Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Receivers

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-29-2005, 09:14 PM   #1
The Starter
 
GoSkins!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Yorktown, Va
Age: 45
Posts: 1,587
Receivers

In the NFC East there are a lot of big physical receviers on all the other team but ours. I keep thinking that we really need to fill that void... but then I started wondering about the other side of the ball. I was reading a Redskins article about us drafting Rogers and how we needed him to defend at corner with all the other big receivers on the other teams. So, if the Giants, Cowboys, and Eagles have also stacked their defenses to defend that, would it make sense to do what we are doing??? That is, stack up speed at receiver to blast past the slower more physical guys?

I know that we probably dont have the blazing speed needed to really accomplish this, but is it even a valid way of thinking?
__________________
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. A. Einstien
GoSkins! is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 04-29-2005, 10:38 PM   #2
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 35
Posts: 8,314
Re: Receivers

The need for speed at receiver isn't so much about taking advantage of the defensive backs, it's really about creating another dimension of the offense to threaten a team's defense with. Mainly, Gibbs wants to keep safeties back to defend the potential double-post patterns, which opens up lanes for his running game.

We had a problem last year because nobody respected our receivers deep speed, and they stacked the line on Portis. If we're going to get 4.5 yards a carry, we need to keep the safeties honest.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 11:05 PM   #3
Inactive
 
KLHJ2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: DC Metro Area
Age: 36
Posts: 5,829
Re: Receivers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10
The need for speed at receiver isn't so much about taking advantage of the defensive backs, it's really about creating another dimension of the offense to threaten a team's defense with. Mainly, Gibbs wants to keep safeties back to defend the potential double-post patterns, which opens up lanes for his running game.

We had a problem last year because nobody respected our receivers deep speed, and they stacked the line on Portis. If we're going to get 4.5 yards a carry, we need to keep the safeties honest.
Get out of my mind. I am in 100% agreeance with what you just said. I also noticed that the skins were being blitzed an awfull lot last season. I believe that to aleviate this they need to implement more of the quick slants to accomplish two things. Get rid of the ball quickly with the potential of big yardage after the catch, and force the LB's and safeties to play further off of the ball. This will also help open up the running game.
KLHJ2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 11:26 PM   #4
The Starter
 
jamf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Diego Ca
Posts: 2,365
Re: Receivers

i agree with pretty much every thing.
But
we run into the same problem gibbs'sessesssss scheme ran into last year; you cant stretch the field sending two WR's and a H-Back downfield. when the redskins put 3 wr's and sent portis in a route, the line folded and the quarterback got killed(or brunell couragously tossed the ball to the waterboy)

here is what is probably going to happen; teams will put 3 DB's on our 3 WR's. then they will use 1 or 2 LB's on our HBack and/or TE. the remaining guys go after the QB. if they can get pressure with those 5 guys, we are screwed(in the same position as last season). but if we can block those guys, any qb in the league will be able to pick the defence apart.

if bugal can create new blocking schemes for todays defences, we should have an exciting season.
jamf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 11:36 PM   #5
Inactive
 
KLHJ2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: DC Metro Area
Age: 36
Posts: 5,829
Re: Receivers

I think that Joe realizes this. Now what should happen the beginning of next season is pelt our opponents through the air enough so that their defense's stay honest. Once they respect our passing game we move to a more balanced attack. Playing ball and clock control with the run and short to medium passing game and taking the long shot from time to time. It will keep the skins from being one or two dimensional.
KLHJ2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2005, 11:49 PM   #6
Playmaker
 
skinsfanthru&thru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 34
Posts: 3,720
Re: Receivers

and of course the o-line will be getting a huge boost by having Jansen back this year.
I hadn't thought about the matchups with the more physical dbs, but I thought most of the dbs in the division were kinda on the smallish side. I don't know all the stats of the startings cbs in the division and right now I'm just feeling too lazy to look for them, lol.

I love the option the speed wrs give the team though especially on slants and stop and go's. and one of the smartest things I've heard about in relation to tweaks Gibbs is making to the offense is implementing the shotgun on passing downs which if I remember correctly, Ramsey used quite a bit in college as well as the added bonus of more effective draws, delays, screens, and even shovel passes.
skinsfanthru&thru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2005, 12:58 AM   #7
Mr. Brightside
 
Big C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Fairfax, Virginia
Age: 28
Posts: 4,439
Re: Receivers

goddab im drunk dirhg tnow cant aeven deread the damn dpost. wee do have big as riadevers in thi s dicision tho
__________________
"I don't care what nobody say I'm a be me, stay hood stay real, cause I'm out here grindin'" -Joe Gibbs
Big C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2005, 01:06 AM   #8
Playmaker
 
skinsfanthru&thru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 34
Posts: 3,720
Re: Receivers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big C
goddab im drunk dirhg tnow cant aeven deread the damn dpost. wee do have big as riadevers in thi s dicision tho
and this boys and girls is what u get when u mix alcohol and posting
skinsfanthru&thru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2005, 09:17 AM   #9
Karma Chameleon (I come and go)
 
jdlea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Annapolis, MD
Age: 30
Posts: 3,087
Re: Receivers

I don't know that I agree 100%. Now it looks like Gardner will stay and we have McCants. I think they need to act as the #3 or #2 receivers. We need someone who we know can get 10 yards when we need exactly 10.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack
Albert Connell is perhaps the worst Redskin I ever had the misfortune of meeting. He's the kind of guy that makes media people covering their favorite team growing up no longer like that team
jdlea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2005, 10:10 AM   #10
Playmaker
 
Defensewins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,917
Re: Receivers

Our current receivers will do just fine. We American sports fans must be really bored, because we get way too caught with numbers and stats. 'This WR is 6' 4" so he will be better than the 5' 9" WR.'
That is all a bunch a of crap. I don't care if NFC east teams have big recievers, the 3x champion New England Patriots have a bunch of Smurf receivers and they seem to be doing ok. The superbowl MVP is a WR (Deion Branch) that is 5' 9" with his cleats on. The Eagles could not cover him. Both tall and short WR have their advantages and disadvantages, the good one's just know how to better use the strengths.
I really think the main reason(s) our offense suffered last year was due to our QB play and new offensive system. Not because our WR were so terrible.
Defensewins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2005, 10:22 AM   #11
Special Teams
 
RedskinsJunkie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Connecticut
Age: 38
Posts: 128
Re: Receivers

Why does everyone use New England as an example??? They build their team diffrently, they act differently, their O and D schemes are completely different, and they have a quarterback that distributes the ball to everyone. We max protect on almost every play and have 2 people running in routes. If you only have 2 patterns to cover it doesn't matter who your WR are.
BUT
I think that you have to have a balance. IN Gibbs O he loves a balanced attack. He like to hit a quick slant and a bubble screen, use his backs out of the back field and run the ball like crazy. AND hit the big one with play action with a burner on the outside. Yes New England has Smurf receivers, but they play completely different. That is why no one that plays fantasy Football drafts New England receivers... 12 different people catch a pass in that style O. When you have one receiver catching 90+ it is just not the same kind of offense and you really can not compare it.

That being said I do think Joe will turn the offense around this year and it will be better (couldn't get worse than last year).
__________________
Jimoh--- OH NO!
RedskinsJunkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2005, 11:16 AM   #12
Playmaker
 
Defensewins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 2,917
Re: Receivers

New England's spreading the ball around to many receivers has more to do with Tom Brady's great ability to read defenses than their offensive system. Brady reads the defense and throws to the open man. Another great QB (Joe Montana) did the same thing. New England is not the only team to run the Parcells/Bellicheck system, it is basically a multi-formation system derived from the west coast system/pro system. All teams steal or borrow from each other. Remember in the early 80's all teams started running the counter-trey after we debuted it with great success. Once a team invents a new play the very next week most teams are trying it.

In regards to the Redskins in max protection, it was not all the time. They changed it up some depending on the situation. I think Gibbs will be mixing up even more this year. I think the max-protection was more out need than desire, our QB's were killed the years befroe Gibbs arrived.
Defensewins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2005, 12:08 PM   #13
Impact Rookie
 
memphisskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Nashville, TN
Age: 42
Posts: 960
Re: Receivers

I think our offensive line is the key. We've got solid guys at wideout, I'm going to say it again Taylor Jacobs IMO is going to have a breakout year, and if our line can give Ramsey some protection then we can see more of the offense. If we can keep the safeties back and get more push out of our line, which I agree should happen with the return of Jansen, then we should get more big plays out of Portis.
memphisskin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2005, 01:13 PM   #14
Camp Scrub
 
lifetimeskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Maryland
Age: 49
Posts: 84
Re: Receivers

Quote:
Originally Posted by jamf
i agree with pretty much every thing.
But
we run into the same problem gibbs'sessesssss scheme ran into last year; you cant stretch the field sending two WR's and a H-Back downfield. when the redskins put 3 wr's and sent portis in a route, the line folded and the quarterback got killed(or brunell couragously tossed the ball to the waterboy)

here is what is probably going to happen; teams will put 3 DB's on our 3 WR's. then they will use 1 or 2 LB's on our HBack and/or TE. the remaining guys go after the QB. if they can get pressure with those 5 guys, we are screwed(in the same position as last season). but if we can block those guys, any qb in the league will be able to pick the defence apart.

if bugal can create new blocking schemes for todays defences, we should have an exciting season.
I hope you are right Jamf....love the odds. If Ramsay gets the ball off before he gets sacked we get a TD. I truly would love to see Moss and Patten 1v1 with cornerbacks. It won't take too many long TDs before teams back off. This will also help Gardner who will now be seeing the nickel back more often.
__________________
---lifetime skin
lifetimeskin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2005, 03:32 PM   #15
Puppy Kicker
 
Daseal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, Virginia
Age: 31
Posts: 8,220
Re: Receivers

Quote:
This will also help Gardner who will now be seeing the nickel back more often.
Can't buy it. Gardner will be our #1 next year. I can see both Moss and Patten seeing a lot of bench time with Jacobs, McCants, and Gardner all getting heavy amounts of play time. Moss and Patten are mediocre #2's but pretty good #3s.
__________________
Best. Player. Available.
Daseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.30813 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25