O-line The Real Problem

[wolfeskins]

nothing wrong with running up the middle on first and goal, i just wish gibbs would spread the defense out by going with four or even five wideouts. the "jumbo package" doesn't work very well with portis at rb.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

If they punch it in on one of those runs the "playcalling" is a non-issue.

Like I said, if you can't punch it in on 1st and goal there's a problem that is deeper than the playcalling. If you have to get creative on 1st and goal, that's a problem.

Exactly! That is the problem Gibb's is faced with right now figuring a way to get short yardage without a running game when the opposing team know's you can't run it, that makes it very difficult to fool defenses, the problem with Portis under these circumstances is he is not a YAC guy [yard's after contact] but the way our line block's right now very few back's if any could get short yard's in our offense when the defense know's what's coming.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Daseal

How many times have we scored on Tthrowing as opposed to running? 14 throwing TDs and 5 rushing TDs. So obviously throwing works. We tried going around the side once, and had Portis not run 15 yards backwards it would have netted the same gain as running up the middle. We don't have a dominating interior (or exterior) for that matter. I'd also rather try for a TD than virtually give up by trying to run between the tackles.

I still feel playcalling is too conservative. Especially in the redzone.

I have to disagree with you on this one Daseal, I know your rational look's good on paper but if throwing TD's was working we would average more than 18 point's a game if that, it's not working that's why we have to get a running game, those number's you refered to only show the ineptitude of our offense to run the ball, not the success of our passing game. Do we throw the ball better than we run it right now? Yes, but we are also 5-9, 5 rushing td's in almost a full season is absolutly horrible.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

nothing wrong with running up the middle on first and goal, i just wish gibbs would spread the defense out by going with four or even five wideouts. the "jumbo package" doesn't work very well with portis at rb.

Gibb's is a master at spreading out defenses the problem with that right now is our line is not winning any 1 on 1 matchup's which put's the QB in a vulnurable position when the defense doesn't respect the run.

[Daseal]

Offiss: The problem is a big part O line, but shouldn't you gameplan around that? I mean, if they can't get the push in tight situations you have to try something new. We're easy to play defense against in the red zone (Hey, they're going to run!)

Now, don't get me wrong. Especially in a tight game, I'm all for running in the redzone. I'd just like to see a little variety in the type of run plays being called. Not to mention the occassional play action/rollout/normal drop back would work wonders. I can think of one time we threw it inside the 10 last week, and we spent a lot of time there!

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

"jumbo package" doesn't work very well with portis at rb.

Its not the jumbo package you might be referring to from Gibbs' first tenure..its just a basic goal line formation.....I don't believe we have the personnel yet to have a true jumbo package they way we did in the 80's.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Offiss: The problem is a big part O line, but shouldn't you gameplan around that? I mean, if they can't get the push in tight situations you have to try something new. We're easy to play defense against in the red zone (Hey, they're going to run!)

Now, don't get me wrong. Especially in a tight game, I'm all for running in the redzone. I'd just like to see a little variety in the type of run plays being called. Not to mention the occassional play action/rollout/normal drop back would work wonders. I can think of one time we threw it inside the 10 last week, and we spent a lot of time there!

Understood, but think about that for a second what happen's to a team when they fall way behind in a game? They have to pass to get back into it, so what does the defense do? They pin their ear's back and go after the QB because they have no concern for the run, and what usually happens is INT's and QB sack's, and that's pretty much how defenses aproach us right now, a good offense will dictate to the defense and how it react's, we are not able to do that, any defense can be beat if you can execute on offense, some of the best offenses in history were offenses not neccessarily complicated but offenses that regardless whether you know what's coming or not you can't stop them, our offense right now is working in reverse of that, team's know that they can stop our run game with their front 4 which allow's them to focus on every other aspect of our offense, if we could force team's to have to commit to stop the run or else, we would be fine, but we can't, I am not saying we have to become a juggernaut with our run game, but we have to get some kind of push up front so defenses know that if they don't overcommit to the run we will run it down their throat's, yes we can game plan to throw the ball 60 times a game but we will probably get Ramsey killed in the process, we would also extend the game time with all the incompleted passes leaving our defense out on the field for far more time than they deserve, it's bad enough as it is for them, Dasael I know your a SS fan and possibly he may not have been that bad on offense, our offensive line probably really lead to his demise in DC, how many of us last year saw Brandon Winey outplay Samuel's? And Winey is a scrub! Now we are treated to one of the greatest coaches of all time who can't make 1 yard in the red zone, or any other time we are in short yardage, Gibb's has been a way for a while but not that long to be absolutly incompetent not to be able to run for a yard, I know we have a lot of money tied up in our O-line but we have seriously overvalued their talent they are big, and slow, with no power, or leg drive, yes we could throw every down but do you think that's the solution? And then we have to explain to the redskin nation why we gave Portis 50 million to pass protect.

[SmootSmack]

And how about 'dem Chargers throwing it 6 times the entire game in their 21-0 win over the Browns....sorry just thought I'd throw it in there

[Daseal]

Smootsmack: The second we have that line, that back, and sub-zero temperatures in snow I'll totally agree with running it that much.

We're 17th in rushing with 1564 yards. Ahead of philly, buffalo, carolina, tampa. And Offiss, I'm not saying the line is not a problem, because it is. However, the only thing that can make that line better is continuity. Heston was an absolutely horrible O line coach, I saw an interview with Samuels that said he tryed to change the blocking technique he's always used. I feel that running up the middle three times in any situation is often a very poor series of calls. Because it always seems to send our offense right back to the bench! Mix it up a little bit! I totally agree that a running game is VERY important, but if we're in a tight game and can't punch it in, then we have some real problems.

Honestly, most of the time on 4th and goal within the 5 I'd just go for it. With our defense we'll keep field position. OKay, not most of the time, but depending on the situation it's worth a try. I think we just need to mix up how we deal with the red zone a little bit.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Dockery made a few really good plays. I wonder why we keep going between the tackles. Why don't we stretch the field out. It seems to work very well for Portis. He can run inbetween the tackles, but he's much better if we give him some room. What happened to the Giants. Start going, look, look, look cut inside. Just like the Falcons do with Warrick Dunn. Let him pick his holes and run how he feels comfortable.

To me, the dropoff between this game and the Eagles was somewhat sad. I felt better about our team after the Eagles loss than the San Fran win. =/

could not agree with you more Daseal. my thoughts exactly, what happened to all we learned about Portis??

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by hurrykaine

irrespective of how poor the O-line played, Clinton Portis did not come out with any intensity yesterday - he looked rather lackadaisical and dazed for the most part. Anyone else agree?

completely! i love Portis, and he usually exudes effort in every play, but on Saturday he was playing very "shy". he would let up way earlier and fall down before contact, not like any of the games before.

i think it could have been him protesting the run plays Gibbs was calling because he did NOT look happy on the sideline. anyone know if he's hurt?

[MTK]

Didn't he grind out 110 yards?

I think we're looking a little too far in to this.

[illdefined]

it's a real problem and not just stat vanity when we aren't using our personnel strengths to score TDs instead of FGs on the 49ers.

[illdefined]

http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=5119

i don't think getting a bigger back is the answer (although Rock Cartwright shouldn't have lost that weight, condemned him to special teams).

the answer is whipping the OLine into shape and calling plays that use Portis's SPEED. a toss or sweep from that close with Portis has to be close to 100%. Gibbs keeps going back to this one-dimensional offense even after he's seen what opening up accomplishes

[wolfeskins]

[QUOTE=skinsguy]Its not the jumbo package you might be referring to from Gibbs' first tenure..its just a basic goal line formation.....I don't believe we have the personnel yet to have a true jumbo package they way we did in the 80's.



i'm not referring to the 80's, i'm referring to this years version. i agree with you when you say we don't have the personel yet, thats why i think gibbs should spread the defense out by going with 4 or 5 receivers. i think it would benefit portis' running style, give him more space instead of trying to jam him up into the middle of a huge pile