Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Why Is It So Hard For America To Distinguish Between Zone Read And Scrambling?


garyclarkforhall

Recommended Posts

I continue to hear pundits on ESPN, NFL Network, and radio falsely place blame on the zone read option as the risk to RGIII's health.

 

I understand that it's convenient to label everything the Skins do as ZRO, but:

 

a - all three of RG's injuries last year were in scramble situations.  I believe the knee was already toast prior to the shotgun snap vs Seattle (and that wasn't going to be ZRO either)...

 

b - After the Cincy game where I agree the running thing with RG had gone too far, the offense was modified and his hits from running greatly diminished...

 

c - As mentioned on Cooley's show yesterday, Pat White didn't take one hit this preseason running ZRO.  It was RG's unwillingness to get down or get out of bounds that led to most hits downfield.

 

I listened to Herm Edwards say the team needed to scale ZRO out of the offense to protect RG.  Thankfully, Brian Dawkins jumped in and said that the ZRO isn't the issue, it's RG's willingness to protect himself.

 

I simply don't get how a smart NFL coach like Edwards doesn't see the difference.

 

Is it because old school coaches are scared of new schemes?  That they think this is a fad?  That they really don't watch enough film to understand our offense?  Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RG3 had also done a good job of minimizing the punishing hits he took well before the Ravens game. There were several straight weeks he wasn't hit hard outside the pocket. The situation with the Ngata hit dictated he take an extra risk since the game was on the line and we needed the 1st down. Even then, he was attempting to avoid the hit.

I'm not worried about him taking as many shots this year. Honestly if he gets hurt it'll probably be on a hit in the pocket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other then highlights I dont think many TV 'analysts' watch all the games of the players they talk about.

Bingo.  To expand on this point, we know that the clear majority of all of the football shows--that we all watch so faithfully--are ratings driven.  To that end, many posters on this board have already noted how little in depth analysis is given to our team.  It seems the reason has to do with our lack of genuine contention over recent years.  These shows only seem to follow the contending/sexy teams exclusively, with a lack of quality, informed analysis of all of the teams in the league.  The average football fan only cares about who's in the mix, not the downtrodden and rebuilding teams.

 

That explains the mis-diagnosis of the problem.  Which one of these talking heads are looking at large chunks of film on our team?  Virtually none of em.  In fact, it appears more likely that a narrative is created, it gets parroted over & over, then becomes conventional wisdom.  My take is that The Redskins still fall prey to this.  You watch - when Washington seriously contends this year, the football press will know we're legit & will pay much closer attention to DC Football.  Right now, most folks consider last year a fluke, so they aren't paying real close attention.  Those in the press that are, know better.

 

[side note: call me crazy, but I firmly believe that if you want a higher quality breakdown of Washington on a weekly basis, look at some of the better gambling sites pick 'em breakdowns.  Whether you 'speculate' or not, understand that since these guys do, they have a more vested interest in getting it right (and people pay attention to their picks record).  They tend to call em as they see em, but of course all prognostication is speculation]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other then highlights I dont think many TV 'analysts' watch all the games of the players they talk about.

You pretty much nailed it on the head with this one.  Most of the folks that talk about the Redskins on TV and Radio are clueless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other then highlights I dont think many TV 'analysts' watch all the games of the players they talk about.

 Right there---and 80% of what you hear out of most pro-athlete-commentators mouth on camera (minus the experienced and proven-better communicators in that group) are not only rehearsed (as much as possible) but afterwards their primary comments (what they're expected to say) are fed to them by an assistant through an earpiece plus their use of teleprompters.

 

I think most of the gaffes we see/here, even from football smart guys like Herm, are them trying to "fill-in" and display (add) some personal stamp while reading/listening. Some eventually take off enough on their own persona (i.e. Irvin) that you can tell it's more their call on the dialog they present.

 

Of course, not all football-smart guys are equally adept with  conveying their wisdom in the broadcast studio.  :blink:

 

Imagine what some of these guys would be like if they weren't so thoroughly herded.  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm anxious to see what Ray Lewis brings to ESPN Countdown. And by anxious, I mean not anxious at all.

They're too many pundits out there. So many that the guys who do good work get lost in the shuffle. I long for the days when it was just Berman and Tom Jackson giving the highlights to us straight up. This is why I don't get bent when analysts pick us, against us, whatever. Their insight is about as good as my bartender's, and at least he's serving me drinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other then highlights I dont think many TV 'analysts' watch all the games of the players they talk about.

End thread.

No one pays more attention to this team than us. We aren't a top team yet according to the media so we don't get the benefit of deep analysis.

I was watching that Insiders show on ESPN and everything they said about the offense was bs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is pretty annoying. Without the read option, Robert would be running for his life and that's the situation where he gets hurt. These people just don't understand how controlled the situation is in the RO. The QB knows exactly who he has to worry about. The only tricky part is knowing when to end the play. Sliding at the last second leads to unnecessary hits, so he's got to slide a step or two sooner.

 

A broken-play scramble is a much more chaotic situation for the QB to process. He's not sure who his man is or where the defenders are coming from. The play, as it was called, has broken down at that point. THAT is what we should be dialing back on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could easily convince myself to join in & pile-on in speaking out against lazy media.....instead i'll just point out how gratifying & reassuring it is that you all see exactly the same two cent reporting going on in most forms of media.

I feel slightly less crazy, & somewhat justified in my observations of late.

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...