Skins26 Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 This topic went away after opening day against the Cardinals last year. But it seems to be resurrected recently by some people who are feeling after a poor preseason with Spurrier type guys in here, that his system just wont work in the NFL. For you doubters I am going to tell you why there is nothing to fear, why its not only going to work, but in years to come we may see some teams try and start using it, the "East Coast Offense" The reason is Danny Wuerffle, this guy isnt even good enough for another NFL team to even consider calling him. He's not even a 3rd stringer to ANY other NFL team, his arm is so weak he can just not make it in this league, everyone knows that. However in the games he did start last year, he seemed pretty average, he beat the Rams and threw 3 TD's against the cowboys, however he did throw 3 int's that game too. However the point I am trying to make here is if a guy this bad, as physically limited as this guy, can get by looking average at least by just knowing the system as well as he does, then this things gonna work. Just think if a guy that is limited so much physically can do even mediocore just because he knows the system well, think of what a guy that is as physically gifted as Ramsey is going to do once he is at the same level as DW as far as mentally. Ramsey says that by the end of this season this offense is going to be "second nature" to him, what i'm saying is once that point comes, you better watch out for the Redskins because i cant see anyone stopping us. As soon as the game slows down for him and he really has the same understanding of this system that DW did, then we are going to be a very, and i mean VERY good offense. So folks i'm just trying to help you from worrying, there is no need to fear the system wont work, cause the Fun N Gun is coming boys, and its coming soon! All Hail The Fun N Gun Offense! Good luck defensive coordinators, we'll see who gets the last laugh soon enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 I'm not sure that the success of a system is measured by a poor QB's relatively good statistics, at least not anywhere except fantasy football. I seem to recall the Run 'n Shoot having a similar effect upon some mediocre QBs' stats. Eric Kramer anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins26 Posted September 3, 2003 Author Share Posted September 3, 2003 The fact is, is that we were kept in several games with DW, and he was just going on how well he knew the system. So if Ramsey ever gets to a point where he knows it this well, we will be winning some games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 I think what 26 is saying is "We won 7 games with Danny, Shane and a rookie Patrick" which is more games that a lot of Vet coaches were able to win in systems that they've had running for years. If Spurrier can get a NFL quality QB who understands his system the same way Danny did....and you get faster WR's which he had in college.....there is no reason you can't win at least as many if not MORE games than the team did last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins26 Posted September 3, 2003 Author Share Posted September 3, 2003 Exactly. Thank you Bufford, I had trouble with how I should put it. So basically what he said, as soon as we get a QB that has NFL talent to understand the system as well as DW did, then we're going to be awsome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 my biggest complaint about the system is the short yardage game, I gasp and faint everytime we run a sweep play on 3rd and 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Well, I'm certainly not going to post on this thread because I believe in S.S.'s system and clearly this wasn't meant fo------- (looks around), :doh: . In a way, I kinda see the logic behind this and when adding Coles and other new and improved parts to the offense, can almost see it. Of course, this would raise the bar for Weurffle a little too, but that's a nother story. Yeeeeeeesh. DW apparently went around and kicked alot of peoples dogs, cats, goldfish, ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Let me add this. I think the system now is more advanced than the college Version......so basically....I think Patrick needs to be the starter for another 2 to 4 years to really master it. He will not Master it this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougWilliams Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 you think a sweep is a bad play to run for short yardage? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurent Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Wuerffel got clobbered behind that horrible offensive line, but when he had protection he actually didn't look to bad at times. I'd take him over Johnson any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Originally posted by DougWilliams you think a sweep is a bad play to run for short yardage? I do indeed, especially with any kind of regularity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleSteve Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Originally posted by DougWilliams you think a sweep is a bad play to run for short yardage? Not the best of choices. It tends to put O-lineman in space and a decent LB corps will string it out. If there's a good safety, the play will in all likelihood lose yardage. Shortest distance to the first down is a straight line, if your O-line can move the defense. Even an off-tackle is safer than a sweep. There's always play-action to the TE. Flemister? Maybe not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Hog Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Don't sleep on the Rock up the middle this year baby ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 If your point is that Spurrier's system makes the QB, then I'd just point out that the Run 'n Shoot could make the same claim, and even had teams with some respectable records at times, particularly with Detroit and Houston. If your point is that a talented QB will make the system look good, then the same is true with the WCO, which doesn't work nearly as well with Elvis Grbac running it as it does with Joe Montana running it. So, I'm not sure what the point is other than to reinforce the obvious or to bestow a non-unique argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 warren moon is da man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 who did we beat in the championship in 91? Wasn't it Detroit with the run-n-shoot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 The Run n Shoot wasn't a terrible system. I think Houston's playoff failings were more typical of the standard choking team, not attributable to the offensive system. Atlanta, Detroit and Houston ran the Run n Shoot. I think with the evolution of big AND fast WRs and DBs(though not as big as the WRs) the smurf-like WRs of the Run N Shoot were rendered obsolete. The other big problem of the Run N Shoot was it's lack of flexibility. If they had incorporated the TE(Houston didn't even carry one, IIRC) so they could perform better in running situations, it might have seen a longer lifespan. It did come back in a way with Jauron's first year at Chicago with 4/5 WR spread offense, but now they're boring under Shoop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AzSkinsFan63 Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 I think the real question is...can Spurrier's fun n gun..defeat a Tampa bay type defense and totally change the game. tough question. but Spurrier's offense running on all cylinders is a scary thing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsThug Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 I prefer running the ball down the other teams throat with extreme prejudice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 I agree with the basic premise of this post. Basically, the fun and gun was developed to allow Spurrier to win at Duke with less talented players. 7-9 was not all that bad for the talent we had last year. With more talent, the record gets better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 The counter argument is that Marty Schottenheimer's offense allows a team to win with lesser players too. Does anyone else think that it's remarkable in hindsight that we were 8-8 with Tony Banks as our starter (after acquiring him in mid-August) and that we managed to have him throw more TD's than INT's that year? I sure do. Also, while it's wonderful to make mediocre players look good, I thought our goal was to have great players who performed at an elite level. Has Spurrier's system ever proven that it can do that? The WCO offense does, as does the Norval/Martz offense and Kevin Gilbride's offense. The problem with those offenses is that they actually need good or great players to look good. I'm not pooping on Spurrier's system. I like it and I think it's wonderful that it's as flexible as it is and puts as much responsibility on the QB as it does. I have concerns about it's ability to perform in cold/wet weather, or against superior pass defenses, as I'm not sold on our ability to run the ball when we need to and when the defense expects us to. And like the run 'n shoot, I wonder how well it can perform with a shortened field, such as in the red zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakofthesouth Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Originally posted by DougWilliams you think a sweep is a bad play to run for short yardage? I think it is... There is a higher risk associated with it. If you are successful, the payoff would be greater, in terms of yardage. If you are not, the chance of losing yards is much greater, based on the position of linebackers, etc. This is more of a first/second down call. Third and short, in my opinion, should likely be a gut run (depending on field position, it could be a play-action pass). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdmiralWaugh Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 I'm not even going to bother responding to the ludicrous comments about Wuerffel's arm strength. He's been in the league a while now, lately as 3rd string QB. However, he showed that he obviously should be our 2nd string QB, probably runs the offense better than Ramsey does at the moment, and has indeed dominated at every level of play with one exception (NFL-- thanks o-line!). He set ridiculous records in the NFL Europe because, mentally, no one really surpasses him. As SOS said, though, he's not putting his foot down to throw sometimes and then it floats. I don't understand it, myself. Regardless, to say that Ramsey will ever grasp the offense like Wuerffel is just to make a joke. This guy was one of a kind, mentally. Ramsey's one of a kind physically. They're never going to intersect each other. What we hope for is that Ramsey could achieve/surpass, say, Shane Matthews' ability. Ramsey, by all indications, is an intelligent QB himself these days. I anxiously await the possibilities of the offense firing on all cylinders! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 until this offense puts up big numbers and basically it proves on the field that it works, everything else is speculation. until then doubters will remain. now spurrier has everything an offense could ask for relative to other teams in the league. he should make it work this year or this offense doesn't work in the NFL. I have my doubts since I believe you need to have a strong running game to survive and be able to keep leads (one of the problems with Run and Shoot offense). Without a respected RB RB in the backfield, teams can FLood the DB field and slow down the passing game. Even the pass happy rams had a great RB that helped the offense click and created night mares for def. coordinators. if the offense fails to solidify this year and show that its for real, then this offense will be considered a failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codeorama Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Originally posted by shawn until this offense puts up big numbers and basically it proves on the field that it works, everything else is speculation. until then doubters will remain. now spurrier has everything an offense could ask for relative to other teams in the league. he should make it work this year or this offense doesn't work in the NFL. I have my doubts since I believe you need to have a strong running game to survive and be able to keep leads (one of the problems with Run and Shoot offense). Without a respected RB RB in the backfield, teams can FLood the DB field and slow down the passing game. Even the pass happy rams had a great RB that helped the offense click and created night mares for def. coordinators. if the offense fails to solidify this year and show that its for real, then this offense will be considered a failure. This offense works in the NFL, it's already proven. Check out the 84 Dolphins or the Fouts era Chargers. Same concepts. Throwing to areas of the field rather than check downs, audibles to change routes based on reads by receivers and qb, and on and on... The fun and gun is not a Spurrier creation, sure, he has taken a previous concept and tweaked it and made it his own, but it is not the abnormal freak that some assume. It's only odd now because most are into the WCO which is the polar opposite. I honestly think Ernie Zampese's offense's were similar in a lot of ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.