Gibbs Pressconference

[Gmanc711]

Brunell hasent had us in any game. No Member of our offense has had us in any game. Our defense is the the only thread that this team is hanging from. Like I said, I really hate to throw it on Brunells shoulders, I really do, but hes the only one that I can justify replacing. Quite frankly, I think Ramsey has more ability than he does to get the job done, from what I have seen. Now I dont see everything, and neither does anyone else, but its obvious somthing isnt working. Brunell cant throw the longball, he cant throw any ball. He is missing wide open recivers, hes just playing really really bad. He looks like the " emergency " punter quarterback on most teams. I blame all 4 of our losses on our offense and soley on our offense, and I think having Brunell as our QB is a big reason we cant run the ball. But thats just me.

[SUNRA]

What does a QB have to do with a running back's inability to get a 100yds. How many back handoffs has Brunell given Portis? Maybe 1 in five games. Your'e focusing on one player and you're not looking at the total offense that sucks. The long pass is a low percentage play because of the threat of double coverage. If Brunell is struggling with the long pass, then Ramsey has f#%ked up on the short pass. He has overthrown passes and thrown INTS in the endzone, something Brunell has not done this year. The TD to Cooley wasn't an easy feat. The reality is there are no real Redskins on offense. I mean a player with the fire like Smoot and Arrrington on defense. Coles and Gardner are as consistent as the Florida ballots. Ramsey couldn't come back in one game, now how do you think he's going to come back three games down?

[Gmanc711]

Originally Posted by SUNRA

What does a QB have to do with a running back's inability to get a 100yds. How many back handoffs has Brunell given Portis? Maybe 1 in five games. Your'e focusing on one player and you're not looking at the total offense that sucks. The long pass is a low percentage play because of the threat of double coverage. If Brunell is struggling with the long pass, then Ramsey has f#%ked up on the short pass. He has overthrown passes and thrown INTS in the endzone, something Brunell has not done this year. The TD to Cooley wasn't an easy feat. The reality is there are no real Redskins on offense. I mean a player with the fire like Smoot and Arrrington on defense. Coles and Gardner are as consistent as the Florida ballots. Ramsey couldn't come back in one game, now how do you think he's going to come back three games down?

I respectfully disagree. I am looking at the big picture of the whole offense that sucks. Mark Brunell cannot throw the football well, to anyone. Teams realize this, and that is why they go with very basic coverage, and run schemes to stop the run. That is why the Quarterback has everything to do with Portis's inability to gain yards. No one respects our pass, that is why we can not run. Until we make teams pay for not putting enough of their gameplan on our passing game, they are going to be able to stop the run. Personally, I feel that Ramsey gives us a better chance for our passing game to succeed. I feel he has a better arm, he will take the chances that Brunell is not willing to take. I understand that he is going to throw picks, and some of them might be costly. However, I feel the risk is worth the reward. Brunell hasent done anything to win us any football games, and he has done everything to help us lose them.

[joecrisp]

Originally Posted by SUNRA

What I have heard over and over again is how strong Ramsey's arm is. How many long passes over 45yds are thrown on an average in one game? 2,3 or 4? The reality is the long pass is a low percentage play. What I think is being over looked in Ramsey is his lack of leadership, instinctive knowledge about reading defensive blitzes and his immobility. Ramsey also stuggles at getting the plays off in time. I'm certain that with this poor offensive line Ramsey will not be successful at this point. If he understood what he was doing in practice, he would be starting right now.

But here's the thing, SUNRA: we're lucky if Brunell gets away ONE deep pass per game. He refuses to throw the deep ball, because he knows what will happen-- exactly what happened Sunday night. Why? Because he doesn't have the arm strength or the confidence to put the ball where it needs to be on the deep pass.

Let me ask you this: how many times did Mark Rypien throw the deep pass in a game? Two? Three? Four times? And he put it right on the money most of the time, because he had the arm-- and the confidence-- to get it there. Because Ryp was able to complete two or three deep passes a game-- often for game-changing touchdowns-- defenses were forced to respect the deep routes, which opened up things not only for Byner and the running game, but also for Monk and the tight ends on the short and intermediate routes.

It's also important to note that arm strength is critical not only for the deep pass, but also for those short and intermediate routes, where timing is critical. If the pass is a split-second late, it can be the difference between an incompletion or a first down.

As for leadership, instinctive knowledge, reading blitzes and mobility, how much have those attributes-- which I assume you're attibuting to Brunell-- helped the Redskins offense with Brunell at the helm? How many times has Brunell wasted timeouts this year because he couldn't get the right play off in time? How many times has he refused to throw the ball because receivers weren't wide open? How many times has he thrown 5 yard passes when 10 yards were needed?

People refuse to believe that Gibbs has anything to do with the problems this offense is having, but I'll tell you this: Gibbs has stressed to Brunell the importance of protecting the football, so much so that Brunell has followed that directive to a fault. Gibbs defends Brunells' performance every game, saying that Brunell "is doing exactly what we've asked him to do." Well guess what? It's not working. This offense is not moving the football-- and it's not for a lack of weapons-- it's for a refusal to use them for their intended purpose. There's no aggression in this offense, it's as meek as a lamb, and just as surely as a lamb thrown into a den of lions, this offense is being devoured by opposing defenses.

[SUNRA]

Brunell's performance against Dallas must have been a fluke. No INTs and 325 passing yards. He threw more than 2 passes over 40 yds. to Gardner. Even with these numbers our running game was horrible. My biggest problem with the running is, we don't know where Cartwright is, and Betts has not been able to carry the ball consistently on 3rd and short downs and thus the unsuccessful first down attempts.

Turnovers have decided the outcome for at least 3 out of 4 losses this season. Brunell has thrown to 2 INTS in 5 games. Fumbled 3 times in 5 games. Look at the teams in our division that have successful offenses. The running backs are averaging 100 yds. per game. Kurt Warner' arm isn't strong, and McNabb is beating teams throwing overtop to TO. I thought the run established the play action pass?

The real problem has been in the play calling. Pitching out to Betts on 3rd and 1 is just unacceptable. Having Portis handle 99% of the hand offs is suicide. Portis's turnover's taken his confidence and he needs to have a substitute on certain downs. This has to change or our running game is finished.

[joecrisp]

Originally Posted by SUNRA

Brunell's performance against Dallas must have been a fluke. No INTs and 325 passing yards. He threw more than 2 passes over 40 yds. to Gardner. Even these numbers our running game was horrible. My biggest problem with the running is Portis we don't know where Cartwright is, and not been able to carry the ball consistently on 3rd and short downs and thus the unsuccessful first down attemts.

Yeah, SUNRA, unfortunately most of those yards against Dallas came too little too late. He piled up most of those in the fourth quarter, when the Redskins were playing from behind, and running the ball was no longer a viable option. Those two 40+ yarders to Gardner both came with less than 5:00 minutes left in the game and Washington was trying to overcome a 21-10 deficit. Only when it became an absolute necessity, was Brunell willing to throw the ball down the field.

Originally Posted by SUNRA

Turnovers have decided the outcome for at least 3 out of 4 losses this season. Brunell has thrown to 2 INTS in 5 games. Fumbled 3 times in 5 games. Look at the teams in our division that have successful offenses. The running backs are averaging 100 yds. per game. Kurt Warner' arm isn't strong, and McNabb is beating teams throwing overtop to TO. I thought the run established the play action pass?

Yes, the run establishes the play action pass, but the passing game also pulls the linebackers and safeties away from the line of scrimmage to open up the running game. It's like Gibbs said, "everything goes hand in hand." If you want to open up the running game, and defenses are crowding the line of scrimmage with linebackers and safeties, then you have to come into the game with your guns blazing, and make those suckers back off. I remember when Gibbs used to open up drives with long passes by Rypien, just to remind the defense: "hey, you might want to give us a little room, here." Sometimes those passes fell incomplete, but sometimes they went for 50 yards. Sure enough, the running game opened up.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by SUNRA

There is nothing that you can point to in Ramsey's overall playing that would justify him replacing Brunell.

oh yeah? he didn't have any trouble getting yards and points last year, while brunell was riding the bench.

running sets up the play action pass, but passing opens up the run, and WE CAN'T PASS... AT ALL... comparing brunell to warner or mcnabb is silly, they can both hit receivers 20-30 yards out easily... and they have, over and over again... besides dallas, i don't think brunell has thrown much over 10 yards, let alone 20...

ramsey couldn't come back from 14 points down in limited time (he did get 7)... but brunell helped put them in that hole, and he can't come back from being even 7 points down... maddox and johnson have already been replaced for QBs that are more vertical threats, and the records since the switch have been 4-0... from 1-5...

[MTK]

Originally Posted by joecrisp

Gibbs has stressed to Brunell the importance of protecting the football, so much so that Brunell has followed that directive to a fault.

I definitely agree with this point. Watching some of the replays on Monday Night Countdown last night you could see Brunell looking, looking and looking for a WR, almost as if he's looking for that perfect opening. He's not willing to force anything at all, then once the pocket starts to collapse only then he forces a throw and it was usually off the mark.

Perhaps a change in the system is what's needed. We all know Gibbs loves max protection, but when you're only sending out two WR's on routes it's pretty easy to defend.

I'm really surprised we haven't seen more 3 WR sets and specifically more 3 WR bunch sets that Gibbs used to run regularly.

In Gibbs first season back in '81 he came in with a more wide open offense and quickly realized he needed to scale things down and go with a power running game as the focal point the offense. Seems like right now he needs to go in the opposite direction and open things up more. He doesn't need to completely get away from running the ball, but the passing game is so stale it's not even funny.

[SkinsRock]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

In Gibbs first season back in '81 he came in with a more wide open offense and quickly realized he needed to scale things down and go with a power running game as the focal point the offense. Seems like right now he needs to go in the opposite direction and open things up more. He doesn't need to completely get away from running the ball, but the passing game is so stale it's not even funny.

I agree. I said something similar on another thread. The majority of this team was put together for Spurrier's wide-open offense, and they are trying to be a power-running team. Think about it, Portis is the type of back that they wanted Canidate to be, and the WR's are basically the same, with only the addition of Thrash....another fast guy. The main difference is the addition of more TE's and replacing the FB's with H-backs. I think Gibbs will adapt and find some middle ground.
Also, they do need to open things up early. Yeah, I remember Gibbs opening up games by going deep on 1st down once or twice early. Also, in the pre-season game vs Atlanta, the first play was a reverse to Gardner for at least 15 yards, and I've been waiting for them to try something like that again. Anything to catch the defense off guard. All they really need to do is to prove that they can get the ball downfield, and while I'd love to see Ramsey in there, I trust Gibbs in his belief that Brunell can get it done. If that happens, the running game will open up, and CP will get his confidence back....