ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Al Saunders (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=140374)

htismaqe 05-08-2006 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King
KC's offense became elite in 2002 and has been ever since.

The only guy of note who came in 2002 and has been here since is Willie Roaf.

Make no mistake about it, Roaf is the offense, along with Green, Gonzo and the other guys.

Al Saunders; nice guy but he won't be missed near as much as some people think IMO.

Bingo.

EA-47 05-08-2006 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaWolf
The question I have with the Redskins is that they sound like they have too many cooks in the kitchen. With the Chiefs DV gave Saunders complete offensive control, but from what I've been reading Saunders is joining a club where there are a lot of people with big titles on the offensive side of the ball, Gibbs included, who may be tempted to meddle or get egos involved. I mean look, you have:

Joe Gibbs Head Coach/Team President
Al Saunders Assoc. HC - Offense
Joe Bugel Asst. HC - Offense
Don Breaux Off. Coordinator
Jack Burns Offensive Assistant

While Al will apparently be calling the plays, it'll be interesting to see what, if anything, comes of all that.

The only ones with explicit control over the offensive scheme are Gibbs and Saunders... and even then, Gibbs got Saunders specifically to take control of the offense. What the Redskins have right now is a relatively unique coaching set-up... with two head coaches controlling each side of the ball and Joe Gibbs overseeing the whole operation. Essentially, Gibbs acts like a GM but has coaching control and input.

Greg Williams and Al Saunders will be running the show as far as scheming goes. Bugel is just the offensive lines coach, really, and Don Breaux/Jack Burns won't be doing anything to interfere with Saunders either.

Quote:

Basically IMO having a good offense really depends a lot on your OL. If the Redskins get good OL work, they'l lbe a good offense, just like we will continue to be if our OL keeps doing its thing. It's really no mystery why we were a good offense. It had nothing to do with the triple reverses or empty backfield passes we called...
Fortunately, the Skins do have one of the better offensive lines in the league (not quite as good as the Chiefs but still very good). Randy Thomas is among the best guards in the league and Jansen and Samuels make up one of the best pairs of tackles out there. Dockery and Rabach are also very solid players at their position and have been steadily improving the last couple of positions.

I get the feeling that you guys underestimate Al Saunders a bit now that he is bailing out for DC. Speaking from the vantage point of a fan whose team has all the tools necessary to be a dominant offense but hasn't had much to show for it... he is going to make a huge impact. Sure he can be too cutesy at times with the playcalling but the man KNOWS how to open up the field and get everyone in position for a big play. Give him more credit.

Stang 05-09-2006 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale Mercer
I believe we have a great offense. It relies a little TOO much on Willie, but a great offense, none the less. I believe Saunders built a great unit, and MOST of the time, he ran his crew well. I am just saying, that there were times when he was too predictable. There are many that agree. Obviously, not here.

I also believe that without our Oline, washington won't do as well as most of you mopes think they will. The Chiefs will NOT miss Saunders(at least this season, maybe in the later seasons, because as I said, Saunders BUILT a great defense) On top of that, I assure you that the Defense WILL improve.

I sure hope he turns our offense into one of the best, he couldnt be worse then Don Breaux and Bill Musgrave the way they called our plays in the Tampa and Seattle playoffs, it was run run pass till the final gun.

Grant it we were down to one reciever and an H-back but at least try to confuse a defense. Al was given the reigns over the offense and the play calling this year and he's got some weapons here if Brunell can stay healthy, Im looking forward to seeing what he can do.

I wish you guys luck getting your D together because I been pulling for KC to get back to the show, just been too close not to finaly make it.

burt 05-09-2006 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stang
I sure hope he turns our offense into one of the best, he couldnt be worse then Don Breaux and Bill Musgrave the way they called our plays in the Tampa and Seattle playoffs, it was run run pass till the final gun.

See, I think Saunders just got a little complacent....a little stale. When he sees new weapons...he WILL improve Washington's offence. I think it was a good thing for Washington, Saunders AND KC for him to get a change....

DaWolf 05-09-2006 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EA-47
I get the feeling that you guys underestimate Al Saunders a bit now that he is bailing out for DC. Speaking from the vantage point of a fan whose team has all the tools necessary to be a dominant offense but hasn't had much to show for it... he is going to make a huge impact. Sure he can be too cutesy at times with the playcalling but the man KNOWS how to open up the field and get everyone in position for a big play. Give him more credit.

No I think he really has gotten plenty of credit around here, sometimes too much IMO. But he deserves the kudos, he did bring the attacking mentality to this team and he does know how to spread the ball around and diversify. I'm still not quite sure what to make of him never even sniffing an OC job since he was fired from San Diego until DV gave him the chance here.

Bottom line though is that Washington will be a better offense with him in charge as long as they stay healthy, and I'm still glad the guy did not become our head coach...

blueballs 05-09-2006 05:21 PM

Al had such good luck under Dick
he became a Foreskin

ck_IN 05-09-2006 08:23 PM

To strike gold a third time he'd have to have struck it a second time. DV's and by extension AS's tenure here was not gold.

They saddled us with I believe the oldest team in the league. They put up pretty offensive numbers but they didn't translate into wins. We had a 13-3 season that clearly was a fluke. Both DV and AS were apparently more concerned with stroking their egos then getting wins as evidenced by some of the cutesy play calling. For the length of DV and AS's tenure we got one division title, zero playoff wins and a 550 win percentage. More like fools gold.

Reaper16 05-09-2006 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ck_IN
To strike gold a third time he'd have to have struck it a second time. DV's and by extension AS's tenure here was not gold.

They saddled us with I believe the oldest team in the league. They put up pretty offensive numbers but they didn't translate into wins. We had a 13-3 season that clearly was a fluke. Both DV and AS were apparently more concerned with stroking their egos then getting wins as evidenced by some of the cutesy play calling. For the length of DV and AS's tenure we got one division title, zero playoff wins and a 550 win percentage. More like fools gold.

It's is real gold if we're just going off of Al Saunders' work.

milkman 05-09-2006 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ck_IN
To strike gold a third time he'd have to have struck it a second time. DV's and by extension AS's tenure here was not gold.

They saddled us with I believe the oldest team in the league. They put up pretty offensive numbers but they didn't translate into wins. We had a 13-3 season that clearly was a fluke. Both DV and AS were apparently more concerned with stroking their egos then getting wins as evidenced by some of the cutesy play calling. For the length of DV and AS's tenure we got one division title, zero playoff wins and a 550 win percentage. More like fools gold.

You can blame Dick for the failures of the Chiefs as a team.

But Al did his part.
The offense, i his time as the OC was among the very best in the league.
Yes, he did, at times, try to get cute.
But the fact remains, his offense was prolific.

He wasn't responsible for the crappy defense.

Edit:You can also blame Carl for the team failures.

ck_IN 05-09-2006 08:50 PM

Sidewinder and Reaper, I'm not holding AS responsible for non offensive issues. But I do contend that our offense put up pretty numbers but it didn't translate into wins.

How many times were we in position to score the game clinching touchdown but instead of giving it to #31 AS called cutesy pass plays? How often would a good dose of smashmouth to kill the clock have meant a win, rather then calling plays that only serve to show how brilliant AS thinks he is? Someone please explain to me why we pay so much to get Green and then don't allow him to audible?

As pretty as the offensive stats were there were basic flaws and game planning issues that were exploited week in and week out.

AS stuffed his resume here but he didn't do Chiefs fans any favours.

jspchief 05-09-2006 09:23 PM

My personal opinion is that Saunders what very good at building an offensive scheme, but was mediocre at game planning and bad at in game adjustements.

It's why our offense as a whole was dominant, but at times appeared clueless.

burt 05-09-2006 10:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jspchief
My personal opinion is that Saunders what very good at building an offensive scheme, but was mediocre at game planning and bad at in game adjustements.

It's why our offense as a whole was dominant, but at times appeared clueless.

are we related?

jspchief 05-09-2006 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale Mercer
are we related?

I hope not. I'd feel kind of bad finding out I've had a reeruned brother all this time.

MOhillbilly 05-10-2006 10:11 AM

O-line is the biggest concern in DC imo. They looked fair last year down the strech but started off SLOW. The D held that team together all year.
The Skins will be a fun team to watch this year, no doubt.

Inspector 05-10-2006 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jspchief
My personal opinion is that Saunders what very good at building an offensive scheme, but was mediocre at game planning and bad at in game adjustements.

It's why our offense as a whole was dominant, but at times appeared clueless.

Yep. Seems that way to me too.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.