Where was Keiland Williams???

[skinsguy]

When you're gaining an average of about 1 yard per carry, why would you stick with the running game?

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

When you're gaining an average of about 1 yard per carry, why would you stick with the running game?

Run game opens up the pass. Open up the pass, you can go back to the run. Obviously running it 2 downs and then throwing it is kind of predictable. But that's what we do.

Plus having practice squad fodder as your premiere back for the game seemed kinda ridiculous.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

Run game opens up the pass. Open up the pass, you can go back to the run. Obviously running it 2 downs and then throwing it is kind of predictable. But that's what we do.

Plus having practice squad fodder as your premiere back for the game seemed kinda ridiculous.

LOL! You can't open up the passing game when you're averaging 1 yard per carry! And why complain about not running the ball, but then complain about running the ball on two downs and then passing it? Isn't that what you're saying they should have been doing? And the "practice squad fodder"...well... who is on the team to run the ball? We cut Larry Johnson, we cut Willie Parker, Torrain is hurt, and Clinton Portis is out for the rest of the season. There's nobody else to hand the ball off. It all starts in the trenches, that's where your running game is going.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

LOL! You can't open up the passing game when you're averaging 1 yard per carry! And why complain about not running the ball, but then complain about running the ball on two downs and then passing it? Isn't that what you're saying they should have been doing? And the "practice squad fodder"...well... who is on the team to run the ball? We cut Larry Johnson, we cut Willie Parker, Torrain is hurt, and Clinton Portis is out for the rest of the season. There's nobody else to hand the ball off. It all starts in the trenches, that's where your running game is going.

Well if you're passing 3 downs, I'm pretty sure that the other team is going to play the pass and NOT the run. Vikes were blowing up McNabb all game. Did we even do 1 draw play all game? That's the whole point. It's the Gibbs philosophy. I'm saying they need to mix it up. Gibbs never completely abandoned the run, even in tough games. The first drive of the game, Skins mixed it up. Did some dual TE forms, wildcat, they had a pretty mixed bag. Then after that they went conservative. Dink and dunk passes and it wasn't until we switched into desperation mode after the half we started throwing downfield. And if we're gonna throw, why are you gonna complete phase out Cooley after he produced so well in the first drive? I get that he was probably covered but damn, 3 whole quarters he wasn't even a target afterwards?

Keiland Williams had done decent in previous games. He's no Portis or Torrain but when you're taking a practice squad dude over someone who has at least proven that they can play a backup role... Well....

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

Well if you're passing 3 downs, I'm pretty sure that the other team is going to play the pass and NOT the run. Vikes were blowing up McNabb all game. Did we even do 1 draw play all game? That's the whole point. It's the Gibbs philosophy. I'm saying they need to mix it up. Gibbs never completely abandoned the run, even in tough games. The first drive of the game, Skins mixed it up. Did some dual TE forms, wildcat, they had a pretty mixed bag. Then after that they went conservative. Dink and dunk passes and it wasn't until we switched into desperation mode after the half we started throwing downfield. And if we're gonna throw, why are you gonna complete phase out Cooley after he produced so well in the first drive? I get that he was probably covered but damn, 3 whole quarters he wasn't even a target afterwards?

Keiland Williams had done decent in previous games. He's no Portis or Torrain but when you're taking a practice squad dude over someone who has at least proven that they can play a backup role... Well....

First of all, the first 10 to 15 plays of the game are just about always scripted. That is the reason why you normally see the offense look decent at the start of any game. Plus, the defenses adjust to the game plan making you as the offensive coordinator having to adjust your game plan according to the defense's adjustments. That's pretty much the cat and mouse game of any NFL game you're going to watch.

Secondly, this isn't Gibbs' offense. It really doesn't matter if a team is a run first to set up the pass or the other way around. There isn't anything in the bible that says "Thou shalt always run first to set up the pass". It all happens with your offensive line, always. Philosophy has nothing to do with. Gibbs had big offensive linemen who didn't need to worry about quickness as much as power to open up holes up the middle or maybe just enough speed for counter plays. But, Gibbs philosophy wasn't built upon a zone running type of offense as what Shanahan's offense is based on. The offense obviously still doesn't have the right personnel up front to make Shanahan's offense work on a consistent basis.

Also, there were plenty of plays in which the Redskins would have had first downs or would have had large gains if not for poor execution. Armstrong makes a huge play down field only to drop a pass right to him in the flat. You can't expect to stick with the run when you're facing 3 and 10 or 3 and 15. Look, the Redskins were facing a very talented, all-pro defensive line. I don't care what their record was, it is tough to run against that team, especially with our offensive line. THAT is the reason why you were seeing more dink and donk and a pass happy offense than what Shannahan normally likes to do. In the case of the Vikings and our running back situation, we did just exactly what we needed to do game plan wise, the players just didn't execute.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

First of all, the first 10 to 15 plays of the game are just about always scripted. That is the reason why you normally see the offense look decent at the start of any game. Plus, the defenses adjust to the game plan making you as the offensive coordinator having to adjust your game plan according to the defense's adjustments. That's pretty much the cat and mouse game of any NFL game you're going to watch.

Secondly, this isn't Gibbs' offense. It really doesn't matter if a team is a run first to set up the pass or the other way around. There isn't anything in the bible that says "Thou shalt always run first to set up the pass". It all happens with your offensive line, always. Philosophy has nothing to do with. Gibbs had big offensive linemen who didn't need to worry about quickness as much as power to open up holes up the middle or maybe just enough speed for counter plays. But, Gibbs philosophy wasn't built upon a zone running type of offense as what Shanahan's offense is based on. The offense obviously still doesn't have the right personnel up front to make Shanahan's offense work on a consistent basis.

Also, there were plenty of plays in which the Redskins would have had first downs or would have had large gains if not for poor execution. Armstrong makes a huge play down field only to drop a pass right to him in the flat. You can't expect to stick with the run when you're facing 3 and 10 or 3 and 15. Look, the Redskins were facing a very talented, all-pro defensive line. I don't care what their record was, it is tough to run against that team, especially with our offensive line. THAT is the reason why you were seeing more dink and donk and a pass happy offense than what Shannahan normally likes to do. In the case of the Vikings and our running back situation, we did just exactly what we needed to do game plan wise, the players just didn't execute.

So I guess it's just deja vu we're ranked 30th in rushing attempts. Yet when we do rush we're 14th in average yards and smack dab in the middle of the pack when it comes to breaking runs for 20+ yards.

The run game works, if implemented, skillfully used and executed properly. But I guess its hard to give something a chance to work when you hardly use it.

I'm also not sure why you're under the impression I think we should just run run run. I've said the run compliments the pass. If you can weave your game plan together, execute, then you can rely less on the run, more on the pass or whatever you choose. But the Redskins do neither. They can't mix together play calls nor can they execute what's been called. It's not about pro DL or not. The Lions don't have a Pro DL and they schooled us, along with the Rams. Between the awful playcalling and the awful execution, the Skins are pretty bad.

But I digress.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

So I guess it's just deja vu we're ranked 30th in rushing attempts. Yet when we do rush we're 14th in average yards and smack dab in the middle of the pack when it comes to breaking runs for 20+ yards.

The run game works, if implemented, skillfully used and executed properly. But I guess its hard to give something a chance to work when you hardly use it.

But I digress.

Read the bold statement again. I think you just answered your own question. And really, that statement can be true for anything you're trying to do offensively. Obviously today, the run game didn't work, because it was not executed skillfully. If Shanahan thought Davis and Williams could run the ball effectively against the Vikings front DL, then the game plan would have emphasized the run a bit more. Obviously, Shanny didn't believe running the football would have been effective against the Vikings. Normally, however, I would agree that you always need to remain balanced and you stick with the running game, but let's look at the facts. The Vikings are tough against the run, our offensive line is not very good at all. It's not like we had John Riggins or Earnest Byner to hand the ball off to.

[Coff]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

When you're gaining an average of about 1 yard per carry, why would you stick with the running game?

There was an interview with Shanny this offseason in which he discussed his running game, particularly that he sticks with it even when it isn't working, because the stretch plays wear out the defense. Regardless, it's hard to say the running play isn't working when you only run it 13 times.