- Thread starter
- #81
Caliskinsfan
Burgundy & Gold Forevah
Can’t figure whether embed or this method is easier, lolYou might already know this, but just change the x.com to twitter.com and the tweet will show up instead of the link.
Can’t figure whether embed or this method is easier, lolYou might already know this, but just change the x.com to twitter.com and the tweet will show up instead of the link.
Wow! Teams are daring us to pass with those receivers? That speaks to the line and Howell.A recap from a HH poster of some of Logan Paulson analysis on the run game…
(Edited)
Avatar for Christopher Battle
I was watching a breakdown with Logan Paulsen the former Commanders tight end and he was saying that according to the numbers in the box meaning the defensive guys in the box to stop the run vs the offensive guys to block. That Washington is running when they are supposed to with even or light boxes from the defense. Of course you can run into a heavy box but it is rarely successful. He was saying that teams are putting more defenders in the box and daring Washington to pass.
He gave an example of Henry in Tennessee running against boxes that have more defenders than offensive guys to block and he was averaging almost no yards a carry against those looks. So we can say hey just run more. But until you can make teams stop loading the box and daring us to pass I am not sure what we are going to get from just running for running sake.
He also gave an example of the Shanahan tree from when he was playing with him in Atlanta when they went to the Super Bowl and he said Shanahan or McVay and the guys from that coaching tree never run into a heavy box. They call 2 plays, one a pass and one a run and it is up to the qb to read the box and then decide at the line of scrimmage which one to run based on the numbers. So again I don't know if asking Washington just to run against teams that are putting more defenders to tackle in the box than you have people to block is going to get the results we as fans expect it to.
Post was more about the running game and when it’s effective.Wow! Teams are daring us to pass with those receivers? That speaks to the line and Howell.
No i completely understand. I read the whole thing. You cant run just for the sake of running. My point was we have a really good WR group but our line is so bad they would rather take their chances with them than allow us to run.Post was more about the running game and when it’s effective.
While many fans want to see us running ALOT more, there are reasons that unless your watching tape, we as fans don’t see or know
That said, how quickly Sam processes, how pass pro is diagnosed and Oline strengths/weaknesses def play a role too
At least that’s my take and I’m no X and O guru, lol
Also thats no ding on our WRs (tho separation and spacing have been an issue) but Sam getting them the ball. The Oline has given enuff time by most metrics out there and of course this is par for the course for a young QB
GotchaNo i completely understand. I read the whole thing. You cant run just for the sake of running. My point was we have a really good WR group but our line is so bad they would rather take their chances with them than allow us to run.
I listened to Logan Paulsen's and Craig Hoffman's podcast Take Command today ... it was an hour long analysis of the game. Logan is my go to guy, he said early on Buffalo was using an 8 man box. Washington was moving the ball then but repeated mistakes (TOs and sacks) were killing drives. I think I comment how few rushing yards/attempts we had at halftime. Of course that went up in the 2nd half but by the Buffalo was only playng 6 in the box.Wow! Teams are daring us to pass with those receivers? That speaks to the line and Howell.
Logan put ONE sack on the OLine, a couple on just really tood plays by Buffalo and pretty much the rest on Sam. I think he said on the first drive when they were in the red zone one sack 3.2 seconds after the snap .... he said ball has to be out in 2.7 max. I am more demanding and said after the game said he needs to get it out in 2.5. LOLNo i completely understand. I read the whole thing. You cant run just for the sake of running. My point was we have a really good WR group but our line is so bad they would rather take their chances with them than allow us to run.
Yeah i heard the Junkies rattle off the sack times. Like you said a couple were in the 4s. That is way too long. Sam missed a couple of easy checkdowns as well. I like Sam but this is part of the process.Logan put ONE sack on the OLine, a couple on just really tood plays by Buffalo and pretty much the rest on Sam. I think he said on the first drive when they were in the red zone one sack 3.2 seconds after the snap .... he said ball has to be out in 2.7 max. I am more demanding and said after the game said he needs to get it out in 2.5. LOL
Keyboard coaches, if only it were that simple LOLAll week long all I heard was "we need to run the ball more, especially in the first half". Well if they run a lot on Sunday they will end up with 2nd and 9 all day long.
Naive to play the schedule game but 5-2 headed into the home Eagles game isn't a hot take.Everyone realizes we are 2-1 right, lol. The same team we beat also beat Dallas last week. Its a week to week league imo. The sky isn't falling. We have a NEW OC, OL, QB & scheme, lets give this some time to marinate. My guess is all of those mentioned are working their collective tails off to right the ship and will rally around Howell.
Look it up
Everyone realizes we are 2-1 right, lol. The same team we beat also beat Dallas last week. Its a week to week league imo. The sky isn't falling. We have a NEW OC, OL, QB & scheme, lets give this some time to marinate. My guess is all of those mentioned are working their collective tails off to right the ship and will rally around Howell.