Should Al Saunders return in '08?

Fine line between kill or be killed. Why force something that isn't there especially when we're pinned back near our own end zone. Going for the kill doesn't have to be as glamorous as an 80-yard bomb. It can also mean giving the opponent a slow death by forcing them to burn their timeouts, milking the clock down, and pinning them deep in their own territory needing to score twice.

I voted for Al to return with the caveat that he gets FULL control over playcalling/offense.. Here's where the playcalling argument always goes.. I agree that going for the kill doesn't have to be an 80 yard bomb, but do you honestly think that plunging into the line for 3 straight plays, especially on third and 6 is a slow death for the opponent? Killer instinct (see New England) is running your offense, your ENTIRE offense, for 60 minutes.. Playing for the win is different than playing not to lose..

Fine line between kill or be killed. Why force something that isn't there especially when we're pinned back near our own end zone. Going for the kill doesn't have to be as glamorous as an 80-yard bomb. It can also mean giving the opponent a slow death by forcing them to burn their timeouts, milking the clock down, and pinning them deep in their own territory needing to score twice.

I understand what you are saying but look at buffalo, we could have won that game but we sat on the lead. I understand what you are saying, I just get tired of loosing games because we don't put teams away when we have the chance...

I voted for Al to return with the caveat that he gets FULL control over playcalling/offense.. Here's where the playcalling argument always goes.. I agree that going for the kill doesn't have to be an 80 yard bomb, but do you honestly think that plunging into the line for 3 straight plays, especially on third and 6 is a slow death for the opponent? Killer instinct (see New England) is running your offense, your ENTIRE offense, for 60 minutes.. Playing for the win is different than playing not to lose..


But see that's the caveat: full control. I'm telling you now, I don't see it happening. If he returns, they'll continue to tinker around the edges to make it look like Al is in control, but I just don't see it.

Joe just might as well take it all back. Honestly, and this is just my opinion, but I think for Gibbs to be 100% effective, he needs to be all the way dialed into the game. Part of the clock mismanagement and botched timeouts is due to Gibbs having to fade in and out of the game and consult the other guy. It's just too much for him manage inside his own head.

I voted for Al to return with the caveat that he gets FULL control over playcalling/offense.. Here's where the playcalling argument always goes.. I agree that going for the kill doesn't have to be an 80 yard bomb, but do you honestly think that plunging into the line for 3 straight plays, especially on third and 6 is a slow death for the opponent? Killer instinct (see New England) is running your offense, your ENTIRE offense, for 60 minutes.. Playing for the win is different than playing not to lose..

Well we also shouldn't assume, as too many do, that "failed" plays-particularly failed running plays are because of Gibbs. Every great play is followed by "What a great call by Saunders" and retarded threads like "This is Al Saunders' offense" But botched plays are "Old Man Gibbs needs to go" Not saying everyone does this, but a lot of people do.

I think Saunders; system works. We have seen it work with less talent. The keys are that he needs to be given full control. No meshing of systems or anything like that. Also, he needs to commit to putting the full system in with Campbell. I don't buy that he can't run the system like Collins can. I know he'll make mistakes that Collins wouldn't make but he'll also make plays that Collins can only duplicate in Madden. And his mistakes will disappear more quickly through live action. I am fully supportive of trial by fire at this point. So I say yes.

Someone stated similar philosophies...

However, they are not the same. And even a small difference can mess up the cohesiveness of the offense. If the two are similar yet slighty evolved, then more then likely it'll effect the way the offense will be executed.

For example: There are the Spaniards who live in Spain speak spanish. Then there are the Latin Americans. Even though the Latin America was derived from Spain once a time long ago, the two are totally different identities.

With that said, I do not think Saunders is a good fit in Washington. We've given him 2 years to build and I have yet to see any progress. We have only scored 30 points or more ONCE this season. That is a direct result of the offense that is being executed. Whether it is that the players arent adjusting, execution, preparation. It doesnt matter, I believe we've given him enough time to implement his offense. And there has yet to be any real progress thus far.

I say let him go.

And lets be honest, the only reason why we win game is not because of our explosive offense, it's because our defense puts us in a position to stay in the game.

I certainly wouldn't want Campbell to start over in another variation of the Gibbs/Coryell offense. I feel that we are very close to being an outstanding offense. Saunders version of that offensive system has been prolific in KC and St Louis - let's give it a full chance to work here.

Saunders system works. Let him have complete control of the offense. Don't even give Joe Gibbs a headset. Let Saunders call the plays, 2 pt, 1 pt, 4th down, etc calls. This dudes offenses have been on top of the NFL many years for a reason.

We gotta take the shackles off Campbell, and work on our redzone offense, along with staying aggressive. I hate seeing us take a 3 point league and act like we have the game wrapped up.

Im not saying Gibbs keeps us from doing that, we don't know. If it's all on Al, then fine, but I want to know.

I think Al needs to come back, but only if Gibbs stops riding his back. (If he is doing so). We see that the team is capable of amazing things if they open up the playbook. JC will be starting on his 2 year of starting, its time to let the reins off JC and off the playbook and see what we're really capable of.

I am surprised a majority of people said yes. Thank you for seeing the light. Yes continuity is the key.