Alridge and Dorsey, The Wrong Way to Diversify an Offense

[TheLongshot]

Your stats lie. Bradshaw isn't the homerun threatr that Sproles respresents. One factor -- San Diego's O line did not compare with the Giants O line which I understand hasn't suffered a significant injury in three seasons.

So, that's your one rebuttal? The subjective quality of their lines?

Yes, the Chargers' line got a lot of faults for last year, but the year before they were considered one of the best lines, and Sproles' stats were worse overall.

Also, the OL has nothing to do with if a back can get runs over 50 yards, which Sproles has none and Bradshaw has two, and Bradshaw has been in the league two years less.

[BIGOLEBOB]

I'd much rather run the risk of scoring too fast than run the risk of not scoring at all, which is what we did last year. I understand where you're coming from, but I'll gladly take a 70 yard TD on a screen pass over a 14 play, 70 yard drive ending in a field goal.

Big Fat DITTO. I'm wif ya.

[jkypoo]

My remark implies nothing of the sort. You have created a strawman.

Not when you keep using the term "specialization." So, when you say, "specialization," what exactly are you referring to if not speed? Because that is where I am drawing my assumption from.

No, I haven't assumed that either. My argument has to do with strategy and the assumption that the Post writer and most ES members have made and that is that we need a Darren Sproles type player in this offense. That's a false premise in my opinion.

I think that if you created a list of "needs," then a Darren Sproles type player might pale in comparison to other "need" areas, especially if that list were created by the collective voice of "most ES members."

So, basically you are arguing that the premise that they were brought in to diversify the offense, as the Post article and most ES members speculate, is wrong.

Technically, any player will, in some sense, diversify an offense, because no two players are exactly alike. So, yes, if they make the roster they will "diversify" things. However, a less argumentative way to say it would be: Should they possess that talent and skill set to contribute to the team and the overall scheme, and there are enough roster spots, then they will eventually bring diversity to offense, which is true of any player in any sport. But, again, I doubt very much that any two players are going to dictate the offensive scheme.

That's fine. It doesn't matter to me. My argument stands that whether you are right or wrong. I can settle for -- IF they were brought in for the reason most of us have assumed,the strategy is unsound.

I would have thought that "most of us" would understand one of the many purposes for and results of training camp and preseason: to bring in and evaluate young talent with potential for making the team while exposing them to the existing schemes. I don't remember anyone crowning either of these players or even considering them anything more than possible roster spots and maybe contributors on special teams. In fact, I remember reading about how Betts was going to be getting more downs, so I wonder how exactly either player, should they make the team, is going to get on the field, let alone represent a shift, change, or diversification of the offense.

Another strawman.

Actually, that wasn't implicit. It was a generalization. We probably shouldn't get started on strawmen.

[Thinking Skins]

I referred to them as "specialists" in a move-the-chains WCO offense because they would be brought in primarily to offer the homerun threat. They are not built to be power runners or possession receivers. As good as he is, even Darren Sproles would be a specialist in our offense.

Who's to say they couldn't be possession receivers? Thats essentially what Westbrook is in Philly. And its part of what Betts does here (at least what he does best). Adding these guys to our offense is all about finding ways to maximize their talent and get them on the field.

[mnb123]

Bringing in new personnel: the wrong way to diversify an offense.

There is alot more to gain than lose if one of these guys can play ball.

If they both get cut, what have we lost? Absolutely nothing. I don't understand the point of this argument.

[Oldfan]

Exactly. And we don't need Clinton getting another 300 carry season. A two back system will keep him fresh later in the season. If that second back is a speedy guy, then I've got no problem with it. If that second guy is Betts, he should win the spot. It shouldn't just be handed to him.

Nothing will be handed to Ladell. He has already proven what he can do with real bullets flying. His skillset gives defenses a completely different set of problems even though Portis and Betts are much alike as runners. Ladell can be used much like Westbrook is used by Andy Reid.

[TheLongshot]

No, I don't know what Zorn is thinking. I said that. But, his comments on Alridge don't convince me that he's in awe of anything but his speed -- which ewveryone is in awe of.

Jason Reid also reported in his blog that the coaching staff is looking for a change-of-pace back

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/jason-reid/alridge.html#more

You've got nothing on the Vinny angle.

You didn't quote me. Read the Trung quote again and get back to me if you find fault with it.

Sorry, but it is hard to read with a 3 year old tugging at your sleeve. The sentence wasn't quite as clear as it could have been, but I get the point now.

Not relevant. Two backs are needed because the 16-game schedule is too demanding for one. Zorn said that in explaining his plans to get Ladell more touches.

It was part of the larger point, tho. Betts doesn't scare anyone. He only seems to go well if the OL goes well.

I referred to them as "specialists" in a move-the-chains WCO offense because they would be brought in primarily to offer the homerun threat. They are not built to be power runners or possession receivers. As good as he is, even Darren Sproles would be a specialist in our offense.

I think reading Reid's piece above will disavow that point. A back in this offense will still need to show the ability to block and pick up the blitz. I don't think the expectations of the backups would be any more or less than the starters in what they are expected to do back there when they are in the game.

In my mind, a specialist is a "3rd down back", which is a term that goes back to Gibbs. I think in today's game, those guys have proven that they can be used on any down.

[Thinking Skins]

Walsh disagreed. Belichick and I disagree also. Scheme fit is very important.

But again, you act as if you know Zorn's scheme in its entirety. Zorn admitted that he was keeping Gibbs's running game last year. Who knows if there's an element for a speedy back who can catch passes. Who knows if Sherman Smith didn't bring an element of that from Tennessee, where they make use of both Speedy and Power backs?

All we need to do is look at our defense though to see that everybody doesn't necessarily agree with this philosophy. Before there was no spot for a Jason Taylor type player on our defense last year. But we wound up creating one. And in the Philly game last year, we saw it utilizing JT pretty well. Now we've gone and drafted Orakpo and it seems he's going to fill that same type of position.

Accoding to your (and Walsh's and Bellicheck's) philosophy, we should have just passed on Orakpo and gotten Oher because he 'fits our scheme', ignoring the talent that each player brings to our team. Thats the same philosophy that Gregggg Williams used to bench Rocky and keep Warrick "drag me into the end zone" Holdman on the field - because Holdman fit our scheme better.

[Thinking Skins]

Nothing will be handed to Ladell. He has already proven what he can do with real bullets flying. His skillset gives defenses a completely different set of problems even though Portis and Betts are much alike as runners. Ladell can be used much like Westbrook is used by Andy Reid.

Ladell doesn't have anywhere near Westbrook's speed! If we sent Betts out as a WR he'd be picked up by a LB (if not a DL). Westbrook must be picked up by a fast LB or a safety. Thats a big difference. Westbrook creates mismatches. Betts doesn't.

[bulldog]

Westbrook is so effective because he is a three down back and is one of the best receivers out of the backfield in the NFL.

The Redskins have not had that kind of two-way back since Larry Brown in the 1970's.

What the Redskins did have though in 1991 was a two-headed attack featuring Earnest Byner running inside and Ricky Ervins coming in on third downs to spread out the defense.

While not a WCO, the mix and match using these two players was very effective.

Ervins averaged 5.1 yards per carry that year for Washington and Byner made the pro bowl.

[TheLongshot]

What the Redskins did have though in 1991 was a two-headed attack featuring Earnest Byner running inside and Ricky Ervins coming in on third downs to spread out the defense.

And Gerald Riggs as a short yardage back. (11 TDs.)

[Oldfan]

But again, you act as if you know Zorn's scheme in its entirety.

You are misreading. I have said that I don't know what Zorn has in mind. What do I have to say to persuade you of that? Write it for me and I'll sign it.

It's MY opinion that it would be a poor strategty if that's what he has in mind, because it doesn't fit a move-the-chains plan. I gave my reasons for my opinions.

All we need to do is look at our defense though to see that everybody doesn't necessarily agree with this philosophy.

No, that doesn't work because Greg Blache's handling of the defense didn't complement our offensive strategy in 2008. We can't learn anything at all from that.

Accoding to your (and Walsh's and Bellicheck's) philosophy, we should have just passed on Orakpo and gotten Oher because he 'fits our scheme',

Nonsense. A move-the chains offense needs an aggressive defense to stop the opponent from moving the chains, not one that lays back and plays the bend-but-don't break approach. Orakpo is a good fit for the defense that Jim Zorn has told us he wants this season.

[whatmeworry]

I don't think it hurts to give the opposing D different looks and add something additional for them to have to game plan for. A speed back would certainly do that for us. One reason we sucked on O last year was that we were predictable and played in a confined 20 yard area. Not saying AA is the answer but I'd like to see him in preseason before I start dissing him.

[Oldfan]

Ladell doesn't have anywhere near Westbrook's speed! If we sent Betts out as a WR he'd be picked up by a LB (if not a DL). Westbrook must be picked up by a fast LB or a safety. Thats a big difference. Westbrook creates mismatches. Betts doesn't.

Disagree.

Ladell can run with Portis. Westbrook is not faster than Ladell or Clinton. He's more elusive as a runner than either. That's why he's a better player.

Cooley just told us that most LBs will have trouble covering Fred Davis. You think Ladell can't outrun Davis?

[Oldfan]

Westbrook is so effective because he is a three down back and is one of the best receivers out of the backfield in the NFL.

Ladell is as good as Westbrook in running the pattern and catching the ball. What he lacks is the elusiveness after the catch.

What I said was that Ladell can give defenses different problems than Portis if used like Reid uses Westbrook in the offense.

We don't need to depend on this hypothetical "change of pace" advantage.

[Oldfan]

I don't think it hurts to give the opposing D different looks and add something additional for them to have to game plan for. A speed back would certainly do that for us. One reason we sucked on O last year was that we were predictable and played in a confined 20 yard area. Not saying AA is the answer but I'd like to see him in preseason before I start dissing him.

The offense was predictable in 2008 because:

-- injuries to the O line forced the passing game to dink and dunk

-- Zorn was running vanilla WCO with just 50 passing plays

More of Ladell Betts and a ramped up passing game will give defenses more to worry about this season than just stopping the run and short passes.

[Oldfan]

Jason Reid also reported in his blog that the coaching staff is looking for a change-of-pace back.

What the coaches told Reid was the obvious: Alridge and Dorsey have homerun potential. He might just be assuming Jim Zorn is eager to add this element to the offense since there's no quote to support the assertion. Here's the quote:

But coaches also are interested in having a change-of-pace speed back to complement top back Clinton Portis and Ladell Betts, and Alridge and Dorsey have home-run potential, coaches said.

It was part of the larger point, tho. Betts doesn't scare anyone. He only seems to go well if the OL goes well.

Portis goes well even if the O line doesn't? Neither back is scary in my opinion.

In my mind, a specialist is a "3rd down back", which is a term that goes back to Gibbs. I think in today's game, those guys have proven that they can be used on any down.

The third-down back was just a label. He wasn't just used on third-down. he was used primarily in passing situations. That's no different than what Zorn has in mind for Ladell or the way that Alridge or Dorsey would be used if either shows he can catch.

[[[ghost]]]

The problem with building diversity through RBs who can do more than just one part is that the RBs that can do those things demand high dollars.

What separates the elite RBs from the rest? Their ability to do all things needed in a RB. Home run, goal line, pass catch, pass block, etc.

If we had another RB who could be speedy and a consistent runner, he'd want the high dollars and probably would feel capable of starting someplace else.

[Oldfan]

];6617017']The problem with building diversity through RBs who can do more than just one part is that the RBs that can do those things demand high dollars.

What separates the elite RBs from the rest? Their ability to do all things needed in a RB. Home run' date=' goal line, pass catch, pass block, etc.

If we had another RB who could be speedy and a consistent runner, he'd want the high dollars and probably would feel capable of starting someplace else.[/quote']

That's why you draft your RB. You don't trade for one or use free agency. It's an instinctive position, so you can start them as rookies. Those rookie contracts are bargains.

[Thinking Skins]

];6617017']The problem with building diversity through RBs who can do more than just one part is that the RBs that can do those things demand high dollars.

What separates the elite RBs from the rest? Their ability to do all things needed in a RB. Home run' date=' goal line, pass catch, pass block, etc.

If we had another RB who could be speedy and a consistent runner, he'd want the high dollars and probably would feel capable of starting someplace else.[/quote']

That is the problem, but its also the privildge. Look at the Chargers before Sproles. They had Turner and LT. Turner could do (and often did) all the things of a RB, but because he was on a rookie contract and was behind LT, he was their second guy. Then he leaves and goes to Atlanta and is carrying the team. We'd like to have something like that - A backup who has the talent to be a starter.

[Thinking Skins]

That's why you draft your RB. You don't trade for one or use free agency. It's an instinctive position, so you can start them as rookies. Those rookie contracts are bargains.

Thats what we're doing though. Unless you count signing a guy from Canada and a guy that got cut from his rookie deal because he was hurt and his coach got fired as signing them as free agents. I mean, they're still on rookie-like deals. And the talk about Aldridge is that Shanahan was ga-ga over him telling Vinny all about how talented he is.

[TheLongshot]

What the coaches told Reid was the obvious: Alridge and Dorsey have homerun potential. He might just be assuming Jim Zorn is eager to add this element to the offense since there's no quote to support the assertion. Here's the quote:

But coaches also are interested in having a change-of-pace speed back to complement top back Clinton Portis and Ladell Betts, and Alridge and Dorsey have home-run potential, coaches said.

You really are working hard at not believing that Zorn has anything to do with this move, despite the fact that it has been Vinny's MO in the past to get the type of players the coaching staff wants. Whatever makes you feel better, but the reality is that Zorn would like one of these guys to make the team.

Portis goes well even if the O line doesn't? Neither back is scary in my opinion.

Considering that Portis generally produces no matter what the condition of the line is and the passing game tells me that he is something special.

[Oldfan]

Thats what we're doing though. Unless you count signing a guy from Canada and a guy that got cut from his rookie deal because he was hurt and his coach got fired as signing them as free agents. I mean, they're still on rookie-like deals. And the talk about Aldridge is that Shanahan was ga-ga over him telling Vinny all about how talented he is.

This is the RB that Ghost described.

What separates the elite RBs from the rest? Their ability to do all things needed in a RB. Home run, goal line, pass catch, pass block, etc.

One waived by Denver, another a kick and punt returner in Canada --- Dorsey or Alridge might turn out to be useful, but there's not a chance in hell that either of these players turns out to be an elite back. The kind Ghost described are usually drafted and in the early rounds.

[Oldfan]

You really are working hard at not believing that Zorn has anything to do with this move...

What did I write that made you think that? The fact that I didn't jump to that conclusion as you did?

Whatever makes you feel better, but the reality is that Zorn would like one of these guys to make the team.

Well, of course he does. Does that mean he thinks his offense needs a change of pace back -- no.

Considering that Portis generally produces no matter what the condition of the line is and the passing game tells me that he is something special.

Portis produces what his O line allows him to produce. He doesn't get that much on his own. There is no WOW factor in his game. He has been a reliable, workhorse back. Nothing special.

[chipwhich]

Portis produces what his O line allows him to produce. He doesn't get that much on his own. There is no WOW factor in his game. He has been a reliable, workhorse back. Nothing special.

No truer comment could be made in this thread.