Re: Al Saunders
 

At least we're not all still bitter about the season.

Re: Al Saunders
 

I'm not bashing Saunders. Im totally for him as the offensive coordinator. We need to lose some of 40 coaches let OC and DC do their jobs at the offense and defense. The offense was not explosive it was that we playing teams who could not stop the run. We ran to set up the playaction pass for Campbell to get the ball downfield. To me it a pathetic offense. I do agree with you Gabe1984. We ran a lot to help a first year starter in this complex offense. I just think that we have to take our bumps and bruises and should have let him learn on the fly instead of protecting him. Just as Clinton Portis says every qb is going to throw interceptions. Eventually this offense is going to be very explosive only when Joe Gibbs leaves the playcalling to Al Saunders.
As far as the personnel issue I have I just want Gibbs to leave the offense to Saunders and let him pick the players he would like to run the offense. I guarantee that Saunders did not want Brunell to be the quarterback of this offense. I believe that he wanted Collins to start and for Campbell to learn but it totally did not play out like that. As far as why there was no paragraphs I was just frustrated and did not want to take time and do that. I just wanted to vent my anger as to how things are within the Redskins organization.

Re: Al Saunders
 

With regard to the size of the coaching staff being an issue, that argument holds some water. Sonny and Sam mentioned that issue in during the game against the Eagles when the Redskins got called for too many men in the huddle and it helped kill their drive. It seems that having the 40 headed monster for a coaching staff might lead to some confusion amongst the players.

Re: Al Saunders
 

[quote=skinsfan69;268189]Here is the main problem w/ Gibbs and Saunders. Saunders likes to get 5 guys out in the pass patterns. Gibbs likes to send out 3 and keep everyone else in to pass protect. Gibbs is going to have to give in if this offense is ever going to reach it's full potential. In the NFL you have to pass to score and run to win. And right now our passing game isn't good enough to win on a consistent basis. Can anyone tell me when was the last time we threw for 300 yards?[/quote]

But does it make any sense to send 5 guys out in pass routes when you have a young QB just learning how to make reads? I mean isn't that exactly what Spurrier did to Ramsey?

When a QB is older and wiser, and has been in the offense for a while, like Trent Green, then you can send 5 guys out and the QB can probably make the reads and decisions fast enough to beat the pass rush. But a young QB like Campbell is slower to read and react, and needs more time than that. He'll end up holding onto the ball too long and taking mad sacks, or he'll end up making bad decisions and getting picked.

I strongly favor Gibbs' approach for the sake of a young QB's development. Max protect is your friend. Win the game on the ground, and take your shots through the air without sacrificing protection.

Re: Al Saunders
 

[quote=Sean"Big Hurt"Taylor;268210]I'm not bashing Saunders. Im totally for him as the offensive coordinator. We need to lose some of 40 coaches let OC and DC do their jobs at the offense and defense. The offense was not explosive it was that we playing teams who could not stop the run. We ran to set up the playaction pass for Campbell to get the ball downfield. To me it a pathetic offense. I do agree with you Gabe1984. We ran a lot to help a first year starter in this complex offense. I just think that we have to take our bumps and bruises and should have let him learn on the fly instead of protecting him. Just as Clinton Portis says every qb is going to throw interceptions. Eventually this offense is going to be very explosive only when Joe Gibbs leaves the playcalling to Al Saunders.
As far as the personnel issue I have I just want Gibbs to leave the offense to Saunders and let him pick the players he would like to run the offense. I guarantee that Saunders did not want Brunell to be the quarterback of this offense. I believe that he wanted Collins to start and for Campbell to learn but it totally did not play out like that. As far as why there was no paragraphs I was just frustrated and did not want to take time and do that. I just wanted to vent my anger as to how things are within the Redskins organization.[/quote]

Well it would be one thing if Al Saunders could just dump our current offensive line and just go sign all of his guys from KC. But he can't because of the salary cap. It's just not realistic. You can't just bring in a 5-wide, air it out, run on the edges, throw screen passes offensive philosophy to a team that is built for power running.

Gibbs admitted he underestimated the difference in offensive philosophies between him and Saunders. With hindsight being 20/20, Gibbs has all but admitted that bringing in Saunders was a mistake.

Re: Al Saunders
 

[QUOTE=Sean"Big Hurt"Taylor;268210]I'm not bashing Saunders. Im totally for him as the offensive coordinator. We need to lose some of 40 coaches let OC and DC do their jobs at the offense and defense. The offense was not explosive it was that we playing teams who could not stop the run. We ran to set up the playaction pass for Campbell to get the ball downfield. To me it a pathetic offense. I do agree with you Gabe1984. We ran a lot to help a first year starter in this complex offense. I just think that we have to take our bumps and bruises and should have let him learn on the fly instead of protecting him. Just as Clinton Portis says every qb is going to throw interceptions. Eventually this offense is going to be very explosive only when Joe Gibbs leaves the playcalling to Al Saunders.
As far as the personnel issue I have I just want Gibbs to leave the offense to Saunders and let him pick the players he would like to run the offense. I guarantee that Saunders did not want Brunell to be the quarterback of this offense. I believe that he wanted Collins to start and for Campbell to learn but it totally did not play out like that. As far as why there was no paragraphs I was just frustrated and did not want to take time and do that. I just wanted to vent my anger as to how things are within the Redskins organization.[/QUOTE]

Too frustrated to take the time to hit to "Enter" a couple of times to make paragraphs, but not too frustrated to type up a rambling rant, eh? ;)

And, um, are we now saying why wasn't Todd Collins our starting QB?

Re: Al Saunders
 

When an actor is playing a role and he doesn't believe in what he's doing, doesn't know how to play the role with any confidence, then the audience doesn't believe in him, and everything comes off as false.

The Redskins were asked on offense to play a new role, and they didn't believe in what they were doing, didn't play the role with any confidence, and the fans didn't believe in them, and everything came off as false in general.

The mistake the Redskins made was not including the players in the decision making process as to what kind of offense to run. Maybe that is not normally done, but I think it was called for here. It is one thing to hire Saunders without consulting the players, but it is another to impose an offense on them without the players having any real say in the matter.

Joe Gibbs didn't realize that the offense of Saunders was going to be so different. On paper, maybe it didn't look as different, but in terms of the mindset of the players playing it, it is very different.

Finally Coach Gibbs realized that we had to go back to Redskins football. That means football that the Redskins know how to play - roles they are confident in playing out, that ring true when they do. Gibbs has his personality and that is what sets the tone with the team. Saunders came in and starting playing a different tone, and the two didn't mix.

So now the task is for Saunders to recognize that he has to adapt his system to the team, and not simply try to impose his system and let them sink or swim.

I am hopeful that things will work out. I am optimistic about next season.

Re: Al Saunders
 

[quote=SouperMeister;268206]LMFAO!!![/quote]

Off season is officially here!

Re: Al Saunders
 

[quote=Oakland Red;268255]When an actor is playing a role and he doesn't believe in what he's doing, doesn't know how to play the role with any confidence, then the audience doesn't believe in him, and everything comes off as false.

The Redskins were asked on offense to play a new role, and they didn't believe in what they were doing, didn't play the role with any confidence, and the fans didn't believe in them, and everything came off as false in general.

The mistake the Redskins made was not including the players in the decision making process as to what kind of offense to run. Maybe that is not normally done, but I think it was called for here. It is one thing to hire Saunders without consulting the players, but it is another to impose an offense on them without the players having any real say in the matter.

Joe Gibbs didn't realize that the offense of Saunders was going to be so different. On paper, maybe it didn't look as different, but in terms of the mindset of the players playing it, it is very different.

Finally Coach Gibbs realized that we had to go back to Redskins football. That means football that the Redskins know how to play - roles they are confident in playing out, that ring true when they do. Gibbs has his personality and that is what sets the tone with the team. Saunders came in and starting playing a different tone, and the two didn't mix.

So now the task is for Saunders to recognize that he has to adapt his system to the team, and not simply try to impose his system and let them sink or swim.

I am hopeful that things will work out. I am optimistic about next season.[/quote]

Real nice post.

Re: Al Saunders
 

[quote=Schneed10;268226]But does it make any sense to send 5 guys out in pass routes when you have a young QB just learning how to make reads? I mean isn't that exactly what Spurrier did to Ramsey?

When a QB is older and wiser, and has been in the offense for a while, like Trent Green, then you can send 5 guys out and the QB can probably make the reads and decisions fast enough to beat the pass rush. But a young QB like Campbell is slower to read and react, and needs more time than that. He'll end up holding onto the ball too long and taking mad sacks, or he'll end up making bad decisions and getting picked.

[I][B] I strongly favor Gibbs' approach for the sake of a young QB's development. Max protect is your friend. Win the game on the ground, and take your shots through the air without sacrificing protection.[/B][/I][/quote]

That's how I feel it should be all next year as well. As I've mentioned before, run, run, run and let Saunders throw in some of his innovativeness along the way.

We see now the benefits of having a strong-armed QB and the running game is only going to benefit next year. With those kind of options, why even try end-arounds, five-wide sets when you can get by just running the ball and throwing it when you have to. Sometimes, it's just overkill.

I firmly believe that if the defense can at least get back into average mode, we'll be a playoff team again. We need a top ten defense for a Super Bowl run.

Re: Al Saunders
 

When Campbell, Moss, Randle El, and (maybe) Lloyd have time to get on the same page, this offense should be able to do whatever it wants, whenever it wants.

Re: Al Saunders
 

[quote=Schneed10;268226]But does it make any sense to send 5 guys out in pass routes when you have a young QB just learning how to make reads? I mean isn't that exactly what Spurrier did to Ramsey?

When a QB is older and wiser, and has been in the offense for a while, like Trent Green, then you can send 5 guys out and the QB can probably make the reads and decisions fast enough to beat the pass rush. But a young QB like Campbell is slower to read and react, and needs more time than that. He'll end up holding onto the ball too long and taking mad sacks, or he'll end up making bad decisions and getting picked.

I strongly favor Gibbs' approach for the sake of a young QB's development. Max protect is your friend. Win the game on the ground, and take your shots through the air without sacrificing protection.[/quote]

Gibbs acts like JC is a frickin little baby. He needs to stop coddleling him. Sending 3 guys out on 3rd down is outdated. JC STARTED AT AURBURN FOR 4 YEARS. He can handle it. In certain situations you can send out 5 guys. Like on 1st down? Not all the time but some of the time you have to do it. This is why we don't score enough TD's becasue our offense is too conservative. Or how about running a hurry up offense next year some of the time? I watched Pennington do it and he can't even throw the ball. We need to diversify the offense.

Re: Al Saunders
 

[quote=Beemnseven;268328]When Campbell, Moss, Randle El, and (maybe) Lloyd have time to get on the same page, this offense should be able to do whatever it wants, whenever it wants.[/quote]Not to be a hater, but couldn't that be said about most any team? "When <QB>, <Top WR>, <other WRs>, get on the same page (translation: start playing better), they will be unstoppable!"

Our passing game fell off the map after the Dallas win, and although a lot of that was Jason Campbell's inexpierience, a lot of that was protection issues caused in part by a lack of Portis. Brunell's stats likely would have declined had we kept him in there also, although he still likely would have completed more passes per game than Campbell.

I have full faith in Campbell 07.

Re: Al Saunders
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;268388]Not to be a hater, but couldn't that be said about most any team? "When <QB>, <Top WR>, <other WRs>, get on the same page (translation: start playing better), they will be unstoppable!"

Our passing game fell off the map after the Dallas win, and although a lot of that was Jason Campbell's inexpierience, a lot of that was protection issues caused in part by a lack of Portis. Brunell's stats likely would have declined had we kept him in there also, although he still likely would have completed more passes per game than Campbell.

I have full faith in Campbell 07.[/QUOTE]

Well, take your pick with Brunell's high percentage short passing, versus Campbell's riskier down field passing. Either way, the offense was doomed in '06. The naysayers were right about Brunell, the new offense was too much for a one-year transition, and Campbell was going to make the rookie mistakes sooner or later.

And yes, I guess all fans say that about receivers and QBs. But in our case, Campbell [I]does[/I] need time to develop chemistry with Moss, ARE, and Lloyd only because he ran with the practice squad guys for most of the year while Brunell ran with the starters.

Re: Al Saunders
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection;268202]And spelling is yours. ;)[/QUOTE]

Auwsum!