Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Welcome to the Redskins Antonio Gibson, RB/WR Memphis

zCommander

By zCommander
in The Stadium

 Share

Recommended Posts

Voice_of_Reason

Voice_of_Reason

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, COWBOY-KILLA- said:

McKissic has been solid and a nice change of pace but to say he’s is the best back on the roster is a huge overstatement imo. To me it’s not very close as to who is the best back on the roster. AG is superior both physically and statistically, in almost every way. 

For whatever it’s worth, Cooley says McKissic right now is the best back in terms on knowing what to do when.  And he’s got some quicks also. 
 

Gibson is so raw. He is going to learn and grow every week.  He’s got a higher upside. But he’s not there yet. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
COWBOY-KILLA-

COWBOY-KILLA-

Posted
Posted

Physically its not even a little close. Being the “best” mentally is great and yes the nod would go to McKissic today, granted he’s a vet. But when you are so talent poor on the offensive side of the ball and your drives have to be 10-15 plays long, someone with AG’a ability should be fed, and fed very well, imo. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OVCChairman

OVCChairman

Posted
Posted
Just now, COWBOY-KILLA- said:

Physically its not even a little close. Being the “best” mentally is great and yes the nod would go to McKissic today, granted he’s a vet. But when you are so talent poor on the offensive side of the ball and your drives have to be 10-15 plays long, someone with AG’a ability should be fed, and fed very well, imo. 

 

 

Why force feed him when McKissic has been very effective?  4.7 ypc avg and he's dynamic enough in the pass game (7.3 ypr / 5.5 ypt) to be effective.  Gibson is clearly the focus in the backfield but why not use the weapons you have.  At those numbers... McKissic has a definite use in this offense.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Voice_of_Reason

Voice_of_Reason

Posted
Posted

I think we’re arguing about the definition of “best.”

 

Why can’t we just say there’s a role for both of them, Gibson is developing and McKissic has more experience?

 

Also, on the 2 point play against the Giants, apparently the play was designed to go to Gibson and he just bumfuzzled the route.  Cooley had it in his filmbreakdown.  And said if it was him, he would have had McKissic running the route right now. 
 

Gibson has more talent and power, and they want to get him the majority of touches. McKissic has better sense of the offense and what to do, and has quicker feet. 
 

There’s a role for both of them.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDawg

KDawg

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I think we’re arguing about the definition of “best.”

 

Why can’t we just say there’s a role for both of them, Gibson is developing and McKissic has more experience?

 

Also, on the 2 point play against the Giants, apparently the play was designed to go to Gibson and he just bumfuzzled the route.  Cooley had it in his filmbreakdown.  And said if it was him, he would have had McKissic running the route right now. 
 

Gibson has more talent and power, and they want to get him the majority of touches. McKissic has better sense of the offense and what to do, and has quicker feet. 
 

There’s a role for both of them.  


Exactly what I said a page or so back. Full agreement.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewCliche21

NewCliche21

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, KDawg said:


Except it’s not silly. It’s football. McKissick is a better running back right now. Why is that a bad thing? :ols:

 

I don't understand what's so hard to understand about this.

 

How could it EVER be a bad thing to have two running backs that are both playing really well?  If 24 or 41 is better is irrelevant; the fact is that we have two players who are really good.  One being better doesn't mean the other one is bad.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wit33

wit33

Posted
Posted

Have to think Gibson's ability to run the go route and slants provides unique schematic advantages that can make a 2RB offense a pillar of an offense. Meaning, he has the ability to threaten teams down field, most receiving backs operate underneath. 
 

Dare I say, use him like Marshall Faulk? He’s one of my top 5 backs ever. His ability to run intermediate routes was incredibly unique. Point being, Gibson should have the capability to run intermediate and deep routes making the offense more dynamic with he and Mckissic on the field. 
 

I go this direction with the topic, due to knowing there must be a reason a 2RB offense has never been a pillar for an offense. Not that I can think of. Anyone?

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Voice_of_Reason

Voice_of_Reason

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, wit33 said:

Have to think Gibson's ability to run the go route and slants provides unique schematic advantages that can make a 2RB offense a pillar of an offense. Meaning, he has the ability to threaten teams down field, most receiving backs operate underneath. 
 

Dare I say, use him like Marshall Faulk? He’s one of my top 5 backs ever. His ability to run intermediate routes was incredibly unique. Point being, Gibson should have the capability to run intermediate and deep routes making the offense more dynamic with he and Mckissic on the field. 
 

I go this direction with the topic, due to knowing there must be a reason a 2RB offense has never been a pillar for an offense. Not that I can think of. Anyone?

 

But he hasn’t actually shown he can do that at the NFL level. 
 

He might get there, but his route running right now isn’t there yet.  
 

I’d like for him first to develop into something approaching McCaffrey, where he catches a ton of balls out of the backfield.  Once he can do that, then we can start thinking about splitting him out wide. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OVCChairman

OVCChairman

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, wit33 said:

Have to think Gibson's ability to run the go route and slants provides unique schematic advantages that can make a 2RB offense a pillar of an offense. Meaning, he has the ability to threaten teams down field, most receiving backs operate underneath. 
 

Dare I say, use him like Marshall Faulk? He’s one of my top 5 backs ever. His ability to run intermediate routes was incredibly unique. Point being, Gibson should have the capability to run intermediate and deep routes making the offense more dynamic with he and Mckissic on the field. 
 

I go this direction with the topic, due to knowing there must be a reason a 2RB offense has never been a pillar for an offense. Not that I can think of. Anyone?

 

 

In the NFL?  Not really.  The Giants did something with the old 'Thunder and Lightning' days with Tiki and Dayne.   New Orleans did something similar with Reggie Bush, Pierre Thomas, and Deuce McAllister.  

 

Larry Johnson and Priest Holmes were a pretty damn potent 1 - 2 punch in KC.   Most 'tandems' have been systems run where one RB supplements the other, instead of a 'true' dual RB system.  I've wanted so bad to see more of Gibson and McKissic on the field together.  The versatility there is insane and you can pretty much dictate your matchup by pre snap motions and audibles.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
XxSpearheadxX

XxSpearheadxX

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

McKissic is the better back "right now".

And Barber is the back who the coaches obviously trust the most in pass pro. I have to imagine for young RBs, regardless of talent, learning schemes and dealing with an NFL pass rush must be massive adjustment. There is no conceivable reason Barber would see the field otherwise, he is pretty solid in pass pro. 

Edited by XxSpearheadxX
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wit33

wit33

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, XxSpearheadxX said:

And Barber is the back who the coaches obviously trust the most in pass pro. I have to imagine for young RBs, regardless of talent, learning schemes and dealing with an NFL pass rush must be massive adjustment. There is no conceivable reason Barber would see the field otherwise, he is pretty solid in pass pro. 


It seems like it’s more short yardage work than 3rd and medium or long situations that Barber is involved in. My thinking was Gibson lost that work to Barber due to lack of vision and patience. Lost trust of staff to get the need led 1 to 2 yards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
XxSpearheadxX

XxSpearheadxX

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, wit33 said:


It seems like it’s more short yardage work than 3rd and medium or long situations that Barber is involved in. My thinking was Gibson lost that work to Barber due to lack of vision and patience. Lost trust of staff to get the need led 1 to 2 yards. 

I've just noticed that when the back is staying in to block its often barber, mckissic and gibson are more often running routes in the flat. I feel like the last two games Gibson has been the short yardage back, though I agree earlier in the season barber seemed to be always doing it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skinny21

skinny21

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, XxSpearheadxX said:

I've just noticed that when the back is staying in to block its often barber, mckissic and gibson are more often running routes in the flat. I feel like the last two games Gibson has been the short yardage back, though I agree earlier in the season barber seemed to be always doing it. 

 I got the impression they tried Gibson a couple/few times more recently, which makes sense given his power, contact balance and ability to move the target on tacklers to limit direct hits.  With that said, I thought they went back to Barber afterwards (though I could be wrong and it could have been more situational - ie. late and with the big lead).  

I am not a fan of Barber because he is just so limited, but he has seemed to do a good job in his role - short yardage, pass pro, and closing out games... well, one game anyway.  It’s an important role and should serve as a good example to Gibson as he tries to expand his toolbox.

 

Have I missed any word on Bryce Love?  Even if/when he’s fully healthy, it’s going to be a challenge to unseat one of these guys given how they are being used.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
method man

method man

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, skinny21 said:

 I got the impression they tried Gibson a couple/few times more recently, which makes sense given his power, contact balance and ability to move the target on tacklers to limit direct hits.  With that said, I thought they went back to Barber afterwards (though I could be wrong and it could have been more situational - ie. late and with the big lead).  

I am not a fan of Barber because he is just so limited, but he has seemed to do a good job in his role - short yardage, pass pro, and closing out games... well, one game anyway.  It’s an important role and should serve as a good example to Gibson as he tries to expand his toolbox.

 

Have I missed any word on Bryce Love?  Even if/when he’s fully healthy, it’s going to be a challenge to unseat one of these guys given how they are being used.


He can’t catch as well as McKissic, doesn’t have Gibson’s top gear/home run ability and lacks Barber’s power and pass pro.


It’s a shame because this system is a good fit for him

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...