie the game?

he's not the reason this team can't close out victories.

he's not the reason we choke. he's not the reason we stink.

is he the world's best kicker? no. should he have eventually been replaced? probably.

but, if people on the skins were fired after every costly screw up - there would be no team left.

so, congrats redskins. for one game you have a scapegoat and can deny you stink.

enjoy the feeling. one day soon you'll have to look in the mirror.....

Posted by: CF11555 | December 8, 2009 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Didn't anyone on the Skins notice that the snap was WAY high on that missed FG and that the ball came down WAY out of rhythm? This seems like more idiocy from not having a professional GM to me -- blame the kicker when in fact it was the snapper/holder's fault.

Posted by: dolph924 | December 8, 2009 4:14 PM | Report abuse

wes hopkins on the eagles NOT andre waters recovered a fumble by g.riggs(the ball was knocked out of riggs hand by..raleigh mckenzie a guard on washington. riggs had ran over the eagles for more than 200yds that day in 1989 washington was up 30-14 at the half and I knew they were going to lose that game. happy to see suiSHAM cut he chokes when its time to make a big kick I don't care about his high percentage of kicks he CHOKES, if he can't make kicks regularly 45yds and closer he should not be in the nfl. anyone saying campbell should get cut like suiSHAM is a fool campbell has taken many hits since last year and most of this year had no running game and bad o-line campbell has many skills, suiSHAM supposedly 1 and he gags BIG time on the big kicks he does not catch the ball tackle block throw it, all he has to do is kick it" don't let the door slam you in the a- -"

Posted by: wathu19 | December 8, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Suisham's miss was crucial and might have iced it for the Redskins, but more important in my mind was the ignorance of the whistle that blew on Sellers' fumble while the ball was on the ground, with no Saint touching it. Maybe the ball came out after his elbow hit, maybe before, but the play was over. How can the refs ignore that? Sellers may have tried to recover the ball, but he thought (correctly, I might add) that the whistle had blown and the play was over. Moreover, what is the league's position on this? Sellers has commented that this was his interpretation.

Posted by: pc-wiz | December 8, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

The Season is over anyway, so it is time to start giving a new Kicker a chance to practice in live situations. By signing Groza to a 3 year contract, the Redskins must have seen something in him. Shuisham was always too short on the kickoffs and never had enough leg for field goals longer than 40+ yards. If Groza works out, then that is a pick that can be saved for another O-linemen instead of being wasted on a special team player (ie. D. Brooks).

Posted by: JohnWWW | December 8, 2009 4:44 PM | Report abuse

To Wathu19-

I stand corrected! It was Wes Hopkins in 1989 not "Dirty" Waters. Didn't make it any less heartbreaking though ...

Posted by: Monkman63 | December 8, 2009 4:58 PM | Report abuse


Another OBVIOUS, KNEE-JERK, BONE-HEADED move by the Skins. Like Suisham is the reason the team lost those two games.

What a bunch or maroons.

Posted by: TerpInTime | December 8, 2009 5:59 PM | Report abuse

For those of you who want JC gone....let's look at the NFL landscape....WHo is better.....
#1 Brees
#2 P.Manning
#3 Brady
#4 Big Ben
#5 WHO?

THAT is right folks, not one QB after Big Ben I would trade for JC right now....give this kid his due to preform....You tell me any of you could do your job at work if your employer didn't provide you a computer - NO or they didn't provide you a chair - NO - all this is comparible to football in that a computer and a chair support you the worker....WELL, the Offensive Line and RB/WR's support the QB.
Remember, if the WR's are not in the right spot on the field, who do you expect JC to throw to....thats right the RB, so in that situation, why do yo ubalme JC...you can't....Sign this young QB, who has more than shown he is durable, strong armed and now battle tested...he is on the right spot to show the world what he is as a QB.

I ahte to say it, we are much closer today at a winning recordd next year than making wholesale changes....remember folks, the Redkins win the Offseaons Super Bowl every year signing someone who is a BUST - so, lets take our lumps this year - heck we have lost something like 6 games by 6 points or less or 7 games by 8 points or less, that shows this team is NOT a deadbeat team, we are 1 possession or 1 kick from a win here folks!
We are not the Detroit or crappy teams in the NFL, we are NOT getting blown out every week.

I rather lose close this year to win the close one's next year and make the playoffs with JC and Portis and a revamped OL with Depth and we still need a GM, because this should have all happened a few years ago and today we would be talking about the playoffs.

Glass half full folks, NOT half empty!!

Posted by: talbottj | December 8, 2009 7:47 PM | Report abuse

For those folks uneasy about letting the kicker go, the kicker is only worth a darn if he kicks and makes in the CLUTCH...NOT making kicks that DON'T determine the outcome of a game....look at Vinateri for the Pats/Colts, he has made millions of $$ becasue he is CLUTCH.....enough said, get over letting the kicker go....
If this new kicker makes CLUTCH kicks then he is a keeper....remember folks, Mark Mosley kicked a 42yarder in the Snow t obeat the NY Giants - PLUS keep his Streak alive of # of kicks made in a row....CLUTCH....kickers are about being CLUTCH - enough said.

Posted by: talbottj | December 8, 2009 7:52 PM | Report abuse

we suck

Posted by: kickass10101 | December 8, 2009 7:58 PM | Report abuse

add a u to Gano and he's guano

Posted by: nativedc | December 8, 2009 7:58 PM | Report abuse

For those arguing that a 10 point lead with less than two minutes remaining and the opposing team with no time outs left - and yes, even with Mr. Brees quarterbacking - isn't anyone suggesting that highly praised Redskins defense couldn't stop a team from scoring twice in under two minutes? That the highly praised defense, even if they gave up a touchdown, would give up the ball on the ensuing kick-off or, even if they did, couldn't hold off the opposition?

Granted, the kicker should have made the kick. And while I agree that a touchdown would have been better than a field goal, you're still forcing the other team to score twice, I think most people are reading into "we played for the kick" wrong; I think what was simply mis-speak, and what was meant was "we worked our way down there to get into points position, and we thought that a 10 point lead would suffice because it shouldn't be likely that any team will score twice in under two minutes with no time outs left.

To me, where was the defense? Yes, the offense made mistakes, whether it be a missed field goal, an interception, or a fumble, but where was the defense?

dungarees@gmail.com

Posted by: Dungarees | December 8, 2009 8:45 PM | Report abuse

Another gutless move by Cerrato and Synder.
As others pointed out, Suisham was 18 for 21.
It's a good thing Synder didn't own the team in 1979. Mark Mosely, returning to the team after the murder of his sister, missed a game-winning field goal against New Orleans that would have given the Skins an 11-5 record and a playoff berth.

Posted by: sweetolrob | December 8, 2009 9:17 PM | Report abuse

C'mon! I'm no skins fan, but SS had to go. An NFL kicker that can't hit from 23 yards is like a school bus driver that "only" ran over one kid last week.

Posted by: hoos3014 | December 8, 2009 9:31 PM | Report abuse

JohnWWW: Groza? If only we had "Lou the Toe" now!

Posted by: ExPatYankee | December 9, 2009 3:11 AM | Report abuse

curzon, beantowngreg and zcezcest, i've read several post of yours in the past and have strongly disagreed but you guys were spot on with these posts. for the life of me, i don't understand how in the world we decide to suddenly cool the jets on campbell but calling 3 run plays and "play for a fuqqin fg". do you guys remember when we last played the patriots and everyone was complaining about them "running up the score"? a reporter asked belichick about the scoring and his response was "what were we supposed to do? kick a field goal?" that's the kind of attitude our coaches need. fuqq all this playing like gentlemen. we were up against the saints...the best offensive team in the league and had the opportunity to humiliate them in brutal fashion and we played for a fuqqin fg!!!! the same shyt happened when tryon got that pick against the eagles. plenty of time left on the clock and the didn't give campbell the vote of confidence to bleed out the eagles! it's obvious the coaches have no idea how bad snyder wants to win and they (the coaches) blew it by getting all passive. i'm not a huge zorn detractor but if his playcalling duties have been pulled, just send him to the stands and allow sherm and sherm to call the plays.

Posted by: charronegro1971 | December 9, 2009 4:36 AM | Report abuse

I thought I heard Sonny Jurgenson say the snap was high and the hold was off. I am not so sure about that.

Still, if SS couldn't win games for us, why have him? Remember Mark Mosely? He won games for us.

I hope the Skins continue this personnel accountability attitude. Fumble the ball and get cut.

By the way, it was nice to see Devin Thomas produce. I'd like to see some others produce like Kelly, Fred Davis, Marko Mitchell, etc. We need much more young talent. We also need speed.

Posted by: neil64 | December 9, 2009 4:41 AM | Report abuse

Suisham was the best kicker we've had in a long time. He was kicking from the swamp area of the field. The Skins should have tried to get a touchdown and used the slippery field to their advantage and realized that a kick was not a sure thing. Zorn is done. Caput. Hopefully Vinny also. Shanahan is my bet to be the coach with full control next year. He will keep Campbell. With our first pick we need a talented left tackle, like Samuels when he was young. There is no need to waste a high pick on a running back. We still need a reliable second receiver. Our young receivers were not playing against top cornerbacks in this game. The Saints were missing all theirs. Lets see if Thomas can do it again this week against the Raiders. If he continues to improve then maybe we can count on him.

Posted by: Falmouth1 | December 9, 2009 6:06 AM | Report abuse

The team's problem is the inability to score touchdowns. Yes the field goal kicker must be more reliable, but the reality is that he has been reliable. But I understand, you want him to hit when you need it the most. Maybe there is a coaching issue???? This is an aversion to the failures of the QB and his leadership of the offense. Touchdowns are the problem, not FG's!

Posted by: righteous1 | December 9, 2009 7:42 AM | Report abuse

MY QUESTION IS WHY WAS SS EVEN BACK IN CAMP FOR KICKING COMPETITION? HE WAS THE WORST KICKER IN THE NFL LAST YEAR. HE HAS TROUBLE GETTING THE BALL TO THE END ZONE ON KICK OFFS.
THE TEAM HAS A LOT OF ISSUES TO DEAL WITH.
REPLACING SAMUELS, GETTING MORE O LINEMEN, FINDING A COUPLE OF CORNERS WHO CAN ACTUALLY COVER, TEACHING LANDRY HOW TO TACKLE, DECIDING ON WHETHER JC WILL BE THE QB..OR SEE IF HE WANTS TO BE. IF ZORN IS FIRED..HE MAY WANT TO LEAVE. WHAT ABOUT COLT..CAN HE TAKE OVER? DO THEY NEED TO FIND (SOME HOW) A POTENTIAL OR STARTING QB.
IF ZORN GOES..WILL BLACHE GO..AND A NEW DEFENSE WILL BE INTRODUCED WITH A NEW COORDINATOR...
I COULD KEEP GOING, BUT THESE ARE SOME THINGS THE {{{BRAIN TRUST}}} WILL HAVE TO GRAPPLE WITH.

Posted by: blazerguy234 | December 9, 2009 7:48 AM | Report abuse

IF THE DEFENSE HAD STOPED THE OTHER TEAM FROM SCORING THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN KNOW NEED FOR A KICK!

If the skins don't invest in linemen next year they will have the same problem whom ever the QB will be.

SO STOP SAYING STUPID THINGS LIKE CAMPBELL CAN'T GET THE JOB DONE. YOU CAN'T WORK IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE PROPER TOOLS!
IF YOU THANK ANOTHER QB COULD HAVE DONE BETTER YOUR FOOLING YOUR SELF!

SS is a good kicker that had a bad slump the skins should not fire him for a couple of bad games. The NERVE of them while they have a 3-9 record.

NOBODY BUT DANNY

Posted by: shamken | December 9, 2009 7:51 AM | Report abuse

No, this was a good move. The only move. I'm so glad they did it. You could tell from Zorn's comment (he's not cleaning out his locker...yet) that it was gonna happen. Next up: Zorn himself. Then, geez, give Blache or Smith the job, or of course the best option: bring GW back. A few tweeks here and there, and a major overhaul of the secondary and O line, and clap your hands, you're done. I might even be quiet about Snyder.

Posted by: sugarstreet | December 9, 2009 7:55 AM | Report abuse

No, this was a good move. The only move. I'm so glad they did it. You could tell from Zorn's comment (he's not cleaning out his locker...yet) that it was gonna happen. Next up: Zorn himself. Then, geez, give Blache or Smith the job, or of course the best option: bring GW back. A few tweeks here and there, and a major overhaul of the secondary and O line, and clap your hands, you're done. I might even be quiet about Snyder.

Posted by: sugarstreet | December 9, 2009 7:56 AM | Report abuse

Suisham will be picked up by someone in need of a good kicker, he's obviously injured in some way. Why not fire Campbell for the last interception....no High School QB would've thrown that pass

We get a former (fired) CFL player that wasn't picked up by a NFL team until week 13 (only the Skins). So he passes the mustard at practice, another great decision.

Stay tuned for more picks in Jan by DANNY & VINNNY !!!

DANNY BOY RULES - GO VINNY !!!

Posted by: dannyboyrules | December 9, 2009 8:06 AM | Report abuse

Idiots. They'd better also fire Landry (who cost them 14 pts getting burned on deep routes), Sellers (3 pts with overtime fumble), Cambbell (end of game interception), and Moore (7 pts on interception-fumble).

Posted by: A1232 | December 9, 2009 9:00 AM | Report abuse

You guys against JC need to come to Carolina and watch our #17. We'll take JC over JD any day. With our rushing attack and stable front 'O' he could do well in the Queen City.

Posted by: jbeard32 | December 9, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

i would also cut sellers and campbell. sellers has done this before and campbell alwasy chokes when we need him.

Posted by: cavalieri10 | December 9, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Suisham becomes the Poster-Child and scapegoat for a failed organization. Should never have come down to the missed FG. Why not make Landry a scapegoat for his OLE coverage on double moves? Why not the coaches (oh yeah, they will be a scapegoat in 4 more weeks) for playing for a FG when a TD would have ICED the game?
And ultimately, why not CERRATO as the ULTIMATE SCAPEGOAT for this playoff roster he constructed for ZOrn, and for his 'connect-the-dots' mentality to having multiple play callers and for his evisceration of the HC?

THis is THE JOKE TEAM of the NFL!!! BAR NONE!

Posted by: wagenstill | December 9, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

I'm surprised at the Zorn criticism on "playing for the field goal". I thought that was a sound approach given the talent on the team, and who they were playing. If he had pulled a Bill Belichik and "played for the win" someone would have thrown a pick or fumbled the ball, and Zorn would have been fired on the spot. Or, they could have scored earlier and given Brees the ball back with more time left. There was no reason to believe SS would miss that extra point. Was it conservative, yes? Was it the wrong strategy given the situation? I don't think so.

Cut LL now.

Posted by: BKDenver | December 9, 2009 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, Suisham was the problem with this team.

Suisham wass the most consistent kicker I remember the Skins having in the last 10 years or so.

Posted by: acebojangles | December 9, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

"At the end of Sunday's game, it would've been a super dramatic conclusion if Soup would've run through a saints' player to score.

It would've shut up a fan base that's been mocking him for five years for not being a 'savior'.

And it would've changed the conversation about the end of this redskin season.

Posted by: MistaMoe | December 8, 2009 2:59 PM"

Moe,

Yes it would have been super-dramatic...and if I were Tom Brady, I'd be rich, handsome, and tappin' Ms. Bundchen every night like a cold keg of beer...so what's your point?

Sorry partner. Jason Campbell AT HIS BEST = Tony Banks.

A few flashes of brilliance sprinkled liberally over a wide base of mediocrity.

You don't pay a Tony Banks' quality QB talent 6 mil a year...if you want to win in the NFL that is.

If you just want a bag of fat stats, a sizable pile of losses, and a bucket of heartbreak then rock on...make that move.

Yes, Campbell sometimes racks up nice looking stats, most often in garbage time, while adding to his massive portfolio of losses.

Then, every once in a VERY blue moon Campbell even has a legitimately nice game...but usually still in a losing effort.

Me, I'd take nine or ten ugly as sin 17 of 49 low TD#, lower or no INT# 9-6, 9-7, 16-10 Todd Collins/Mark Brunell type wins a season over any number of pretty stat line crazy losses...but that's just the kind of silly fan I am.

And is there ONE Skins Fan amongst us who would honestly say any differently if we'd just think about it and shelve the agendas before we'd speak?

TM

Posted by: ThinkingMan | December 9, 2009 11:17 AM | Report abuse

The kicker missed the kick, and to some its Zorns fault, Jason's fault, etc...

At my job, works the same way.
The person who brought in the failed renegade employee doesn't get blamed for the primary problem. That they brought them in or brought in other failed projects and employees.

In this case, Joe Gibbs brought the kicker in, thus HIS FAULT. The same Joe that brought in Jason, Portis, Randle-El, Brunell, Desmond Howard. But just like at my job, someone elses fault.

Posted by: kedavis | December 9, 2009 11:31 AM | Report abuse

The kicker missed the kick, and to some its Zorns fault, Jason's fault, etc...

At my job, works the same way.
The person who brought in the failed renegade employee doesn't get blamed for the primary problem. That they brought them in or brought in other failed projects and employees.

In this case, Joe Gibbs brought the kicker in, thus HIS FAULT. The same Joe that brought in Jason, Portis, Randle-El, Brunell, Desmond Howard. But just like at my job, someone elses fault.

Posted by: kedavis | December 9, 2009 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Yeah the kicker was the problem, not the fact that jason threw a pick later or moore fumbled when trying to score after a pick or sellers the sissy grabbed his thigh instead of holding onto the ball. Yeah it was the kicker ,the man who scored al your points until you finally figured out that if you got the ball in the endzone with somebody holding it you got 6 points yeah goo look s.s go somewhere else and come back and beat us with a winning kick. just shows us Zorn has no control over what is going on. no way he did this ,it comes from the top ,the day before he said he would put him right back out there. there purpose of keeping the field wet bit them in there but

Posted by: tird45 | December 9, 2009 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Yeah the kicker was the problem, not the fact that jason threw a pick later or moore fumbled when trying to score after a pick or sellers the sissy grabbed his thigh instead of holding onto the ball. Yeah it was the kicker ,the man who scored al your points until you finally figured out that if you got the ball in the endzone with somebody holding it you got 6 points yeah goo look s.s go somewhere else and come back and beat us with a winning kick. just shows us Zorn has no control over what is going on. no way he did this ,it comes from the top ,the day before he said he would put him right back out there. there purpose of keeping the field wet bit them in there but

Posted by: tird45 | December 9, 2009 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, the kickers fault they're 3-9. Had he made ALL of his kicks this year, they might be 4-8. Oh sure, they would have beaten Dallas or the Saints had he made FG's. Maybe, maybe not. Bad teams find various ways to lose. Had he made kicks against Dallas, Dallas probably would have scored on a 100 yard kickout instead.

And fans tend to forgot what they want to. That had Denver's QB not gotten hurt, Denver would likely have won as they were scoring at will until he went out.

Yeah blame the kicker. Didn't the D have the opportunity to Stop Dallas, Philly and Saints late? Did they? But cut the kicker cause its HIS fault they're 3-9. LOL

Posted by: kedavis | December 9, 2009 11:52 AM | Report abuse

No way should SS have missed that field goal at extra point range.

But there is the problem. They should have played for the TD instead of the FG. Bad coaching put SS in a position to show what he is.

Should have let JC try to win the game based on his performance in that game.

Zorn should be next to go.

Posted by: Curzon417 | December 8, 2009 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Exactly, that's why Zorn will be gone, despite improvement on the Offense.

Posted by: Veretax | December 9, 2009 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Everyone blames the kicker. But Zorn should hold himself equally accountable for the miss. Zorn was playing for the field goal once they had first and goal. So why not center the ball between the hash marks to lessen the margin of error for the kicker. Suisham has performed well this year and for 90 percent of the season he was the only positive offensive weapon that we had. If people would have been watching the game you'll would have noticed that the Saints was getting alot of pressure coming off the left side of the Skin's special teams side. Can Zorn hold himself accountable for something other than always blaming someone else.

Posted by: Ranrocy2k | December 9, 2009 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Every business (and the NFL is a business) has to have an escape goat. SS just happens to fit the bill and is easily replaced. This way mgm't looks good as they are actually doing something.

Posted by: fearturtle44 | December 9, 2009 1:40 PM | Report abuse

18 for 21 in field goal tries and they cut him. Using that logic Jason Cantbell should have been benched six games ago. "We played for that field goal". How typical of Zorn and this sorry coaching staff. If you play for a TD and succeed, there is no way they lose this game. You have to play to win.

Posted by: theBozyn1 | December 9, 2009 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Zorn is right on the money -- from top to bottom, Snyder, Cerrato, Zorn on down, you don't do your job, you're out. No if ands or buts. No excuses. Produce or move on. This guy is just the latest guy to learn that. Also, I think, the first.

Posted by: markfromark | December 9, 2009 4:25 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company