Why all the complaining?

[SouperMeister]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Ok. So, I'm hearing people complain about Al Saunders. Fine. You guys were the ones who said we needed an offensive coordinator other than Joe Gibbs. What difference has it made? At least we made the playoffs under Gibbs' offense. And, that was an offense with Mark Brunell at quarterback, and with one goto receiver in Santana Moss.

So, knowing those facts, if we have all the offensive weapons now that we didn't have in '05, why wouldn't Joe Gibbs' offense work now? Don't get me wrong, until our record falls under .500 and we miss the playoffs again, I will continue to support this team and the coaches. But, I do believe the FO has done just about everything that the fans have asked them to do, and the fans still don't like it.

What I saw today was a lot more Joe Gibbs conservatism in the game plan than the Al Saunders offenses that I remember from STL and KC. I'm fine with conservatism if it's working. It was a beautiful thing when Portis bludgeoned teams down the stretch of '05, but we are not seeing the kind of production with that approach for THIS team. If conservatism is not working, I'd like to see more of a Saunders-styled game plan, that often used the passing game to set up subsequent running success in his previous stops. This would have been a 14 point win with any second half production from the offense.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

What I saw today was a lot more Joe Gibbs conservatism in the game plan than the Al Saunders offenses that I remember from STL and KC. I'm fine with conservatism if it's working. It was a beautiful thing when Portis bludgeoned teams down the stretch of '05, but we are not seeing the kind of production with that approach for THIS team. If conservatism is not working, I'd like to see more of a Saunders-styled game plan, that often used the passing game to set up subsequent running success in his previous stops. This would have been a 14 point win with any second half production from the offense.

And again, you have to ask, why were we playing conservative. Our freakin' offensive line. Why did Joe Gibbs' offense work in '05? Because we had our offensive line intact. It's that simple.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

And again, you have to ask, why were we playing conservative. Our freakin' offensive line. Why did Joe Gibbs' offense work in '05? Because we had our offensive line intact. It's that simple.

During that 5-game stretch, we also saw intensity and determination that hasn't been matched before or since.

There's been a lot of half-assing it if you ask me.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

During that 5-game stretch, we also saw intensity and determination that hasn't been matched before or since.

There's been a lot of half-assing it if you ask me.

And those players need to do a better job.

[SouperMeister]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

And again, you have to ask, why were we playing conservative. Our freakin' offensive line. Why did Joe Gibbs' offense work in '05? Because we had our offensive line intact. It's that simple.

And I argue that it's foolish to try to go smashmouth with the O-line in shambles. I've said it before, and it bears repeating, you can spread the field with 3 and 4 WR sets to create more running lanes. Today was an obvious lack of willingness to adjust on offense, and it probably should have cost us the game.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

And I argue that it's foolish to try to go smashmouth with the O-line in shambles. I've said it before, and it bears repeating, you can spread the field with 3 and 4 WR sets to create more running lanes. Today was an obvious lack of willingness to adjust on offense, and it probably should have cost us the game.

Doesn't matter if you spread the offense or not, if your offensive line is in shambles, none of it is going to work. If opening running lanes was the only problem with our OL, then we could work around that, but pass protection is also suspect now because of our OL being injured.

[SouperMeister]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Doesn't matter if you spread the offense or not, if your offensive line is in shambles, none of it is going to work. If opening running lanes was the only problem with our OL, then we could work around that, but pass protection is also suspect now because of our OL being injured.

So by your logic, nothing will work until the O-line gets healthy. If that's the case, then we might as well mail in the season now. I prefer to think that you can get creative to try to make something happen. We haven't seen Randle El or Portis throw an option pass all season. We haven't seen Saunders try to roll the pocket to one side to buy Campbell more time on deeper pass plays. We haven't tried no huddle to prevent defensive substitutions, possibly resulting in mismatches. I noticed when we did go jumbo today, Thrash was the lone WR in that package (instead of Moss). That strikes ZERO fear in opposing safeties, who may as well put 9 in the box against that package. The only thing that I saw on offense today was coaching scared.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

So by your logic, nothing will work until the O-line gets healthy. If that's the case, then we might as well mail in the season now. I prefer to think that you can get creative to try to make something happen. We haven't seen Randle El or Portis throw an option pass all season. We haven't seen Saunders try to roll the pocket to one side to buy Campbell more time on deeper pass plays. We haven't tried no huddle to prevent defensive substitutions, possibly resulting in mismatches. I noticed when we did go jumbo today, Thrash was the lone WR in that package (instead of Moss). That strikes ZERO fear in opposing safeties, who may as well put 9 in the box against that package. The only thing that I saw on offense today was coaching scared.

First of all, the offensive line is what makes everything work. If it's not there, it's not going to happen.

Secondly,you're talking about relying on gadget plays. If you're having to run gadget plays to jump start your offense, you're in trouble. It may work once or twice a game, but that isn't how things work.

Thirdly, rolling the quarterback out is a nice thought and something I'd like to see more often as well. However, while it does buy some time, roll outs still require protection from your offensive line. So, once again, it comes back to the trenches.

As far as mailing it in for the season, I do believe the 2000 Ravens' O was quite pathetic, and they relied on their defense just as much as we have. Yet, they did come away with a Super Bowl trophy. While I don't believe we're as good as that team was, we do have a strong defense that will at least give us a chance to win games for us, but we have to fix our offensive line to have any improvement with our offense.

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

As far as mailing it in for the season, I do believe the 2000 Ravens' O was quite pathetic, and they relied on their defense just as much as we have. Yet, they did come away with a Super Bowl trophy. While I don't believe we're as good as that team was, we do have a strong defense that will at least give us a chance to win games for us, but we have to fix our offensive line to have any improvement with our offense.

Good point about the Ravens. I don't recall the 2000 season all that well, but were there any offenses then that rival the Pats or Indy? I know the Rams were damned good, but I think you're looking at a potentially record-breaking offense with the Pats, and Indy is always just incredible.

If I got real imaginative I could even see our defense just carrying the team deep into the playoffs like the Ravens, but I just don't see us stopping a Brady or Manning for a championship.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

And I argue that it's foolish to try to go smashmouth with the O-line in shambles. I've said it before, and it bears repeating, you can spread the field with 3 and 4 WR sets to create more running lanes. Today was an obvious lack of willingness to adjust on offense, and it probably should have cost us the game.

This requires a complete adjustment of offensive philosophy. That doesn't happen overnight. And what happens when Wade and Kendall aren't gimpy and Rabach is fine? Our line is tremendously better and we're supposed to simply switch back to our original plan? It doesn't work like that. e're calling the stuff we can run right now.