PDA

View Full Version : We need a new 3rd and short play!



bhi4582
January-2nd-2006, 11:22 AM
Every single third and short the Skins had on Sunday they called the exact same play. Brunell rolls out left Cooley pretends to block and slide in on the flank into a sea of Green. Well, its a safe assumption Philly watched their film this week because I recall seeing it designed to go to Cooley 5 times on 3rd and short and each time Brunell just threw it away. Although the first TD to Sellers was that same play and it worked, maybe we should disguise Cooley better and/or get Seller involved more outside of the Goal Line.

Art Monk 4 HOF
January-2nd-2006, 11:26 AM
Yeah, I noticed that, too. I wonder if there was something tipping them off, besides the fact that we always run that play on 3rd and short. Still, Philly was all over that play. Good job by them, hopefully Tampa isn't so smart.

stwasm
January-2nd-2006, 11:26 AM
Give the ball to Bettis and let him ploy through that line.

sk1ns
January-2nd-2006, 11:27 AM
it works for the most part.. we ran that play on the goal line to sellers for a TD dont forget

Alldaz
January-2nd-2006, 11:27 AM
I agree. We definetely need to add a few new wrinkles in the playbook for Saturday.

skinfan13
January-2nd-2006, 11:28 AM
ive got the best 3rd and short play ever!!! run p-o-r-t-i-s, seriously why do we pass on third and short with portis???

carter23
January-2nd-2006, 11:32 AM
Give the ball to Bettis and let him ploy through that line.


maybe we can sign him in the off season

:D

but yeah, it was the exact same play atleast 5 times, and it never worked.... with the way the running game has been the last few weeks, i would think we'd be comfortable running on third and short

SUNSTONE
January-2nd-2006, 11:32 AM
ive got the best 3rd and short play ever!!! run p-o-r-t-i-s, seriously why do we pass on third and short with portis???

Because he doesn't have a high rate of success in that situation. He isn't a big back to do damage like that. His heart makes him look like that at times. But it's just not an ideal situation.
Especially rolling into the playoffs where we will be facing the tougher D's.


Maybe Gibbs didn't want to show his hand, so he ran that play over and over.
With his playoff success, I couldn't imagine the man doesn't have a ton of new plays up his sleeve all designed for the playoffs.

Gibbs is so successful, that I bet he does set up teams in the playoffs by the way he plays in the regular season.

GhostofAlvinWalton
January-2nd-2006, 11:34 AM
ive got the best 3rd and short play ever!!! run p-o-r-t-i-s, seriously why do we pass on third and short with portis???

Agreed!!!!! I was saying before the game that I could not believe that the Skins have gotten away with calling that play in the flat on short yardage all season. I couldn't believe that no one had consistantly stopped it yet through 15 games. Then it worked AGAIN on Sellers TD. Of course that was the last time it worked and I have a strange feeling TB will be watching this game film. What did we get? Like 5 first downs all game. :D Enough to win I guess. :laugh:


.

GhostofAlvinWalton
January-2nd-2006, 11:37 AM
Because he doesn't have a high rate of success in that situation. He isn't a big back to do damage like that. His heart makes him look like that at times. But it's just not an ideal situation.
Especially rolling into the playoffs where we will be facing the tougher D's.


Maybe Gibbs didn't want to show his hand, so he ran that play over and over.
With his playoff success, I couldn't imagine the man doesn't have a ton of new plays up his sleeve all designed for the playoffs.

Gibbs is so successful, that I bet he does set up teams in the playoffs by the way he plays in the regular season.

I disagree with the first part. Portis does have a high sucess rate on short yardage. Check the stats. We just weren't giving him the ball in those situations earlier in the year. When we did he converted most of them.

The rest of your post is dead on. :cheers:



.

SUNSTONE
January-2nd-2006, 11:37 AM
He probably has the option, but the D is always stacked up close to the line, so he opts to pass. Maybe???

That would make sense.

RVAbrendan
January-2nd-2006, 11:40 AM
Draw. With the amount Brunell goes shotgun on 3rd, this would be a great play for a clutch conversion.

Or FB handoff.

Heavy Jumbo
January-2nd-2006, 11:45 AM
Maybe Gibbs didn't want to show his hand, so he ran that play over and over.
With his playoff success, I couldn't imagine the man doesn't have a ton of new plays up his sleeve all designed for the playoffs.

Gibbs is so successful, that I bet he does set up teams in the playoffs by the way he plays in the regular season.

I think you're on to something here. Gibbs will have a few wrinkles in his gameplan for the playoffs. :cheers:

SkinFan63
January-2nd-2006, 11:45 AM
Yeah, I noticed that, too. I wonder if there was something tipping them off, besides the fact that we always run that play on 3rd and short. Still, Philly was all over that play. Good job by them, hopefully Tampa isn't so smart.

Hopefully, we CHANGE the play.
We should be showing them things they have never seen and mixing it up like never before.
Throw the book at them!

Hail!:point2sky

Warhead36
January-2nd-2006, 11:48 AM
We gotta go back to pounding it on 3rd and short. Gibbs wanted to try to be cute and creative.