Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamiteRave
Well if you're passing 3 downs, I'm pretty sure that the other team is going to play the pass and NOT the run. Vikes were blowing up McNabb all game. Did we even do 1 draw play all game? That's the whole point. It's the Gibbs philosophy. I'm saying they need to mix it up. Gibbs never completely abandoned the run, even in tough games. The first drive of the game, Skins mixed it up. Did some dual TE forms, wildcat, they had a pretty mixed bag. Then after that they went conservative. Dink and dunk passes and it wasn't until we switched into desperation mode after the half we started throwing downfield. And if we're gonna throw, why are you gonna complete phase out Cooley after he produced so well in the first drive? I get that he was probably covered but damn, 3 whole quarters he wasn't even a target afterwards?
Keiland Williams had done decent in previous games. He's no Portis or Torrain but when you're taking a practice squad dude over someone who has at least proven that they can play a backup role... Well....
|
First of all, the first 10 to 15 plays of the game are just about always scripted. That is the reason why you normally see the offense look decent at the start of any game. Plus, the defenses adjust to the game plan making you as the offensive coordinator having to adjust your game plan according to the defense's adjustments. That's pretty much the cat and mouse game of any NFL game you're going to watch.
Secondly, this isn't Gibbs' offense. It really doesn't matter if a team is a run first to set up the pass or the other way around. There isn't anything in the bible that says "Thou shalt always run first to set up the pass". It all happens with your offensive line, always. Philosophy has nothing to do with. Gibbs had big offensive linemen who didn't need to worry about quickness as much as power to open up holes up the middle or maybe just enough speed for counter plays. But, Gibbs philosophy wasn't built upon a zone running type of offense as what Shanahan's offense is based on. The offense obviously still doesn't have the right personnel up front to make Shanahan's offense work on a consistent basis.
Also, there were plenty of plays in which the Redskins would have had first downs or would have had large gains if not for poor execution. Armstrong makes a huge play down field only to drop a pass right to him in the flat. You can't expect to stick with the run when you're facing 3 and 10 or 3 and 15. Look, the Redskins were facing a very talented, all-pro defensive line. I don't care what their record was, it is tough to run against that team, especially with our offensive line. THAT is the reason why you were seeing more dink and donk and a pass happy offense than what Shannahan normally likes to do. In the case of the Vikings and our running back situation, we did just exactly what we needed to do game plan wise, the players just didn't execute.