Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[B]Jim Zorn[/B] – This offense is boring, predictable, unproductive, and ineffective. We couldn’t pass or run the ball effectively. Don’t give me “49ers are surging” excuse. We couldn’t pass or run the ball effectively against the Bengals. Don’t give me the “system is fine but the execution is not” excuse. As a coach, you are responsible for ensuring that the players execute. Don’t give me the “we lack talent” excuse. This team had enough talent on offense to get the job done for 8 weeks and, suddenly, collapsed. As Ed Reed said, the offense is predictable. It sounds like teams got a bead on our offense after watching film and we, or rather you, have not adapted. I’ll give you another season since you’re a rookie, but you’re severely testing my faith.

[B]The Offensive Line[/B] – The offensive line couldn’t maintain a pocket for more than 2.5 seconds or open running lanes. In short, this group was and is awful.

[B]Greg Blache[/B] – Once again, your defense collapsed when we needed it most (i.e., the 4th quarter).

[B]The Defensive Line[/B] – They didn’t pressure the quarterback or clog running lanes. Nuff said.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

It's kinda funny, on one hand you say the offense is boring and predictable and let's not blame the execution, and then with your 2nd rant you blast the OL for not being able to open running lanes and pass protect.

The offense wasn't boring and predictable in the first half of the season when the OL was firing on all cylinders. Scoring was an issue all year I know, but early on it seemed like we were always just a play or two away from getting it figured out. Then the OL went to hell and the entire offense did as well. If we want to know what happened to the offense this year look no further than the big uglies up front.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=Mattyk72;516301]It's kinda funny, on one hand you say the offense is boring and predictable and let's not blame the execution, and then with your 2nd rant you blast the OL for not being able to open running lanes and pass protect.

The offense wasn't boring and predictable in the first half of the season when the OL was firing on all cylinders. Scoring was an issue all year I know, but early on it seemed like we were always just a play or two away from getting it figured out. Then the OL went to hell and the entire offense did as well. [B]If we want to know what happened to the offense this year look no further than the big uglies up[/B] [B]front[/B].[/quote]

Overall, yes, I totally agree with that statement. But Moss' three BAD drops and Portis' fumble are piss poor execution. Portis will put one on the ground every once and a while, but that was really bad timing yesterday. And those drops by Santana were baffling. All three would have been first downs.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

Moss always seems to be good for some key drops here and there. That's just who he is.

Yeah Portis fumbling yesterday couldn't have come at worse time, but I'm wondering why we're not using Betts more. Portis was clearly run into the ground this year, again. Why can't we use a true committee approach for once?

Betts had 61 carries ALL YEAR, while Portis was well over 300 again for the 4th time in 5 seasons in Washington. That just doesn't make much sense to me.

Next year we need Betts in there more, and if he's not a guy that Zorn trusts then get someone in here that he does. Portis had nothing left these last few weeks.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

I didn't see the game, but 2-minute defense??? I was at the Rams game when our offense finally clicked only to have the D give up the game at the last minute, sounds like the same thing happened here.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=Mattyk72;516315]Moss always seems to be good for some key drops here and there. That's just who he is.

Yeah Portis fumbling yesterday couldn't have come at worse time,[B] but I'm wondering why we're not using Betts more.[/B] Portis was clearly run into the ground this year, again. Why can't we use a true committee approach for once?

Betts had 61 carries ALL YEAR, while Portis was well over 300 again for the 4th time in 5 seasons in Washington. That just doesn't make much sense to me.

Next year we need Betts in there more, and if he's not a guy that Zorn trusts then get someone in here that he does. Portis had nothing left these last few weeks.[/quote]

I've been wondering that for awhile now. Is it about keeping Portis happy or winning games? I'm really not sure what's going on here.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=Mattyk72;516315]Moss always seems to be good for some key drops here and there. That's just who he is.

Yeah Portis fumbling yesterday couldn't have come at worse time, but I'm wondering why we're not using Betts more. Portis was clearly run into the ground this year, again. Why can't we use a true committee approach for once?

Betts had 61 carries ALL YEAR, while Portis was well over 300 again for the 4th time in 5 seasons in Washington. That just doesn't make much sense to me.

Next year we need Betts in there more, and if he's not a guy that Zorn trusts then get someone in here that he does. Portis had nothing left these last few weeks.[/quote]

Wow, I didn't know he only had 61 carries for the season. That's not good. I'm not sure why we're intent on shortening Portis' career by pounding him constantly (especially right after giving him $20M guaranteed) when we have a very good backup who has proven he can play at a high level.

Even if we just gave 3-5 of Portis' carries per game to Betts, that would average out to a little over 60 less carries in a season for Portis. Pretty significant as far as keeping him fresher for the duration.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

I don't agree that the O-Line is to blame for all our offensive woes. I know that the pass protection wasn't stellar (to say the least) this year but there many, many times this year I watched Cambell check the ball down for little to no gain when he was not being pressured at all.

I know this is the west coast offense and it is predicated on quick passes and yards after the catch but I seriously believe that J.C. was not doing his part to allow his receivers time to get open down field.

As for Betts, he has been ineffective for 2 seasons now and I think it is time we draft some talent at the RB position. Portis is taking a pounding and who knows how long he will hold up. I have always liked Betts and Cartwright as Redskins but it is obvious that neither is the heir apparent.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

Although Betts wasn't exactly bad in relief of Portis, it seems to be hard to find a situation where a team that isn't that great at running, like us in the 2nd half, can justify handing Betts the ball. He's too close to Portis. We don't have designed plays for Betts, because he's really just Portis lite. So a running play with Betts must seem like swallowing the bullet to Jim Zorn. We'll get Betts in the game a lot, but we're going to throw.

I'm not sure if that's the right call or not to change the run/pass ratio with Betts in, but it's certainly something we do.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=81forHOF;516337][B]I don't agree that the O-Line is to blame for all our offensive woes.[/B] I know that the pass protection wasn't stellar (to say the least) this year but there many, many times this year I watched Cambell check the ball down for little to no gain when he was not being pressured at all.

I know this is the west coast offense and it is predicated on quick passes and yards after the catch but I seriously believe that J.C. was not doing his part to allow his receivers time to get open down field.

As for Betts, he has been ineffective for 2 seasons now and I think it is time we draft some talent at the RB position. Portis is taking a pounding and who knows how long he will hold up. I have always liked Betts and Cartwright as Redskins but it is obvious that neither is the heir apparent.[/quote]

No, the OL is not totally to blame, but it's a big part. As they say it all starts up front and when you can't open holes for the running game and you can't pass protect, it's tough to get anything going on a consistent basis.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=GTripp0012;516338]Although Betts wasn't exactly bad in relief of Portis, it seems to be hard to find a situation where a team that isn't that great at running, like us in the 2nd half, can justify handing Betts the ball. He's too close to Portis. We don't have designed plays for Betts, because he's really just Portis lite. So a running play with Betts must seem like swallowing the bullet to Jim Zorn. We'll get Betts in the game a lot, but we're going to throw.

I'm not sure if that's the right call or not to change the run/pass ratio with Betts in, but it's certainly something we do.[/quote]

My gripe is with not giving Betts the ball more early on in the year to keep Portis fresh for later on. I'd like to see a situation where Portis gets 15-20 carries and another guy gets a solid 10-15 per game.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=Mattyk72;516343]My gripe is with not giving Betts the ball more early on in the year to keep Portis fresh for later on. I'd like to see a situation where Portis gets 15-20 carries and another guy gets a solid 10-15 per game.[/quote]

Exactly. On a per season basis, we've got to have long-term thinking, if that makes any sense. Just like you said, because Portis is fresh early on doesn't mean we should beat him into the dirt. KEEP him fresh. We need a complimentary RB capable of around 10 carries a game right from the get go. I don't know if that's Betts or not.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=GTripp0012;516338]Although Betts wasn't exactly bad in relief of Portis, it seems to be hard to find a situation where a team that isn't that great at running, like us in the 2nd half, can justify handing Betts the ball. He's too close to Portis. We don't have designed plays for Betts, because he's really just Portis lite. So a running play with Betts must seem like swallowing the bullet to Jim Zorn. We'll get Betts in the game a lot, but we're going to throw.

I'm not sure if that's the right call or not to change the run/pass ratio with Betts in, but it's certainly something we do.[/quote]

Agreed. We need a lightning quick guy like Sproles or Norwood to contrast Portis. Someone like Joe Washington! Betts needs 20 carries a game to be effective.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=Warren85Ellard;516348]Agreed. We need a lightning quick guy like Sproles or Norwood to contrast Portis. Someone like Joe Washington! Betts needs 20 carries a game to be effective.[/quote]

I believe Sproles is a FA after this year... and he's a sick return man too. I'd be surprised if SD let him get away, but I would love to have him. Dude is the flash.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

You guys can yell at me all you want, but I'd love to have a Darren Sproles in the backfield to compliment Portis. Guy is fast as hell and would be a nice change of pace from Portis, who has a more bruising style.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=GMScud;516355]I believe Sproles is a FA after this year... and he's a sick return man too. I'd be surprised if SD let him get away, but I would love to have him. Dude is the flash.[/quote]


We seem to be on the same page all the time, man.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=SeasonTicketHolder;516357]We seem to be on the same page all the time, man.[/quote]

It's the Jesuit education. ;)

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=Mattyk72;516343]My gripe is with not giving Betts the ball more early on in the year to keep Portis fresh for later on. I'd like to see a situation where Portis gets 15-20 carries and another guy gets a solid 10-15 per game.[/quote]I think it's just a product of the games being on the line all the time.

But ultimately, I agree with you. If we're going to struggle in the first quarter of every game anyway, might as well go three and out with Betts carrying the ball, and gradually move to Portis as the plays become more and more decisive.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=Mattyk72;516342]No, the OL is not totally to blame, but it's a big part. As they say it all starts up front and when you can't open holes for the running game and you can't pass protect, it's tough to get anything going on a consistent basis.[/quote]
You are correct. We have multiple problems, but they have to be fixed on a worst first basis..............and the O-line is our worst problem. Additionally, it is such a limiting factor, it is not possible to fairly evaluate JC, Zorn, etc until that is fixed.
Look at Mark Rypien's performance when the Hog's were in their prime and.......not. That may be the kind of protection required for JC to have success.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=SeasonTicketHolder;516356]You guys can yell at me all you want, but I'd love to have a Darren Sproles in the backfield to compliment Portis. Guy is fast as hell and would be a nice change of pace from Portis, who has a more bruising style.[/quote]

I'm right there with you. I personally have never been a Betts fan and don't really care that he didn't get more touches. He had one decent season, in a contract year, when he was the guy. Other than that, he's failed to impress me since he's been a Redskin.

I would love Sproles as a complimentary/3rd down back and KR/PR. We also should draft a hybrid back like Brian Leonard a few years back from Rutgers who can play some HB and also have the power to be a short yardage threat.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=Hog1;516364]You are correct. We have multiple problems, but they have to be fixed on a worst first basis..............and the O-line is our worst problem. Additionally, it is such a limiting factor, it is not possible to fairly evaluate JC, Zorn, etc until that is fixed.
Look at Mark Rypien's performance when the Hog's were in their prime and.......not. That may be the kind of protection required for JC to have success.[/quote]

I agree. I would also add that better O-line play could have saved a few games for Washington (St. Louis, Cincy, SF, Dallas). Dominant O-line play garnered wins at Dallas and Philly early on. Conversely, it lost games in which Campbell was running for his life and wasn't able to find the open man. Some of that is Campbells fault but again, with solid O-line play, he did beat Dallas and Philly on the road. It's been said a thousand times on this site, the game is won and lost in the trenches! Look at our Super Bowl teams of the past. They all had dominant offensive and defensive lines. That's part of the reason Gibbs won 3 Superbowls with 3 different QBs.

HAIL!!

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

extremely basic schemes offense and defense

we're not enough of a powerhouse that you can do what you want, no matter what

it hasn't been that type of NFL in years

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=GTripp0012;516362][B]I think it's just a product of the games being[/B] [B]on the line all the time.[/B]

But ultimately, I agree with you. If we're going to struggle in the first quarter of every game anyway, might as well go three and out with Betts carrying the ball, and gradually move to Portis as the plays become more and more decisive.[/quote]
this, and Betts consistantly putting the ball down. cant have it in close games( i.e. the 49er game)

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=GMScud;516355]I believe Sproles is a FA after this year... and he's a sick return man too. I'd be surprised if SD let him get away, but I would love to have him. Dude is the flash.[/quote]

Thanks for bringing up Sproles. I was afraid of getting blasted by everyone on the site. I've wanted Darren for a couple of years now. He's the best screen pass runner in the NFL. Which is perfect for the west coast offense.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=SOUL-SKINS;516464]Thanks for bringing up Sproles. [B]I was afraid of getting blasted by everyone on the site.[/B] I've wanted Darren for a couple of years now. He's the best screen pass runner in the NFL. Which is perfect for the west coast offense.[/quote]

Don't ever worry about that. If you feel like you have a legitimate idea that you can convey intelligently (especially about addressing a need with a legit player in this case), don't be a afraid. This site wouldn't exist without opinions and speculation. Someone is always going to disagree. If they didn't this place would be pretty boring.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=Warren85Ellard;516348]Agreed. We need a lightning quick guy like Sproles or Norwood to contrast Portis. Someone like Joe Washington! Betts needs 20 carries a game to be effective.[/quote]

I think you mean the Jets' Leon Washington. And you're right. He is an explosive back. We've got 3 backs with prett similar running styles. Portis USED to be the explosive back who could break one at any time.

I really wanted to replace Betts last year with Steve Slaton or any of the many talented RBs in last year's draft. There were lots of good backs available in the middle rounds. This year's draft, not so much. Several of you have brought it up, but Portis isn't getting any younger, and he's got a lot of mileage, not to mention he normally misses some games due to injury. He needs an heir apparent.

I think Darren Sproles would be the ideal guy for the Skins, but I don't think the Chargers will let him get away. They've already lost one great back to free agency, and they have a smart front office who understands LT can't shoulder the load himself and won't always be carrying the rock for them as effectively as he has.

Steven Jackson, Brandon Jacobs, and Marion Barber are going to be garnering all the attention and high dollar contracts. Maybe, the Skins can pry away Sproles. If not, I wonder if the Giants' Derrick Ward would fit in nicely. He's the speedy alternative to BJ in NY. And he's been very productive at times.

The Skins do definitely need to bolster the RB corp somehow though.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=Mattyk72;516301]It's kinda funny, on one hand you say the offense is boring and predictable and let's not blame the execution, and then with your 2nd rant you blast the OL for not being able to open running lanes and pass protect.[/quote]

I don't lay all of the blame for struggles on offense at the feet of a single person or a single unit. The offensive line is awful but the coaches deserve some blame for failing to get them to perform and failing to do things to mask those deficiencies. How about moving the pocket once in a while? How about instructing Jason to play out of the shotgun more? How about more keeping more guys in to block instead of running 4 guys out into routes?

Moreover, I'm not the only person saying that the offense is predictable. JLC "reported" that defenders for other teams (e.g., Ed Reed) think the offense is predictable.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

Thanks for covering while I was away SGG

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

I don't think any Skins' fan should get too hyped about Sproles. First, no way does SD let him go. LT seems to be breaking down and SD probably should have traded him and kept Turner: they won't make a similar mistake w/ another dynamite backfield threat.

Secondly, I'd venture to say Sproles wouldn't have much success here. I say that because our run-blocking, even at it's best, is nothing compared to SD. Our old fogies can push off the line a few yards when they're very fresh but rarely make blocks down field, which is why CP doesn't break the big ones anymore. Sure he can grit 7 or 8 yards w/ defenders battering him but there is a certain number of yards from the LOS where it's just CP facing several defenders and our lineman are nowhere in sight. At no time was this more evident than in SF, when I repeatedly saw the o-line give up on blocks/plays while CP was still on his feet. Heyer especially has a knack for giving up on plays, while Rabach/Thomas just don't seem to have what it takes to block DTs or really aggressive LBs. Not to get completely off subject but our line regressed so much this season to the point of looking lazy, slow and very incompetent IMHO. This is a very sad group at this point. Anyway, the whole point is Sproles would struggle mightily to break anything big w/ our line.

To the bigger debate of how to get more dynamic in our backfield, i just see that another/different RB is the answer. Again, speedsters and scat-backs just won't have success until we almost completely gut the line. Have we forgotten that CP was the premier scat-back when we traded for him? To his extreme credit he's become a GD bruiser, but really it's what he had to do (to have success as a Skin). If anything, we should go the opposite direction of Sproles (until the line is completely recycled) and grab a great big bruiser. Honestly I'd hoped Betts would become this guy more each year, adding more bulk and strength to pound defenses whenever CP is out of the game. Betts is not that player. He's a Portis lite as someone said.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

RB may be something we draft this year, especially if we can trade Betts somehow and grab another draft pick. Anyway, if the FO is smart it will look for a Brandon Jacobs type, not a Sproles type... unless of course we make massive changes to the o-line (like replace Kendell, Rabach and obviously Jansen/Heyer at RT). As i said in another thread i just don't see o-line getting the focus it needs this year so... i'm hoping for a new bruiser in the backfield that "replaces" Ladell.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=The Goat;517596]RB may be something we draft this year, especially if we can trade Betts somehow and grab another draft pick. Anyway, if the FO is smart it will look for a Brandon Jacobs type, not a Sproles type... unless of course we make massive changes to the o-line (like replace Kendell, Rabach and obviously Jansen/Heyer at RT). As i said in another thread i just don't see o-line getting the focus it needs this year so... i'm hoping for a new bruiser in the backfield that "replaces" Ladell.[/quote]

One of my biggest gripes with the Skins is that we don't use the players
we have on our roster.

Betts, Cartwright and Sellars have all proved that they can run and catch.
Instead of drafting another RB why don't we use the backs we have more?

We should give them enough opportunities to show their skills and help the team win.

Meanwhile it seems like every other team in the league is spreading the carries to more then one back.

Cowboys-Barber,Jones, Choice
Giants-Jacobs, Ward, Bradshaw
Eagles- a team that runs the ball as an afterthought gave their #2 runningback more work then ours- Westbrook, Buckhalter
Vikings- Peterson, Taylor
Falcons- Turner, Norwood
Seahawks- Jones, Morris
Panthers- Williams, Stewart
etc...etc...etc...

i don't think we need to draft running back
unless we somehow trade back from the 13th pick and still manage to get Knowshon Moreno

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

If the coaches tried to limit Portis to 15-20 carries a game and gave 10-15 carries to someone else, how long would it be before Portis was griping to the press about not being used correctly?

I'll go with Game 3...

Portis has been allowed to do as he pleases here in DC for too long to put him on a leash now. Remember in training camp he said that he wasn't going to play in the exhibition games and Zorn said that yes he was. That caused a stir in the summer and Portis played a few snaps just so the coach could look like he was in control there.

Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down: WAS @ SF
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;517840]If the coaches tried to limit Portis to 15-20 carries a game and gave 10-15 carries to someone else, how long would it be before Portis was griping to the press about not being used correctly?

I'll go with Game 3...

Portis has been allowed to do as he pleases here in DC for too long to put him on a leash now. Remember in training camp he said that he wasn't going to play in the exhibition games and Zorn said that yes he was. That caused a stir in the summer and Portis played a few snaps just so the coach could look like he was in control there.[/quote]

Good point. I also remember the talks of having both CP and Betts at the field at the same time. I don't think that ever happened. They do need to figure out something, otherwise CP is going to break down if he doesn't get spelled more often.