Old Dogs, New Tricks

[BurgundyNGold]

So I'm watching the first half of the Giants/Chargers game on Sunday night and I was just "wow"ed by the offenses of both teams. Great mix of run and pass and not predictable in the least. Now, before folks tell me this is posted in the worng forum, hear me out. The offensive success exhibited by these two team was impressive for sure. Then, I paused to think of who the coaches were: Tom Coughlin and Marty Schottenheimer.

Yes, that Marty Schottenheimer. The guy whose 2001 Redskin offense went nearly an entire half of football without throwing a pass. The guy whose 2001 Redskin offense was so conservative that we were all elated just to see it reach double digits.

Let's not forget Tom Coughlin. He doesn't exactly spend his weekends during the offseason base jumping or street louging. These are two of the most conservative coaches in the recent memory of the NFL.

As I was watching the two old dogs showing off thier newly learned tricks, I recall that I was seriously hoping that Gibbs & Co. were watching this game -- especially Jack Burns and Don Breaux. An 11.5 PPG average ain't gonna cut it folks. If Coughlin and Schottenheimer, of all people, can make the change to be more aggressive on offense, surely our coaching staff with its vaunted ability to adapt can make these adjustments to the modern offensive game. In fact, we have to do just that if we hope to have any change of hanging onto our division lead.

[akhhorus]

In all fairness, both Defenses were basically non-existent. The Giants would be better off if they put up Cardboard cutouts as LBs and CBs. The Chargers are basically the same. The Skins need to put up more points, but what Marty and Coughlin did was sympomatic of playing terrible defenses.

[BurgundyNGold]

In all fairness, both Defenses were basically non-existent. The Giants would be better off if they put up Cardboard cutouts as LBs and CBs. The Chargers are basically the same. The Skins need to put up more points, but what Marty and Coughlin did was sympomatic of playing terrible defenses.
That doesn't account for the great mix of run and pass or the abundance of intermediate and downfield passes by both squads. Regardless of the defense, you can't make plays if you don't call them. Both of these historically conservative coaches have been making aggressive and original offensive calls, I guess that was more my point.

[akhhorus]

That doesn't account for the great mix of run and pass or the abundance of intermediate and downfield passes by both squads. Regardless of the defense, you can't make plays if you don't call them. Both of these historically conservative coaches have been making aggressive and original offensive calls, I guess that was more my point.

I watched that game and neither team could stop the other. The Giants blew it because they just started passing the ball every down. But San Diego has a great RB and the Giants simply couldn't stop him, especially after he threw the QB. The Skins have played two good defenses so far(1 great one, 1 good one), but it will interesting to see what happens when they play an average defense like the Giants or Seattle.

[joethefan]

I'm just one to believe that if this great D that we have can stop people from scoring, the offense should be able to sustain long drives for touchdowns, in turn taking up the clock, giving the D a breather. Esp if the defense is supposed to be equiped to be off the field and the offense is supposed to be on the field longer.

[BurgundyNGold]

I watched that game and neither team could stop the other. The Giants blew it because they just started passing the ball every down. But San Diego has a great RB and the Giants simply couldn't stop him. The Skins have played two good defenses so far(1 great one, 1 good one), but it will interesting to see what happens when they play an average defense like the Giants or Seattle.
I hope they're able to mix it up like the Bolts and the Gints did. SD got the ball to LT out in space of swing patterns and set him up on screens really well. They even ran the ball with originality. For example, they'd do misdirection pitches to LT, countering the guard as a lead blocker. The misdirection held the LBs long enough for LT to get in to the secondary. Some of that offense was poetry. To a lesser degree, the Gints did the same thing. Comparatively, the Redskins offense was been little more than a nursery rhyme.

I know CP hasn't proven to be at the level of LT yet, but where are these patterns and plays for us? We nedd to get him the ball in space -- preferably with blockers. I understand if you think that that certain plays may not work against a defense, but does that mean you just never call them? I don't even know that we have them. That's my point. If we have them, we need to call them to mix things up. If we don't have them, we need to get them.

[Spence]

I want to see the Redskins do a better job of hooking up on those big plays. My complaint about the offense in that Dallas game is not that they didn't take shots downfield. The Redskins did take shots downfield -- during the entire game -- but they weren't any good at it. They didn't come close to hitting on a big play until they actually hit on a big play. I think Gibbs is running a very different and more aggressive offense this year. It's just that it hadn't produced any big plays until the last 4 minutes of week two. I'm not worried about Gibbs refusing to put the ball downfield -- he's doing plenty of that already. My concern is with actual execution of the game plan.

[IowaSkinsFan]

Portis will continue to see 8 in the box because the types of plays we hit downfield don't do much to draw the LB's away from the LOS. We need play action passing to hit the deep crossing patterns, 25-30 yards up field. Shots downfield are nice, but to aid the running game, you need the intermediate stuff.

[IowaSkinsFan]

I watched that game and neither team could stop the other. The Giants blew it because they just started passing the ball every down. But San Diego has a great RB and the Giants simply couldn't stop him

Couldn't stop him? It's liek they didn't even have their D on the field. LT averaged 9.1 ypc. That's highschoolish.

[akhhorus]

I hope they're able to mix it up like the Bolts and the Gints did. SD got the ball to LT out in space of swing patterns and set him up on screens really well. They even ran the ball with originality. For example, they'd do misdirection pitches to LT, countering the guard as a lead blocker. The misdirection held the LBs long enough for LT to get in to the secondary. Some of that offense was poetry. To a lesser degree, the Gints did the same thing. Comparatively, the Redskins offense was been little more than a nursery rhyme.

I know CP hasn't proven to be at the level of LT yet, but where are these patterns and plays for us? We nedd to get him the ball in space -- preferably with blockers. I understand if you think that that certain plays may not work against a defense, but does that mean you just never call them? I don't even know that we have them. That's my point. If we have them, we need to call them to mix things up. If we don't have them, we need to get them.

Well, we saw that work in the Bears game and not work vs Dallas. Portis is running much less between the guards and running more off tackle. The draw worked very well vs the Bears but the Skins rarely ran that vs Dallas. Using the draw and trap with Portis will be very effective.

[BurgundyNGold]

I want to see the Redskins do a better job of hooking up on those big plays. My complaint about the offense in that Dallas game is not that they didn't take shots downfield. The Redskins did take shots downfield -- during the entire game -- but they weren't any good at it. They didn't come close to hitting on a big play until they actually hit on a big play. I think Gibbs is running a very different and more aggressive offense this year. It's just that it hadn't produced any big plays until the last 4 minutes of week two. I'm not worried about Gibbs refusing to put the ball downfield -- he's doing plenty of that already. My concern is with actual execution of the game plan.
I agree. My concern is not the long ball either. I think the Santana Moss demonstration just bought us at least 2-3 weeks without so many 8 man fronts. I'm talking more about utilizing the entire field especially 10-20 yard downfield, getting your marquee players the ball in space and mixing up the plays and play calling. Maybe its just a rhythym thing, so we'll see.

[akhhorus]

Couldn't stop him? It's liek they didn't even have their D on the field. LT averaged 9.1 ypc. That's highschoolish.

The best was watching the entire Giants LB corps trying to tackle him. That aint happening.

[akhhorus]

I agree. My concern is not the long ball either. I think the Santana Moss demonstration just bought us at least 2-3 weeks without so many 8 man fronts. I'm talking more about utilizing the entire field especially 10-20 yard downfield, getting your marquee players the ball in space and mixing up the plays and play calling. Maybe its just a rhythym thing, so we'll see.

especially when the Skins are facing a defense without a true FS, like they will Vs Seattle, Denver and Kansas City. The Cb doesn't matter visa via Moss, exploiting the Safety deep is the key.

[joethefan]

Couldn't stop him? It's liek they didn't even have their D on the field. LT averaged 9.1 ypc. That's highschoolish.

reminds me of the little league games I coach.....

[BurgundyNGold]

Well, we saw that work in the Bears game and not work vs Dallas. Portis is running much less between the guards and running more off tackle. The draw worked very well vs the Bears but the Skins rarely ran that vs Dallas. Using the draw and trap with Portis will be very effective.
Let me ask you a question, since you saw that Gints/Bolts game. Do you think our offense is as innovative as either of the ones that we saw on Sunday might? The Bolts scored 45 points for crying out loud. I don't think the Redskins have score 45 points in a game since 1991. The Gints defense may be part of that, but 45 point doesn't just happen. I don't think we can score 45 points on Vandy.

[IowaSkinsFan]

The best was watching the entire Giants LB corps trying to tackle him. That aint happening.

Antonio Pierce have a bad game?

[smoak]

I didn't see the game, but I agree with akh that the defenses just didn't show up. While Marty and Coughlin may have opened up the playbook more, I don't think either team will factor in the playoffs. I really like Marty and I hope I am wrong there.... but their schedule is brutal and they are off to a slow start.

[akhhorus]

Antonio Pierce have a bad game?

Terrible. He hasn't looked that good anyways, but he looked like practice squadder against San Diego. And they were throwing the ball right at him as much as possible.

[akhhorus]

Let me ask you a question, since you saw that Gints/Bolts game. Do you think our offense is as innovative as either of the ones that we saw on Sunday might? The Bolts scored 45 points for crying out loud. I don't think the Redskins have score 45 points in a game since 1991. The Gints defense may be part of that, but 45 point doesn't just happen. I don't think we can score 45 points on Vandy.

I think our offense isn't "innovative" and relies more on execution. San Diego executed extremely well-their plays weren't particularly dynamic. Slants to Gates, off tackles with LT. They ran the same 5 running plays all night, and ran extremely similar passing plays. The Giants couldn't stop Gates' curls and slants. And they couldn't do much to stop San Diego's out patterns. And I think if the Skins can execute the offense well, they will be fine. we saw what happened when the qb and wr execute well. And Brunell's biggest problem vs Dallas seemed to be timing and not scheme.

[BurgundyNGold]

I think our offense isn't "innovative" and relies more on execution. San Diego executed extremely well-their plays weren't particularly dynamic. Slants to Gates, off tackles with LT. They ran the same 5 running plays all night, and ran extremely similar passing plays. The Giants couldn't stop Gates' curls and slants. And they couldn't do much to stop San Diego's out patterns. And I think if the Skins can execute the offense well, they will be fine. we saw what happened when the qb and wr execute well. And Brunell's biggest problem vs Dallas seemed to be timing and not scheme.
Luckily, we play the Gints twice this year. So, if we execute the same 5 running plays, run curls and slants to Cooley and run lots of outs, I should expect to see a "45" next to the Redskins name in the scoreboard? I hope you're right, but I'll believe it when I see it.

[bwparker]

Luckily, we play the Gints twice this year. So, if we execute the same 5 running plays, run curls and slants to Cooley and run lots of outs, I should expect to see a "45" next to the Redskins name in the scoreboard? I hope you're right, but I'll believe it when I see it.
If we EXECUTE those same five plays and the Giants fail to compensate for their ineffectiveness then, yes we will score 45 points against them.

However, chances are we won't execute as well and the Giants will adjust so that they don't get spanked so hard again.

[GWBlitzST]

I think our offense isn't "innovative" and relies more on execution. San Diego executed extremely well-their plays weren't particularly dynamic. Slants to Gates, off tackles with LT. They ran the same 5 running plays all night, and ran extremely similar passing plays. The Giants couldn't stop Gates' curls and slants. And they couldn't do much to stop San Diego's out patterns. And I think if the Skins can execute the offense well, they will be fine. we saw what happened when the qb and wr execute well. And Brunell's biggest problem vs Dallas seemed to be timing and not scheme.
While timing was a huge factor with Patten and early on with Moss, I really feel like untimely penalties disrupted the flow of our offense. It seemed like in the first three quarters, every time Brunell dropped back to look long, there was a false start called on the Oline. That has got to stop.

[akhhorus]

Luckily, we play the Gints twice this year. So, if we execute the same 5 running plays, run curls and slants to Cooley and run lots of outs, I should expect to see a "45" next to the Redskins name in the scoreboard? I hope you're right, but I'll believe it when I see it.

Cooley is no Antonio Gates, but the Skins should be able to look effective on offense against the Giants. And if they execute the offense well, they could run up 45 on the Giants. Will Allen and Gibril Wilson trying to cover Moss? Thats a win matchup for the Skins.

[becky]

Terrible. He hasn't looked that good anyways, but he looked like practice squadder against San Diego. And they were throwing the ball right at him as much as possible.

the announcers seemed to think he was having the game of his life. i kept wondering if we were watching the same game.

[akhhorus]

the announcers seemed to think he was having the game of his life. i kept wondering if we were watching the same game.

Yeah, Paul Macguire was really kissing his rear, but as he was saying that, Gates was shredding him for first down after first down. Must have Alzheimers or something.

[becky]

Yeah, Paul Macguire was really kissing his rear, but as he was saying that, Gates was shredding him for first down after first down. Must have Alzheimers or something.

i know! it was embarassing to listen to them discuss how he is pro-bowl caliber in the middle of a play where he is getting torn apart. proof that IMO he simply just fit well in our system. the guys on our defense (well most) are good, but GW is making them look great.

[Ibleedburgundy]

So I'm watching the first half of the Giants/Chargers game on Sunday night and I was just "wow"ed by the offenses of both teams. Great mix of run and pass and not predictable in the least. Now, before folks tell me this is posted in the worng forum, hear me out. The offensive success exhibited by these two team was impressive for sure. Then, I paused to think of who the coaches were: Tom Coughlin and Marty Schottenheimer.

Yes, that Marty Schottenheimer. The guy whose 2001 Redskin offense went nearly an entire half of football without throwing a pass. The guy whose 2001 Redskin offense was so conservative that we were all elated just to see it reach double digits.

Let's not forget Tom Coughlin. He doesn't exactly spend his weekends during the offseason base jumping or street louging. These are two of the most conservative coaches in the recent memory of the NFL.

As I was watching the two old dogs showing off thier newly learned tricks, I recall that I was seriously hoping that Gibbs & Co. were watching this game -- especially Jack Burns and Don Breaux. An 11.5 PPG average ain't gonna cut it folks. If Coughlin and Schottenheimer, of all people, can make the change to be more aggressive on offense, surely our coaching staff with its vaunted ability to adapt can make these adjustments to the modern offensive game. In fact, we have to do just that if we hope to have any change of hanging onto our division lead.


The Giants offensive line was giving Eli all day to throw and huge gaping holes for Tiki. I didn't think the Offense was inventive so much as they simply executed well, especially the O-line. They only score 23 points I believe so I was not that impressed. Still not impressed with Eli either. Although he made some decent passes, several of them would have been picked if the Chargers had a DB that was worth his weight in blubber. That stuff ain't gonna work against the Skins.

The Chargers offense on the other hand, I fully agree with you B&G. They have such a balanced attack (doesn't hurt to have the best RB in football). Drew Brees is super accurate, like he was at Purdue. Anyway, the Tomlinson pass to McCardell was beutifully executed-much prettier than the Portis to Coles version the Redskins ran last year. The Chargers were able to get Gates 1 on 1 in the middle of the field and that's always a good match-up no matter who the DB/LB is. Play calls were very good.

I think a lot of these older coaches have a "crawl before you walk" offensive mentality. Look who Schottenheimer had behind center in 2001. No wonder he didn't want to throw the ball. They want to feel comfortable with the short passes before they start taking bigger risks.

Joe Gibbs always wanted to run the ball last year because he didn't have faith in either QB. This year, Brunell looks good and that will be the key to Joe Gibbs opening up his playbook. We learned to crawl, now it's time to walk.

[akhhorus]

The Giants offensive line was giving Eli all day to throw and huge gaping holes for Tiki. I didn't think the Offense was inventive so much as they simply executed well, especially the O-line. They only score 23 points I believe so I was not that impressed. Still not impressed with Eli either. Although he made some decent passes, several of them would have been picked if the Chargers had a DB that was worth his weight in blubber. That stuff ain't gonna work against the Skins.

The Chargers offense on the other hand, I fully agree with you B&G. They have such a balanced attack (doesn't hurt to have the best RB in football). Drew Brees is super accurate, like he was at Purdue. Anyway, the Tomlinson pass to McCardell was beutifully executed-much prettier than the Portis to Coles version the Redskins ran last year. The Chargers were able to get Gates 1 on 1 in the middle of the field and that's always a good match-up no matter who the DB/LB is. Play calls were very good.

I think a lot of these older coaches have a "crawl before you walk" offensive mentality. Look who Schottenheimer had behind center in 2001. No wonder he didn't want to throw the ball. They want to feel comfortable with the short passes before they start taking bigger risks.

Joe Gibbs always wanted to run the ball last year because he didn't have faith in either QB. This year, Brunell looks good and that will be the key to Joe Gibbs opening up his playbook. We learned to crawl, now it's time to walk.

And Brees, despite having an accurate game, still had less yards passing than LT had running. LT dominated the game, and the Giants barely used Tiki(60 yards on 17 carries, half of the yards on one run).