View Single Post
Old 11-14-2011, 04:06 PM   #4
Slingin Sammy 33
Playmaker
 
Slingin Sammy 33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 4,347
Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
What talent is there to tailor the scheme to?

Seriously though, we do make adjustments to the defense (case in point, screens to Helu against the Niners). But, what team goes changing their scheme week to week? You have to have a philosophy and stick with it for the most part.
You have an offensive philosophy, but you put emphasis on where the opponent is weak and tailor the gameplan to exploit the weaknesses. Screens against the 49ers were fine, but outside of that we've seen little creativity in O gameplanning this year. (17rush - 32pass yesterday)

The talent here is weak at QB and WR, but we had three solid runners and had two strong TEs...yet we continue to work the pass game and almost ignore the run/PA game. We pass on almost every 3-2 or 3-3. If the goal is to win, you can't put weak talent in a position to fail, again, and again, and again. If the goal is to prepare for next season, keep the offensive philosophy in place "talent level be damned", and get the young guys used to the system, then we'll be dealing with a 3-out/no TD offense the rest of this year.

It's very clear to me a decison has been made that Kyle's system from Houston is the way we're staying....but what if we don't get the QB next year? What if we get a QB and he busts? I think the reliance on the current system (puts too much pressure on the QB position while we have no QB), reluctance to use a more balanced attack, and vanilla ZB run scheme is mistaken.
__________________
"I would bet.....(if), an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything] in the world you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' — Jack Kent Cooke, 1996.
Slingin Sammy 33 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.51673 seconds with 10 queries