• 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.

so...let's get to it

I hope it means you're addressing the Defense in the first round. We're playing a 3-4 defense with 4-3 personnel. We need a BIG MLB that can run. We need a better NT and someone better than Golston at DE. We need a legitimate FS. Hey, I'm not asking for much. ;)

I think NT is our biggest need on defense. The others are needed, but without this position filled the 3-4 is about worthless. Not only that, it is one of the hardest positions to fill. I bet when they were deciding to switch to the 3-4, Haynesworth was in the plans to fill this position, but greed, anger and immaturity got in the way.

I think our D would be a lot better with a great NT and mediocre LB rather than mediocre NT and great LB. I would say we need a better OLB to fill for Carter before MLB. But, we all understand there are holes to fill. To make matters worse, Rogers is in the final year of his deal as well. We may need a corner.

Of course, all of this could be mute if there is a lockout next year. I rather have a team riddled with holes than not watch football.

Back on track with the OP, I hope Neophyte is correct and teams start backing off and playing the pass a little bit. If we cannot run against the Rams this week, I wonder if we will be able to run at all.
 
hey guys im back :cool4:

Welcome back z0eboy. While you left without admitting you were wrong about Doughty making the team, I will now admit you were correct to suggest he is not the player we thought he was.

As far as our running game, it looks like we are abandoning the run too easily. Just like the Cowgirls' game we began to run the ball well in the 4th quarter, but it really didn't get going because we couldn't convert on 3rd and long.

CP does not look like he hits th holes like he once did, but he did hit the corner well. I think they ran the wrong plays for LJ, he should be running between the tackles not trying to get around the edge. I would agree with many who have suggested bringing in Ryan Torrain in favor of LJ. He just doesn't seem to have it which is a shame because he hustled more than anyone else in Training Camp.
 
Last edited:
Based on this article from Ryan O'Halloran, it appears that the unblocked man is making the tackle on running plays. This would lead me to believe that we don't quite have the scheme down yet.

http://www.csnwashington.com/09/21/10/Playing-Time-Totals-Vs-Texans/landing.html

The chief culprit for the lack of running game production is unblocked players making the tackle. On a first-and-10 play, T. Williams and Dockery headed up field and nobody blocked Jesse Nading, who made the play...
 
I don't think we will have a clear picture of what kind of team the Skins are for another couple of weeks. There are so many new wrinkles on this team. New coaches, Qb, Oline 3-4 transition.
I would think the coaches are looking at tape and looking at what worked, what didn't and why....just not enough data with just 2 games played. I'm guessing the defense will be feast or famine for most of the season. A healthy functional run game will certainly help the defense ecspecially late in the game. There are alot of top shelf rbs in the NFL that are struggling with consistency going into week 3 so I'm uncertain how much of a problem the Skins have at this point. No doubt it isn't functional after 2 games.
 
As far as the unblocked man scenario, isn't there always going to be at least one unblocked man? We, as fans, are not entirely certain at all times of which man should or should not be blocked. Yes, sometimes it is obvious, other times it is not. I cannot get the link to work for me for some reason, so I am not entirely sure which play he is discussing.

It is my understanding that the running back should expect having to get around or run through at least one guy every play. We really do not have a back that can do this.
 
As far as the unblocked man scenario, isn't there always going to be at least one unblocked man? We, as fans, are not entirely certain at all times of which man should or should not be blocked. Yes, sometimes it is obvious, other times it is not. I cannot get the link to work for me for some reason, so I am not entirely sure which play he is discussing.

It is my understanding that the running back should expect having to get around or run through at least one guy every play. We really do not have a back that can do this.

Not on the first level - a correctly designed run play should have everyone blocked.
 
Not on the first level - a correctly designed run play should have everyone blocked.

Lanky, not to poke at you, but wasn't the run by John Riggins in SB 17 designed to have him one one one with the safety? I guess I am not quite sure what you mean by first level because my understanding is that the safety was at first level. Wasn't it the safety's responsibility to hit Riggins at the line of scrimmage? Isn't that 1st level?
 
Lanky, not to poke at you, but wasn't the run by John Riggins in SB 17 designed to have him one one one with the safety? I guess I am not quite sure what you mean by first level because my understanding is that the safety was at first level. Wasn't it the safety's responsibility to hit Riggins at the line of scrimmage? Isn't that 1st level?

It was designed for Riggins to be one-on-one with Don McNeal, a CB. That is a battle Riggins should win 99 times out of 100. And a CB is a "2nd level" defender, generally, however that play being 4th and inches, everyone was stacked on the line. Technically Riggins did meet him after he'd picked up a yard or two.

Also, the Redskins were unique because they made no secret about what they were going to do. Every single person in that stadium knew they were gonna give it to Riggins.
 
As a completely irrelevant tangent, I once saw an interview with Don McNeal about that play. He said he had Riggins by the jersey so tightly that his fingernail ripped completely off when Riggins broke free. Now whenever I see that play I think about getting a fingernail ripped off.

Anyway, that's it, sorry. Back to the running game. :)
 
Getting back to fan's original question, there are a few issues I see that go somewhat hand-in-hand with our OL learning the ZBS. In Denver, Mike had Tom Nalen, a guy who made several Pro Bowls. I'm no expert on zone blocking but I think the center position is a key to making it work. Casey Rabach is no Tom Nalen.

In addition, Derrick Dockery certainly doesn't seem to fit the mold of the ZBS, nor does Jammal Brown. Artis Hicks is athletic enough but is he REALLY starter material? That pretty much leaves Trent Williams, a rookie, who appears to be the one starter on the O-Line fit for the ZBS.

My question: Is it easier to fit young, rookie types into a ZBS or can a grizzled vet forget most of the mauling he's learned in the past and re-learn a foreign scheme easier?

Watching some old Broncos footage, not only do the tackles need to be athletic but the guards seem to need to be even moreso. I would prefer seeing Mike and Kyle throw in some of our old running plays, including the counter-gap/counter-trey play. That was alway effective when you wanted to run play action, which we all know the Shanahans LOVE to do. At least for this season, I think the coaches are going to have to adapt to the O-Lines abilities rather than forcing the O-Line to adapt to the scheme. Hopefully they can reach a happy medium.

As for Portis and Johnson, I think they would prefer this as well. Johnson looks a lot more comfortable running between the tackles rather than Dancing With The Stars. I think Portis will be OK as he gets re-acclimated to the ZBS.

Yeah, it's gonna take time but I'm hoping we give the running game a little help. Then again, when McNabb is on fire like he was last week the temptation to throw is just too great.
 
Larry Johnson has been cut, and Chad Simpson has been signed, according to multiple reports.
 
Running game is as much about attitude as anything. During the Super Bowl it got to the point where the Hogs would tell the Dolphins the play and dare the DL to stop them.
This is border line arrogance, but it shows a nasty attitude the Hogs had.

I think rotating OL is hindering any chemistry development among the OL and RB's. Like someone else mentioned earlier, I feel Portis has lost a step. Remember watching a play last week and Portis had a huge hole and gained 10 yrds. A younger Portis would have ripped off a long run. Specualtion is we will see more of Williams as many in organization feel he could be the next RB find by Shanahan.

If Heyer has to play in place of Trent Williams...McNabb better pray we develop a running game fast.
 
Wether or not if Portis lost a step or not. There was no way the FO could have signed Mcnabb and (fill in the blank__RB__?) this off season. So using the benefit of hindsight would you have passed on Mcnabb or Trent williams and instead traded up to grab your favorite rb?
 
why is running game so bad?

IMO, we just haven't committed to it. I think Portis still has some gas in the tank and we should take advantage of that. 13 touches is simply not enough.

I guess the game itself dictates what plays you call but it would have been nice to have been able to run the ball a bit more effectively late in the game Sunday with the lead. I don't think we can do that unless we soften the other team up with he run early in the game.

Still, we nearly won Sunday and probably should have won. So it's a clear concern but I'm not going to panic...yet.
 
2 games into the season I'm not all that concerned. As for Portis? He appears to be fine except on the stat sheet. For the time being I don't think that is a reflection of Portis as much as our Oline needing more time to gel.
 
K.Shanahan on slow progress on ground: "I think it's scheme.. but it's also a bunch of players haven't played together. It takes some time."
 

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

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