Saunder's running game is a bit different than Gibbs, but it works better

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Seriously, re-watch the game. I don't care if it was the Texans or not. We play like that this weekend, we win.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by illdefined

some people here are seriously bi-polar. asking for Al's head one week, then praising his 'record breaking' gameplan the next week.

fact is, so far, we've had two unequivocally terrible games against good, established teams, and one good game against a terrible team.

our offense is as yet unestablished and Al's 700 page playbook spans multiple games vs. multiple teams. Mike Sellers has confirmed as much. it's just too soon to tell.

I was one of the people who was criticising the playcalling after the Dallas game. I wasn't saying, "Saunders sucks, fire him!" or anything, but I was critisizing him for not doing EXACTLY what he did against Houston. A methodical offense that mixes short passes with runs is hard to defend, easy to execute, and universially effective. You really have to pull your safeties up to defend it, and Saunders (I absoulutely guarentee you) was waiting for his chance to go deep. The Texans never gave him that chance. I'm not sure the Jags will either. But the Giants...I know for a fact they will. Brunell has his confidence back, and this offense will be clicking on all cylinders over the next few weeks.

The defense however, I don't see improving anytime soon. It's good still, but weaker than last year, plain and simple.

[CanadianSkin]

We need Springs back ASAP.. once that happens then Gregg will be more willing to blitz as he will have two corners that can cover man to man instead of only one right now. Any word yet on his return?

[That Guy]

springs is out this week for sure.

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by CanadianSkin

We need Springs back ASAP.. once that happens then Gregg will be more willing to blitz as he will have two corners that can cover man to man instead of only one right now. Any word yet on his return?

Which one that's playing now can play man-cover? Seriously?

[wilsowilso]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

Which one that's playing now can play man-cover? Seriously?

Carlos Rogers is much much better than many Redskin fans realize. He has forgotten to turn around and make a play on a few deep balls this year and he doesn't have very good hands, but otherwise he can really play football. Young CB's have one of the hardest jobs and adjustments in the NFL and he is pretty darn good already. Sure he needs to improve in many ways but he is 1 on 1 in man more often than not over the last three games. He is a cover corner no question IMO.

[wilsowilso]

Oh and our pass rush really sucks right now so I don't see how a second year player playing man against NFL #1 wideouts with no pressure on the QB is supposed to look amazing anyway.

[CanadianSkin]

He will be good, with Springs covering the #1 guy and Carlos covering the #2 guy we are way better off. I also totally agree that our pass rush is horrible, we give QB,s way way too much time to find an open guy. I thought Carter was supposed to be a specialist? This could also be due to the fact we need extra help covering right now.. but those front four need to get a better push for sure.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Everyone is saying we played Gibbs football this, Gibbs football that. But I think if Gibbs was calling the plays, we would not have ran so well. Obviously our passing was not all Saunders style(no deep passes, but some screens), our run game was all Al. This is why.

1)Gibbs is all about power running. Straight up the middle, hard earned yards.

2)Alot of Gibbs running plays are in the I formation.

3)What did we see in the game? Alot of singleback 2-4 wideout, runs. That is all Saunders, and something I feel Gibbs would not have done on his own.

4) There were alot of runs to the outside, with the line pulling, which Gibbs does not do.

Therefore, my claim is without Al, the game would been closer, and now with Al, our running offense is only getting better. Stop hating on Al.

You don't know what you're talking about.

1. Gibbs doesn't run out of the I formation...it's a single back formation.
2. Gibbs bread and butter running play, the counter trey..is ALL about the line pulling.
3. Both Al's and Gibbs' offense is a variation of Don Coryell's offense. They're both based on the same principle, with Saunders mixing up a few of the formations (such as the WR's linging up in the backfield.)

So, therefore, your claim has no bases of truth. I'd suggest getting your hands on a copy of some games from Gibbs' first era. But, I will agree with you, I do think Al is a valuable addition to our coaching staff.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Everyone is saying we played Gibbs football this, Gibbs football that. But I think if Gibbs was calling the plays, we would not have ran so well. Obviously our passing was not all Saunders style(no deep passes, but some screens), our run game was all Al. This is why.

1)Gibbs is all about power running. Straight up the middle, hard earned yards.

2)Alot of Gibbs running plays are in the I formation.

3)What did we see in the game? Alot of singleback 2-4 wideout, runs. That is all Saunders, and something I feel Gibbs would not have done on his own.

4) There were alot of runs to the outside, with the line pulling, which Gibbs does not do.

Therefore, my claim is without Al, the game would been closer, and now with Al, our running offense is only getting better. Stop hating on Al.

Are you out of your mind? Let me know when Saunders gets his third ring.

Saunders can call a better game than Joe right now but to use a blanket statement to discount the power running of Joe Gibbs is completely false.

Watch the fourth quarter of Super Bowl XVII and come talk to me.

[Riggo44]

Originally Posted by CanadianSkin

I am living by that rule... in fact I told this girl I was seeing (who hated break ups) all she had to do was say she liked the Cowboys and I would know it was over..... made it easy on her...

That one made me laugh.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by dmek25

hey hoo, alittle love for Al? Saunders running style has the bigger chance for both the long run, and loss of yardage. almost like a home-run hitter. Gibbs straight ahead is almost guaranteed positive yardage, with the emphasis on getting what you earn. Saunders definitely has a higher chance of the big play

Saunders running game is a lot less predictable than Gibbs, back in the 80's we never fooled anyone with the run they all knew it was coming but no one could stop it, that's not the case any longer. We now need deception in the running game via the draw plays, and shovel passes, etc. Saunders running game is designed to take full advantage of Portis's abilities, where as Gibbs running game was designed to end Portis's career prematuraly.