O-line The Real Problem

[Daseal]

Matty - the average is what's important to me and showing we have success. Granted the playcalling got very conservative late (3 runs and out) but he didn't exactly break any big ones. I like Portis, but I want to see us cater to his strengths a bit more.

[skinsguy]

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]

Originally Posted by 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

Yeah I am referring to this year too..that's why I was saying it's not a "jumbo package." I think what you are referring to are the fullback leads and the counter trey plays that are usually ran off tackle or up the middle. Spreading the defense out by using 4 or 5 wide receivers is okay to do some of the time, but it won't work all of the time.

I think most people are missing the point with Gibbs' offense. Its a ball controlled offense that appears mostly conservative. Its designed to eat up large portions of the clock while wearing down the opposing defense. Once our Quarterback develops further and once our receivers become more of a deep threat to defenses, then you'll see the full magic of Gibbs' offense. Things are going to be rather simple...maybe too simple for some tastes...but this is how Gibbs offense is ran.

[Daseal]

That's fine skinsguy - but to call games like that it demands a lead or a close game. It's also very important to have a solid running game, which means working to your back's strengths!

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Yeah I am referring to this year too..that's why I was saying it's not a "jumbo package." I think what you are referring to are the fullback leads and the counter trey plays that are usually ran off tackle or up the middle. Spreading the defense out by using 4 or 5 wide receivers is okay to do some of the time, but it won't work all of the time.

I think most people are missing the point with Gibbs' offense. Its a ball controlled offense that appears mostly conservative. Its designed to eat up large portions of the clock while wearing down the opposing defense. Once our Quarterback develops further and once our receivers become more of a deep threat to defenses, then you'll see the full magic of Gibbs' offense. Things are going to be rather simple...maybe too simple for some tastes...but this is how Gibbs offense is ran.

Good points.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Daseal

That's fine skinsguy - but to call games like that it demands a lead or a close game. It's also very important to have a solid running game, which means working to your back's strengths!

That's true too, but I did see some counter trey plays that Portis ran just fine. We can't run Portis to the outside on every play...we have to have inside runs to keep the defense honest. Being able to have Portis run effectively on plays that call for full back leads up the middle and the counter trey plays are important to this system. That is why we need to strengthen the offensive line in the off season. We all know Portis' run style, but why have the run plays one dimensional? We can't go away from the meat and potatoes of this offense; which is ball controlled, shove it down their throats run plays. This is what wears down that front three or front four of the defense...AND this is what allows our defense to get plenty of rest between times out on the field which contributes quite a bit to their number 2 ranking right now!

[SKINSnCANES]

People have given Portis a hard time all year, and while there is some room for critique, the bottom line is that he has a solid chance to become the Redskins All Time single season rushing record holder in his first year. And that is with the crappy oline. With Jansen back, and a center we could be a great unit. I also have to beleive that Bugel will continue to mold them into a solid unit.

[Daseal]

Skinsguy: I understand we have to go up the middle, but you can count on one hand where we let him pick his hole and go this week. That's his forte and I feel we should at least go 50/50 using his speed, but keeping them honest by going inside.

Skins: No one gives Portis a hard time, he does what he's told and he's silently racked up yards, we just want to see some of that homerun threat! I also think we should leave the line alone minus center and maybe a guard to replace dockery.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Skinsguy: I understand we have to go up the middle, but you can count on one hand where we let him pick his hole and go this week. That's his forte and I feel we should at least go 50/50 using his speed, but keeping them honest by going inside.

That's what I just said? He racked up 110 yards this week...so even if running plays that are designed for Portis to pick where he wants to run are limited, Portis was still able to run effectively against a decent defense. Remember the homerun play against the Bucs WAS up the middle....

It all comes back to having better blocking up front. A team can be completely predicatable in their play calling, but if everything is executed right, they cannot be stopped. This is what was great about this offense years ago...it was just as simple and predicatable back then as it is now, yet nobody could stop it because we had a great offensive line that was awesome with pass blocking and run blocking.

[Daseal]

Portis averaged 3/4th of a yard less per carry than the 49ers normally give up. The 49ers aren't exacty a defensive powerhouse, their run defense is decent, but certainly not great. It was up the middle, it was the first play of the season, and we haven't seen a run up the middle like that since.

Yeah, newsflash. We don't have the hogs anymore, so that's something that needs to be worked around. How many teams now-days are predictable but still good? The Colts? Who mix it up very well and use play action tremendously? Most offenses try not to be predictable because defenses will lock them up. Sorry, but for the most part if a defense has your offense figured out then you're in trouble.

Let me ask you something. Since our defense has been so stout, they don't deserve any recognition because other offenses haven't been executing, right? Because if you flip your statement around you say the offense could be lighting up the score board with execution, does that mean we've been lucky to play poor opponents who can't execute all year?

[BrudLee]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Portis averaged 3/4th of a yard less per carry than the 49ers normally give up. The 49ers aren't exacty a defensive powerhouse, their run defense is decent, but certainly not great. It was up the middle, it was the first play of the season, and we haven't seen a run up the middle like that since.

Yeah, newsflash. We don't have the hogs anymore, so that's something that needs to be worked around. How many teams now-days are predictable but still good? The Colts? Who mix it up very well and use play action tremendously? Most offenses try not to be predictable because defenses will lock them up. Sorry, but for the most part if a defense has your offense figured out then you're in trouble.

I think the problem has been less about predictability, and more about the absence of a "home run" threat outside of Portis. Coles isn't healthy - he didn't start out healthy, and he's gotten worse. He's still the best receiver we have. The first eight games consisted of Brunell showing an inability to throw the ball downfield effectively, which made our playcalling more conservative, which made Portis more of a target.

Portis isn't without blame for his "poor" stats, either. He had a run where he wasn't finding his stride - marked by the Pittsburgh game where he could barely stay on his feet. The fact that he still has a realistic shot at 1500 yards is a testament to the organizational dedication to ball control and his own hard work.

Bottom line - if we can force teams to respect the other skill players on the field, we can expect Portis to have better opportunities for long runs.

[skinsguy]

"Yeah, newsflash. We don't have the hogs anymore,"

Hey, newsflash! We have the coaches that created the hogs...

Portis averaging 3/4th of a yard less per carry is hardly a solid point to argue.

"Let me ask you something. Since our defense has been so stout, they don't deserve any recognition because other offenses haven't been executing, right? Because if you flip your statement around you say the offense could be lighting up the score board with execution, does that mean we've been lucky to play poor opponents who can't execute all year?"

Who said the defense doesn't deserve recognition? Can you find that in any of my posts? Why are you switching the subject on our defense when this thread is about our offensive line?

[MTK]

Sometimes I can't even tell what we're arguing about

LOL

[wolfeskins]

[QUOTE=Daseal]Skinsguy: I understand we have to go up the middle, but you can count on one hand where we let him pick his hole and go this week. That's his forte and I feel we should at least go 50/50 using his speed, but keeping them honest by going inside.




thats basicaly what i was saying. there's nothing wrong with bunching it up and trying to run up the middle , i just wish they would spread it out every once in a while , especially in goal line situations

[monk81]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Because god knows 3 runs up the middle is as good as playcalling can get!

well said!

[MTK]

I think we need to go 4 wide at the goal line and pitch it around a bit.

It was a nice night in San Fran last week for some pitchin' and catchin'. Hell why not throw the ball 50 times?

Ahh the good old days!