chef8181 Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Here's what kills me with our offense. Since the Giants game teams have doubled Moss preventing him for the most part from getting downfield. Now to do that you have to bring a safety over. Remember this is the safety that was "in the box" during the first part of the season to stop us from running Portis down everybody's throat. So what happended to the running game? This is Gibbs after all. If defenses are doing that to us then why are we not running the ball like crazy? And why did we abandon the run in the 2nd half of the Raiders game when we were in control? :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canesluver Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Not running in the second half of the Raiders game is a mystery to me. I know Portis fumbled twice, but to go from 17 carries to 5 is ridiculous in a game we were tied or leading most of the second half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwebst1 Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 With the OL we have, I just can't believe that Portis doesn't put up Shaun Alexander yards and TD's week in and week out.... either they are underachieving and overpaid OR the scheme, gameplan, and predictability of our running attack is completely subpar. I think it's the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slm2856 Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 With the OL we have, I just can't believe that Portis doesn't put up Shaun Alexander yards and TD's week in and week out.... either they are underachieving and overpaid OR the scheme, gameplan, and predictability of our running attack is completely subpar. I think it's the latter. Portis needs more carries.. I think it is that simple. We abandon the running attack so quickly it's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 I agree with this thread. Mystified by the lack of faith in Portis. Because he had two fumbles does that mean you give up on the run? Does that mean Gibbs isn't going to run this week? If Gibbs is upset with Portis, than he should put the backup in and run with that guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 It sounds like Gibbs just had a brain fart. It happens sometimes when you are in the middle of a game, and you think you can get something going, and you forget that there are other options. I also think we had a few situations where we had long yardage situations where it may have not made sense to run the ball. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofAlvinWalton Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 So what happended to the running game? :mad: LT Samuels LG Dockery C Rabach RG Thomas RT Jansen . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canesluver Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 It sounds like Gibbs just had a brain fart. It happens sometimes when you are in the middle of a game, and you think you can get something going, and you forget that there are other options.I also think we had a few situations where we had long yardage situations where it may have not made sense to run the ball. Jason We did have a couple penalties on 1st down that did put us in the hole, but there were still plenty of 3 and outs with no running play used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fpickering Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 We abandoned the run in the 2nd half and turned out to be a huge mistake. I think that the fumbles were the cause of this along with the fact that the Raiders were covering our 2nd WR with single coverage a lot of the game and the CB in that single coverage was a guy named Asomugha. I suppose that Gibbs and Brunell liked that matchup. Portis was running really well minus the fumbles and I wish that we would have stuck with him and played a more ball control offense and eaten up the clock. Those 3 and outs killed us. Here's what kills me with our offense. Since the Giants game teams have doubled Moss preventing him for the most part from getting downfield. Now to do that you have to bring a safety over. Remember this is the safety that was "in the box" during the first part of the season to stop us from running Portis down everybody's throat. So what happended to the running game? This is Gibbs after all. If defenses are doing that to us then why are we not running the ball like crazy? And why did we abandon the run in the 2nd half of the Raiders game when we were in control? :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 We did have a couple penalties on 1st down that did put us in the hole, but there were still plenty of 3 and outs with no running play used. That's why I suggested the brain fart. Sometimes you get locked into something that you think is going to work, and forget to go back to what did work for you. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canesluver Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 That's why I suggested the brain fart. Sometimes you get locked into something that you think is going to work, and forget to go back to what did work for you.Jason Forgetting about our running game and the play calls on 3rd and less than 10 were my biggest regrets from the Oakland game. Not only didn't we run the ball, but we also seemed to want to throw deep too much. After the first half success of Cooley, what happened? I don't know whether we even threw to Cooley or a running back in the flats on a third down attempt in the second half. The way Oakland pressured us, I would rather see Brunell throw to the flats rather than try a deep ball or throw it intentially out of bounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlsbadd Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 I mentioned this in another thread. Portis was getting good yardage in the first half but fumbled but you should stick with whats working. Tiki Barber had a game where he lost 3 fumbles and still had over 200 yards and the Giants won. When Brunell has a bad game he doesn't get yanked , why should Portis? It also goes back to Portis's running style, he can't cut back and make things happen when he has two hands over the ball for fear of fumbling. I don't know what the answer is except he is to important to our offense to have 5 carries in a half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FootballGuy2677 Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Portis needs more carries.. I think it is that simple. We abandon the running attack so quickly it's ridiculous. exactly....15-20 carries a game...please coach...:doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canesluver Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 I mentioned this in another thread. Portis was getting good yardage in the first half but fumbled but you should stick with whats working. Tiki Barber had a game where he lost 3 fumbles and still had over 200 yards and the Giants won. When Brunell has a bad game he doesn't get yanked , why should Portis? It also goes back to Portis's running style, he can't cut back and make things happen when he has two hands over the ball for fear of fumbling. I don't know what the answer is except he is to important to our offense to have 5 carries in a half. He was definitely covering up with both hands when he approached traffic. He started that after his first fumble. By doing that, he was taking something away from his overall skills. The thing is, he was still gaining some solid yardage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiveStrongSkins Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Easy. Our line is paid off reputation and not production. CP cant get to the second and third level. It is off pure athleticism that he has the yards he has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canesluver Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Easy. Our line is paid off reputation and not production. CP cant get to the second and third level. It is off pure athleticism that he has the yards he has. Very true. Through 10 games, I haven't seen a ton of gaping holes for the guy. He has had a few, but not nearly the amount one would expect. He is doing it with his athleticism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 I think the offensive line has underperformed during the recent 2-5 skid. All the attention has been on the defense and Brunell's ups and downs, but the line is what sets the table for the offense and except for the 49ers game our quarterback has rarely had the kind of time in the pocket that you see guys like Hasselbeck get. Walter Jones and Chris Samuels may be getting paid a roughly equivalent amount of money, but Jones has performed as the best OT in the NFC the past 3-4 years while Samuels has had a whole bunch of excuses. Supposedly, the poor line schemes from the Spurrier days and the inattention of Kim Helton being replaced by Joe Bugel and Rennie Simmons was going to make the difference for #60. Evidently, not yet. And the clock is ticking here nearing the three quarter mark of Year 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.