E-Dog Night Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Joe Gibbs likes trick plays, to a certain extent - especially if you can call a reverse a trick play. But I was wondering if Al Saunders, who will most certainly be calling the plays next year, has a penchant for them. With these WRs in place, trick plays could work well, and often. Randle-El was of course a QB in college, and with his speed, a WR reverse, double reverse, direct snap, or fake-reverse option pass all seem ripe. In a February column, Wilbon suggested that, as a potential Redskin-to-be, Randle El was a good match because he presented that kind of versatility: ...the new offensive boss, Al Saunders, could figure out what to do with a quadruple threat. Is it a stretch to think that Randle El is the piece that could dramatically improve the Redskins' offense?......Randle El caught five passes in a game only once this season, and just 35 in 16 games, 15 of which he started. But he also rushed 12 times for 73 yards, returned one kick and 44 punts, three of them for 70 yards or longer. This season, he completed all three of his pass attempts, one for a 51-yard touchdown. He and Ward take exception to the "jack of all trades, master of none" description that gets hung on both of them. "I don't like the phrase 'trick plays,' either," Randle El said. "You guys call it that, but they're just plays. When run properly, they're plays that work." So the question is, did Saunders run a lot of "trick" plays with the Chiefs? I searched for a while via Google, and didn't come up with many instances. He just doesn't call that many, at least not from would I could find. Maybe he didn't have the personnel to do it? I don't know. Hopefully someone here knows more about it? Chime in please if so. In the end, I think we have an offense ready to do some serious damage. There's a lot of speed on the field with Moss, Randle-El, Lloyd, and Patten in a WR set. I would have to imagine that the intermediate routes are going to be wide open in 3 & 4 WR sets. This should be fun to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDSKINSQ Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 oh its gunna be fun and enjoyable to watch skins games they always are anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spear Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 They obviously have plans for ARE. EVIL plans. Mwahahahaha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amm11387 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 yea i think he mixes it up a bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 To answer your question, I don't think Saunders relied too much on trickery in KC. I think all they've had to do recently is hand off to Priest or LJ and they're O was running fine. Hopefully he earns what we're paying him by mixing a good running game with a good passing game and mixing in some "plays" as Randel-El likes to call them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ItchySkin Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I posted this earlier in a similar thread: Portis above all others is the primary benificiary. Moss would be a logical choice but despite all our air power...our bread and butter still and will be the run. What all these acquisition does is keep opposing defenses honest. You will rarely see teams stack up 8 men in the box. Last year when they did Moss made them pay, so they backed the safeties and Portis had a good year (1500+ yrds). But our lack of decent #2 last year got us in trouble cause teams started doubling Moss...Portis still got his production but it was a matter of teams dbling Moss and stoping portis and containing Cooley (the problem was Cooley lacks ideal game-changing speed despite his pass catching ability). Adding 2 good WRs will keep teams from doubling or tripling Moss. So you will see more 1-1 and we like it that way cause: #1 Moss will burn anyone 1-1, #2 our #2s are better than the opponent's #2 CB, nickle, and even dime (patten, thrash) CBs. If teams play zone, Randle El and Cooley (especially this guy) are known for finding weak spots. As for Brunell, I wouldnt worry about him being able to "read" he's a vet so he can do that...but do worry about his arm and legs. As for Campbell, that's when you worry about the "reading" part of the game as he is yet to take a snap on an actual NFL game (nfl speed etc.). But the good thing about both QBs is that they are both known to make plays with their legs. So we no longer have to have max protect as much (we still will in I-Form) but when we go to our 3 WRs Sets, our Qbs can buy us time even when teams Blitz. In fact Brunell prefered to have less max protection in mid-season in favor of more catchers. After all this is said, NFL is still a chess game, its the minds of our coordinators that will give us favorable match-ups. We had this priviledge with Gibbs but now we have the luxury of having the right players to win individual matchups, especially in our passing game...and we wont have to hesitate to pass on 1st downs this time around. So don't stress too much, 4get about what other skin haters are saying, the fact is, if they dont have good depth in the CBs, they WILL get fried with our speed and talent @ WR (and they still have to worry about cooley, portis and our huge o-line on top of that). HAIL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spear Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 Didn't the Chiefs burn us on a reverse double screen, which we later lifted for ourselves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Dog Night Posted March 13, 2006 Author Share Posted March 13, 2006 Didn't the Chiefs burn us on a reverse double screen, which we later lifted for ourselves? I checked the play by play from last year's game and didn't see it. To answer your question, I don't think Saunders relied too much on trickery in KC. I think all they've had to do recently is hand off to Priest or LJ and they're O was running fine. That's kind of what I thought. I know they run a lot of play action, which makes sense with the running backs they have, but not many options passes. Maybe Priest & Larry can't throw? Seems to me, with their offensive line and RBs, they could get a HB option pass to work beautifully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warpath11 Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 I think our offense will be similar to the Rams offense of '99/'00 when Al Saunders was there and had Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt and Az-zahir Hakim running around. Of course there will be adjustments and we will run the ball a lot more but on passing downs i can see us resembeling that St. Louis team that Saunders helped create. Should be exciting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40Gut Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 KC didn't need to do many if any tricks plays they were putting 35 or more points a game up without them. But i'm sure we will see them because Joe is going to have some input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Full Monty Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 To answer your question, I don't think Saunders relied too much on trickery in KC. I think all they've had to do recently is hand off to Priest or LJ and they're O was running fine. Hopefully he earns what we're paying him by mixing a good running game with a good passing game and mixing in some "plays" as Randel-El likes to call them. Ah---but Saunders has never had a weapon like Randel El at his disposal --- now he does -- and we can watch a good bag of tricks this year. Watch out Portis! You've got company in practice for those option passes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted March 13, 2006 Share Posted March 13, 2006 al saunders play book can be so wide open this year because he could call just about anything and we can make it work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.