Run the damn football!

[RobH4413]

Originally Posted by illdefined

Then we miss out on Cooley. the one receiver big and slow enough for Brunell to see in the middle.

despite his size, Duckett isn't a fullback and probably wouldn't take to lead blocking. Cooley has done that a good deal though. i think Cooley lead blocking for Sellers is a hell of an idea at times, Sellers has some pretty good feet! it's true!

I was implying Sellers lead blocking for Duckett. Not vice versa. But Cooley blocking for Sellers isn't a bad idea either.

Sellers reminds me of Bettis at times. He's this big monstrous human that throws in a juke here or there. He's definitly one of the many weapons being under-utilized.

[JGisLordOfTheRings]

Originally Posted by RobH4413

I was implying Sellers lead blocking for Duckett. Not vice versa. But Cooley blocking for Sellers isn't a bad idea either.

Sellers reminds me of Bettis at times. He's this big monstrous human that throws in a juke here or there. He's definitly one of the many weapons being under-utilized.

wow, how can the fans see this potential but the fucking coaches are blind to it? make no sense to me but, then again im not a coach either....

[RobH4413]

I say we form a legion and just storm Redskins park with a Coup de Fans.

I'm pretty sure we'll all fail miserably, but so far that won't change anything.

[MTK]

We don't even need to get this cute with running Sellers, we have a 1500 yard RB in Portis, one of the best backs in the game, USE HIM. Give him 20-25 carries per game, Betts another 10 carries or so, and let's finally get Duckett involved in some short yardage situations. We had that formula working beautifully against Jacksonville (minus Duckett) , but somehow we took that gameplan and shoved it under the couch or something. Dust that baby off and let's get back to work!

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by RobH4413

I think we need to set the tone against INDI.

Why don't we institute a "full house" backfield. Sellers, Portis, and Duckett.
Saunders can run his sweeps with Sellers and Duckett blocking.

oh, you either minced your words there or implied Duckett would block for Portis whenever they went that direction. either way, Cooley would be best for that plus pose the passing threat from there or the TE position.

sadly, we actually use this package ALOT!

[JGisLordOfTheRings]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

We don't even need to get this cute with running Sellers, we have a 1500 yard RB in Portis, one of the best backs in the game, USE HIM. Give him 20-25 carries per game, Betts another 10 carries or so, and let's finally get Duckett involved in some short yardage situations. We had that formula working beautifully against Jacksonville (minus Duckett) , but somehow we took that gameplan and shoved it under the couch or something. Dust that baby off and let's get back to work!

BRAVO BRAVO!

'if it aint'a broka dont'a fix it, ah?'

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Throw in Rock...the non-fumbling version.......to the list of good RBs we've got in our stable.

[JGisLordOfTheRings]

Rock is great...i wonder if he ever did get that fumbilitis under control.....

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

We don't even need to get this cute with running Sellers, we have a 1500 yard RB in Portis, one of the best backs in the game, USE HIM. Give him 20-25 carries per game, Betts another 10 carries or so, and let's finally get Duckett involved in some short yardage situations. We had that formula working beautifully against Jacksonville (minus Duckett) , but somehow we took that gameplan and shoved it under the couch or something. Dust that baby off and let's get back to work!

replace Betts with Duckett and Duckett with Sellers in the above and we got the winning formula. keeping Cooley as the 2nd FB.

[hooskins]

See the "its not al's fault, so stfu" thread. Can't blame him too much from getting away from the run, it falls on the execution of the plays.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by hooskins

See the "its not al's fault, so stfu" thread. Can't blame him too much from getting away from the run, it falls on the execution of the plays.

I do blame him for getting away from the run. I also blame the players for the (lack of) execution. There's enough blame for everyone to take bite.

[illdefined]

Originally Posted by hooskins

See the "its not al's fault, so stfu" thread. Can't blame him too much from getting away from the run, it falls on the execution of the plays.

executing is much harder to do when the defense knows exactly what to expect. all they were doing (all any team needs to do really) is a wide zone or close up underneath man with the safeties shading the sidelines. even so, Clinton was getting 4.some YPC despite that fact, i'd call that a fair amount of execution..

[hail_2_da_skins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

We don't even need to get this cute with running Sellers, we have a 1500 yard RB in Portis, one of the best backs in the game, USE HIM. Give him 20-25 carries per game, Betts another 10 carries or so, and let's finally get Duckett involved in some short yardage situations. We had that formula working beautifully against Jacksonville (minus Duckett) , but somehow we took that gameplan and shoved it under the couch or something. Dust that baby off and let's get back to work!

I like your thinking Matty. The Skins need to establish their identity and slam the ball down their opponents throats. I propose that Portis gets the majority of the runs, at least 20 touches per game. I would increase T. J. Duckett's role and reduce Bett's role. T. J. Duckett should be featured as a change of pace to Portis. His power running style is a perfect complement to Portis breakaway ability. Ducket should also be used in short yardage situations. Betts would be the third down back. Betts is a better receiver out of the backfield and the Skins should take advantage of that. Rock is doing a great job on special teams. No change there.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I do blame him for getting away from the run. I also blame the players for the (lack of) execution. There's enough blame for everyone to take bite.

I agree. There's no way we should have gotten away from the run. Running the ball is all about attitude and having the mindset that even if the other team stops you 9 times out of 10, you're not going to give up and that 1 play could bust the game open.

In a close game against an 0-5 team, there was no reason to bail on the running game and give Portis just 14 carries.

[hooskins]

If this was all Al's doing, then why didn't Gibbs step in any point during game, and said "Hey Al, let's call more runs." He apparently didn't, so I would rest some of the blame on him, because isn't he suppose to oversee the entire game, and make sure things are running "well"????