Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

I agree with SmootSmack. Moss and Davis were the focal points of our passing game. We ran to the left because Trent and Lich blocked well for us.Now Helu, they should be featuring more. Other than that, what do we really have? Our right side of the OL is just passable in both run blocking and pass pro. Rex is inconsistent and Beck is a scrub.

Also, the ZBS does take some time to settle in. Houston used to have a completely awful running game before 2010. Now they are tops in the league with almost the exact same OL.

We should've been more balanced L vs. R, early on Chester and Brown were solid run blocking.

The ZBS needs to actually be run to settle in. HOU is tops in rushing because of a committment to run. In each game they've won, they've run more than passed, in their wins they average 40 att. In their losses to the Ravens, Raiders, Saints they had only 25 rush attempts. I didn't see any of those games or review a play-by-play breakdown, but I'll assume the running game was struggling vs. those teams and they needed to throw. With the committment to run, play action can be part of the gameplan. With us we don't run, who needs to prepare for PA, we're not fooling anyone there.

[Dirtbag59]

I would like to temporarily replace Hail to the Redskins with this song for the remainder of the 2011 season.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

And imagine if we brought in a new coaching staff that wanted to change the d back to a 4-3 base and do entirely away with the ZB system, we would be just as bad in 2 years as we are now, maybe worse.

I don't think so. We have the pieces in-house for a 4-3 base. Two very good, young DEs. Our DTs are very solid for a 4-3, Cofield (1 Tech), Carriker (3 tech), Jenkins (1 tech), Bowen (either 1 or 3 tech). With Fletch (although long in the tooth) we have a borderline Pro Bowl MLB and Riley showed flashes yesterday. Our secondary isn't really affected either way. All we really need is some help at OLB.

Id also love to go to a partial ZB scheme that incorporated plays suited for short yardage situations, but most importantly id like to see our coaches become more adaptive and less uncompromising in their philosophies.

Excellent point, agree 100%.

[mlmpetert]

I dont see Kerrigan doing well in a 4-3, although i think Orapko would be an absolute beast in a 4-3. Kerrigan could probably make a good OLB 4-3 LB though. I think youre right, we still have more 4-3 pieces (or universal guys) on hand then 3-4.....

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

All fair points. I agree that there's no way to know if a QB will bust. It's a risk you take. I guess we won't really know until we get that QB.

True, but my main point is the coaching staff is putting a system in place that is extremely QB reliant....with no QB in place or currently on the radar.

Why not modify the system to more of an MS system, featuring the run & PA and de-emphasize the spread passing until a QB is actually in-house that can run the system. HOU/SF/NYJ/OAK/NYG/BAL/CIN are doing pretty well with that formula; power run game and a mid-level QB (Eli is pretty good though).

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

I thought Jake retired because he was traded to TB since Gruden can never have enough QBs. I remember Plummer being good but he was one of those guys that would throw a bunch of interceptions every now and then. Once Cutler got drafted Plummer's time in Devner was over, as Mike was keeping Cutler on the sidelines until he was ready.

I will say with regards to your question, i agree with you in that he won with those QBs. But the situation here is entirely different and not just because we dont have a decent QB; this isnt Mikes offense, its Kyles. So if we win it will be with Mike but because of Kyle and whoever the QB is, just like we are losing now with Mike because of Kyle and Grossman and Beck. Although the longer Mike stands on the sidelines and doesnt intervene our losing is becoming "because of Mike".

The chronology is that Plummer retired.

Then he was traded to Tampa - - Gruden thinking he could coax him out of retirement.

Then he made his statements about playing QB for Shanahan and how much it frustrated him.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

I dont see Kerrigan doing well in a 4-3, although i think Orapko would be an absolute beast in a 4-3. Kerrigan could probably make a good OLB 4-3 LB though. I think youre right, we still have more 4-3 pieces (or universal guys) on hand then 3-4.....

Kerrigan was a 1st Team All-American and Big 10 DPOY at LDE.

[GMScud]

Mike Shanahan needs 3 more wins this season to match Zorn's 2 year total of 12. That's probably not going to happen. Eesh. He's pacing to have the worst 2 year run of any coach in the Snyder era. Wow.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

As mentioned you're mistaken about Plummer's retirement...and you're also wrong about Elway

Check the chronology on Plummer's retirement and statements subsequent to that.

How am I wrong about Elway? He was in the NFL from 84 until Shanahan showed up in Denver in 96. That is "more than a decade". Elway took an over-achieving bunch of guys to a Super Bowl without Shanahan's guidance in the 80s.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

Check the chronology on Plummer's retirement and statements subsequent to that.

How am I wrong about Elway? He was in the NFL from 84 until Shanahan showed up in Denver in 96. That is "more than a decade". Elway took an over-achieving bunch of guys to a Super Bowl without Shanahan's guidance in the 80s.

I've talked to Plummer directly (about handball mainly) and I know of his dislike for Shanahan, but I also know it wasn't Shanahan that led him to retire. It was that when Shanahan let him go he sent him to a place (Tampa) where he'd have to compete for a spot. And that's not what he was interested in.

As for Elway, who do you think was his offense coordinator in the mid 1980s?

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I've talked to Plummer directly (about handball mainly) and I know of his dislike for Shanahan, but I also know it wasn't Shanahan that led him to retire. It was that when Shanahan let him go he sent him to a place (Tampa) where he'd have to compete for a spot. And that's not what he was interested in.

As for Elway, who do you think was his offense coordinator in the mid 1980s?

Oh oh oh I know this one. Buddy Ryan.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

I agree with SmootSmack. Moss and Davis were the focal points of our passing game. We ran to the left because Trent and Lich blocked well for us.Now Helu, they should be featuring more. Other than that, what do we really have? Our right side of the OL is just passable in both run blocking and pass pro. Rex is inconsistent and Beck is a scrub.

Also, the ZBS does take some time to settle in. Houston used to have a completely awful running game before 2010. Now they are tops in the league with almost the exact same OL.

Another way of reading those same facts is this: That Houston had a "completely awful running game" until Kyle left and brought his "completely awful running game" to Washington.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I've talked to Plummer directly (about handball mainly) and I know of his dislike for Shanahan, but I also know it wasn't Shanahan that led him to retire. It was that when Shanahan let him go he sent him to a place (Tampa) where he'd have to compete for a spot. And that's not what he was interested in.

As for Elway, who do you think was his offense coordinator in the mid 1980s?

My recollection of the situation with the Broncos of the mid-80s was that Dan Reeves was the "offensive guy" and that it was Reeves and Elway who worked together to fashion the offense - - until the two of them had a falling out and it got to the point of "loser leaves town". The owner - - Bowlen - - smartly chose to keep Elway and lose Reeves in that circumstance but by then Shanahan had moved on to Oakland and then SF.

Next time you talk to Plummer, ask him what kind of mentality one should look for in a QB that Mike Shanahan might draft with a "Top Five Pick" in the draft... Here is a guess:

Intelligence of Einstein
Patience of Job
Serenity of Ghandi

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I see that he gets guys open, too. But someone who designs nice pass plays is a "play designer," not "offensive coordinator." To be the latter also requires play calling and scheming which is suitable to your talent.

I am not on the "fire Kyle" bandwagon. But to me, this year he has been a great play designer but poor offensive coordinator.

Practical brilliance at work here Lotus, although I think you give Kyle too much credit as a play designer as we've faced some truly awful defenses and been totally unable to execute one big play...shit even the lowly Rams guided by a backup QB can manage that one big play a game where you sit up and yell. Not Kyle though.

I think it's also worth mentioning the Texans' offense has improved since he left. Kyle is a playbook guy at best.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Another way of reading those same facts is this: That Houston had a "completely awful running game" until Kyle left and brought his "completely awful running game" to Washington.

I think my point is worthless since its basis is crappy. Toss it in the dump, folks. I had a stupid moment.

Upon further perusal, I see that the 2008 Texans had a 4.3 YPA(including end arounds, scrambles, etc) with Kyle at the helm. That was their first year.


That said, our 22 or so carries a game is even below the average of 27 carries a game while Kyle was in Houston.