Let's talk team identity

[William Barbour]

Redskins atm seem more built for flag football rather playoff winter football. 

We should be able to pass, and stop the pass. But we haven't been able to do either effectively 

[wilco_holland]

But now going back to the GM. This is not what Scot wants. His vision is that we become a hard nose football team. He had one of does quotes where he said that the day after playing, the opponent would feel they had played the Redskins. There body's would feel sour and bruised. 

I.m.o. we are not playing like that kind of team. 

I think our O is designed well only I think Kirk is just out of the zone. He needs to take the short stuff that is open and not overthink it. It's a little like the older GB Rodgers team's. Just quick short throws that move the chains. I do agree that we need to force the run more to keep the opponent honest.

Our D is just a bend not break D. Works when your O is dominanting but sucks when your O is behind. They can not create or stop anything then. Personally I wouldn't mind if we take some more risks on D. Sure blitzing is risky but there is also a big upside. This sitting back in coverage thing is not working. 

In general I would like to see the coaches show some more balls. Sometimes it feels like we have the opponent on the ground but forget to make the knock-out punch. Get the ball on a turnover? Then i.m.o. you can go for some more risky O plays like deep shot. If you then score it hypes up your team and makes other team feel terrible. You are winning the mind games then. 

[wilco_holland]

7 hours ago, Vilandil Tasardur said:

TK, you bring up an interesting point. It seems like our plays are really well designed to get one specific guy open. It seems like they work quite often. But on occasion, if that guy gets keyed on (Reed/DJax), most of the time there isn't another progression to go to because those routes are clear out routes that aren't viable options. So what's the solution?

1) Kirk just has to hit them when they're there so that we don't feel the pain when they're not

2) Move to a more traditional route tree and trust Kirk to move through a progressio

I think the second one is Kirk his issue. I feel like now he understands the O more and has gotten 20 milion he wants to think more, prove himself. Not just be a puppet who throws at player A. And I understand that. Everybody wants to be a Peyton Manning. Only McVay totally designed this playbook for a systeme QB. You throw the hot read. Not open? Dump it off, throw it away or run with the ball. You trust the systeme to get guys open. Which is a fine O strategy.

[Vilandil Tasardur]

9 hours ago, s0crates said:

I agree about the front 7 being one of our weaker units, and there is no denying our defense will be better with a lead. Every defense is better with a lead, because it makes teams one dimensional. 

I don't think our run game is nearly as poor as advertised. I think our RBs and interior linemen get much more criticism than they deserve. Consider:

Matt Jones: 20 carries, 83 yards, 4.3 ypc, 1 TD, 0 fumbles.

Chris Thompson: 6 carries, 24 yards, 4.0 ypc, 1 TD, 0 fumbles.

Total: 26 attempts,107 yards, 4.1 ypc, 2 TDs, 0 fumbles.

Sacks Allowed: 2 (on 89 attempts).

Those are the numbers of a good offensive line and good enough running backs.

As far as how this relates to team identity: I think we should run the ball more. Gruden has imprinted his pass happy ways on this team. We're currently passing 77% of the time. That's insane.

It's not like other teams are making us one dimensional. We're making ourselves 1 dimensional. We run the ball fine on the rare occasions we attempt it, and we're not facing many 7 and 8 man fronts.

A more balanced offense would help in two problem areas:

1. It will increase the time of possession and give our beleaguered defense some rest.

2. It will force the defense to respect the run, which will give Cousins some easier looks and set up the play action fakes he likes to run.

Thats my two cents worth on the topic of team identity anyway.

So this is an interesting thought. Perhaps we need to redefine what a successful running game is in today's NFL.

Many of us seem disappointed that, regardless of actual YPC or total yards, we don't have the kind of running game that allows us to line up and convert 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 (or 3/4th and goal on the 1). 

Looking around the NFL though, I wonder how many teams still do. I see an awful lot of passing on 3rd and short. I see an awful lot of teams that don't have offensive lines that can just grind out 3 yards and a cloud of dirt. And I see an awful lot of teams who don't have backs that an put their shoulder down and grind those yards. 

I think what this running game really lacks is a Danny Woodhead. We're not looking for a Todd Gurley. He doesn't fit out play style. We don't even have a full back anymore. But we need someone that can get 5+ if you spread the field out and run a draw.

I'd also like to see us throw more on 1st and run more on 2nd. The reason against doing this is that, if you throw incomplete, you can't afford to run on second. But with how short our passing game is, we should be able to reliably turn out 4-8 yards on first and all of a sudden the running playbook is opened.

In a lot of ways, our identity seems similar to the Eagles. Wentz had a drive where he went 8 of 9, methodically moving them down field. This is how we won games last year. But it'll never work if we're missing throws and getting behind in down and distance with penalties.

[paloosa]

If the assessment of the Team by the OPer is correct then Jay Gruden's plan sucks and he needs to be fired. That plan is a surefire way of losing instead of winning.The plan should cover every aspect of the game in every situation of the game you would face. Why do you think Bill Belichick and the New England Patriots are consistently a 10-6 or better team year in and year out. If Joe Barry has a Bend don't break defense then he needs to be fired. You don't see Pittsburg, Baltimore, New England, Seattle, Arizona,Carolina, or Denver play that style of defense. Why? Because it is a losing formula. They play and attacking smash mouth type of defense. One that takes your heart and soul away from you because they plan for everything and they are disciplined. Something this team lacks at this point.

[Vilandil Tasardur]

4 hours ago, wilco_holland said:

I think the second one is Kirk his issue. I feel like now he understands the O more and has gotten 20 milion he wants to think more, prove himself. Not just be a puppet who throws at player A. And I understand that. Everybody wants to be a Peyton Manning. Only McVay totally designed this playbook for a systeme QB. You throw the hot read. Not open? Dump it off, throw it away or run with the ball. You trust the systeme to get guys open. Which is a fine O strategy.

I kind of feel this way too. Couple times on Sunday I felt like he double clutched, like he knew the play was there but wanted to go for more. That works in a Mike Martz system, but not in McVay's system. This system mandates you get the ball out of your hands. 

 

2 minutes ago, paloosa said:

If the assessment of the Team by the OPer is correct then Jay Gruden's plan sucks and he needs to be fired. That plan is a surefire way of losing instead of winning.The plan should cover every aspect of the game in every situation of the game you would face. Why do you think Bill Belichick and the New England Patriots are consistently a 10-6 or better team year in and year out. If Joe Barry has a Bend don't break defense then he needs to be fired. You don't see Pittsburg, Baltimore, New England, Seattle, Arizona,Carolina, or Denver play that style of defense. Why? Because it is a losing formula. They play and attacking smash mouth type of defense. One that takes your heart and soul away from you because they plan for everything and they are disciplined. Something this team lacks at this point.

Well, sure. But my assertion isn't that we built the team this way on purpose. My assertion is that "this is who we are" right now, based on the pieces available. In 5 years, after spending 1st and 2nd round draft picks on defense, we may look like Pittsburg or Baltimore. But right now, we have Golston at NT (well, we did). 

[justice98]

15 hours ago, Vilandil Tasardur said:

Realistically, what did we "know" going in to the season.

Perceived strengths:

QB, WR, TE, T, Pass Rush, CB

Perceived weaknesses:

C, G, RB, DL, MLB, S (SS especially)

This is a problem.  This is the construction of a soft team when you look at what the strengths were supposed to be and the weaknesses.

[Burgold]

The OP feels on target which opens up a contradiction. When McCloughan got here he kept talking about tough players and how other teams would feel the Redskins after playing them. And last year, they did...

That philosophy doesn't really jibe with a soft bend, but don't break one. So, I'm guessing that somewhere there was a change of heart or strategy.

i wonder how much internal friction is caused by this or if coaches and front office are on the same page

 

[Vilandil Tasardur]

49 minutes ago, Burgold said:

The OP feels on target which opens up a contradiction. When McCloughan got here he kept talking about tough players and how other teams would feel the Redskins after playing them. And last year, they did...

That philosophy doesn't really jibe with a soft bend, but don't break one. So, I'm guessing that somewhere there was a change of heart or strategy.

i wonder how much internal friction is caused by this or if coaches and front office are on the same page

 

Change of heart? Or resignation to reality?

If the GM wants to be aggressive and tough, but the coach thinks that, given the current players on the team, the best way to get the most total wins is to play bend but don't break, what's the right course of action? I think GMSM would LOVE to have a defense like the Steelers D. I don't think we built this defense this way on purpose. But I didn't see "Steelers" type of players available for us to jump on. The question is, would you rather go 6-10 establishing that identity or 9-7 maximizing what you've got. I'm not actually sure.

The Rams, for example, are a team that I consider as having established that identity over the last four years. I'm not sure it's done them a lot of good. The Colts, on the other hand, have played soft defense and prayed the QB would play perfect for the last four seasons. I'm not sure it's done them much good either.

[Burgold]

I don't know. I think ultimately the GM has to give way to the philosophy of the coach. He can buy the ingredients, but the chef has to make the meal. If you buy all the best steak for a vegan restaurant it won't work. So, if Gruden is asking or pushing for this identity then it's McCloughan's job to reframe and get him the pieces to make it work.

Philosophically, I think I like McLoughan's approach better than the approach we are using today, but it could be a chicken and the egg problem like you suggest above.

[Vilandil Tasardur]

3 hours ago, Burgold said:

I don't know. I think ultimately the GM has to give way to the philosophy of the coach. He can buy the ingredients, but the chef has to make the meal. If you buy all the best steak for a vegan restaurant it won't work. So, if Gruden is asking or pushing for this identity then it's McCloughan's job to reframe and get him the pieces to make it work.

Philosophically, I think I like McLoughan's approach better than the approach we are using today, but it could be a chicken and the egg problem like you suggest above.

I think I agree here.

I get the sense that Scot really likes Gruden. He's clearly a proven, brilliant play designer. There have been reports that he's one of the most brilliant minds and concept design to get guys open. But there's also no question that the two don't jibe stylistically. 

On defense, you can dismiss this away by saying "of course they both want a dominant D, and they both settle for what they can get". But on offense? I can't imagine any of the Scot QBs (especially Wilson) succeeding in Jay's system. And Jay hasn't really even shown that kind of offense. 

 

Interestingly enough, when it comes to defense, I don't see our current state as "Jay's vision" or "Scot's vision". I see it is "Mike and Kyle's bare bones attempt to not suck during the cap penalty" that hasn't been fixed. I really think the Shanahan's first took us on this direction when it became clear that we couldn't afford any depth and couldn't afford to keep our own (OMG). The result was a bunch of stop gaps and a hope that we wouldn't just blow huge plays. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to find defensive playmakers in the years since (Norman not withstanding). Guys like Kerrigan getting paid A+ money but giving us solid B production don't help either. 

[Burgold]

Or maybe on D it's just that the investments didn't pan out. Orakpo and Kerrigan ideally should have become our new Mann and Manley. Amerson washed out, etc. 

 

probably, it's both. 

[JSSkinz]

I think when your offense and defense are "designed" as the OP explains you have little to no margin for error, maybe we need a different design until we have the talent to play that style of football.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Oh, let's don't.

[bobandweave]

Identity? Well we are in the middle of witnessing a funnel offense and a funnel defense here. That's our identity. In one word Funnel.

On Defense we are average at stopping the opposing passing game, currently ranked 17th but we are ranked 32nd at stopping the opposing running backs. So when other teams play us they are going to funnel there offenses to rushing more against us then they normally would against other teams. Even though we know this is how we will be attacked we can't stop this attack and getting beaten for it.

Our offense is a funneling passing offense. We rank 1st overall in the league in pass attempts. We rank 32nd overall in rushing attempts. When other teams play us they know we will be passing first and rushing rarely so the other teams plan for that. This type of unbalanced offense is easy to stop. Instead of our offense facing balanced defenses we are seeing the other teams funnel there defenses to stopping the pass only and it's working.

I guess you could call this team unbalanced but I think about a funnel. Like a funnel where it starts with everything coming together in the beginning by the time it actually comes out its always the same thing no matter how you mix it.

 

 

 

 

[Peregrine]

I wouldnt say our expectations are off unless we expected this team to go 11-5 or better.  9-7 should win the division this year, its weak.  We should beat the Cowboys.

[Vilandil Tasardur]

3 hours ago, Burgold said:

Or maybe on D it's just that the investments didn't pan out. Orakpo and Kerrigan ideally should have become our new Mann and Manley. Amerson washed out, etc. 

 

probably, it's both. 

There's a lot of that. I know a lot of people are high on Kerrigan; he's one of the lone bright spots on this defense. But we act like he's Watt, Harrison, Dumervil, Ware, etc, and he frankly just isn't. Somehow, some way, we've got to find a blue chip middle line backer so that everyone else can start to escalate their play. 

2 hours ago, Peregrine said:

I wouldnt say our expectations are off unless we expected this team to go 11-5 or better.  9-7 should win the division this year, its weak.  We should beat the Cowboys.

Well, that's kind of what I'm saying. I thought this team had a ceiling of 10-6, and a floor of 7-9. And I thought the wiggle room between those records would be games like Sunday, where you could and should win but maybe don't.

I don't think anything's changed, other than the fact that we've now lost one of those, so we're one step closer to the floor than the ceiling. 

But I think this team's ceiling is higher than last year's ceiling, and this year's floor is higher than last year's floor. And in that, I think the team can be said to be measurably better. Perhaps not enough for most fans, but still. 

[KDawg]

Great OP! I'd like to respond but time is tough right now. Hopefully I get a chance tomorrow to post something worthy of the effort the OP gave!

[SWFLSkins]

On 9/19/2016 at 5:28 PM, Vilandil Tasardur said:

Well, let's see. We're all down on the team at this point; it's hard not to be. But most of this, realistically, has to do with expectations. So let's dig deeper than "a franchise QB made us a playoff team and now we're going 0-16!!!"

 

Realistically, what did we "know" going in to the season.

Perceived strengths:

QB, WR, TE, T, Pass Rush, CB

Perceived weaknesses:

C, G, RB, DL, MLB, S (SS especially)

 

When I look at that, I see one thing. For better or for worse, this team was built to play with a lead.

Thoughts?

That was a great read. Expectations are a fanbase killer, us realistically being setup year after year by the hype that comes out of DC. 

The team to me has lacked intensity, I see flashes of it, but certainly not from the beginning of games in which they could grab a lead and then maintain it. The team is like a teenager that you have to "motivate" to achieve high effort but then it is too late by the time they wake up. 

Certainly you could have added Coaches to the categories above, though currently I would struggle to put any in the perceived strengths column.

4 hours ago, jschuck12001 said:

I think when your offense and defense are "designed" as the OP explains you have little to no margin for error, maybe we need a different design until we have the talent to play that style of football.

 

Great point, if you are playing awesome D you can have an offense like the one we have and still win. The Redskins just don't have that D. 

4 hours ago, Peregrine said:

I wouldnt say our expectations are off unless we expected this team to go 11-5 or better.  9-7 should win the division this year, its weak.  We should HAVE beaten the Cowboys.

And your point stands on the standings, it is still possible, but not at this rate. Something has to change, and I think intensity is numero uno. 

User Actions

 Following

Tre‏@Treg2Cole

@M_W_19 being a Skins fan is like being in that Edge of Tomorrow film when you die and come back with new knowledge of your defeat each time

[skins island connection]

23 hours ago, paloosa said:

If the assessment of the Team by the OPer is correct then Jay Gruden's plan sucks and he needs to be fired. That plan is a surefire way of losing instead of winning.The plan should cover every aspect of the game in every situation of the game you would face. Why do you think Bill Belichick and the New England Patriots are consistently a 10-6 or better team year in and year out. If Joe Barry has a Bend don't break defense then he needs to be fired. You don't see Pittsburg, Baltimore, New England, Seattle, Arizona,Carolina, or Denver play that style of defense. Why? Because it is a losing formula. They play and attacking smash mouth type of defense. One that takes your heart and soul away from you because they plan for everything and they are disciplined. Something this team lacks at this point.

I wonder if Scot even likes Barry? Is he in favor of him being here or does he have someone else in mind?

This 0-2 start can't be making anyone cozy, and while the offense is sputtering, its bound to come together soon, but defensively, I just don't see Barry doing anything to contribute to the building or improvement of the defense. I can imagine that if we have another stinker on defense, win or lose, especially lose, that the FO should be rumbling about it, and it would really make my day if Scot walked up to Barry on the field, handed him a check, and pointed to his car.

 

[KDawg]

I'm not sure that this team has an actual identity. We can say it's to play with a lead, but is it and should it be? Sure, we have a couple of home run threats, but the offense is best when we're hitting short to intermediate throws and running the ball well to open up the big play. To me, that style of offense is similar to the old West Coast style. Throw to open the run. Keep the clock running. High percentage passes. Lull the defense to sleep and hit them over the top. 

The backs are averaging over 4.0 ypc. It's not like the team can't run the ball. Instead, it appears we are opting to throw the ball all over the field. When you throw that much you significantly open up the possibility for more bad scenarios than good. Think about it this way: When you throw, there is basically four things that can happen... complete, incomplete, interception, sack. 75% of those items are bad. That changes significantly with a better QB who can protect the ball, but still, the more the ball is in the air the more opportunity for the opposing team. 

Heres the other key to that... A west coast team keeps the clock running. High percentage passes and running the ball chews clock. Low percentage passes stops the clock more often AND becomes a loss of down due to the incomplete pass. Clock stopped means more total time the defense has to be on the field. The more they're on the field the more tired they become, and this team certainly doesn't have a ton of depth to overcome that issue at the moment. 

So a tired Kerrigan is much less effective. A tired Norman is less effective. You get the point... so in crunch time, our pass rush goes from meh to "where is our DL?". 

To be honest, I'm not sure what the team is going for. If they are looking for home runs on offense, the defense needs to either be stout as hell or a turnover machine (and they need to actually hit on the homeruns). If they are looking for ball control they need to throw more high percentage passes and run the ball and let the defense get after the QB. 

Right now the Skins are doing a lot of everything and not much of it is working. 

[Vilandil Tasardur]

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

I'm not sure that this team has an actual identity. We can say it's to play with a lead, but is it and should it be? Sure, we have a couple of home run threats, but the offense is best when we're hitting short to intermediate throws and running the ball well to open up the big play. To me, that style of offense is similar to the old West Coast style. Throw to open the run. Keep the clock running. High percentage passes. Lull the defense to sleep and hit them over the top. 

The backs are averaging over 4.0 ypc. It's not like the team can't run the ball. Instead, it appears we are opting to throw the ball all over the field. When you throw that much you significantly open up the possibility for more bad scenarios than good. Think about it this way: When you throw, there is basically four things that can happen... complete, incomplete, interception, sack. 75% of those items are bad. That changes significantly with a better QB who can protect the ball, but still, the more the ball is in the air the more opportunity for the opposing team. 

Heres the other key to that... A west coast team keeps the clock running. High percentage passes and running the ball chews clock. Low percentage passes stops the clock more often AND becomes a loss of down due to the incomplete pass. Clock stopped means more total time the defense has to be on the field. The more they're on the field the more tired they become, and this team certainly doesn't have a ton of depth to overcome that issue at the moment. 

So a tired Kerrigan is much less effective. A tired Norman is less effective. You get the point... so in crunch time, our pass rush goes from meh to "where is our DL?". 

To be honest, I'm not sure what the team is going for. If they are looking for home runs on offense, the defense needs to either be stout as hell or a turnover machine (and they need to actually hit on the homeruns). If they are looking for ball control they need to throw more high percentage passes and run the ball and let the defense get after the QB. 

Right now the Skins are doing a lot of everything and not much of it is working. 

I think there's a double edged sword to the "functional west coast" offense that is what we're seeing now. The functional west coast system minimizes the number of drives you have because you keep the clock moving, so you absolutely HAVE to score. Matt Stafford of the past several years could afford a punt because he could get 80 yards on one play. We can't afford a punt because we take 8 minutes to score.

 

Against the Steelers we had drives of 7, 9, 5, and 5 plays in the first half, yet managed only 6 points. In the second half it was 4, 9, 7, 5, and 6 plays.

Against the Cowboys it was 5, 8, 3, and 12 in the first half, and 8, 7, 5, 6, 7, and 7 plays.

 

To me, this really speaks volumes about our offense. We have almost no drives that are 3 and out. We're basically always able to generate a 1st down. But we also have almost no (one) drives going into double digits. This to me verifies out "between the 20s" success. But if you aren't converting these drives into touchdowns, then all you're doing is eating up your own time. If you're playing with a lead, this is okay. But the way we're built, because also GIVE UP long drives on defense, we don't give ourselves many opportunities to come back. 

 

I imagine this would look similar if you did TOP instead of just number of plays. I'll try to dig in to that when I get a little bit of free time. 

[KDawg]

 

I think there's a double edged sword to the "functional west coast" offense that is what we're seeing now. The functional west coast system minimizes the number of drives you have because you keep the clock moving, so you absolutely HAVE to score. Matt Stafford of the past several years could afford a punt because he could get 80 yards on one play. We can't afford a punt because we take 8 minutes to score.

 

Against the Steelers we had drives of 7, 9, 5, and 5 plays in the first half, yet managed only 6 points. In the second half it was 4, 9, 7, 5, and 6 plays.

Against the Cowboys it was 5, 8, 3, and 12 in the first half, and 8, 7, 5, 6, 7, and 7 plays.

 

To me, this really speaks volumes about our offense. We have almost no drives that are 3 and out. We're basically always able to generate a 1st down. But we also have almost no (one) drives going into double digits. This to me verifies out "between the 20s" success. But if you aren't converting these drives into touchdowns, then all you're doing is eating up your own time. If you're playing with a lead, this is okay. But the way we're built, because also GIVE UP long drives on defense, we don't give ourselves many opportunities to come back. 

 

I imagine this would look similar if you did TOP instead of just number of plays. I'll try to dig in to that when I get a little bit of free time. 

Well, if you don't chew the clock, your defense actually has to make a stop or twelve. 

[Hail4Life]

Passing team that can't stop other teams.