Chamberlain Released
 

The Skins signed blocking tight end Brian Kozlowski and released Bryon Chamberlain.

[url]http://www.redskins.com/story.asp?ContentID=12648[/url]

I'm really surprised about the Chamberlain move, is that a sign that KW2 will be wearing the burgundy and gold?

Not necessarily. They did sign another TE and a receiver. Both interesting moves. I kinda figured Bryon was on his way out. I guess Gibbs just wants blocking tightends and isnt interested in KWII. Why another receiver?

special teams

I wonder if he is leading towards KWII now. We still have Flemister and Royal and Sellers right? Or did some of them get cut. I know we had a ton of TE's, which is weird since we were in an offense that didnt use them.

I don't think they have Flemister anymore. Crisp do you remember how Chamberlain looked at mini-camp? I had thought he might have a turnaround this season

I always liked Royal, I thought he looked good the few times he was in with getting open.

Here's what JC said about Chamberlain:

[quote]Chamberlain looked particularly slow coming out of the three-point stance, really lacking the explosiveness you would expect to see off the snap.[/quote]

Plus I remember reading somewhere he was out of shape and overweight, what a surprise. It's a shame because the guy has talent, sounds like he's just lazy.

Thanks Matty

I'm actually kinda excited they signed Kozwolski. He played at a high school right in my area, so its nice to have someone local on the skins. hes a pretty decent player as well.

chamberlain is not a hard worker, in fact he's fat and lazy, just another move in the direction of work ethic and charactor.

The Kozlowski aquisition sounds like a good deal. It also makes me think we're not going after KWII. I'm looking more toward picking up Sean Taylor or trading down for more picks.

What TE do we have left on the roster.

Joe, how was Gibbs using the TE at minicamp.

As I said in another thread, when you look at winslow and how gibb's uses TE's realisticlly, they are both heading in different direction's, 1 Winslow is a pass catcher, Gibb's rarley throw's to the TE, 2 winslow has a big mouth Gibb's like's guy's who let thier play do the talking, and 3 winslow is a me first player, Gibb's want's team first player's, add up 1+2+3 = no winslow, and yes to taylor, or another trade scenerio.

Gibbs never used a TE before but that doesnt mean he hasnt watched game film of the Giants, Ravents and Chiefs and thought about using the TE differently. He said he would steal from successful things.

[QUOTE=SKINSnCANES]Gibbs never used a TE before but that doesnt mean he hasnt watched game film of the Giants, Ravents and Chiefs and thought about using the TE differently. He said he would steal from successful things.[/QUOTE]

Well he has used TE's before, in san diego with winslow senior, but he evolved into his own kind of coach when he came to us, the longer he coached us the less he threw to the TE, I just feel he will make a player out of whoever he choses to play that position, but saftey is another story and I think that is where we will look for talent, or on the D-line.

Yea theres not doubt if he had KWII that he would take our O to a wohle new level. But im sure hes going to do that anyways, so Taylor would take our D to a new level as well.

Can't play football if your fat.

haha, so why was our oline called the HOGS. Theres plenty of great fat people.

[QUOTE=SKINSnCANES]Gibbs never used a TE before but that doesnt mean he hasnt watched game film of the Giants, Ravents and Chiefs and thought about using the TE differently. He said he would steal from successful things.[/QUOTE]

Don Warren, Clint Didier, Rick Walker, Terry Orr, Jimmie Johnson, Ron Middleton, Ray Rowe ... those guys were all tight ends.

Now, some of them lined up at the H-back position, but certainly Gibbs uses TEs.

Does anyone actually know the technical differences between H-back, full back and TE?

A quick and dirty explanation is that the h-back is a hybrid postion that combines the blocking duties of the FB with the receiving duties of the TE.

Here's a good explanation:

[quote]Buchsbaum: A tight end generally lines up next to the tackle, close to the line of scrimmage on the strong side. He is generally in a down position with one hand down on the ground. An H-back often goes in motion and is used as a blocker in a momentum situation, where he’s in motion and turning upfield at the time the block needs to be thrown. Or, the H-back can be used more like a flanker. By putting the H-back in motion, the offense creates confusion for the defense: who’s going to guard him; when he blocks, whom is he going to go after; etc. The H-back is generally more of an athletic player than the tight end.[/quote]

source: [url]http://archive.profootballweekly.com/content/archives/features_2000/football101_052300.asp[/url]

Ok, I've always wanted to know that. But, why don't they just call the H-back a fullback? What's the difference there?

While we're at it, what's the difference between a tailback and a halfback?

...Also, what's the origin of the universe?... the meaning of life?

Does anyone have any background on Kozlowski ?

Kozlowski

[url="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1564"]http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1564[/url]

[url="http://www.atlantafalcons.com/team/001/400/"]http://www.atlantafalcons.com/team/001/400/[/url]

I meant Gibbs doesnt use them as a receiver, hes very well known for using tightends, probably more than anyone.

[QUOTE=SKINSnCANES]I meant Gibbs doesnt use them as a receiver, hes very well known for using tightends, probably more than anyone.[/QUOTE]

Ok, I see what you mean. Yeah, he's always used lots of TEs, with several on the roster. In '91, there was Orr (#89), Middleton (#87), Johnson (#88), and Brandes (#82, also played long snapper). But as a receiver, as you said, yes, they were not much of a factor.

I was looking through the stats of Gibbs' offenses towards the last part of his tenure as head coach. There was a fairly significant drop off in pass receiving after Monk and Clark. I believe even Ricky Sanders was a distant third in catches for a season or two, with running backs and TE/H-backs not far behind.

[QUOTE=Beemnseven]Ok, I've always wanted to know that. But, why don't they just call the H-back a fullback? What's the difference there?

While we're at it, what's the difference between a tailback and a halfback?

...Also, what's the origin of the universe?... the meaning of life?[/QUOTE]The difference between an H-back and your traditional fullback is the way in which the H-back is sent in motion. While a fullback will often shift from the strong to the weak side or vice-versa, he generally stays in the backfield, whereas an H-back is often shifted to the TE position-- either opposite the primary tight end, or alongside him in a "slot TE" look.

As far as tailbacks and halfbacks, think of the tailback as the "tail" back in the various "I" formations. In those sets, the tailback always lines up behind the fullback. However, in the "Pro" set, the runningback lines up next to the fullback, and becomes a halfback. Of course, the term "Halfback" has been around for a long time-- ever since the days of the old "T" and "wishbone" formations, where there was one fullback and two runningbacks split to either "half" of the backfield.

I hope those explanations clear up what have often been fuzzy terms applied to the players in the offensive backfield.... I can't help you with the other stuff!

This is kind of sad, Chamberlain obviously has (had?) natural talent, and it's not like he has any job besides work out and get in shape. I mean, if my job was to play football, I would be at that place for at least 8 hours every day, during the season or crunch time like this much, much more!

Byron Chamberlain could have been a great asset for us if he got back into old form, it's a shame!

I hope Gibbs runs a Wishbone offense! That would rock!!

This is the reason the Skins had the chance to sign Chamberlain in the first place. He showed up for his injury rehab out of shape and WAAY overweight and so they put him in a conditioning program and he was lazy there. That's why they cut him the day they were allowed to cut him after his injury time had expired.

This is also the reason to be glad that Joe Gibbs is looking for "character" and "work ethic" in his players.

Somebody else will sign Chamberlain because he is talented and someone will believe that they have the key that will unlock that talent and get him to work hard. Not likely that is going to work. Chamberlain will probably be out of the NFL in two more years.

[QUOTE=joecrisp]However, in the "Pro" set, the runningback lines up next to the fullback, and becomes a halfback. Of course, the term "Halfback" has been around for a long time-- ever since the days of the old "T" and "wishbone" formations, where there was one fullback and two runningbacks split to either "half" of the backfield.[/QUOTE]

I always thought that fullback and halfback came from the T formation where the fullback was at the back of the formation (i.e. he was "fully" back from the line of scrimmage) and the halfback was halfway between the full back and the line of scrimmage and the quaterback (surprise surprise) was one quarter of the distance between the line of scrimmage and the fullback.

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin]I always thought that fullback and halfback came from the T formation where the fullback was at the back of the formation (i.e. he was "fully" back from the line of scrimmage) and the halfback was halfway between the full back and the line of scrimmage and the quaterback (surprise surprise) was one quarter of the distance between the line of scrimmage and the fullback.[/QUOTE]
In the traditional T-formation, the fullback is indeed "fully" back from the line of scrimmage (straight behind the quarterback), with the halfbacks split to both sides of the fullback (or each "half" of the backfield). In the wishbone, the fullback lines up a couple of steps closer to the quarterback (3-5 yards off the line of scrimmage), with the halfbacks remaining in their standard T-formation positions (approx. 7 yards off the line of scrimmage).

If Gibbs doesnt plan on getting Winslow im surprised at some of teh moves hes made. Portis needs good blockers. BJ would have done that in the fullback role, but now hes gone. I wonder if Gibbs plans on running a lot of single back. The H-back position is more effective when you have a guy that a treat to catch the ball and thats quick. Otherwise you dont worry about him running out of formation. If Winslow ran in motion from the hback spot you have to worry whether Portis gets the ball, you have to send someone to cover winslow because hes a threat, and still worry about our wideouts. Id liek to see us get Taylor but if we got Winslow, after seeing the offense with him in itI dotn think anyone woudl complain.

[QUOTE=joecrisp]In the traditional T-formation, the fullback is indeed "fully" back from the line of scrimmage (straight behind the quarterback), with the halfbacks split to both sides of the fullback (or each "half" of the backfield). In the wishbone, the fullback lines up a couple of steps closer to the quarterback (3-5 yards off the line of scrimmage), with the halfbacks remaining in their standard T-formation positions (approx. 7 yards off the line of scrimmage).[/QUOTE]

Thanks JoeC