We're not there yet. But, we're getting there.

[Art]

I disagree that the stacked box is because we're "a hair off" deep passes. Right now, Brunell is still,usually holding it a bit long, because he needs to trust the play a bit more or start understanding the speed there.

But there are plenty of teams that RARELY THROW deep in the NFL that somehow manage to run the ball with 8-9 in the box. I think what teams will start to do is realize Mark can hit those passes in the middle now and if he gets a pocket he'll step up--then eventually, they'll drop back. Because right now, I'm seeing teams put everyone but the deep safety near the LOS. That's not something even poor passing offenses see.

No, it's not at all true that PLENTY of teams rarely throw deep in the NFL but can manage to run the ball consistently. This is one of those exaggerated statements you don't like when others make, so please don't do so yourself. It may not be solely because we are a hair off on our deep throws that is keeping teams confident about stuffing the box. It is clearly a choice that they'd rather see if Brunell can beat them than Portis and because we're a hair off we can't keep them from making that choice.

It'll keep on being this way until Brunell hits on five or six of those throws that simply scare teams to death.

[jrockster21]

That's not true at all. many teams, as a result of their systems, do not throw deep frequently. And certainly the completion rate and attempts we've had is good enough for teams to know that stacking it is not going to account for everything.

The problem(other than basic execution and running well) is that for a few reasons teams don't care about the deep ball enough OR about the short passing game really. Eventually, teams will learn, but right now the RBs are going to have to gut it out while teams learn that we have a passing game.

What teams rarely go deep and are successful in the NFL? Other than the Redskins, that is.

We are a hair off on some of the deep balls. Brunell underthrew Patten by a couple of yards, or that was a TD. Patten still should have caught it, but he had to slow down. A couple of deep passes were overthrown, but it looked like the Hawks' defenders had their hands on our WRs a little past 5 yards if not outright pass interference. The deep ball to Cooley and one to Moss are two examples that pop to mind. I'm not trying to make excuses, I'm saying the deep ball is there, its only a matter of time before it gets clicking.

As far as the running game, Gibbs for some reason still refuses to give it to Portis wide. I think we had one pitch to Portis all game, and it went for 7 yards or something like that. I'm still confused about that; I'm not sure why we aren't putting him out in space more often. And there seemed to be only one or two designed rollouts for Brunell, something that I think will greatly improve the offense.

The most important thing is that we're 3-0. BTW, is that you in your sig?? Aren't you a little late with that?

[Warhead36]

BEST PART-2 penalties for 10 yards.

I agree with Art. We're not there yet, but that's a good thing too. The best is yet to come.

We're 3-0 and now we're just stealing games as fillers as Steve Czaban said on the postgame show.

[Ghost of]

The most important thing is that we're 3-0. BTW, is that you in your sig?? Aren't you a little late with that?

I was having fun with the whole thing. Cut me some slack, I just got the camera.

Anyways, I think when I said "we aren't a hair off" I am meaning to convey that it's not THAT we're missing those shots that is keeping teams in the box. That's all. I know that we're close, I just don't think a "hair" is what's keeping teams with 8-9 in el boxo.

[Ghost of]

No, it's not at all true that PLENTY of teams rarely throw deep in the NFL but can manage to run the ball consistently. This is one of those exaggerated statements you don't like when others make, so please don't do so yourself. It may not be solely because we are a hair off on our deep throws that is keeping teams confident about stuffing the box. It is clearly a choice that they'd rather see if Brunell can beat them than Portis and because we're a hair off we can't keep them from making that choice.

It'll keep on being this way until Brunell hits on five or six of those throws that simply scare teams to death.

The point(and if you check the stats, I'd wager you find the deep completion percentage is quite small) is that it's not the 'bombs' that need to be completed to get teams to loosen up.

If teams don't respect the overall passing game, for whatever reason, blocking, blitz pickup, receiver quality, route design--then that's when you get people up in the box. It's not because some team can't hit 5 bombs a game.

Assuming, of course, we even mean the same thing when talking about "Deep."

[bubba9497]

That's not true at all. many teams, as a result of their systems, do not throw deep frequently. And certainly the completion rate and attempts we've had is good enough for teams to know that stacking it is not going to account for everything.

The problem(other than basic execution and running well) is that for a few reasons teams don't care about the deep ball enough OR about the short passing game really. Eventually, teams will learn, but right now the RBs are going to have to gut it out while teams learn that we have a passing game.

name them

The Ravens are now having problems because defenses are daring them to throw......

[Ghost of]

name them

The Ravens are now having problems because defenses are daring them to throw......

Bubba, read more closely.

I didn't say(at any point) that a team can offer NO threat passing and not get stacked up on.

I said the 'stacking' comes when they don't respect the passing game rather than just one element(deep passes) Because 40+ yard passes, contrary to popular opinion, are not frequent occurrences.

I also see teams stack the line against premier running backs and said RB still getting yards.

Come on now, let's not FORGET the rest of the league and what happens in games.

[bubba9497]

The point(and if you check the stats, I'd wager you find the deep completion percentage is quite small) is that it's not the 'bombs' that need to be completed to get teams to loosen up.

:laugh: even the best deep passing teams deep completion percentage is quite small.. it's the threat of the deep ball that helps keep defenses honest.

[Guest Gichin13]

No, it's not at all true that PLENTY of teams rarely throw deep in the NFL but can manage to run the ball consistently. This is one of those exaggerated statements you don't like when others make, so please don't do so yourself. It may not be solely because we are a hair off on our deep throws that is keeping teams confident about stuffing the box. It is clearly a choice that they'd rather see if Brunell can beat them than Portis and because we're a hair off we can't keep them from making that choice.

It'll keep on being this way until Brunell hits on five or six of those throws that simply scare teams to death.

I think it is less the 2-3 deep tosses a game that are always hit or miss. It is consistently finding the soft spot at 10-20 yards downfield when the LBs pull up to stop the run.

Hit that middle 15 yard range with utter consistency and teams will fear stacking the box.

We are showing some real signs of hitting that range lately -- all those comebacks, to late route to Moss on the last drive, multiple passes to Thrash in long yardage, a couple to Cooley.

I think the offense is a couple steps away. Here are my steps:

1. Mounting a consistent screen attack. Portis could be devestating coming out of the backfield, but his hands look shaky to me so this may not work. If we could get consistent screens working, this would potentially be a big boost against teams that are blitzing alot. We seem to struggle with blitzes (although Portis looked fantastic today blocking when he was picking up blitzes).

2. Play action more on first down. We seem to be running play actions a lot on 2 and 10, 3 and 6 type of situations instead of true running downs.

3. Keep hitting Royal and Cooley -- big target, tough cover guys in the 10-15 yard range over the top of the LBs if they are cheating up on Portis.

4. Use the WR screen plays as a fake to sucker people up to the line.

5. Run more pitches and sweeps. Stop trying to convert Portis into an inside runner when the corner is his bread and butter. I would go outside in and Portis and inside out with Betts, mix it up with both.

6. More quick slants to Patten. For his size, he gets inside well and it forces folks to stay honest in their lanes rather than waiting for slower developing routes.

[bubba9497]

Bubba, read more closely.

I didn't say(at any point) that a team can offer NO threat passing and not get stacked up on.

I said the 'stacking' comes when they don't respect the passing game rather than just one element(deep passes) Because 40+ yard passes, contrary to popular opinion, are not frequent occurrences.

I also see teams stack the line against premier running backs and said RB still getting yards.

Come on now, let's not FORGET the rest of the league and what happens in games.

one of us seems to be, hint... it ain't me

last season we had mainly 5-10-15 yrd passes, yet the defense played tight, no threat of any wr getting deep

[Pedro]

It's all about character.

The boss has his type of player in now. Sure they're not playing like they wish they could but they are still winning. They, as a whole franchise, are learning they can win - it's the character of the team from the top right down that is why we are winning right now. Time is all we need to be firing on D and O but while we wait the character of the people we have is dragging us over the line.

There is so much more to come it's damn exciting.

Also for the D we need to cut them some slack for two reasons. Firstly they have won us two games 'cos the O wasn't there. Secondly I think they were maybe floored by the control the O had in the first half meaning they were only on the field for 2 minutes something in the first half. It takes time to go from 10 minutes per quarter played time to one so give them a break, they are learning too.

Lastly before you post something negative (constructive I like) think pre-season. If I said we would have issues and be 3 and 0 who wouldn't take it?

My :2cents:

[jrockster21]

BEST PART-2 penalties for 10 yards.

This is definitely a good thing, one I forgot to mention.

We're 3-0 and now we're just stealing games as fillers as Steve Czaban said on the postgame show.

Its funny how we can be winning and people still try and make excuses for why we aren't really as good as we are. Stealing games?? I guess we are "stealing" games in the same sense that we had games "stolen" from us a year ago...

Right now we are outplaying teams. We outplayed Seattle. True, they probably should have won if their kicker was worth half a pile of snot, but he missed it. Kickers miss kicks, its the way of the NFL. We got the ball in overtime and simply had our way with the Seattle defense, pretty much doing whatever we wanted to do. We would have scored a TD, but Gibbs played it safe and went for the 3.

Can't you guys feel it??? Its something special brewing -- its Redskins football the way its supposed to be!

[Ghost of]

one of us seems to be, hint... it ain't me

last season we had mainly 5-10-15 yrd passes, yet the defense played tight, no threat of any wr getting deep

It's about balance. All you need is the THREAT of deep, you don't need to COMPLETE 5-6 passes a game deep. Again, it's the threat of a real passing game. Once we started completing intermediate passes and once we start this year, things will open up. Completing a few more deep bombs may open up certain things, but if it's feast or famine, teams will still take their chances with defending the deep ball while putting 28 guys near the line.

[Art]

It's balance. all you need is the THREAT of deep, you don't need to COMPLETE 5-6 passes a game deep. Again, it's the threat of a real passing game. Once we started completing intermediate passes and once we start this year, things will open up.

No one said you have to complete five or six deep passes in a game to make teams respect it. You have to have big plays every game. Even five or six. But, deep passes you simply need to connect on five or six before teams will believe you are a threat to throw deep. YOU added the "a game" component. I'd simply ask you to address the words and ask me what I meant if I wasn't clear enough. But, don't debate a point you have to add words to debate.

[AJ_Skins]

Brunell has accuracy, poise and some mobility. He's not the problem. But, he's not the solution either. We're a hair off, which likely comes from timing, which should improve.

There's something missing and it's hard to figure out exactly what it is at 3-0, but, at 3-0 we've been able to work through things while not playing really great football yet.

I feel a lot more comfortable with Brunell playing after today. Up until this game, he had never shown an ability to even be productive as a passer. Although he didn't do anything great, he did complete passes to the WRs, enough so that we can have some semblence of an offense. Having said that, you answered your own question there. Brunell is not the answer. We will never be a real threat in the passing game with him in there, which means we will struggle to score a lot of points. I now believe he can get us enough points to win though, which is a big step up.

I still think we would be better off in the long run if Ramsey was playing, but there's no possibility of intelligent discussion on that issue, so I won't bother with it.

[Art]

I feel a lot more comfortable with Brunell playing after today. Up until this game, he had never shown an ability to even be productive as a passer. Although he didn't do anything great, he did complete passes to the WRs, enough so that we can have some semblence of an offense. Having said that, you answered your own question there. Brunell is not the answer. We will never be a real threat in the passing game with him in there, which means we will struggle to score a lot of points. I now believe he can get us enough points to win though, which is a big step up.

I still think we would be better off in the long run if Ramsey was playing, but there's no possibility of intelligent discussion on that issue, so I won't bother with it.

There's a possibility of an intelligent discussion, to be sure. Unfortunately, intelligence in the discussion can not begin with the premise you come to it with, which is that Brunell is in only because of Gibbs' blind adoration of him and not because Ramsey is not ready for the full offense as a starter and, frankly, because Brunell is more efficient.

[bubba9497]

It's about balance. All you need is the THREAT of deep, you don't need to COMPLETE 5-6 passes a game deep. Again, it's the threat of a real passing game. Once we started completing intermediate passes and once we start this year, things will open up. Completing a few more deep bombs may open up certain things, but if it's feast or famine, teams will still take their chances with defending the deep ball while putting 28 guys near the line.

look about a half page up

:laugh: even the best deep passing teams deep completion percentage is quite small.. it's the threat of the deep ball that helps keep defenses honest.

thanks for quoting me against me

[jrockster21]

No one said you have to complete five or six deep passes in a game to make teams respect it. You have to have big plays every game. Even five or six. But, deep passes you simply need to connect on five or six before teams will believe you are a threat to throw deep. YOU added the "a game" component. I'd simply ask you to address the words and ask me what I meant if I wasn't clear enough. But, don't debate a point you have to add words to debate.

Exactly -- its not that you have to hit 5 or 6 deep passes a game, or even 2 or 3. You have to be able to hit at least one deep pass consistently a game, and we haven't shown we can do that. However we have shown that Moss will get a big gainer at least once a game. Teams are going to have to start game planning around Moss, which should open up the rushing lanes for Portis quite a bit.

The other thing we need to get rid of the is WR screen. Man, I am so over that play. Unless its a fake, like someone else suggested. Ugh.

[AJ_Skins]

There's a possibility of an intelligent discussion, to be sure. Unfortunately, intelligence in the discussion can not begin with the premise you come to it with, which is that Brunell is in only because of Gibbs' blind adoration of him and not because Ramsey is not ready for the full offense as a starter and, frankly, because Brunell is more efficient.

That's your assumption about my thinking, not what I've ever said. I've speculated on every reason I could think of why Gibbs made the move, but ultimately it comes down to him being cautious, rightly or wrongly, with the QB position. The fundamental reason I was so strongly against Brunell playing was how poorly Brunell had played up to this point. Today's game eased my mind to some extent.

I guess the million dollar, unanswerable hypothetical is, would we still be 3-0 if Ramsey hadn't been pulled? Nobody knows. It's my belief that if he was in there, playing reasonably well and improving, teams would be much more scared of us in the passing game, and with good reason.

[AJ_Skins]

The other thing we need to get rid of the is WR screen. Man, I am so over that play. Unless its a fake, like someone else suggested. Ugh.

We agree on something. They keep calling it, and it keeps not working. At some point you've got to pitch that out, or at least re-design it.

[jrockster21]

There's a possibility of an intelligent discussion, to be sure. Unfortunately, intelligence in the discussion can not begin with the premise you come to it with, which is that Brunell is in only because of Gibbs' blind adoration of him and not because Ramsey is not ready for the full offense as a starter and, frankly, because Brunell is more efficient.

Don't even try, Art. AJ has the debate skills of a 5-year-old. He proved it by saying there was no possiblity of intelligent discussion. We all know by now that his skull is solid steel, and will never be penetrated by any kind of reason. So I wouldn't even try.

[Ghost of]

Bubba,

I still think you're misreading the point.

Teams are retarded if they don't know the Skins can go deep by now. Just doing it once in some games is enough to change up how teams are playing.

I KNOW what a 'threat' of deep play does--I'm saying that it's not the lack of that 'deep threat' that is causing people to crowd the line. I'm saying that even teams that don't necessarily rack up huge big plays, can still see non-9 men boxes.

Basically, my entire point has been about about a balanced passing attack--or the perception of one. I'm pretty sure both teams in the Jets/Ravens games stacked the lines, but it was because the QBs suck rather than the 'lack of deep threat.'

Not saying that's the case here, I think teams are going off of last year, to an extent, but I just disagree with the idea that Brunell hitting Patten in the 4th quarter is going to get guys out of the box. That's why I disagreed with the "a hair off" being the difference between a normal D and one stacked against the run. It will be the threat of an overall passing game, one that is multi-faceted, that will make teams back off(not just Safeties but LBs)

Remember, the CB for the hawks were already giving up big cushion, precisely because teams know the WRs are FAST.

[jrockster21]

Bubba,

I still think you're misreading the point.

Teams are retarded if they don't know the Skins can go deep by now. Just doing it once in some games is enough to change up how teams are playing.

I KNOW what a 'threat' of deep play does--I'm saying that it's not the lack of that 'deep threat' that is causing people to crowd the line. I'm saying that even teams that don't necessarily rack up huge big plays, can still see non-9 men boxes.

Basically, my entire point has been about about a balanced passing attack--or the perception of one. I'm pretty sure both teams in the Jets/Ravens games stacked the lines, but it was because the QBs suck rather than the 'lack of deep threat.'

Not saying that's the case here, I think teams are going off of last year, to an extent, but I just disagree with the idea that Brunell hitting Patten in the 4th quarter is going to get guys out of the box. That's why I disagreed with the "a hair off" being the difference between a normal D and one stacked against the run. It will be the threat of an overall passing game, one that is multi-faceted, that will make teams back off(not just Safeties but LBs)

Remember, the CB for the hawks were already giving up big cushion, precisely because teams know the WRs are FAST.

Yes, but can't you argue that if Brunell is on target on those deep balls that the passing offense is multi-faceted and complete? I mean, he was hitting intermediate balls like nobodies' business. The INT was a fluke, even though it was a bad pass.

[Underwater Ally]

I agree Art, good post! Not putting them away when we have the chance is something I see as a problem that will come back to haunt us sooner or later. Our D hasn't generated turnovers, and our offense didn't turn out any real big plays. Doing either or both of these things would go a long way in helping us achieve that end. This victory was an example of doing the little things well - good protection, decent running game, converting on third and long, etc. But comming off the Dallas game, I think this is a victory that is a good step in the right direction, and one we can build on. Now we need to take this on the road and continue to build. I hope we continue to improve.

[Fred Jones]

Two things I noticed that we need to overcome to move to the next level are receivers making the great catch and creating turnovers by the defense. Nothing turns a game around like turnovers. We have a very good defense, but we need to generate more turnovers.

Besides Moss, who is making the great catch. Any QB is not going to make a great throw every time he goes down field. The receiver has to sometimes come up big. Patten had a chance on the long pass in the second half. Brunell didn't air it out enough and the DB made a nice play. The WR has got to make a great catch to keep the chains moving. I am not saying that the receivers today didn't catch almost everything they should have, but you have to catch the balls your not expected to catch. The receivers need to make the catch that makes the QB look good after an average to poor throw.