PDA

View Full Version : HOF Strategy



V-Unit
09-12-2006, 09:15 PM
This is just a little experiment. I hope it works.

I wanted to talk with the more hardcore fans about the actual strategy we are seeing in the games. Things like original gameplans, halftime adjustments, exploited matchups, and other strategical issues. Much of the board is focused on individual players, but the difference between Tice and Childress can already be seen.

I think coaching strategy and gameplanning is an interesting subject, but I'm no buff, so I thought I would start the thread out with a few stragegical questions. Feel Free to answer with your opinions!

1. Did we plan all along to have Taylor carry the ball 30 times?
I would think that Moore is able to spell him more than he did against Washington.

2. In the first half Al Saunders' offense had the D a bit confused. What adjustments did we make during halftime to stop the confusion?

3. The Redskins tried to exploit Greg Blue as a weakness in our D, but it really didn't work. What do you think the reason for that is?

4. The defense blitzed a bit more than I was expecting them to. I know this is not typical cover 2, but I think the front four wasn't applying as mcuh pressure as we would have liked them to. Can we expect a lot of blitzes throughout the season or do you think the lack of pressure (no sacks) was the reason for increased blitzing?

5. It all worked out in the end, but what did you think of Childress' playcalling on the final drive? Once we were in field goal position, he did not try for a touchdown. Also, he ran to the left three straight times. I know that is the strength of the OLine, but what is wrong with running right to center the ball for Longwell?

NodakPaul
09-12-2006, 09:28 PM
I am not an expert football strategist by any means, but I will weigh in with my opinion on a few of those points.

1) I didn't see a need for Moore to spell Taylor.
He was running fine, in fact better IMHO, as the game wore on.
I think if the need arises to spell him more, Coach Childress will do so.

4) I didn't notice a lot of extra blitzes, but I could be wrong. I think the front four were doing well with their penetration, MB was just smart enough to get rid of the ball before getting sacked.

5) I agreed with Childress's playcalling on the final drive 100%.
It was more important to burn the clock than to go for a touchdown.
Had we tried to throw a couple in the endzone and had an incomplete pass, the skins would have had a time out left, which would have meant at least one chance throw into the endzone for them.

DarrinNelsonguy
09-12-2006, 09:33 PM
Not only did we have a Gameplan to begin with, but what amazes me is that we stuck to it even when times got tough. In the past we would have quit trying to run the ball early and would have become turnover prone because we didn't have the patience.

cajunvike
09-12-2006, 09:58 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


I am not an expert football strategist by any means, but I will weigh in with my opinion on a few of those points.

1) I didn't see a need for Moore to spell Taylor.
He was running fine, in fact better IMHO, as the game wore on.
I think if the need arises to spell him more, Coach Childress will do so.

4) I didn't notice a lot of extra blitzes, but I could be wrong. I think the front four were doing well with their penetration, MB was just smart enough to get rid of the ball before getting sacked.

5) I agreed with Childress's playcalling on the final drive 100%.
It was more important to burn the clock than to go for a touchdown.
Had we tried to throw a couple in the endzone and had an incomplete pass, the skins would have had a time out left, which would have meant at least one chance throw into the endzone for them.


It's more of a change-of-pace thing than spelling Taylor...it throws off the defense to have to adjust to different running styles.

Brunell is a puss...he was ditching the ball WAY too early so he wouldn't get hit...and that roughing the QB call was LAME...yet the Skins crowd cheered that...while booing the OBVIOUS late hit call on Sean Taylor!

You are dead on though on the fact that Childress's strategy was perfect.
We WON...and now that is all that matters.
The one thing that Childress seems to have down pat after only ONE game is something that Tice never mastered...CLOCK MANAGEMENT!
If this game is any indication of Coach Chill's game management skills, we should be JUST FINE, thank you very much!!!

Zeus
09-12-2006, 10:02 PM
1. Did we plan all along to have Taylor carry the ball 30 times?
No, I don't think in anyone's mind Taylor would have that many carries.
MeMo did not look good and Chester was grinding out good yards late in the 3rd and into the 4th.
When it came time to chew the clock, giving Taylor 5 more carries wasn't any big deal.
It was all about holding onto the ball and running time down.

2. In the first half Al Saunders' offense had the D a bit confused. What adjustments did we make during halftime to stop the confusion?
Who knows what adjustments were made.
I think that Sharper's big hit woke them all up a bit to the nasty side of this D.

3. The Redskins tried to exploit Greg Blue as a weakness in our D, but it really didn't work. What do you think the reason for that is?
Steady D-Line pressure, nickle & dime packages whenever the Skins were in 3 WR sets and exploiting a safety in the Tampa2 isn't as easy as picking on a rookie corner (which they did to Ced Griffin a couple times).

4. The defense blitzed a bit more than I was expecting them to.
I thought the D-Line had steady pressure all night long.
Don't just judge that based on the number of sacks.
You've also got to look at the lousy Redskins 3rd-down conversion rate.
Steady pressure forced bad throws or throw-aways on several occasions in the 2nd half.
That's what veteran QBs (like Brunell and Brad) should do - protect the ball.

5. It all worked out in the end, but what did you think of Childress' playcalling on the final drive?
I would have liked to have seen a shot at the end zone, but chewing the clock and taking the safe FG is also a sound choice.
If you have a chance to win on the road, you gotta go for the best chance which is a lead, other team with no TOs and only a minute left on the clock.

=Z=

Vikes_King
09-13-2006, 12:13 AM
im not going to comment on all 5, but as for the amount they planned to have taylor carry the ball, i'd say they planned to run the ball about 30 times, at least 20 of them coming from CT and 10 from fason/moore.

the reason for him running so much was our a couple of our drives just pounding on them to run down the clock

as for the exploitation of blue, i'd say it was 2 things, like previously said its harder to exploit a rookie in the tampa 2, but i'd say blue had a little less on his play because of usual excellent play of sharper and winfield, and the stepped up play of smoot

singersp
09-13-2006, 06:17 AM
Just because we're HOF'ers, doesn't necessarrily mean we are more "hard-core" fans than members with less than 1250 posts.
;)

The "Interview" & "Thread about nothing" threads bred many a HOF'ers.
;D

Disclaimer: This is not a shot at you Prophet.

Del Rio
09-13-2006, 07:04 AM
1. Did we plan all along to have Taylor carry the ball 30 times? I doubt it. If Childress' real intent was to run the ball at all cost regardless of production I would think he would run HB by committe. I would be surprised to see C. Taylor get 30 carries a game all year. I am also not buying into the idea that Childress will run no matter what because it is in his gameplan. We were never in the hole bad enough to make us stop. If we fell down 14 you would see a huge drop in the # of runs.

2. In the first half Al Saunders' offense had the D a bit confused. What adjustments did we make during halftime to stop the confusion?
I noticed in the first half the CB's were playing far off the ball I assume it was because they didnt want to fall behind. Smoot later said in an interview that they could tell they wanted to go deep. It seems at half time they brought the defense forward.

3. The Redskins tried to exploit Greg Blue as a weakness in our D, but it really didn't work. What do you think the reason for that is?
He is a saftey. So he has 10 guys in front of him they have to get through before they can "exploit" him.

4. The defense blitzed a bit more than I was expecting them to.
The line was eating up the pocket. Forcing Brunell to roll out. The blitzes IMO were sent to force him to throw the ball away which he did immediately. I think he was a bit TOO EAGER to get rid of the ball.

5. It all worked out in the end, but what did you think of Childress' playcalling on the final drive?
I honestly think from looking at the game that Childress leaves a lot of the playcalling to the QB. The running plays have very little variation and I think they ran with the intent to make the Skins burn their timeouts.

COJOMAY
09-13-2006, 08:15 AM
1. Did we plan all along to have Taylor carry the ball 30 times?
I'm certainly no expert but Childress did mention in his press conference that he likes to see a runner get "lathered up," and that he used MeMo just for a change of pace. So I think there were a LOT of carries in the plan. Maybe not 30 but "lots."

2. In the first half Al Saunders' offense had the D a bit confused. What adjustments did we make during halftime to stop the confusion?
I liked Del Rio's answer to this question. But I noticed that the Redskins did a lot of shifting and threw about every formation in the book at the Vikes. That can make for a lot of cunfusion the first game. I think a lot of the "adjustment" was just sorting things out.

3. The Redskins tried to exploit Greg Blue as a weakness in our D, but it really didn't work. What do you think the reason for that is?
Even though Blue was a newcomer, he isn't that bad a player. He got beat a couple of times just playing "safe" but all in all, he played a great game.

4. The defense blitzed a bit more than I was expecting them to.
That is the hallmark of the Tomlin defense. Create confusion -- lots of movement -- pressure on the QB. You can do that if you got solid backups behind you covering your rear.

5. It all worked out in the end, but what did you think of Childress' playcalling on the final drive?
In that final drive you saw Childress' coach style. Nothing flashy. No chancy plays, just keep grinding it out and protect the ball for the final play. It's not the kind of football the fans like to see and neither did the TV announcers who were saying that a pass could have worked for a TD. But like I said, that's not Childress' style. Expect Childress to always go for the conservative approach. You got a taste of that in the very first pre-season game when he didn't go for the win but allowed the game to end in a tie. It was meaningless to win and someone could have gotten hurt.

josdin00
09-13-2006, 11:42 AM
1. Did we plan all along to have Taylor carry the ball 30 times?
I doubt he had a strict number of carries for any one person. Running with Taylor was working, and he stuck with it.

2. In the first half Al Saunders' offense had the D a bit confused. What adjustments did we make during halftime to stop the confusion?
That one, I'm going to defer to Del's answer. I was dealing with a three year old for much of the first half, so I wasn't able to watch as closely as I otherwise would have.

3. The Redskins tried to exploit Greg Blue as a weakness in our D, but it really didn't work. What do you think the reason for that is?
1. He's a decent player
2. He's a safety, so it's harder for an offense to try to direct a play at him than, say, a corner.

4. The defense blitzed a bit more than I was expecting them to....
I seemed to me that the front four was putting pressure on MB pretty consistantly.

5. It all worked out in the end, but what did you think of Childress' playcalling on the final drive?
I liked it. If there had been a little less time on the clock, I think you might have seen them go for the endzone on the last play, but as it was, it was more important to run down the clock and force Washington to use their time outs. Plus, this is the first game for a new coaching staff, on national TV. Everyone is curious to see how he's going to handle these situations. I'm not saying that this entered Childress' mind as he was calling the plays, but he's establish a pattern in people's minds now. He might be able to use that to set up late-game play action later in the season.

gregair13
09-13-2006, 11:09 PM
1. Did we plan all along to have Taylor carry the ball 30 times?
- I think the plan should be run the ball 30+ times. control the clock, keep the defense fresh. I assume this was his plan from the start, but not all with Taylor.

3. The Redskins tried to exploit Greg Blue as a weakness in our D, but it really didn't work. What do you think the reason for that is?
- He is just a guy playing his role in the system. Not more to it than that.

4. Can we expect a lot of blitzes throughout the season or do you think the lack of pressure (no sacks) was the reason for increased blitzing?
- nothing wrong with a little blitzing. but the front 4 has to get to the quarterback.

5. It all worked out in the end, but what did you think of Childress' playcalling on the final drive?
- i was screaming at them to run the ball. that is all we had to do. the announcers, and my dad, was calling for a pass and i thought that that could have been the stupiest thing ever. throws in redzone = int = you loose. that was the last way i wanted our night to end. big deal it was the same play, all to the left, it worked and it will work again.

whackthepack
09-14-2006, 02:38 PM
"gregair13" wrote:


1. Did we plan all along to have Taylor carry the ball 30 times?
- I think the plan should be run the ball 30+ times. control the clock, keep the defense fresh. I assume this was his plan from the start, but not all with Taylor.

3. The Redskins tried to exploit Greg Blue as a weakness in our D, but it really didn't work. What do you think the reason for that is?
- He is just a guy playing his role in the system. Not more to it than that.

4. Can we expect a lot of blitzes throughout the season or do you think the lack of pressure (no sacks) was the reason for increased blitzing?
- nothing wrong with a little blitzing. but the front 4 has to get to the quarterback.

5. It all worked out in the end, but what did you think of Childress' playcalling on the final drive?
- i was screaming at them to run the ball. that is all we had to do. the announcers, and my dad, was calling for a pass and i thought that that could have been the stupiest thing ever. throws in redzone = int = you loose. that was the last way i wanted our night to end. big deal it was the same play, all to the left, it worked and it will work again.



I don't think that even Chester Taylor will hold up if we continue to give him 30+ carries a game, I would like to see 20 to 25 carries a game and have MeMo get 10 to 12.

I think that we will see more blitzing than we expect and done right could be a huge factor in games even if we are getting good pressure from our front 4.


I would have liked to seen maybe a end around or a screen pass something to take advantage of the short yardage D that the Skin's were running, and if you can score a TD then you force them to get a TD because the almost sent it into OT.

gregair13
09-14-2006, 11:31 PM
why risk throwing when you can run the clock out and kick a field goal?

V-Unit
09-15-2006, 08:52 AM
It's not a risk when Brad Johnson is your QB. I trust him with the ball 100%.

Del Rio
09-15-2006, 09:23 AM
"V-Unit" wrote:


It's not a risk when Brad Johnson is your QB. I trust him with the ball 100%.


Risking passes at the end of the game has very little to do with the QB. The play itself is more dangerous, the ball getting tipped at the line, deflected in flight, of the WR's pads.........lots of things can go wrong between point A and point B that the QB has absolutely no control over.

gregair13
09-16-2006, 08:18 PM
"Del" wrote:


"V-Unit" wrote:


It's not a risk when Brad Johnson is your QB. I trust him with the ball 100%.


Risking passes at the end of the game has very little to do with the QB. The play itself is more dangerous, the ball getting tipped at the line, deflected in flight, of the WR's pads.........lots of things can go wrong between point A and point B that the QB has absolutely no control over.

and that was the exact reason i was yelling for a run left call once we got field goal range.

V-Unit
09-18-2006, 05:24 AM
Some more questions to
debate:

1. Have you ever seen a defense that gets better as the game goes on?
2. What are your thoughts on the missed call in overtime?
3. How come we made no adjustments to help Johnson against Peppers?
4. Can you believe John Fox's stupidity in OKing that call?
5. Some members on the board have voiced displeasure with the playcalling, what do you think?

1. I'm just in awe about our D. I don't know whether its passion, character, or talent, but it all comes together in the end. FRENZY! If Tomlin keeps coaching like this he coach be a coordinator for too long. I love how the whole defense has bought into the system, and makes afjustments to completely shut the other team down. I think it speaks volumes that it was a cohesive team effort of that side of the ball.

2. I think Childress needs to make a fuss about it, not to show me he cares, but because there is a chance for the NFL to tweak the rule here. It is obvious that Delhomme was not trying to throw the ball, so it can be a incomplete pass. No one will say anything because we won, but the NFL Ryules committee should make the proper adjustment in the rule book. Maybe the booth sould give the ref one look at the play in full speed.

3. I understand that it is hard to track Peppers because he lines up on both sides, but shouldn't a veteran like Matt Birk have the ability to make changes in the blocking assignments when he was lined up against Johnson? Instead wqe chose to ignore their best player, that isn't a very good strategy.

4. The only reason I can think of is that we were frustating the Carolina offense very badly and Fox was trying to get a big play to clinch the game. Had it worked we would have been talking about that play as the game ender, instead it was the game changer. The coverage was so good that the call was doomed from the beginning. A veteran would have just eaten it, but Gamble also threw a HORRIBLE lateral.

5. I don't think it was that bad. Brad didn't have time in the pocket to deliver long shots and we still ran the ball 25 times. Carolina defended well against the pass all day. I am even betting that some shots were called, but Brad either checked down or got sacked.

Zeus
09-18-2006, 09:01 AM
1. Have you ever seen a defense that gets better as the game goes on?
Yes.
The '85 Bears and 2000 Ravens.
The Vikes D has given up SIX POINTS in two second-halfs this year.
Just outstanding.

2. What are your thoughts on the missed call in overtime?
The rule is the rule.
It's a horrendous call, to be sure, but it is the rule.
Can't be changed in-season, so I'm just glad it didn't end up costing the Vikes the game.

3. How come we made no adjustments to help Johnson against Peppers?
They did!
They had JimmyK over there doubling him a large part of the game, especially in the 2nd half.
Jermaine Wiggins was coming out of the game in almost EVERY single-TE set, because JimmyK was in there to help with Peppers.
Give Julius the credit he deserves - that was as good a game as I've seen from a D-Lineman in quite a while.

4. Can you believe John Fox's stupidity in OKing that call?
No.
But if the fake FG had failed and the Vikes had lost the game because of that, we'd all be calling that a stupid play-call rather than genius.

5. Some members on the board have voiced displeasure with the playcalling, what do you think?
I hated the 3rd-and-goal-from-the-15-draw-play-to-MeMo call.
That's chickenshit, IMHO.
The FG is almost a guarantee from the 15, so I think they needed to take a shot at the end zone.
And there were several times when the Vikes could have taken shots down the field (situationally) that they didn't.
But I can't argue with the results, that's for sure.

=Z=

Vikes_King
09-20-2006, 04:36 PM
i'll comment on some


1. Have you ever seen a defense that gets better as the game goes on?well, i can say ours has seemed to get better as the game goes on, tomlin/the D makes adjustments and changes it up some as the game goes on, look at the points we've given up 1st half vs 2nd half this year, look at yardage also

2. What are your thoughts on the missed call in overtime?
eh, we all know there were 2 or three iffy calls that game. there are 2 rules that we can really argue, the fumble call, which could have cost us the game had we not pushed so well, and the out of bounds call.

the fumble was bull, we all know, but thats how the rule is written, so unfortunatly its indisputable, they need to look into that this year and have a clause in the rule that can argue intent of the QB to throw

the out of bounds.. also unfortunatly was called correctly, his arm hit out of bounds before his foot/ass hit in bounds, would have been different had twill just wrapped both arms around the ball and taken the fall, but again, nothing we can do

3. How come we made no adjustments to help Johnson against Peppers?
peppers constantly switched sides, and like zues said they often did throw jimmy on top of him, or tried to have a HB help in coverage, he's just a plain beast

4. Can you believe John Fox's stupidity in OKing that call?
eh, a trick/risky play has worked twice this season so far, got to take a risk sometimes, he was doing what he thought was right at the time (i, however, wouldnt have)

5. Some members on the board have voiced displeasure with the playcalling, what do you think?
im fine with our coaching staff's play calling so far; look at last year's.

V-Unit
09-21-2006, 06:41 PM
What are the Key Matchups for this game against the Bears? I think overall this game will be an obvious example of how the game is won in the trenches.

Offense: I think Jermaine Wiggins/Jim Kleinsasser will be key. There are really no weaknesses in the Bears D, so these guys need good days, both pass catching and run blocking. There may be several situations where the receivers aren't getting open, or Brad has little time to throw because of DLine pressure. This makes checkdowns and quick passes important.

Defense: It's all about the LBs. I'm thinking we are going to blitz to try to get to the young QB early and often. I'm also thinking we will be changing defensive formations and hiding coverage to confuse Grossman, and Napo controls all that as the MLB. Finally, the LBs must use their speed to
plug holes and shut down the run.

Any thoughts?

Vikes_King
09-21-2006, 06:56 PM
i say our main goal is to prove grossman isnt what the lions and packers made him out to be =)