Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The Brunell playbook doesn't work


Burgold

Recommended Posts

The offense stank it up in the second half, but what I really noticed was that it tried to be too cute, too clever. Saunders called a very conservative game, but didn't really want to run, so he kept calling swing passes and short short routes and dump offs. It was a throw-back to the Mark Brunell game. No risk, but no reward, and the results were the same. Three and outs, stalled drives, and eventually a loss.

Saunders was infatuated with the pass this game, but didn't want to air it out. We also had far too many drops again. And this time, it didn't look like velocity was the problem. It looked like it was concentration.

This team is not built to dink and dunk. Moss and El are receivers that should challenge the field and scare people. When this team decides to milk a lead and go conservative, it should attack with the running game. The passing game needs to utilize all areas of the field.

In the second half, our offense and defense played not to lose. Special teams were great. Special teams set us up in great field position all day. It's a shame we squandered our opportunities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, unless my memory is exaggerating it. Jason was asked to keep all passes within a five yard radius for most of the second half. Throw only high percentage safe passes. This allowed a previously poor d to concentrate on a much smaller area of the field and be successful. Also, two goal line stretch plays? Bah!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They did the same thing two years ago. Build a lead and then stopped doing what worked.

Here are a few basic truths when it comes to this offense.

-If its a bunched formation with Thrash as the lone WR. You know its a run. Most likely to the left.

-We won't go 4 wide

-The phrase "Put them away" is considered rude and will not be considered

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, unless my memory is exaggerating it. Jason was asked to keep all passes within a five yard radius for most of the second half. Throw only high percentage safe passes.
Where did you hear this?

It looked to me that he dropped back several times and looked deep, but just decided to dump it off to the underneath receiver. We did go deep to Moss once but just missed. The receivers were definitely still running deep routes, but they were either covered or Campbell missed them. I'm not entirely sure it was conservative play-calling but just tentative play and poor execution.

If there's anything we definitely did get conservative on, it was pass protection, because Cooley was staying in to block almost every play. Without Cooley, we don't really have an intermediate receiver ... there is Moss and Randle El running deep and a RB underneath, and that's it.

The swing pass and the end-around were definitely a little too cute, but I don't know if I'd call them "conservative." I would have preferred the even more conservative Joe Gibbs-style run-run-pass ... If we had just run the ball straight up the middle, I think we would have picked up a few more yards and eaten some clock. Portis only carried four times during the second half, and was actually gaining some decent yardage, but we didn't stick with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They did the same thing two years ago. Build a lead and then stopped doing what worked.

Here are a few basic truths when it comes to this offense.

-If its a bunched formation with Thrash as the lone WR. You know its a run. Most likely to the left.

-We won't go 4 wide

-The phrase "Put them away" is considered rude and will not be considered

Even Sonny and apparently Pierce was calling too as well as when a lineman comes in as an extra tightend the run is going his way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have preferred the even more conservative Joe Gibbs-style run-run-pass ... If we had just run the ball straight up the middle, I think we would have picked up a few more yards and eaten some clock. Portis only carried four times during the second half, and was actually gaining some decent yardage, but we didn't stick with him.

That's what I was saying. If you are going to run when they expect it every time (first down) then why not run it on 2nd and 3rd. They were setting up the defense to be in the right defense on every play. Thats garbage and the Giants saw it coming every time. Run Sellers behind Rabach/Kendall 3 times and see whats up then.

The dink and dunk passing game against a deep suspect defense when we have speed guys who are built to stretch defenses makes no sense. It's about as bad as 2004 with Gibbs forcing Portis to run up the middle 25 times a game. They go and get players who are good at a totally different offense than the one they want to run. If your going to 5 yard it all day then keep Gardner and go get some other tall possession guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even Sonny and apparently Pierce was calling too as well as when a lineman comes in as an extra tightend the run is going his way

and they wonder why the Saunders 700 page playbook gets ripped. Last year it was the pre-snap moving. Now its the refusal to attack a defenses weak point. We should have attempted at least 6-10 deep passes against their DB's.

Not to mention, this Lloyd thing is turning into a "We're not calling his packages" type of situation. He's on the active roster. Then try to throw at him. At least once.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a sense that the coaching staff doesn't fully trust Campbell enough yet to make full use of his downfield throwing ability. He has a beautiful play action fake that can go a long way toward making first down play action passes effective.

I would like to see numbers on how many first down passes the Redskins throw in situations other than the end of the half/game. It seems very rare that first down passes happen. Perhaps it goes against the power football identity the team is trying to construct for itself. Or perhaps they'll come when the staff has more confidence in Campbell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The offense stank it up in the second half, but what I really noticed was that it tried to be too cute, too clever. Saunders called a very conservative game, but didn't really want to run, so he kept calling swing passes and short short routes and dump offs. It was a throw-back to the Mark Brunell game. No risk, but no reward, and the results were the same. Three and outs, stalled drives, and eventually a loss.

Then why don't you rip Cambell's ass like you do Brunell's?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't Saunders calling a conservative game in the second half. It was Gibbs limiting the plays Saunders could use, it was obvious. When he was in KC, they looked unbelievable. Look who they had though. They had a decent but not great QB, no recievers, two stud RB's, a good OL and a great TE.

Now look at our Redskins. We have a very talented QB who can make every throw on the field, two stud RB's, a good OL even when banged up, a great TE and even a great WR. Seems to me something isn't adding up. It's not Saunders, it's Gibbs plain and simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a sense that the coaching staff doesn't fully trust Campbell enough yet to make full use of his downfield throwing ability. He has a beautiful play action fake that can go a long way toward making first down play action passes effective.

I would like to see numbers on how many first down passes the Redskins throw in situations other than the end of the half/game. It seems very rare that first down passes happen. Perhaps it goes against the power football identity the team is trying to construct for itself. Or perhaps they'll come when the staff has more confidence in Campbell.

How can the coaching staff trust Campbell when he make such poor decisions. For the third straight game he threw a 10 yard pass in tight coverage(the same play got picked off in week one and two) that almost got picked off again. He doesnt have to throw ever other pass away like Brunell did but he has to throw a few away or else he is going to win more games for the other team than his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first half seemed to go pretty well. The second half we tried too long to preserve the lead. The Rock gave us some pretty good field position that we didn't take advantage of. It looked like we kept trying to punt and pin them deep in their own territory, hoping for another FG attempt.

In respect to the Giants, the defense was chasing JC alot more in the second half. He didn't seem to be able to see the field very well while under pressure.

We were lucky enough to get an opportunity at the end for a tie. We had the ball on the 1 and we didn't even try a single run up the middle. I blame this loss on the coaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...