A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

Is it just me, or did it seem like we had a different offensive coordinator? How many bubble screens did people see today? I didn't see any bubble screens. The offense looked much more conventional than it has; we threw down the middle and tried to run the ball. I likey.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

Agree--felt more like a Gibbs gameplan than a Saunders gameplan. Run the ball, down the middle with the TE, occasional play action deep...

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

Daseal and I briefly discussed this at halftime...

We both thought that by Moss being out could be a good thing for Brunell. It would force him to look at someone other than 89. Without him in there, he couldn't set his sights on him every play. Did it help? Who knows. Just a thought.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[QUOTE=cpayne5;239367]Daseal and I briefly discussed this at halftime...

We both thought that by Moss being out could be a good thing for Brunell. It would force him to look at someone other than 89. Without him in there, he couldn't set his sights on him every play. Did it help? Who knows. Just a thought.[/QUOTE]

I hope we see more of this offense.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

brandon lloyd can be a beast if brunell would throw it his way you can't just focus on santanna moss all the time.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

Brunell was interviewed on NFL Network and said it was due to the looks he was getting from the safeties.

Hopefully more safties will look at him like that.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[QUOTE=RedskinRat;239383]Brunell was interviewed on NFL Network and said it was due to the looks he was getting from the safeties.

Hopefully more safties will look at him like that.[/QUOTE]

I think, perhaps incorrectly, that defenses simply haven't respected our passing game and didn't think we could throw over the middle. The Cowboys D was looking to stuff the run, and they did. Fortunately for us, we exploited their concentration on Portis and hit Thrash et al.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

The playcalling in the first two series had an Al Saunders stamp on it. However, on the redzone possession in the first quarter, the 7 straight runs that failed to punch the ball into the endzone reeked of Gibbs playcalling. The playcalling at the end on the last series before Novak's botched FG was also Gibbs playcalling. He needs to surrender playcalling to Al, period.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

yea but santana wasn't in the game too , thats probably one reason

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

Czaben said the same thing on the comcast post game show, looked like Gibbs took the reigns back today

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

The redzone play needs to get better. I would of liked to see my man Sellers get one of those carries there on the 1 yard line.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

The offense definitely had a Gibbs flavor today. If he really did take back control of the offense I say stick with it.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;239527]The offense definitely had a Gibbs flavor today. If he really did take back control of the offense I say stick with it.[/quote]

True or False.

1. Today Gibbs was holding a laminated play sheet.

2. Gibbs held no laminated playsheet the previous 7 games.

3. Offensive Linemen pulling like crazy today.

4. Most called pass play today was play-action 7 step drop.


In fairness to Al, the two touchdowns were obviously his misdirection plays. But, they worked because they were anomalies. For mis-direction to work, the defense has to think your likely to do the other. Ellis got caught sneaking inside on the toss to Portis because of the 12 Gibbs gut plays that came before. The Cooley TD was bootleg action with Brunell rolling out. The entire Dallas defense was following Portis or Betts or whoever the fake was to. Beautiful.

I think they should let Saunders design the gameplan and then let Gibbs call most of the plays. (Joe will end up using about 3 run plays out of 30) If Saunders has something he likes he can do an Arnold Horshack impression and try to talk Joe into it. OOOH, OOOH, OOOH. That way we get the best of both worlds.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

Yeah I noticed him holding what looked like a play call sheet.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[quote=cpayne5;239367]Daseal and I briefly discussed this at halftime...

We both thought that by Moss being out could be a good thing for Brunell. It would force him to look at someone other than 89. Without him in there, he couldn't set his sights on him every play. Did it help? Who knows. Just a thought.[/quote]I think you call the same plays with 89 in the lineup as you did today. The offense would only improve.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[quote=70Chip;239548]True or False.

1. Today Gibbs was holding a laminated play sheet.

2. Gibbs held no laminated playsheet the previous 7 games.

3. Offensive Linemen pulling like crazy today.

4. Most called pass play today was play-action 7 step drop.


In fairness to Al, the two touchdowns were obviously his misdirection plays. But, they worked because they were anomalies. For mis-direction to work, the defense has to think your likely to do the other. Ellis got caught sneaking inside on the toss to Portis because of the 12 Gibbs gut plays that came before. The Cooley TD was bootleg action with Brunell rolling out. The entire Dallas defense was following Portis or Betts or whoever the fake was to. Beautiful.

I think they should let Saunders design the gameplan and then let Gibbs call most of the plays. (Joe will end up using about 3 run plays out of 30) If Saunders has something he likes he can do an Arnold Horshack impression and try to talk Joe into it. OOOH, OOOH, OOOH. That way we get the best of both worlds.[/quote]Which is what I wanted preseason! I love your analysis/idea.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;239557]I think you call the same plays with 89 in the lineup as you did today. The offense would only improve.[/QUOTE]

I pray we see the same kind of passing attack next week that we saw today. I'd like to see the running game improve, but I was happy with the passing game's production and style. I just hope #89's return doesn't cause us to go back to our pre-Week 9 passing game.

Today's offense definately looked like a Gibbs-Saunders hybrid. I don't know whether Saunders and Gibbs were splitting the play-calling duties, but I liked what I saw.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

Today was Gibbs calling the plays but he should have used Duckett or Sellers at the goaline. Exciting Game HAIL TO THE REDSKINS

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

i wish someone would ask Gibbs if he was calling some of the plays today, because it sure looked like it. where is Joe crisp when you need him?

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[quote=DGreen28;239602]Today was Gibbs calling the plays but he should have used Duckett or Sellers at the goaline. Exciting Game HAIL TO THE REDSKINS[/quote]

My thioughts exactly. We wasted a 3rd round pick on Duckett, who is pretty good, an we don't use him. He did wonders for Atlanta punching the ball into the endzone. At the very least it wouldn't hurt to go back to last year and do the Play Action Roll Out flip to Mike Sellers, that worked a shit load of time last year.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[quote=DGreen28;239602]Today was Gibbs calling the plays but he should have used Duckett or Sellers at the goaline. Exciting Game HAIL TO THE REDSKINS[/quote]There is nothing Duckett can do that Portis can't do better.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;239718]There is nothing Duckett can do that Portis can't do better.[/quote]


I agree on the one you give the big guy at least one shot... or put him in as a play action decoy and have him run a delay to the outside... gibbs did it alot last year...

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;239718]There is nothing Duckett can do that Portis can't do better.[/quote]

except barrel foward with 280lbs behind him.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

al saunders is starting to trust brunell some more

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[quote=Big C;239730]al saunders is starting to trust brunell some more[/quote]

or gibbs is trusting saunders less.

Is this REALLY a Saunders offense?
 

I don't know if it's me or not, but this offense looks a lot more like a Gibbs system than a Saunders system. Is that a fair statement?

Re: Is this REALLY a Saunders offense?
 

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/15459-new-playcalling-offense.html[/url]

Re: Is this REALLY a Saunders offense?
 

I think this is a great thread because the truth may never be known. They looked like Old School Gibbs a few times today...

Re: Is this REALLY a Saunders offense?
 

[quote=jsarno;239839]I don't know if it's me or not, but this offense looks a lot more like a Gibbs system than a Saunders system. Is that a fair statement?[/quote]

The consensus seems to be that it is a mix. Using Gibbs basics for the bread and butter plays and mixing in Saunders' more creative ideas to try to create explosive plays on the outside. All I know is that they ran up the middle a lot and kept doing it even though it wasn't that successful. As far as the passes over the middle (the ones that made us feel so warm inside) it's difficult to say. I suspect they would both say that those are integral parts of their system. It was a staple of Gibbs approach in the 80s but we haven't seen enough of it in the second term. I think part of the reason it worked today was the cover 2 that Dallas plays and Roy Williams looked a little off. And Brunell had time. There is no substitute for play action on 1st and 10 in my book.

I hope they at least try the same approach next week because Philly plays a lot of cover 2 as well and Trotter can't do much in coverage. Philly blitzes a lot more often, though, which will constrain them a little. And they are on the road which could make it tougher for the O-Line. And Philly was off this week. The last time, we played an NFC East opponent on the road who was coming off the bye week we tried to use the gameplan from the week before and we got crushed.

My main point would be that because Gibbs knows so much about offense and what basically works, it would be foolish not to use him as a resource. Especially with a losing record.

Re: A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

I would've liked to have seen Duckett in at the goal line one our first offensive series. I'm disappointed we traded away our draft pick and we aren't even using him where he's a beast, which is right at the goal line.

Re: A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

I think Moss being out and Dallas having such a fast D probably negated out short screem stuff. They're D is so fast it wouldn't have worked well. I mean we couldn't run outside really at all minus the one TD. In fact they're run D stuffed us up. The best thing though was that we never abandoned the run. We kept bangin' it and I think it opened up the pass a little. That's the type of O we ran last year when we were marching to the playoffs. Bang 3 yards. bang 4 yards, 3rd down pass to Cooley for a 1st, 15 yard in to Moss/Thrash,...

Keep dosing CP and we have a chance. Now if only our line could figure out how to block a little better.

Re: A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

The play calling was better. It's about FRICKIN TIME they pushed the ball down the field.

Re: A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

Right. See, that's what I want to see. See what we did last year, with some of that famous Saunder's ingenuity mixed in.

Re: New Playcalling on Offense?
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;239548]True or False.

1. Today Gibbs was holding a laminated play sheet.

2. Gibbs held no laminated playsheet the previous 7 games.

3. Offensive Linemen pulling like crazy today.

4. Most called pass play today was play-action 7 step drop.


In fairness to Al, the two touchdowns were obviously his misdirection plays. But, they worked because they were anomalies. For mis-direction to work, the defense has to think your likely to do the other. Ellis got caught sneaking inside on the toss to Portis because of the 12 Gibbs gut plays that came before. The Cooley TD was bootleg action with Brunell rolling out. The entire Dallas defense was following Portis or Betts or whoever the fake was to. Beautiful.

I think they should let Saunders design the gameplan and then let Gibbs call most of the plays. (Joe will end up using about 3 run plays out of 30) If Saunders has something he likes he can do an Arnold Horshack impression and try to talk Joe into it. OOOH, OOOH, OOOH. That way we get the best of both worlds.[/QUOTE]



Good post, 70chip. It's crazy to think that Gibbs shouldn't have input on the offense--it's not like he just stopped understanding NFL offenses. And I think that with MB as QB, the Gibbs stuff may be a better fit, in all honesty. 7 step play action seems to focus MB to the deep seams, for whatever reason (safety looks, whatever). But we need more creativity in the red zone, or we NEED TO PLAY DUCKETT ON SHORT YARDAGE. Still a complete mystery why he doesn't get even ONE of those plays from inside the 5. So we need a good mix of Gibbs and Saunders--not a surprise, I suppose, that it hasn't happened over night.

Re: A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

All I cared about is that we played either Sellers OR Duckett on short. Good to see Sellers getting some looks too.

Re: A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

Whatever happened to the playaction flips near the goalline to Sellers that we ran so well last year??

I really was hoping to see that when we couldn't punch it in down inside the 5. Dallas has a very stout front line so running down there was next to impossible.

Re: A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

[quote=Mattyk72;240118]Whatever happened to the playaction flips near the goalline to Sellers that we ran so well last year??

I really was hoping to see that when we couldn't punch it in down inside the 5. Dallas has a very stout front line so running down there was next to impossible.[/quote]

Yea, i still thought we would be able to get it in from a yard out running the ball. So i wasn't upset w/ the playcalling just upset at the result.

I question the 3 straight runs at the end of the game. We have a questionable kicker at best so i didn't understand why we didn't run a playaction or something else there. We hadn't had a lot of success running the ball all day (w/ exception to the td). If we had a great kicker maybe. Sometimes i think we play to not screw up rather than playing to win. Another 10 yards gives you a makeable FG.

Re: A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

I sent this email to Jason LaCanfora at the WPost this morning and he replied:

[quote]Hey Jason can you find out what was up with the offense yesterday and Gibbs' involvement? The playcalling seemed to have a Gibbs flavor to it with all the counters, and it seemed like he was holding one of those laminated play call sheets at one point. Was he calling the plays?[/quote]

[quote]Hey Matt, he always has the card, but I agree it did seem like classic Gibbs calls, especially around the goal line and all the run at the end of the game, when they could have used a few more yards.

We'll look into it.
Cheers.
[/quote]

Re: A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

Be good to know for sure.

Re: A New Offensive Scheme? (Merged Thread)
 

too bad we only used HALF of what worked yesterday.

still very little shotgun, no audibles, and very few of those short outs to cooley and sellers (or chip block/outs) that were used all the time last year (successfully). well, i guess it's really too bad we didn't use this crap WEEK ONE instead. but i digress...