EnFoRcEr_uPu Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Besides the obvious... We all know of the additions to our team in both the staff and roster, but why or how do you think we will be successful this season on offense? Personally, I think the shear fact that our offense won't looking anything like our offense from the past few years will make it almost impossible for teams to game plan for us(especially Week 1). My guess is that will lead to our offense seeing a lot of zone coverage, which for the type of wideouts we have would be a field day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigredskin77 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 More recieving threats= less people in the box less people in the box= Easier for portis to run. easier for portis to run= Time of possesion More time of posession= victory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jofizz Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 I think it's obvious that our offense will be much more productive next year. However.. With the new additions to the team, it does nothing for team chemistry. This team needs to gel to be successful. I would say that's the most important factor there. It seems everyone is happy with all of the new additions and hopefully that's true. If this team gets the chemistry it had during that six game streak at the conclusion of last season, this team will be very tough to beat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 portis 1700+ and recievers 3200 yds recieving and about 500-600 for cooley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J3553 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 i can't give spacific reasons. all i know is that's we're freakin unstoppable on paper. i guess we'll have to wait and see what happens. is it august yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philip Pease Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 From what I have read (here and elsewhere) our new offensive head coach likes to mix it up so as to keep defenses guessing as to what is coming at them. Last season defenses knew we were going to run or first and second downs and a roll left pass on third. We were very predictable. This year I expect to see more passing on first and second down and I expect more of passing from the pocket (so the whole field is in play) instead of the roll-outs (which narrow the field by half or less). I expect we will pass all over the field to lots of different receivers (picking the best match-up). For example that WR screen (or quick pass in the flat) will not just go to Santana; but may go to the receiver on the other side if that is the mismatch. To counter the rush we will use the draw, or the screen pass, or those quick timing patterns. Last season defenses played to stop the run on first down and came with the blitz with double team of Santana and rolled to the side where our QB was going. That won't happen this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjbrown Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 They might not be if they don't get o-line help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 The Skins look solid along the offensive line, at WR, at TE, and at RB. The only real question marks are QB and OL depth. The Skins could survive (knock wood) a Portis injury or a Moss injury. An injury to just about anyone on the OL would be tough. And QB, as we all know, is the single most important position on the field. Brunell played heroically down the stretch, but the man is pretty old to be playing a kid's game. I'm cautiously optimistic about the Skins offense. I don't think ARE or Lloyd are great WRs, but they don't need to be. Moss has that covered. And Cooley and Portis are Pro Bowlers in my mind. So the talent is there. It all comes down to quarterbacking, as it always does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooooley47 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Al Saunders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ_Skins Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Al Saunders That's the main reason for hope. If we had a QB who could really throw the football downfield and put pressure on the defense, we could turn into an offensive powerhouse overnight. Brunell has never been that kind of QB, and he definitely isn't at this stage of his career. Campbell was not that kind of QB in his one good year in college. Assuming we trade Ramsey and go in with Brunell, Campbell and Collins, what is likely to happen is that they'll try to find some way to merge Saunders' approach with Gibbs's ball control approach in a way that masks the deficiencies at the QB position. I have a feeling the new WR acquisitions may find themselves without quite as much to do as they would like, as we continue to focus on the running game and the short pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stroupjr Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 My biggest concern on offense is the QB position. We can be loaded at all of the other positions, but without a steady QB, we can't take advantage of all of the talent. My concern is that Brunell is shaky like at the end of last season (and like 2 years ago) due to injury/age. I'm not sold that GB will make it an open competition at QB at training camp although I am hoping for it. I would love to see JC at the helm to start the season. That way, we have some athleticism (like when Brunell scrambles for first downs) and a young guy to take over for the future. We would just need JC to manage the game and not force anything and I think he can do that. Only time will tell w/ the QB position this year, but that position will make or break us in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Al Saunders. Simple as that. I disagree with the zone comment. Our recievers excell more in a man-to-man environment, because they are guys who are great when the ball is in the air(Moss, Lloyd). In a zone, you have to have a QB with a strong enough arm to fit the ball in between the zone, which Brunell doenst have. But against man to man, you can let our reciever go up and make a play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IM A REDSKIN FAN Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 JASON CAMPBELL! (YEAH I SAID IT!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuckDallas81 Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 They might not be if they don't get o-line help. I think the play of the o line is gonna be a big factor in how our offense performs I'm satisfied with the starters we have on the line but we definately need more depth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gayformoss Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 Defense will be as good as ever. And with the addtions of Lloyd, Randle El, and Al saunders, get a little o-line back-up help and...... lombardi trophy #4 here we come!!!!!!!!! :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 More recieving threats= less people in the boxless people in the box= Easier for portis to run. easier for portis to run= Time of possesion More time of posession= victory :applause::applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gayformoss Posted March 16, 2006 Share Posted March 16, 2006 plus as far as Qbs go I would rather have Brunell than Mcnabb(choker the eagles WILL NEVER WIN a super bowl w/ him) or Drew please sack me bledsoe. and I would take cambell before over rated eli any day!!!!!!!! p.s. the Eagles would have been better off getting rid of mcnabb and keeping TO you gotta love owens just for what he did to dallas and having the guts to speak the truth about mcnabb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sknsrbck26 Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 I think our O will be great because of one person. AL Saunders, he lead the chiefs with no Wr and a Beast T.E. and a average QB(at the time) plus a amazing RB. We have Beast Wrs and great T.E.(Cooley) and a good QB (Brunell) and a great RB. #1-#3 O this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwsleep Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 Al Saunders Yup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underwater Ally Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 Same three reasons it was successful last season. 1) Clinton Portis 2) Clinton Portis 3) Clinton Portis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted March 17, 2006 Share Posted March 17, 2006 Because the receiving group cant possibly match the pathetic results of the WRs opposite Moss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.