Gibbs Preseason Quote Scares Me - GameFilm Exposing Us?

[GatorEye]

I remember in preseason Gibbs saying that we had an advantage the first 4 games of the season because you get an opposing teams previous 4 games worth of film and since he had been out of the game so long and thus the lack of film on him, he'd have a 4 week advantage on the league.

We'll he's used up his 4 week advantage and correspondingly the offense appears to get worse with each week as more film of our offense becomes available. I'm wondering if wholesale changes are coming because I'm afraid minor tweaks to the offense aren't going to get it done. The more the defenses see, the worse it seems to get.

I wonder if this explains Cleveland's players saying they knew what plays were coming? It was really just properly dissecting the film.

[Ghost of]

I know this sounds ridiculous, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.

I've had opponents on Madden online diagnose my playcalling tendencies, and I am not predictable and I've done it to opponents.

From what I've seen, you can eliminate the deeper pass routes, so from there it ain't that hard to figure out how to predict the offense. Heck, the screens seemed to be the most surprising thing to the Ravens.

[bulldog]

we all know what is coming. Portis trying to run, Brunell short-arming passes beyond 20 yards and defenses jumping the shorter routes and knocking balls down or making jarring hits.

notice how our receivers are never really open? there is always 2 or 3 guys around even when we make the catch.

time for the team to add in the other 8 chapters of our 10 chapter offensive playbook by starting Ramsey

[Art]

When Gibbs was here the first time he kind of reinvented the offense every four weeks just to keep teams from using the coaching tape and developing a real fix on what he's doing. I don't know that you've really seen those changes yet here, though some of that may be just that we aren't getting anything going so it's hard to see anything at all.

Last year after four games it seemed Spurrier got conquered. Teams would trigger plays and would just eat us up. The only teams we had success with after the first four games was when we played stubborn teams like Seattle who liked doing their thing and not what everyone had seen on film that worked.

It is possible as teams are figuring out what Brunell can do and how Gibbs wants to use him that they are taking that knowledge and stuffing us with it. I just think it's a bit more problematic than that at this point.

[GatorEye]

Originally posted by Art

It is possible as teams are figuring out what Brunell can do and how Gibbs wants to use him that they are taking that knowledge and stuffing us with it. I just think it's a bit more problematic than that at this point.

That's what really worries me. It's not like we were doing anything particularly well in the first 4 weeks and things are getting worse. If we couldn't get off to the fast start like Spurrier when we had the advantage, it's going to be a tough hill to climb when we don't seem to have anything that works.

I guess on the flip side you could say Chicago can look at all that film and it could turn out to be useless because Gibbs could decide to chuck just about everything out the window because nothing seems to work with any consistency.

I did like that he tried to work Jacobs in the game a little more. I still say he needs to take more shots down the field, just to show we are willing to try. I think there is a middle ground between Spurrier's approach and what we are doing now. Gibbs just needs to figuratively settle into that soft spot in the zone so to speak and get us back on track.

At this point, I'd accept Ramsey just getting in there and winging it around more if only because the results can't be any worse than what we are seeing now. A loss is a loss.

[bulldog]

nothing opens up the run like the threat of the pass. we need to present the threat of the forward pass to the Bears next Sunday

Brunell's final stats in all but the Cowboys game have bene brutal, and against Dallas most of those yards came in a short burst in the fourth quarter.

We have seen none of the veteran experience and calm he supposedly brings to the table pay off in any demonstrable way.

With 3 turnovers in one half to work with the Redskins had the Ravens on the ropes and should have been able to apply the kill shot.

What Brunell and the offense have never done is give the defense a decent lead to work with and then NOT SELF-DESTRUCT to give all the points back! :mad:

You have to slap yourself across the face to believe the Redskins could lose a game in which the defense didn't give up a single touchdown!

[Art]

GE,

I don't know that I can say precisely what our problems are, but I think I have a pretty good idea. First, Gibbs appears to be much more system oriented than he was the first time around. He seems tied to certain types of plays and those plays are not ideally suited for the guys we have, unlike the first time when he seemed to continually reinvent the offense to fit the guys he had.

While no one is going to suggest Gibbs go away from the fundamental principles of his offense being sound running, max protect and play action, the fact is, the running we're doing is with a guy who is probably the fastest, quickest back in football. Running an offense, that by design, makes this running back slow in order to succeed, seems like something Gibbs would change more rapidly than he has so far.

No question once Portis develops some timing with things it'll look better. But, right now, you are essentially making the fastest, quickest running back in the league a slow guy. You're making him a sitting duck while the play develops. What makes him special is a skill we seem to have removed from the equation.

Obviously we seem to think once he develops that patience, with his explosion and quickness he may be even better than he's ever been, but there's no doubt it takes time to develop a chemistry running things like we are.

In the passing game the problem really may be tied almost totally to Brunell as the routes just seem strange and short. There is no layering you remember from Gibbs in the past, where several levels had viable options. I remember when Gibbs would run two receivers in a pattern with Sanders on the side of Rypien rolling out. He would run a post to the far side away from Rypien. Gibbs would have a receiver in front of Rypien like that little hitch we do now. And he'd drag a tight end into the flat to occupy the corner on the far side.

That left Sanders running all the way across the field against a safety. And Rypien would throw the ball across the field to him and it was open so often you couldn't believe it. Brunell may not be able to make that throw. Gibbs seems to not be willing to run those types of LONG-developing routes either to this point.

While many of us point to Brunell and say he lacks arm strength, to be truthful, I think the situation is more dire. I think it's that Gibbs really didn't have to face consistent blitzing defenses. He asked Williams to draw him up a few of his favorite blitzes when he hired him and Gibbs had never seen any of them.

Gibbs believes in max protect. But, he also is unaccustomed to heavy blitzing schemes. So, he seems to have shortened his passing game to accomplish both max protect AND quick release. The problem is teams aren't just pounding us with a constant blitz. Often we're running short stop routes into seven and eight man coverages and when we do uncork a long one, we are usually hitting that into a blitz.

I think a lot of the problem may go beyond Brunell not being able to throw certain routes. I think Gibbs is so unsure of the best way to consistently attack blitzing defenses that he has installed a WCO foundation.

It'll take time for him to develop a feel for the timing of hitting the right play call. But, to me, it just seems that Gibbs is taking away his best player's greatest strength to FORCE him to be more patient within a running scheme and he's unsure of how to attack attacking defenses so he's shortened everything down until he develops a feel.

In both cases it will take either an adjustment or time to rectify.

[Commander PK]

I think our biggest problem is simply the lack of a deep threat. The opposing defenses KNOW that we are not going to throw the ball deep, we only do it when we have to. That is our problem, among others, but without a doubt our most glaring.

[sammino]

we need to make changes with who is starting on offense like QB, maybe put ray brown at left guard, he may be more effective in openiing holes for portis than dockery has been.... change our playcalling, give mccants a shot atleast in the redzone, if he been in i bet we would have score 2 more touchdowns atleast of fieldgoals.

[GatorEye]

Art,

I always enjoy your thoughful and insightful analysis. I'm wondering how well Gibbs could really know about the talent in the league. And yes, I'm sure he looked at a lot of film. But without turning this into a VC bashing session, do you think Gibbs was really in a good position to go for some of the guys he did? I mean, getting Portis for example just seems like the type of guy not real suited for what Gibbs wants to do, per your example.

I do remember a lot more deeper balls thrown back in our glory years and that is what is so perplexing to me that we haven't seen more of it. It just seemed more open back then but maybe my memory has it wrong. It seemed like guys like Clark and Sanders were running open all over the place especially that one year with Rip where it seemed like he completed every long ball he threw. It also seems like we're missing a guy like Monk who could always find a spot to settle in just a half yard pass the first down marker on third down. Now it seems like we hope a guy can run after the catch for a first down, which doesn't seem to be too successful.

[Awesome]

Originally posted by bulldog

You have to slap yourself across the face to believe the Redskins could lose a game in which the defense didn't give up a single touchdown!

HA! funniest thing i've heard all season. :laugh:

Don't forget the THREE int's...

effing highlarious :puke:

[Stone Cold]

imo, i think we need to open it up more. by that, i mean, perhaps, we should see more 3 or 4 wr sets. spread the d out. even if we can't throw it vertically, the nature of the spread offense should open up some lanes for portis. this is not out of the realm of the gibbs gameplan either...see monk, sanders, clark. for now, i say dump the two te/wr sets and open it up. oh well, what do i know

[afparent]

I just want to see some changes in philosphy. Even if we do execute one game, teams will catch up to us eventually. Does anyone know of a team that can run right at you and dare you to stop them with a "little" back? I think smaller backs needs misdirection and surprises to excel. We just can't bang him into the line time after time, especially on short yardage situations when everyone knows he is going to get the ball. I think he needs a lead back.