Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=Stacks42;603320]Zorn mentioned on Comcast Sportsnet yesterday that he bascially only has DT on the field to run picks againt defenders, and he wants to get DT more involved.[/quote]

If true, this is the most ridiculous thing I've heard today.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

See Stacks, if true, that has to be painfully obvious to the opposition. They should know what is up every time DT is on the field. I guess it makes more sense why our offense sucks.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;603265]Honestly, I'm getting a little concerned that ARE hasn't shown up recently. Those slants were NASTY against the Giants.[/quote]The problem with Randle El the last two weeks is playing time.

According to [URL="http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/redskins/2009/oct/06/playing-time-vs-bucs/"]Ryan O'Halloran of the Times[/URL], Mike Sellers played 34 snaps Sunday. He played at least that many if not more against Detroit.

The result: 22 snaps for Randle El. The guy is just not on the field enough.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=Stacks42;603320]Zorn mentioned on Comcast Sportsnet yesterday that he bascially only has DT on the field to run picks againt defenders, and he wants to get DT more involved.[/quote]

Yeah he basically said Thomas has been put on the field that much, and when he is it's often for the purposes of getting other receivers open. Not sure what that means. Does he think DT will draw double teams?

Wants to continue to feed Kelly, wants to see him get more separation.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=Mattyk72;603256]It's obvious they have some plays for Kelly, they've tried to hit him deep a few times per game. Yeah it would be nice to see them dialing something up for Thomas deep.[/quote]


Maybe i'm offbase here but i watched the game last night. GB had everyone involved in the offense and Gruden did a good job of explaining the plays. McCarthy (and Childress) called some great plays to get guys open. It doesn't look like rocket science here. You're right Zorn has got to draw up some plays to get EVERYONE involved. If not SM and Cooley are getting doubled more often than not.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

I'm not impressed with these "so-called" WRs we drafted. It would have made more sense to keep Keenan and draft O-line men. You know I keep hearing everyone talking all this trash about last year's draft and I'm still pissed. Phil Loadholt did good last night [U][B]STARTING [/B][/U]for Minn. We could really use another center like Alex Mack. Perhaps no one else notices that Casey is starting to get a lot more penalties? Why we passed on Duke is beyond me? So what if he had a bad game. So we just throw out the whole season that got him to a bowl game because he has a bad game? He would've been a steal and who do we get? eff Vinny.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;603349]I'm not impressed with these "so-called" WRs we drafted. It would have made more sense to keep Keenan and draft O-line men. You know I keep hearing everyone talking all this trash about last year's draft and I'm still pissed. Phil Loadholt did good last night [U][B]STARTING [/B][/U]for Minn. We could really use another center like Alex Mack. Perhaps no one else notices that Casey is starting to get a lot more penalties? Why we passed on Duke is beyond me? So what if he had a bad game. So we just throw out the whole season that got him to a bowl game because he has a bad game? He would've been a steal and who do we get? eff Vinny.[/quote]Even if we had gotten him, we'd still be just as reliant on the five current guys to perform. Depth is unconditionally a good thing for the long run, but our situation wouldn't have been any better.

And if it cost us a key special teams player, then we'd be worse off. Again, just because you draft LBs, Safeties, Backs, and Recievers with second day selections doesn't mean you'll improve your special teams necessarily, but that is how you do it.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=GTripp0012;603373]Even if we had gotten him, we'd still be just as reliant on the five current guys to perform. Depth is unconditionally a good thing for the long run, but our situation wouldn't have been any better.

And if it cost us a key special teams player, then we'd be worse off. Again, just because you draft LBs, Safeties, Backs, and Recievers with second day selections doesn't mean you'll improve your special teams necessarily, but that is how you do it.[/quote]

Perhaps? I can't see the future. Time will tell as the season goes on. Which him are you talking about, Mack, Loadholt, or Robinson?

ST is great but CP, Rock, and Betts are running out of steam. The O line is the problem.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;603379]Perhaps? I can't see the future. Time will tell as the season goes on. Which him are you talking about, Mack, Loadholt, or Robinson?

ST is great but CP, Rock, and Betts are running out of steam. The O line is the problem.[/quote]Not the first two round guys. Particularly Robinson.

The O-Line is a problem, but it's a problem because Thomas, who was the key cog on the interior, is injured again. It's not a problem because Rinehart/Heyer can't play. Dockery-Rabach-Rinehart on the interior OL scares no one, but the hope is that by the end of the year, Rinehart is the best of the three.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

why doesn't Zorn send DT & MK in motion to get more separation?

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=Redskin Warrior;603385]why doesn't Zorn send DT & MK in motion to get more separation?[/quote]The answer is simple: they both play the "X" position in the offense. Well, not exclusively. But the 'X' can't go in motion legally.

Moss loses a lot of effectiveness if you line him up on the line, which they will sometimes, if only to send Cooley in motion for a specific play. But then Moss usually isn't a big part of the play.

It's tough for a guy like Kelly to get separation, sometimes you just have to hope for a size mismatch.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

I think I've seen Kelly in motion

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=SmootSmack;603390]I think I've seen Kelly in motion[/quote]Yeah. Zorn will go out of his way to design plays to get certain players involved, and one of the most useful film cues I have is when players go in motion, it's usually related to the play that will actually be called.

Especially if Zorn is trying to create a mismatch, which happens a lot. Problem is, the only mismatch Kelly and Thomas provide is if they are going up against Muggsy Bogges. Kelly seems to excel against zone coverages, however. No stats on that, just anecdotal evidence.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=GTripp0012;603381]Not the first two round guys. Particularly Robinson.

The O-Line is a problem, but it's a problem because Thomas, who was the key cog on the interior, is injured again. It's not a problem because Rinehart/Heyer can't play. Dockery-Rabach-Rinehart on the interior OL scares no one, but the hope is that by the end of the year, Rinehart is the best of the three.[/quote]

I don't buy that at all. We could've gotten Mack in the first round either with the pick or by trading down. Oher was there too. We might've not had the ability to pick up Loadholt, but Duke was right there.

There is no way in my mind that this:

Samuels, Dock, Rabback, Mack, Loadholt
Montgomery, Rinehart, Batiste, Robinson

Sounds worst than this:

Samuels, Dock, Rabback, Thomas, Heyer
Williams, Montgomery, Rinehart, Batiste

Thomas is already gone for the season if not for good.

Later in the season? No way! The time to play is now.

Re: looking at the numbers at the 25% mark of the season
 

[quote=hail_2_da_skins;603314]Have you watched the replays with an isolation on the receivers? Randle-El, Kelly and Thomas are not getting separation. Moss and Cooley are the only guys getting open.[/quote]

As long as they're in single coverage, they're plenty open. There's a reason we were last in the league in pass interference calls last year and don't have any this year. If a guy is in single coverage, throw him the ball.