Why Doesn't "Gibbs' Football" Work for the Redskins?

the thing that stands out to me is during the 80,s to early 90,s joe gibbs was able to get the players personnel with a general manager and an owner who understands the buisness aspect of the nfl. then joe gibbs was able to just put the players in the right positions for 10-15 years.in todays economics of the nfl with the salary cap he is unable to go out and get the necessary players he needs for the long term without any restructuring of their deals being made. it pains me to see other teams using joe gibbs system with the exact same players joe had back then but it also makes me feel good at the sametime,so in short it still works in todays nfl.now i,m going to say that this organization has been a part of my life since birth and i aint gonna change now but what needs to be changed is the people in the front office starting with a general manager who understands todays nfl and acquire players so the coach can put them in the proper positions but again we have some solid players now but they aren,t utilizing them the way they should but i think they need to open it up more often cause these teams today don,t care what you used to do it,s what you can do in todays nfl and joe hasn,t done too much other than what he,s done in 2005..your right the past doesn,t buy us anything but good memories and i,m getting tired of falling back on good memories but this team is improving and thats great to see and they need to keep their feet fimly planted on the other teams throats when given the chance but being 2-1 is a good start to a season that has quite a few teams on the schedule that don,t play around they just get it done plain and simple.. i,m a true joe gibbs beleiver but i beleive someone needs to grab a firm hold on what playbook to use..catching a few balls wouldn,t hurt either.JC is only going to get better but with AS playbook or a joe gibbs,s playbook that remains to be seen but it,s time to open it up a little more against these teams of today...i,m with most of you all we are 2-1 right now with the season still in front of us so no panic here at all.it,s all about being leaders and taking a leadership role so who wants to step up and be a leader of this team and organization i,m ready as a fan so are you ready as a team and organization to do the same..joe gibbs 2.0 doesn,t compare to joe gibbs 1.0 so something tells me we need an upgrade from joe gibbs 2.0 so where,s the recovery disc somebodys holding it so they can,t run what they need to run as of yet...

great post smootsmack....

The problem for me isn't that the system "won't" work, it's more that it's not. As far as why it isn't, I have a lot of opinions, I won't get into all of them in this post, but I think that much of the struggles in the past years have been a function of the quarterback. I don't know that I blame Gibbs for the offense not stretching the field before because that was certainly part of the gameplan the first time around. It would be a relatively run focused gameplan and then they would stretch the field. That's what I see this team evolving into. I think if Gibbs stays next season, this team could be amazing.

However, I think my main issue with a lot of the playcalling is that there were so many short passes. As I stated previously, I believe that was largely a function of the QB not throwing the ball down the field. Were they calling different plays with Brunell in then they are with Campbell? Possibly, I'm not sure. However, I think that for a run first team to be successful, the threat of the deep ball needs to be there. My main complaint from Sunday wasn't so much that the playcalling, as far as pass - run ratio was wrong, it was more th passes they were calling. I didn't like seeing so many play action passes when the G Men were getting some pretty good pressure on Jason, I'd rather him be able to come away from center looking downfield.

Sunday aside, however, I think that a lot of people look at teams like the Colts, Patriots, and last year's Saints (and this year's Cowboys) and see that a team who is predominately a throwing team, winning games they want that because it's "sexier." I agree with that notion, but most of those teams have good balance. I think that was the problem with Gibbs 2.0 under Brunell, while there was a decent pass - run balance, the pass was never that much of a threat because it wasn't downfield, so it didn't back anyone off. Because of that, the run was less effective. With a qb who can stretch the field when teams put 8 in the box, the gameplan can be successful, it just needs to be well executed.

I think the major problem is that the really successful offenses of the nfl in the last 10 years are teams that can spread the field and exucte quick plays and shay away from the power game. For instance the colts have been masterminds of spreading defenses out and putting up huge numbers. They attack vertically, and can dink and dunk all the way down the field. They rarely use a fullback and most of the runs are in multiple reciever sets. If you even look at Clinton Portis in Denver...he was utilized as a one cut back relying on speed in multiple reciever formations. If you look at the best offenses of the last ten years they all have one thing in common, spreading the field. The Vikings did this with Randy Moss/Chris Carter in the late 90's. The Rams did it with Tory Holt, Issac Bruce and Marshall Faulk at the beginning of 2000. The Colts and Patriots have been doing it for years. Luckily our defense has been good enough to keep us close in many games. But it hasnt been as good as teams like the Ravens or Steelers who can win games on their own.The main problem is that we have not been able to put up enough points to win games. The power run game will keep us close in most cases but usually will not lead to a winning record...just look at our recent win/loss record. I think we have plenty of players that can stretch the field, Moss, Randle El, Cooley, Portis, even Betts. I would like to see more single back sets and more quick hitting run plays because scoring 18 points a game will not lead to many victories.

Look at the teams that are winning right now. Indy, Dallas, NE, and GB. They keep putting up points and do not let up until they completely devastate you. They make you shoot yourself in the foot by trying to play catch up against their solid defenses. That is the type of attitude and type of strategy that Gibbs is lacking. Gibbs was great in the 80's but the league is no longer a conservative one.

Indy, NE, and GB all have HoF quarterbacks. Dallas is an exception, but when you have a rookie QB, and are leading by multiple scores, common wisdom is to run clock. Otherwise, you might end up committing turnovers and giving the other team a chance to win. Imagine if we came out passing in the 2nd half, and JC threw a pick for TD. Whoops, now our lead is only 1 TD. What's better -- going 3 and out, or that?

Indy, NE, and GB all have HoF quarterbacks. Dallas is an exception, but when you have a rookie QB, and are leading by multiple scores, common wisdom is to run clock. Otherwise, you might end up committing turnovers and giving the other team a chance to win. Imagine if we came out passing in the 2nd half, and JC threw a pick for TD. Whoops, now our lead is only 1 TD. What's better -- going 3 and out, or that?

Why assume he would throw a pick 6?
I said it once, and I'll say it again, even IF he did (and that's a MONSTER if), then we would chaulk it up to QB inexperience. I'd rather lose that way, then by a bunch of experienced coaches making poor calls.
Take the handcuffs off the offense. Campbell is the best QB we've seen in at least decade, maybe since Joey T.

Maybe the game has changed alot since...the 80's.
Other teams have adjusted and now and then a team will get caught in a "WEAR THEM DOWN.".. Gibbs style football game....I think first you need true "HOGS" up front, so the run can setup the pass.
So,far the offensive line have been adverage at best with lots of injuries early. One thing is for sure never count a Gibb's coached team out.

Wow..I've just drank the kool aid and lived!

Gibbs football is still about pounding the ground, and pulling offensive linemen. The addition to Gibbs football since the 80's has been the horrendous clock control.

Im sure this has been re-hashed a billion times. But we are successfull running our plays 10.5 quarters out of 12 this year. We move down the field methodically with the occasional deep ball.

If we're playing for close games as Gibbs says Redskins football is, then he needs to take a remedial course in clock management. And to the local sports radio "allstars" that think we need to hire someone to assist in that portion of the game, I say get real. If a coach cant handle the two minute drill, then how can you expect your inexperienced QB to handle it? And furthermore, what are you being paid for?

I don't sleep better at night because Joe is our coach again, I sleep better at night when we win. And he doesnt look like an ass.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree.
In 1986,
There were only 8 players that had 1000 or more rushing yards. 23 in 2006. (that's 15 more)
There were only 10 people that had 1000 or more receiving yards. 19 in 2006. (that's 9 more)
There was only 1 player that had 2000 or more yards from scrimmage. 5 in 2006. (that's 4 more)
There were only 16 that had 2500 or more passing yards. 21 in 2006. (that's 5 more)
There were only 2 that had 4000 or more passing yards. 5 in 2006. (that's 3 more)
There were only 7 that had 80 or more receptions. 18 in 2006. (that's 11 more)
There were only 13 that had 70 or more receptions. 27 in 2006. (that's 14 more)
There were only 28 that had 60 or more receptions. 44 in 2006. (that's 16 more)
There were only 19 players that averaged 6 or more points per game. 37 in 2006. (that's 18 more)

Those numbers speak for themselves. Every era is different, and usually the more we progress the better the players get. We have more prolific players and offenses today.The mid 80s seem to lie as a dead ball era in history. Defenses totally dominated offenses most of the time. Obviously, thats not true anymore, but the strategies and nuiances are ever so similar (statistically at least, not necessarily anecdoteally).

To me, Gibbs football is doing whatever works best. It's not running the ball into 9 man fronts. It's not throwing the ball in 3rd and 1 situations more than you run it.

I don't think anyone cares if we run the ball 40 times a game, as long as we are effective. Something that didn't happen for the 3rd and 4th quarter. We better change our approach before the Lions game or we'll find ourselves in a hole VERY fast!