O-line The Real Problem
 

I have finally come to the conclusion that our O-line is at the heart of our problem's as an offense, we can't run up the middle Raymer, Dockery, cannot move people off the line of scrimmage and Raymer is being dominated inside I am not impressed with Portis he seem's a little hesitant to hit the holes full bore he had 110 yds but it took him 35 carries to get there not all his fault but he's not breaking any tackles either, we can add in a fumble as well as a 15 yd taunting penalty late in the game as if he's in a position to critisize, and rub it in to other's.

My thought on the play calling comes down to this, because of our inability to run with any real authority it really limit's Gibb's to what he can do on offense with his playcalling, we did a much better job of getting the offense into position fast enough with no urgency as the play clock was running down nice adjustment by Gibb's especially on the road, but team's just don't respect our running game and why should they? We really have had little success running the ball when we really need to, our red zone run game is none existant, I don't care who your back is we could bring Riggo out of retirement and we should run the ball better than we are.

Gardner had a nice game so let's trade him now before he burn's us again, as usual even when he makes a catch he's bobbling the ball all over the place the guy scares me.

Ramsey seemed much more comfortable today and his passes where much more accurate, our reciever's weren't having to stretch all over the place to make catches he was hitting them right in the hand's, not perfect but he does keep improving.

Final annalasist, we have to make our O-line first and formost top priority this offseason, problem is that's easier said than done, but if we want to contend we have to upgrade, Thomas, and Jansen, stay, the rest are on the chopping block, Brown can come back but as a backup, I would also like to see more of Wilson, and Molinaro, the rest of the season to see if they are potential starter's for next season.

Taylor just keep's impressing more, and more, this kid has a real shot at going down as one of the all time great's at the saftey position.

Nice to see Lavar out there finally, I had to laugh when he laid out that pulling guard, impressive, a LB dropping a 300lb lineman like a bag of dirt, I don't really like him on the strong side I would rather have him rush the passer from the QB's blindside I am curious why William's did that?


Bottom line? Fix the line!

Cory Raymer and Ray Brown are horrible. Dockery has been inconsistent. But I think his play is gradually improving. We must upgrade center. And Jansen will be back at right tackle.

Dockery made a few really good plays. I wonder why we keep going between the tackles. Why don't we stretch the field out. It seems to work very well for Portis. He can run inbetween the tackles, but he's much better if we give him some room. What happened to the Giants. Start going, look, look, look cut inside. Just like the Falcons do with Warrick Dunn. Let him pick his holes and run how he feels comfortable.

To me, the dropoff between this game and the Eagles was somewhat sad. I felt better about our team after the Eagles loss than the San Fran win. =/

[QUOTE=Daseal] To me, the dropoff between this game and the Eagles was somewhat sad. I felt better about our team after the Eagles loss than the San Fran win. =/[/QUOTE]
You also got to take into account that the skins played a late Sunday game, which means they probalbly didn't practice till Tuesday or maybe Wednesday, then I'm sure Friday was a travel day. How many days is that to practice and prepare, maybe two??? Not excuses just facts. San Fran has the 15 rated Defense in the league, not bad....and playing at home that makes them that better.

I agree the line is a problem, especially in short yardage.

When you have first and goal inside the 5 and you can't push guys off the ball and pound it in, that's a problem. If you have to think about throwing on 1st or 2nd down when you're that close, that's a problem.

I don't want to hear about how playcalling is a problem at the goal line, because it's simply not. I also don't want to hear that Portis is too small to be a goal line back because that's also not true, he scored 29 TD's in his 2 seasons in Denver. The difference between his time in Denver and his first year here is very simple, the offensive line.

As the old saying goes it all starts up front, and all year we've had problems in short yardage situations. Short yardage comes down to simply beating the guy in front of you, it's nothing fancy, it's hat on a hat and the best man wins, and all year we've struggled in those situations.

With Jansen back and an upgrade at center, we should see a huge difference next year.

[QUOTE=gortiz]You also got to take into account that the skins played a late Sunday game, which means they probalbly didn't practice till Tuesday or maybe Wednesday, then I'm sure Friday was a travel day. How many days is that to practice and prepare, maybe two??? Not excuses just facts. San Fran has the 15 rated Defense in the league, not bad....and playing at home that makes them that better.[/QUOTE]
I agree, going across the country to play after coming off a very emotional division loss isn't an easy thing to do in the least bit.

I was very pleased with the effort against the 49ers.

Because god knows 3 runs up the middle is as good as playcalling can get!
:rolleyes:

If they punch it in on one of those runs the "playcalling" is a non-issue.

Like I said, if you can't punch it in on 1st and goal there's a problem that is deeper than the playcalling. If you have to get creative on 1st and goal, that's a problem.

As opposed to three pass plays that could either be picked off or fall incomplete.

[QUOTE=skinsguy]As opposed to three pass plays that could either be picked off or fall incomplete.[/QUOTE]


or give up a sack and lose yards

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]If they punch it in on one of those runs the "playcalling" is a non-issue.

Like I said, if you can't punch it in on 1st and goal there's a problem that is deeper than the playcalling. If you have to get creative on 1st and goal, that's a problem.[/QUOTE]


Matty, until the Redskins win the Super Bowl, some "fans" will have no faith in Joe Gibbs whatsoever.

Skinsguy and Mattyk: Agreed! Right on target. As I have said in the past... our first and foremost priority in the off-season is to improve our O-line. That's where it all starts for any offense regardless of who the head coach is. Jansen is a lock and I think Samuels is a lock as well but we need to renegotiate his contract is possible. Thomas is a lock as well. I'd be anxious to see what the rookie linemen can do. I know the one rookie that started seemed to do well but got hurt (Wilson or something like that?). Ray Brown could be kept as a back up if not too expensive and the same goes for Cory Raymer. He may have been something years ago but injuries have really hurt his game. Trust me guys, a solid O-line will solve about 90% of our offensive woes. The other ten percent comes with time to gel.

How many times have we scored on Tthrowing as opposed to running? 14 throwing TDs and 5 rushing TDs. So obviously throwing works. We tried going around the side once, and had Portis not run 15 yards backwards it would have netted the same gain as running up the middle. We don't have a dominating interior (or exterior) for that matter. I'd also rather try for a TD than virtually give up by trying to run between the tackles.

I still feel playcalling is too conservative. Especially in the redzone.

irrespective of how poor the O-line played, Clinton Portis did not come out with any intensity yesterday - he looked rather lackadaisical and dazed for the most part. Anyone else agree?

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I agree, going across the country to play after coming off a very emotional division loss isn't an easy thing to do in the least bit.

I was very pleased with the effort against the 49ers.[/QUOTE]
So was I Matty... end result- it got us another W. Anyone that wants to argue a win, be my guest. All I know is, there's no need to feel good about yourself because you played a good game and lost. There's no need to make excuses about coulda woulda shoulda, because you won. The real project is to focus on next week's game against the 'Boys and what we need to do to win it!

nothing wrong with running up the middle on first and goal, i just wish gibbs would spread the defense out by going with four or even five wideouts. the "jumbo package" doesn't work very well with portis at rb.

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]If they punch it in on one of those runs the "playcalling" is a non-issue.

Like I said, if you can't punch it in on 1st and goal there's a problem that is deeper than the playcalling. If you have to get creative on 1st and goal, that's a problem.[/QUOTE]


Exactly! That is the problem Gibb's is faced with right now figuring a way to get short yardage without a running game when the opposing team know's you can't run it, that makes it very difficult to fool defenses, the problem with Portis under these circumstances is he is not a YAC guy [yard's after contact] but the way our line block's right now very few back's if any could get short yard's in our offense when the defense know's what's coming.

[QUOTE=Daseal]How many times have we scored on Tthrowing as opposed to running? 14 throwing TDs and 5 rushing TDs. So obviously throwing works. We tried going around the side once, and had Portis not run 15 yards backwards it would have netted the same gain as running up the middle. We don't have a dominating interior (or exterior) for that matter. I'd also rather try for a TD than virtually give up by trying to run between the tackles.

I still feel playcalling is too conservative. Especially in the redzone.[/QUOTE]


I have to disagree with you on this one Daseal, I know your rational look's good on paper but if throwing TD's was working we would average more than 18 point's a game if that, it's not working that's why we have to get a running game, those number's you refered to only show the ineptitude of our offense to run the ball, not the success of our passing game. Do we throw the ball better than we run it right now? Yes, but we are also 5-9, 5 rushing td's in almost a full season is absolutly horrible.

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]nothing wrong with running up the middle on first and goal, i just wish gibbs would spread the defense out by going with four or even five wideouts. the "jumbo package" doesn't work very well with portis at rb.[/QUOTE]


Gibb's is a master at spreading out defenses the problem with that right now is our line is not winning any 1 on 1 matchup's which put's the QB in a vulnurable position when the defense doesn't respect the run.

Offiss: The problem is a big part O line, but shouldn't you gameplan around that? I mean, if they can't get the push in tight situations you have to try something new. We're easy to play defense against in the red zone (Hey, they're going to run!)

Now, don't get me wrong. Especially in a tight game, I'm all for running in the redzone. I'd just like to see a little variety in the type of run plays being called. Not to mention the occassional play action/rollout/normal drop back would work wonders. I can think of one time we threw it inside the 10 last week, and we spent a lot of time there!

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]"jumbo package" doesn't work very well with portis at rb.[/QUOTE]


Its not the jumbo package you might be referring to from Gibbs' first tenure..its just a basic goal line formation.....I don't believe we have the personnel yet to have a true jumbo package they way we did in the 80's.

[QUOTE=Daseal]Offiss: The problem is a big part O line, but shouldn't you gameplan around that? I mean, if they can't get the push in tight situations you have to try something new. We're easy to play defense against in the red zone (Hey, they're going to run!)

Now, don't get me wrong. Especially in a tight game, I'm all for running in the redzone. I'd just like to see a little variety in the type of run plays being called. Not to mention the occassional play action/rollout/normal drop back would work wonders. I can think of one time we threw it inside the 10 last week, and we spent a lot of time there![/QUOTE]


Understood, but think about that for a second what happen's to a team when they fall way behind in a game? They have to pass to get back into it, so what does the defense do? They pin their ear's back and go after the QB because they have no concern for the run, and what usually happens is INT's and QB sack's, and that's pretty much how defenses aproach us right now, a good offense will dictate to the defense and how it react's, we are not able to do that, any defense can be beat if you can execute on offense, some of the best offenses in history were offenses not neccessarily complicated but offenses that regardless whether you know what's coming or not you can't stop them, our offense right now is working in reverse of that, team's know that they can stop our run game with their front 4 which allow's them to focus on every other aspect of our offense, if we could force team's to have to commit to stop the run or else, we would be fine, but we can't, I am not saying we have to become a juggernaut with our run game, but we have to get some kind of push up front so defenses know that if they don't overcommit to the run we will run it down their throat's, yes we can game plan to throw the ball 60 times a game but we will probably get Ramsey killed in the process, we would also extend the game time with all the incompleted passes leaving our defense out on the field for far more time than they deserve, it's bad enough as it is for them, Dasael I know your a SS fan and possibly he may not have been that bad on offense, our offensive line probably really lead to his demise in DC, how many of us last year saw Brandon Winey outplay Samuel's? And Winey is a scrub! Now we are treated to one of the greatest coaches of all time who can't make 1 yard in the red zone, or any other time we are in short yardage, Gibb's has been a way for a while but not that long to be absolutly incompetent not to be able to run for a yard, I know we have a lot of money tied up in our O-line but we have seriously overvalued their talent they are big, and slow, with no power, or leg drive, yes we could throw every down but do you think that's the solution? And then we have to explain to the redskin nation why we gave Portis 50 million to pass protect.

And how about 'dem Chargers throwing it 6 times the entire game in their 21-0 win over the Browns....sorry just thought I'd throw it in there

Smootsmack: The second we have that line, that back, and sub-zero temperatures in snow I'll totally agree with running it that much.

We're 17th in rushing with 1564 yards. Ahead of philly, buffalo, carolina, tampa. And Offiss, I'm not saying the line is not a problem, because it is. However, the only thing that can make that line better is continuity. Heston was an absolutely horrible O line coach, I saw an interview with Samuels that said he tryed to change the blocking technique he's always used. I feel that running up the middle three times in any situation is often a very poor series of calls. Because it always seems to send our offense right back to the bench! Mix it up a little bit! I totally agree that a running game is VERY important, but if we're in a tight game and can't punch it in, then we have some real problems.

Honestly, most of the time on 4th and goal within the 5 I'd just go for it. With our defense we'll keep field position. OKay, not most of the time, but depending on the situation it's worth a try. I think we just need to mix up how we deal with the red zone a little bit.

[QUOTE=Daseal]Dockery made a few really good plays. I wonder why we keep going between the tackles. Why don't we stretch the field out. It seems to work very well for Portis. He can run inbetween the tackles, but he's much better if we give him some room. What happened to the Giants. Start going, look, look, look cut inside. Just like the Falcons do with Warrick Dunn. Let him pick his holes and run how he feels comfortable.

To me, the dropoff between this game and the Eagles was somewhat sad. I felt better about our team after the Eagles loss than the San Fran win. =/[/QUOTE]

could not agree with you more Daseal. my thoughts exactly, what happened to all we learned about Portis??

[QUOTE=hurrykaine]irrespective of how poor the O-line played, Clinton Portis did not come out with any intensity yesterday - he looked rather lackadaisical and dazed for the most part. Anyone else agree?[/QUOTE]

completely! i love Portis, and he usually exudes effort in every play, but on Saturday he was playing very "shy". he would let up way earlier and fall down before contact, not like any of the games before.

i think it could have been him protesting the run plays Gibbs was calling because he did NOT look happy on the sideline. anyone know if he's hurt?

Didn't he grind out 110 yards?

I think we're looking a little too far in to this.

it's a real problem and not just stat vanity when we aren't using our personnel strengths to score TDs instead of FGs on the 49ers.

[URL=http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=5119]http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=5119[/URL]

i don't think getting a bigger back is the answer (although Rock Cartwright shouldn't have lost that weight, condemned him to special teams).

the answer is whipping the OLine into shape and calling plays that use Portis's SPEED. a toss or sweep from that close with Portis has to be close to 100%. Gibbs keeps going back to this one-dimensional offense even after he's seen what opening up accomplishes :(

[QUOTE=skinsguy]Its not the jumbo package you might be referring to from Gibbs' first tenure..its just a basic goal line formation.....I don't believe we have the personnel yet to have a true jumbo package they way we did in the 80's.



i'm not referring to the 80's, i'm referring to this years version. i agree with you when you say we don't have the personel yet, thats why i think gibbs should spread the defense out by going with 4 or 5 receivers. i think it would benefit portis' running style, give him more space instead of trying to jam him up into the middle of a huge pile

Matty - the average is what's important to me and showing we have success. Granted the playcalling got very conservative late (3 runs and out) but he didn't exactly break any big ones. I like Portis, but I want to see us cater to his strengths a bit more.

[QUOTE=wolfeskins][QUOTE=skinsguy]Its not the jumbo package you might be referring to from Gibbs' first tenure..its just a basic goal line formation.....I don't believe we have the personnel yet to have a true jumbo package they way we did in the 80's.



i'm not referring to the 80's, i'm referring to this years version. i agree with you when you say we don't have the personel yet, thats why i think gibbs should spread the defense out by going with 4 or 5 receivers. i think it would benefit portis' running style, give him more space instead of trying to jam him up into the middle of a huge pile[/QUOTE]

Yeah I am referring to this year too..that's why I was saying it's not a "jumbo package." I think what you are referring to are the fullback leads and the counter trey plays that are usually ran off tackle or up the middle. Spreading the defense out by using 4 or 5 wide receivers is okay to do some of the time, but it won't work all of the time.

I think most people are missing the point with Gibbs' offense. Its a ball controlled offense that appears mostly conservative. Its designed to eat up large portions of the clock while wearing down the opposing defense. Once our Quarterback develops further and once our receivers become more of a deep threat to defenses, then you'll see the full magic of Gibbs' offense. Things are going to be rather simple...maybe too simple for some tastes...but this is how Gibbs offense is ran.

That's fine skinsguy - but to call games like that it demands a lead or a close game. It's also very important to have a solid running game, which means working to your back's strengths!

[QUOTE=skinsguy]Yeah I am referring to this year too..that's why I was saying it's not a "jumbo package." I think what you are referring to are the fullback leads and the counter trey plays that are usually ran off tackle or up the middle. Spreading the defense out by using 4 or 5 wide receivers is okay to do some of the time, but it won't work all of the time.

I think most people are missing the point with Gibbs' offense. Its a ball controlled offense that appears mostly conservative. Its designed to eat up large portions of the clock while wearing down the opposing defense. Once our Quarterback develops further and once our receivers become more of a deep threat to defenses, then you'll see the full magic of Gibbs' offense. Things are going to be rather simple...maybe too simple for some tastes...but this is how Gibbs offense is ran.[/QUOTE]
Good points.

[QUOTE=Daseal]That's fine skinsguy - but to call games like that it demands a lead or a close game. It's also very important to have a solid running game, which means working to your back's strengths![/QUOTE]


That's true too, but I did see some counter trey plays that Portis ran just fine. We can't run Portis to the outside on every play...we have to have inside runs to keep the defense honest. Being able to have Portis run effectively on plays that call for full back leads up the middle and the counter trey plays are important to this system. That is why we need to strengthen the offensive line in the off season. We all know Portis' run style, but why have the run plays one dimensional? We can't go away from the meat and potatoes of this offense; which is ball controlled, shove it down their throats run plays. This is what wears down that front three or front four of the defense...AND this is what allows our defense to get plenty of rest between times out on the field which contributes quite a bit to their number 2 ranking right now!

People have given Portis a hard time all year, and while there is some room for critique, the bottom line is that he has a solid chance to become the Redskins All Time single season rushing record holder in his first year. And that is with the crappy oline. With Jansen back, and a center we could be a great unit. I also have to beleive that Bugel will continue to mold them into a solid unit.

Skinsguy: I understand we have to go up the middle, but you can count on one hand where we let him pick his hole and go this week. That's his forte and I feel we should at least go 50/50 using his speed, but keeping them honest by going inside.

Skins: No one gives Portis a hard time, he does what he's told and he's silently racked up yards, we just want to see some of that homerun threat! I also think we should leave the line alone minus center and maybe a guard to replace dockery.

[QUOTE=Daseal]Skinsguy: I understand we have to go up the middle, but you can count on one hand where we let him pick his hole and go this week. That's his forte and I feel we should at least go 50/50 using his speed, but keeping them honest by going inside.
[/QUOTE]


That's what I just said? He racked up 110 yards this week...so even if running plays that are designed for Portis to pick where he wants to run are limited, Portis was still able to run effectively against a decent defense. Remember the homerun play against the Bucs WAS up the middle....

It all comes back to having better blocking up front. A team can be completely predicatable in their play calling, but if everything is executed right, they cannot be stopped. This is what was great about this offense years ago...it was just as simple and predicatable back then as it is now, yet nobody could stop it because we had a great offensive line that was awesome with pass blocking and run blocking.

Portis averaged 3/4th of a yard less per carry than the 49ers normally give up. The 49ers aren't exacty a defensive powerhouse, their run defense is decent, but certainly not great. It was up the middle, it was the first play of the season, and we haven't seen a run up the middle like that since.

Yeah, newsflash. We don't have the hogs anymore, so that's something that needs to be worked around. How many teams now-days are predictable but still good? The Colts? Who mix it up very well and use play action tremendously? Most offenses try not to be predictable because defenses will lock them up. Sorry, but for the most part if a defense has your offense figured out then you're in trouble.

Let me ask you something. Since our defense has been so stout, they don't deserve any recognition because other offenses haven't been executing, right? Because if you flip your statement around you say the offense could be lighting up the score board with execution, does that mean we've been lucky to play poor opponents who can't execute all year?

[QUOTE=Daseal]Portis averaged 3/4th of a yard less per carry than the 49ers normally give up. The 49ers aren't exacty a defensive powerhouse, their run defense is decent, but certainly not great. It was up the middle, it was the first play of the season, and we haven't seen a run up the middle like that since.

Yeah, newsflash. We don't have the hogs anymore, so that's something that needs to be worked around. How many teams now-days are predictable but still good? The Colts? Who mix it up very well and use play action tremendously? Most offenses try not to be predictable because defenses will lock them up. Sorry, but for the most part if a defense has your offense figured out then you're in trouble.[/QUOTE]
I think the problem has been less about predictability, and more about the absence of a "home run" threat outside of Portis. Coles isn't healthy - he didn't start out healthy, and he's gotten worse. He's still the best receiver we have. The first eight games consisted of Brunell showing an inability to throw the ball downfield effectively, which made our playcalling more conservative, which made Portis more of a target.

Portis isn't without blame for his "poor" stats, either. He had a run where he wasn't finding his stride - marked by the Pittsburgh game where he could barely stay on his feet. The fact that he still has a realistic shot at 1500 yards is a testament to the organizational dedication to ball control and his own hard work.

Bottom line - if we can force teams to respect the other skill players on the field, we can expect Portis to have better opportunities for long runs.