Portis will have 2,000 all purpose yards in 2006

[paulskinsfan]

OK. I didn't want to get caught up in the Ramsey/Collins/Campbell/Brunnell debate......AGAIN. So, surprisngly Im just gonna act like it doesn't exist, Im just going to start a positive thread for once.

With the new receivers, Portis will set new career highs for all purpose yards, guaranteed! Picture this, you run the opponents defense, and out come the Skins with 3 wideouts: Moss, LLoyd, Randle El. Whatcha gonna do? You can't go into man to man coverage with that speed. So, you have to bring your safeties over to help out, which means teams can't put 8 men in the box to stop Portis. Throw in Cooley and it creates additional problems. If Cooley goes out, and the outside LB follows, who will cover Portis if he comes out of the backfield just like Priest Holmes. This is going to be very, very fun to watch.

[SmootSmack]

I definitely agree. Like I said in a couple other threads I think Portis will be league MVP. His numbers are going to be insane in 2006.

[Frost]

oooo yea it will deff be a blast watching portis this season,, and another good thing is that he wont get hurt as much

[#56fanatic]

I do think our O is going to be pretty versatile. I am interested in seeing which offense we are going to put in. Gibbs has said the offense will be the same with some minor changes here and there. Saunders will be calling the plays, but they will be from Gibbs playbook. They are probably going to add more 3 to 4 receiver sets, 1 back sets, maybe employee to split backs behind the QB. I will be interesting. Before I go predicting any MVP awards, I just want to see us be consistant with the ball. It will be nice for a change to expect to score, than to be suprised when we do score.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

Saunders will be calling the plays, but they will be from Gibbs playbook.

That doesn't make too much sense.

I don't think we're giving Saunders control of the offense with the caveat that he uses Gibbs' playbook only.

Saunders was brought here for his offense, not simply to be a playcaller of Gibbs' system.

There are alot of similarities though between the two that will help ease the transition.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

That doesn't make too much sense.

I don't think we're giving Saunders control of the offense with the caveat that he uses Gibbs' playbook only.

Saunders was brought here for his offense, not simply to be a playcaller of Gibbs' system.

There are alot of similarities though between the two that will help ease the transition.

Thought I might just provide why I said what I said.

Saunders will oversee the Redskins' offense in 2006, a role that will include tweaking some of the current offensive schemes, adopting some of the schemes Saunders employed in Kansas City, and handling the play-calling duties on game day.

The terminology of the Redskins' offense will likely stay the same, but the play-calling may change as Saunders learns the strengths and weaknesses of his personnel.

"What I hope I can help this football team do is take some of the things we have done here...and maybe tweak some things and add some things that will make us a more productive point potential offense," Saunders said.

Below is what I said. what is so different. I said Saunders will be calling the plays. they are going to run the Joes offense, with some changes and additions here and there. Thats what I get from what saunders said.


I do think our O is going to be pretty versatile. I am interested in seeing which offense we are going to put in. Gibbs has said the offense will be the same with some minor changes here and there. Saunders will be calling the plays, but they will be from Gibbs playbook. They are probably going to add more 3 to 4 receiver sets, 1 back sets, maybe employee to split backs behind the QB. I will be interesting. Before I go predicting any MVP awards, I just want to see us be consistant with the ball. It will be nice for a change to expect to score, than to be suprised when we do score.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

Thought I might just provide why I said what I said.

Saunders will oversee the Redskins' offense in 2006, a role that will include tweaking some of the current offensive schemes, adopting some of the schemes Saunders employed in Kansas City, and handling the play-calling duties on game day.

The terminology of the Redskins' offense will likely stay the same, but the play-calling may change as Saunders learns the strengths and weaknesses of his personnel.

"What I hope I can help this football team do is take some of the things we have done here...and maybe tweak some things and add some things that will make us a more productive point potential offense," Saunders said.

Below is what I said. what is so different. I said Saunders will be calling the plays. they are going to run the Joes offense, with some changes and additions here and there. Thats what I get from what saunders said.


I do think our O is going to be pretty versatile. I am interested in seeing which offense we are going to put in. Gibbs has said the offense will be the same with some minor changes here and there. Saunders will be calling the plays, but they will be from Gibbs playbook. They are probably going to add more 3 to 4 receiver sets, 1 back sets, maybe employee to split backs behind the QB. I will be interesting. Before I go predicting any MVP awards, I just want to see us be consistant with the ball. It will be nice for a change to expect to score, than to be suprised when we do score.

That makes more sense, thanks for elaborating

[Daryl Elite]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

I do think our O is going to be pretty versatile. I am interested in seeing which offense we are going to put in. Gibbs has said the offense will be the same with some minor changes here and there. Saunders will be calling the plays, but they will be from Gibbs playbook. They are probably going to add more 3 to 4 receiver sets, 1 back sets, maybe employee to split backs behind the QB. I will be interesting. Before I go predicting any MVP awards, I just want to see us be consistant with the ball. It will be nice for a change to expect to score, than to be suprised when we do score.

Shut up, you don't know what you're talking about. And what does "I will be interesting" mean? Huh? Jerk.

OK, that was just a joke. I read a thread yesterday and everyone was bashing poor #56. I love you #56. I wasn't serious with my own bashing. Don't be sad.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by Daryl Elite

Shut up, you don't know what you're talking about. And what does "I will be interesting" mean? Huh? Jerk.

OK, that was just a joke. I read a thread yesterday and everyone was bashing poor #56. I love you #56. I wasn't serious with my own bashing. Don't be sad.

dude, that was funny. First I was like who the hell is the F**K face!, then I laughed my ass off. "IT will be interesting"

[NAVYSKINSFAN]

I get goosebumps thinking about this season. I was looking at some of the clips of the acrobatic catches that Lloyd makes paired with the speed of Moss...

signing free agents - money
signing high profile free agents - lots of money
superbowl - PRICELESS

[PWNED]

more than anything i think we'll be seeing portis as a receiver a whole lot. hes a GREAT receiver when he gets a DECENT pass thrown to him. brunell always seemed to throw crappy passes to portis where hed have to dive/jump up/etc.

[Winskins]

I agree with all of you, Portis should have a huge year with other teams taking men out of the box, not only respecting, but fearing our wideouts.

***Does any one know how Randle-El and Lloyd are as blockers?

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Winskins

I agree with all of you, Portis should have a huge year with other teams taking men out of the box, not only respecting, but fearing our wideouts.

***Does any one know how Randle-El and Lloyd are as blockers?

they both suck at it. they just aren't very big or especially strong.

[Redskins8588]

Originally Posted by That Guy

they both suck at it. they just aren't very big or especially strong.

I wouldnt think that Randel el would be that bad at run blocking down the field, I mean he did come from a heavily run first offense...

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Redskins8588

I wouldnt think that Randel el would be that bad at run blocking down the field, I mean he did come from a heavily run first offense...

just cause they ran a lot doesn't mean he's not 5'8" or 190lbs. he's not nearly as good as guys like KJ or ward or TO etc. There are corners with 20-25lbs on him. He's might be decent for a 5'8" tiny guy, but he's not a blocking WR.