It's official - Al Saunders is our new offensive coordinator!

I think you are all missing the point of Gibbs hiring Saunders!!! First it shows again Gibbs can check his ego at the door and get minds that know the NFL game!!! In todays NFL it is not the same game when GIBBS left. Free agency for one and the Cap!!! D's are attacking you all the time!!! The games is much more fast paced with technologly,rule changes and so on!!!

Gibbs has never had an ego, I agree with you on that part! Not sure exactly what you mean by "getting minds that know the NFL game?" Are you suggesting that Gibbs doesn't have the mind for the NFL anymore? I'd have to humbly disagree with that! Even though I believe the offense needed improvement after the performance we witnessed in the playoffs, overall, Gibbs and his offensive staff elevated the offense from #30 to #11. While it wasn't a flashy offense, at times, it was unstoppable! Hiring Al Saunders will give us what we need to push it over the hump and really allow this offense to exploded! But remember, Saunder's philosophy is the same philosophy of Gibbs. You're not going to see a completely different philosophy. He is just going to reinforce what we have already been doing while hopefully spreading the offense some.

I think the first question you ask is:

Who will call the plays? If Gibbs were to give that up, you would have one heck of a story. If not, they're just adding one more person to an already overstaffed comittee.

Well it's not really who calls the plays, but what plays and schemes, if you will, are added. Playcalling is a part of it, but not all of it. Also take into consideration that Saunders may utilize certain players more or less.
For instance, the role of a Robert Royal could be expanded next year.

And yes, I think Gibbs will give up some of his play calling to Saunders.

Gibbs wasn't calling all the plays this year anyway, so if he gives part or all of it up it won't be a radical change.

Its going to be interesting to see if they keep the Gibb's system (h-back and multiple formation/motion plays) or totally convert. I understand that the guys have the same background, but their offenses are completely different. Also, I know we sort of collapsed in the post season, but Gibbs/Breaux/Buges took the team from the 30th ranked offense in 2004 to 11th in 2005... I'm not sure if its time to re-vamp everything.

I wonder how radical this change is going to be.

If you had read this thread, you would have noticed that almost no one is missing the point...

Thank you. What exactly did we miss, RedskinPete? The previous 148 posts basically said everything you said.

And what's with ending almost every sentence with three exclamation points !!! That's pretty annoying !!!

Its going to be interesting to see if they keep the Gibb's system (h-back and multiple formation/motion plays) or totally convert. I understand that the guys have the same background, but their offenses are completely different. Also, I know we sort of collapsed in the post season, but Gibbs/Breaux/Buges took the team from the 30th ranked offense in 2004 to 11th in 2005... I'm not sure if its time to re-vamp everything.

I wonder how radical this change is going to be.

Good points. I think the 'H-back' is purely a Joe Gibbs innovation. In fact, I remember reading that Gibbs came up with the position as a way to combat the threat posed by Lawrence Taylor. Looking back, Norv never used an H-back, as it's called, in Dallas or Washington -- Daryl Johnston, Marc Logan, Larry Bowie -- they were all listed as "full backs". They mainly served as blockers. Norv Turner once said that his fullbacks blocked 70% of the time, received passes 20% of the time, and ran the ball just 10%.

The other key difference appears to be use of tight ends in receiving patterns more so than in Gibbs' offense. Guys like Jay Novacek, Jamie Asher, Stephen Alexander for Norv Turner, and Tony Gonzales for Al Saunders are clearly more involved as receivers than Gibbs' tight ends are. Ron Middleton, James Jenkins, and Robert Royal now, come to mind as players who served roles more as blockers than pass catchers. Something tells me that Cooley would be more than capable of adapting to the 'receiving' tight end if called on to do so.

I guess it's all going to depend on precisely how much control Gibbs is willing to relenquish to Saunders with the offense.

Yes, Dan Henning...now w/Carolina. And Don Breaux, our current OC, worked with Gibbs in the past.

So what is going to happen to Don Breaux (http://www.redskins.com/team/cprofile.jsp?id=31) now? What will his role be? Assistant OC? Although he and the rest of the coaching staff just signed a new contract?
see http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=15096

So what is going to happen to Don Breaux (http://www.redskins.com/team/cprofile.jsp?id=31) now? What will his role be? Assistant OC? Although he and the rest of the coaching staff just signed a new contract?
see http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=15096

I think we'll see yet another innovative, assistant coaching title for Breaux: Maybe he'll be the "Quality Control - Offensive Assistant in charge of Converting 3rd and Long." Or 3rd and Short. Either one.

I am I the only one that thinks that KC's offense is very similar to ours? I mean think about it, Cooley and Tony G. play similar rolls on the offense, both rely on a strong running game and play action passes. KC lined up in 2 TE sets, and single back formations, too. I think that we will see basicly Gibbs offense with new rinkles intellegently mixed in from Saunders.

I am I the only one that thinks that KC's offense is very similar to ours? I mean think about it, Cooley and Tony G. play similar rolls on the offense, both rely on a strong running game and play action passes. KC lined up in 2 TE sets, and single back formations, too. I think that we will see basicly Gibbs offense with new rinkles intellegently mixed in from Saunders.

no, you're right - that is what makes this such a good fit. they are similiar. saunders may have schemed a little differently and used different sets, but the philosophies are pretty much the same.