Commanders Post at The Warpath

Commanders Post at The Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Locker Room Main Forum (http://www.thewarpath.net/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition (http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?t=54318)

GTripp0012 09-16-2013 07:28 PM

One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
Felt like this was necessary today. Not so much based on the Warpath's reaction to yesterday's lost, but the media scrutiny on the team is reaching an unproductive level, and the rosy narratives from the preseason that weren't based on anything of substance have turned sour -- though they remain without substance.

I have a relatively small platform that I am going to use to set the record straight for those who are interested in deeper analysis. I'm not going to fight a war against the crazies: the narrative is still going to win the day. I'm just trying to save a few people some trouble by writing this.

Coaches Tape isn't yet available, so I've done pretty much all this off the broadcast feed. I'm not going to be telling you what percentage cover two the Redskins played. Sorry.

[B]Redskins Myth #1: RG3 isn't 100% healthy and he's hurting the team by playing[/B]

This is probably the largest, most aggressive myth about the start to the Redskins season, because you neither need to be a Redskins fan or have watched either of their games this year to hold this opinion. But if you did watch the first half of the Eagles game, and know the Redskins started 0-2, you probably feel very strongly about this.

Futhermore, there are no shortage of people who will go on TV and basically vouch for this conclusion. These are the worst kind of people: analysts who get money to go on TV and be poor analysts. I'd be a hypocrite if I told you don't listen to anything you hear, but at least consider the source.

I can't tell you whether Griffin is 100%. I suspect that from an explosive, sprinter/athlete type of perspective, Griffin isn't going to be like that all year, if ever again. But we don't pay him to be an olympic sprinter, we pay him to be a quarterback. And from the perspective of quarterback, who dealt with injuries and quarterbacked -- he's good. He's healthy. The ball comes out with excellent velocity from a clean pocket. But if you have a Twitter account and follow Redskins beat reporters like John Keim et al, you already knew that, and aren't going to change your mind because of some mouthbreather on television (or four).

Which leads us to the seemingly more glaring issue:

[B]Redskins Myth #2: RG3 has really struggled with throwing from the pocket in both games this season[/B]

I mean, if you slipped into a coma at halftime of the Eagles game and awoke from that coma specifically to read this article, 1) thank you and feel better soon, 2) you'd pretty much have nothing to throw you off that conclusion.

For the rest of us, it just depends if you know what you are looking at. Griffin has forced a lot more balls into tight coverage (sometimes foolishly) the first two games, and has shown a general lack of patience. He's also left very, very few plays on the field in that time.

Griffin's biggest issues are consistent with last season, well before the injury. He's struggling at times to move though his progressions with the pocket collapsing around him. His timing from the shotgun short passing game isn't good, and this can affect his accuracy. He's relatively short for a quarterback, and sometimes doesn't get a clear picture of the defense on half field reads. All of these issues are consistent with last year when he won offfensive rookie of the year. In a lot of ways, he's actually more advanced as a pocket passer now than he was last year, against all odds (you do have to throw out the first half of both games to see statistical evidence of this, which is not something I suggest you do).

The single, and possibly only, biggest difference in RG3 2013 and 2012 has nothing to do with throwing from the pocket. It's as a runner, and more generally, extending plays. Griffin has simply not been effective through two games when forced to extend a play. He hasn't risen beyond all reasonable expectation to save a crumbling team. He's mixed it up between throwing the ball away and forcing a pass to a covered receiver. And it's led to underwhelming results, which should not be a surprise.

Overall, Griffin was 26 of 40 for 320 yards, 2 TDs and a pick against Green Bay. If he has that game in a losing effort in October of last season, before the seven game winning streak raised expectations, we're talking about how advanced he is for his age. Dude is 23 years old.

[B]Redskins Myth #3: RG3 is afraid to keep on the Read Option and Kyle Shanahan is not calling it because he is afraid Griffin will get hurt[/B]

Kyle Shanahan didn't call the read option as much as you probably remember last year. It was devastatingly effective when he did call it, but he used it carefully last year. He's doing the same this year. I don't think he's sequencing as well this year, and the defenses aren't playing nearly as scared against us this year as they were last year, and Kyle deserves real blame for this. But this isn't a read option issue.

In the handful of read options Griffin has been given this year, somewhere between 4-6 depending on how you define the play, Griffin has handed off every time.

He's made the right read every time. Alfred Morris is averaging better than 5.0 YPC this year on the read option, again, depending on how you define the play.

This is how disciplined teams defend the read option. You force the quarterback to give the football to the back, and you try to make up the numbers in the running game with safeties filling the hole.

I wish Kyle Shanahan would call the RO a lot more than he does, because it's one less defender Morris has to worry about. But Griffin is not going to get to keep very often against disciplined defenses. That's because the quickest way to get gashed on the read option is to let the quarterback outside contain. Making Griffin give to Morris on the option is choosing death by a thousand papercuts as opposed to having Griffin keep on the option, which is quick and painless.

[B]Redskins "Myth" #4: Forget the Read Option. Kyle Shanahan hasn't called any designed runs for RG3. You mean to tell me he's not using his mobility as a weapon at ALL?[/B]

Well, pretty much, yeah. This is not a myth. Kyle and Mike have been a bit protective of RG3 -- and by extension themselves -- at the expensive of the team. But this is a minor reason, not a major reason, the Redskins are 0-2.

[B]So wait, if the Redskins offense talent is capable of attacking and constraining defenses the way Philadelphia and Green Bay have done to ours...why have we struggled so poorly in back to back first halves?[/B]

So happy you asked, straw man Redskins fan!

The Redskins have done a number of silly things over the last ([I]insert timeframe you are comfortable with here, not exceeding four years[/I]) with their personnel and it's lead to some real, undeniable offensive issues.

The pass protection has been a bit of an issue through two games, although the five starters on the OL are all playing better than they did last year. The Redskins have faced a high pct of blitzes from Green Bay and Philadelphia. Last year, teams hardly ever blitzed RG3, because they were terrified he would break contain and beat them down the field with his legs and arm. Combine that with a run heavy offense out of the pistol, and we never really found out how Griffin handled the blitz last year.

Early returns on that this year aren't good. But the real issue is not about Griffin, or the offensive line (our TEs and backs have done a crappy job picking up blitzes, and that's accounted for more than half of the hits on RG3 this season). It's about a total difference in how teams are defending the Redskins. Specifically, man to man coverage with a high safety.

Last year, teams preferred to zone cover the Redskins, because it allowed their defense to keep 11 sets of eyes on RG3. This year, the Eagles went with a lot more man coverage against the Redskins than they had done last season, and enjoyed some success. Cary Williams picking off RG3 in the second half was a great example of a route you expect a Redskins receiver to win on vs. a mediocre corner, combined with a noodle-armed throw, turning a Redskins first down into an Eagles INT and short field.

The Packers though are a zone coverage team, and so when they are playing man coverage on your receivers, they simply don't respect them. With Casey Heyward out, I didn't think GB could or should try to man cover the Redskins.

They did. And they won decisively. Josh Morgan can't separate from anyone. Garcon can and did, but he's inconsistent in doing so. But the guy the lack of zone coverage really hurts is Santana Moss, whose one remaining NFL skill is finding the void in zone coverage before it closes. That was the Redskins go-to on third down last year, now that teams are man covering Washington on third downs, Moss just gets engulfed by whoever is covering him. He's erased from the pattern. Garcon's routes are inconsistent. And too often, the coached leave Hankerson and Fred Davis (!) on the bench on third down with Paulsen and Morgan on the field instead. Bad moves.

Griffin is going to have to pick up some first downs with his feet before the Redskins start seeing a stead diet of zone coverage again, and the offensive line has allowed him to be pinned inside the pocket a bit. The real issue on third down has been the blitz: we're not picking it up, and our receivers aren't freeing up. In the event that one or both of those things happen, there's a good chance the Redskins lined up illegally or held or something that will bring it back.

It's kinda like the 2010 season all over again, from a talent, usage perspective. The Redskins issues are correctable to an extent, but it's not going to be enough to just throw Jordan Reed out there and hope for the best. Reed, Hankerson, Robinson, Helu, and Garcon can all beat man to man coverage quickly on third down, and so the Redskins need to get players who can't or won't (like Josh Morgan) off the field to give themselves enough options to move the chains.

That is what is ailing the offense right now.

GTripp0012 09-16-2013 07:33 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[B]TLDR version[/B]: Griffin is throwing the ball pretty well from the pocket and is getting the Redskins lots of yards and points because that's what good QBs do.

He's turning the ball over at an increased rate and struggling to convert first downs because his teammates suck. Also the coaching has been less than stellar, but you knew that already.

That Guy 09-16-2013 07:50 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
doesn't debasing myths require facts? i see a lot of opinions, besides the uncouched, garbage time stats for griffin in an out of reach game.

GTripp0012 09-16-2013 08:06 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=That Guy;1026253]doesn't debasing myths require facts? i see a lot of opinions, besides the uncouched, garbage time stats for griffin in an out of reach game.[/quote]Generally speaking, yeah, there'd be a lot more stats in a piece like this.

But everybody's dealing in small sample size theatre, and the main takeaways are that we can make observable conclusions using last year as a guide. But if we don't use any guide, then it amounts to throwing crap against a wall and hoping it sticks.

More generally, this isn't about facts vs opinions, its about observation vs absence of observation.

JGisLordOfTheRings 09-16-2013 08:09 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
Love the write up.

Positivity is needed at a time like this with the real possibility of being a 1 or zero win team at the bye week.

Bucket 09-16-2013 08:09 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=That Guy;1026253]doesn't debasing myths require facts? i see a lot of opinions, besides the uncouched, garbage time stats for griffin in an out of reach game.[/quote]

I was reading the first paragraph and started thinking the same thing. I was hoping for some sort of quick film or pictures.. When I watch the games, I see a totally different thing. I see Griffin throwing sidearm while running out of the pocket, not planting his back foot when releasing, struggling to reach corners when scrambling out so easily like last year, faking the handoff to the wrong side and forgetting the play, bobbling several snaps, and staring down receivers on 3rd down.

All these are fixable, and i'm 100% positive RG3 will be back to dynamic soon enough.

Although, he doesn't have a grove right now, and it's obvious.. You can add his "stats" and try to argue, but ANYONE who's watching the game can tell our offense is not meshing very well at the moment and it starts at QB.

This just looks like a bunch of opinionated responses followed by saying "I watched the film, so it's true"

Basically........ Typical Gtripp stuff here.

I was really hoping to read something useful here too.

EDIT : "A" for effort though, because this may the most positive thing you've said about the Redskins in over a decade. :)

GTripp0012 09-16-2013 08:17 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=Bucket;1026257]I was reading the first paragraph and started thinking the same thing. I was hoping for some sort of quick film or pictures.. When I watch the games, I see a totally different thing. I see Griffin throwing sidearm while running out of the pocket, not planting his back foot when releasing, struggling to reach corners when scrambling out so easily like last year, faking the handoff to the wrong side and forgetting the play, bobbling several snaps, and staring down receivers on 3rd down.

All these are fixable, and i'm 100% positive RG3 will be back to dynamic soon enough.

Although, he doesn't have a grove right now, and it's obvious.. You can add his "stats" and try to argue, but ANYONE who's watching the game can tell our offense is not meshing very well at the moment and it starts at QB.

This just looks like a bunch of opinionated responses followed by saying "I watched the film, so it's true"

Basically........ Typical Gtripp stuff here.

I was really hoping to read something useful here too.

EDIT : "A" for effort though, because this may the most positive thing you've said about the Redskins in over a decade. :)[/quote]I don't think asking for pictures or short vids is an unreasonable request. I might work on that on a blog (not that the story wouldn't be the same), but in general, anything on the WP is going to be write-up only, because of the format.

Like, I could grab a GIF of the Cary Williams INT, but we've all seen the play, so the description is adequate.

warriorzpath 09-16-2013 09:20 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
I think it's a myth that Aikman is unbiased - especially with the Redskins.

Aikman concluded quickly after Meriweather went down that his season was over. Doesn't actually debunk the myth, but makes you wonder. Wishful thinking maybe?

Aikman was probably visualizing Lavar Arrington in Meriweather's place.

warriorzpath 09-16-2013 09:41 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
I know this is off topic but the one buzzword/phrase that everyone uses that gets on my nerves is - sample size. That buzzword always reminds me of food servers at a mall food court giving away little bite sized food samples with toothpicks.

An entire game, by definition, cannot be a sample. A sample is supposed to be a portion of something that is meant to represent the whole. I can see a series being a sample of a game, but what does a "sample size" really consist of?

warriorzpath 09-16-2013 09:45 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
I have a feeling "not much of a sample size" really means: "I'm holding off on what I think because I may be wrong" or "disclaimer: I may be wrong so don't hold me to this".

Lotus 09-16-2013 09:50 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=warriorzpath;1026269]I know this is off topic but the one buzzword/phrase that everyone uses that gets on my nerves is - sample size. That buzzword always reminds me of food servers at a mall food court giving away little bite sized food samples with toothpicks.

An entire game, by definition, cannot be a sample. A sample is supposed to be a portion of something that is meant to represent the whole. I can see a series being a sample of a game, but what does a "sample size" really consist of?[/quote]

"Sample size" is a statistical term which describes how small or large a data set is. If you ask one mall food server what they think of the Redskins, the sample size is one. If you ask the same question of three mall food servers, the sample size is three.

If someone says, "The sample size is small," that means that there weren't enough instances to draw a strong conclusion.

HailGreen28 09-16-2013 09:56 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
So is RG3 now as healthy as he's ever going to get, or not?

And why haven't we run the read option as much as we used to? I don't mean the times where Griff keeps it, I mean running the RO period.

punch it in 09-16-2013 10:00 PM

Maybe others have asked i dont know. Why does it seem like our offense has to be either the read option, designed run stuff or making Griff a pocket passer ? Why cant we roll him out several times a game and let him either throw or run based on what he sees? I mean even if he isnt 100% he is still more mobile than most qb's. Rolling him out also would not subject him to the punishment of the ro. Sort of a conventional run/pass happy medium is what im looking for. Why is it all or nothing?

CRedskinsRule 09-16-2013 10:00 PM

[QUOTE=warriorzpath;1026269]I know this is off topic but the one buzzword/phrase that everyone uses that gets on my nerves is - sample size. That buzzword always reminds me of food servers at a mall food court giving away little bite sized food samples with toothpicks.

An entire game, by definition, cannot be a sample. A sample is supposed to be a portion of something that is meant to represent the whole. I can see a series being a sample of a game, but what does a "sample size" really consist of?[/QUOTE]
One game represents a part of the whole season.

warriorzpath 09-16-2013 10:03 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
... I don't think football or NFL experts are using that term correctly but whatever- it will continue to get on my nerves.

Another pet peeve is attaching "gate" to an nfl incident to represent a scandal like Bounty-gate or Spy-gate. "Gate" comes from the political scandal known as Watergate. Watergate was a facility where the scandal took place and not a scandal involving water. But Bountygate was a bounty scandal and Spygate was a spying scandal.

HailGreen28 09-16-2013 10:09 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=punch it in;1026274]Maybe others have asked i dont know. Why does it seem like our offense has to be either the read option, designed run stuff or making Griff a pocket passer ? Why cant we roll him out several times a game and let him either throw or run based on what he sees? I mean even if he isnt 100% he is still more mobile than most qb's. Rolling him out also would not subject him to the punishment of the ro. Sort of a conventional run/pass happy medium is what im looking for. Why is it all or nothing?[/quote]That's a good point. I thought that's exactly what we did with Cousins against the Browns. Why aren't we doing that now?

GTripp0012 09-16-2013 10:09 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=warriorzpath;1026270]I have a feeling "not much of a sample size" really means: "I'm holding off on what I think because I may be wrong" or "disclaimer: I may be wrong so don't hold me to this".[/quote]Put it this way: if the Redskins win by a combined margin of 65 points the next two weeks, the conclusion wouldn't be "Griffin was 50% in Weeks 1&2 and then improved to 100% in Weeks 3&4," it would be "that's why you don't draw conclusions on someones health after two games."

My points weren't that we can be absolutely sure Griffin is 100%, but just that he's as able a thrower as he was at any point last year. That's not to say he's not messed up mechanically, or whatever everybody else is seeing. It's just to say: if its something you ignored last year, it's not a reason for the team being 0-2.

ethat001 09-16-2013 10:13 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
Like the write-up GTripp, it's at least positive in a depressing time for us.

1) Two games is still a small sample size, statistics require a lot to be definitive.
2) Our O-line, RB's, TE's all struggle at pass blocking. We knew it, and we knew the zone read masked this issue. Last year in passing situations it was clear as well.
3) I think everyone agrees RG3 doesn't have his mojo yet, and I think when he gets it everything gets better. When you don't have IT the other team knows IT, your teammates know IT and get you get highlights on ESPN trying to hand off the ball in the wrong direction.
4) Gut feeling is that he planned to not run much in the beginning of season, and I wonder whether he'll start to run more as time goes on, when he's confident knee is back to normal.
5) The Eagles and GB games were tough to start off with RG3 and no practice -- but the next few games will be more of a true test of how we're progressing. If GTripp's writeup is true, we'll be seeing more blitzing and man coverage until RG3 learns how to beat it.

warriorzpath 09-16-2013 10:17 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
My question is what is a good enough "sample size"? The point in that is- since it's a statistical term, there must be statistical way to figure that out, right? And if not, why not? That's partly why I don't get that term being used in football.

Green Monk Machine 09-16-2013 10:18 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
Sorry Tripp. I don't see how this has debunked these "myths". I think it's more complicated of a problem than defending Robert. The dude hasn't produced. Debate more of a scheme failure or whatever but he's not explosive or able to step into his throws, thus the arguement concedes that he isn't 100% physically b/c mentally the game out to be as slow as neo in the matrix.

GTripp0012 09-16-2013 10:19 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=punch it in;1026274]Maybe others have asked i dont know. Why does it seem like our offense has to be either the read option, designed run stuff or making Griff a pocket passer ? Why cant we roll him out several times a game and let him either throw or run based on what he sees? I mean even if he isnt 100% he is still more mobile than most qb's. Rolling him out also would not subject him to the punishment of the ro. Sort of a conventional run/pass happy medium is what im looking for. Why is it all or nothing?[/quote]I wasn't unhappy with the offensive approach against Green Bay like I was against Philadelphia, but it does strike me as similar to the plan when Grossman was our quarterback in 2011. It's very pass-centric, and we probably don't have the passing game to put that much of our hopes and dreams on it.

We ran the ball much better against GB than against Philly, but we didn't stick with it, part because of the score, part because I think that's a Kyle tendency.

More diversity in the offense cannot hurt, but some of that has to fall on the defense to keep us in the game a little longer.

GTripp0012 09-16-2013 10:29 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=warriorzpath;1026282]My question is what is a good enough "sample size"? The point in that is- since it's a statistical term, there must be statistical way to figure that out, right? And if not, why not? That's partly why I don't get that term being used in football.[/quote]It all depends on what you're looking at of course, but if you want a blanket number where you have a sample that's not TOO small, I'd say 30 is pretty good.

30 games? Sure, you can start to use W/L to evaluate a team at that point. 30 passes? You can start to make conclusions off how a guy looks throwing a football.

There is a statistical way to figure it out. It's called a significance test. Basically, a significance tests only goal is to determine how likely that a result is due to random chance. If the sample is adequately large, something can be deemed significant. If not, it will tell you that something is not significant to 'X' degree of certainty (typically 90% or 95%).

There is no sample size in which something can be 100% certain, but most people are okay with something that is 99.9% certain.

It's a really math-y answer, but I don't have a non math-y way to describe a significance test.

warriorzpath 09-16-2013 10:36 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
... So why exactly are 2 games not a good enough sample size, statistically speaking of course?

GTripp0012 09-16-2013 10:36 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=Green Monk Machine;1026283]Sorry Tripp. I don't see how this has debunked these "myths". I think it's more complicated of a problem than defending Robert. The dude hasn't produced. Debate more of a scheme failure or whatever but he's not explosive or able to step into his throws, thus the arguement concedes that he isn't 100% physically b/c mentally the game out to be as slow as neo in the matrix.[/quote]It's probably less debunking than offering an alternative explanation. I was hard on the myth-creators where it was warranted, because a lot of the myths were started by people who should know better.

I wouldn't expect anyone to be less skeptical of my explanations themselves, but people know that I've gone through the game in a way that many haven't, so there's where the credibility comes from.

He's stepping into his throws pretty normally. I'm not trying to "defend" him or suggest that he's perfect. This analysis does neither of those things. It's to point out that this team went 9-6 with this guy throwing the football last year, and he's not lost or anything throwing the football. When you really sit down and watch play after play, the position that something is "off" in his pocket play won't hold up.

He's less effective from the pocket because the team isn't playing that well around him. Like at all. And I agree with the masses in this way: if Robert could rip off a big run or two with his legs, that would take a lot of pressure off his teammates to get open. But if his teammates could get separation, that would take a lot of pressure off Robert to run. It's a two way street.

And too much of the narrative focuses on what Robert isn't doing, which isn't THAT unusual, but he's getting very little help from his team. And this analysis just looked at the offense. The defense hasn't exactly been that competitive out there.

GTripp0012 09-16-2013 10:47 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=warriorzpath;1026286]... So why exactly are 2 games not a good enough sample size, statistically speaking of course?[/quote]It's an adequate sample for some things, but not for others.

It's not an adequate sample to conclude the Redskins are a 0-16 team (sample size - 2), although that is what they are on pace for.

It is an adequate sample to conclude something that happens on every play. For example, the Redskins are allowed to line up with 11 players on every play, and their continued success at doing so can be confirmed through statistics. I.e. through 150 plays this year on offense, the Redskins have lined up in a legal formation 146 times (or something). We CAN conclude that the Redskins know how to line up in a legal formation (Sample size - 150), because they have to do it every play, and they're generally pretty good at it.

That's a really stupid example, but my point is two games is only a large sample when we talk about events that happen on every play.

GTripp0012 09-16-2013 10:53 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
However, if you only watched the first half of the Eagles game (sample size 25 ish), you would have been unable to conclude (statisically) that the Redskins lining up legally wasn't just due to random chance. The sample size would have been too small (and frankly, they weren't that convincing).

artmonkforhallofamein07 09-16-2013 11:06 PM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
I think it's best described in the play calling. That's all that ready matters, and I do agree with you in that the offensive scheme looks much more like 2011 then anything we did in 2012.

punch it in 09-16-2013 11:32 PM

[QUOTE=HailGreen28;1026278]That's a good point. I thought that's exactly what we did with Cousins against the Browns. Why aren't we doing that now?[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Wasnt even thinking about the browns game - but yes. We stil wanted to mix the run with the pass and keep the d guessing but we coudnt ro with cousins like we did with griff so we rolled him out alot and got him into space where he could keep the d guessing. Well now We cant ro with Griff like we did with Griff - lol so roll him out. That being said ro here and there - griff may not be 100% but he has proven he can take a hit - cant play scared with him. A viscious hit can happen to any player anytime.

punch it in 09-16-2013 11:46 PM

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;1026284]I wasn't unhappy with the offensive approach against Green Bay like I was against Philadelphia, but it does strike me as similar to the plan when Grossman was our quarterback in 2011. It's very pass-centric, and we probably don't have the passing game to put that much of our hopes and dreams on it.

We ran the ball much better against GB than against Philly, but we didn't stick with it, part because of the score, part because I think that's a Kyle tendency.

More diversity in the offense cannot hurt, but some of that has to fall on the defense to keep us in the game a little longer.[/QUOTE]

Oh by no means am i letting the d off the hook. First team in nfl history to give up that many yards in the first two games. However if its going to be shootouts that win the game than lets score 35 and hope that atleast some extended drives will give the d enough time to catch their breath and maybe just maybe make one or two more stops to win said shootout. There is no way our offense puts up enough points to mask the defense if Griff runs three times a game. From what ive seen he is more than healthy enough to scramble for 6-7 yards at a clip starting in space on a rollout/bootleg and help metriculate the ball down the field for those one or two more scoring drives that would have kept us in both games.

Tiny12 09-17-2013 01:45 AM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
Would I be wrong in suggesting that the time to let Cousins play is getting closer?

The Goat 09-17-2013 02:13 AM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=Tiny12;1026294]Would I be wrong in suggesting that the time to let Cousins play is getting closer?[/quote]

Yes.

The Goat 09-17-2013 02:25 AM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
If you put much stock in GTripp's analysis, and I do, it sounds like the best short term fix on offense is putting the right players on the field i.e. receiving targets who best create separation from defenders. I think Tripps a little harsh on Moss because that dude has shown as much ability to get open as anyone so far, it's pretty spot on otherwise. I don't ever notice Morgan getting wide open. He doesn't have the moves. But he is a gritty runner so as long as he's on the roster Morgan should be out go to guy on screen passes. Garçon isn't consistent, just as Tripp said.
So our base offense should include garçon, hankerson, Reid and mix in Helu more to mask passing downs. But it still begs the question why we aren't seeing bootlegs and roll outs.

Either way, coaching is a big issue, the biggest IMO. Why don't mike/Kyle recognize who can help RG the most by making plays? And why the reversion back to pre 2012 football? Now RG isn't even good enough for what you gave cousins to work with? C'mon.

skinsfan69 09-17-2013 07:48 AM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
What I see is a QB that isn't good enough right now to run this type of offense. He needs a running game to be successful. Sorry but that scares me a little bit. We saw some of this last year... when teams knew we had to pass, we couldn't convert 3rd downs. Right now he needs to get help from the coaches, as others have said...get him on the move a bit more, spread out the field formation wise and run some quicker passes, run the no huddle...things he did well at Baylor. Not only does RG3 need to pick it up, but you too Kyle.

Green Monk Machine 09-17-2013 08:46 AM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
I think we just need to dump the pistol and RO. It got is in this mix and isn't going to help Rob one bit. We have TE's, good receivers, and RB's. they must be the offense, not a guy coming off knee surgeries. Pound the ball, use these 2 te sets and go more traditional b/c rob is not physically dynamic anymore. That's all it is. If he can't run, he needs to stop RO, if he can't step in throws, he needs to be taken off the field. The season is underway and Kirk is more able. That will never happen though, not b/c it doesn't make sense but b/c Shanny/Rob are too hard headed. Shanny can never be wrong and he doesnt scold his son Off Cord. afterall the shanny plan has always been 2 part- get kyles career advanced and get Mike into HOF. theyve already gone all in despite any sort of longterm costs to fans and franchise before/after Rob. We do not win with the RO this year. Other teams can, b/c they protect their QB (and certainly don't send him downfield for a pass against the steelers, thanks Kyle).

CRedskinsRule 09-17-2013 09:06 AM

[QUOTE=Green Monk Machine;1026324]I think we just need to dump the pistol and RO. It got is in this mix and isn't going to help Rob one bit. We have TE's, good receivers, and RB's. they must be the offense, not a guy coming off knee surgeries. Pound the ball, use these 2 te sets and go more traditional b/c rob is not physically dynamic anymore. That's all it is. If he can't run, he needs to stop RO, if he can't step in throws, he needs to be taken off the field. The season is underway and Kirk is more able. That will never happen though, not b/c it doesn't make sense but b/c Shanny/Rob are too hard headed. Shanny can never be wrong and he doesnt scold his son Off Cord. afterall the shanny plan has always been 2 part- get kyles career advanced and get Mike into HOF. theyve already gone all in despite any sort of longterm costs to fans and franchise before/after Rob. We do not win with the RO this year. Other teams can, b/c they protect their QB (and certainly don't send him downfield for a pass against the steelers, thanks Kyle).[/QUOTE]

How does dumping the pistol help? You have actually seen a lot more teams incorporate it, because it gives qbs a split second more time to read the defenses.
As for the RO I think all the RO teams wanted to get a feel for how the refs were going to call it and how defenses were going to adjust.

No matter what this week the offense needs to come out on track.

firstdown 09-17-2013 09:09 AM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
So what your saying is teams are not affraid of RGII's arm unless he is able to run which I agree. He is not a pocket passer and needs his legs to be affective.

SouperMeister 09-17-2013 09:19 AM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=firstdown;1026328]So what your saying is teams are not affraid of RGII's arm unless he is able to run which I agree. He is not a pocket passer and needs his legs to be affective.[/quote]Nobody could function as an effective pocket passer behind this line. Griffin threw plenty of accurate intermediate to deep passes from the pocket last year. This notion that he cannot become excellent in the pocket is bunk. That said, with his lack of protection, he better start using his legs to extend plays, or this will be a very long season.

firstdown 09-17-2013 09:24 AM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=GTripp0012;1026284]I wasn't unhappy with the offensive approach against Green Bay like I was against Philadelphia, but it does strike me as similar to the plan when Grossman was our quarterback in 2011. It's very pass-centric, and we probably don't have the passing game to put that much of our hopes and dreams on it.

We ran the ball much better against GB than against Philly, but we didn't stick with it, part because of the score, part because I think that's a Kyle tendency.

More diversity in the offense cannot hurt, but some of that has to fall on the defense to keep us in the game a little longer.[/quote]

GB pretty much stuffed the run in the 1st half giving up 52 yards which at first sounds not too bad. Problem is 32 of those yards cam on one play where we didn't score. Take that away and we had 20 yrds rushing at 2.85 per play.

Chico23231 09-17-2013 09:25 AM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
So its Santana and Josh Morgan killing the team? ummm no. I would agree to an extent that the coaching staff is not doing a very good job with the offense.

RG3 throwing mechanics are not right, your not watching if you dont see it. His accuracy stat is most tell'ing and this has nothing to do with Moss, Morgan. He is missing bad on some throws. Some high, some timing and touch, and some just plain long. Sometime he stands tall and delievers the ball in the face of pressure, sometimes he gets happy feet and doesnt. He's inconsistent. The thing is, it all can be fixed.......if he is truely healthy. If he knee is not, he will continue to struggle.

SmootSmack 09-17-2013 09:38 AM

Re: One Night Only: Offensive Packers-Redskins Game Review, Mythbusters Edition
 
[quote=GTripp0012;1026287]It's probably less debunking than offering an alternative explanation. I was hard on the myth-creators where it was warranted, because a lot of the myths were started by people who should know better.

I wouldn't expect anyone to be less skeptical of my explanations themselves, [B]but people know that I've gone through the game in a way that many haven't, so there's where the credibility comes from.[/B][/quote]

What does that even mean?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.

Page generated in 0.12314 seconds with 9 queries