bubba9497 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/20/AR2006012002000.html Redskins' Cerebral Tack Looks Smart good piece but some flaws #1 Usually, the first thing a coordinator does is look to bring over some assistants from the previous stop. Saunders system of offense, by all accounts, is different, very different from what Gibbs and Joe Bugle and Don Breaks and gang have been doing.So, who's going to help Saunders teach his system to the Redskins? The Gibbs Gang that doesn't know Saunders's system? It would seem Saunders needs at least two or three of the boys in his band to teach the new music. That would mean, not that Snyder would care, having, oh, 23 or 24 assistants, instead of the 21 he has now. And one would presume that if you're paying Saunders $2 million for his offensive expertise, he's the one who is going to call the plays on Sundays. It's fair to say after two years, the jury is back on the 2004 and 2005 offenses and they need to be scrapped. Are the assistant head coach-offense and all of the other coordinators willing to abide by that? The Redskins don't need a hybrid, they need Saunders. Saunders system is GIBBS system, which is Don Coryells system, modified I am sure, but basically the same, and probably much of the same verbiage #2 It wouldn't make any sense to bring Saunders in and not allow him to be the boss of the offense, as autonomous as Williams is on defense. Correct me if I am wrong but didn't Buffalo stop Williams from bringing his trusted defensive assistants like Jerry Grey??? Hello And Lindsey, Blanche, and Jackson... never worked with Williams before #3 But why can't Moss be used the way Carolina uses Steve Smith, who is only the best player in the postseason? Wait didn't Moss finish #2 behind Smith, with only 80 yards less? and a better yards per catch avg? I thought we did use Moss like Steve Smith :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 You see...he must not have understanded that Smith...IS the Carolina offense. We actually have 2 other decent players in ours. 1. Portis 2. Cooley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomoreyuppies Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 i think cooley could have been mvp completely based on the fact he shattered all h-back records and had the most non receiver catches and tds ever. cooley is the god of h-backs, we need to lock him up forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiggoReincarnated Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 i think cooley could have been mvp completely based on the fact he shattered all h-back records and had the most non receiver catches and tds ever. cooley is the god of h-backs, we need to lock him up forever. Whats the difference between H-back and tight end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Wait didn't Moss finish #2 behind Smith, with only 80 yards less? and a better yards per catch avg? I thought we did use Moss like Steve Smith :doh: What Wilbon is talking about is even though when Smith was doubled they were still able to get him the ball. When Moss was doubled we had problems some games getting him the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 21, 2006 Author Share Posted January 21, 2006 Whats the difference between H-back and tight end? Tight End stays on the line of Scrimmage H-Back shifts and moves and is a hybryd, TE-FB-OL-WR, can line up anywhere from the back field to the line, in the slot, and can catch passes, be a lead blocker, trap block, run a play (though very rare) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 #2 Correct me if I am wrong but didn't Buffalo stop Williams from bringing his trusted defensive assistants like Jerry Grey??? Hello And Lindsey, Blanche, and Jackson... never worked with Williams before You missed the point, his take on Saunders leading the O is based on the contract and the fact he pasted up some HC jobs for the skins. Gibbs didn't go all the way to KC just to have him help with the O, Saunders will be running the O. KC under him has had one of the best offenses in the game, based on the power running, different type of blocking. The amazing thing about Saunders was he was able to get production from his QB's without great WR's, with Moss he will lick his chops Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 21, 2006 Author Share Posted January 21, 2006 What Wilbon is talking about is even though when Smith was doubled they were still able to get him the ball. When Moss was doubled we had problems some games getting him the ball. no jbooma he wasn't. and clearly if Moss had as many yards, and a better YPC avg. we did a better job of getting him the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Whats the difference between H-back and tight end? H-Back is a hybrid position, that combines aspects of TE, FB and WR. Basically, Cooley could line up anywhere in the offense. TEs usually just line up on the end, or sometimes get spread out. Cooley could line up in the backfield. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 21, 2006 Author Share Posted January 21, 2006 You missed the point, his take on Saunders leading the O is based on the contract and the fact he pasted up some HC jobs for the skins. Gibbs didn't go all the way to KC just to have him help with the O, Saunders will be running the O. KC under him has had one of the best offenses in the game, based on the power running, different type of blocking.The amazing thing about Saunders was he was able to get production from his QB's without great WR's, with Moss he will lick his chops no I wasn't. :doh: IF YOU READ THE ARTICLE, he was saying having full command of the offense, and would need to bring his assistants from KC to help install it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 no jbooma he wasn't. and clearly if Moss had as many yards, and a better YPC avg. we did a better job of getting him the ball. Yes he was, he talked about it on his show :doh: Just look at the playoffs, Smith has been amazing, Moss has been good, there is a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 no I wasn't. :doh: IF YOU READ THE ARTICLE, he was saying having full command of the offense, and would need to bring his assistants from KC to help install it Well you didn't post that part, all you did was post that one line, just going by what you said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish50 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 I never pay much attention to that overwieght idiot that nobody wanted on thier team when he was growing up (and out) as a kid has to say. Seems like he knows as much about football as I do about ballet, and that's nothing. I'll say this, the few months that I've been here and the many years that I've read Wilbon in the Post, Art is a much more informed and well written writer than Wilbon wishes he could be. If the Post was smart, they would pull a Snyder and steal him from ES and pay him double the amount they pay that clown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey T Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 What Wilbon is talking about is even though when Smith was doubled they were still able to get him the ball. When Moss was doubled we had problems some games getting him the ball. That was our QBs problem, not Santanas' :cool: Delehomme(sp) vs. Brunell. I would take Delehomme @ this stage in their careers. Don't get me wrong Mark. I luv ya man d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aluadan Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 #1 Sorry Bubba but they are different, quite different in style. Just because they came from the same 'school' many many years ago, things have evolved and so have each offense in it's own form. Hell, we all came from our parents but that doesn't mean we're anything like them #2 I'm not exactly sure what point you're trying to make there but all Wilbon seems to be saying is let him run the show on offense which is fine by me. Although, what would we be able to complain about every sunday without the beloved "run, run, pass" offense. #3 This bothered me as well, it didn't matter how many people teams put on Smith, they still threw him the ball. It's been said by both Brunell and Ramsey when he was in there against the giants, if they didn't get thier exact look, they wouldn't put the ball up for him. Sometimes, even against double coverage, you need to put it up there and see if he can beat the defense. As good and fast as Moss is, he should come out often enough and even when he doesn't, his playmaking ability will have great potential to draw flags. That's one thing this offense almost never did, give the recievers a chance to make plays. So what if the guy isn't open by 2 or 3 yards, put the ball up and let him make a play, every other team does it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Well you didn't post that part, all you did was post that one line, just going by what you said What do you think this is, Slashdot? Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 21, 2006 Author Share Posted January 21, 2006 Yes he was, he talked about it on his show :doh: Just look at the playoffs, Smith has been amazing, Moss has been good, there is a difference. yeah he played the Giants... which Moss had 150+ yards and 3 touchdowns against last game, and the Bears for some reason left him in single coverage , with a backup cb covering him most of the game (who slipped twice on TDs) Hey if Moss played those defense's he would have lit up the scoreboard as well. BTW he said the same thing on PTI as he wrote. Implying the Skins didn't use Moss properly... Also lets mention Brunell against TB was horrible. can't fault Moss or the play calling on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 yeah he played the Giants... which Moss had 150+ yards and 3 touchdowns against last game, and the Bears for some reason left him in single coverage , with a backup cb covering him most of the game (who slipped twice on TDs)Hey if Moss played those defense's he would have lit up the scoreboard as well. BTW he said the same thing on PTI as he wrote. Implying the Skins didn't use Moss properly... Also lets mention Brunell against TB was horrible. can't fault Moss or the play calling on that. I am not faulting Moss at all he had a great season, but Steve Smith is the best offensive force in the league, he is on a different level then everyone else and you have to give him his props. I do agree we didn't usevMoss properly, we should have had him touch the ball at least 10 times a game, he can take it to the house on any play. With Saunders here, he is going to make moss more lethal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aluadan Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Ah, forgot to add, if there is one thing you should complain about this article, it's the mention of Martz as a possibility. Now this really makes no sense, Martz style is pass first then pass some more. The Rams have been near dead last in rushing attempts the last 2 season, this simply doesn't make a good fit with the Skins. The Chiefs on the other hand have been in the top 10 the last 2 years and were only 5 attempts behind us this year. They like to pound the ball and it would seem Saunders is a FAR better fit than Martz could ever be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REEGSKINS Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 i think steve smith is a more explosive version of santana moss. and i think jake is by far a better qb than brunell. and im not talking numbers wise . brunell wore down as the season went on , i think he would be better served as a backup at this point in his career. the problem is that brunell will be fresh and healthy again to start camp this year and that will lead to the coaches thinking he is the right man for the job and then around the 5th or 6th game he will be done . i just hope they will lean towards ramsey or cambell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 21, 2006 Author Share Posted January 21, 2006 #1 Sorry Bubba but they are different, quite different in style. Just because they came from the same 'school' many many years ago, things have evolved and so have each offense in it's own form. Hell, we all came from our parents but that doesn't mean we're anything like them . Dick Vermil said before the offense was a version of Joe Gibbs offense in the 80's The TE lines up any where, two TE sets, multiple shifting before the snap (which Gibbs did a lot more of back in the day), one back offense... now I agree they may do things somewhat differently, and the play calling style maybe different... but in essence it's the same offense. Like so many West coast offense are basically the same, but each coach uses it differently, and adds his own spin to it. per WP article Saunders Has Been Known to Mix It Up http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/20/AR2006012001673.html From a historical perspective, the addition of Saunders to Redskins Coach Joe Gibbs staff, a move that was announced by Washington on Thursday, makes perfect sense. Saunders and Gibbs came off the Coryell coaching tree of the 1970s and early 1980s and learned the "Air Coryell" offense, an innovative, attack-through-the air system that has roots going back to Sid Gillman's San Diego teams of the old American Football League.In terms of play calling, Redskins fans will recognize traits of the Saunders offense, an example being personnel groupings that feature Gibbs staples like two-tight end sets and three-receiver formations with pass patterns coming out of bunch alignments (a combination of tight ends and/or wide receivers lined up in a "bunch" on one side of the formation). One key difference is that while Gibbs veered toward a more conservative, ground-oriented approach when he left San Diego to take over the Redskins in 1981, Saunders's philosophy begins with aggressively pushing the ball downfield and then mixing the pass and run to keep defenses off-balance. Gibbs sees virtue in running a play until the defense stops it, but Saunders preaches unpredictability. With that in mind, the Chiefs often ran out of the shotgun formation and passed out of traditional under-center formations, and would often run on third and five or longer and pass on second and short. Saunders almost never called the same play out of the same formation twice in the same game -- or even in a string of games. Two other things made the Saunders offense unique: Perhaps more than any team in football, the Chiefs used pre-snap shifting and motion by players to create mismatches, particularly for Gonzalez, who always draws extra attention from linebackers and safeties. It wasn't unusual for the Chiefs to be snapping the football as the defense still adjusted to the last shift or motion. And Green almost never changed plays at the line of scrimmage. Saunders's philosophy is that any play he calls should work against any defense because of the options within the play. Saunders would call a play from the coaches' box, it would be relayed to Green from the sideline and Green would call it the huddle. Like all veteran quarterbacks, Green sometimes would have liked to have had the option to change a play, but one major bonus of the system was that the Chiefs were rarely hit with delay-of-game penalties. Again Gibbs uses the pre-snap shifting, scaled back lately... and Gonzalez is a H-Back... used like Cooley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Saunders system of offense, by all accounts, is different, very different from what Gibbs and Joe Bugle and Don Breaks and gang have been doing. Who's Don Breaks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCRoughrider Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Well, Wilbon would be right if you were trying to merge a Run and Shoot offense with a Wishbone offense. These two offenses are substantially similar. Next year, we'll still be running Gibbs' offense but you'll see a substantial stream of what Kansas City did with Saunders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Whats the difference between H-back and tight end? You are banned from Redskins fandom!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 Again Gibbs uses the pre-snap shifting, scaled back lately... and Gonzalez is a H-Back... used like Cooley I wouldn't call Gonzalez a pure HBack -- he's more of a HBack/TE hybrid. I don't think he ever lines up in the backfield... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.