Kevin West Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 We aren't going to make the play-offs by being good enough to beat the Cards and Carolina didn't exactly throw all 31 flavors at us tonight. Vanilla vs. vanilla, they beat us pretty soundly . Art is right, we're killing ourselves w/ mental mistakes. I was particularly upset with the way our RBs failed to pick up the zone blitz. You protect the pocket w/ simple geometry, inside out, the shortest distance between 2 points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin West Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 ACK! Member #325 and I'm a rookie again? God help me, I feel like Johnny Mitchell. Please, Coach, please, don't cut me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 Don't worry! We want you on the team Zeron.....errr...I mean Kevin. By the way, would you mind clearing out of your locker for a day or two? We're going to be doing some....painting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 nerm......it's true that we are going to have to handle the constant barrage of blitzes better to have any hope at success. one way is quick hitting runs up the middle. it does seem our running plays take too long to develop. obviously, quick qb decisions on hitting short passes "where they aint" is also a necesssity. others have spoken about the blocking schemes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins4Life Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 Originally posted by Die Hard Art.. if Spurrier was serious about the fundamentals and wanted to fine players... screw this $10 crap. On a bad day... a player would screw up 3 times and pay $30. Give the appetite of an average 0-lineman.. that's probably just the dessert menu. Make it $100 at least This was the same thing I said, when I first heard about Spurrier fining players. $10 is a joke. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 one observation I have heard made at points in time is that the Redskins PLAYERS have bought into the hype that comes from making moves in the offseason and have a tendency to overrate where the team is and how much work is going to be required to reach the lofty goals we see enunciated in the papers each day. in other words, the blue collar, take nothing for granted, 'we aren't talented enough to win without all 45 guys playing together' mentality does NOT currently exist as it did in the Gibbs years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 10, 2003 Author Share Posted August 10, 2003 Originally posted by Nerm I really think the F-N-G is going to fail in the NFL (this has nothing to do with tonight's performance). You have to leave guys in to block in the NFL. If you dont then your QB will get killed and he will turn the ball over a lot. The F-N-G does not seem to work well in the red zone either. Just my opinion. Nerm, There's plenty of protection in the offense. Hell, we gave up the same number of sacks last year with a weaker offensive line and more passes attempted than the year before under Marty's awful offense. It's not a lack of protection that's a bother. It wasn't last year really for the most part. It's normal in this league to have three and four receivers into routes and that's pretty much what Spurrier does. The Fun and Gun does work in the Red Zone. In fact, that was one of the strengths of the offense as cited by anyone who broke down film. Because Spurrier spreads the field as the field shrinks, it benefits the offense as it approaches the goal line. The question about Spurrier's offense is not the red zone or protection. It's that it's based on the right play for each defense. It requires everyone to be on the same page and reading the same thing and knowing what to go to correctly. If Ramsey isn't correctly reading what he's seeing, the offense is done. It's not a traditional offense in that it requires sometimes subtle, sometimes bold changes before and even after the snap to get to the right play against a specific defense. Unlike an offense like Norv's or Martz's where the receivers have specific routes to run and the QB always knows where they'll be so if his primary is gone he can roll to the backup and go with it, Spurrier requires players to make changes on the fly. Spurrier doesn't want his receivers running a curl if a backer is sitting on the route. He wants them to run an out. That's why this week they were talking about how Spurrier wants Ramsey not to look at the receivers, but to feel where they'll be by looking at the defense. A receiver may not run a hook if that's covered. Ramsey has to know as he's dropping back that the receiver is supposed to be somewhere else when the coverage dictates and he has to come to believe that he and the receiver will be on the same page. That's the major question with Spurrier's offense. In college his best success came with a QB who just knew what was going on in Wuerffel. If Ramsey can't be that, the offense will fail until someone can be that in the offense. So, you're right it could fail. I just think your basis is well of the mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarhog Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 Originally posted by inmate running the asylum Loosen up Bulldog -- BallCoachSpurrier is out of town. And Pu$$y Galore aint got nothing on me. Inmate...were you saying something?? What point was it you were trying to make Christina...err...Inmate? Its a little warm in here..... :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins4Life Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 Btw, its not against league rules to institute fines on the practice field. Jeff Fisher did the same thing last year with the Titans, and they eventually developed to be a fundamentally sound football team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 Jeff Fisher is also a guy with a SB ring as a player and a resume as an outstanding DC and solid HC in the NFL. Oh, and he took his team to the SB a couple of years ago too, that helps When you are trying to reach NFL players the best antidote is NFL success to throw at them. What do you think allows Parcells to come in and immediately to get guys like Keyshawn in NY and Bledsoe in NE to shut up and work harder to achieve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 10, 2003 Author Share Posted August 10, 2003 Redskins4life, I don't know it with certainty, but I'm nearly certain that you can't fine players for practice field infractions like jumping off sides and holding. You CAN fine them for cussing, or being overweight, or anything against team rules. In order to fine players for penalties on the practice field, the team itself has to initiate it and the players have to account for it and force the issue. If I have time I'll try to find this out one way or the other with certainty and it's possible I'm just mistaking what I've seen before on this. But I think I have it correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Williams Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 i think it's time to put this game aside and start talking about next week.....there has been at least 30 thread created today about the game....... lol.....and everyone who wasn't here tonight will repeat everything said in the morning. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 Originally posted by Kevin West We aren't going to make the play-offs by being good enough to beat the Cards and Carolina didn't exactly throw all 31 flavors at us tonight. Vanilla vs. vanilla, they beat us pretty soundly . Art is right, we're killing ourselves w/ mental mistakes. I was particularly upset with the way our RBs failed to pick up the zone blitz. You protect the pocket w/ simple geometry, inside out, the shortest distance between 2 points. I can't say this for a fact, but I find it hard to believe that Carolina was just being plain vanilla. Their quantity and variety of blitz packages would seem to belie that. And, having the QB run a fake toss naked reverse bootleg would seem to indicate a certain desire to achieve more than just evaluating players. What good does that play do in evaluation? All it does is keep the opposing D from pursuing too aggressively, while also picking up some cheap yards. It could also get your QB hurt on a play that is completely useless in evaluating talent. Maybe you're putting something on film for the Redskins to think about later, but I don't see much benefit to that. Other things, too, indicated a team pulling out some stops - the first pass play to Davis 15 yards up field, the throws to Muhammad working on players way down the Redskins depth chart. It didn't seem like a team playing just vanilla. That's fine, I don't see the point in being just plain vanilla in the preseason as you need to practice some of this stuff in more live fashion. But don't pass it off as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted August 10, 2003 Author Share Posted August 10, 2003 Carolina wasn't just being vanilla. You don't run naked bootlegs while being vanilla. Even May commented that the Panters were bring out a lot for the Redskins to have on film to look at for the regular season game. They blitzed a lot, including a corner blitz late in the game. They put Mushin in the slot to exploit the slot corner. We're practicing this with Coles but in the six plays he was in there no one here said we did that to show it. I think Carolina showed a bit more of themselves to us in this game than we showed to them. Or, perhaps that's what I hope and pray to be so . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SkinsHokie Fan Posted August 10, 2003 Share Posted August 10, 2003 "We'll see you in 13 weeks" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.