Saunders and the Fullback.
 

It has been no secret that Portis said he loved having a fullback in front of him. With Saunders in as coordinator won't a fullback be a staple for this offense? If so, what happens to Cooley? Does he get moved to a pure TE position, and we draft/FA a fullback? Use Sellers? Maybe someone a little more familliar with Saunders can give me a little help!

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

It would be hard to imagine a Gibbs offense without a H-back. So who knows what will happen.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

I thought Portis said he likes running out of the singleback better??

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

if they do start using a fb a lot, they should definitely use sellers

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I thought Portis said he likes running out of the singleback better??[/QUOTE]

Thats what i thought.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

i dunno, if we started using a fullback i would use sellers and put cooley in as a tight end.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

KC runs a lot of single back sets. He used blocking backs too, but wouldn't hesitate to run out of 3 WR sets either.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]It has been no secret that Portis said he loved having a fullback in front of him. With Saunders in as coordinator won't a fullback be a staple for this offense? If so, what happens to Cooley? Does he get moved to a pure TE position, and we draft/FA a fullback? Use Sellers? Maybe someone a little more familliar with Saunders can give me a little help![/QUOTE]

I believe he'll implement more fullback lead running sets - I don't believe it will be the only running set we implement. We'll more than likely continue to use the same Joe Gibbs syle of running attacks - counter Trey plays, and also the Denver plays we implemented for Portis this past season. It will be a good mixture of stuff. You'll probably still see Cooley as an H-Back, though, he might be slowly converted to a pure tight end role.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

Here are a couple of good articles on Saunders' philosophy:

[url]http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2005/07/18/gretz_21st_century_offense_part_1/[/url]

[url]http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2005/07/20/gretz_21st_century_offense_part_2/[/url]

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

I doubt that Saunders was brought in to overhaul the offense. I think he was brought in to give it more of a facelift. I think he'll open up the playbook, but I doubt that the Gibbs system will change too drastically. I especially can't envision the use of the H Back being phased out, but I could be wrong.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=jdlea]I doubt that Saunders was brought in to overhaul the offense. I think he was brought in to give it more of a facelift. I think he'll open up the playbook, but I doubt that the Gibbs system will change too drastically. I especially can't envision the use of the H Back being phased out, but I could be wrong.[/QUOTE]


disagree. suanders was brought here to put inwhatever offense he wishes. same as williams. there were no restraints put on him. there will be done on sauders. expect some turnover of personnel but not wholesale changes the first offseason as he figures out who the best players are

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

the one thing that we will see more of is 3 wr sets.now where the redskins are going to get the other 2 wr's.........

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=mooby]i dunno, if we started using a fullback i would use sellers and put cooley in as a tight end.[/QUOTE]
I'm all for getting Sellers on the field more often--good things seem to happen when he is on the field. Just get him some anger management counseling during the offseason to avoid his infamous personal fouls

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=shallyshal]disagree. suanders was brought here to put inwhatever offense he wishes. same as williams. there were no restraints put on him. there will be done on sauders. expect some turnover of personnel but not wholesale changes the first offseason as he figures out who the best players are[/QUOTE]

Yep, you don't bring a guy like this in to just tweek things. I think that he will still use the things that worked for the Skins this year but will call his style of offense on gameday. Look for more shifts and a more vertical passing game.

How fun do you think it will be for him and Williams to be going at it this preseason?????

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

Yeah, I think I'm wrong about Portis, I had visions of Sellers' belt dragging Portis into the endzone when I said something!

Either way, I also agree that Saunders will overhaul this offense and this is his deal.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

more 3 wr sets, and we'll probably have a lot more shifting (which gibbs ditched last offseason)... and more aggressive play calling (no sitting on 3 point leads for 40 minutes). He's here to fix it, not slightly modify it.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

Both Saunders and Gibbs come from the same coaching tree so you can imagine thier coaching philosophies are interchangable. I cannot see Saunders doing anything to really limit our offensive playmakers, it makes no sence to do so, what he will do is to try and iron out the incosistancies and have a plan B when things get shut down .

The thing that really interests me about this move is it really looks like the structure is being put in place to prepare for life after Gibbs. Williams has already said when he takes another HC job he will not try and do everything but put in place a good offensive co-ordinator . I really couldnt see Gibbs and Williams changing place but Saunders has never really looked to get a HC jig since the Chargers back in the 80s .

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

I agree with everyone who is saying that Saunders was brought in to be in charge of the offensive schemes. Gibbs didn't decide to hire him for 2 million per year just to be another source of input. He's coming in and will get control.

But Saunders is also not stupid, he's not going to come in and change the things that have been working for us. There's no way he'll make any changes to the off-tackle sweeps by Portis, the play he ran out of a single-back set where Randy Thomas would pull out in front of him and get into open space. That play was our bread and butter running play because it took advantage of Thomas's athletic ability.

The Saunders offense is very similar in style to Gibbs. He's going to change a few things, but he's NOT going to change what works. And the fact is, the offense had a fair amount that worked this past season. After all, it ranked 11th and managed 22 points per game. We will still see the WR screens to Moss, the double move go-routes to Moss, the sweeps to Portis, the flat passes to Cooley, and the stretch plays for Portis. Saunders is not going to come in and insist that Portis run with a fullback. There may be some new plays ADDED to the playbook that include a fullback, but I think the primary running plays will be anything where Randy Thomas pulls into space. If it ain't broke don't fix it. And a lot of the offense isn't broken.

Saunders will improve playcalling and make us less predictable, he'll add some plays, and he'll use what worked well for us last year. It's not going to be a 100% overhaul.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=jdlea]I doubt that Saunders was brought in to overhaul the offense. I think he was brought in to give it more of a facelift. I think he'll open up the playbook, but I doubt that the Gibbs system will change too drastically. I especially can't envision the use of the H Back being phased out, but I could be wrong.[/QUOTE]

I'm so sure about. First of all, they didn't pay him all that money to just add and consult, and overee. I think he is going to have an active role in changing alot about philiospy and the plays as well. From what I read, he lives off of keepting the defense off balance, so I see a lot of changes in our playbook, more screens, reverses, more 4 WR sets, more bunch formations, ect.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=gortiz]I'm so sure about. First of all, they didn't pay him all that money to just add and consult, and overee. I think he is going to have an active role in changing alot about philiospy and the plays as well. From what I read, he lives off of keepting the defense off balance, so I see a lot of changes in our playbook, more screens, reverses, more 4 WR sets, more bunch formations, ect.[/QUOTE]

Yeah but there's no way he'll do away with the things we did so well. We'll keep the WR screens to Moss and a lot of Portis' plays.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

Well, turns out I was wrong, I just started a new thread about Gibbs giving up playcalling. It looks like Saunders is gonna be the man as far as the O is concerned

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

ya suanderssaid that sometimes he wont run the same play in 2-3 games, he likes to run plays that the dfense has no idea its comming, unlike gibbs, hell take a play milk it for every yard he can in oe game........im really excited to see how this will end up

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

if saunders does impliment the fullback system, i see sellers as the fullback and cooley going to a fully tight end position.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=mooby]if saunders does impliment the fullback system, i see sellers as the fullback and cooley going to a fully tight end position.[/QUOTE]

You're probably right. Cooley is a better receiver than blocker (and he's a pretty decent blocker). Portis has said explicitly that if someone has to lead the way for him out of the backfield, he prefers Sellers to anyone else. Sellers is like an offensive lineman in the backfield (at close to 280 lbs.) and I like the idea of him clearing the way for Portis.

Hopefully, Sellers won't be a cap casualty.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

Although they both descend from the Coryell tree, the primary difference is that Saunders uses the pass to set up the run. I'm guessing that we'll see the H-back (with Cooley) and Sellers at tight end unless we can draft someone with better speed.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

there are a lot of good TEs we could draft. pope is the best, klop is also good and tim day will be better than royal, but not as good as the other two.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]there are a lot of good TEs we could draft. pope is the best, klop is also good and tim day will be better than royal, but not as good as the other two.[/QUOTE]

I've read that the draft is deep with TE's but, other than Pope and Vernon Davis, I don't know much about the others. Royal is a blocking TE but I think Saunders will be looking for someone who is more of a weapon.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=Huddle]I've read that the draft is deep with TE's but, other than Pope and Vernon Davis, I don't know much about the others. Royal is a blocking TE but I think Saunders will be looking for someone who is more of a weapon.[/QUOTE]

cooley is the receiving TE. there's 3 good blockers we'll actually have a chance to draft (pope, klopenstein, andd tim day). pope is 6'7" and the best all around TE except for V davis (m lewis is a great catching guy, but a terrible blocker and he'll be gone before our pick). klop is 6'5" (doesn't have the greatest ups) and is also good at finding open spots and a willing and able blocker. tim day is 6'3" and probably has the best potential for blocking, is only average as a catcher and is generally unpolished (but still an upgrade over royal in blocking and catching). All three should catch better than royal right now.


If you really want a catching TE, byrd is a cooley clone and will be available too, but that's really not what the skins need (he's 6'3" and not a super jumper either.)

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]
If you really want a catching TE, byrd is a cooley clone and will be available too, but that's really not what the skins need (he's 6'3" and not a super jumper either.)[/QUOTE]

Where are Byrd and Pope projected to be drafted? I thought that they would both be gone by the time we drafted?

I personally like the idea of drafting a tight-end, as opposed to a wideout with our 2nd round pick. It's easier to get an impact TE than a WR in the late-second round. Plus, given Gibbs'/Saunders' playbook, it makes sense to draft another TE.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

davis is high first, lewis low first, pope and byrd in the 2nd-3rd (low 2nd), klop in the 3rd, day in the 4th. fasano is in there too (2nd round), but i'm really not that impressed with him.

so we should have our choice and be able to get one of them in the 2nd or 3rd (depending on if a good OL guy is there in the 2nd). after day there's no one though. preferrably if you put off the TE pick to the 3rd round klop would still be there.

I agree that a TE is better than a WR. everyone got really hung up on the big WRs (stovall, hagan), but they're 4th round talent that's going to be picked up in the 2nd round cause the class sucks. pope is taller, heavier, faster, and a better jumper than stovall, so why not go TE?

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]cooley is the receiving TE. there's 3 good blockers we'll actually have a chance to draft.[/QUOTE]

Saunders, unlike Joe, strives to be unpredictable. For that reason, I don't think we're likely to see specialists like a "receiving TE" and a "blocking TE." If we draft at TE, my bet is that we go for the biggest baddest offensive threat on the board and teach him to block if necessary..

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

I want to see Dockery at fullback. Like a mowing scythe through the wheat.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=Sociofan]I want to see Dockery at fullback. Like a mowing scythe through the wheat.[/QUOTE]

he's way too slow. thomas could do it (that wouldn't be a waste ;) ), but not doc.

Re: Saunders and the Fullback.
 

[QUOTE=Huddle]Saunders, unlike Joe, strives to be unpredictable. For that reason, I don't think we're likely to see specialists like a "receiving TE" and a "blocking TE." If we draft at TE, my bet is that we go for the biggest baddest offensive threat on the board and teach him to block if necessary..[/QUOTE]

pope is a good catch guy that can jump and he's faster than byrd and much taller/heavier. he just happens to be one of the best blockers too. same deal with klop, klop is 2 inches shorter and doesn't jump though.