Are the redskins gearing up for 5 WR sets?

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by BDBohnzie

Buster - you're forgetting Reche Caldwell. That would be the 5th, and will likely see the field this weekend if Moss can't go.

Re-read my post.

[redsk1]

I haven't read all of the posts but I'll go ahead and make comments...

The answer is NO. For one, JC often misses the open reciever in 3 WR set's. So that would conclude for a young QB reading 4 WR sets wouldn't be feasible. Secondly, we are short 2 starting Offensive and Gibbs likes to max protect. So sending out 5 would get our QB killed most likely.

With that being said, I do have enough trust in the coaches to throw the 4 WR package in their if they see they can execute it. But my guess right now is no.

[GTripp0012]

I don't know if I'd ever send 5 guys out into the pass pattern at the snap. As good as NFL QBs are at their trades, who can make 5+ accurate reads in less than 4 seconds? Peyton Manning probably could, but who knows if we will ever see someone as good as Manning again?

We should always keep one guy in not only to help the protection, but to give the QB a place to throw at in the event of a pass protection break down. Even if it's just designed to be thrown at his feet. Mix it up. Portis, Yoder, Sellers, even Cooley every once in awhile should be kept in.

I think that Max Protect can be a good strategy if used sparingly, and with the Giants performance against the Eagles, you can see exactly what Gibbs and Co. were thinking. Problem is that you don't want to limit your options too often and make the defenses job easy for them.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by redsk1

I haven't read all of the posts but I'll go ahead and make comments...

The answer is NO. For one, JC often misses the open reciever in 3 WR set's. So that would conclude for a young QB reading 4 WR sets wouldn't be feasible. Secondly, we are short 2 starting Offensive and Gibbs likes to max protect. So sending out 5 would get our QB killed most likely.

With that being said, I do have enough trust in the coaches to throw the 4 WR package in their if they see they can execute it. But my guess right now is no.

If we do this JC will not be making 4-5 reads. It doesn't work that way. Before he snaps the ball he'll already know which side of the field he is going to throw to. So that's probably 2 reads. But we aren't going to be doing this cause Gibbs would never allow it.

[800lbape]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

New England isn't missing their entire right side along the offensive line and they also don't have a QB with 10 career starts.

And they also have found a new way to steal the other teams signals, yuck-yuck !!!!!!!!!

[Crat92]

God I hope so!!!!

[skinsnut]

What they should do is have a 2 back set with ARE, Moss and Cooley in all the time.

Originally Posted by WillH

Thats an interesting thought. I think that would be a good formation for this team (Im assuming you are alluding to a wish-bone type of formation).

With Betts and Portis, and sometimes Sellers in there, they could do many versatile misdirection plays, which they seem to love (ie. the counter). And besides that, on passing plays it would be nice to have Betts in there for a check down route and portis in for blocking/play action. Also Portis, though his hands aren't as sure as Betts, is a threat for a first down on little screens and other short passes out of the backfield.

Do many NFL teams utilize this formation? If not how come? If so why don't the Redskins?

I dont know of any NFL team that uses the wishbone...but...it doesn't neccessary need to be a wishbone....Betts could also line up as a full back for portis...he is big enough to lead block...he could take the ball...he could pass block or go out for a pass.....I just dont understand why they aren't both in there at the same time....we only have 3 legit recievers....keep em in!
We have 2 quality backs....keep em both in with occasional breaks....am I an idiot or did I miss something here?

Don't you want your 5 playmakers in all the time?....DUH!!!

[Cowell]

Haha, that is like what I do in Madden. I put Betts in at fullback, Cooley in at 3rd receiver and usually Brandon Lloyd at 2nd receiver, just because he is a lot better than Randle El in the game.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by skinsnut

What they should do is have a 2 back set with ARE, Moss and Cooley in all the time.





I dont know of any NFL team that uses the wishbone...but...it doesn't neccessary need to be a wishbone....Betts could also line up as a full back for portis...he is big enough to lead block...he could take the ball...he could pass block or go out for a pass.....I just dont understand why they aren't both in there at the same time....we only have 3 legit recievers....keep em in!
We have 2 quality backs....keep em both in with occasional breaks....am I an idiot or did I miss something here?

Don't you want your 5 playmakers in all the time?....DUH!!!

Last year in the Houston game ARE lined up w/CP & Sellers (or maybe it was Betts) in the backfield & caught a td on a little swing pass that was more like a screen. So, Saunders has put them in a wishbone before.

Some of Saunders' plays like that are really tricky, but then he won't use them again or even any variation of them.

I'd just like to see 2 backs in to block & let one of them release if there's no rush. Also, Cooley could still catch a screen or 2 to get him the ball.

[skinsnut]

Originally Posted by Cowell

Haha, that is like what I do in Madden. I put Betts in at fullback, Cooley in at 3rd receiver and usually Brandon Lloyd at 2nd receiver, just because he is a lot better than Randle El in the game.

that is cool!!
....but in real life, lloyd sucks and Cooley needs to be a TE mostly cause he usually only matches up well with LBs/safeties.

Someone else had a post about Cooley taking wideout quick screens...I disagree with that.
Cooley doesn't have a killer first move like Moss, ARE or Portis.
A corner is trained to take someone down 1 or 1 in open space, if the dude doesn't have a juke, he doesn't have a chance...unless, he can plow over the guy and 1 second later, a safety too.

The only kind of screen Cooley could take would be an old school screen with 2 linemen blocking for him...and that is risky these days since that would limit us to the left side linemen

[skinsnut]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

Last year in the Houston game ARE lined up w/CP & Sellers (or maybe it was Betts) in the backfield & caught a td on a little swing pass that was more like a screen. So, Saunders has put them in a wishbone before.

Some of Saunders' plays like that are really tricky, but then he won't use them again or even any variation of them.

I'd just like to see 2 backs in to block & let one of them release if there's no rush. Also, Cooley could still catch a screen or 2 to get him the ball.

That was a good call, and thanks for the reminder!
Hmmm....touchdown...I like the sound of that!

Now that I think of it, ARE hasn't had many reverses this year, and I cant think of a single one with Moss....we've got some serious shake n' bake players in Moss ARE and Portis....what gives?
Our offensive talent is a lot better than how we are playing...
I will let the line of the hook for 2 more weeks...MAX...this offense should be performing with these sorts of players....
Unfortunately, our playmakers spend half of the snaps on the BENCH!
UGH

[Cowell]

Yeah, it really boggles my mind knowing we have all these great players, yet we don't use them to their full potential. We could have one of the most wide open offenses in the NFL. The only potential problem is Jason, but give him until week 10 and I think he would be fully prepared to run that type of offense.

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by wbecker999

Or is that what they want everyone to believe?

it's a shell game I tell ya, it's just a shell game.

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by skinsnut

That was a good call, and thanks for the reminder!
Hmmm....touchdown...I like the sound of that!

Now that I think of it, ARE hasn't had many reverses this year, and I cant think of a single one with Moss....we've got some serious shake n' bake players in Moss ARE and Portis....what gives?
Our offensive talent is a lot better than how we are playing...
I will let the line of the hook for 2 more weeks...MAX...this offense should be performing with these sorts of players....
Unfortunately, our playmakers spend half of the snaps on the BENCH!
UGH

Our reverses almost never work. I cringe everytime I see it coming because it's all but a guaranteed 2 yard loss. You need to stretch the field to get the dbs playing off before you can do that. We don't.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

If we do this JC will not be making 4-5 reads. It doesn't work that way. Before he snaps the ball he'll already know which side of the field he is going to throw to. So that's probably 2 reads. But we aren't going to be doing this cause Gibbs would never allow it.

This is accurate and exactly why I believe spreading the field isn't necessary.

He's making 2-3 read plays, how many dummy routes do we need, considering every player sent out is one less player to help in pass pro.

I would play 2 WRs all day, move Cooley all over the place, and let Yoder prove he deserves to be in the NFL. Send the backs into the pattern sometimes like we did in the first half against the Giants. Campbell generally makes good reads, he'll find the open guy.

I can't see a situation in which the Washington Redskins should ever have more than 3 of their wideouts on the field at once. With guys like Betts, Sellers, Portis, Cooley and Yoder, I believe having more than 3 WRs on the the field (and in most cases, more than 2 WR) is a strategic misuse of personnel.

Which is why we don't do it very often.