What's your defnition of 'conservative playcalling'?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GusFrerotte

GTripp wrote that?

Yup. Greg Trippiedi....GTripp

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by MTRedskinsFan

Anyone still so obdurate as to believe play-calling is not the biggest reason behind our shit offense needs to read this.

Hog Heaven | MVN - Most Valuable Network » Blog Archive » Redskins’ short yardage woes under Saunders hard to swallow

OBDURATE??
1.unmoved by persuasion, pity, or tender feelings; stubborn; unyielding. 2.stubbornly resistant to moral influence; persistently impenitent: an obdurate sinner.


That is AWESOME!
Useage is everything
You, definately qualify for the bonus round..........I'm out!

[Paintrain]

Some of you guys may want to check the bottom of those Kool-Aid cups.. Gibbs said the offense was 'too conservative' washingtonpost.com in Sunday's game..

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Some of you guys may want to check the bottom of those Kool-Aid cups.. Gibbs said the offense was 'too conservative' washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines in Sunday's game..

Not I sir. I said the playcalling was conservative against Arizona, but the playcalling the Arizona game was not representative of the playcalling this season (see post #87 in this thread). I think that TMC said the same thing during the game thread.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Not I sir. I said the playcalling was conservative against Arizona, but the playcalling the Arizona game was not representative of the playcalling this season (see post #87 in this thread). I think that TMC said the same thing during the game thread.

I did indeed. If we have game-plans like we did against Detroit and Green Bay, THOSE are the types that win games.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Some of you guys may want to check the bottom of those Kool-Aid cups.. Gibbs said the offense was 'too conservative' washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines in Sunday's game..

I think that article pretty much sums up Gibbs whole approach since his return, he has tried to lay the burden of winning the game on the defense, which he has done over and over since his return, the problem is he doesn't get it, no matter how many times he goes 3 and out because the opposing team knows we are going to run the ball he continues any way. Gibbs in 4 seasons has yet to realize our line is not a line that will knock players backwards unlike the hogs, they have to maneuver and push players to the side because they can't push them backwards, which is fine if you utilize it properly, it is as if Gibbs is blind, and no one told him the hogs are gone. The definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over again expecting a different result, I would love for Gibbs to show us he's not insane when it comes to football and stop pretending that the hogs are still out there blocking?

He needs to pass more on first down, keeping the defense off balance with the purpose of putting us in 2nd and 3rd and short which does not allow the defense to focus in on a one dimensional pass offense looking for a first down, it is so much easier for a defense to know it just has to defend against a pass and a pass alone, rather than having to respect both the run and the pass.

Further more Gibbs better stop watching and hoping that the defense looks good that day and decide to ride them to victory, he needs to play full throttle until the game is in the bag, the fact that he made some of those statements in that article just tells me he doesn't get it and he ain't going to either.

And lastly and maybe the biggest problem that happens when you shut your offense down is you lose momentum, and continuity, timing is the name of the game in the passing game and it is very hard to turn it on immediately if you have shut it down for a while, players need that continual repetition through out the game, not much different than a pinch hitter in baseball it's tough to just turn it on after [for the most part] you have sat on the bench most of the game, getting away from the passing game will cause the same problem especially for a young inexperienced QB, in the passing game you need to have and maintain rhythm. And what that article confirms is that even though Saunders calls the plays Gibbs makes sure he outlines the type of plays he wants to run, because I see no difference in the game planning now than in any other season of Gibbs 2. Saunders in his career has not been able to throw the ball enough in any situation but all of a sudden he has had a changes of heart? I don't think so! You would think sooner or later a bell will go off in Gibbs head, but if it hasn't rang already I don't think it's going to.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Some of you guys may want to check the bottom of those Kool-Aid cups.. Gibbs said the offense was 'too conservative' washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines in Sunday's game..

I don't think the debates have been over whether the offense was conservative or not, the debate for me has been WHY the offense was conservative.

Some seem to think that we should just "open up the offense" and things will be fine and dandy. That's the thinking I take issue with.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I don't think the debates have been over whether the offense was conservative or not, the debate for me has been WHY the offense was conservative.

Some seem to think that we should just "open up the offense" and things will be fine and dandy. That's the thinking I take issue with.

If the discussion was purely limited to last Sunday's game then I'm with you 100% that it's due to the OL we had on the field last week. However, as I've tried to assert throughout the thread it's the conservative philosophy that I take issue with.

[The Zimmermans]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I don't think the debates have been over whether the offense was conservative or not, the debate for me has been WHY the offense was conservative.

Some seem to think that we should just "open up the offense" and things will be fine and dandy. That's the thinking I take issue with.

Opening up the offense might not go that smoothly...agreed...but to be a contender we need to be good on both sides of the balll. Therefore, since the two O-linemen are not coming back in the near future...we gotta build on JC and become a real contendor in the NFC East. Gotta see what we got in the passing game...don't you agree

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by The Zimmermans

Opening up the offense might not go that smoothly...agreed...but to be a contender we need to be good on both sides of the balll. Therefore, since the two O-linemen are not coming back in the near future...we gotta build on JC and become a real contendor in the NFC East. Gotta see what we got in the passing game...don't you agree

We do. But I have been upset with our passing attack in just two games. First, against Green Bay, I loved the playcalling, but hated the execution by the wideouts. Second, against Arizona, I liked the run-out-the-clock offense, but think we should have called a few more pass plays. So, aside from the Arizona game, I have had no complaints about the playcalling on offense.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by The Zimmermans

Opening up the offense might not go that smoothly...agreed...but to be a contender we need to be good on both sides of the balll. Therefore, since the two O-linemen are not coming back in the near future...we gotta build on JC and become a real contendor in the NFC East. Gotta see what we got in the passing game...don't you agree

I'm all for leaning on JC more, I think he's shown that he's capable and we should take the handcuffs off of him a bit. I don't think should completely abandon the run, I think that's an issue that we need to continue to try to iron out, but in the meantime I definitely think we should let JC take on more responsibility, as long as the protection is there of course.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I don't think the debates have been over whether the offense was conservative or not, the debate for me has been WHY the offense was conservative.

Some seem to think that we should just "open up the offense" and things will be fine and dandy. That's the thinking I take issue with.

Isn't there something to be said of coaches allowing their teams to "evolve" to the circumstances they're in? If three of your best bulldozers are out, then you have to adjust to the situation. A possible example could be to morph your offense into a 'west coast' type scheme. If running the ball has been a problem, use the short passing game to compensate. If pass protection is lacking, utilize more quick, 3-step drops, slants, and hitches.

Bottom line, in this league you cannot be stagnant. Forcing a square peg into a round hole is something Steve Spurrier tried to do with the personnel he had and was excoriated for it. Attempting to be road-graders without the players who can carry it out isn't going to work, and it really won't work against New England.

As SouperMeister correctly put it in some other thread, why try to play smashmouth when your offensive line is a weakness and not a strength?

[freddyg12]

Redskins Insider

JLC's latest - pretty convincing #s to show that we can't run the ball like Gibbs (& AS for that matter) would like us to.

I said in previous posts that the problem was more execution than play calling, but in the AZ game Gibbs himself admitted the approach was too conservative. These #s & the state of our line seem to make a good case to set up the run w/the pass.

Let's be a pass first team!

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

Redskins Insider

JLC's latest - pretty convincing #s to show that we can't run the ball like Gibbs (& AS for that matter) would like us to.

I said in previous posts that the problem was more execution than play calling, but in the AZ game Gibbs himself admitted the approach was too conservative. These #s & the state of our line seem to make a good case to set up the run w/the pass.

Let's be a pass first team!

That's interesting because these numbers seem to indicate that CP improves as the game goes on and he gets more carries

Clinton Portis: Situational Stats

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

Redskins Insider

JLC's latest - pretty convincing #s to show that we can't run the ball like Gibbs (& AS for that matter) would like us to.

I said in previous posts that the problem was more execution than play calling, but in the AZ game Gibbs himself admitted the approach was too conservative. These #s & the state of our line seem to make a good case to set up the run w/the pass.

Let's be a pass first team!

I look at it this way:

We are six games in. We came in (rightfully or incorrectly) thinking we could be a pretty good running team. In the second half of games, we felt like we could have offensive success running at them. The coaches can not be held responsible for thinking like that. That in most situations is good football.

However, unless we find a matchup to exploit, we can't run out the clock while running the football. Now with this new information, it seems to be time to take a new approach to killing the clock. I vote for safe short passes, but not of the 3 step drop variety. Let Campbell sit back there and try to hit the intermediate route. If he gets pressured, dump the ball off complete and keep the clock moving. As we get closer to the first down sticks, THEN we can run the ball to try to pick up the first down.

Consider that a revised offensive philosophy to play with a lead, that the coaches probably already came up with prior to me doing so.