Should Al Saunders return in '08?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Playing for the win is different than playing not to lose..

Explain how.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Explain how.

Very simple..

Playing to win is continuing to be aggressive for 60 minutes (see New England), continuing to run your ENTIRE offense for 60 minutes, taking chances when they are there, making things happen on both sides of the ball by dictating to your opponent..

Continuing to try to score EVERY TIME you have the ball, regardless of the score, is playing to win..

Playing not to lose is getting a lead and changing what you've been doing to try to get the clock to run out before your opponent can catch up, avoiding throwing the ball downfield or running all of the plays in your playbook once you have a lead because you are afraid of turning the ball over, allowing your opponent to move the ball by playing vanilla defense because the clock will keep running and trying to stiffen up in the red zone..

Basically running out to a lead and sitting on it is playing not to lose..

[Redskins8588]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Fine line between kill or be killed. Why force something that isn't there especially when we're pinned back near our own end zone. Going for the kill doesn't have to be as glamorous as an 80-yard bomb. It can also mean giving the opponent a slow death by forcing them to burn their timeouts, milking the clock down, and pinning them deep in their own territory needing to score twice.

I understand what you are saying but look at buffalo, we could have won that game but we sat on the lead. I understand what you are saying, I just get tired of loosing games because we don't put teams away when we have the chance...

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Fine line between kill or be killed. Why force something that isn't there especially when we're pinned back near our own end zone. Going for the kill doesn't have to be as glamorous as an 80-yard bomb. It can also mean giving the opponent a slow death by forcing them to burn their timeouts, milking the clock down, and pinning them deep in their own territory needing to score twice.

See, here's the problem. "Going for the Kill" doesn't have mean 'throwing a 80 yard bomb' or trying to 'force something that isn't there.'

There are high percentage passing plays available -- a 4 to 6 yard pattern to a tight end in the flat, a wideout screen...

Your last sentence is something they've tried many times this season, and it's come back to bite them. Fortunately, the Giants offense was inept Sunday night and that strategy happened to work for the first time in weeks.

Needless to say, I was jacked up for calling three straight running plays too.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

See, here's the problem. "Going for the Kill" doesn't have mean 'throwing a 80 yard bomb' or trying to 'force something that isn't there.'

There are high percentage passing plays available -- a 4 to 6 yard pattern to a tight end in the flat, a wideout screen...

Your last sentence is something they've tried many times this season, and it's come back to bite them. Fortunately, the Giants offense was inept Sunday night and that strategy happened to work for the first time in weeks.

Needless to say, I was jacked up for calling three straight running plays too.

Personally I would have liked another draw on a delay on that last sequence, or even a draw out of a shotgun. And I agree that short, intermediate passes could work. Especially considering the great job the offensive line did the other night.

However, I don't think the majority of people here who say go for the kill mean anything less than launching it deep for one of our players to run under and gallop into the end zone.

[Rock31]

I'll maintain we need one or two more playmakers for Saunders' schemes to work well. With one more offseason will come greater maturity and knowledge of the offense for Campbell, and much-needed healing for our line and receivers. It may be that the lack of execution this season has been a function of our players grasping the system, but lacking the explosiveness to execute on most plays. Portis will get the grunt yards, Cooley will make a reception to get the O started, and Moss will keep the chains moving every other drive. But who will turn a screen into a 70-yard touchdown? A shovel pass into a 15-yard gain? One of those lob shots deep down the field for an unbelievable, over-the-shoulders catch to set up a red-zone possession? Anyone?

I think if we can find a receiver and/or back with those capabilities, then yes, Saunders will stay to coordinate the O next season. If not, the Skins may "smart up" and play within the limits of their offense, the way Gibbs would run it. Of course, I am in the camp that wants Wash to make the acquisitions necessary to make Saunders' system work.

[FRPLG]

I think Saunders; system works. We have seen it work with less talent. The keys are that he needs to be given full control. No meshing of systems or anything like that. Also, he needs to commit to putting the full system in with Campbell. I don't buy that he can't run the system like Collins can. I know he'll make mistakes that Collins wouldn't make but he'll also make plays that Collins can only duplicate in Madden. And his mistakes will disappear more quickly through live action. I am fully supportive of trial by fire at this point. So I say yes.

[redskinz79]

Someone stated similar philosophies...

However, they are not the same. And even a small difference can mess up the cohesiveness of the offense. If the two are similar yet slighty evolved, then more then likely it'll effect the way the offense will be executed.

For example: There are the Spaniards who live in Spain speak spanish. Then there are the Latin Americans. Even though the Latin America was derived from Spain once a time long ago, the two are totally different identities.

With that said, I do not think Saunders is a good fit in Washington. We've given him 2 years to build and I have yet to see any progress. We have only scored 30 points or more ONCE this season. That is a direct result of the offense that is being executed. Whether it is that the players arent adjusting, execution, preparation. It doesnt matter, I believe we've given him enough time to implement his offense. And there has yet to be any real progress thus far.

I say let him go.

And lets be honest, the only reason why we win game is not because of our explosive offense, it's because our defense puts us in a position to stay in the game.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by redskinz79

And lets be honest, the only reason why we win game is not because of our explosive offense, it's because our defense puts us in a position to stay in the game.

The 2004 Redskins do not support this argument. That team had a fantastic defense. But the offense couldn't score. The result was a 6-10 season.

Even the best defenses you've ever seen can have a breakdown or two. And that doesn't even account for your opponent scoring on a punt or interception return.

You have to be able to score points offensively. The defense cannot do everything on their own.

[SouperMeister]

I certainly wouldn't want Campbell to start over in another variation of the Gibbs/Coryell offense. I feel that we are very close to being an outstanding offense. Saunders version of that offensive system has been prolific in KC and St Louis - let's give it a full chance to work here.

[Daseal]

Saunders system works. Let him have complete control of the offense. Don't even give Joe Gibbs a headset. Let Saunders call the plays, 2 pt, 1 pt, 4th down, etc calls. This dudes offenses have been on top of the NFL many years for a reason.

We gotta take the shackles off Campbell, and work on our redzone offense, along with staying aggressive. I hate seeing us take a 3 point league and act like we have the game wrapped up.

Im not saying Gibbs keeps us from doing that, we don't know. If it's all on Al, then fine, but I want to know.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Saunders system works. Let him have complete control of the offense. Don't even give Joe Gibbs a headset. Let Saunders call the plays, 2 pt, 1 pt, 4th down, etc calls. This dudes offenses have been on top of the NFL many years for a reason.

We gotta take the shackles off Campbell, and work on our redzone offense, along with staying aggressive. I hate seeing us take a 3 point league and act like we have the game wrapped up.

Im not saying Gibbs keeps us from doing that, we don't know. If it's all on Al, then fine, but I want to know.

LOL!!!! I gotta say you made my ass crack up. Gibbs w/out a headset! But the thing is I agree w/ you 100%. Al knows what he's doing and Joe just needs to get out of the way with his jumbo packages. There is a time for that jumbo stuff, like Sun. night. But I don't think we're going to go into Minn. and run them over. They have a very strong front 7. We had better spread them out and try to throw on these guys. They stink against the pass.

[DynamiteRave]

I think Al needs to come back, but only if Gibbs stops riding his back. (If he is doing so). We see that the team is capable of amazing things if they open up the playbook. JC will be starting on his 2 year of starting, its time to let the reins off JC and off the playbook and see what we're really capable of.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

I think Saunders should return, but Williams needs to go. IF Gibbs stays on the sidelines he needs to give TOTAL offensive control to Saunders. Gibbs would obviously create the overall gameplan and handle the critical coaching decisions but all offensive playcalling needs to be with Saunders. Give a guy all the rope he asks for and he'll either be successful or hang himself.

GWs defense has done fairly well statistically, but the second half breakdowns game after game are a major concern and show a major coaching flaw. The stat they showed in the game Sunday night was that Gibbs 1.0 was 2nd best in the NFL in protecting 2nd half leads from 1982-92 (Richie Petitbone). Gibbs 2.0 was either the worst or 2nd worst in the same stat since 2004 (GW). Gibbs' offensive philosopy hasn't changed dramatically, Gibbs 1.0 was constantly criticized for being "too conservative" also. So IMO this is primarily a D-Coordinator issue. What this indicates is good preparation going into the game but the ability to "think on your feet" and make in-game adjustments is poor. We need to make sure our defense is strong, and makes good halftime adjustments because in late Nov. & December in the NFC East the elements can limit an offense severely and the D must carry us.

The D-Coordinator I would like to see is Ron Rivera. He had extremely successful defenses in Chicago from 2004-2006 and you see how they're doing this year without him. He's currently a LB coach in San Diego so their wouldn't be any problem with him taking the D-Coordinator job.

[hooskins]

I am surprised a majority of people said yes. Thank you for seeing the light. Yes continuity is the key.