Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Surprising comment from Mike Sellers on Channel 9...

wilbur58z

By wilbur58z
in 2005 Archives Forum

What would you like to see the Skins wear as an alternate Jersey?  

68 members have voted

  1. 1. What would you like to see the Skins wear as an alternate Jersey?

    • Theres no need for an alternate jersey
      34
    • Mostly black (like on redskins.com vid) but the #'s gold and outlined in burgendy
      10
    • An inverse of our current jersey. Where burgendy currently is, would be gold and vise versa
      8
    • The Miami U look with some burgendy and gold but major color is black
      11
    • same color schemes but different layout and styles of numbers and lettering
      7
    • other
      6

Recommended Posts

thewagen

thewagen

Posted
Posted
Three back backfield....

Portis, Betts, and Rock in the backfield at once.

Or 5 wideouts

Moss, Jacobs, Thrash, S. Taylor, Patten

Or the double reverse flea flicker screen pass

Think for a minute: The 'Skins couldn't protect Brunell witha 3 WR set. The Beagles have Kearse to rush. NO way in H$11 they go to 5 WRs...might as well pin a steak on Brunell's chest and tell the Beagles it's feeding time. It's going to be some change in O or D philosphy, not just the players.

FS

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Arsenic

Arsenic

Posted
Posted
I remember Gibbs made a switch from a two-back set to a one-back set many years ago. Maybe with the personnel we have here, he's going to switch back?

Sellers has the potential to be a punishing lead blocker and has good hands to catch the ball out of the backfield.

I agree with this idea. With the qoute coming from Sellers, my guess would be he would be invloved in the change that was made.

Look at how they use Lorenzo Neal in San Diego to block for LT (I know CP is no LT, calm down Eagle fans).

I think that the Redskins might start using sellers as a fullback, becuase obviously, we're having problems running the ball consistantly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
illone

illone

Posted
Posted
That's exactly what I was thinking when I wrote that. I think it would be interesting to see what Portis would do with a blocking back...

One would want to immediately translate this to Ladanian Tomlinson and how the Chargers use Lorenzo Neal. I think Portis would do better in this type of system than our current one back system. Portis has great vision and has the ability to make great cuts. Running him off tackle into 8 man fronts isn't productive IMO. Using a lead blocker to hit a "run blitzing LB" or penetrating DE will give Portis more space to actually utilize his vision, why do you think he keeps asking for the draw play?

I hope we do see a 2 back set or even a power I formation. I don't want to turn Portis into a power back but if we keep up what we're doing he's gonna keep slowing down. I admire the guys toughness but he isn't John Riggins or Earnest Byner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bonez3

Bonez3

Posted
Posted
This one makes some sense. Been wondering when the no-huddle would reappear. Gibbs used it to great success the first time around, and I figured when Brunell got the starting nod it was just a matter of time given his experience. We'll see it as some point, I suspect. Sunday makes sense.

We'll see.

And don't sweat Bonez, who apparently is something of an internet tease. We had someone feed him disinformation ... :)

Oh Om,

Your genius is only surpassed by your ignorance.

However, more news to follow...stay tuned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
azmodeus13

azmodeus13

Posted
Posted

How about running out of a two back I formation with three WR?

I can also believe a 4 wr set with Portis running it up the gut with the defense spread...

two backs with Betts and CP - maybe - but I doubt it...

I think that the coaches had best figure out that they are showing way too much with their formations - and if they have finally made the connection they are probably going to start running out of passing formations more.

I believe the Giants did the exact same thing to us... especially on the longer running plays - line up with 2 backs and 3 wr and read the defense to shift to a run or pass depending on the lineup...

Sellers as a lead blocker would be like a mobile OL that doesn't have to pull and leave a gap for a chase down tackler - I would hate to be a linebacker facing him down too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skins11

Skins11

Posted
Posted
You know what? That actually could be it. I didn't see him when he commented on it, but Sellers could of been joking a bit.

Hey, that might be possible if he's used as a fullback. Block for Portis and Betts most of the time, and then get a carry here and there as a change up. This would mean he gets carries AND there is a change in formation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thewagen

thewagen

Posted
Posted
I really hope the change is to have Sellers as a true fullback. I think our running game would really improve.

And then we can make Cooley a true TE, and remove "Stone Hands" Royal from the lineup..he gave me flashbacks of ZEROn PHLEMister this past Sunday.

A shame that it gives Philly things to think about early enough to at least address in practices. If only Sellers had kept his mouth shut, then on game day it would've been fun to see Philly try to react to it real-time. The way defenses rotate these days, a NO HUDDLE makes more sense because it doesn't give the D any chance to disguise their set then have them change just before the snap. They'd have to "show their cards" from the get go, then Brunell could play shooting fish in a barrell...DON'T I WISH!!!

FS

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SoCalRedskinFan

SoCalRedskinFan

Posted
Posted
I didn't want to let the cat out of the bag, but I guess I can trust you guys... The surprise is me. That's rigth, me. Gibbs called me up Monday night and asked me to help. He saw what I did on Madden 06 and was highly impressed.

WOW! I feel much better now gimpy-go get em!!!!:notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jaw3232

jaw3232

Posted
Posted

:eaglesuck

- Brunell wants more options, less max protect.

- Portis wants to be able to choose his holes, not follow a fullback.

- Gibbs has used no huddle in the past.

- Brunell was very successful in JAX the few times they tried the no huddle.

This all points to a no huddle/spread type/single back offense; if indeed there is a "big" change coming. I doubt this would be the staple, but run occasionally throughout the game.

I would like to see it in the first possessions and go off a well rehearsed scripted play selection.:2cents:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
azmodeus13

azmodeus13

Posted
Posted

I agree with the folks who have said Brunell wants more options... plus quit running behind whereever the TE shifts to - I don't necessarily agree with the fact that CP doesn't want to run behind a fullback - if the FB can take on the first hit for him and get him a bit more running room I think he'd be all for it.

I do think that the Denver style of running seemed to work better for CP than the power style, counter trey - be interesting to see if they go to that

I still think they are going to spread it out more and quit broadcasting their runs as much... it's killing CP in there when they do that

Toss sweeps to CP? That might be interesting - kind of worries me with the speed we see in the NFL and how sweeps can get so strung out with the LBs moving so fast - not like college ball

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ross3909

ross3909

Posted
Posted
Wow, I'm shocked no one figured it out yet. I read the whole thread and just a bunch of clown remarks.

But, one of you were close and doesn't even know it.

Does anyone else think this guy is full of sh**?

Only I know what the secret is...and I will tell you on Monday. :paranoid:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...