The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

After watching our first half preformance after a total score of zero, I was a little upset with our offensive coaching. I knew coming into the game that Gibbs ran a very conservative offense, however, this conservativity (it that even close to a word?) was just beyond me. Every passing down, we would not throw the ball past ten yards, except one long incompletion to Patten.

HOWEVER, this conservative offense was the very thing that opened up those two long receptions for Moss. ey ran a shorter route on the first bomb, and Roy Williams opted to cover that route instead of Moss'. So, it's hard for me to be frusterated with the play calling, but I hope that this game helps our playcalling to go beyond 10 yards so defenses will stop stuffing Portis by stacking the line with 8 men.

Great comeback Brunell, you're the man, and you've got the arm no one thought you had!!

The thing we all have to keep in mind is this: Gibbs' offense is built around the running game. Yes, the passing game inevitably opens up lanes for the rushing attack. But Gibbs doesn't run an "Air it Out" offense like St. Louis or Green Bay. Considering all things, I think we've seen the beginning (4th quarter) of our offense gelling together.

We also have to remember that Brunell worked with the second team all preseason. I, for one, am proud to see this finally coming together -- we currently have the 10th ranked offense and 4th ranked defense. Not to shabby at all.

The play calling was based on Gibbs' incorrect assessment that we could win with Brunell playing Trent Dilfer. Coaching: An F. Brunell and Moss' unexpected plays saved Gibb much embarassment. If Gibbs had had a choice, he wouldn't have called those two pass plays at all.

The play calling was based on Gibbs' incorrect assessment that we could win with Brunell playing Trent Dilfer. Coaching: An F. Brunell and Moss' unexpected plays saved Gibb much embarassment. If Gibbs had had a choice, he wouldn't have called those two pass plays at all.

Oh, you are a sad, bitter man, aren't you? Perhaps, someday, even you can have a friend.

crazyhorse1 wrote: If Gibbs had had a choice, he wouldn't have called those two pass plays at all.

Gibbs had infinite choices, including benching Brunell.
Can I see your copy of Gibbs' play sheet because you must have it in order to make a statement like that.

SkinsHead56 wrote:

crazyhorse1 wrote: If Gibbs had had a choice, he wouldn't have called those two pass plays at all.

Gibbs had infinite choices, including benching Brunell.
Can I see your copy of Gibbs' play sheet because you must have it in order to make a statement like that.

what he means is that we never would have been down by 13 with 4 minutes left. gibbs's offensive system is designed to GET the lead and then pound away until the clock is gobbled up.

crazyhorse1 wrote:The play calling was based on Gibbs' incorrect assessment that we could win with Brunell playing Trent Dilfer. Coaching: An F. Brunell and Moss' unexpected plays saved Gibb much embarassment. If Gibbs had had a choice, he wouldn't have called those two pass plays at all.

I thought Gibbs has always been known for taking a few of those downfield shots each game. . .

FanfromAnnapolis wrote:

crazyhorse1 wrote:The play calling was based on Gibbs' incorrect assessment that we could win with Brunell playing Trent Dilfer. Coaching: An F. Brunell and Moss' unexpected plays saved Gibb much embarassment. If Gibbs had had a choice, he wouldn't have called those two pass plays at all.

I thought Gibbs has always been known for taking a few of those downfield shots each game. . .

that's definitely how i remembered him, but that seemed to disappear last year.

crazyhorse1 wrote:The play calling was based on Gibbs' incorrect assessment that we could win with Brunell playing Trent Dilfer. Coaching: An F. Brunell and Moss' unexpected plays saved Gibb much embarassment. If Gibbs had had a choice, he wouldn't have called those two pass plays at all.

you're right there genius, gibbs isn't calling the plays at all this year.

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic. ... sc&start=0[url][/url]

hailskins666 wrote:

crazyhorse1 wrote:The play calling was based on Gibbs' incorrect assessment that we could win with Brunell playing Trent Dilfer. Coaching: An F. Brunell and Moss' unexpected plays saved Gibb much embarassment. If Gibbs had had a choice, he wouldn't have called those two pass plays at all.

you're right there genius, gibbs isn't calling the plays at all this year.

http://www.the-hogs.net/forum/viewtopic. ... sc&start=0[url][/url]

You're such a jerk.

my question is where are the crossing routes ???? we have speed and using crossing routes would be very effective !!!! right ????agree or not

I agree that things are a bit too simple but what do I know?

I'd add in some 3 WR sets and toss the ball around. Alleviate the hedge from around Portis and we'll be even better.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:I agree that things are a bit too simple but what do I know?

I'd add in some 3 WR sets and toss the ball around. Alleviate the hedge from around Portis and we'll be even better.

heck just run MOSS or PATTEN across the middle nothing special ...one is going to break a big gainer sooner or later.

redskinz4ever wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:I agree that things are a bit too simple but what do I know?

I'd add in some 3 WR sets and toss the ball around. Alleviate the hedge from around Portis and we'll be even better.

heck just run MOSS or PATTEN across the middle nothing special ...one is going to break a big gainer sooner or later.

I agree with that also in my predictions for the Pukes game I said that we need to let those cats run up the YAC.

FanfromAnnapolis wrote:

crazyhorse1 wrote:The play calling was based on Gibbs' incorrect assessment that we could win with Brunell playing Trent Dilfer. Coaching: An F. Brunell and Moss' unexpected plays saved Gibb much embarassment. If Gibbs had had a choice, he wouldn't have called those two pass plays at all.

I thought Gibbs has always been known for taking a few of those downfield shots each game. . .

I saw one before the end of the first half. . . and then the final two. The one completion to Sanatana before the bombs was just a great change of route by Moss to give Brunell that option (also an AMAZING pass!).

I think that after this game we should see a bunch more shots downfield.

Crossing routes are a great idea!! I was telling the guys watching the game with me that we need some good midrange passes to open our whole offense up, especially the running game.

SkinsBigtime wrote:
Crossing routes are a great idea!! I was telling the guys watching the game with me that we need some good midrange passes to open our whole offense up, especially the running game.

maybe they will come as brunell gets more comfortable with the WR'S and the playbook.

I still have enough memory left to remember that Gibbs is neither a run-only nor a bombs-away coach. He throws long, short, and in-between. Evidence? Get out your SB 22 video.

He always threw long (as in, who was offensive coordinator for Air Coryell?). And ran until the other team choked, as in the great pounding that the Skins put on the Cowboys in the NFC championship before SB 17. [Find the story on THN: "Randy, the coach likes you so much he's going to run right at you again".]

If we haven't seen much long passing before this, look for another reason than Gibbs' inclination.

Instead, look at whether the long passes were working.

Now, well, this might be different from now on.

Now, well, this might be different from now on.

I agree, welch. It seems like perhaps the confidence sparked by a huge win like Monday's is one of the final ingredients to the equation.