Should we ditch the Gibbs/Bugel run game in 2009?

[CPAllTheWay012]

Seriously, how about a new running scheme?

Zorn decided to keep the Gibbs/Bugel running attack, but maybe a new scheme might be more effective in the West Coast offense.

Gibbs and Bugel have been all about a physical running style that I think you can argue has taken a toll on the players (specifically O-line and running backs). Looking back over these past few years, I think some of the injuries that have occured were very costly. In fact all of our starting O-linemen have dealt with injuries, as have Portis and Betts. I know injuries are part of the game, but maybe incorporating a new run game could help cut back.

There has also been a lack of big runs in the offense, and I really believe it's a combination of the system and downfield blocking. Alot of members disagree here, but Clinton Portis remains a very fast running back. A new system has the potential for "bigger" runs. I mean look back in Seattle with Shaun Alexander. Alexander never was a fast back, yet he was still able to rip off 80 yard runs in Holmgren's offense.

I just don't think the running game we have now meshes with Zorn's passing attack. We need the PB & J, so we can get things going on offense.

[CRobi21]

I'm all for it.

But that will be in result that we get OL that will flourish in that new running attack. Right now, with our big old slow guys, the power running game is probably all we can go with.

But if we get some young athletic guys, we could try the zone blocking scheme. Which will put more years on the wheels of our RBs.

[fire3fighter4]

I would love to go to a zone blocking system and draft another back so we could have a 1-2 punch...Zone blocking is starting to be more succesful(panthers, vikings, broncos, cardinals(making the transition over the next season or so))

But No.

1st. We don't have any OL that would be extremely successful in a zone blocking system. Zone blocking requires quick, atheltic OL that excell in cut blocking...virtually none of our guys are/do.

2nd. There aren't very many RB's with a lot of potential in this draft compared to previous years...If there were a complete stud coming out this year(wow that sounds bad...) then I'd say yes, but there aren't.

[Joe Gibbs II]

why? i dont konw where we ended in the ranks, but we were very good with the rush. The system seems fine, i mean doesnt anyone remember that CP had 6 games with about 120 yards rushing?

O line needs work, not the system

[SUpartyCommish]

It's about time we update the run system...thats why I'm in favor of purging any Gibbs assistants that remain. You can run all day, and true, games will stay close; there will be some won and lost that come down to the wire. The main problem with the Skins (and has been the case for a while) is our ability to get a quick strike, scoring points through the air, and fast.

If this team is to rise to the next level, the Offense will have to master the quick strike of moving the ball down field quickly through the air.

[Temple]

If this team is to rise to the next level, the Offense will have to master the quick strike of moving the ball down field quickly through the air.

Master it?! We need to ATTEMPT it!

[Oldfan]

Al Saunders told us in 2006 that we had switched to a zone-blocking style in the running game. We haven't used the Gibbs/Bugel vertical power blocking much since then -- except in short yardage situations.

Jim Zorn spreads the field more often than Gibbs creating natural holes -- which probably accounts for Portis's higher YPC this year.

Both Portis and Betts are well-suited to the zone blocking schemes -- one cut and go backs, but neither is as elusive in the open field as Westbrook and others.

Zorn wants a 60/40 pass to run ratio. If he shoots for that next year, Betts could be on the field more than Portis catching screens, swings and flats ala Westbrook.

[Oldfan]

If this team is to rise to the next level, the Offense will have to master the quick strike of moving the ball down field quickly through the air.

If my read on Zorn is correct, you aren't going to see the Andy Reid big strike WCO. Zorn wants a more consistent offense that can control the ball. That was Bill Walsh's basic idea.

[Toproller]

It was my understanding that we kept the Gibbs style of running because the team was familiar with it. The passing side of the WCO is more difficult to transition to , so it was implemented first. The running portion of the WCO is scheduled to be put in next season.

HTTR

[CM916]

Isn't that the only part of our offense that has worked over the last five years?

[Ernie5]

Yes. I've been saying this. It is incongruous to have a fluid, quick paced WCO system and a smashmouth, play-action setting up running game.

[Ernie5]

If my read on Zorn is correct, you aren't going to see the Andy Reid big strike WCO. Zorn wants a more consistent offense that can control the ball. That was Bill Walsh's basic idea.

Which is fine by me. One of the things holding Philly back has been just dreadful offensive play calling. Reid's version of the WCO is one of the less efficient ones in the game. Only McNabb and Westbrook have really saved it from costing them more.

[Willy Wonka]

Why would you put an end to a successful running game? I really don't see your argument here.

[Ernie5]

Why would you put an end to a successful running game? I really don't see your argument here.

Because it does not work with the basic concept of the WCO. Everything in a WCO needs to be quick, precise, and take advantage of space. The Gibbs running game doesn't do that. And the Gibbs running game doesn't compliment a WCO attack; it exists to compliment a play-action attack -- exactly the opposite of what the WCO does.

The WCO uses pass plays like run plays (often using the pass to set up the run) while the Gibbs system uses the run to set up play-action. One of the reasons I think we got predictable is that the approach to WCO and Gibbs is so different, Ds could see one or the other coming.

The Gibbs plan worked for a while, but defenses got to the point where they could read which was coming. It was not effective in the end. Bring in a WCO running game or ditch the WCO.

[REEGSKINS]

i think zorn should do it his way. people might not want to hear this but bugel and the rest of the gibbs offensive holdovers should be let go and zorn should complete his own staff. not saying those guys arent great coaches but if zorn is gonna go down he might as well do it his way.

[Willy Wonka]

Because it does not work with the basic concept of the WCO. Everything in a WCO needs to be quick, precise, and take advantage of space. The Gibbs running game doesn't do that. And the Gibbs running game doesn't compliment a WCO attack; it exists to compliment a play-action attack -- exactly the opposite of what the WCO does.

The WCO uses pass plays like run plays (often using the pass to set up the run) while the Gibbs system uses the run to set up play-action. One of the reasons I think we got predictable is that the approach to WCO and Gibbs is so different, Ds could see one or the other coming.

The Gibbs plan worked for a while, but defenses got to the point where they could read which was coming. It was not effective in the end. Bring in a WCO running game or ditch the WCO.

It just seems to me like the passing attacked failed, where the running game worked. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see the WCO working with us, while having Campbell as a QB. He doesn't have a quick and accurate pass, off of the snap.

[Oldfan]

Which is fine by me. One of the things holding Philly back has been just dreadful offensive play calling. Reid's version of the WCO is one of the less efficient ones in the game. Only McNabb and Westbrook have really saved it from costing them more.

It's possible, Ernie, that Reid's WCO only looks like it does BECAUSE he has McNabb and Westbrook. You know, playing the cards he was dealt.

[Ernie5]

It's possible, Ernie, that Reid's WCO only looks like it does BECAUSE he has McNabb and Westbrook. You know, playing the cards he was dealt.

To some extent, although their abandonment of the run for long stretches has just killed them. I also think McNabb's dreadful technique sometimes kills them, but that's another story.

[Ernie5]

It just seems to me like the passing attacked failed, where the running game worked. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see the WCO working with us, while having Campbell as a QB. He doesn't have a quick and accurate pass, off of the snap.

The running game didn't work in the second half of the season. My only statement is that if you're going to go WCO, go all in. Give it a REAL try. Campbell may not be a good WCO QB, but he did show signs of being just fine with it over the first half of the season (especially given that it was a new system). Without question, Zorn made Campbell a better QB (at least in my mind), so I'll be curious what an off-season together can do to make further improvements.

I think in terms of having a fluid offense, the running and passing games ought to compliment each other and work together as one system. Using two very different systems as a hybrid works against that goal.

[justice98]

It's possible, Ernie, that Reid's WCO only looks like it does BECAUSE he has McNabb and Westbrook. You know, playing the cards he was dealt.

Except being the coach and GM, he kinda dealt himself the cards.

[justice98]

The running game didn't work in the second half of the season. My only statement is that if you're going to go WCO, go all in. Give it a REAL try. Campbell may not be a good WCO QB, but he did show signs of being just fine with it over the first half of the season (especially given that it was a new system). Without question, Zorn made Campbell a better QB (at least in my mind), so I'll be curious what an off-season together can do to make further improvements.

I think in terms of having a fluid offense, the running and passing games ought to compliment each other and work together as one system. Using two very different systems as a hybrid works against that goal.

And it's no coincedence, that once the running game stopped working, so did Campbell.

[Oldfan]

It just seems to me like the passing attacked failed, where the running game worked. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see the WCO working with us, while having Campbell as a QB. He doesn't have a quick and accurate pass, off of the snap.

I watch QB mechanics closely. Campbell was a different QB this year from the one that we drafted out of Auburn when I thought he'd never make it in the NFL. I think he will play much better in his second year in the system.

Most fans are not putting a value on moving the chains and playing the field position game which this offense did fairly well this year. It needs bigger receivers like the rookies we drafted.

Give it another year.

[Mufumonk]

I'd rather ditch the passing game.

[Ghost of]

It's actually the Saunders running game.

[nebster21]

Hmmm CP was leading the league in rushing for most of the year. I think not.