Bills Post Game Massacre. U like thats and dislikes

[30gut]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

... but I disagree that when 4-5 scheme critical players go out, you adjust your offense to sub-par talent

Which 4-5 players? And in what part of the scheme do you think they are critical to? And in what way do you mean to adjust your offense? This is what I mean by broad strokes.

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I'm really not talking broad strokes. I am saying that the Skins, this year, with this roster should not have adjusted their scheme to include more use of DY as a blocking fullback,

I couldn't disagree more. The goal is to win games. If using a FB helps you win games then that is the direction your offense should move. The function of a coach/team is to win, the form or style or scheme they win with is secondary or a by product of maximizing personnel.

IF their goal is to see how players stepped up to the roles they need to fill going forward. Does it make our team record worse this year, yes, does it also fit with SM's mentality of building our team for the future, yes.

Again, imo are creating a false dichotomy. I doubt Scott's view for the future includes losing winnable games because the coaches chose not to make adjustments.

Good convo anyhow, just another point we disagree on.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Which 4-5 players? And in what part of the scheme do you think they are critical to? And in what way do you mean to adjust your offense? This is what I mean by broad strokes.

Niles Paul, Logan Paulsen, Lauvau, for the year, DJax, Lichtensteiger for substantial parts early. But I really believe you know the players that we lost due to injury, so I don't think it's broadstrokes.

edit: add answer to other questions:

Specifically critical to JG/OL Coach Run Scheme

Specifically, putting DY or FB in or going to a power run scheme that does not rely on 2-3 TE sets.

I couldn't disagree more. The goal is to win games. If using a FB helps you win games then that is the direction your offense should move. The function of a coach/team is to win, the form or style or scheme they win with is secondary or a by product of maximizing personnel.

Again, imo are creating a false dichotomy. I doubt Scott's view for the future includes losing winnable games because the coaches chose not to make adjustments.

Good convo anyhow, just another point we disagree on.

I agree that we disagree, and it's a good back and forth. I think early on, SM set the bar not at the number of wins this team ends with, but with the evaluation of how the players play- football intensity, football smarts, etc. And I think Gruden set the base for what his players need to be able to do. My expectation is that SM and Gruden are on the exact same page, somewhat do to the failures early on.

I disagree with the premise that in a first year full body shakedown and rebuild, you play to subpar talent's ability, and make no mistake by the time we were at the 4th new TE, we are speaking of sub par ability. You set the standard and if players don't meet that standard you move to the next one. But in the current Salary cap based NFL, you can't just do that willy nilly, and you have to take time to evaluate each player. That's what good coaches/GM's do.

[NoCalHail]

I remember when we first switched to 3-4 scheme, Lorenzo Alexander went from special teams stud/budding player on the rise to looking mediocre and not being able to justify keeping him around even with his importance on special teams.

Scheme does matter for certain players depending on their skill set and what they are asked to do in certain schemes.

Who can forget Jeremiah Trotter being a stud on the Eagles, awful for us, and then pretty good again even as an older vet when he went back to the Eagles? The Redskins simply asked him to do things outside of what made him so good in Philly which was primarily shoot gaps and play along the line of scrimmage.