• Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.

Random Commanders Thoughts

Not to mention, Hue Jackson won't take any of the prima dona **** from him.
 
Boone said:
That's a nice counter Ax - touche' - but the difference is, you don't hear me predicting the downfall of the Redskins because of the decision. Everyone here has the right to applaud or critique whatever they want - obviously. I don't understand what McCloughan and/or Gruden see in McRib. But ultimately I figure they most know something we don't. I'm not going as far as McD5 just did. But I do see a trend where moves that fans 'love' are attributed to McLovin, and moves they 'hate' are all about Gruden. And you'll notice that I questioned what McLovin is thinking with LeRibeus, not Gruden - because I know ultimately its Scot that is driving the player/talent decisions.

Ultimately with Almo, I think we are arguing about the wrong things. It's really not about Almo's talent level, work ethic, or whether or not he'll torch us down the road or be a star on another team. It's about whether he's a good fit for this offense. You said it well - the dropoff in production that is inarguable and dramatic may be as much about the Gruden offense as it is Almo. But where I push back is that this means Gruden's offense cannot be effective on the ground. There's 2 years of evidence though that it can't be effective with Almo carrying the ball.
Click to expand...

I agree that Alfred is a bad fit for Gruden's offense as presently constituted. I guess I'm wondering, after we spent a third round pick on a guy who was supposed to be a GOOD fit for Gruden's offense, yet did not perform well, is... IS there a good fit for Gruden's offense? I mean, are we going to have to try to find the next Adrian Peterson? Tomlinson? What is the right fit? As Ax pointed out, I prefer a coach who can adapt a little to the strengths of his players, which seems anathema to Gruden.

But then again, as Neo has pointed out many times, that coaching trait seems to have died off a while ago, unfortunately.

And referencing your other post which I'm too lazy to quote and format (it's a Sunday, leave me alone) I am not forecasting doom and gloom for the Redskins. We just won the division and went to the playoffs. I think we could have performed better against the Packers, and perhaps even had a chance of winning if we had anything close to a semblance of a running game. In my mind, Gruden's passing attack is strong, but if we're going to take the next step, I think even a collegiate-level running game would be nice. Screw nice, it's necessary.
 
Elephant said:
There are 2 RB's that will likely go in the 1st round this year. Not sure why you are putting such a low premium on RB's. Not everyone is getting 4 years out of a 6th round draft pick at RB.

And I just don't get the idea that Matt Jones looked worse than Morris. Yes, there were fumbling issues, so I guess we can use that criteria. Yes he was injured so I guess we can use that one too. However, when in the game, Jones was much more apt to hit the same holes that Morris missed, without hesitation like Morris. He showed he could get around the edge, unlike Morris this past season. He caught passes out of the backfield better than Morris. And he certainly had break away speed as witnessed on at least a couple long TD runs, unlike Morris.

Morris was a great character and back for us for 2 years, I am not sure I buy into the struggle in season 3 as Boone does, but if you are incapable of seeing that Alfred Morris' ability declined dramatically this year, not because of any scheme he was running, but simply his personal performance, I just wonder.
Click to expand...

Wonder what? Go ahead and say something if you like, don't insinuate. :)

And I just don't remember Jones hitting the holes with authority, sorry El. I know you were at the games and I wasn't, but from my vantage point, Alfred looked tentative some and Jones looked tentative some. In fact, they looked pretty much identical to me - essentially the same back for most of the year. At the end, when Jones was injured and Morris was the clear undisputed starter, I thought Morris shone and looked pretty good; but when Gruden flip-flopped between the two of them and went back and forth with no evident plan of how to form a coherant rushing attack, I thought both players looked tentative.

I remember a few isolated instances of Jones looking authoritative hitting the hole, but I remember Alfred looking good in isolation as well.

As a whole, neither back looked like a feature back at all. And the rushing attack looked like a after-thought as far as scheme goes.
 
McD5 said:
It's not selective McLovin support. I'd guess it's more of a consistent hate for Gruden that lingers within a small portion of our fan base that is still upset with Gruden for verbally undressing RG3.

Which in itself is very ironic. We are very thick-skinned when it comes to our own team name, and expecting everyone else around the league to not be offended.

But God forbid our HC verbally corrects our QB, then benches him and wins the division. The horror!

That portion of fans still incorrectly (in my opinion) blames the fall of RG3 more on Gruden than on Shanahan playing him injured or his own performance.
Click to expand...

OK.

Are you TRYING to incite with this drivel?
 
Boone said:
Will that prove to be true with Almo? I don't know. I just don't understand the selective McCloughan support.
Click to expand...

Forgot to address this, and I wanted to. See, I can be active on a Sunday too! :)

I don't see it as selective. If I were Scot, I'd be a little frustrated. I have to imagine, because it defies common sense if this didn't happen, that Scot went to Gruden with a bio on Jones and asked Gruden what he thought of Matt Jones before the draft. Can we all agree that makes sense? So assuming that is the case, Gruden had the choice of saying either Jones would be a GREAT fit for his offense, a lousy fit for his offense or an OK fit for his offense. Fair so far?

Presumably, he told Scot he was a GREAT fit. Right? Bulldog keeps saying a lot of people had Jones as a 6th rounder, so for Scot to take him in the 3rd has to mean that Gruden endorsed Jones very highly. So for Scot to pull the trigger on Jones at such an early round means they thought he wouldn't be there later and they needed to grab him while they could, which happened to be in the 3rd.

But the ROI was not good. So was Jones not as talented as Scot and Gruden thought? Or was he a bad fit for Gruden's offense?

To be fair, it's way too early to tell. I hope to goodness Jones comes out and crushes it this year and shuts me up once and for all about Gruden's rushing attack. (and I know you hope the same thing - specifically that I shut up) But also to be fair, the first year returns weren't great. In fact, they weren't really even good.

If you look in a vacuum at the fact that Morris's production dropped precipitously in the two years since Gruden took over, I don't think it's insanley crazy to think that Gruden doesn't know how to coach an effective rushing game. Jones was supposed to be that player who provided that attack for us; that didn't happen last season. It might this season, but it certainly didn't happen last season.

At some point, I think it's fair to question the scheme; and if I'm Scot, why would I keep investing in a position that doesn't bear returns?
 
Elephant said:
I agree with this. I understand the concern for degrees of a personal foul, but that doesn't negate the foul. I know this isn't soccer, but the yellow card situation where a player can be ejected for reciving 2 in a game and be subject to miss the next game is a very successful policy. Not only does it give the players something to think about, but it also makes a referee consider whether the consequence warrants the call. I can remember many situation where a flat out foul occurred and an immediate ejection was warranted, where a semi-serious foul occurred that deserved a yellow card and then a second less serious foul occurred which forced me to consider an ejection was warranted.

There is subjectivity involved, and good refs will be able to handle it. I also like the idea of accountability from above where video replay shows a better perspective for intent.
Click to expand...

I like relating this to soccer, but the analogy is not an apples to apples comparison if they put in the 2 fouls and out rule. In soccer the center ref has full control in deciding when that second yellow is deserving regardless of the type of foul. In football any one ref could make that decision just by throwing the flag. There is no human decision making being done on whether it's worthy of ejection.

I don't think they need the rule because can't the head umpire eject anyone at any time already? Just encourage them to start doing it when warranted. Maybe institute a warning system like the yellow/red cards to give the players a heads up when they are on thin ice.
 
Goaldeje said:
OK.

Are you TRYING to incite with this drivel?
Click to expand...

Of course not. What would I have to gain by that?

And on your prior post, the running game was anything but an afterthought.

We were 10th or 13th in the league in rushing attempts--I don't remember offhand.

If anything, we rushed too much. We may have sucked at it, but we certainly did it more than most.

Instead of putting the ball into Alf's hands, we may have been better off with Reed, Garcon or Jackson.

That would be my main complaint about last year's offense. Not enough shots to Desean. We should be doing that 5 to 7 times a game. He would be deadly on NE's offense. He needs to be deadly on ours.
 
I didn't say the run game was an afterthought. I said scheming for the run game was apparently an afterthought.

The Packers game could have been different imo with the threat of a running game.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
Goal - I don't even know where to begin with that post. You say 'To be fair, it's too early to tell'. But that doesn't stop you from assuming that Matt Jones is a blown pick and implying McCloughan only signed off on it because Gruden thought he was a good fit.

I think they both thought Jones was a steal, and they may well prove to be right.

Lets just all agree that the Redskins need a more effective running game, and hope our coaches and front office aren't as clueless in forging one as some believe they are.
 
Last edited:
I don't like the 'hate' comment - because it does 'incite' and also implies 'mindless'. So does 'drivel' :) Agree or disagree, I don't know many mindless posters here. I do think that McD5 has a point in there somewhere, that some took the management of Griffin very personally and that it will take a lot of positive work and success to win those fans over.
 
Oh I don't think McD is mindless. Far from it. I think he is exceptionally purposeful, and I did not intend to imply otherwise.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
Boone said:
Goal - I don't even know where to begin with that post. You say 'To be fair, it's too early to tell'. But that doesn't stop you from assuming that Matt Jones is a blown pick and implying McCloughan only signed off on it because Gruden thought he was a good fit.

I think they both thought Jones was a steal, and they may well prove to be right.

Lets just all agree that the Redskins need a more effective running game, and hope our coaches and front office aren't as clueless in forging one as some believe they are.
Click to expand...
I get all that, and I agree with you for the most part. I get a little sick of seeing people rationalize discarding Morris because he is ineffectual and a lesser player when that very well may not be the case.

Entirely possible that Morris has lost a step or however you want go term it, but I think it's also possible Gruden doesn't have a good grasp of how to engineer a good rushing attack.

Or both. Both is also possible.

But instead there seem to be a lot of people willing to pin it all on Alfred. And I think the last couple of years suggest that Gruden is at least partially responsible.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
I dont know about team rushing stats but overall last season there was only what 8 rushers over or close to 1000 yards. Alfred's numbers were better when Bob was the QB because of the dual threat.
Our running game took a big hit when lich and Lavou went out. But that being said the strength is the passing game so I wouldn't be surprised to continue in that area.
 
Lots of factors contributed to the anemic running game last year.

Defenses focused on it starting after the week 2 romp over the Rams, figuring they'd take that away and force the young QB to show he could stop throwing the ball away and beat them. As we saw, it took about half the season before the "light came on" for Kirk, and DeSean returned, and Reed decided to go Stud.

Injuries not just to Lavao and Kory, but to every tight end not named Reed, who was never a blocker and may never be. A guy like Paulsen exists in the league not because he's a passing threat, but because he's a mobile, reliable blocker--I'd argue that no modern running game thrives without one.

The running backs were substandard. Alfred was "off" all year--he was simply not the same physical presence out there we remember from 2012 or even 2013. And Jones ran hard, but was stuck in rookie mode all year. I suspect he didn't develop his mental game anywhere near what the coaching staff and GM were hoping for as a rookie, and will have to prove a lot to them in that area this season if he hopes to become anything more than just a guy.

Gruden ... I know some of you think he's simply inept when it comes to the running game, and until this team proves otherwise, it's an argument that I won't bother to have. I do believe he's professional enough a football coach to understand the need to run the ball, and adapt if necessary to do so, but I think last year he was more about going with what DID work, as the passing game did big-time down the stretch, in order to win games.

If we come out in 2016, with a healthy OL, healthy stable of TE's, an offseason to tweak the scheme (now that we think we have a QB who can generally throw it to our guys and not theirs), running backs who look dialed-in and hungry, can pass the ball semi-effectively, and we STILL can't run the ball to NFL standards? Then I'll start to worry we have a potentially crippling problem.

But not yet.
 
Boone said:
That's a nice counter Ax - touche' -
Click to expand...
I knew you'd like that. :)
but the difference is, you don't hear me predicting the downfall of the Redskins because of the decision. Everyone here has the right to applaud or critique whatever they want - obviously.
Click to expand...
I don't recall anyone predicting the downfall of the Redskins. But maybe I missed it. I know I haven't. But I don't see where stating the opinion, that a decision may prove to be a bad decision, is anything wrong/crazy/irrational.

I don't understand what McCloughan and/or Gruden see in McRib. But ultimately I figure they most know something we don't.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But, they are also not incapable of being wrong. Beathard had a truckload lousy personnel moves. And Joe Gibbs made many mistakes too. Winning Lombardi's, wipes them away. I will be in constant orgasm when Mr. McCloo and Gruden achieve the same, here.

I'm not going as far as McD5 just did.
Click to expand...
Nobody else here does. But, he keeps getting away with it, so why would he ever stop?

But I do see a trend where moves that fans 'love' are attributed to McLovin, and moves they 'hate' are all about Gruden. And you'll notice that I questioned what McLovin is thinking with LeRibeus, not Gruden - because I know ultimately its Scot that is driving the player/talent decisions.
Click to expand...
Eh, human nature. It's always the other guys fault. Not MY guy. And, GM's have final call on personnel moves. Coaches have final say on who plays. And when. And how.

Ultimately with Almo, I think we are arguing about the wrong things. It's really not about Almo's talent level, work ethic, or whether or not he'll torch us down the road or be a star on another team. It's about whether he's a good fit for this offense. You said it well - the dropoff in production that is inarguable and dramatic may be as much about the Gruden offense as it is Almo. But where I push back is that this means Gruden's offense cannot be effective on the ground. There's 2 years of evidence though that it can't be effective with Almo carrying the ball.
Click to expand...
The difference is, it was shown over his first two years in one system, and the first year of Gruden's hybrid system, he performed damn well.
So, out of 4 years here, Almo had a 3-1 ratio of good/great success, to poor results.
On the other hand, Gruden's "systems", have netted 1 barely average year, where he kept some of what had been working, and 1 very subpar year using his new approach.

I still believe Gruden will ultimately succeed here. But, to date, he has failed to produce a cohesive running attack, that actually looks like it has a rhyme or reason to it's operation. And I don't think anybody pointing this out, is deserving of having his attack dog here constantly claiming all who question Gruden's moves/results are irrational haters worshipping at the altar of Robert Griffin.

But hell, I've been wrong before. So WTF do I know.
 
McD5 said:
Of course not. What would I have to gain by that?

And on your prior post, the running game was anything but an afterthought.

We were 10th or 13th in the league in rushing attempts--I don't remember offhand.

If anything, we rushed too much. We may have sucked at it, but we certainly did it more than most.

Instead of putting the ball into Alf's hands, we may have been better off with Reed, Garcon or Jackson.

That would be my main complaint about last year's offense. Not enough shots to Desean. We should be doing that 5 to 7 times a game. He would be deadly on NE's offense. He needs to be deadly on ours.
Click to expand...

Jackson was targeted 6 times a game when he was actually on the field. If your game plan is to magically make Jackson healthy all season I'm all for that too.

And our rushing scheme certainly did seem like an afterthought. Not due to the amount we rushed (we were 14th in the league BTW), but due to the amount of effort seemingly put into actually scheming the run game. It was a big mess all season long, and that really hurt us when our passing game stalled ... like when, for example, Jackson was hurt. I sure hope someone on that team figures out how to run the ball effectively. Otherwise we'd better hope your Magic Plan actually works this year and our passing game with the ever-durable Jackson and Reed doesn't get dinged again.
 
Last edited:
It's not going to be easy watching Morris in Dallas, tough to root against him, but hope we shut him down when we play.
 
If you wear the star, you are the enemy.

I hope Morris is as washed up, as some here say he is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 22)

Help Users
As we enjoy today's conversations, let's remember our dear friends 'Docsandy', Sandy Zier-Teitler, and 'Posse Lover', Michael Huffman, who would dearly love to be here with us today! We love and miss you guys ❤

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top