The offense.... it's Brunell.

[Bigmuss1]

Brunell is killing us, I'm not denying that. The 3 picks were flat out bad. However, why in the world are we not running the ball out of the eye formation with Sellers at fullback and Cooley at H when it is 3rd and 1. Instead, we go shotgun and try some pulling guard draw play. They tell us we are a running team and we don't stick to it, they tell us we can throw the ball down field and we haven't since the 49ers game. We need to bail out our D or it could get bad sunday.

The only good news is Dallas scored two field goals against us the first time and a fluke flea flicker. We need to be ready for that cute stuff!!

GO SKINS

[The Sisko]

I stand by the idea (and I never relented on this) that while I was happy for Brunell's (short-lived) improvement, that we'd have been better off with the other guy. Many expressed the concern Brunell would wear down or slip into old habits. Dude is not a pocket passer, the fact he had a few games where he was is an aberration as far as his Washington career is concerned. The overly deep drops, the backpedaling to give pass rushers a STRAIGHT LINE, the looking at the rush and not downfield, the locking onto one receiver (not just for a particular receiver on a given play, but the same one, play in and play out) it was all there from jump. The boost Mark got from throwing the two TDs to Moss has dissipated.

Now he's only a little better than last year and I'd remind you that he could have been replaced some time ago to give Pat or even Jason some time to get acclimated. Patrick did better with a similarly conservative(even including roll-outs and half rolls) game plan last year.

It's funny how everyone will engage in the mental acrobatics to justify anything Gibbs does (but far fewer than before) or to forgive Mark Brunell's lackluster efforts and FEAR, but when it was the other guy, these same cowards couldn't be more critical (except cats like Bubba, who back the team in either circumstances or Om who is even-handed, I know he'd back Patrick if things happened out differently.)

I forgot to mention this in my first post but I agree with you. I said last offseason that we needed to consider bringing in an OC and posted guys we should maybe look at. Maybe I'll dig up that post sometime today.

This season's offense (during the time Brunell was healthy) was only slightly better than last year's. We need to bring in someone with Air Coryell roots (the Rams' OC or QB coach might be a place to start) to get things going offensively. A mix of the Rams passing game, Portis playing Marshall Faulk and our power running would be a beautiful thing to see.

Since this thread has referred to the play calling as one of the issues. Let me ask the guys who've been around in our glory days a question about offensive playcalling.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Gibbs back in the day have a almost 3-4 new plays every game?? I remember watching as a kid and saying, i've never seen that before.. that was cool. Am I right about this?

The reason I bring this up because I don't see that anymore with Gibbs. Once in a while we see something but it was very constant back in the 80's and 90's that he'd have about 3 or 4 new plays that the other team hasn't seen before. It just seems we are running the same set of plays with a few sprinkled in every 2 to 3 games.

Thoughts?

I remember Doc Walker saying that Gibbs used to change the playbook every 4 weeks since that was how often teams got film of the opponents. That way whenever a team got film on us it was of little use.

However, I don't know if that would work today. With F.A. you just can't keep guys as long to let them gain that knowledge base to switch things around that much and not have a total mess on the field. However, I'm sure he is changing up some subtle things periodically. Sounds like one of those chat questions if you ask me:)

[GSF]

I forgot to mention this in my first post but I agree with you. I said last offseason that we needed to consider bringing in an OC and posted guys we should maybe look at. Maybe I'll dig up that post sometime today.

This season's offense (during the time Brunell was healthy) was only slightly better than last year's. We need to bring in someone with Air Coryell roots (the Rams' OC or QB coach might be a place to start) to get things going offensively. A mix of the Rams passing game, Portis playing Marshall Faulk and our power running would be a beautiful thing to see.

I remember Doc Walker saying that Gibbs used to change the playbook every 4 weeks since that was how often teams got film of the opponents. That way whenever a team got film on us it was of little use.

However, I don't know if that would work today. With F.A. you just can't keep guys as long to let them gain that knowledge base to switch things around that much and not have a total mess on the field. However, I'm sure he is changing up some subtle things periodically. Sounds like one of those chat questions if you ask me:)

Air Coryell roots? You do know who was Coryell's offensive coordinator was, don't you?

[GSF]

It's not like Gibbs can't figure out how to pass the ball Yusof.

[Die Hard]

This is the question SkinsHokiesFan asked 7 or 8 pages ago, and I repeated 5 pages ago...but DH has yet to answer.

Are you serious??? We held Dallas to 13 points in a tremendous defensive performance. In case you forget, the only way they could get a touchdown was on a trick play...and since you're so quick to negate anything positive about our special teams TD, truly a trick play is just as bad.

I'm surprised at the negativity, DH. What I'm more surprised at is your unwillingness to answer any questions that could potentially poke holes in your theory. You just seem to be all doom & gloom...

Oh, how the mighty have fallen. I feel bad for you...I don't think you're becoming a chicken little, but your lack of confidence and your intent to spread it to the rest of us, well...if it looks like a chicken and quacks like a chicken...you know why AJ_Skins is so berated on this board? Because he refuses to argue the points that poke holes in his theories, or makes up lies to defend them. Now you wouldn't lie, but you aren't defending your point of view, which is a little shady. Not that you have to...I mean you were "The Man" for however many years.

Why don't you respond to what I posted ? These two teams are almost statistically identical -- this game will come down to who wants it, nothing more, nothing less. Just as every Skins/Cowgirls game in the history of the rivalry has done, this will come down to the who ****ing wants the game. The Cowboys have been just as crappy as the Skins the past 5-6 years, but still whomped on us. They are just as good as we are this year. Brunell is looking older as the year goes on, especially because he is getting hit more frequently.

Since when did you become a drama queen?

"Answer me. Answer me dammit. I deserve an explanation. I replied to your post dammit. You are obligated to reply to every post challenging you! Why haven't you responded to my post 5 minutes after I posted it at 5:00 AM in the morning. Oh, have the mighty have fallen".

Seriously, take a chill pill dude. You're beginning to freak me out.

You want to call me a hater. Check my posting history. Up until this thread... I've had maybe 5 posts all friggin year :laugh: Yeah, I see how my prolific posting history can infect this forum with negativity.

I think you need to take a break from the board dude. I think you're losing your head.

[Gallntfox]

229 replies...................enough already.............give us the punch line Die Hard!!!!

[Oldfan]

Air Coryell roots? You do know who was Coryell's offensive coordinator was, don't you?

Joe started coaching as a graduate assistant under Coryell at San Diego State. He coached the O-line for Coryell at St. Louis before he was promoted to OC.

Gibbs popularized the H-back scheme but he credited Coryell as its author.

[Destino]

Honestly I think we are seeing the reason we drafted JC. The coaching staff isn't stupid, they know what they have. We have a need at QB but we gain nothing by having the head coach come on TV and express no confidence in the guys we do have. So we drafted one and are making the best of a limited situation this season.

[Die Hard]

This is the question SkinsHokiesFan asked 7 or 8 pages ago, and I repeated 5 pages ago...but DH has yet to answer.

Are you serious??? We held Dallas to 13 points in a tremendous defensive performance. In case you forget, the only way they could get a touchdown was on a trick play...and since you're so quick to negate anything positive about our special teams TD, truly a trick play is just as bad.

I'm surprised at the negativity, DH. What I'm more surprised at is your unwillingness to answer any questions that could potentially poke holes in your theory. You just seem to be all doom & gloom...

Oh, how the mighty have fallen. I feel bad for you...I don't think you're becoming a chicken little, but your lack of confidence and your intent to spread it to the rest of us, well...if it looks like a chicken and quacks like a chicken...you know why AJ_Skins is so berated on this board? Because he refuses to argue the points that poke holes in his theories, or makes up lies to defend them. Now you wouldn't lie, but you aren't defending your point of view, which is a little shady. Not that you have to...I mean you were "The Man" for however many years.

Why don't you respond to what I posted ? These two teams are almost statistically identical -- this game will come down to who wants it, nothing more, nothing less. Just as every Skins/Cowgirls game in the history of the rivalry has done, this will come down to the who ****ing wants the game. The Cowboys have been just as crappy as the Skins the past 5-6 years, but still whomped on us. They are just as good as we are this year. Brunell is looking older as the year goes on, especially because he is getting hit more frequently.

Statistics?! That's the crux of your argument? You want a pat on the shoulder for drudging up statistics to show how eerily similar these teams are.

Here's a few stats:

(1) Statistically, our offense and defense was ranked higher than the Giants when we played them earlier this year. When we both had the same record. We lost 36-0. That's what statistics will get you.

(2) We've lost 14 of the last 16 games against Dallas. And yet, how many of those years did we finish AHEAD of the Dallas Cowboys in the standings? What good are rankings and statistics.

Stats are for the mathematicians to study AFTER the game. They've got nothing to do with anything going into the game.

Ask me about the odds that Miami was going to be the Chargers last weekend!

What are the odds we'd get in a shootout with the Tampa Bay Bucs a month ago?

What were the odds we'd lose to Oakland a few weeks ago... a 4-9 team right now?

You simply cannot discount flea-flicker plays. They are no different than any other play in an offensive arsenal. If executed correctly, is no different than play-action pass (which, essentially, is what the play is). Or a reverse. An offensive play is an offensive play. Richie Anderson's half-back pass for a touchdown to win the game counts.

Unlike a kickoff return... which is simply good fortune. However, it's unfortunate that the Redskins needed some good fortune... to defeat the Phoenix Cardinals.

You know, the team we're statistically better than (on defense and in the win column). You know, playing for our playoff lives and relatively healthy to boot.

And yet, we needed kickoff return for a touchdown.

Who the hell needs an offense? Great Gibbs.... keep calling those kickoff returns for a touchdown. Gets you the "W" every week.

What's wrong with Brunell? He's done. He's hit the wall. Just like every QB does at some point in their career. Happens to... hmmm... every single QB that's ever played the game. Must be shocking to you though huh?

You give a QB enough chances... and he's bound to have a good day. The reality is... in nearly 2 years of starting for the Skins... how many 250+ plus passing days has Brunell had? Ponder that.

I mean, it's not like you're going to see Brunell's leg fall off... and you're going to say "Yup, he's done. He needs to retire now". You think Tim Couch forgot how to throw a football?

At some point, you lose it.

[GSF]

Joe started coaching as a graduate assistant under Coryell at San Diego State. He coached the O-line for Coryell at St. Louis before he was promoted to OC.

Gibbs popularized the H-back scheme but he credited Coryell as its author.

Yeah, I know. He was also the OC in San Diego for a few (2 or 3, I can't remember) seasons under Coryell, and had a big part in designing that passing attack. I'd say that qualifies as Coryell roots, wouldn't you? Or do agree with Yusof that the QB coach of the Rams would be better?

[FootballGuy2677]

Well.. Time for our defense to win us a game!

kinda hard when both of your starting cornerbacks are out and you have no depth there.

[Die Hard]

Honestly I think we are seeing the reason we drafted JC. The coaching staff isn't stupid, they know what they have. We have a need at QB but we gain nothing by having the head coach come on TV and express no confidence in the guys we do have. So we drafted one and are making the best of a limited situation this season.

Exactly.

Brunell currently has 8 interceptions and it was mentioned he had 10 fumbles going into the game on Sunday (far and away more than the 2nd place person) and I believe he fumbled again last Sunday - recovered by the Skins.

That would put him in the top 3 in turnovers for the QB position on the season (Brett Favre and Aaron Brooks). Now, if Brunell was protecting the ball... I could understand keeping him in the game. Managing the game.

But we're not seeing that.

Our defense isn't the '85 Bears. Or the 2000 Ravens. We can rely on the defense... but at some point we're going to need the offense to contribute to win games. And right now, it's playing with one-hand tied behind its back.

It's amazing what 2 unimpressive wins against bottom feeder teams will do for the average Skins fan. So typical.

Where's McCants these days? I voted for him 10x to go to the Pro Bowl.

[HailYeah]

I will say this one thing as I was at the game too. Brunell had a horrible game but only one of the picks was his fault. The other one (not tipped) that looked awful was completely Betts' fault. Right after he threw Brunell went over to Betts and started explaining the route to him (which he obviously muffed big time). Then on the bench there were three coaches showing Betts their clip boards and yelling at him to think more.

Brunell was bad but this doesnt mean the Cowboys will kill us. People have been saying Brunell is done for years, he's hit the wall, etc., etc., etc. They still got stop Portis and figure out how to get by #21.

[Om]

Just curious, Tony ... given your opinion of Brunell at this point, if you were Gibbs, what you do Sunday?

[jrockster21]

Since when did you become a drama queen?

"Answer me. Answer me dammit. I deserve an explanation. I replied to your post dammit. You are obligated to reply to every post challenging you! Why haven't you responded to my post 5 minutes after I posted it at 5:00 AM in the morning. Oh, have the mighty have fallen".

Seriously, take a chill pill dude. You're beginning to freak me out.

You want to call me a hater. Check my posting history. Up until this thread... I've had maybe 5 posts all friggin year :laugh: Yeah, I see how my prolific posting history can infect this forum with negativity.

I think you need to take a break from the board dude. I think you're losing your head.

I would expect more from you, DH...a personal attack? Come on, now. I wouldn't have thought it was that easy to get under your skin. I guess if you're posting that "we're going to get killed by Dallas," then you're already over the edge. I wanted you to respond to my post because I respect your opinion....but if you'd rather attack my character and call me a drama queen, then do your thing, bro.

By the way, I never called you hater. I should have placed a smily next to the line "if it looks like a chicken and quacks like a chicken"...but I would have though using the word "quacks" when referring to a chicken would have been enough to tell it was in jest. My apologies that you took it to mean I thought you were a hater. Do you honestly think I'm that dumb? You're one of the originals, you've got a JKC avatar -- I'm not retarded.

Check my posting history. Up until this thread... I've had maybe 5 posts all friggin year :laugh: Yeah, I see how my prolific posting history can infect this forum with negativity.

It should be apparent from the responses in this thread the amount of weight your opinion carries around here, DH. So yes, when you post "we are going to get killed by Dallas," it gives weight to all the real haters and chicken littles. Someone else already posted this, but all you're doing with that line is giving them ammunition. Maybe you're truly blind to the amount of power your posts (or any mod, really) carry, I don't know. But yes, that one line of one post spreads more negativity than 1,000 one-line, hater posts. And I say that with all possible respect.

[Die Hard]

Just curious, Tony ... given your opinion of Brunell at this point, if you were Gibbs, what you do Sunday?

I would have put in Ramsey at the half last Sunday... and as long as we're in the playoffs... he'd finish the season. As soon as we're out, I'd play Campbell.

[illone]

Brunell played a bad game yesterday. Gibbs even made comments to the fact that the Cards threw some new looks and defensive packages at us.

Regardless, we pulled out the W. It's too late in the season to be worrying about what went wrong, blah blah.

Save it for the off-season.

:wewantd:

[Mordy]

I don't know about us having a bad offense, but it's definately INCONSISTENT. Afterall are offense scored 28 points against a Tampa Bay Defense which was ranked 1 at the time. Playcalling definately needs a look. And Brunell definately needs to step it up.

Let's just hope they make some adjustments this week, and Santana Moss burns their sorry a s s e s again.

[Die Hard]

But yes, that one line of one post spreads more negativity than 1,000 one-line, hater posts. And I say that with all possible respect.

We got killed by the Cowboys when we beat them this year. We got killed by the Chargers this year (people are discounting missed field goals, turnovers deep in our territory, etc)... even though people thought since we took them to overtime that we could and SHOULD have won that game.

And on the other end.... we took it to the Broncos and Chiefs. I wouldn't say we "killed" them.... but we beat them solidly.

And I view the Oakland Raiders and Arizona Cardinals games a wash. Which to me... is very disappointing.

I define the quality of play of a football team beyond the scoreboard.

[HailYeah]

Ramsey would have thrown 6 picks in that game and been sacked for a loss 5 or 6 times as well. I don't get it...is the problem that "Brunell has hit the wall" or that he is "only using half the field."?

[Om]

I would have put in Ramsey at the half last Sunday... and as long as we're in the playoffs... he'd finish the season. As soon as we're out, I'd play Campbell.

To be honest, at halftime I wondered if we'd see Brunell on the bench too, if he started the 2nd half as poorly as he ended the first ... but damnit, he led the team to the tying touchdown (with a little help from CP, of course) and tied the game instead.

I hate when that happens.

Kidding.

Fact is, as we both know, Gibbs WILL replace a quarterback if he feels he has a better option. There is nothing in his history to suggest otherwise. If he was convinced that Patrick OR Campbell gave this team, right now, it's best change to win, he'd pull the trigger.

That he hasn't tells me all I need to know. It tells me that, even now, even given Mark's clear struggles with the downfield ball, he doesn't view Patrick as a viable option. And it tells me that Mark and Campbell will be competing for the starters job next spring.

*

And just for grins ... can you imagine what the reaction around here would have been had he PULLED his starter at halftime, with a 6-6 team still alive for the playoffs, and the team had gone on to lose the game? Ouch.

[Mooka]

From what I saw, Gibbs kept it simple due to the offense being unable to execute. We couldn't execute, had trouble on 3rd down against the Cardinal blitz, and Brunell's safety valve in Cooley was having an off day.

The only trend I see is Brunell not looking towards the other receivers, but these guys study so much film, I'm sure its being addressed.

Since the Oakland game Brunell has definently worn down, he's still capable, against the Chargers he was stepping up in the pocket and Gibbs was running some more complicated passing routes. The protection broke down in the 4th of that game though.

We'll see if Gibbs will open up the playbook against Dallas, because we're not going to be able to run over their defense. Santanna burned them on double moves and I'll expect to see some more until Dallas proves they can cover it. As for Brunell, he is the best chance we have. If he lays another egg at home, then Ramsey will have a shot.

[jrockster21]

Statistics?! That's the crux of your argument? You want a pat on the shoulder for drudging up statistics to show how eerily similar these teams are.

My only point, and I was using the statistics to back that up, was that this game is a toss-up. We've been equally terrible the past few years, and the Cowboys win because they wanted it more. Remember 1991?

Here's a few stats:

(1) Statistically, our offense and defense was ranked higher than the Giants when we played them earlier this year. When we both had the same record. We lost 36-0. That's what statistics will get you.

(2) We've lost 14 of the last 16 games against Dallas. And yet, how many of those years did we finish AHEAD of the Dallas Cowboys in the standings? What good are rankings and statistics.

Only goes to further my point that anything can happen on Sunday, especially in the Redskins/Dallas game. You of all people should know the storied history of this rivalry. True, its lost some luster the past few years with the one-sidedness of it, but that Monday night win, deserved or not (we'll have to agree to disagree about that one), rekindled the fire in the rivalry in my eyes.

You simply cannot discount flea-flicker plays. They are no different than any other play in an offensive arsenal. If executed correctly, is no different than play-action pass (which, essentially, is what the play is). Or a reverse. An offensive play is an offensive play. Richie Anderson's half-back pass for a touchdown to win the game counts.

Unlike a kickoff return... which is simply good fortune. However, it's unfortunate that the Redskins needed some good fortune... to defeat the Phoenix Cardinals.

A kickoff return may have slightly more of a "luck" element to it, but how can you discredit it by saying its "simply good fortune?" Teams practice kickoff returns, they design wedges, all that stuff. Its execution, just like a flea-flicker or play-action pass. I called the kickoff return for a TD because I saw the huge seam that was opening up, Antonio just needed to break that one tackle and he was gone. He almost took 3 kicks to the house, not just the one.

Not to mention, who's to say we didn't score on offense on that drive? I mean...we got the KR for a touchdown, but we had momentum from our last drive going and I believe we'd have marched down the field and scored again. True, we had more possesions that we didn't score on afterwards, but by then we already had the lead.

You know, the team we're statistically better than (on defense and in the win column). You know, playing for our playoff lives and relatively healthy to boot.

And yet, we needed kickoff return for a touchdown.

Who the hell needs an offense? Great Gibbs.... keep calling those kickoff returns for a touchdown. Gets you the "W" every week.

Great idea!

What's wrong with Brunell? He's done. He's hit the wall. Just like every QB does at some point in their career. Happens to... hmmm... every single QB that's ever played the game. Must be shocking to you though huh?

What's with the continued personal attacks?

You give a QB enough chances... and he's bound to have a good day. The reality is... in nearly 2 years of starting for the Skins... how many 250+ plus passing days has Brunell had? Ponder that.

I mean, it's not like you're going to see Brunell's leg fall off... and you're going to say "Yup, he's done. He needs to retire now". You think Tim Couch forgot how to throw a football?

At some point, you lose it.

The fact is we don't need Brunell to have a 250+ yard passing day to win...and comparing Tim Couch and Brunell is a wee bit of a stretch, man. And yes, at some point all QBs lose it, and Brunell is old. Its quite possible that he is done. I just was wondering why you thought that way -- if you'd seen or heard something different than the rest of us. Because granted, he had a terrible day passing, but Gibbs has said that two of the picks were becuase receivers were running the wrong route. One of them bounced off Cooley's hands. What is your response to this?

[Oldfan]

It should be apparent from the responses in this thread the amount of weight your opinion carries around here, DH. So yes, when you post "we are going to get killed by Dallas," it gives weight to all the real haters and chicken littles.

I think the number of response to this thread are due to Die Hard's posting of his observations which offered insights into the reasons for the failure of the passing game which has been ongoing since the Giants game (Tampa Bay exception).

His prediction that Dallas would kill us was rash in my opinion but it didn't detract from the worthiness of his post.

[The Sisko]

Yes, I am aware of Gibbs connection to Air Coryell. C'mon, give me some credit guys. My point in suggesting that was to bring in someone with experience in a similar offensive system so as to avoid starting over from scratch. However, if it's necessary I wouldn't be averse to bringing in someone with different roots either.

FWIW, I did dig up the post in whichI batted around some names for a new OC for us . Strangely enough, it wasn't last offseason but after the Pukes win. After seeing more of our offense during the season, I think our need for a breath of fresh air on the offensive side of the ball is obvious.