A Mismanaged Offensive Game Plan [Archive] - hailRedskins.com Fan Board

Spence

12-01-2003, 03:55 PM

There are a number of reasons the Redskins lost to the Saints on Sunday, but here is one of my personal favorites:

Redskins average gain per rushing play: 6.2 yards
Redskins average gain per passing play: 5.5 yards

Redskins total number of rushes: 26
Redskins total number of passes: 42

There you have it. Even though it was a tight game and the Redskins needed to run the ball to keep Deuce McAllister off the field and the running game was working better than the passing game, the Redskins still called far more passing plays than running plays.

Why did Spurrier take play-calling duties back from Hue Jackson? Exactly how has Spurrier done better than Jackson?

kelly

12-01-2003, 03:59 PM

Friday, November 28, 2003
By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com

~ ~ ~ Around the league

~ ~ Washington coach Steve Spurrier reclaimed the play-calling duties last week from offensive coordinator Hue Jackson, but one has to wonder if "The Ol' Ball Coach" did his team much good in that regard. During a recent practice, some Redskins players told ESPN.com that Spurrier struggled to get through the offensive script for the day. And then in last Sunday night's loss at Miami, the players said, Spurrier called at least four plays that were not included in the game plan. It didn't make things easier, for sure, for youngster Tim Hasselbeck, who had relieved injured starting quarterback Patrick Ramsey. Perhaps the most notable strength of Spurrier was not only in his offensive blueprint, but also in directing the in-game action like some football maestro. Maybe last week was simply an aberration. But if Spurrier is to pass muster in the NFL -- and, as one-time true believers, we are now starting to waffle on whether he will succeed at this level -- he has to play to his strengths. And last week, at least, his strengths were transformed into shortcomings.

> http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=1673094

RedskinsDave

12-01-2003, 04:01 PM

I saw that stat last night and it also showed that New Orleans stayed with the run and was pretty much 50/50. Hmmm, tell me again who won.

PennSkinsFan

12-01-2003, 04:03 PM

Yeah. The play calling yesterday was horrendous. Why we have leads int he foruth quarter and do not protect them on the ground is simply baffling. Especially yesterday. I mean when you have a running game going liek we did yesterday, especially us, since we seem to have a tough time getting it going, but we turn tot he pass, it just blows my mind. Heck, 116 yards on 15 carries? Trung could have racked up another 40 to 50 yards if he was used properly.

Spurrier quote:

On the play of the Trung Canidate (RB, #30) and the running backs:
“Trung did have one long run there that really helped and had over 100 yards rushing. Obviously when you look back at all of those incompletions, we should have been running the ball, but you’ve got to believe in your receivers and your quarterback. The pass protection was very good tonight. Brandon Winey (OT, #68) did a good job over there at left tackle, as well as the other offensive linemen. But we didn’t connect as well as we needed to tonight.”

Obviously when you look back at all of those incompletions, we should have been running the ball, but you’ve got to believe in your receivers and your quarterback

Why is it so hard to figure otu the running game was working? Did he not do any scout reporting to find that a NO weakness is the run. Was he not watching Trung rack up yards? Folks, this is uncalled for and baffling. This is not the first time Spurrier has gotten lost in a game.

PennSkinsFan

12-01-2003, 04:05 PM

Pasq is right on this account. I really honest to God thinkt hat Steve Spurrier is just totally lost in the NFL, just plain and simply, lost!

BigCountry

12-01-2003, 04:06 PM

He's not ready for the NFL just yet but hopefully another training camp will help

Spence

12-01-2003, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by PennSkinsFan
[B]Obviously when you look back at all of those incompletions, we should have been running the ball, but you’ve got to believe in your receivers and your quarterback I was going to bring up that quote. It's baffling to me. You've got to believe in your receivers and your quarterback? Does that mean you don't have to believe in your running backs and offensive line? Does that mean you throw the ball no matter what is working better?

I admit, I'm shocked by Spurrier's terrible coaching. I thought he'd be much better than this when he was hired. He had such a supple and dynamic mind in college, but he's become completely ossified and clueless in the NFL. It's like the other team read rulebook and he never glanced at it.

RedskinsDave

12-01-2003, 04:07 PM

How the hell did he win anywhere?

Spence

12-01-2003, 04:09 PM

Originally posted by RedskinsDave
I saw that stat last night and it also showed that New Orleans stayed with the run and was pretty much 50/50. Hmmm, tell me again who won. The Saints passed 30 times [4 yards per attempt] and ran 37 times [5.1 yards per attempt]. I think the Saints actually passed too much--especially in their second to last drive when they threw two incompletions instead of running and making the Skins burn their final two timeouts--but clearly New Orleans ran enough to win the game. They had a better idea of what was working than the Redskins did, that's for sure.

RedskinsDave

12-01-2003, 04:09 PM

The speed of the game must be what's doing it. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that he isn't that stupid.

PennSkinsFan

12-01-2003, 04:18 PM

Yeah. I don't think Spurrier is stupid, I just think is out coaches and not suited for the NFL. lets face it, some are, and some are not.

Spence

12-01-2003, 04:21 PM

I merged two threads because they were so similar.

dj_stouty

12-01-2003, 04:24 PM

I posted this elsewhere...but I'll bring it up again.

Spurrier didn't abandon the RUN until AFTER the Saints took over the lead. I keep hearing that he abandonded the run with the lead but that is just not true. He mixed it up pretty nicely up to that point.

Spence

12-01-2003, 04:29 PM

Actually, the Redskins had thrown more than they passed before the Saints took the lead, but that's not really the larger point. There was no need to go away from the run after the Saints took the lead. It was a one-score game and the Redskins had two timeouts, the 2-minute warning, and a running game that was slicing the Saints to pieces. If the Skins were down by two scores going away from the run would have made sense, but down by only one score, it was a bad decision.

The fact is, though, that even before the Saints took the lead, the Redskins should have run the ball more than they did. Since the defense could not stop McAllister, running it thru a bad Saints rush defense was the best way to manage the game. The Redskins threw 20 incompletions yesterday. That's far too many. Run the ball, eat the clock, keep McAllister on the sidelines. That was the proper way to manage the game, especially since our running backs were doing so well.

dj_stouty

12-01-2003, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by Spence
Actually, the Redskins had thrown more than they passed before the Saints took the lead, but that's not really the larger point.

I actually thought they did a fairly decent job mixing up the run/pass ratio with the lead.

When the Skins took the lead in the 3rd quarter after the Chad Morton kickreturn, the Skins ran the ball 12 times vs passing the ball 15 until the mid-4th quarter when the Saints regained the lead. That really isn't that much of a difference between the two to claim that Spurrier "abandoned the run" with the lead.

Just my 2 cents...

Redskinmayhem

12-01-2003, 05:02 PM

I really think it's hugh Jackson, not spurrier. HJ should be teeling spurrier why something worked a few plays ago and how to exploit it again. While the OBC is not innocent, I think things will be better next season.

Spence

12-01-2003, 05:14 PM

DJ, you keep writing that people claim Spurrier "abandoned" the run. Who is claiming that? I didn't write that here. What I wrote is that the Redskins should have run the ball far more often than they did and that the relative effectiveness of the rushing and passing games backs that contention up. It's not a matter of abandoning anything. It's a matter of not calling the right mix of plays and not sticking with what was working better.

Spence

12-01-2003, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by Redskinmayhem
I really think it's hugh Jackson, not spurrier. HJ should be teeling spurrier why something worked a few plays ago and how to exploit it again. While the OBC is not innocent, I think things will be better next season. What???? Hue Jackson should be explaining these things to Spurrier? If that is the case, why is Spurrier coach at all? Why not just make Hue Jackson the coach, if he is supposed to know these things and Spurrier is not?

Green-Is-Good

12-01-2003, 05:25 PM

Exactly! Cut out the 5 mil/year middleman!

Redskinmayhem

12-01-2003, 05:36 PM

Great coaches have great coaching staffs around them. W/o a good staff, Parcels, Vermiel, Belichick would be nothing. this is a rookie staff and they need more time to get things straight. If we give up on the HC and Staff now, it'll be another 4 years before we even have the right to talk playoffs. In the past few years, we've tried everything to right the ship. We've gotten bin name FA's, Big name coaches, Top Draft Picks, Fired coaches, cut guys, everything you can imagine, except one thing. CONSISTENCY. That's the last thing. If we give that a shot and still fail, then it's a problem within the Staff. At that point we blow it all up and start over. Until that is proven, we can't continue this parade of coaches through this town. Look at Holmgren, sure he made the playoffs his first season but it's been 3 since he's been able to have a lgit shot at getting back in(this year). We need that consistency here.

Spence

12-01-2003, 05:46 PM

It does not really matter. From what I understand, Snyder will not fire Spurrier. If Spurrier leaves after this season he will do so of his own accord. If Spurrier wants the job for a third season, he will have it. I've gotten used to my Redskins losing and losing and losing for year after year. I have no doubt a third season of Spurrier will yield nothing but more losing--and the same way. I've put up with it until now. I can take another 20 games of Spurrier's ineptitude. I managed to survive 7 awful years of Norv Turner. I can survive three awful years of Steve Spurrier.

PennSkinsFan

12-01-2003, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by Spence
It does not really matter. From what I understand, Snyder will not fire Spurrier. If Spurrier leaves after this season he will do so of his own accord. If Spurrier wants the job for a third season, he will have it. I've gotten used to my Redskins losing and losing and losing for year after year. I have no doubt a third season of Spurrier will yield nothing but more losing--and the same way. I've put up with it until now. I can take another 20 games of Spurrier's ineptitude. I managed to survive 7 awful years of Norv Turner. I can survive three awful years of Steve Spurrier.

Agreed. I am not optimistic about a third year, I really, really believe it will be nothing but the same, regardless of talent that is borught in. The play calling is bad, the offensive system sucks, and Spurrier HAS NOT learned much from year to year. Why does this guy not show emotion. get pissed Steve. Throw something, show you care, instead of just saying "we gotta do a better job at coachen'um up"

dj_stouty

12-01-2003, 07:34 PM

Originally posted by Spence
DJ, you keep writing that people claim Spurrier "abandoned" the run. Who is claiming that? I didn't write that here.

My post was not directed at YOU.

The "abandon" part comes from a few other threads in which one or more people have claimed Spurrier abandoned the run. I'm not calling those people out...I'm just making the point that it has been said.

NamVet4

12-01-2003, 08:43 PM

Spurrier is not a very exciting interview... I seem to recall in the begining of the season some posters were looking forward to his quick quips as we won. Well, we haven't won a lot, so no quick quips. I do agree that the "aw shuck" shtick is getting very lame. And yes, it would be refreshing to at least see Spurrier blow up at somebody, anybody!

:(

Spence

12-01-2003, 11:35 PM

Originally posted by dj_stouty
My post was not directed at YOU.

The "abandon" part comes from a few other threads in which one or more people have claimed Spurrier abandoned the run. I'm not calling those people out...I'm just making the point that it has been said. Ah, I see. That had me confused.

Spence

12-01-2003, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by NamVet4
Spurrier is not a very exciting interview... I seem to recall in the begining of the season some posters were looking forward to his quick quips as we won. Well, we haven't won a lot, so no quick quips. I do agree that the "aw shuck" shtick is getting very lame. And yes, it would be refreshing to at least see Spurrier blow up at somebody, anybody!

:( Joe Gibbs was the most boring interview of all time, but at least he was boring after a win two-thirds of the time. I think Spurrier is only clever after winning and he just has not done very much of that in Washington.

SkinsKY

12-02-2003, 12:34 AM

I would almost wager to say that SS has no game plan and the things he does are done with no particular order or reason other than, "let's see if this play here will work this time." I just don't see how everyone sees the same flaws (fans and analysts alike) and yet he doesn't see them or chooses to ignore them. I can't say he will do better next year because he probably won't. I think we showed a lot of heart in the first few games and many of us commmented on it. However Spurrier never seemed to harness that to bring the level of play up and consequently the players took note of Spurrier's behavior and lost motivation themselves. I don't need Spurrier to be an exciting interview. I need him to be an effective coach. That is a role he shows absolutely no skill in playing.

bigcmr

12-02-2003, 02:27 AM

I have had it SS is dumb. If Trung is running good why not keep running the ball? The problem is all of us say you have to run the ball. But SS still thinks passing 40 times a game is the way to go. If you are playing with a backup QB. Your D-fence cant stop the run. And to top it off you are running good. Isn't it a sign to RUN THE BALL? And can you belive this coach is getting $5 mill. a year!

PennSkinsFan

12-02-2003, 08:51 AM

Snippet from the Times

Observers spotted tackle Jon Jansen and guard Randy Thomas on the sideline pleading with Spurrier to call more running plays — the Redskins ran the ball only 10 times in the second half (compared with 21 passes) despite averaging more than 6 yards a carry.
Thomas yesterday said the sideline confrontation was "just a heat of the moment thing." Jansen did not appear in front of reporters at Redskin Park, but following Sunday's game he hinted at the players' mounting frustration over Spurrier's choice of plays.

NamVet4

12-02-2003, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by PennSkinsFan
Snippet from the Times

Observers spotted tackle Jon Jansen and guard Randy Thomas on the sideline pleading with Spurrier to call more running plays — the Redskins ran the ball only 10 times in the second half (compared with 21 passes) despite averaging more than 6 yards a carry.
Thomas yesterday said the sideline confrontation was "just a heat of the moment thing." Jansen did not appear in front of reporters at Redskin Park, but following Sunday's game he hinted at the players' mounting frustration over Spurrier's choice of plays.

This is nothing new.. it's endemic to all teams when they are losing. You should hear the "Gints" fans up here screaming
about their players saying this and that! - whether it is true or not.:smash:

Spence

12-02-2003, 10:28 AM

It's a bad sign when the players show more sense than the coach. The entire point of having a coach is that he will show more sense than players. When that does not happen, there are only three ways to fix it:

1] Coach wises up;
2] Get new stupid players;
3] Get new smart coach.

RedskinsDave

12-02-2003, 10:37 AM

If that is actually the case, he needs to be fired ASAP.

Green-Is-Good

12-02-2003, 04:22 PM

Can he be fired midseason, because that would be great!

Brokenstriker

12-02-2003, 06:58 PM

Boys ... boys .. boys ... have you forgotten ... Spurrier doesn't scout the opposition ... he doesn't game plan to take advantage of their weaknesses ... and what's more ... he has never pretended to do that ...

system ... system ... system ... (geez where have you been ... you keep thinking like seasoned NFL thinkers ... old school baby ... behind the times .... )

say it with me .... "system"

*system = as close as a once-was pass happy play calling old-school quarterback can be to the quarterback without actually taking the snap (and trust me he would if he could!)