H-back Position Disappearing ?

[AnonEmouse]

Might I also point out that there are various twin TE formations where teams use blocking and pass catching TE's on the same play. Saunders could very well switch up FB and a pass catching TE or motion Cooley from the FB position.

I don't think Cooley will have a problem getting off the line anyway, and there are so many options to motion various players, that he will definitely be in the mix without major changes to his position (i.e. he won't have to relearn his role).

[jermus22]

Our personnel fit much better into a Saunders offense rather than the traditional Gibbs style. Don't get me wrong, I like Gibbs' offense and I think it worked fairly well last year. But having both Sellers and Cooley on the field together at FB and TE respectively would be more effective rather than alternating them at H-B and using Fauria and Robert Johnson at TE. Also, while Portis has done an awesome job for us, he strikes me more as a Priest Holmes kind-of-guy, someone known as an outside runner and receiver as opposed to the typical Gibbs type: a smashmouth runner in the mold of John Riggins, George Rogers, Gerald Riggs, and Earnest Byner. Gibbs did have guys like Joe Washington, Timmy Smith, and Ricky Ervins perform well in his offense, but they always had limited roles and served primarily as backups. Portis will do fine no matter how the team utilizes him, but I think a Saunders offense matches his skill set better.

[jermus22]

Oh yeah, and Manuel White will probably work better as a FB instead of an H-B.

[freddyg12]

At this point, there's no right or wrong answer, and contrary to what a few have said in this thread, we can't say what Saunders' authority is, or if the H-back will be eliminated.
Gibbs is a great strategist & part of that is not showing your cards too early. I'm sure he hopes other teams are wondering about the h-back as well & what offense they'll see

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by That Guy

the change on the team's roster (at redskins.com) changed almost immediately to remove all H-backs and list them as either FBs or TEs. cooley missing the pro-bowl due to being mislabelled as a FB probably also had something to do with it.

When was immediately ?

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

At this point, there's no right or wrong answer, and contrary to what a few have said in this thread, we can't say what Saunders' authority is, or if the H-back will be eliminated.
Gibbs is a great strategist & part of that is not showing your cards too early. I'm sure he hopes other teams are wondering about the h-back as well & what offense they'll see

This may be the case, but I doubt that they would hire Saunders as another assistant on offense. I would think that Saunders was brought in to be in charge of the offense, which was similar to the role he had in KC.

I agree that gibbs is a great strategist, but he was and is doing so much now that he needed to free himself of some of his duties. What better coach than Saunders. He's a guy who learned the same offensive philosophies and is a great offensive mind in his own right. It was perfect timing with his situation.

Gibbs is great at what he's doing now, but he was spreading himself too thin. Saunders is taking over the offense. It wouldn't make sense to me to give him another role on this team. This role is where he has proven success in and what he is great at.

[warriorzpath]

To me, to bring him in at any other role would be a waste of his talents.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

When was immediately ?

At least two months ago.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

To me, to bring him in at any other role would be a waste of his talents.

don't knock it till you've tried it. maybe he'll put up even better stats or the overall offensive production will jump dramatically. worst case we can always revert back to the moss-cooley-out of bounds play of last year.

[EXoffender]

Will be running what Gibbs and Saunders ran at USC. No. Saunders just gives us a playcaller in tune with the game. Just as Greg Williams gives on defense. End of thread!?

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by That Guy

At least two months ago.

http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=15667

That's good you said 2 months ago because as recently as 2 and half months ago, they still seemed uncertain of this position.

On March 2, redskins.com posted this story, which still made me think that they were unsure of the h-back position.

With associate head coach-offense Al Saunders coming in to take over the reins of the offense, the H-back position becomes a question mark in the Redskins offense. Will Saunders stay with the H-back or go to a more traditional offensive alignment, with fullbacks and tight ends?

And BTW, this h-back thing is not as old of a story that you make it out to be. They never clearly announced it in their stories - it was just a couple of mentions to it being a possibility or a player moving to a new position. And I have only seen it being mentioned in 3 stories.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by That Guy

don't knock it till you've tried it. maybe he'll put up even better stats or the overall offensive production will jump dramatically. worst case we can always revert back to the moss-cooley-out of bounds play of last year.

I was referring to Saunders.

[warriorzpath]

Originally Posted by EXoffender

Will be running what Gibbs and Saunders ran at USC. No. Saunders just gives us a playcaller in tune with the game. Just as Greg Williams gives on defense. End of thread!?

Reopening of thread !?
What did gibbs and saunders run at USC ? and what will the difference be ?

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

This may be the case, but I doubt that they would hire Saunders as another assistant on offense. I would think that Saunders was brought in to be in charge of the offense, which was similar to the role he had in KC.

I agree that gibbs is a great strategist, but he was and is doing so much now that he needed to free himself of some of his duties. What better coach than Saunders. He's a guy who learned the same offensive philosophies and is a great offensive mind in his own right. It was perfect timing with his situation.

Gibbs is great at what he's doing now, but he was spreading himself too thin. Saunders is taking over the offense. It wouldn't make sense to me to give him another role on this team. This role is where he has proven success in and what he is great at.

Understood, My main point is that Gibbs & co. would not come out & say "Al Saunders will control all of the offense." They want the rest of the league (& us for that matter) to keep guessing as to what the offense will be. Don't be surprised if there are some hybrid plays & some old gibbs' plays, especially the counter trey & wideout screen.
I'm just saying that at this point we don't know the specific involvement that Gibbs will have & he probably doesn't either. Later in the year he may take a more active role. The strategy at this point is for them now is to send a lot of smokescreens. That stuff on redskins.com about the h back may just be as bogus as a lot of draft rumors that teams put out there.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by warriorzpath

http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=15667

That's good you said 2 months ago because as recently as 2 and half months ago, they still seemed uncertain of this position.

On March 2, redskins.com posted this story, which still made me think that they were unsure of the h-back position.

With associate head coach-offense Al Saunders coming in to take over the reins of the offense, the H-back position becomes a question mark in the Redskins offense. Will Saunders stay with the H-back or go to a more traditional offensive alignment, with fullbacks and tight ends?

And BTW, this h-back thing is not as old of a story that you make it out to be. They never clearly announced it in their stories - it was just a couple of mentions to it being a possibility or a player moving to a new position. And I have only seen it being mentioned in 3 stories.

i said the team roster changed cooley's position a while back, not that it was mentioned in any articles.