Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=DGreene28;825301][QUOTE=SmootSmack;825293]After a brief hiatus, the smackdown is back.

For those of you are new here, this is a weekly (ideally) feature that takes a look at what didn't quite work in the previous game.

The idea is not to be negative, bash the team, or say the sky is falling. Just to point out what needs improvement. I'll kick it off and other can jump in.

1.) [B]The Beckwagon[/B]-[B]Slow your roll, Beckwagoneers. He did nothing wrong really, and he was very efficient in one half. But he played in a pretty simple offense last night against a simple defense[/B]. He didn't cleary distance himself from Rex Grossman last week. The question, of course, is does he need to?


I disagree, yes it was preseason but he managed the game and spun the ball well on the run into some tight spots. The Beckwagon is being pushed along flat ground right now by those who see an exciting QB leading the redskins on and off the field. If you don't want to get on or help push thats okay, but when it really starts rolling don't be upset if you can't catch up! HTTR!![/quote]

If the Beckwagon keeps rolling, it will be due in no small part to Kyle Shanahan who has gotten a bum rap this past year by a lot of people who think he's only in the NFL because of his last name.

And I'm only half kidding. Maybe a third kidding...if that. I'm not trying to knock Beck at all. I thought he was fine. And I realize he didn't really have to throw deep on Friday, which is why we didn't see that/if he could. And the advantage he has over Grossman is that they're neck and neck in my mind, but Grossman should probably be way ahead considering he has a lot more experience.

All I'm saying I want to see more out of Beck and over a steady period of time. But if he's the starting QB for a winning Redskins team I will be very happy. Whether I was right about a player or not doesn't matter to me so long as the team wins

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

This isn't really a thought about a player or unit that needs improvement, but here' goes:

This team, through two preseason games, does not strike me as talent deficient. It actually strikes me as talent-laden. Perhaps a team that could compete for a playoff spot if it had gone after Chad Henne or Vince Young in the offseason. I think it's lacking in *young* talent, but not talent overall. The Redskins could surprise some folks this year if Kyle keeps calling good games that benefit his quarterbacks and Mike stays the f out of the way.

Over 16 games, there are far too many issues here that will get exposed: the QB, the secondary, the offensive line, Rocky Mac, the defensive scheme, and some young players being forced into premier roles before they are ready (Kerrigan, for example). I think a team like that can start strong, but it's going to be tough to finish strong with that many real issues. But in a perfect would, a 5-3 start and an 8-8 finish isn't totally out of the question, with some early luck (similar to last year).

But I like what I've seen from Tim Hightower, Jabar Gaffney, Donte Stallworth, Terrence Austin, Brandon Banks, Anthony Armstrong, Santana Moss, Roy Helu, Evan Royster, Rex Grossman, John Beck, Fred Davis, Logan Paulsen, Darrel Young, and Kory Lichtensteiger. And you know what, that's a lot of players who know what the f they are doing (and all Shanahan acquisitions, except Davis, Young, Armstrong, and Moss!) to expect this offense to be worse than last year.

The biggest improvement to date however, (and its been just two preseason games so take it as a grain of salt) has been Kyle Shanahan. He's called two great preseason games after being a liability for us last year. Hope it continues.

Well it was Mike Shanahan who decided Young should be a FB, not LB. So I guess give him that

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;825495]This isn't really a thought about a player or unit that needs improvement, but here' goes:

This team, through two preseason games, does not strike me as talent deficient. It actually strikes me as talent-laden. Perhaps a team that could compete for a playoff spot if it had gone after Chad Henne or Vince Young in the offseason. I think it's lacking in *young* talent, but not talent overall. The Redskins could surprise some folks this year if Kyle keeps calling good games that benefit his quarterbacks and Mike stays the f out of the way.

Over 16 games, there are far too many issues here that will get exposed: the QB, the secondary, the offensive line, Rocky Mac, the defensive scheme, and some young players being forced into premier roles before they are ready (Kerrigan, for example). I think a team like that can start strong, but it's going to be tough to finish strong with that many real issues. But in a perfect would, a 5-3 start and an 8-8 finish isn't totally out of the question, with some early luck (similar to last year).

But I like what I've seen from Tim Hightower, Jabar Gaffney, Donte Stallworth, Terrence Austin, Brandon Banks, Anthony Armstrong, Santana Moss, Roy Helu, Evan Royster, Rex Grossman, John Beck, Fred Davis, Logan Paulsen, Darrel Young, and Kory Lichtensteiger. And you know what, that's a lot of players who know what the f they are doing (and all Shanahan acquisitions, except Davis, Young, Armstrong, and Moss!) to expect this offense to be worse than last year.

The biggest improvement to date however, (and its been just two preseason games so take it as a grain of salt) has been Kyle Shanahan. He's called two great preseason games after being a liability for us last year. Hope it continues.[/quote]

You know I pretty much agree with.....young Tripp and I frequently do not. In addition I would like to add I think the coaching staff has these guys believing. They seem like [B]pack your own lunch[/B] kind of work ethic and I REALLY like that.
And as has been stated we have added much youth, talent and improved MANY positions across the board on this team.
It is beyond my ability to understand how the Pundits.....universally as far as I know suggest this is a 4 and..team.....possibly worst in the NFL? I don't get it.
Oh well.....so much crow.....so little time

And I would like to add having so many additions and no OTA's, this team will learn on the fly fast and have an opportunity for dramatic improvement throughout the season.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=Beemnseven;825459]I guess I wouldn't be as concerned about his drops if that wasn't a knock on him coming out of college. If he never had a problem with it before, you could chalk it up to rookie nerves. But he [I]did[/I] have issues with it at Miami. Not saying it can't be corrected. It's just ... concerning.

Especially when you consider that we haven't drafted a wide receiver who's had any long term success with the team since Ricky Sanders.[/quote]

The thing about that is, his really bad drops all came in his first two years at Miami. His last two seasons, he was there most consistent---if not their ONLY consistent--weapon. Once he settled down in the offense and worked on just focusing and concentrating on catching the football, he was more than solid.

So he [i]has[/i] corrected the problem before, and he drops were kind of overplayed, as tends to be the case. But his senior season, he didn't have a game where he caught less than three passes.

That's why I'm not worried now, because I know exactly what the problem is, and I know he fixed it once, and after dropping one on Friday he came right back and made two more catches on almost the same route.

We knew what we were getting when we drafted him. I'm more than willing to guess Keenan, Mike and Kyle knew this might happen, and they know how to solve it.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=GTripp0012;825495]This isn't really a thought about a player or unit that needs improvement, but here' goes:

This team, through two preseason games, does not strike me as talent deficient. It actually strikes me as talent-laden. Perhaps a team that could compete for a playoff spot if it had gone after Chad Henne or Vince Young in the offseason. I think it's lacking in *young* talent, but not talent overall. The Redskins could surprise some folks this year if Kyle keeps calling good games that benefit his quarterbacks and Mike stays the f out of the way.

Over 16 games, there are far too many issues here that will get exposed: the QB, the secondary, the offensive line, Rocky Mac, the defensive scheme, and some young players being forced into premier roles before they are ready (Kerrigan, for example). I think a team like that can start strong, but it's going to be tough to finish strong with that many real issues. But in a perfect would, a 5-3 start and an 8-8 finish isn't totally out of the question, with some early luck (similar to last year).

But I like what I've seen from Tim Hightower, Jabar Gaffney, Donte Stallworth, Terrence Austin, Brandon Banks, Anthony Armstrong, Santana Moss, Roy Helu, Evan Royster, Rex Grossman, John Beck, Fred Davis, Logan Paulsen, Darrel Young, and Kory Lichtensteiger. And you know what, that's a lot of players who know what the f they are doing (and all Shanahan acquisitions, except Davis, Young, Armstrong, and Moss!) to expect this offense to be worse than last year.

The biggest improvement to date however, (and its been just two preseason games so take it as a grain of salt) has been Kyle Shanahan. He's called two great preseason games after being a liability for us last year. Hope it continues.[/quote]

young or henne? have you seen them play? no thanks. henne is a great backup. are we sure it was kyle and not mcnabb and guys like galloway and the lackluster RB stable the held the O back last year? that OL was also pretty awful, and all that figures into calling and executing plays.

btw, i'd argue that kerrigan will start slow and become better when he figures out wtf he's doing 8 games in... there's still the week 12 rookie wall, but i think he'll be alright.

we're missing an ILB and #1 CB right now though, with no hier to fletcher's spot either. rocky wouldn't be out there if we had a better option. still need 2 OL and a QB too ;), but i guess no team is perfect.

I don't think QB is necessarily the bottleneck though. our entire top 22 is fairly middle of the pack.

as far as that game - (in general, not at you GTripp) just dont bandwagon too hard when you realize that the colt's D operates best when the know your offense HAS to scor 14 TDs to keep up with peyton. that is not a dink and dunk grind it out defense.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NLC1054;825364]There's a reason we didn't stretch the field last night.

The Colts play a Tampa 2 defense. The strength of that defense is defending the deep ball. Two deep safeties, one deep linebacker, and rush with the front four. The weakness in the Tampa 2 defense is short and intermediate, particularly over the middle. Which is the part of the field the Redskins attacked over and over again.

You guys don't remember the Colts game last year? The go route with Banks? The deep pass attempt to Armstrong? They're always ready to defend the deep ball. They could've tried it, but the chances of completing it wasn't much. So why take a shot deep when they're giving you the short stuff and leaving the middle of the field open for you, not to mention they're having trouble stopping the run?

I guarantee you, if the Ravens try to crowd the box to stop the short passing game, Beck will have no problem chucking one deep, provided he has the time. The weakness of the Ravens defense is still in their secondary; they bought in Bernard Pollard, but he's like Landry and has issues covering, and they'll likely be starting Jimmy Smith, who was worked on by Dwayne Bowe.

As for red zone production, if Sellers doesn't get accidentally tripped up, it's a touchdown. I think there's like, five teams who made the playoffs last year that had an even worse red zone conversion rate than we did. I saw some good red zone plays called in the regular season at the end of the year, particularly with Fred Davis. You don't want to tip your hat to that too much, though.[/quote]

But we didn't have much of a vertical dimension to the offense against the Steelers, either. If memory serves the longest completion was a catch-and-run and generally shots were not taken down the field. Maybe this problem is an artifact of circumstance. But if we don't take occasional shots, over 16 games safeties will cheat towards the line and the running game will suffer thereby.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

Henne or VY? I would rather give the helm to Grossman after his decent performance last year or take a chance with Beck than chase known failures.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

Tripp and I are probably the only Redskins fans who care about the Dolphins QB battle: Henne vs. Moore

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

I don't see how a Beck bandwagon can be formed yet with him only playing one preseason game against a team that just screws around during the preseason, and will be lucky to make the playoffs this year. If Beck does start against the Ravens and does well, I will raise my eyebrows and gain interest. All he has done thus far in my mind is show me he does have some potential and so far is serviceable. Whether or not he is starting caliber is another matter though. He shows promise, but one preseason game does not a season make.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=SmootSmack;825566]Tripp and I are probably the only Redskins fans who care about the Dolphins QB battle: Henne vs. Moore[/quote]

Naturally the airwaves down here are a battle ground for this. Henne is not a real popular guy and if Moore gives any serious indication that he can deliver the goods week after week...he's hired.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;825595]I don't see how a Beck bandwagon can be formed yet with him only playing one preseason game against a team that just screws around during the preseason, and will be lucky to make the playoffs this year. If Beck does start against the Ravens and does well, I will raise my eyebrows and gain interest. All he has done thus far in my mind is show me he does have some potential and so far is serviceable. Whether or not he is starting caliber is another matter though. He shows promise, but one preseason game does not a season make.[/quote]

I'm sure Beck is waiting with bated breath to see your eyebrows raised and your interest piqued lol but yeah, one preseason game is nowhere near enough to make a call on a qb but for his limited action, he played well and gave us something to look forward to ... that is the extent of the beck bandwagon right now

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

Since we all agree Beck is not a pro-bowl QB, then what does it matter what he does against the ravens they make most QB's look bad. I just want to see a good team effort.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NYCskinfan82;825668]Since we all agree Beck is not a pro-bowl QB, then what does it matter what he does against the ravens they make most QB's look bad. I just want to see a good team effort.[/quote]

Exactly, JB's responsibility is to manage the game and not make mistakes

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NYCskinfan82;825668]Since we all agree Beck is not a pro-bowl QB, then what does it matter what he does against the ravens they make most QB's look bad. I just want to see a good team effort.[/quote]

If the Ravens make QB's look bad, what if he looks good?

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=Lotus;825684]If the Ravens make QB's look bad, what if he looks good?[/quote]

Then it's just another meaningless preseason game.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=Mattyk;825685]Then it's just another meaningless preseason game.[/quote]

Exactly, the game only means something when we look bad.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

im gonna be fairly disappointed if Beck doesnt start agains the Ravens. Ravens gonna bring a really good test.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NYCskinfan82;825696]Exactly, the game only means something when we look bad.[/quote]

Not only that, in games that we play well -- the only things that matter are what the skins did poorly. Yeah, sure beck was 14 for 17 but he didn't throw a TD.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=Chico23231;825697]im gonna be fairly disappointed if Beck doesnt start agains the Ravens. Ravens gonna bring a really good test.[/quote]

He almost has to start.

We know what we have in Grossman, if Shanahan is serious about starting Beck 9/11 he has to give him the nod this week.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

I can't imagine Beck not starting on Thursday

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NYCskinfan82;825668]Since we all agree Beck is not a pro-bowl QB, [/quote]

Speak for yourself when you say "we". I on the other hand have no idea if Beck is going to be Pro-bowler or a Toilet Bowler. We don't have enough evidence to make a distinction either way at this point in time.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;825717]Speak for yourself when you say "we". I on the other hand have no idea if Beck is going to be Pro-bowler or a Toilet Bowler. We don't have enough evidence to make a distinction either way at this point in time.[/quote]

I was trying to make a point but in your case never mind. :argue:

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;825717]Speak for yourself when you say "we". I on the other hand have no idea if Beck is going to be Pro-bowler or a Toilet Bowler. We don't have enough evidence to make a distinction either way at this point in time.[/quote]
Totally....looks good so far..........but more evidence is required.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NYCskinfan82;825719]I was trying to make a point but in your case never mind. :argue:[/quote]


Sorry. :(

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=Lotus;825545]But we didn't have much of a vertical dimension to the offense against the Steelers, either. If memory serves the longest completion was a catch-and-run and generally shots were not taken down the field. Maybe this problem is an artifact of circumstance. But if we don't take occasional shots, over 16 games safeties will cheat towards the line and the running game will suffer thereby.[/quote]

Deep passes are traditionally low percentage passes, so you want to take those shots when the have a higher probability of being completed. The Colts defended the deep pass all night, rushing for and dropping seven into coverage on nearly every down. There was no opportunity to pass deep, so you're likely looking at an incompletion, or even suckier, a turnover. Then we'd all be sitting here talking about Beck's decision making.

I mean, you have to look at Houston's offense as the way we do things, since it's essentially the same offense. Matt Schaub doesn't stretch the field a lot. He's highly efficient in the short to intermediate route, and they now have a strong running game. But if you do cheat and put a safety in the box, Schaub will have no problem throwing one deep-ish to get you to back off.

It's only one preseason game, and I think it's kind of foolish to think our "gameplan" for the Colts game will be our gameplan all the time. I guarantee the Ravens will cheat a safety in the box to stop the run and force Beck to pass. I expect him to at least be able to show that, yes, he can throw the deep ball, to get them to back off.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

Didn't DM lead the league (or very close to it) in completed deep passes last year? How'd that work out for us?

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

I wasn't talking about going deep all the time. Of course deep throws are low percentage. I believe I used the adjective "occasional."

I simply alluded to the fact that taking an occasional shot keeps the defense honest. We haven't really done that yet this year. And such shots can be taken safely, without much fear of a turnover. Many teams do this.

A lack of taking shots is only problematic if it is chronic. We haven't yet had a chance to see if it is chronic. But we haven't taken shots in the first two games - that is all that I was saying.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

Perhaps we just don't have enough of a sample size yet to make any accurate determinations regarding the deep game, or lack of one.

We haven't had many problems moving the ball so far, I'll take that over the all or nothing offense we mostly had last year.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

I'm curious to see Beck play in general (missed Friday), but especially so to see him throw deep. There have been a lot of nfl qbs that are said to not have a "strong arm" but that doesn't mean they can't throw deep, it's just not as easy for them. From what I read about friday's game, he always had someone open so it wasn't an issue that he didn't go deep.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=Lotus;825755]I wasn't talking about going deep all the time. Of course deep throws are low percentage. I believe I used the adjective "occasional."

I simply alluded to the fact that taking an occasional shot keeps the defense honest. We haven't really done that yet this year. And such shots can be taken safely, without much fear of a turnover. Many teams do this.

A lack of taking shots is only problematic if it is chronic. We haven't yet had a chance to see if it is chronic. But we haven't taken shots in the first two games - that is all that I was saying.[/quote]

Rex took two shots versus the Steelers. The first one was on the play action bootleg to his left, where he had Davis open for the first down, but threw it deep to Stallworth in the end zone. It was incomplete. The second shot was on a pump and go to Santana Moss. Moss was double covered by the corner and the safety. Incomplete.

Versus the Colts, there was no point in "taking a shot to keep the defense honest", because the defense more or less bailed on being worried about the run game. In the whole time Beck was in the game, I count them blitzing twice (and on one, Beck hit Moss on a crossing pattern that resulted in a first down). Every other time, they dropped 7 guys into coverage and rushed the passer with 4 guys.

The Colts pretty much sold out the run by being totally committed to defending the deep pass. At that point, "taking a shot to keep the defense honest" is pointless, because the defense is pretty much giving you the run game and the ability to throw it short whenever you want it.

And it's funny, because last year, Kyle was accused of trying to go deep too often. Now he's accused of not trying to go deep enough. (Not by you, just in general).

How quickly things change...

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

I'd rather consistently go 80 yards in 10-15 plays, while moving the chains and controlling the clock, than to go 80 yards in a single play on occasions.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;825765]I'd rather consistently go 80 yards in 10-15 plays, while moving the chains and controlling the clock, than to go 80 yards in a single play on occasions.[/quote]

Bingo.

I thought we sucked last year a controlling the clock. No point in McNabb throwing a 78 yard bomb to anyone if he gets to the red zone and the drive stalls and we have to kick a field goal. Teams kick our butt a lot based on TOP, which also contributed to our defense being torn up all season.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;825765]I'd rather consistently go 80 yards in 10-15 plays, while moving the chains and controlling the clock, than to go 80 yards in a single play on occasions.[/quote]

Yes, that's what I would also call - being in full control of the game.

It's boring to some, but this is what I enjoyed and why I became a fan of the redskins during the reign of Gibbs I. Every season, under the Gibbs I era, they were consistently competitive even when they weren't good enough to compete for the superbowl. And some of the main reasons were the ones that you mentioned above.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

much greater concern than throwing it deep is converting in the red zone. I dont give a sh*t if we throw it long to get down there or dink and dunk. But it doesnt take a genius (even though many of us are on this board) to understand coming away with 7 is better than 3 and in our recent history of kicking fieldgoals, 0. Throw the damn ball in the endzone or a RB run over someone to get in...our redzone issues are nothing new

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

Matt Schaub attempted forty 20+ yard passes last season out of 574 attempts. He attempted 48 20+ yard passes in 2009 out of 583 attempts, which was Kyle Shanahan's last season there.

Andre Johnson's also had a 1500+ yard season in 2009. What this means is that a hell of a lot of the yards he got were from short and intermediate passes.

The Texans had a remarkably efficient passing game, and they didn't go deep that often.

Besides, with the touchback off kickoffs as king this season, teams will have to be able to move the chains or suffer in the field position battle.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

We don't need to go deep we have guys peeling off 50 yard runs.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

who cares if he can throw 60 yards? He's accurate and makes good decisions

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=NLC1054;825525]The thing about that is, his really bad drops all came in his first two years at Miami. His last two seasons, he was there most consistent---if not their ONLY consistent--weapon. Once he settled down in the offense and worked on just focusing and concentrating on catching the football, he was more than solid.

So he [i]has[/i] corrected the problem before, and he drops were kind of overplayed, as tends to be the case. But his senior season, he didn't have a game where he caught less than three passes.

That's why I'm not worried now, because I know exactly what the problem is, and I know he fixed it once, and after dropping one on Friday he came right back and made two more catches on almost the same route.

We knew what we were getting when we drafted him. I'm more than willing to guess Keenan, Mike and Kyle knew this might happen, and they know how to solve it.[/quote]

If you say so ... I just know I personally spoke to Dan Schonka (Ourlads, on a radio call-in show) and he said the same thing -- the reason Hankerson fell to the third round was his issue with drops. Don't get me wrong, I'm rooting for the guy.

But we already had one wide receiver here with the nickname "50/50". He didn't last too long.

Re: Smoot Lays The Smack Down (Redskins vs. Colts)
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;825777]Matt Schaub attempted forty 20+ yard passes last season out of 574 attempts. He attempted 48 20+ yard passes in 2009 out of 583 attempts, which was Kyle Shanahan's last season there.

Andre Johnson's also had a 1500+ yard season in 2009. What this means is that a hell of a lot of the yards he got were from short and intermediate passes.

The Texans had a remarkably efficient passing game, and they didn't go deep that often.

Besides, with the touchback off kickoffs as king this season, teams will have to be able to move the chains or suffer in the field position battle.[/quote]

So in 2009 Schaub averaged 3 deep balls a game and 2.5 deep balls a game last year.

We've thrown maybe 2 deep balls in 2 games (I say "maybe" because the Stallworth throw was right about 20 yards and thus not that deep). Even if we count the Stallworth throw, we thus average 1 deep ball per game.

1 per game vs. 2.5 or 3 per game. There's a difference here.

If Houston's offense is the standard - which is debatable - then we have a lesser vertical element in our offense so far. That was my point.

As I said above, things may change with time.