I think Jim Zorn is a great head football coach.

How do you score points with an OL devastated by injury, against the Giants, Ravens, Steelers, Cowboys, Eagles..

Umm, good coaching? They weren't exactly lighting it up on offense when the O line wasn't "devastated" and they couldn't even score against the Rams and Lions (needed a punt return to win that game). It's one thing to struggle, it's another thing to score 12 points a game.



Kelly - injured. Davis - How do you get him into the game when you have a Pro Bowl TE and haven't had time to install a complete offensive package. Thomas - not an issue with "can't" it was a matter of "wouldn't" read the playbook. His attitude appears changed this year. To me his motivation is an issue that should've been handled by the position coach or OC (S. Smith)

Time? Several teams had new head coaches, new offensive coordinators and/or new QBs and they found a way to "install" their offense and get rooks to produce at least a little. The Skins had an excuse for every rookie. Even Chris Horton, as good as he was, would have ridden the pine all year if it hadn't been for Doughty going down. 1 out of 10 draft picks contribute???

I am not inclined to give the coaching staff the benefit of the doubt until they prove they deserve it. If our rooks can't get on the field playing for one of the worst offenses in the league, then they are either worthless, which is an indictment of the FO, or the coaching staff sucks at player development. Could be a little bit of both.

When the run game was working Zorn fed Portis. Any good coach does that. When the running game was struggling Portis got less carries to not wear him down. Team/carries Steelers/13, Cowboys/15, Seahawks/29, Giants/11, Ravens/11, Bengals/25, Eagles/22, 49ers/29 (this is the only game late in the year where the YPC was low and Portis had a heavy workload). The only opponents during this stretch that had a somewhat balanced workload for their backs were the Giants (Jacobs/Ward), Ravens (Mclain/McGahee), 49ers (Gore/Foster). If Zorn put Betts in and he fumbled in a key situation, the Negative Nancy crowd would be screaming Zorn is a bad coach for putting Betts in.

Fine. Feed him. But why not develop him into a passing threat as well, especially since our WRs are so mediocre? And I don't know how anyone could expect Portis to hold up all year with the recent injuries and his overall tread. Because they relied so much on Portis, no one was able to step up when he and the O line started to wear down. Dallas has a balanced running attack and a home run hitter in Felix Jones. I think he was injured in the second half. The Eagles pass 70% of the time and have a multi-dimensional back who can score from anywhere on the field, whether the ball is handed to him or thrown to him. All I'm saying is we have 2 1000 yard backs and a guy like Rock who can make things happen when he gets the ball in space (as evident from his kick-off returns for TDs). And Portis fumbles too, so big whoop. I think and hope Zorn will mix things up this year.

It's been said before, Zorn didn't have his whole package in. If you remember correctly Gibbs' retirement and the coaching search was pretty sudden. Our offensive system change was a major overhaul in the passing game. How do you execute a no-huddle when the offense is still being learned? .

Exactly how many games are required to throw in a no-huddle series every now and again to keep the defense off-balance? Again, several teams experienced significant change and still did more with what they had. If the players couldn't figure out Zorn's offense when only a third of it was installed, then I shudder to think what's going to happen when he unleashes his entire scary offensive repertoire. As much as I hate the Ravens, they had a new HC, rookie QB and new offensive coordinator and their offense was prolific during the second half of the year and they successfully ran trick plays on a regular basis. And I know, I know. Their D and their O line... blah blah.


Here's some numbers for you: Redskins - 20% of passes to RB/FB.
Dolphins - 26%
Chargers - 33%

Team X - 18.4%
Team Y - 16.8%

Are the OC's of team X & Y bad OCs? I'm sure you guessed by now who Team X & Y are? X - Cardinals, Y - Steelers.



The Dolphins and Chargers do it by design and for long gains, while the Skins checked down for 5 yard gains on 3rd and 10. In the playoff game against the Ravens, the Dolphins went 80 yards for a score on the opening drive without throwing a single pass to a WR (all passes went to RBs, including their third back). Portis falling down to catch a 5 yard dink counts in your stats, but it doesn't tell the true story of our offense.


Possibly. Or, he believed his 270+ lb Pro Bowl FB could get in from the 1. For the record though, I agree that was a bad couple of playcalls. Sellers isn't a ball carrier. He's a blocker and decent receiver out of the backfield. But do we say Zorn sucks because he made one mistake at a crucial point? I don't believe so.

And he would believe this because? When has Sellers shown the skills to be a goal line back? And if LBS is all that counts, then give the ball to Samuels. Zorn did it to spite Portis. And I don't think Zorn sucks. I think there's more evidence to indicate he WILL suck than there is to indicate he will be GREAT. Like I said, I hope I am wrong.


If I remember correctly during the HC search, most of the HC candidates mentioned Zorn as a very good OC candidate. The FO track record over the last 4-5 years is far superior to the first 5 years. We'll find out this season, but if DT & Rinehart gain starting roles, Kelly/Davis produce, and we get solid play from Orakpo and Barnes I'd say the FO is doing pretty good.


Agreed.


I believe you will be proven wrong. IMO the 2-6 finish had a lot more to do with OL injuries/age and the defense's inability to stop people in the 4th Qtr and create turnovers than Zorn's coaching ability.


I hope you are right.

Maybe you should have titled the thread "I predict Zorn will become a great head football coach" so people wouldn't get their panties all tied up in a bunch wilsowilso. :)

Agreed, since apparently it's ok to exaggerate a negative thing about our team (the o-line is in ruins, AH will be a bust, JC is done, etc., etc.) but exaggerating positive things (like your thread) will not be tolerated.

May I remind some of you that the Redskins went undefeated in three games against the two teams that played in the NFC Championship game last year.

Last season was a roller coaster for sure and there are many questions we all want answered, but is it so hard to project a significant step forward from the offense this year?

If he proves out the way I think he will, THE Dan will be the genious for elevating a .........mere position coach

somewhere down the line i want russ grimm to coach this team.

somewhere down the line i want russ grimm to coach this team.

Dude can't seem to land a HC job anywhere else so it means he's probably an ideal fit here.

I think three to four years should be long enough for any coach to turn a team around, not one or two.

Note:
Jim Zorn inherited a playoff team...there wasn't much to "turn around"
He only needed to do as well or 2 wins better to be considered a good coach...not to mention, he didn't touch the defense, special teams...and even the runnning game.
That is a pretty light load for a new head coach, but understandable considering how light of a rookie he was.

Ask yourself this question...if Gibbs had this team with a 6-2 start, would they have missed the playoffs?....doubtful...I don't care who is injured....he'd probably make seller a RT to make it happen...it would be ugly...and he'd be launching deep passed to Moss to make it happen...but it is rare that a great coach wins 75% of his games only to finish 500.

Note:
Jim Zorn inherited a playoff team...there wasn't much to "turn around"
He only needed to do as well or 2 wins better to be considered a good coach...not to mention, he didn't touch the defense, special teams...and even the runnning game.
That is a pretty light load for a new head coach, but understandable considering how light of a rookie he was.

Ask yourself this question...if Gibbs had this team with a 6-2 start, would they have missed the playoffs?....doubtful...I don't care who is injured....he'd probably make seller a RT to make it happen...it would be ugly...and he'd be launching deep passed to Moss to make it happen...but it is rare that a great coach wins 75% of his games only to finish 500.

The Skins used to have a "system" much like the Patriots have today. Guys put on the Pats jersey and somehow play better than they did with the jersey they wore the year before. That's how they can overcome truly "devastating" injuries like losing Tom Brady (losing line men is something most teams have to deal with every year). The Skins used to be the same way. Lose the starting QB and still make it to the Super Bowl. Take marginal talents like Ricky Ervins and Ricky Sanders and turn them into Super Bowl legends. Guys like Rypien and Gary Clark would go to different teams and wouldn't be near the players they were when they were with the Skins.

If Zorn can build a system like that, one that gets the most out of its players, one that can overcome injuries, and one that wins championships, he will be great.

Of course, Gibbs didn't have Cerrato and Snyder to deal with;)

Maybe you should have titled the thread "I predict Zorn will become a great head football coach" so people wouldn't get their panties all tied up in a bunch wilsowilso. :)

This forum would be boring if people weren't getting their nuts twisted from time to time;)

Fine. Feed him. But why not develop him into a passing threat as well, especially since our WRs are so mediocre? And I don't know how anyone could expect Portis to hold up all year with the recent injuries and his overall tread. Because they relied so much on Portis, no one was able to step up when he and the O line started to wear down. Dallas has a balanced running attack and a home run hitter in Felix Jones. I think he was injured in the second half. The Eagles pass 70% of the time and have a multi-dimensional back who can score from anywhere on the field, whether the ball is handed to him or thrown to him. All I'm saying is we have 2 1000 yard backs and a guy like Rock who can make things happen when he gets the ball in space (as evident from his kick-off returns for TDs). And Portis fumbles too, so big whoop. I think and hope Zorn will mix things up this year.



The Dolphins and Chargers do it by design and for long gains, while the Skins checked down for 5 yard gains on 3rd and 10. In the playoff game against the Ravens, the Dolphins went 80 yards for a score on the opening drive without throwing a single pass to a WR (all passes went to RBs, including their third back). Portis falling down to catch a 5 yard dink counts in your stats, but it doesn't tell the true story of our offense.



And he would believe this because? When has Sellers shown the skills to be a goal line back? And if LBS is all that counts, then give the ball to Samuels. Zorn did it to spite Portis. And I don't think Zorn sucks. I think there's more evidence to indicate he WILL suck than there is to indicate he will be GREAT. Like I said, I hope I am wrong.
A lot of these assertions contradict each other. You can't claim lack of creativity on offense and then question Zorn's desire to turn Mike Sellers into a GL back...because he's never been a goal line back before. That's what creativity is, it's not necessarily about being unconventional, just about doing different things to try to maximize the value of your personnel. In this respect, I think Zorn is quite creative.

What evidence do you have to defend the claim that the Skins checked down more often than other teams? Speicifally, how are they different than the Dolphins or Chargers in this respect (outside of the misbelief that some teams use their backs aggressively, but when other teams do the exact same thing they are being too conservative)?

Just to throw a stat out there, the Redskins passing game was up to a yard per attempt more effective when they blocked with 6 as opposed to 5. So if you are wondering why the Redskins don't always use Portis as a receiving threat, I think that might be a good place to start. Not that you can't use both Portis and Betts in obvious passing situations, but if you do, you lose the ability to get one of your young receivers into the game in a critical situation.

I also think you are understating the value of the Betts injury on our offense. I'm really not the biggest Betts fan, and despite the fact that he does all the small things well, he doesn't offer anything that Portis doesn't, but when he went down, you lose a lot of trick play ability in the offense. Zorn was using them together in packages, but once you lose one of them, it's understandable that they moved away from these packages. By the time Betts came back for the Seattle game, you could understand how a team on a two game losing streak was not so worried about trying to get two running backs on the field together (especially since Kelly was healthy for the first time).