What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

We're going to be discussing the playcalling all week long again because there are a segment of us who are fed up with the offense we're seeing and a segment of us who would like to see more but feel we are doing what we can with what we have to work with.. Which camp are you in an what would you like to see different or stay the same?

I think we're too conservative, especially with a lead.. What seems to be missing from our offense once we have a 2 td lead is:

1. Aggressiveness-Gibbs seems to throttle back the aggressiveness once we've gotten a 'comfortable' lead on the other team and doesn't keep attacking. NE has a defense that rivals if not exceeds ours and they never play like they are comfortable with their lead.. I'm not comparing personnel, just philosophy.. Being aggressive isn't bombing the ball 30 yards downfield at every chance. It can be as simple as calling a mid range pass play on 1st and 10 rather than a dive play. It can be calling a screen on 2nd and 5.. Our mid range and across the middle of the field passing game disappears in the 2nd half of games. There are many ways to be aggressive without taking a 7 step drop and looking deep..

2. Imagination-When 90% of us can call the play before the Redskins break the huddle, that's bad. How many times have we seen run, run, pass, punt in the second half of games this year? As great as our defense is, how much better would they be if they weren't on the field for 20 minutes in the 2nd half? I believe Saunders has the plays and imagination to call a dynamic game plan (which we saw vs. Detroit) but is handcuffed..

3. Courage-How many times have we heard JG17 allude to he was 'afraid of what bad may happen' in post game pressers? He's afraid of turnovers, afraid to put his players in certain positions during a game, afraid of getting a FG blocked, etc.. Scared money don't make money in the NFL.. When you coach scared, your players play scared (see Brunell, Mark) and you can't be effective.. Against the Giants, we all felt like we went down with plenty of bullets left in the gun.. Same as yesterday, we got SO tight in the 2nd half once Portis scored it was crazy.. We all know about the OL injuries and that certainly has an effect on play calling and the game plan, but we've still got to man up and play OUR GAME with what we have.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

with the pats we might as well air it up on ofense, come out completely different. were not going to be able to scrap with NE i dont think, they are too explosive on D. even with our D being as good as they are right now, this is the week to put the Gibbs/Saunders playbook down and watch the cleveland/cincinnati tape from a few weeks ago. we need to get creative this week.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

I'll probably sound like a broken record by the end of this week but here goes. I think a lot of people are seriously underestimating how damaging it is to an offense to have 3 starters out on the offensive line. Thomas and Rabach are HUGE keys to the running game when it comes to getting guys out in space on pulling plays. We sorely miss their athleticism along with Rabach's ability to make all the line calls and do it well.

Our OL depth has been stretched beyond it's limit and I think it's having a serious impact on the offense in regard to consistency, game planning, and play calling on game day. We could barely scrape together enough guys to practice during the week and people are acting surprised that the offense is sputtering. It's simply amazing to me that some people are either so thick-headed that they can't see this or they are just plain dumb. Sorry just calling it like I see it, I hate to be blunt but the shoe seems to fit.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;367404]I'll probably sound like a broken record by the end of this week but here goes. I think a lot of people are seriously underestimating how damaging it is to an offense to have 3 starters out on the offensive line. Thomas and Rabach are HUGE keys to the running game when it comes to getting guys out in space on pulling plays. We sorely miss their athleticism along with Rabach's ability to make all the line calls and do it well.

Our OL depth has been stretched beyond it's limit and I think it's having a serious impact on the offense in regard to consistency, game planning, and play calling on game day. We could barely scrape together enough guys to practice during the week and people are acting surprised that the offense is sputtering. It's simply amazing to me that some people are either so thick-headed that they can't see this or they are just plain dumb. Sorry just calling it like I see it, I hate to be blunt but the shoe seems to fit.[/quote]

You are 100% correct. I already knew the offensive line troubles were going to hamper the running game, but I was personally shocked by how big of a problem the injury to Rabach turned out to be. Seeing linebackers shooting gaps completely untouched, and ends coming around the corners unblocked was frustrating as hell to watch.

Mike Pucillo seems to be able to handle the actual blocking well enough at the center position, but he's obviously lacking experience when it comes to calling out the O line audibles. I hope for their sake that Rabach is able to go next week.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

I'll second Matty's (and others) statement about the line.

Gibbs conceded that the game plan was conservative, I think the staff was really worried about JC given that Pucillo was playing & the center is so vital to line communication. I think Gibbs was so happy to get the win because he knows that Rabach will be back & they can open the playbook up a little more.

I am a little tired of hearing about Saunders' play calling. I think he's done a good job this year, we've just had so many drops. As the WP article about Saudners notes, if Moss or Loyd had hauled in one of those passes last week at GB, those questions don't come up.

The only thing I was really disappointed with in the game plan was that unlike the previous 2 weeks, we didn't set up the run w/the pass nearly enough. Against Detroit we didn't run well untill we'd worn them down w/short passes. I see that as our new O identity - pass first & wear defenses down to run in the 2nd half. This o-line seems much better at pass blocking than run blocking.

Maybe it's an issue for a separate thread, but what I've worried about in re: to Saunders, is if Gibbs is trying to tweak his game plans so much that he doesn't have enough freedom to call the game the way he'd like. Sometimes, it's just best to have 1 person in charge.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

Its been rough on the offensive line, but why don't we run quick passes to take some pressure off those backup linemen in running situation. Get the ball out of Campbells hand FAST so he's NOT running for his life. Quick slants, outs, etc could really back the defense off the running game some and open up some running room for Portis/Betts.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

[quote=Southpaw;367411]You are 100% correct. I already knew the offensive line troubles were going to hamper the running game, but I was personally shocked by how big of a problem the injury to Rabach turned out to be. Seeing linebackers shooting gaps completely untouched, and ends coming around the corners unblocked was frustrating as hell to watch.

[B]Mike Pucillo seems to be able to handle the actual blocking well enough at the center position[/B], but he's obviously lacking experience when it comes to calling out the O line audibles. I hope for their sake that Rabach is able to go next week.[/quote]

I'll have to watch some of the game again but I honestly wasn't very impressed with his blocking ability. Granted the Cards have a big and physical defensive line, but I saw Puccillo getting blown up way too much for my taste. Rabach is a big loss and I think we saw just how valuable he is yesterday.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;367404]I'll probably sound like a broken record by the end of this week but here goes. I think a lot of people are seriously underestimating how damaging it is to an offense to have 3 starters out on the offensive line. Thomas and Rabach are HUGE keys to the running game when it comes to getting guys out in space on pulling plays. We sorely miss their athleticism along with Rabach's ability to make all the line calls and do it well.

Our OL depth has been stretched beyond it's limit and I think it's having a serious impact on the offense in regard to consistency, game planning, and play calling on game day. We could barely scrape together enough guys to practice during the week and people are acting surprised that the offense is sputtering. It's simply amazing to me that some people are either so thick-headed that they can't see this or they are just plain dumb. Sorry just calling it like I see it, I hate to be blunt but the shoe seems to fit.[/QUOTE]
Matty, I agree with you that the OL injuries are a factor in game planning and execution but I am talking more about overall philosophy than yesterday's game.. Yesterday we almost saw the same thing we've seen 12 times in the past 3 years, we can't use yesterday's injuries as a blanket excuse for it all. By now Wade and Fabini are starters. They've had 4 games and a bye week together so we can't continue to bemoan missing 3 starters. Having Rabach makes a huge difference no doubt and we'll be more talented and effective with him in there.. The overall philosophy is what's more of an issue than the injuries.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

The offense has been undoubtedly affected by the injuries to the o-linemen. Moreover, when JC drops back to throw and dumps it off, it's hard to know what play was actually called. Did Saunders call for JC to dump it off? Or were the wideouts covered and was JC, therefore, forced to throw to a back in the flats? So, it's hard to conclusively say that the offense is "conservative."

However, we did seem to be running the ball an awful lot. I understand that it is important to run the ball and get the d-linemen to back off of bliting JC. But, when the running game is your bread and butter, and it is ineffective because the D is stacking the box, it is important to at least establish the threat of going deep. We have been able to do that in some games and have failed to do so in other games.

Hopefully, our offensive woes are a function of the injuries and once guys heal, our offense will display the explosiveness that we all expect, or at least want, to see.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;367404]I'll probably sound like a broken record by the end of this week but here goes. I think a lot of people are seriously underestimating how damaging it is to an offense to have 3 starters out on the offensive line. Thomas and Rabach are HUGE keys to the running game when it comes to getting guys out in space on pulling plays. We sorely miss their athleticism along with Rabach's ability to make all the line calls and do it well.

Our OL depth has been stretched beyond it's limit and I think it's having a serious impact on the offense in regard to consistency, game planning, and play calling on game day. We could barely scrape together enough guys to practice during the week and people are acting surprised that the offense is sputtering. It's simply amazing to me that some people are either so thick-headed that they can't see this or they are just plain dumb. Sorry just calling it like I see it, I hate to be blunt but the shoe seems to fit.[/quote]

I get so tired of everyone crying about the injuries to the o-line. I would understand if we had rookies on the right side of the line. Balt. had three rookies starting on the o-line yesterday. If we had that situation then I could see. But these guys have been in the NFL for a long time. No reason we can't throw the ball down the field more than 15 yards. Especially on 1st down. It's just pathetic. It shows a complete lack of respect for your skill players. If I were JC I would be screaming at Gibbs and Sanders for that bullshit that went on yesterday. Why the hell do you have Moss ARE and Cooley? To throw stupid ass screens every play? If your so worried about pass protection then run some play action passes and keep 7 guys in to block.

Not sure if anyone heard Sanders comments after the game. But he said we decided to play to the strength of our team and come in with a conservative game plan. If they pull that shit next week we are going to get beat down real bad.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;367419]I'll have to watch some of the game again but I honestly wasn't very impressed with his blocking ability. Granted the Cards have a big and physical defensive line, but I saw Puccillo getting blown up way too much for my taste. Rabach is a big loss and I think we saw just how valuable he is yesterday.[/quote]

The biggest issue was at center........ARizona was reading the snap count ALLL GAME, by the time pucillo snapped the ball, there were two DT's in the backfield.....if he has a whole week to practice and cannot change up the snap count....that is on the coaching staff. Arizona knew exactly when the snap was coming on every third down...giving JC no time to convert on the third down passes.

THAT'S high school level football.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;367441]I get so tired of everyone crying about the injuries to the o-line. I would understand if we had rookies on the right side of the line. Balt. had three rookies starting on the o-line yesterday. If we had that situation then I could see. But these guys have been in the NFL for a long time. [/quote]

Why is it so hard for people to comprehend that sub par O line play has a negative impact on EVERYTHING the Redskins try to do offensively? In yesterdays game specifically, there were next to no running lanes, and Campbell was under constant pressure all day. He was hurried every time he took more than a three step drop. How were they supposed to take shots downfield with linebackers and ends rushing him, basically untouched?

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

[quote=Paintrain;367386]We're going to be discussing the playcalling all week long again because there are a segment of us who are fed up with the offense we're seeing and a segment of us who would like to see more but feel we are doing what we can with what we have to work with.. Which camp are you in an what would you like to see different or stay the same?

I think we're too conservative, especially with a lead.. What seems to be missing from our offense once we have a 2 td lead is:

1. Aggressiveness-Gibbs seems to throttle back the aggressiveness once we've gotten a 'comfortable' lead on the other team and doesn't keep attacking. NE has a defense that rivals if not exceeds ours and they never play like they are comfortable with their lead.. I'm not comparing personnel, just philosophy.. Being aggressive isn't bombing the ball 30 yards downfield at every chance. It can be as simple as calling a mid range pass play on 1st and 10 rather than a dive play. It can be calling a screen on 2nd and 5.. Our mid range and across the middle of the field passing game disappears in the 2nd half of games. There are many ways to be aggressive without taking a 7 step drop and looking deep..

2. Imagination-When 90% of us can call the play before the Redskins break the huddle, that's bad. How many times have we seen run, run, pass, punt in the second half of games this year? As great as our defense is, how much better would they be if they weren't on the field for 20 minutes in the 2nd half? I believe Saunders has the plays and imagination to call a dynamic game plan (which we saw vs. Detroit) but is handcuffed..

3. Courage-How many times have we heard JG17 allude to he was 'afraid of what bad may happen' in post game pressers? He's afraid of turnovers, afraid to put his players in certain positions during a game, afraid of getting a FG blocked, etc.. Scared money don't make money in the NFL.. When you coach scared, your players play scared (see Brunell, Mark) and you can't be effective.. Against the Giants, we all felt like we went down with plenty of bullets left in the gun.. Same as yesterday, we got SO tight in the 2nd half once Portis scored it was crazy.. We all know about the OL injuries and that certainly has an effect on play calling and the game plan, but we've still got to man up and play OUR GAME with what we have.[/quote]

Agree with everything here. Good post.

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;367438]The offense has been undoubtedly affected by the injuries to the o-linemen. Moreover, when JC drops back to throw and dumps it off, it's hard to know what play was actually called. Did Saunders call for JC to dump it off? Or were the wideouts covered and was JC, therefore, forced to throw to a back in the flats? So, it's hard to conclusively say that the offense is "conservative."

However, we did seem to be running the ball an awful lot. I understand that it is important to run the ball and get the d-linemen to back off of bliting JC. But, when the running game is your bread and butter, and it is ineffective because the D is stacking the box, it is important to at least establish the threat of going deep. We have been able to do that in some games and have failed to do so in other games.

Hopefully, our offensive woes are a function of the injuries and once guys heal, our offense will display the explosiveness that we all expect, or at least want, to see.[/quote]

True- and I'll be the first to admit that when i watch the game, I probably can't tell you what the aim of each pass call was...but i tend to agree with pain train with the perception of conservatism. We seem to run, run, pass, punt far too often with the lead. fact is, we aren't good enough to run for first downs consistently...

I also agree that the 0-line injuries are largely a part of it, but aren't these guys pros? Wasn't Wade supposed to be so good as to challenge jasen (teammate opinion? At this point, a lot of the line have played several games together not to mention practice (i'm not specifically talking about yesterday's game either), if they aren't good enough to fill the void (perhaps we should be more prudent about giving way draft pick- which deplete our depth).

at the same time, a win is a win...
i'll take it...4-2 ain't bad

Re: What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?
 

[quote=Southpaw;367449]Why is it so hard for people to comprehend that sub par O line play has a negative impact on EVERYTHING the Redskins try to do offensively? In yesterdays game specifically, there were next to no running lanes, and Campbell was under constant pressure all day. He was hurried every time he took more than a three step drop. How were they supposed to take shots downfield with linebackers and ends rushing him, basically untouched?[/quote]

No excuse. Throw the damn ball down the field! Just throw and keep on throwing.

~removes tin foil hat~