QB or defense: what's the bigger problem?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

that was worth about .5 cents

I was about to create a monetary unit small enough for that post, but apparently the government beat me to it:tongue

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

ah, but then we get back into what Brunell considers "open". his reflex so far has been to check down immediately, and defenses have done everything to encourage this, because they know how to stop it.

Brunell is well documented to avoid throwing to the middle of the field (BEFORE Saunders), so teams do the ideal defense against that tendency, the ubiquitous Cover-2. the safeties bracket the outside recievers toward the sidelines, where Brunell does throw often (to avoid INTs surely) and essentially double cover his number 1 and 2.

1 LB covers Cooley (or the Nickelback covers ARE in 3 WR sets), if Cooley stays in to max protect that LB becomes a pass rusher. the other LB goes on a blitz to make Brunell dump it off/and or occupy the dump off in a block, remember both his WRs are bracketed under and over already...

since Brunell won't throw to the middle of the field, the middle linebacker doesn't need to run up and cover the gap left by the safeties. instead he can stay on a spy near the line to stop the dump off, or the 'surprise' draw or double cover Cooley if need be.

it's what defenses have been doing to us like clockwork this whole season. i cant see if our WRs are taking middle of the field routes, but i definitely know Brunell isn't throwing there. defenses are taking advantage of Brunell's tendencies and dictating exactly what we get. while you can call him 'efficient' you can also call him dangerously predictable.

Wait, are you saying that the Skins see more cover two than any other team? That would be a very interesting point if true, but I'm sure someone would have picked up on that.

If Cooley is covered by a linebacker in this scheme every play (which would be really stupid defense, but OK), I'd throw him the ball every play. 10 yard hook or something.

If defenses have been running this scheme like clockwork against us, it hasnt been working. We have more points scored than 22 other teams. That includes return TDs (Randle El and Rock) and Defensive TDs (none), but so does everyone elses numbers.

If the 'window' of the field (between the safeties) is as wide open as you think it is, I seriously would hope that Al Saunders would have realized this by now. Even then, a theroy that says Brunell is afraid to throw to a wide open area of the field doesn't hold much water. Granted, the safeties have more time to cover passes thrown down the field (thats why they are low percentage passes after all), but if the opponent was playing a bastardized hard 2 against us each week every play, it seems like a monkey could beat it.

More realistically, it's a coverage we are seeing a few times a game, and when we have the right play called, Lloyd goes down the middle for 20+. When we don't, we end up checking down into LB territory. That's not a bad way to play it. It's not a coverage that would be apparent presnap, it would likely look like any other even (cover 2, quarters) coverage.

Also, its tough to blitz out of a hard 2, because if you run to the blitzer, you go all the way to the safeties. Brunell doesn't usually check down unless hes facing a blitz. If no ones open, he has a tendency to roll, look, and throw it away. Very conservative, yes, but its a safe effective way to move the ball.

Overanalysis in its truest form.

[BMF21]

MB punk ass, and Joe Gibbs for, holding Jason Campbell back, hell Dallas pulled there QB and put in Romo and gave him a shot, and for his first NFL game, he played pretty good,......this is sad, that we rode one horse, for this long

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by BMF21

MB punk ass, and Joe Gibbs for, holding Jason Campbell back, hell Dallas pulled there QB and put in Romo and gave him a shot, and for his first NFL game, he played pretty good,......this is sad, that we rode one horse, for this long

You call Romo's game "pretty good". Compare it to a randomly selected Brunell game. Chances are Brunell's would be better.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Wait, are you saying that the Skins see more cover two than any other team? That would be a very interesting point if true, but I'm sure someone would have picked up on that.

yes. let me find the link.

If Cooley is covered by a linebacker in this scheme every play (which would be really stupid defense, but OK), I'd throw him the ball every play. 10 yard hook or something.

that's my point, I would too. the last TD Cooley had was that play, but Cooley isn't getting it enough as is, being covered by a LB in man or zone.

If the 'window' of the field (between the safeties) is as wide open as you think it is, I seriously would hope that Al Saunders would have realized this by now. Even then, a theroy that says Brunell is afraid to throw to a wide open area of the field doesn't hold much water. Granted, the safeties have more time to cover passes thrown down the field (thats why they are low percentage passes after all), but if the opponent was playing a bastardized hard 2 against us each week every play, it seems like a monkey could beat it.

More realistically, it's a coverage we are seeing a few times a game, and when we have the right play called, Lloyd goes down the middle for 20+. When we don't, we end up checking down into LB territory. That's not a bad way to play it. It's not a coverage that would be apparent presnap, it would likely look like any other even (cover 2, quarters) coverage.

exactly about the monkey, hence the frustation. Brunell not throwing to the middle of the field isn't a theory, it was illustrated in game 2 with stats before Saunders' offense came to town, and it's a recent career hallmark of his conservative play.

of course it's not an every down defense, my point was that defenses don't feel the need to cover the window because of Brunell's tendencies. Lloyd has made that exact over the middle 20yarder by the way, but not often enough (just ask Lloyd when he's not screaming), the 2-3 times this season Brunell has reacted quickly enough and felt confident enough for it.

Also, its tough to blitz out of a hard 2, because if you run to the blitzer, you go all the way to the safeties. Brunell doesn't usually check down unless hes facing a blitz. If no ones open, he has a tendency to roll, look, and throw it away. Very conservative, yes, but its a safe effective way to move the ball.

huh? i just said the mike stays in the instance i gave, its him barreling his way to the dump off/runner way before the safeties, because he knows where Mark is throwing (or where Portis is drawing). especially if Cooley stayed in to block. no need for a cover-3 when Mark doesn't look over the middle past the LB. and again, it was a blitz.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

yes. let me find the link.



that's my point, I would too. the last TD Cooley had was that play, but Cooley isn't getting it enough as is, being covered by a LB in man or zone.



exactly about the monkey, hence the frustation. Brunell not throwing to the middle of the field isn't a theory, it was illustrated in game 2 with stats before Saunders' offense came to town, and it's a recent career hallmark of his conservative play.

of course it's not an every down defense, my point was that defenses don't feel the need to cover the window because of Brunell's tendencies. Lloyd has made that exact over the middle 20yarder by the way, but not often enough (just ask Lloyd when he's not screaming), the 2-3 times this season Brunell has reacted quickly enough and felt confident enough for it.



huh? i just said the mike stays in the instance i gave, its him barreling his way to the dump off/runner way before the safeties, because he knows where Mark is throwing (or where Portis is drawing). especially if Cooley stayed in to block. no need for a cover-3 when Mark doesn't look over the middle past the LB. and again, it was a blitz.

Well, my sig would imply I don't think the guy is getting the ball enough. I was almost being sarcastic with the first three paragraphs. It's not going to be that simple, obviously. Defenses will mix looks and coverages all day, and I'm sure we and every other team in the league sees a varity of cover 2s week in and week out. We have plays to beat the two. When you see Lloyd or Randle El go over the middle and Brunell hit them, chances are the play is being called out of the cover 2 beater section of the Saunders playbook. We still have the back as a check down, but theres a reason that it doesnt go there on that play. The intended reciever(s) was open, and for a big chunk of yardage. Simple pitch and catch. No YAC necessary. But that play is designed to beat open coverages. If that play is called agaisnt a closed coverage, I'm sure Brunell will check down.

Also, I'm 100% sure its far more complicated than this, but hopefully this sheds a little light on all the check downs. Sure you could rear back and fire it in there a la favre no matter what the coverage is, but thats not Gibbs style football, and Brunell isn't Brett Favre in his prime. He, due to coaching and style, is far better than Favre is now, IMO.

Anyway, the offense is working the way it is, but it is hard to see that when you are 2-5.

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

You call Romo's game "pretty good". Compare it to a randomly selected Brunell game. Chances are Brunell's would be better.

Romo showed flashes but young quarterbacks make a lot of mistakes. I believe he threw 3 picks. When Campbell gets his chance you will see the same - periods of good play interrupted by a 4 interception game where he seems clueless. That's why Gibbs doesn't want to relent. He still hasn't given up on the season, nor should he. Once Campbell takes the helm, it's a three year process to be a contender. Look at Rypien. Didn't dress at all for a year. Rode the bench the next year. Finally got a chance the next year. Two years later wins the Super Bowl. Once the Redskins have no chance for the playoffs you may see Campbell - or you may not.

Of course , until we get a better defense none of this matters.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, my sig would imply I don't think the guy is getting the ball enough. I was almost being sarcastic with the first three paragraphs.

well crap, hard to tell your sarcasm when you've been compu-spittin Brunell stats in his favor.

you should change your sig to: Chris.Cooley.Santana.Moss.Brandon.Lloyd.Antwaan.Ra ndle.El. hell, while you're at it, David.Patten.James.Thrash. anything but Ladell

We have plays to beat the two. When you see Lloyd or Randle El go over the middle and Brunell hit them, chances are the play is being called out of the cover 2 beater section of the Saunders playbook. We still have the back as a check down, but theres a reason that it doesnt go there on that play. The intended reciever(s) was open, and for a big chunk of yardage. Simple pitch and catch. No YAC necessary. But that play is designed to beat open coverages. If that play is called agaisnt a closed coverage, I'm sure Brunell will check down.

ok uh, are you quoting me now? this is exactly what we're all pulling our hair out begging to happen.

i KNOW we have chapters in the "700" to beat the cover-2, and it involves getting it to Lloyd and ARE near the hash marks in the center of the field (no YAC, as you said now). you act like that's been happening a lot and it hasn't, maybe 2-3 times all season (like before when you admitted this was a YAC based offense?). this has been my point all along. most of these dump offs are contingencies, not designed plays. Brunell is checking down too quick and not punishing the defense.

Also, I'm 100% sure its far more complicated than this, but hopefully this sheds a little light on all the check downs. Sure you could rear back and fire it in there a la favre no matter what the coverage is, but thats not Gibbs style football, and Brunell isn't Brett Favre in his prime. He, due to coaching and style, is far better than Favre is now, IMO.

rearing back and firing is how you get it to your cover-2 beaters as you yourself (agreed with?) said above. alas, one DB close to our speedsters is enough to discourage Brunell, not just a bracket. and as far as i remember, dinking and dunking into mediocrity wasn't "Gibbs style football" either.

[joethiesmanfan]

Actually I think with Griffin and Salavea out, there went the run defense. The pass defense was already shaky. Add in to the mix Marshall being hurt. If you can't stop the run you are a pansy in the NFL. With those DLinemen back for Dallas and hopefully Troy Vincent taking the place of Mike Rumpf and number 25 (I won't even say his name) our defense should look stronger.

Longterm problems, the flaw in Gibbs philospshy is this keepin players for special teams thing. For one that's why there is no depth. We got Jimoh who can't play corner but plays good special teams. Corners get hurt and we hitting the waiver wire getting 49er rejects. Why is Thrash on the field when we got too may good wide receivers as it is. We got Randel El, Thrash should go and in his place depth can be aquired in needed positions. Who cares if they play special teams build the first and second team strong and let the second team play special teams. Good coaching can keep your specail teams from sucking. Using roster spots for players that dont add to depth but play good special teams is a major flaw in Gibbs philosphy.When we have injuries no one is able to come off the bench and shine. There is no competition for starting posistions.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

Of course , until we get a better defense none of this matters.

Bingo.

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Defense is the bigger problem. Brunell is playing the way he played last year, ultra conservative, high completion percentage, low turnover rate, low yards per attempt.

He continues to throw the ball away rather than force things. This strategy works OK when you have a great defense (10-6 last year). It works terribly when you hand the ball to the other team and allow them to march downfield for a TD.

With a better defense we would have beaten both Minnesota and Tennessee, both games were lost on the last drive. Stop Travis Henry, contain Troy Williamson, and all of a sudden we're 4-3.

Brunell is still the same QB. Won't turn it over but is conservative to a fault. Give him last year's defense and we probably win 9 or 10 games. But you can't count on a defense to dominate every year, you need a QB who can not only avoid turnovers, but also make plays.

Defense is the bigger problem, but Brunell isn't far behind.

Agreed.

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable

What is the recurring theme in the recurring nightmare of the last decade and a half? Our quarterbacks SUCK! Get a good QB. Period. If it´s not JC then find someone. FAST. Do not stop until you have a very good player there. It doesn´t matter if we use every pick for every draft for the next hundred years. Or trade every draft pick for one proven stud free agent. (But nobody trades franchise QB´s. You wanna know why? Because it´s the most important part of the team. How many picks would it take to get Peyton Manning? Carson Palmer? Tom Brady? Donovan McNabb? We could offer CP, Cooley, Moss, and Marcus Washington the Grim reaper and the next five drafts and they would say, "No thanks.") We could fix our D, be top 5 in D, and still not make the playoffs or lose early. Get a QB, take a deep sigh of relief, and build the team.

I don't disagree with what you're saying, but isn't that what Gibbs has tried to do since he got here? He immediately brought in a veteran that could win now even though we already had Ramsey. Then he drafted a young QB to hopefully take over the reigns in a couple years and hold it for many more.

You can question whether Gibbs brought in the right QBs or not, but I don't think you can question his intentions.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Out of curiosity, which part of his deal hasn't he been holding up? He hasn't been inaccurate, and he moves the ball. So do you want him to start changing Saunders' plays in the huddle or something? Is that why he sucks, he accepts coaching?

moving the ball before were down by 21 would be nice.

[Skinz4life]

Defense has been the biggest problem so far I think, which is saying something because Burnell has not been that good either, but when you allow T. Henry and the winless Titians to run all over you that is a problem. The defense is giving up way to many big plays and not causing enough turnovers.

[GoSkins!]

I have rewatched many of the Tivo'd games and it has become very clear what the problem is. The defense can't get turnovers. If we could just get one more turnover each game, we would probably be 4 and 3. If we want to stop these teams from bombing us all the time, we are going to have to make them pay with some INT's. AND..it's crazy the way we knock the ball carriers around but don't ever get to the ball. Yeah our coverage stinks, but I think that Vincent and Springs will help get that fixed.

Brunell looks bad, but he is left handed and Jansen appears to have lost all ability to pass block. A couple of time against the Colts he didn't even appear to touch his guy. He was better with broken thumbs last year. I loved the guy, but he is starting to look like Raymer. I would be looking to dump the ball off too. I agree with Gibbs that Brunell can make every throw. The problem is his protection sucks and it scares him. Maybe the coaches are making Mark get rid of the ball fast because they are seeing the suckyness of the o-line's blocking.

Also, can someone please tape up Rabachs hands so he stops holding on every other play?