Combatant Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Yep. In both season's you're talking an average of a FG a game +/-. That's not good in my mind. If you're close enough for John Hall to kick a FG, you really ought to be able to stick the ball in the End Zone. Hall isn't kicking 55 yard Field Goals. When you get down inside the 20 yard line, and especially inside the 10, there's no reason to have to kick a field goal instead of getting the ball in the End Zone. This becomes increasingly important when you're talking about a league and a team where close games are the norm instead of blowouts. That FOUR point difference between the Field Goal and the Touchdown is quite possibly going to be the difference in a lot of games. Hall has kicked SEVENTY PERCENT of his field goals in the last two years with the snap coming from the 20 yard line or closer. FOURTY PERCENT of them are from inside the 10 yard line. That tells me something about the quality of the offense, and what it says is not positive in any way. Mass, I like talking to you guy, and I am in no way shape or form trying to tell you how to think but damn............try to be positive about something for once. You always have good support for your comments, but try to use them in a positive manner. Now that I am done preaching, it is frustrating when we're inside the 20 and don't get inside the endzone but that's part of the game. I don't know the numbers, but I don't think our red zone stats were not that bad this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bhutanibeast Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 how about score more touchdowns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No_Pressure Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 The K.C. offense was built around a big, strong, talented, and quick offensive line that was the best in the NFL in pulling. They ran screen passes and traps better than anybody in the NFL for a reason their line was great. The WR's werent huge factors steady producers but not a focal point of the offense, if a team was doubling up say Santana Moss, Cooley and Portis would become the head of our offense. The QB is not supposed to be a scrambler. This was not a very very play action heavy offense like Gibbs likes to run with Brunell but rather a more drop back passing game. Basically look at what you need for the KC offense. A big talented offensive line- we have it. A smart QB who can make the throws- we have 3 at the moment. A talented fast shifty runningback- Portis. A talented hard nosed tight end that can block and catch all the passes- Cooley, check. We even got something they dont, a 1500 yard pro bowl reciever and a defense so we dont lose games 39-35 like K.C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 What is with the bashing of the offense and scoring TDs? If I'm not mistaken, we were one of the better teams when we got down inside the opponent's 20 yard line last year. The improvement from '04 to '05 was incredible. Mass, kicking one FG per game (while scoring 2.5 TDs) is not bad at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iceman330 Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Well, he's known for keeping D's off-balance so expect lots of plays that you didn't see coming. There will probably be less audibles. From what I understand, he doesn't like QB's to audible much; he expects the play he calls to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazhog Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 I know one thing... Adding Saunders to "Gibbs, Bugel and Breaux"... As a REDSKINS fan... I feel blessed by GOD himself!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme Posted March 9, 2006 Share Posted March 9, 2006 Throwing to more than one receiver would be a step in the right direction. if all we saw on passing were bombs to santana, and short routes that cooley turns into 20+ yards, i'd be more than happy with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 What is with the bashing of the offense and scoring TDs? If I'm not mistaken, we were one of the better teams when we got down inside the opponent's 20 yard line last year. The improvement from '04 to '05 was incredible. Mass, kicking one FG per game (while scoring 2.5 TDs) is not bad at all. I don't know what our Red Zone percentage was last year. I do know that Hall was 14-14 kicking field goals inside that area. My problem is that in a league where the teams are SO equal in talent and ability we can't afford to give up those four points very often. ESPECIALLY when you're talking about kicking 8 fieldgoals from inside the 10 yard line. Two of them from the 1 yard line (which makes me sick to my stomach). Our defense is good enough that if we occassionally turn the ball over to the opponent inside their own 10 yard line, I feel confident we're not going to get scored on. Obviously you want to get the three points most of the time but I really think that Gibbs, Saunders and Co. need to be AGGRESSIVE down in that area of the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Mass, I like talking to you guy, and I am in no way shape or form trying to tell you how to think but damn............try to be positive about something for once. You always have good support for your comments, but try to use them in a positive manner. I understand where you're coming from Gunny and I thank you for the compliments. I am a pessimist. I don't see the glass as half-full or half-empty. I see it as... It isn't completely full so why should I waste my time even looking at it? My pessimism and view of competition come from my personal experiences growing up. I won't bore everyone with the full description and explaination. Just don't expect to see any "In Gibbs I Trust", Kool-Aid drinking posts from me any time in the near future. Now that I am done preaching, it is frustrating when we're inside the 20 and don't get inside the endzone but that's part of the game. I don't know the numbers, but I don't think our red zone stats were not that bad this year. Yes it is frustrating and it is also part of the game. A large part of my problem with the situation is that there are times when it looks like we play for the Field Goal instead of playing for the Touchdown. The playcalling and execution seems to get too conservative. Like we're more afraid of losing the opportunity to kick the field goal than we are interested in getting the ball in the end zone. Obviously the Field Goal is a better option than not getting any points at all. I think we've determined that the Redskins were scoring approximately 2.5 TD's and 1 FG per game this year. Now imagine if that ratio was simply 3:1 instead of 2.5:1. We're talking a difference of 3-4 points a game and that could/would have made a difference in THREE of our losses (Denver, TB, and Oakland). Just something to think about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Gunnyhud, thats exactly what i was saying... Ramsey is the guy who can throw the 20 yard routes, Brunell the guy who cant but can throw the screens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 i think brunell proved to us last year that he can still make a lot of the throws that an NFL QB has to make. he threw a lot of good deep balls (see brunell to santana vs dallas) and showed that his arm strength was still there (see brunell to santana TD vs san diego). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 He's going to introduce the groundbreaking new concept of.... scoring three touchdowns in a playoff game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatant Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Gunnyhud, thats exactly what i was saying...Ramsey is the guy who can throw the 20 yard routes, Brunell the guy who cant but can throw the screens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 What is with the bashing of the offense and scoring TDs? If I'm not mistaken, we were one of the better teams when we got down inside the opponent's 20 yard line last year. The improvement from '04 to '05 was incredible. Mass, kicking one FG per game (while scoring 2.5 TDs) is not bad at all. agreed - with our defense if we average 21 points a game we win 10 to 11 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Against Denver, Oakland, San Diego, and Tampa Bay an extra field goal would have won or tied the game. Honestly, what type of score you get is less important than how often you score and how effective your offense is at getting inside the 35. Getting a field goal on every possession is more productive than getting a touchdown every third possession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddub52 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 thats a sick sig gunny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 The major difference is the 4th quarter run-run-pass-punt will be gone. No more nail-biting 4th quarters and more Spurrier-style running up the score on teams. Our offense really is better than the stats indicate because we spent so much time running out the clock. We will stretch the field more and make defenses pay for stacking up to stop Portis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRay Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I think you're going to see pretty much what he did when he the Chief's offensive coordinator I do not see a lot of things changing with his system. I think you will see him use Portis like he uses Holmes etc.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swissarmy47 Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Throwing to more than one receiver would be a step in the right direction. We've got more than 1 receiver? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mass_SkinsFan Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 Against Denver, Oakland, San Diego, and Tampa Bay an extra field goal would have won or tied the game. Let's look at those games.... Denver: Novak kicks FG's of 34 & 36 yards (snaps from the 16 & 18 yard line) Tampa Bay: Hall kicks FG's of 33 & 40 yards (snaps from the (15 & 22 yard line) Oakland: Hall kicks FG's of 24 & 45 yards (snaps from the (6 & 28 yard line) On FOUR of those six kicks the ball was snapped from inside the 20 yard line. On one the ball was snapped from inside the 10. As I've said before, that both frustrates and infuriates me. When you get down there you have to put the ball in the end zone. Honestly, what type of score you get is less important than how often you score and how effective your offense is at getting inside the 35. Getting a field goal on every possession is more productive than getting a touchdown every third possession. The problem with that philosophy is that we currently have a league where you can't count on getting 3 opportunities to kick the field goal. You NEED to maximize every scoring opportunity nowadays because you just can't be sure that you're going to get that many chances to score. The league is too even/equal for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghetto-smoove Posted March 10, 2006 Share Posted March 10, 2006 I think he will play smashmouth football, and use play action to go deep. Of course this is the philosophy of Gibbs, but I think Saunders will just add wrinkles to it. I definately think Saunders will employ ALOT more 3-4-5 wr sets ( if we acquire the depth to do so ) and will also run from these sets. This will spread the field for portis and open running lanes. I think u can say goodbye to the 1 wr sets Gibbs still loves. I think we will be more wide open in the redzone to produce more scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.