The Truth About Al Saunders

[G-Prime]

a lot of "truths" posted lately :laugh:

I think we need some "lies" posted now to balance things out

Joe Gibbs is washed up and should retire/be fired.. He sucks...

There happy now?? Some fresh lies for you

[whitejimmy]

Exactly. And that's why Saunders has been lobbying -- allegedly -- for Collins to get a chance since the Cowboys game.

Interesting rumor. Do you remember the source? I'm not doubting you, I just want to read more.

[Skinsnsox]

Every team has a capable backup these days, so dont pull that "Trent Green was out" BS.

As for KC offense, here you go:

2001-16th in offense.

2002-1st in offense.

2003-1st in offense.

2004-2nd in offense.

2005-6th in offense.

Every team has a capable backup??? Capable of what???

The goal of the NFL is to win the SB...we definitely don't have a QB capable of that right now.

[Om]

Um, we knew there'd be a learning curve.

Saunders' offense is based on timing ... getting that timing takes, well, time. Five weeks into year one hardly qualifies as sufficient time to start making sweeping pronouncements.

If the defense had shown up this year, we'd be at least 4-2 and everyone would be giddy and fully understanding the offense is still a work in progress. Yes, we'd still be frustrated with Brunell's unwillingness and/or inability to stretch the field, but we'd be pretty confident that by the end of the year, based on the flashes we've seen, that we'd be in pretty good shape to make some playoff noise.

Nothing's happened so far on the offensive side that we shouldn't have seen coming. I talked about it probably taking half a season for them to really get going. Others thought it would take longer, some hoped it would take a little less. But most of us who try to think this stuff through understood that it wasnt' going to be rolling right from the start.

What we assumed, wrongly, was that the defense would be at least a recognizable facsimile of the last two years versions, to help ease the learning curve process on the other side of the ball.

Saunders and the O will be fine over time. Whether it's going to be enough, FAST enough, to compensate for the suddenly backpeddling defense and get this team in position to do anything in December remains to be seen.

[desertfox59]

Exactly. And that's why Saunders has been lobbying -- allegedly -- for Collins to get a chance since the Cowboys game.

We should have never brought Todd Collins here.....or for that matter Al Saunders.

[Hooper]

Interesting rumor. Do you remember the source? I'm not doubting you, I just want to read more.

It's all over the Warpath board. Their version of Andyman claims it's the truth. All I know is that Saunders is giving pretty political answers when asked about the qb situation. "Joe Gibbs decides who the starting qb is."

[whitejimmy]

It's all over the Warpath board. Their version of Andyman claims it's the truth. All I know is that Saunders is giving pretty political answers when asked about the qb situation. "Joe Gibbs decides who the starting qb is."

Thanks for the tip. The rumor was originated by someone within the organization and reported by PCinOZ, who has been reliable.

I'm buying it.

[Oldskool]

Every team has a capable backup??? Capable of what???

The goal of the NFL is to win the SB...we definitely don't have a QB capable of that right now.

:doh: We actually have 2 capable backups. And that's capable of playing QB in the NFL.

[dbarton3]

He sucks. 700 page play book my a**. That proves to me that he is selfabsorbed, egotistical, and erogant. In the words of Walter Sobcheck (big lebowski) "keep it simple Dude. When a plan gets too complicated everything can go wrong." "Donny, shut the F*** up.":laugh:

You got that right! What the hell is wrong with running CP on first and second?

He avg's over 4 a carry. I'm sick of 3rd and 10,12 or 15!

Great movie by the way.

[zoony]

bulldog... if you want the TRUTH about Al Saunders, here it is.

Joe Gibbs brought in Al Saunders for one reason and one reason only. To establish his offense in Washington over the next couple seasons so that when Gibbs moves on, there will not be a vacuum like the one we witnessed when he left the first time.

Gregg Williams failed in Buffalo not because of what he did on the defensive side of the ball, but because the Bills offense was horrid.

Gregg Williams knows this. Joe Gibbs knows this. The TRUTH is that they sat down with Dan Snyder this past offseason (Joe, Gregg, and maybe Buges, that is), and started mapping out Gibbs' transition into either a full blown retirement or a GM type roll.

Fact is, with Gibbs/Buges/Breaux all likely moving on at once, that would leave the offense in shambles, and put a 500 lb gorilla right on the back of Gregg Williams.

Gibbs learned his lesson after he saw what happened to the organization when he left the first time... Al Saunders is his insurance policy that it won't happen again.

Look for Saunders to find his groove over the next few seasons, and to have complete autonomy over the offensive side of the ball when GW grabs the reigns. Actually, wouldn't surprise me if it was next year.

.....

[zoony]

A few other points to consider:

-You almost act as if Joe Gibbs has no say in the offensive game plan. Do you really believe that? Do you believe this is 100% Al Saunders? You think we don't run enough (and I agree), but think back to Gibbs 1 final years... the posse, etc. Those teams were all heavy passing teams. Think back to this time last year... we were throwing the ball way too much, until we got on a roll with the running game at 5-6. I think you're putting too much of the offensive performance on Saunders shoulders.

-If you think that Saunders had nothing to do with KC's offensive performance and that it was driven mainly by talent, check KC's offensive ranking this year. And sorry, "Willy Roaf retired" is not a valid argument here.

-If a coach could determine everything he needed to know about his QB (or any player) from watching game tape... draft picks would be a sure thing, and 1st year coaches would go to Superbowls. You say

"his comment after the Dallas game that he was still learning the talent and how to use it to me is inexcusable."

I think you need to rethink that one.

[zoony]

but he IS the major reason that Jason Campbell's progression has been retarded for yet another season in having to learn a new offense from scratch instead of being able to build directly on 2005.

I would put that on Jason Campbell. To be the #3 gametime QB well into his second season tells me something is wrong with the picture.

It's not like Saunders came in and implemented a WC offense, or even MartyBall.

He comes from the Coryell tree... the verbage might be a tad different and the scope of plays is obviously larger... but the progression, reads, and most importantly offensive philosophy are similar/same.

....

[wbar3383]

Blah Blah Blah

A turnover here, a FG there and there would be a different record and you wouldnt be saying this. Al saunders would be your hero.

Playing the blame game during losing streaks comes in second only to the hindsight warriors

[Fifty Gut]

gut & power offense > Saunders' offense

[Peregrine]

there is no magic inherent in the 'Saunders' approach. in fact there are coordinators out there that are just as capable of taking a team with good skill players and getting similar results.

in Kansas City, Saunders had a quarterback in Trent Green that was mobile in his prime and had an arm strong enough to make all the throws. Saunders had the benefit of a front office that gave him first Priest Holmes and then Larry Johnson, as well as a truly solid offensive line with one HOF caliber player in Willie Roaf and several other pro bowlers over the years.

at receiver there was no 'special' talent, no Torry Holt or Marvin Harrison. But the Chiefs had the best TE in the game in Tony Gonzalez and worked in speedy receivers like Kennison and Morton that were veterans and could get down the field.

I really don't see Saunders as being a genius for getting productivity out of this group.

Are we similarly crediting Tony Dungy for the productivity of Manning, Harrison and Co. over the past several years?

the acquisition of Al Saunders set this team back in 2006. no he is not the reason we can't tackle on defense right now or open holes in the run game.

but he IS the major reason that Jason Campbell's progression has been retarded for yet another season in having to learn a new offense from scratch instead of being able to build directly on 2005.

and he is also responsible for not properly evaluating LONG BEFORE this team set foot on the field against the Vikings that there were passes that Mark Brunell could and could not throw.

his comment after the Dallas game that he was still learning the talent and how to use it to me is inexcusable.

how many hours of film work and work in the OTAs and camp did it take for Saunders to evaluate Brunell's arm and where the strengths of this offense lie, namely in the rushing of Clinton Portis.

For someone with 22k posts on this site, im amazed to see that you know so little about football, or even lack the basic functional ability to be able to read basic stats.

"Failed to open up holes in the run game". Um. We are ranked 7th in the NFL running the ball. Thats with an anemic passing offense, and a defense that cant get off the field and give the ball BACK to the offense. Thats considering also that we have had to pass alot because of being well behind in 2 division games.

"the acquisition of Al Saunders set this team back in 2006" Already this offense has had more production in 2006 then it has had for either of the past 2 seasons. The offense is ranked #11 in the NFL.

You want to sit and maintain that the Chiefs were good because of their personel? Look at the cheifs offense in their first season without Saunders? Kennison, Green(preinjury), Gonzalez, Johnson, all are still there, yet the offense isnt just struggling. Its HORRIBLE. The raiders, browns, bill, texans, ravens, and bucs are the ONLY teams with a worse offense this season than the Cheifs. Thats good company.

You actually mentioned in the post about Saunders inability to see Brunells adequacy, yet act as if you have failed to watch a single skins game this season. Have you SEEN the number of screens we have run? Far more than any other NFL team. We have attempted 1 deep ball this entire season. Why? Because Saunders calls the plays, and Saunders knows how inept Brunell is at throwing the ball down field. Yet you criticize him for doing the very thing you say he isnt doing...

[SkinsHokieFan]

If anything this year, the offense has been inconsistant. Which to be honest should have been expected with a new play caller and from what it appears to be a fairly new scheme, as well as some key new parts

Dissapointments? Saunders SHOULD rely more on CP, but its been pretty clear, sans the Jacksonville game, that CP has not been 100 percent this year. Saunders needs to scale down a bit, then go big time

But if you recall in 2001, there were ups and downs for the Chiefs O. They were winless coming into DC early in the year and plastered 45 points on a reeling Redskins team

And clearly MB is a problem because of his inability to throw over the middle and hit the deep out. Did you see the lasers Byron Leftwhich was hitting against us? If Brunell could do that, Saunders could really open this thing up

There have been some nice glimpses on this O, but its been far too inconsistant. Has JC's progress been halted for a year? Maybe, but I also think Gibbs really feels that this year they have to go with MB and give it the best shot with him before JC takes those lumps that any first time starting QB will

Its too early to make any judgement on Saunders right now, personally I do like the shifts and motions and the routes because these WR's are toasting DB's. If Brunell could consistantly get the ball downfield and if Saunders would rely on the run more (i.e more then 14 times to CP against a poor run D) we could do some things

[Chris Worthy]

Between having a broken finger during OTA's and not enough reps in pre-season when did he have time to evaluate Mark and what he can do with this offense?

Better yet when did he get some chemistry with anyone but who he looks at every single time...that right Moss.

Bottom line is Saunders knows what he has and he is calling the plays to suit the talent level, so you can look at that anyway you want.

[Ghost of]

How much of the feelings about Saunders are based on the mirage of offensive performance last year?

We won emotional divisional games vs. the Giants and Cowboys at home. We beat a TERRIBLY WEAKENED Eagles team on the road and we needed serious help to do that. It was all Portis and the D in that particular game. We looked like garbage on O vs. Tampa in the playoffs. We beat the CARDINALS last year and needed a KICKOFF RETURN to do that. We beat a Rams team with a third string QB and their season pretty much over.

It was a MIRAGE. Not so much Portis' performance but it seems the turnovers created by the D was an aberration and Brunell had his best games BEFORE the winning streak. So where is this idea that we had a top-flight O last year? The O was explosive earlier (KC, SF) because Mark has a few good games. But he fades.

We end up playing on the knife's edge because of this limitation on our offense (middle of the field.)

Don't blame Saunders. Our offense CANNOT resemble anything he's done before because the QB he is stuck with cannot execute a Trent Green or Warner-like passing attack. That's how you break the Cover 2, that's you create space for Portis, that's how you get defenses off guard.

Saunders don't need to prove nothin'. Hell, Gibbs O in 2004 and 2005 doesn't really look like it did in his glory years. What's the one constant in these offenses? We have new wideouts, Jansen in and out, and different run blocking schemes. But the struggles and even some of the 'good' look damn near the same.

Against the Titans, Brunell threw 18 passes at receivers — and 15 were thrown to Santana Moss, even when surrounded by multiple defenders. At least three times Brunell threw to him when two or more defenders were close to Moss.

:doh: Yeah, that's on Saunders.

[Jumbo]

Definitely agree with ya, zoony, on Joe's idea of a legacy having a lot to do with getting Saunders, though I'm sure he figured he'd help some short-term, too. I've posted a fair amount on that matter recently.

And while it's not a popular topic, what with all the deserved attention going to our QB/defensive issues and our injuries, many experts were saying that even under best conditions there might be a whole season, or at least half-season, of serious learning curve with Al's offense. I think that reality is still in the mix of what we have to go through and it's only exacerbated by our other problems and instability. Not a doom-n-gloom comment, just thinking about it.

[SkinsFTW]

Bottom line is that they aren't using Portis. They aren't running the ball and it makes our defense look worse than it is when they are on the field for 35+ minutes a game instead of the 24 or less they were on the field last year without significant injuries. But of course that is my opinion, maybe some expect the defense to look better spending 33% more time on the field while not 100% as they were for most of 2004 and 2005 and you saw the difference when Griffen was out for a couple games in 05.

[DiscoBob]

Everyone seems to have rose colored glasses about last year's offense. This years version is at least as good as last years. The difference (as numerous people have said) is that our defense can't stop anyone. Last years defense + this years offense, and we are at least 4-2, or maybe 5-1, because the Dallas game would've gone a lot differently if we were playing good defense....

[fansince62]

there's some merit to bulldog's post. the gap, however, is that he doesn't (and can't) know what the interaction has been between Saunders and JG. There's more to it than just AS's knowledge of the personnel. one has to assume that other coaches are involved in shaping the offensive gameplan - as well as the roster that has to be worked with.

[dbarton3]

bulldog... if you want the TRUTH about Al Saunders, here it is.

Joe Gibbs brought in Al Saunders for one reason and one reason only. To establish his offense in Washington over the next couple seasons so that when Gibbs moves on, there will not be a vacuum like the one we witnessed when he left the first time.

Gregg Williams failed in Buffalo not because of what he did on the defensive side of the ball, but because the Bills offense was horrid.

Gregg Williams knows this. Joe Gibbs knows this. The TRUTH is that they sat down with Dan Snyder this past offseason (Joe, Gregg, and maybe Buges, that is), and started mapping out Gibbs' transition into either a full blown retirement or a GM type roll.

Fact is, with Gibbs/Buges/Breaux all likely moving on at once, that would leave the offense in shambles, and put a 500 lb gorilla right on the back of Gregg Williams.

Gibbs learned his lesson after he saw what happened to the organization when he left the first time... Al Saunders is his insurance policy that it won't happen again.

Look for Saunders to find his groove over the next few seasons, and to have complete autonomy over the offensive side of the ball when GW grabs the reigns. Actually, wouldn't surprise me if it was next year.

.....

THIS ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE!