Quote:
|
Originally Posted by canthetuna
Its going to be interesting to see if they keep the Gibb's system (h-back and multiple formation/motion plays) or totally convert. I understand that the guys have the same background, but their offenses are completely different. Also, I know we sort of collapsed in the post season, but Gibbs/Breaux/Buges took the team from the 30th ranked offense in 2004 to 11th in 2005... I'm not sure if its time to re-vamp everything.
I wonder how radical this change is going to be.
|
Good points. I think the 'H-back' is purely a Joe Gibbs innovation. In fact, I remember reading that Gibbs came up with the position as a way to combat the threat posed by Lawrence Taylor. Looking back, Norv never used an H-back, as it's called, in Dallas or Washington -- Daryl Johnston, Marc Logan, Larry Bowie -- they were all listed as "full backs". They mainly served as blockers. Norv Turner once said that his fullbacks blocked 70% of the time, received passes 20% of the time, and ran the ball just 10%.
The other key difference appears to be use of tight ends in receiving patterns more so than in Gibbs' offense. Guys like Jay Novacek, Jamie Asher, Stephen Alexander for Norv Turner, and Tony Gonzales for Al Saunders are clearly more involved as receivers than Gibbs' tight ends are. Ron Middleton, James Jenkins, and Robert Royal now, come to mind as players who served roles more as blockers than pass catchers. Something tells me that Cooley would be more than capable of adapting to the 'receiving' tight end if called on to do so.
I guess it's all going to depend on precisely how much control Gibbs is willing to relenquish to Saunders with the offense.