Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Rams)

[Beemnseven]

I think the fundamental question regarding the offense is whether the system is wrong, or if the players just aren't that good. I'm beginning to think it's the latter.

The only bonafide star that other teams would really want is Chris Cooley. But tight ends usually aren't going to be the difference makers in this league. Clinton Portis at this point in his career is good enough to get yardage, but he's no longer a game-breaking threat. We've got two young receivers that have yet to prove themselves, while our so-called #1, Santana Moss, isn't showing up. ARE is a possession guy who, again, isn't a game-breaker.

Point is, we didn't have the playmakers last year, and we don't have them again this year.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I think the fundamental question regarding the offense is whether the system is wrong, or if the players just aren't that good. I'm beginning to think it's the latter.

The only bonafide star that other teams would really want is Chris Cooley. But tight ends usually aren't going to be the difference makers in this league. Clinton Portis at this point in his career is good enough to get yardage, but he's no longer a game-breaking threat. We've got two young receivers that have yet to prove themselves, while our so-called #1, Santana Moss, isn't showing up. ARE is a possession guy who, again, isn't a game-breaker.

Point is, we didn't have the playmakers last year, and we don't have them again this year.

I couldnt have said it better myself.

[SC Skins Fan]

Just remember that it could always be worse.

New York Jets at Washington Redskins - December 11th, 1993 | Pro-Football-Reference.com

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I think the fundamental question regarding the offense is whether the system is wrong, or if the players just aren't that good. I'm beginning to think it's the latter.

The only bonafide star that other teams would really want is Chris Cooley. But tight ends usually aren't going to be the difference makers in this league. Clinton Portis at this point in his career is good enough to get yardage, but he's no longer a game-breaking threat. We've got two young receivers that have yet to prove themselves, while our so-called #1, Santana Moss, isn't showing up. ARE is a possession guy who, again, isn't a game-breaker.

Point is, we didn't have the playmakers last year, and we don't have them again this year.

Cooley didn't enter the league as a bonafide star. My point being how are we going to see if guys like Kelly, Mitchell, Fred Davis (heck, even Marcus Mason) can contribute if they're not given the right opportunities? What makes Colston and Robert Meachem for example so much better than Kelly and Mitchell? It's opportunities. I don't buy that we don't have the players to make things happen.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Cooley didn't enter the league as a bonafide star. My point being how are we going to see if guys like Kelly, Mitchell, Fred Davis (heck, even Marcus Mason) can contribute if they're not given the right opportunities? What makes Colston and Robert Meachem for example so much better than Kelly and Mitchell? It's opportunities. I don't buy that we don't have the players to make things happen.

I agree. I think other teams put their rookies in a position to succeed while we do the opposite. I have a hard time believing that we missed on ALL 3 second round picks. It seems like every time we throw a deep ball to Kelly or Thomas, Campbell misses them. I think Campbell has played very well, but we need to keep feeding these guys the ball.

[roth74va]

I liked......
McIntosh-was flying around making plays.
Horton-this guy is gonna be a beast.
Rogers-regardless of his inability to catch, he is our best cover corner. They need to start negotiating now, maybe we can save some money in the long run.

I didnt like...
Heyer-he is clearly a backup, several plays it looked like his feet were stuck in concrete. One play the defender was 4 yards into the backfield before his feet even moved an inch.
Moss-what happened to what was once our most explosive playmaker. ST would be disappointed, he has lost the fire.
Zorn-pathetic, but Im not surprised. If some dumbass(ME) can sit there and predict 95% of your plays, what makes you think its gonna surprise Spag's? This guy was a good QB coach, but he is in WAY over his head as the head coach.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I think the fundamental question regarding the offense is whether the system is wrong, or if the players just aren't that good. I'm beginning to think it's the latter.

The only bonafide star that other teams would really want is Chris Cooley. But tight ends usually aren't going to be the difference makers in this league. Clinton Portis at this point in his career is good enough to get yardage, but he's no longer a game-breaking threat. We've got two young receivers that have yet to prove themselves, while our so-called #1, Santana Moss, isn't showing up. ARE is a possession guy who, again, isn't a game-breaker.

Point is, we didn't have the playmakers last year, and we don't have them again this year.

We agree more often than not, but I'm going with the former on this one. I think it's system. However, the truth is usually found somewhere in the middle. But if I had to put it on one or the other I would say it's Zorn. Has to be. This team moved the ball up and down the field yesterday, almost at will, until it got into the red zone. The same Redskins players that amassed those stats between the 20s marched right into the red zone. It wasn't the players that changed, it was the play calling and the tempo. That's on Jim Zorn. Besides, how would you know if you have playmakers if you don't call the right plays to even find out? Further when I look around the league, there are more mediocre and average players than great ones. So it's not about having a stud at every position.

The Cowboys took Brandon Jacobs out of the game last night, so what does Coughlin do? He kept chucking the ball to Manningham. At some point Tom Couglin said, we can't score 30 points and keep up with the Cowboys pounding the ball up the middle. So he abandoned the run relatively early and spread the ball around. They even lost one of their top receivers and top defenders, both playmakers, and still pulled it out. That's good coaching.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

We agree more often than not, but I'm going with the former on this one. I think it's system. However, the truth is usually found somewhere in the middle. But if I had to put it on one or the other I would say it's Zorn. Has to be. This team moved the ball up and down the field yesterday, almost at will, until it got into the red zone. The same Redskins players that amassed those stats between the 20s marched right into the red zone. It wasn't the players that changed, it was the play calling and the tempo. That's on Jim Zorn. Besides, how would you know if you have playmakers if you don't call the right plays to even find out? Further when I look around the league, there are more mediocre and average players than great ones. So it's not about having a stud at every position.

The Cowboys took Brandon Jacobs out of the game last night, so what does Coughlin do? He kept chucking the ball to Manningham. At some point Tom Couglin said, we can't score 30 points and keep up with the Cowboys pounding the ball up the middle. So he abandoned the run relatively early and spread the ball around. They even lost one of their top receivers and top defenders, both playmakers, and still pulled it out. That's good coaching.

What was that stat they flashed during the game, something like the Skins avg yards per play was over 7 outside of the RZ and it dropped to 1 something in the RZ? Kinda points to a play calling issue to me.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

We agree more often than not, but I'm going with the former on this one. I think it's system. However, the truth is usually found somewhere in the middle. But if I had to put it on one or the other I would say it's Zorn. Has to be. This team moved the ball up and down the field yesterday, almost at will, until it got into the red zone. The same Redskins players that amassed those stats between the 20s marched right into the red zone. It wasn't the players that changed, it was the play calling and the tempo. That's on Jim Zorn. Besides, how would you know if you have playmakers if you don't call the right plays to even find out? Further when I look around the league, there are more mediocre and average players than great ones. So it's not about having a stud at every position.

The Cowboys took Brandon Jacobs out of the game last night, so what does Coughlin do? He kept chucking the ball to Manningham. At some point Tom Couglin said, we can't score 30 points and keep up with the Cowboys pounding the ball up the middle. So he abandoned the run relatively early and spread the ball around. They even lost one of their top receivers and top defenders, both playmakers, and still pulled it out. That's good coaching.

Certainly I didn't mean to imply that Jim Zorn is blameless. He very well could be lost and clueless, but looking at it as objectively as I can, I wonder if our "playmakers" are as good as we all think they are. And I don't believe our offensive issues are limited to just the red zone. Our success between the 20's could be due to the relative health of the O-line. But if you think back to last year, as the guys up front began to get nicked up, it was no picnic between the 20's either. To assume that the offensive line will be able to maintain good health for the season is a notion that has already begun to fall apart.

Chris Cooley is a world-class tight end. No doubt about it. Though with only one TD catch last year, obviously he isn't being utilized to his best ability. The Clinton Portis debate might rage on forever, but no one can rationally argue that he's just as explosive five years ago as he is today. He gets you the tough yards; he's more of a workhorse back than a home-run threat.

Santana Moss hasn't been close to the level he was at in 2005. Defenses are better able to take him out of the game and reduce his ability to be a factor than ever before. In addition to all of that, it now looks like his head's not completely in it, with some attitude issues to boot.

Randle El is a possession guy only, and he hasn't once been able to add the extra dimension to the offense the way we, and I think the team, envisioned. Simply put, he's not a dynamic playmaker.

So that's a brief, but I think accurate rundown of our four so-called playmakers. And don't forget this: These are the same four guys who were here when Joe Gibbs was running the offense, when Al Saunders was running the offense, and now for Jim Zorn's offense. The results seem to be the same no matter who the coach is. There's not a game-breaker on our roster, and while Zorn's scheme hasn't proven it can get the best from the players on our roster, I'm not sure our best would be good enough no matter what the system is, or which coordinator is running it.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Certainly I didn't mean to imply that Jim Zorn is blameless. He very well could be lost and clueless, but looking at it as objectively as I can, I wonder if our "playmakers" are as good as we all think they are. And I don't believe our offensive issues are limited to just the red zone. Our success between the 20's could be due to the relative health of the O-line. But if you think back to last year, as the guys up front began to get nicked up, it was no picnic between the 20's either. To assume that the offensive line will be able to maintain good health for the season is a notion that has already begun to fall apart.

Chris Cooley is a world-class tight end. No doubt about it. Though with only one TD catch last year, obviously he isn't being utilized to his best ability. The Clinton Portis debate might rage on forever, but no one can rationally argue that he's just as explosive five years ago as he is today. He gets you the tough yards; he's more of a workhorse back than a home-run threat.

Santana Moss hasn't been close to the level he was at in 2005. Defenses are better able to take him out of the game and reduce his ability to be a factor than ever before. In addition to all of that, it now looks like his head's not completely in it, with some attitude issues to boot.

Randle El is a possession guy only, and he hasn't once been able to add the extra dimension to the offense the way we, and I think the team, envisioned. Simply put, he's not a dynamic playmaker.

So that's a brief, but I think accurate rundown of our four so-called playmakers. And don't forget this: These are the same four guys who were here when Joe Gibbs was running the offense, when Al Saunders was running the offense, and now for Jim Zorn's offense. The results seem to be the same no matter who the coach is. There's not a game-breaker on our roster, and while Zorn's scheme hasn't proven it can get the best from the players on our roster, I'm not sure our best would be good enough no matter what the system is, or which coordinator is running it.

I agree. The Skins have some nice players but they are not the dynamic playmakers and weapons most on this board think/want them to be.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by irish

I agree. The Skins have some nice players but they are not the dynamic playmakers and weapons most on this board think/want them to be.

How do we know that?

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

How do we know that?

Because Irish says they aren't. Come on Smoot, do you really need more proof than that?

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

Because Irish says they aren't. Come on Smoot, do you really need more proof than that?

Yeah Smoot. Us Irish are part of a group 36 million strong in America (ironically only 4 million in all of ireland). Do you really want to question us or must we be settling this back down by me boondocks? Wait what am I agreeing to again?

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by irish

I agree. The Skins have some nice players but they are not the dynamic playmakers and weapons most on this board think/want them to be.

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

How do we know that?

Originally Posted by 53fan

Because Irish says they aren't. Come on Smoot, do you really need more proof than that?

We know from watching four seasons with these guys under 3 different coordinators. Our record has been mediocre to average at best, and the offense has been really the only thing keeping this team from reaching the next level. These are the "playmakers" we have on offense.

The proof is what we've seen on the field since 2006.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

We know from watching four seasons with these guys under 3 different coordinators. Our record has been mediocre to average at best, and the offense has been really the only thing keeping this team from reaching the next level. These are the "playmakers" we have on offense.

The proof is what we've seen on the field since 2006.

While it's true that we really only have one playmaker (Cooley), it's not like we've had to suffer through an Oakland or Cleveland stretch of offensive ineptitude or anything.

You have to keep it in perspective: since 2005, the only players we invested in our offense with were the three 2008 2nd round draft picks. The only chance we have at offensive improvements is for the investments to pay off. Honestly, I can't see any other way we can generate offensive firepower.

On Sunday, we threw at Kelly 6 times and he made 4 catches for 36 yards. But Campbell also missed him on the route he ran the best during the game. Davis had the big block on the 3rd and 1 run on the last drive. Thomas was 0 for 2 attempts.

Marko Mitchell is starting to get some opportunities as well. It's not the dead end that the offense reached in the middle of October the last two years, there's actual reason to think that they might get better in the second half, you know, when they need to be.