Houston is THAT bad...

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Yesterday's short passing emphasis was definitely more game plan related. There may have been a few instances where Brunell checked down, but all the screens, slants, and dumps were by design.

I agree with most of what you said except that there were only a "few instances where Brunell checked down". There were a lot.
We just should not think for a minute Saunders is about not opening the offense. Sure plays are designed for Moss / ARE on short plays, but Saunders is losing sleep at night because he can't get Brunell to get confident in his ability to throw downfield. Saunders was salavating at the idea of having Moss and ARE creating separation in the secondary. That hasn't happened yet because Brunell is afraid to pull the trigger.
I hope the 22 straight completions gave Brunell the confidence to open it up. Until that happens, we won't see a true Al Saunders offense.

[hesscl34]

Originally Posted by jsarno

Sorry, bud, no break allowed here.
Watch the game films, break them down. Sure there were plenty of actually planned plays involving ARE and Moss on the short plays, but are you seriously trying to tell me that Lloyd, Moss and ARE (as well as Patton) did not have any downfield routes? WOW? How about the play when everyone was set up on curl routes (downfield) and Brunell hesitated too long to hit anyone. Moss stood there waiting, but Lloyd decided to keep moving, and Brunell hit him in stride after a long delay. Had it not been for the protection, that would have been a loss on the play.
So I ask you again to watch the film, watch how many plays had receivers doing crossing routes downfield, or deep outs, and Brunell not giving them a chance and checking down to the short passes. The problem is, we only remember the deliberate short passes / dumps. Of course those are planned, but what happened when they were not planned?

What "film" are you watching?? Could you post a link? The TV I was watching, you couldn't see the boys downfield. Unless you were at the game how did you see them and know where they were and what they were doing. They weren't showing clips of our WR sitting and waiting for balls.. which usually makes for good conversation during a game. Especially it being Brunell, you’d think they would have pointed about Moss’ so called frustration. You saw film none of us have seen yet.

[MTK]

He checked down alot? How many times exactly? Personally I didn't see many plays where he had the opportunity to check down, maybe 2-3 times at the most.

The majority of the pass plays were quick and short as designed per the game plan.

Together with the team's new associate head coach for offense, Al Saunders, Brunell and Gibbs came up with a plan to attack the Texans. It relied on lots of short passes and quick decisions that would allow the team's pass catchers to take advantage of Houston's overly aggressive defense. The plan worked perfectly.

Bloodied but Unbowed - washingtonpost.com

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by hesscl34

What "film" are you watching?? Could you post a link? The TV I was watching, you couldn't see the boys downfield. Unless you were at the game how did you see them and know where they were and what they were doing. They weren't showing clips of our WR sitting and waiting for balls.. which usually makes for good conversation during a game. Especially it being Brunell, you’d think they would have pointed about Moss’ so called frustration. You saw film none of us have seen yet.

I have DVR, I've watched the game 3 times. It doesn't take much to watch the receivers leave the screen, do you think they are getting a gatorade break when they are not inside your TV screen?
Everyone is a little too preoccupied on those 22 straight completions to note that they were almost all short passes.
Hey, we obviously disagree at this point, no biggy. But unless Saunders and Brunell get on the same page come next week, you'll be singing my tune after we lose to Jacksonville. The Jags have a swarming D and will snuff out all the small stuff. If we are to survive we will NEED to get the ball downfield and relieve the pressure off the running game and the short passes.
Also, where are the gimmick plays? I haven't seen any yet, and would like to.

[RedskinRat]

If nothing else I admire Brunell's attitude and demeanor.

[hesscl34]

Originally Posted by jsarno

I have DVR, I've watched the game 3 times. It doesn't take much to watch the receivers leave the screen, do you think they are getting a gatorade break when they are not inside your TV screen?
Everyone is a little too preoccupied on those 22 straight completions to note that they were almost all short passes.
Hey, we obviously disagree at this point, no biggy. But unless Saunders and Brunell get on the same page come next week, you'll be singing my tune after we lose to Jacksonville. The Jags have a swarming D and will snuff out all the small stuff. If we are to survive we will NEED to get the ball downfield and relieve the pressure off the running game and the short passes.
Also, where are the gimmick plays? I haven't seen any yet, and would like to.

If you think I'll be singing any tune but HAIL TO THE REDSKIN then you are mistaken. Even if we do lose to Jacksonville, that is 3 losses - not 5, not 6, 3. I won't be singing any tune but the one I know best! HAIL!

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by jsarno

I have DVR, I've watched the game 3 times. It doesn't take much to watch the receivers leave the screen, do you think they are getting a gatorade break when they are not inside your TV screen?
Everyone is a little too preoccupied on those 22 straight completions to note that they were almost all short passes.
Hey, we obviously disagree at this point, no biggy. But unless Saunders and Brunell get on the same page come next week, you'll be singing my tune after we lose to Jacksonville. The Jags have a swarming D and will snuff out all the small stuff. If we are to survive we will NEED to get the ball downfield and relieve the pressure off the running game and the short passes.
Also, where are the gimmick plays? I haven't seen any yet, and would like to.

Losing to Jacksonville doesn't negate what Brunell did yesterday.

By the way, are you rooting for the Skins?

[bigm29]

Originally Posted by jsarno

I have DVR, I've watched the game 3 times. It doesn't take much to watch the receivers leave the screen, do you think they are getting a gatorade break when they are not inside your TV screen?
Everyone is a little too preoccupied on those 22 straight completions to note that they were almost all short passes.
Hey, we obviously disagree at this point, no biggy. But unless Saunders and Brunell get on the same page come next week, you'll be singing my tune after we lose to Jacksonville. The Jags have a swarming D and will snuff out all the small stuff. If we are to survive we will NEED to get the ball downfield and relieve the pressure off the running game and the short passes.
Also, where are the gimmick plays? I haven't seen any yet, and would like to.

we're not going to do a gimmick play when were winning by that much

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Houston's overly aggressive defense

snicker.

while those were definitely plays meant to beat the blitz, i don't think i saw a Texan defender in our backfield the whole game. where were these plays the first two weeks? or were they called but just not executed well when played against a real defense?

hope this was a reaction to all the blitzing and not just what the Saunders plays look like in practice.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

He checked down alot? How many times exactly? Personally I didn't see many plays where he had the opportunity to check down, maybe 2-3 times at the most.

The majority of the pass plays were quick and short as designed per the game plan.

The next time I watch the game, I will count them. Unfortunately, I have to head to work, so I will have to post that tomorrow. There are more than you may think.

Assuming you are correct, and they were all by design (they weren't, but I'll assume for a minute they were) this is the 3rd straight game that all Saunders / Brunell has done is short passes. That means our 2 million dollar OC is not worth it. I will obviously agree you play the game to your opponants weaknesses, the Texans could not stop the short plays so why stop? I understand that concept. However, it did not work vs the Cowboys at all, and was not very effective vs the Vikes either. The offense just looks remarkably similar in terms of play calling and Brunell's comfort zone.

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by bigm29

we're not going to do a gimmick play when were winning by that much

So when is a good time? A close game (vikings), a losing blow out (cowboys), or when confortably ahead (texans)? 3 different scenarios, all 3 games no gimmick plays. (not that we need a gimmick play to succeed, it just helps to keep defenses off balance.)

[hesscl34]

Originally Posted by jsarno

The next time I watch the game, I will count them. Unfortunately, I have to head to work, so I will have to post that tomorrow. There are more than you may think.

Assuming you are correct, and they were all by design (they weren't, but I'll assume for a minute they were) this is the 3rd straight game that all Saunders / Brunell has done is short passes. That means our 2 million dollar OC is not worth it. I will obviously agree you play the game to your opponants weaknesses, the Texans could not stop the short plays so why stop? I understand that concept. However, it did not work vs the Cowboys at all, and was not very effective vs the Vikes either. The offense just looks remarkably similar in terms of play calling and Brunell's comfort zone.

How convenient that you have to go to work. You are guessing about what was going on downfield. You need to pick a different team and go sit on their seats. How about those Ravens? Be gone.

[12thMan]

Damn, Hess....I think that's like the third Redskin fan you've de-feathered today!

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by hesscl34

If you think I'll be singing any tune but HAIL TO THE REDSKIN then you are mistaken. Even if we do lose to Jacksonville, that is 3 losses - not 5, not 6, 3. I won't be singing any tune but the one I know best! HAIL!

Hey, I am right there with you. But you can't blame a guy for keeping his eye on the prize (the superbowl). I live and breathe Redskins, trust me on that. I see a flaw in our system right now, and I truly beleive that if we correct it, we will instantly become a super bowl contender.
Like I said before, maybe the 22 straight completions helped Brunell gain confidence in a complex offensive system. We'll find out next week.

ps- 3 losses in 4 games is one hell of a huge hole to get out of in terms of super bowl opportunity. Not impossible, but very hard. The faster we right the wrong, the better.

[724Skinsfan]

We're only one game back in our division.