Redskins Offense: Fewest Points Since 1978.....

[bulldog]

The Times article today noted that the Redskins were on pace to post perhaps their lowest season point total since the NFL moved to a 16 game season in 1978.

That is something to consider. Remember the 6-10 Redskins under Pardee in 1980 when Joe Theismann and John Riggins missed the season due to injuries and in the latter's case a contract holdout?

Remember the 1993 Redskins that were 4-12 under Petitbon and endured the futility of losing 3-0 to the Jets in a nationally televised game with Rich Gannon at quarterback?

Remember the 1994 Redskins under Norv who ended up starting journeyman John Friesz at quarterback and were still trying out Desmond Howard and Reggie Brooks for starting roles on the team?

And this team is on pace to outdo them??????

This offense qualifies as an unmitigated disaster. Not only have Marty and Jimmy Raye failed to use the available talent on hand to full effect, their decisions to keep Jeff George and Michael Westbrook despite their poor fit in the scheme backfired when George was released before the season really even started in earnest and Westbrook was an extra jersey on the field for 10 weeks.

Did you ever see someone get less out of more?

Tony Banks has thrown 9 touchdowns in 12 starts. Stephen Davis has 3 touchdowns in 14 games.

Marty is putting Banks through the proverbial water torture by publicly showing enough confidence in him to keep him on board as the starter, but then undermines him in games by having him hand off on third and 10 and refusing to allow him to build any momentum early by having the receivers run 5 yard routes on third and 15.

Banks is not the answer at quarterback long-term. I think we all know that. Neither is Westbrook going to be our go-to receiver when this team becomes a contender.

But they are the options that Marty chose to go with this season on offense at the playmaker spots of qb and wr and he is bound to attempt to get the most out of them and the other players such as Davis and Gardner.

Davis is a good enough runner where even a quixotic offense like this still allows him to get 1,200 to 1,300 yards. In essence he is Marty proof.

Gardner has had a nice rookie season. Good per catch average, decent yardage for this offense while suffering the drops and inconsistency typical of most first year players.

But how Marty got to Gardner as the go-to receiver in his first NFL game is beyond me.

I thought that was why the Redskins brought in Lockett and kept Westbrook around.

THOSE were the veterans Marty was going to count on while Gardner was learning the pro game.

Instead those players barely touched the ball the first 10 weeks while the offense consisted solely of the running of Davis and the play action pass to Gardner.

On the face of it, not enough of a varied attack to post 25-30 points on many NFL teams I dare say.

Against a rebuilding Dallas team the Redskins scored 7 and 14 points in two games. The 9-5 Eagles scored 40 and 36 in two easy wins. The Giants scored 27 in their early season win. The Raiders 28. The Chargers 32. The Seahawks 29. Even the Cardinals earned a split this season, winning by 7 at home.

Just awful.

And this is a coaching staff that needs "no changes" according to Marty?

Now, that sounds like a friend and father talking rather than a General Manager of a 6-8 football team he said was ready to challenge for the conference title.

The Redskins need to hire a GM for precisely the same reason the Panthers do: The GM cannot make a critical assessment of the on field performance of the team under the present Head Coach, because they share the same hair piece

Having Marty as the GM and HC is like allowing high school students to grade their own exams.

Think you will find any students who flunk themselves so they have to attend summer school?

[OrangeSkin]

Ouch! Well, at least we're not the worst in NFL history.

I remember that Jets game. Talk about pitiful. I was watching it in a bar, and everybody practically crapped themselves from laughing so hard...Now that was a game for the ages.

[RF4L]

bulldog, how the heck do you keep writing these eloquent posts about this team without literally crushing the mouse in your bare hand?

my hat's off to you bro'. I've been so mad at this bunch this season, especially over the past month, that I'm having to tune-out Redskins to keep my sanity.

Seriously, did Marty waste this season on purpose? Sure looks that way.

[SkinsThug]

My question is: How do we hope to compete with fellow NFC teams that can put up SERIOUS points against strong defenses, ie the Rams, Niners, Packers, and perhaps even Chicago next year if they get a talented QB?

The answer is we can't.

These are the teams we will have to face in the oncoming years if we make it to the playoffs, and I have seen nothing in our offensive scheme this year that suggests we will ever be able to score over 20 points on a consistent basis.

But as this season draws to a close, and we start gearing up for free agency and the draft, hope springs eternal.

In the age of parity, ANYTHING can happen from one season to the next. GO SKINS!

[JMac]

Bulldog, that is the best article I have read this year! You hit every point thatI think every person on this board felt. Now, can you please overnight a copy to Shotty and Snyder?

[NavyDave]

I say send it to News4 for Sonny and George Michael to talk about on the Redskins Report.

------------------

Take A Sip of the Marty KoolAid and Believe.

[TennesseeCarl]

That was a terrific post, Bulldog. I'd like to say something to the effect of, "But what about the emergence of the defense?"

But the truth is, even though it appears the defense is playing better, when crunch time comes (and crunch time usually is associated with a Silver Star) we lay down and give up 200 yards or so on the ground.

We rank 21st in the league vs. the run. You can't win that way. I know that "if you throw out the first 5 times" our stats are better. But the league doesn't permit you to 'mulligan' 5 games. They did count and the stats counted as well.

It's going to be an active off-season for the Skins, with 18 free agents. The roster's going to have a very different look next year. But if the same guys are operating the offense, it's hard to see how we're going to improve.

[Art]

What I find interesting is that Marty has two jobs here, in GM and head coach. And in one of those jobs he has no experience, GM. In the other, he's a proven success, winning games and making teams better. Yet, the only way to assess him this season with Washington is that he's a mild failure as a coach and a great success as GM.

I have many problems with what I see him doing with this team as a coach. Every game I see things I just don't like. That doesn't make them incorrect, it just makes them things I don't like. Given the performance of our offense, I could even say it makes them incorrect . But, even our defense, improving as it is, is NOT what it should be. We should be an in your face on every down defense. We should NEVER get out of man coverage on the corners unless we've won the game and we're just running out the clock. We should be bringing pressure like the Eagles.

Hell, we should be the Eagles defense, as we are very similar units in many ways. But, we still play far too much like we have overpowering personnel and we do not. Hell, look at Marvin Lewis in Baltimore. Perhaps the reason he didn't get a head coaching job is because people saw what he is as a coach and as a coach he's just not very good.

Sure, he designed a nice defensive scheme and had great personnel in which to run it, but, without that personnel, when forced to adapt to some weakness, he's been outsmarted and outschemed by the opposition much of the year. He's not made ANY adjustments to injury or to his design or playcalling to account for the changes teams are presenting him. Hell, he's become Mike Nolan with far better talent.

While I see a lot about Marty I do not like, I knew that coming in. I knew he wasn't going to be a genius coach that just outsmarted the opposition with his design. So, what I'm seeing doesn't surprise me in that sense. What does surprise me is we are still undisciplined. Hell, I remember a quote from Marty early about penalties where he said, he understands how sometimes they happen, but, they'd better never happen before the snap. If they happen before the snap that just means you aren't paying attention.

And, here we are, the league leaders in pre-snap penalties. In Marty, we were to get a coach that brought a strict scheme and that played disciplined, tough football. We do have a team that is playing some tough football, but it's not disciplined and if we don't get that out of Marty, we can't win big with Marty. If the mistakes we've seen this year continue, Marty can't succeed like he has because his teams HAVE to play without mistakes to be greatly successful.

This style is a winning style as we are seeing this year, and last with the Ravens and in Marty's past. We just don't play it well yet and Marty, as a coach, has been slow to bring it here. Still, where he's been successful is as a GM. His personnel decisions have largely been of a very high quality.

He's given $80 million to spend, and spends just $53 million so as to clear the decks for his plan he wishes to employ in seasons to come. Here is a clear example of the GM screwing the Head Coach. The GM here shaved the allowance for the future at the expense of the present and the Head Coach in charge can't like that.

That they are the same tells me Marty CAN distinguish his job roles and he has laid out a plan of attack he wants to pursue. As a GM, the players he brought in have all been good signings. Even Banks has been a good signing. We've gotten very solid performance out of Coleman, Gardner, Smoot, Jones, Rasby, Szott and Pierce. We've seen adequate performance from Bennett, Lockett, Lyle and Banks. We have seen a GM who was bargain shopping in free agency, and still came up with a way to turn an atrocious special teams unit into a generally solid one, picking up quality return men in Bates and eventually Metcalf, and building a prideful unit.

This is part coaching too of course.

The GM didn't cut George fast enough. I wouldn't have cut George either. I don't fault Marty the GM or the Head Coach for sticking with George. He didn't sign George, but, he stuck with him and it didn't work out. Hell, I credit him for having the willingness to shed George when he did in an effort to salvage something.

I think this team needs to shake up the coaching staff, especially on the offensive side. But, I do not believe it's crucial to get a GM. I think the present GM did a great job this year. He charted a course for the future and stuck with it. Taking risks that have largely played out well. Terrell is a valuable player, and while not a top-line starter, he's a quality guy and great coverage safety. The GM didn't flinch when the coach wanted to start Mitchell and Smoot and Terrell. He didn't flinch when Lang was to be a full time tackle. The GM said, "We have to clear room for the future," while the coach told him, "I believe in what we have at some spots." And in this configuration at the top, the coach and GM believed in each other.

I can't think of many places where the GM would have allowed the coach to take this many risks. And I don't know many places where the coach would have been happy with the GM not spending his budget. Marty said it his first day. "The good news is, I have a plan. The bad news may be, I have a plan."

------------------

Doom is in the box.

[shamaran]

I agree, Bulldog. The position of "The Man" is tough enough these days. For Marty to be GM and coach, spreads him and his efforts too thin.

It also goes against the basic checks & balances system that has proven to be most effective in sports, politics and in general.

Marty's GMing wasn't bad this season. His handling, however, of the QB did leave a lot to be desired.

It is also hard to forget what contribution Centers could have made in a dink and dunk scheme without a healthy pass-catching TE.

The biggest reason Drassner and Dano may opt to backpeddle on showing Marty the door -- is they have to know how foolish they will look -- AGAIN.

[bulldog]

a few things bother me in trying to split the grade on Marty and separate out his performances as GM and HC. To me they are inextricably linked.

first, as a head coach and GM it is hard for me to believe that based on the poor practices cited in training camp and the performance of the team in the first couple of preseason games, that Marty could be so far removed to not know there was serious dissension brewing with the veteran players and that some action was necessary to remedy the situation. The fact it took him almost 2 months to come to grips with that after the 45-13 loss to the Chiefs at home is something that is truly unexplainable to me.

second, it is also hard for me to believe that a GM or HC worth his salt would look up and down a roster of talent on offense and conclude in the offseason that Jeff George, Michael Westbrook and Stephen Davis along with Donnell Bennett at FB were the cornerstones of a productive WCO. The fact the offense changed with Banks in the lineup (who prefers to run the downfield passing game that George does as well) only tells me that at some point DURING the season Marty and Raye came to the conclusion that the players here were not suited to the plays being run and adaptations were necessary. That decision could and should have been reached much earlier on than it was. I attribute this failure to pure stubbornness on Marty's part. It took the worst start in 40 years for the mirror to be taken out of the pocket and for a realistic assessment to be made.

third, I recognize that Jeff George was inherited and does have some ability. If Marty had been more willing to suit the offense to Jeff's skills then I would have thought the decision to go with him as the starter might have made some sense, especially in light of how Marty wanted to manage the cap. But with the introduction of a controlled passing game and the mercurial personality of Jeff George well-known it would have been prudent to acquire a backup quarterback who provided some insurance in case Jeff didn't turn out to be a good fit. Instead Marty went with a player in Todd Husak that was essentially a rookie and someone that would not push Jeff George to achieve but rather to sit on his laurels as no one expected Husak to be a legitimate starter if George faltered.

While there are other poor moves and some quite nice ones as well (Smoot, Carter, Coleman, Pierce, Gardner) that Marty made in 2001 the underlying theme to me is of a coach and GM that missed out on some important things on a macro level in running an NFL team, things you look to do FIRST off the bat, things like matching your talent with the proposed scheme, keeping your antennas up to ensure there is buyin from the players early on, backing yourself up at key positions where the starters have a past history of being troublesome or uncoachable.

Those are things you don't expect an experienced NFL executive to miss on.

It takes every new coach a period to become established and teams with first year coaches are rarely Super Bowl contenders.

At the same time you really have to wonder how the Redskins got to the point where they were forced to release their starting quarterback after just the second game of the season and replace him with a player that was cut by a 5-11 team that was likely headed to the cellar in 2001.

That is the type of situation a top coach does not fall into at the most critical position on the team.