Using the 2RB scheme

[SKINZ33]

It has become clear to me that we have a very comfortable situation at RB and that our running game should be among the top in the league this year . With that being said, does anyone remember if Portis and Betts were in the backfield at the same time on Sunday?

Both have above average catching ability so I'm wondering if Saunders/Gibbs will put them both back there to throw the defense off. Such a formation could be good for either passing or running. Imagine Betts on the right and Portis on the left, with cooley on the line. This could also free up cooley because the LB's would have to focus on the RB (sometimes) which could free up the middle maybe? I'm thinking/hoping we'll see this at some point as it could provide some positive opportunities.

[Playmaker89]

I could see us doing that at some point in the season, but I don't think we had Clinton & Ladell in the backfield at the same time at any point of the game on Sunday.

[tone_dubbz]

I like the system, but Portis should have gotten more carries. i can understand they're a little prudent about using him so much until he gets his legs back, but I just wanted himto go over a 100 yards on the opening game day.

[Loxley]

No, I never saw the two of them on the field at the same time. It is an interesting idea though, probably best saved for when we get into the paloffs.

[Taylor 36]

No, I never saw the two of them on the field at the same time. It is an interesting idea though, probably best saved for when we get into the paloffs.

God willing!!!

[Veretax]

If Gibs hadn't kicked the FG on 1st and ten in OT Portis would have had 100 yards.

[REEGSKINS]

i dont see the need to have them in the backfield at the same time sellars is a great blocker and can catch very well out of the backfield.

[TankRizzo]

i dont see the need to have them in the backfield at the same time sellars is a great blocker and can catch very well out of the backfield.

Yeah, we don't need 2 RBs back there at the same time, one of them with Sellers is plenty.

One thing I don't get is why we don't throw more screen passes to Portis though.

[chaught76]

I don't see where Betts and Portis in the backfield at the same time would benefit us that much. I mean, I played with the idea myself, but Sellers and Portis/Betts is fine.

I liked to us run the Sellers dive play more often for one. Plus when we go 3 WR set, I liked to see Moss or Randle El go in motion and run more reverses and fake reverses. This would also open up Cooley on delay or quick out away from the motion.

[Robbnva]

No, I never saw the two of them on the field at the same time. It is an interesting idea though, probably best saved for when we get into the paloffs.

As somebody mentioned on another thread when taking about why we did not blitz enough the same theory must be appled to our offense game.

I think the coaches do not want to show their entire hand against the Dolphins, when we have the Eagles and Giants right before our bye week. Hopefully we will see the 2RB set AND more plays to Cooley coming up in the next 2 weeks.

[PeterMP]

Two backs w/ similar skills in the back field doesn't make much sense. You are almost certainly going to ask one to block and Sellers is the better blocker. What I'd love to see them some is start out w/ two backs (one being Sellers), have the other go in motion to the outside, and run a one back set w/ Sellers being the RB. You could run or pass out of the formation.

[krw1010]

I'm pretty sure I saw Cooley, Betts, and Portis all in the backfied for a play. But there was a false start or something. I could be wrong, but i remember thinking, hey what are they all back ther for?

[ouvan59]

What does it really get us? Only one of them can carry the ball and the other one can't touch Sellers as a blocker. Not only that but you end up with both of them tired.

[Robbnva]

I'm pretty sure I saw Cooley, Betts, and Portis all in the backfied for a play. But there was a false start or something. I could be wrong, but i remember thinking, hey what are they all back ther for?

that was the Redskins new way to draw teams offside on short yardage. The problem was Sellars accidentialy moved at the same time as someone else was motioning so they got the false start. They did that in preseason and Sellars again moved at the same time but it was called offsides. They need to work on Sellars not moving if they are going to try that play again.

[ejay183]

that was the Redskins new way to draw teams offside on short yardage. The problem was Sellars accidentialy moved at the same time as someone else was motioning so they got the false start. They did that in preseason and Sellars again moved at the same time but it was called offsides. They need to work on Sellars not moving if they are going to try that play again.

No, even though Sellers moved, the refs messed that call up big time. Yoder went in motion and the Dolphin defender, #98 i think, jumped and touched our offensive line and Sellers reacted to that.