Lookout, CarMikes been thinking again...

[CarMike]

I've said it. And plenty of fans on here have been saying it.

"If we didn't have our defense this year, we would have sucked". Or like Spence put it, "We would have been the 49ers".

Let me throw this bone out for discussion. Lets say if we didn't have this defense for our coaches to fall back on. Lets say that we were as awful on defense this year as we were under Mike Nolan.

Would coach Gibbs have been as patient with our offense as he was this year knowing that we could rely on our defense to win, or keep us in game? It could have meant that he would have taken more shots down the field earlier in the year. Would our offense have put up better numbers? Or would it have been the same story, but with a bad offense and a bad defense?

My point is this. Coach Gibbs probably realized sometime during the year that his offense wasn't going to work in todays NFL. The counter trey is a good option if you use it spareingly. [?] But defenses are too quick today compared to defenses 12 years ago. I think he saw that and realized that the best way for the Redskins to win was to play ball control offense and depend on our defense to win us games.

Alright. I now have a headache. Way too much thinking on my part. :D

Let me read your thoughts....

[lakeskin]

Amen. Been preaching this all year. Joe was just trying to play like Baltimore a few years back and figured he could get away with it. Conservative, ball control, field positiotn, let the D win it for you.

[truant]

We can say with some certainty that the effectiveness of the defense altered Gibbs' offensive mentallity- he's said as much.

It's a good point Carmike.

[redwolf1218]

I've said it. And plenty of fans on here have been saying it.

"If we didn't have our defense this year, we would have sucked". Or like Spence put it, "We would have been the 49ers".

Let me throw this bone out for discussion. Lets say if we didn't have this defense for our coaches to fall back on. Lets say that we were as awful on defense this year as we were under Mike Nolan.

Would coach Gibbs have been as patient with our offense as he was this year knowing that we could rely on our defense to win, or keep us in game? It could have meant that he would have taken more shots down the field earlier in the year. Would our offense have put up better numbers? Or would it have been the same story, but with a bad offense and a bad defense?

My point is this. Coach Gibbs probably realized sometime during the year that his offense wasn't going to work in todays NFL. The counter trey is a good option if you use it spareingly. [?] But defenses are too quick today compared to defenses 12 years ago. I think he saw that and realized that the best way for the Redskins to win was to play ball control offense and depend on our defense to win us games.

Alright. I now have a headache. Way too much thinking on my part. :D

Let me read your thoughts....

What you just described kind of reminded me of Marty ball. The defense was good, but nearly as good as this year, probably middle of the pack (i think we were ranked 10th or 11th on D at the end of that year), but with an equally anemic offense and who was QB? Banks? ugh...and they finished 8-8. hmmm. now marty is in the playoffs, which is where i think we will be next year. i think it's a formula that will work...ball control offense eats the clock, great Defense, and last but not least win the special teams field position battle.

[tbfoster1]

i think in certain situations gibbs would have been less conservative, but overall i think it would have been pretty much the same.

[lakeskin]

You're down 14-0 it sort of takes you out of the conservative mode.

[Skinzaholic]

Let me read your thoughts....


Can you really do that? :imshock:

[redskin_rich]

I would agree w/that observation.
Back when we were playing Marty ball, I used to want the other team to score 1st so we would have to open it up a little and I felt that way this year.

[redwolf1218]

i think Marty wanted to win every game 6 to 3. I think Gibbs is a better offensive coach and wants to win 30 to 3 but it didnt happen that way. maybe next year it will though.

[Skinz4lyfe]

I definitely believe there's some merit to your belief but I'm gonna play devil's advocate for a minute. Not that I refute what you're saying, I just wonder why that approach was taken in the first place. We don't have the personnel to play like the Ravens did or even to play Marty ball. To play like that you need a good offensive line. This year they didn't play up to par and that's why we struggled on offense. That's why we couldn't score TDs in the red zone. That's part of the reason why Brunell stunk and mainly the reason why Portis didn't get his 1500 yards. I think Gibbs should have been a little more creative on offense to make up for our short commings. Create mismatches like putting Portis in the slot from time to time and going on a quick count to catch the defense napping. Run a couple of seam routes (w/Cooley) to eliminate defenses playing a 2 deep zone against us. We have way too much talent on offense to play that conservative. So I guess I'm not disagreeing w/you, I just think it was the wrong approach to take. I guess that's what being away from the game for 12 years will due to you therefore I'm not mad at him for it. He'll learn and improve next year.

[redskin_rich]

We don't have the personnel to play like the Ravens did or even to play Marty ball. To play like that you need a good offensive line. This year they didn't play up to par and that's why we struggled on offense.
A big RB helps alot for Marty ball too.

[CarMike]

Skinz4lyfe. Thats part of my reasoning. Gibbs thought his offense would work in todays NFL. Half way through the season he found out that it wouldn't work. By that time it was too late to make major adjustments. Thats why we continued to see the conservative offense. We played ball control. And we relied on field position.

This is also why I think coach Gibbs now knows that he's has to change our offensive strategy for next year. Which he has said he's already working on.

[Spence]

I don't think there is any doubt about it. Gibbs isn't stupid. No matter what he says publicly, Gibbs must have understood his offense wasn't getting it done and this was not entirely due to the talent level. After all, aside from Brunell and Portis, these are mostly the same players Spurrier got more out of--and Portis was supposed to be an upgrade.

When your offense is terrible and your defense is great, you do what Brian Billick did in Baltimore in 2000--run the ball all the time, throw high-percentage passes that are of the low risk/low reward variety, and you hope your defense and special teams give you a chance to win the game in the 4th quarter. Remember, this was the same Billick who designed and ran one of the most successful and wide-open passing offenses in NFL history, with the Vikings of the late 1990s. He realized he couldn't win that way in Baltimore, the talent just wasn't there. [And it still isn't.] Gibbs couldn't win that way here either so he went to a very conservative offense--one that got more conservative as the season progressed.

Did Gibbs over-compensate? Perhaps. But he had the right idea. As I wrote on this board countless times, the Redskins offense was deeply sick this year. The QB was one problem, but not the only problem. Gibbs offense stunk and it needs an offseason to be rebuilt.

[Skinz4lyfe]

Skinz4lyfe. Thats part of my reasoning. Gibbs thought his offense would work in todays NFL. Half way through the season he found out that it wouldn't work. By that time it was too late to make major adjustments. Thats why we continued to see the conservative offense. We played ball control. And we relied on field position.

This is also why I think coach Gibbs now knows that he's has to change our offensive strategy for next year. Which he has said he's already working on.

Cool. I slightly misinterpreted your post but it appears we have the same frame of mind when it comes to improving the Redskin's offense. Gibbs is a perfectionist and he won't stand for his offense being so bad. I have no doubt we'll see improvements next year.

[smoak]

i think in certain situations gibbs would have been less conservative, but overall i think it would have been pretty much the same.

I agree.

[smoak]

There may be a degree of that, but there were games we threw enough to spread it out... For me, the players didn't execute well and always made the huge mistake to cost us the game. (i.e. if Betts only blocks Ed Reed or at least recovers the fumble).

I think we are definitely played with a conservativenature, but I don't know if there was a realization that we weren't good enough.... I think they just kept plugging along and witha few changes to key personnel, we'll be better next season.

[CowboyKilla]

About the O, take Indy, Minn, KC, St. Louis and Pats. Start there and benchmark. Adapt and Conquer.

[RedskinsVision]

I think Gibbs definitely wasn't overly confident that his Offense would work in today's game. That's why he pursued the best D-Coordinator as soon as he got the job and flew to his house at midnight and sold him of coming here as his D coach.. as well as giving him a raise to be his assistant compared to his old job as the Head Coach.

He wanted to shore up the D side so that he can fully analyze if his old Offense can work. That's what makes him so smart.. he's not arrogant like Spurrier was thinking his system would work no matter what. He knew there was a good chance there'd be growing pains and major adjustments to make this time around so he made sure that the other side of the ball was taken care of.

That's why I think G. Williams deserves most of the credit for the team's combative spirit with Gibbs keeping the team together while he began to understand today's Defenses and his own Offense. Now it's time for Gibbs to take up for Williams and pay him back by unleashing his new adjustments on Offense.

[LATrueRedskin]

Didn't Gibbs change his offense his first year in the league from a throw-first offense to a power running game? I don't think he is really set out to show that "his offense" still works. If it's not working, he'll change it. Agreeing with RV, this isn't Spurrier where it's his way or the highway. Gibbs will make changes inorder to make things work, and more importantly to him, to win football games. He definately banked on Williams' defense this year.

[War Hogg]

I Tivo'ed and watched the "Yearbook" of the Skins 92 season. We went 10-6 and 80 percent of the games Gibbs won that year were by less than a touchdown. Im only 26, and dont remember what the scores looked like all those years he coached but from listening to him this year, My thought would be that he is not as interested in having a offense that can put up huge numbers as he is with being able to control the ball (time of possesion) through spotless offensive execution.

This is why his play calling is dink and donk down the field (2 wideouts or 2 tightends). This will allow the clock to run, but it requires spotless execution from the offense......

[LadyNRedskinsfan]

good post mike. i brought this up way back when the ramsey vs brunell controversy waas going on. i mentioned the reason why gibbs is playing SO conservative was because he knew he could depend on the defense. he wanted the offense to score at least 3 TDS a game, pretty much knowing that the D could hold whoever we played to 21 points or less. once gibbs gets more of "his players" he will be more confident and the offense will less conservative.

[skins74]

Amen. Been preaching this all year. Joe was just trying to play like Baltimore a few years back and figured he could get away with it. Conservative, ball control, field positiotn, let the D win it for you.


The problem is our defense doesn't score a TD every week like Balt's D.

[War Hogg]

I think one of the best things Gibbs could do this off season when he is putting together his new offensive scheme is to bounce his entire playbook off of G.Williams play by play. That way Williams could tell gibbs what defenses he would run based off what looks gibbs offense gives. Ive always wondered why or how teams with dominant defenses can have poor offenses when they practice against each other all week long......

[RedskinsVision]

I Tivo'ed and watched the "Yearbook" of the Skins 92 season. We went 10-6 and 80 percent of the games Gibbs won that year were by less than a touchdown. Im only 26, and dont remember what the scores looked like all those years he coached but from listening to him this year, My thought would be that he is not as interested in having a offense that can put up huge numbers as he is with being able to control the ball (time of possesion) through spotless offensive execution.

This is why his play calling is dink and donk down the field (2 wideouts or 2 tightends). This will allow the clock to run, but it requires spotless execution from the offense......

92' was a struggle but the year before that the Skins' set the NFL record for points in a season that is now 2nd today behind the Vikings. Rypien was horrible (13TDs 17ints) compared to 91' (28TDs 11ints) and the running game wasn't as effective with only 10 TD's (Riggs was no longer on the team and he had 11 TD's rushing by himself in 91' and the team's total was 21 TD's) due mainly to Jim Lachey's injury which cost him about half the season. So it was more the players undoing then Gibbs' schemes. in 91' Rypien was unleashing it to the Posse behind a great running game and the Hogs. 92' the team was getting old, the Hogs were getting injured and the running game was poor.

[redskin_rich]

I Tivo'ed and watched the "Yearbook" of the Skins 92 season. We went 10-6 and 80 percent of the games Gibbs won that year were by less than a touchdown. Im only 26, and dont remember what the scores looked like all those years he coached but from listening to him this year, My thought would be that he is not as interested in having a offense that can put up huge numbers as he is with being able to control the ball (time of possesion) through spotless offensive execution.

This is why his play calling is dink and donk down the field (2 wideouts or 2 tightends). This will allow the clock to run, but it requires spotless execution from the offense......
That was the season that Jim Lachey got hurt in the preseason(torn ACL) and much like this season we struggled on offense. Also Rypien was very erratic that season, he didn't do well when pressured.

[War Hogg]

92' was a struggle but the year before that the Skins' set the NFL record for points in a season that is now 2nd today behind the Vikings. Rypien was horrible (13TDs 17ints) compared to 91' (28TDs 11ints) and the running game wasn't as effective with only 10 TD's (Riggs was no longer on the team and he had 11 TD's rushing by himself in 91' and the team's total was 21 TD's) due mainly to Jim Lachey's injury which cost him about half the season. So it was more the players undoing then Gibbs' schemes. in 91' Rypien was unleashing it to the Posse behind a great running game and the Hogs. 92' the team was getting old, the Hogs were getting injured and the running game was poor.

Ahhhhhh, Thanks for the knowledge. So long ago.....

[RedskinsVision]

Ahhhhhh, Thanks for the knowledge. So long ago.....

yeah.. seems like a distant dream ago. but it shall return! :)

and in the playoffs of our Super Bowl run in 91', we outscored the opponents 102-41. during the regular season we outscored them 485-224. so overall we outscored the league 587-265! yowzers...

[War Hogg]

That was the season that Jim Lachey got hurt in the preseason(torn ACL) and much like this season we struggled on offense. Also Rypien was very erratic that season, he didn't do well when pressured.

Sounds like another QB we've had......

[redskin_rich]

Sounds like another QB we've had......
you mean still... :D

[War Hogg]

yeah.. seems like a distant dream ago. but it shall return! :)

and in the playoffs of our Super Bowl run in 91', we outscored the opponents 102-41. during the regular season we outscored them 485-224. so overall we outscored the league 587-265! yowzers...


Good lord..... I know Joe still has it.......Its just a matter time......Like TO says "yall got your popcorn ready?".........

[Axegrinder]

That's a good theory,now someone get CarMike a BC Powder!:D

[Jimreaper007]

I've said it. And plenty of fans on here have been saying it.

"If we didn't have our defense this year, we would have sucked". Or like Spence put it, "We would have been the 49ers".

Let me throw this bone out for discussion. Lets say if we didn't have this defense for our coaches to fall back on. Lets say that we were as awful on defense this year as we were under Mike Nolan.

Would coach Gibbs have been as patient with our offense as he was this year knowing that we could rely on our defense to win, or keep us in game? It could have meant that he would have taken more shots down the field earlier in the year. Would our offense have put up better numbers? Or would it have been the same story, but with a bad offense and a bad defense?

My point is this. Coach Gibbs probably realized sometime during the year that his offense wasn't going to work in todays NFL. The counter trey is a good option if you use it spareingly. [?] But defenses are too quick today compared to defenses 12 years ago. I think he saw that and realized that the best way for the Redskins to win was to play ball control offense and depend on our defense to win us games.

Alright. I now have a headache. Way too much thinking on my part. :D

Let me read your thoughts....

I don't think anyone would argue with your points too much. If not for the defense the Redskins would be the laughing stock off the league given the amount of our payroll versus the 49ers.

Talk about embarrasing

[Spence]

I Tivo'ed and watched the "Yearbook" of the Skins 92 season. We went 10-6 ......10-8, if you count the playoffs.

[RedskinsVision]

10-8, if you count the playoffs.

woah.. we lost twice in the playoffs? must've been the "mulligan playoffs" year. i know it's just a mistake.. j/k w/ ya'. :D we beat the Vikings and lost to the 9ers. 11-7.

[redskin_rich]

woah.. we lost twice in the playoffs? must've been the "mulligan playoffs" year. i know it's just a mistake.. j/k w/ ya'. :D we beat the Vikings and lost to the 9ers. 11-7.
I think Spence is right(10-8) we finished the reg. season 9-7 after losing our final game against the Raiders and then getting help by of all teams, the Vikes, into the playoffs. You know what happened after that.

[TheGreek1973]

woah.. we lost twice in the playoffs? must've been the "mulligan playoffs" year. i know it's just a mistake.. j/k w/ ya'. :D we beat the Vikings and lost to the 9ers. 11-7.
-----------
its a good theory and we probably seen it with Dallas in our first match when Brunell put up more than 300 yards. The fact is however that Gibbs will play the cards dealt to him. No wonder with the Bears we passed something like one or two times the entire second half. However unlike Marty when I think of Gibbs offense I think of the way we played with the Giants at fedex field. Ball control, take your shots with play action, put up 31 points and make the opponets look lost. Honestly that is what I expect next season. We are almost there guys.

[Jimreaper007]

Didn't we lose to the bears once in the playoffs?

[redskin_rich]

Didn't we lose to the bears once in the playoffs?
'85 I believe.

[PennSkinsFan]

Carmike's been thinking

Really!!!!!!!!! WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[PGiddy18]

Alright. I now have a headache. Way too much thinking on my part.

Now in the title you said thinking again... when did it happen the first time? :D

[tbfoster1]

I think Spence is right(10-8) we finished the reg. season 9-7 after losing our final game against the Raiders and then getting help by of all teams, the Vikes, into the playoffs. You know what happened after that.

i went to that raiders game, it was my first skins game, i was 14 and i remember my father made me go hunting with him the day of the vikings game, needless to say i didn't want to go but he made me. i snuck a walkman in my jacket sat in the woods and listened to the game. after the win i popped a couple buckshot into a tree. my pops was pissed when he came over and saw that nothing was dead.

[CarMike]

Guys, I think my original thoughts are getting lost with all of the other great points that are being made. So I'll try again.

What I was trying to get across the first time is this. If our defense hadn't been so dominant, do you think our offense would have performed better? Would it have made coach Gibbs be more aggressive in play calling knowing that our defense wasn't any good?

I'm sorry for that. Its my fault. After rereading my initial post, I realized that I myself had somehow got off subject.

[Skins57]

Now in the title you said thinking again... when did it happen the first time? :D


PGiddy now that is not nice, funny but not nice:D

[PGiddy18]

PGiddy now that is not nice, funny but not nice:D

lol my apologize then jeff, but i owe Mike an insult or two, Right Mike!! ;)

[CarMike]

lol my apologize then jeff, but i owe Mike an insult or two, Right Mike!! ;)

Very, very, very funny there PGiddy!

Oh, by the way.... :inkston:

[War Hogg]

Guys, I think my original thoughts are getting lost with all of the other great points that are being made. So I'll try again.

What I was trying to get across the first time is this. If our defense hadn't been so dominant, do you think our offense would have performed better? Would it have made coach Gibbs be more aggressive in play calling knowing that our defense wasn't any good?

I'm sorry for that. Its my fault. After rereading my initial post, I realized that I myself had somehow got off subject.

Nahhhh, I think we wouldve been 3-13 and Ramsey would have been on IR......

[PGiddy18]

Very, very, very funny there PGiddy!

Oh, by the way.... :inkston:

lol ehh... you love me anyway! :D

[CarMike]

lol ehh... you love me anyway! :D

;)

[Skins57]

Guys, I think my original thoughts are getting lost with all of the other great points that are being made. So I'll try again.

What I was trying to get across the first time is this. If our defense hadn't been so dominant, do you think our offense would have performed better? Would it have made coach Gibbs be more aggressive in play calling knowing that our defense wasn't any good?

I'm sorry for that. Its my fault. After rereading my initial post, I realized that I myself had somehow got off subject.


Mike I think the offense would have had to been much more aggressive as we would have been in bigger holes from earlier on in the game and we would have had to spend more time airing it out trying to stay with or catch other teams

So I hope I am answering your question. I thin we would have had no choice but to be more aggressive

[split3clemente]

we would have been more aggressive but would that have made our offense better? I dont think so or else Gibbs would have been more aggressive with the dominant defense we already have.