Throwing Short on Third Down

[DjTj]

One great thing about the game yesterday was that not once the entire game did Mark Brunell throw a dump-off completion that left us short on third down. I know this has been driving everyone crazy, but maybe Al Saunders took those 50 pages out of the playbook, or maybe Brunell finally realized that to keep his job he might have to actually get first downs now rather than pad his stats.

Our third-down conversion rate still wasn't very good (5/13), but at least Brunell is trying now:

1st Quarter:

3-6-WAS25 (13:38) M.Brunell pass short left to C.Cooley pushed ob at WAS 46 for 21 yards (K.Burnett).

3-5-DAL10 (10:15) M.Brunell pass short right to L.Betts pushed ob at DAL 4 for 6 yards (T.Newman).

3-4-DAL4 (8:35) M.Brunell pass incomplete short left to A.Randle El. PENALTY on DAL-T.Newman, Defensive Holding, 2 yards, enforced at DAL 4 - No Play.

3-1-DAL1 (7:14) L.Betts left end to DAL 1 for no gain (R.Williams, B.James).

3-2-DAL10 (4:34) M.Brunell pass incomplete short left to B.Lloyd (A.Henry).

3-10-WAS34 (2:48) (Shotgun) M.Brunell pass incomplete short middle (D.Ware) [D.Ware]. Penalty on WAS-R.Thomas, Illegal Touch Pass, declined.

2nd Quarter:

3-6-DAL49 (10:46) (Shotgun) M.Brunell pass short right to J.Thrash to DAL 41 for 8 yards (T.Newman, A.Henry) [D.Ware].

3rd Quarter:

3-26-WAS18 (8:37) L.Betts right guard to WAS 26 for 8 yards (K.Burnett, K.Coleman). :mad:

3-7-DAL47 (5:46) M.Brunell pass incomplete short left to J.Thrash. Penalty on WAS-J.Thrash, Illegal Touch Pass, declined. Penalty on WAS-C.Cooley, Offensive Pass Interference, declined.

4th Quarter:

3-7-WAS36 (6:59) M.Brunell pass short left to L.Betts to DAL 43 for 21 yards (A.Glenn, B.James).

3-10-DAL43 (5:32) M.Brunell scrambles left end ran ob at DAL 39 for 4 yards. :mad:

3-7-WAS48 (2:32) (Shotgun) M.Brunell pass short middle to J.Thrash to DAL 35 for 17 yards (R.Williams).

3-3-DAL28 (:47) C.Portis up the middle to DAL 31 for -3 yards (R.Williams). :doh:

:dallasuck

[Skins11]

Yes, that was nice. That's what was so aggravating in our previous losses.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Is it just me or do several of those descriptions say "short left" or "short middle" in them?

[DjTj]

Is it just me or do several of those descriptions say "short left" or "short middle" in them?

"Short" includes 8 yard passes to James Thrash just past the first down marker or passes to Ladell Betts in stride with open field in front of him. That's very different from dumping it off to a receiver and asking him to beat 3 guys. It can be "short" as long as it's not short of the first down. When it's 3rd-and-5, we don't need a 30-yard bomb. A "short" 5-yard pass will do just fine.

[DiscoBob]

We need Thrash on the field on 3rd and long's. He has proven to be a clutch player, both this year and last....plus the defenses seem to forget about him since he's not a starter......he can be our Ricky Proehl

[TD_washingtonredskins]

"Short" includes 8 yard passes to James Thrash just past the first down marker or passes to Ladell Betts in stride with open field in front of him. That's very different from dumping it off to a receiver and asking him to beat 3 guys. It can be "short" as long as it's not short of the first down. When it's 3rd-and-5, we don't need a 30-yard bomb. A "short" 5-yard pass will do just fine.

Cool man. I was just asking.

I don't remember asking for a 30-yard bomb anywhere.

[Ignatius J.]

I don't think this analysis has much to do with the successes in the sense that correlation does not prove causation. Recievers were getting way open yesterday, against a suspect dallas secondary. As you admit, Brunell thre many passes short of the first down marker, they just worked this time.

I think you would have a point if brunell had thrown a few interceptions on the day while forcing the ball downfield more. I think that would show a more dramatic shift in philosophy. As it stands, all that happened was that our recievers were more open. We were running the same routes and brunell was throwing the same passes. To say that this is somehow cause of brunell's decision making seems suspect to me.

[Veretax]

i think the passes to sellers our other back finally worked in a game

[Robbnva]

The fact remains that he is still throwing short of 1st down territory, we just had players force their way to make it. if it is 3 and 5 there is no reason why you throw a 2 yard pass.

[SkinsWizCubsDukes]

Yesterday was not as bad because he was throwing designed short plays, not ALWAYS dumping off. Brunell is STILL very suspect...

3-10-DAL43 (5:32) M.Brunell scrambles left end ran ob at DAL 39 for 4 yards.

This play was GUTLESS/COWARDLY, he ducked the hit for a 4-5 yard gain...on 3rd and 10 when ANY yards would help, either get us close for a long field goal, maybe close to go for it, maybe break a tackle and get the first down, who knows...but he cringed as he ran out of bounds! You can't do that with the game on the line, ESPECIALLY against Dallas.

This shows how his "heart" has seemingly dimished as well, we won the game in spite of this guy, I don't care how good he looks on paper.

[DjTj]

I don't think this analysis has much to do with the successes in the sense that correlation does not prove causation. Recievers were getting way open yesterday, against a suspect dallas secondary. As you admit, Brunell thre many passes short of the first down marker, they just worked this time.

But you have to admit that they weren't the same kind of passes. In previous weeks, he quite apparently gave up and threw it to receivers coming back to the ball who had linebackers on top of them 3 yards short of the first down. At least in this game when he threw short of the first down it was to receivers running forwards into empty space.

I think you would have a point if brunell had thrown a few interceptions on the day while forcing the ball downfield more. I think that would show a more dramatic shift in philosophy. As it stands, all that happened was that our recievers were more open. We were running the same routes and brunell was throwing the same passes. To say that this is somehow cause of brunell's decision making seems suspect to me.

And he also DID throw the ball downfield more, especially in the middle of the field. And there were a few near interceptions that the Cowboys dropped when Brunell took some chances.

My speculation as to Brunell's thought process is a little bit tongue-in-cheek, but when I was watching the game it definitely seemed like there was something different - as if the coaches had actually worked on our third down plays during the bye week. Brunell's pocket presence also seemed better and he appeared to take more time making his reads ... It could simply be a function of getting healthier, and it's also another week in the Saunders system, but whatever it is I think the fact that we didn't have even one of those clear short-of-the-first-down completions on Sunday is a good sign.

[illone]

There were a few plays that we threw behind the line, but the blocking down field was better.