Peyton Manning videotaped making 35+ yard throws at Duke University

Actually do you know who invented the bunch sets? Gibbs 1 with The Posse.I did not know that, but that would be a smart way to use that personnel.

If he comes here I'm happy, but the more I think about it I want a QB to come in and learn our system not his system, don't get me wrong I'm sure KS can learn alot from PM but he needs to play our system IMO.

Well you talk to the QB's and they will say that most teams copy each other and they all pretty much run similar plays. Personally I think PM is smart enough to adapt to KS's system more so play calls and I too think KS could learn a lot from PM. It would be nice to see both get along well enough to make this system a fine tuned running machine for the next few yrs and maybe get a long well enough to be able to work together in the future.

The Kyle Shanahan offense is a lot more vertical than it seems to be given credit for. It's not really a "sideline to sideline" west coast offense

I have a comment and a question.

What we have been fed in the media, and what we have seen here in DC, is our offense is more of a MS scheme then KS.

In Houston, KS's offense required the QB to throw the ball down field out of the pocket predominantly rather than throwing outside the pocket by design?

So what is our philosophy? How does KS run our system correctly if he has his own way of doing things?

That probably requires a lengthier answer than I'm prepared to write at the moment. I would say a) there were more bootlegs in Houston than Schaub probably needed and b) look at Grossman's games and you'll see more of that vertical offense. Thing is Mike and Kyle don't have a radically different offense from each other. Though yes, Mike prefers more natural mobility from his QB. It's them vs. other WCO guys. Like say Mike Holmgren, which is why a Matt Flynn works for Cleveland but not for us.

I have a comment and a question.

What we have been fed in the media, and what we have seen here in DC, is our offense is more of a MS scheme then KS.

In Houston, KS's offense required the QB to throw the ball down field out of the pocket predominantly rather than throwing outside the pocket by design?

So what is our philosophy? How does KS run our system correctly if he has his own way of doing things?SmootSmack will probably have a slightly different take on things, so I hope that this is taken as a second answer to a good question, instead of just me trying to state his opinion.

This is Kyle Shanahan's offense. Kyle Shanahan's offense uses a lot of plays that you have seen Denver use over the last twenty years.

Philosophically, Kyle is a lot more "college" than Mike ever was. By that I mean: a lot of Kyle's tendencies as a coach suggest that you can prep a very high percentage of your coaching during the week, and that preparation will show on game day. The quarterback's work is done predominantly in practice, not at the line of scrimmage. The Redskins have a game plan going into the week, and they will stick with that gameplan until the game situation dictates they need to wing it.

They can (and do) take a lot of time in the huddle, because on a lot of their passing plays, the quarterback knows where he is trying to get the ball before the defense even gives him a look. I'm not saying the Redskins don't have secondary reads, because that would not be accurate. The Redskins are a 1 -> 2 -> throw away/check down team like most in the NFL. It's just that: the Redskins don't determine the play progression at the line of scrimmage based on the defense. They already had it set on Wednesday in practice. Kyle's plays attempt to act foolproof to defensive wrinkles.

The problem that Kyle has run into as Redskins OC is when defensive coaches decide they are going to man up on the Redskins receiver or man-press the Redskins receiver and dare a quarterback like McNabb, Grossman, or Beck to find a better matchup while the play is happening, or throw the receiver open. When Grossman or McNabb has been locked in, they were able to do this, but a majority of the time, the Redskins have struggled with man coverage defenses.

Grossman's biggest problem is that when he identifies man to man coverage, he often forgets that the defense still has two "free" players on the field he needs to account for. So he'll throw away from the man to man defender to help out his receiver, and possibly will still get him killed.

Philosophically, Kyle believes in his passing game. He doesn't always believe in the running game (whether you believe this to be a talent issue or a coaching failure is entirely up for debate -- but do consider that he believes in his passing game and in Rex Grossman despite no playmakers on the outside). That's a big difference between Mike and Kyle. In Mike's best coaching days, he could force a defense to tip it's hand and cheat to either stop the run or the boot passing game. When defenses cheat on Kyle or queue into something the Redskins are trying to do that is gameplan specific, I don't think Kyle sees it as quickly as some other coordinators, which is why you won't see a lot of screens or draws in the second quarter if the Redskins offense is struggling. Maybe that's something that will come with experience. It's something Zorn did very well, although you could argue that Zorn's base offense would be abandoned entirely after the play script was exhausted.

Kyle runs a largely effective, but highly risky play action passing game off of play action as a staple. The problems have always come when defensive coordinators cheat and start to send two defenders (blitzers) to the same gap in the protection in an obvious attempt to blow up the Redskins pass protection, based on their tendency to not adjust always at the LOS. Obviously, if DCs are cheating often enough, that means that they simply will not have enough guys in the front to stop the run.

But if the Redskins believe they don't have the personnel to run the ball in passing downs, or worse, they have the personnel, but the coordinator can't dial up the correct rushing play to attack a cheating defense, then this is a worthwile gamble by the Rex and Rob Ryans of the world.

Here's a good article

One play can alter a season - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/one-play-can-alter-a-season/2011/12/02/gIQA9fsDQO_print.html)

And some supporting pictures

Film Breakdown of 'An Intricate Look into Kyle Shanahan's Play Call vs Dallas' - Hogs Haven (http://www.hogshaven.com/2011/12/8/2622674/film-breakdown-of-an-intricate-look-into-kyle-shanahans-play-call-vs)

What we have been fed in the media, and what we have seen here in DC, is our offense is more of a MS scheme then KS.

In Houston, KS's offense required the QB to throw the ball down field out of the pocket predominantly rather than throwing outside the pocket by design?

So what is our philosophy? How does KS run our system correctly if he has his own way of doing things?Mike and Kyle run the same offense in terms of verbiage and overall 'playbook'.
Kyle learned from Houston under Kubiak who learned from Mike in Denver.

But, to sum it up in football philosophy I think Mike can be considered more of balanced (which today would probably be considered run heavy) playcaller and Kyle is closer to pass heavy play caller.

Mike has a much greater emphasis and calls a more diverse running game then Kyle.
Mike's was more diverse of course the staple was zone runs but it also featured traps, draws, tosses.
Kyle's running game was very basic: inside zone/out side zone.
Its wasn't until week 12ish that Kyle added and began featuring the toss/pitch as his main weapon in the ground game.
Mike's emphasis on the run creates favorable passing match-ups because the emphasis on the run dictates coverages.
And creates a bunch of easy big play completions almost every game.
Mike also moved the pocket more not just play-action based rollouts and bootlegs but non-playaction dash outs and sprint outs.
The result was an offense that featured well defined and often half-field reads.
The result was an offense easy to execute for the QB.
Kyle's offense is pass first.(and there's nothing wrong with that I'm not saying that Kyle is a bad playcaller. I'm pointing out the difference is their playcalling as I see it.)
In Kyle short career his pass/run ratio is 60/40. (2010 it was actually less then 60/40)
Kyle's offense is more of a straight drop back 5 step passing game.
There is more onus on the QB dropping back and reading out full field progressions.
Its a more QB decision making intensive offense.

Those differences are the big ones that jump out to me.

I think its pretty much moot because IF they sign Peyton Manning they should in essence run 'Peyton Manning/Colt's offense' or else what's the point?
Peyton and Kyle sitdown and discuss their plan of action for the offense but the passing game specifically.
Peyton discussing how the playcalling and audible system worked.
They discuss concepts and translate the core concepts of the Colt's offense into our/Kyle's offense verbiage.

Kyle's offense is better than we have seen simply because we don't have the talent to take it down field enough.

Still reading through the answers guys, but nice work. Thanks for your insight.

And some supporting pictures

Film Breakdown of 'An Intricate Look into Kyle Shanahan's Play Call vs Dallas' - Hogs Haven (http://www.hogshaven.com/2011/12/8/2622674/film-breakdown-of-an-intricate-look-into-kyle-shanahans-play-call-vs)What I like most about this play is it is essentially a spread offense play run out of the tight splits favored by pro coaches.

The pass concept is more popular on the college level, like, for example, here:

Tip Drill Pass Catch (Baylor vs Oklahoma) - YouTube

Although it would help if the QB made the correct read ;)