Did Saunders Arrival Upset The Apple Cart?

[Om]

With all due respect, bulldog's post would be a lot more compelling if this was Week 4 or 5. One week is a pretty flimsy data pool to draw any kinds of conclusions about how a change in offensive coordinators will affect the team over the course of a season and beyond. It's well written and reasoned and all, but it's still one game---and the FIRST game, at that.

Like I said, let's talk again in a month or so and see if things don't look a whole lot different.

[redman]

As I said in another thread, we're trying to shift into a higher gear and we're certainly going to lose speed while we're pressing down on the clutch during the transition. That's where we find ourselves now.

I think by the end of last year we were offensively sound and not outdated. I agree that we were playing to the strengths of our personnel. I also think that Gibbs is intellectually honest and humble enough to realize that he was running out of ideas about how to make the offense more explosive, and thought that for us to continue to improve it would require a fresh mind in here, and one that had not been away from the game for 12 years like he had.

Let's remember one thing - Gibbs is in every one of those offensive meetings that Saunders is, and of course Portis is no wallflower. The line is made up entirely of veterans now. Someone's going to remind Saunders what got them to the playoffs last year.

We're a work in progress. My only real fear is that we're going to be 1-3 or something before we hit our offensive stride, because in this division that would be a killer. I'm NOT worried about us ultimately getting where we want to go offensively.

[PlayAction]

Not to be a repeat, but nice post Bulldog.

Coach Gibbs has always wanted people guessing at his offense, and I believe he felt it became too predictable. While I think his solution was a bit extreme, my hope is that they will take the new information (the vikings game) and develop a more run oriented offense.

.

Skins were very predictable when they had essentially 1 WR and a TE to take the pressure off of Portis. but, would the Offense have been as predictable with the new WRs?

Bulldog did a good job expressing the concerns that many fans had with the coming of Saunders. I recall Jansen and others on the OL saying that they were glad that Spurrier left because they were always passing the ball and now they would have the opportunity to start hitting people again. Saunders Offense doesn't rely on the max protect as often so the OL has to again pass block without as much assistance. They aren't up to it. Fans "knew" that. Not only does Saunders spread the field more than Gibbs but he relies upon timing patterns. That is a big change and will take time to implement. Brunell is probably on his last year. Campbell may have been the perfect QB for the Gibbs Offense but is does he fit with Saunders' Offense? Can the Skins achieve success before they have to start jetissoning some players with artificially high contracts? Lots of questions and no answers.

[bird_1972]

Talk to me again in a few weeks, when 1) the starting offense actually has a few games under its belt in the revised system, and 2) when the defense is able to get the opposing offense off the field enough enought where the Skins revised O can actually find a rhythm. The Minnesota game wasn't so much about the new offense trying to find its way as it was about the defense unable to stop third down coversions.

I hear you, but I worry that in a few weeks, it may be too late if we continue to lose games. This year was supposed to be a legit SB run, not a rebuilding year. Bulldog's point that the new offense might have set us back a season is thought-provoking at the very least.

[Om]

I hear you, but I worry that in a few weeks, it may be too late if we continue to lose games. This year was supposed to be a legit SB run, not a rebuilding year. Bulldog's point that the new offense might have set us back a season is thought-provoking at the very least.

I hear you, too. Which is why I too said we should revisit this in a few weeks.

[kleese]

Everyone keeps talking about the offense, but my fear is that our D has jumped the shark. I believe that Archuleta is a DOWNGRADE from Ryan Clark, and was an awful signing. I also believe Springs is essential for the D and has a career history of being injured. In addition, the DL rarely generates pressure with the front 4. I am very concerned that GW was doing it with smoke and mirrors last year.

[Om]

Everyone keeps talking about the offense, but my fear is that our D has jumped the shark.

Not everyone.

Talk to me again in a few weeks, when 1) the starting offense actually has a few games under its belt in the revised system, and 2) when the defense is able to get the opposing offense off the field enough enought where the Skins revised O can actually find a rhythm. The Minnesota game wasn't so much about the new offense trying to find its way as it was about the defense unable to stop third down coversions.

I believe that Archuleta is a DOWNGRADE from Ryan Clark, and was an awful signing. I also believe Springs is essential for the D and has a career history of being injured. In addition, the DL rarely generates pressure with the front 4. I am very concerned that GW was doing it with smoke and mirrors last year.

Based on one week, this is hard to argue against. My feeling, since we are doing this already, however ... is that Archuleta is going to take a little time to find his niche, just as Clark did when he first got here. But I also believe his upside once he gets there will be considerably higher than was Clark's.

As far as Carter, it's hard not to be a little impatient, given what he was brought here for and how crucial we all know that role will be. Early returns are iffy, no doubt. Sunday night will be a great chance for him to allay those concerns. Like everyone else, I'll be watching that area closely.

As to "smoke and mirrors," I'm not sure when that became a bad thing. If it gets done, it gets done. If it doesn't it doesn't. Anyone could have coached the '85 Bears D and looked pretty good. It's what you can do with normal levels of NFL talent that separates the great coaches from the pack.

Bottom line, week one was a wake up call for everyone--fans, coaches and players alike. Happily, there's a week two just around the corner. And a week three after that. And a week four ...

[kleese]

OM-- I am basing my opinion of Archuleta and Carter on what they've done in their CAREERS-- not just this one game. I've always thought AA was a vastly overrated player-- yeah, he can blitz and play the run, but he might be one of the worst coverage safeties in the NFL-- and teams will figure out how to expose that.

Carter simply wasn't very productive in SF. Lots of excuses as to why he wasn't productive, but excuses nontheless.

"Smoke and mirrors" is fine with me as long as it gets done-- like you said. But I am afraid that perhaps the clock has struck midnight and our defense is about to turn into a pumpkin.

[Om]

OM-- I am basing my opinion of Archuleta and Carter on what they've done in their CAREERS-- not just this one game. I've always thought AA was a vastly overrated player-- yeah, he can blitz and play the run, but he might be one of the worst coverage safeties in the NFL-- and teams will figure out how to expose that.

Carter simply wasn't very productive in SF. Lots of excuses as to why he wasn't productive, but excuses nontheless.

"Smoke and mirrors" is fine with me as long as it gets done-- like you said. But I am afraid that perhaps the clock has struck midnight and our defense is about to turn into a pumpkin.

That's fine, kleese. But I'm going to base mine not solely on what Archuleta and Carter did with other teams in other schemes. Williams and Gibbs saw something in those two that they think they can put to good use in their defense. Until I actually get to see them IN that defense for a reasonable amount of time, I'm simply not going to make what I consider highly premature judgments.

As far as your concerns about GW and the D in general, coming off week one I think we all probably share them to some degree. It looked an awful lot like it did when C. Griffin was out last year, like it didn't take much for things to start to disintegrate if even one of the key pieces wasn't there.

Here's hoping that assessment is premature as well. We'll know more Sunday night.

[Tastes Like Chicken]

You have to learn to walk before you run. We are taking a bit of a step backwards (short term) in order to be able to make giant leaps forwards (long term). Did we set J Campbell back by switching offenses? You bet we did. But in the long run, he'll be better off for it. Is our offense any more anemic than it was 7.9 quarters through the season last year? Nope. But we will get better. Much better. Springs and Portis are major gears in this team. Getting them back, and at 100%, will enable us to make a much more fair comparison. I hated the outcome of that game as much as anyone (I was there and went hoarse from screaming so much). But I saw the light at the end of the tunnel. Last year, we ran out of gas when our offensive weapons were limited to 3 players. This year, we are loaded with weapons and hopefully a backup QB that Gibbs trusts, unlike last year, in case Brunell gets injured.

[fortdick]

the Redskins drive to the playoffs last year was based on making a firm decision (after a number of tough losses) to run the football and be a more physical football team. . . .

I didn't think the offense needed a conceptual overhaul. To me the addition of a second wide receiver capable of 1,000 yards and 60-70 catches and a better conversion rate on third downs on the ground would give Gibbs the tools to be a bit more aggressive on offense in 2006 and score more points while still maintaining the identity forged in a 10-6 campaign.

First, a #2 receiver doesn't make 60-70 catches for 1000 yards. that is a #2 receiver. Second, ho wcan you maintain the identity of a run oriented offense if you throw that much at your #2 receiver? May if you play 7 qtrs a game!

BTW, good luck to the skins and hope no one gets hurt in your loss to the Cowboys this week!

[Tastes Like Chicken]

I think he meant that someone was needed to take the pressure off of Moss and Cooley.

Someone besides Jimmy Farris and Tyler Jennings.

[Leonard Washington]

et tu bulldog? :doh:

exactly...i'm kinda shocked. this would be a nice post at maybe week 3 or 4.

[Chachie]

Temporarily, yes.

[joeknows]

enough already with the "Its just the first game crap!!" al i read last month was "Its just preseason!!" Guess what? .... it is the regular season now and time for excuses has come and gone. in our division every single game on the calander counts. there is a lot of parity in this league now and it is hard to get a leg up over the competition. if we start off losing the first game of the season , which we shouldnt have lost, and then we miss the playoffs and the superbowl is won by a team that we did by chance beat during the season..... then what will you say? im gonna say hey!!! we shouldnt have lost that game against the vikes in week 1!!!! posts like "brunell played ok" well dangit ok wasnt good enough was it?

you homers need to take all losses more seriously!!! dont find solace anywhere in a losing game. if portis ran for 250 and we lost...... it wasnt good enough!!!!

Quit giving our team.... my team.... a bye!!! Snyder pays these guys to much to continue to underperform! are they that disrespectful that they cant step up their play for a man who does everything he can to surround his players with the best of everything?

not to mention.... making them millionaires!!

[tr1]

et tu bulldog? :doh:

With the exception of red zone play, the offense was pretty good...very refreshing.

As for AA and db play, lack of pass rush fixes a ton of db issues. Sometimes, teams match up very well with our D-line personnel...sometimes (maybe Sunday night?) they don't. It's a long season.

I'm surprised at your trepidation, too, bulldog.

[desertfox59]

For those of us expecting a SB run 3-4 weeks is too late.

Here's another old Andy Griffith saying for you, "If it aint broke, don't fix it."

the thing is, it was broke. We did switch to a more run oriented game and what happened?

We won six games in a row...but at what cost...it's not about winning Six in a row. It's about winning it all.

Gibbs saw our o-line slowly start to falter and get worse and worse over that stretch of those smash mouth ground games. To the point where Ray Brown (god bless him) was blocking air on counter treys in the seattle game. Cory Rayhmer was.....well you all saw. Let's not forget what happended to Randy Thomas in that power game. How about CP's shoulder?

As much I love gut-and-power. last years team (o-line mainly) just couldn't do it for a consistant stretch of time physically. Gibbs realized that he can't stash high quality players on IR and Practice squad like in his first tenure to replace these players when the wear and tear of the "Gut and POwer" style sets in. Hence the change to a more offensive line friendly scheme.

But have no fear bulldog...when the going gets tuff...that Ground game will start firing on all cylinders.....I just hope it's not too early to wear our overrated o-line down.

But that means we need win 60% of these finesse games we play. Pull out the tricks Saunders...do it now...! we'll grind it out in December...but put those points on the board...I don't care what % of the playbook you have to show doing it...!

:helmet:

[Om]

It's a serious oversimplification to suggest that the winning streak at the end of last year was due to Gibbs' simply deciding to run the ball more. That was part of it, yes ... as was the defense getting healthy and utterly dominating ... as was the team catching that elusive "wave" that good teams get sometimes and ride deep into the playoffs ... as were probably about a hundred other factors that only those inside the locker room will ever know about. Let's not reduce the major swings in entire seasons to nebulous claims like "well, they finally decided to start running the ball."

Seriously.

[ThomasRoane]

We're taking one step back to take two steps forward.

[G-Prime]

We're taking one step back to take two steps forward.

Accurately simple.. If people can't understand that there is no hope for them.

[Thirtyfive2seven]

I wonder how long it will take before Gibbs pulls in the reins a little bit on Saunders and starts calling some plays. I don't like how the team seems to be struggling with an identity crisis.. Who are we? What do we do best? Do we run the football, do we spread it out and throw the ball ? I think they looked a little confused.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

It's a serious oversimplification to suggest that the winning streak at the end of last year was due to Gibbs' simply deciding to run the ball more. That was part of it, yes ... as was the defense getting healthy and utterly dominating ... as was the team catching that elusive "wave" that good teams get sometimes and ride deep into the playoffs ... as were probably about a hundred other factors that only those inside the locker room will ever know about. Let's not reduce the major swings in entire seasons to nebulous claims like "well, they finally decided to start running the ball."

Seriously.

That and the fact that aside from the Cowboys' game, we were playing teams that were either extremely beat up or falling apart. In the NFL, the schedule dictates a lot of things.

If you played the Steelers last year when Maddox was playing, you were probably going to win. If you played them during the last two months, you were going to lose.

So it was a comination of getting healthy, getting hot, and playing a lot of confused teams.

And I still don't know why people are excited bout Andre Carter. The guy has stunk for most of his pro career. I think Williams is a great coordinator, but not a magician.

[tr1]

And I still don't know why people are excited bout Andre Carter. The guy has stunk for most of his pro career. I think Williams is a great coordinator' date=' but not a magician.[/quote']

This post will look pretty silly when he ends up with at least 10 sacks this year...look for maybe a couple Sunday night.

[redman]

That and the fact that aside from the Cowboys' game' date=' we were playing teams that were either extremely beat up or falling apart. In the NFL, the schedule dictates a lot of things.

If you played the Steelers last year when Maddox was playing, you were probably going to win. If you played them during the last two months, you were going to lose.

So it was a comination of getting healthy, getting hot, and playing a lot of confused teams.

And I still don't know why people are excited bout Andre Carter. The guy has stunk for most of his pro career. I think Williams is a great coordinator, but not a magician.[/quote']

Getting the production he's been getting out of guys like Joe Salave'a, Phillip Daniels and Lemar Marshall implies to me that he's we'll be just fine with Andre Carter.

[tone_dubbz]

Too much over analyzing if you ask me. Saunders influence will be beneficial to the our offense. You just got to give it time, Rome wasn't built in a day!!!