Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: The Most Dangerous Division in Sports

Super bowl, what can the Redskins learn

The elder statesmen puts into perspective what the Redskins can learn from the Superbowl winning teams.



Star-divide

Rich Tandler does and excellent break down over at CSN, on some of the notes Redskins should be taking on the Superbowl winners.

5 Things The Redskins Can Learn From Super Bowl XLIV

 

You can be a 4-3 defense and a 3-4 defense—One of the reasons that the Saints held Peyton Manning and company to just 17 points was the constantly-changing defensive looks that Gregg Williams gave Manning. Although New Orleans runs the 4-3 look as its base defense, they seamlessly moved from that alignment to the 3-4 and back again. In the early going, Williams called the defense according to the situation, going with a four-man front on running downs and with four linebackers on passing downs. As the game went on, Williams mixed it up, confusing Manning with different fronts at different times, sometimes going to a 3-3-5 look with an extra defensive back in the lineup. As the Redskins transition to the 3-4 look, Jim Haslett would be well advised to examine Williams’ maneuvering and keep elements of both defenses in the game plans.

This is the key note for me because tradition is important and the Redskins run a 4-3 defense, just like NO ran a base 4-3 defense..without running a 4-3 defense.  I read a quote one time from Williams that he had a defense which had "0" linebackers...it's about flexibility.

Game changers: The ones "some" want to draft or sign in Free Agency didn't seem to impact the game.  Even the Running game itself seems to be lacking

The big play is overrated—There is a feeling that the Redskins need a playmaker, someone who can score every time he gets his hands on the ball. Maybe they don’t. The Saints beat the Colts without the big offensive play. Drew Brees threw deep once in the Saints’ first series, and the pass fell incomplete. But after that, it was slants and screens. The longest pass of the game came on a short pass that Marques Colston turned into a 27-yard gain. There were no big gains in the running game, either, with Reggie Bush’s 12-yard run being the Saints’ longest of the game. The Saints won with small ball.

The running game no longer wins championships—Actually, it may be a bit early to make this statement, but the trend is moving towards passing being the dominant factor in the big game. Three years ago, the Giants, who possessed a strong running game, ran for just 91 yards in their Super Bowl win over the Patriots. Last year the Steelers won with 58 yards on the ground (the Cardinals almost pulled it out while rushing for 33 yards). The downward trend in rushing totals for the Super Bowl champs continued on Sunday as the Saints ran for just 51 yards.

Agressive play is not overated and remains a key:  In my opinion the Colts lost the game when near the end of the half after stopping the Saints from scoring, A big gamble by the Saints on 4th down, the Colts didn't use it against them and decided to run 3 stright running plays in an attempt to get a first down, not calling one play for the offenses biggest weapon, conservative play calling spelled the doom for the Colts while aggressive play calling proved succesful for the Saints because the Colts failed to match the aggresive play.  A little different twist than Rich uses.

An aggressive play can be the smart play—The onside kick to start off the second half was a calculated gamble that paid off big for the Saints. Some studies have shown that while an onside kick in a desperation situation late in the game is successful only about 20 percent of the time, the kicking team recovers a surprise onside kick about 60 percent of the time. So while there was an element of gambling in Sean Payton’s call to open the second half with the onside kick, the odds were in his favor. And going for the touchdown on 4th down near the end of the second quarter wasn’t such a big gamble either.

 

Redskins building the line, developing a core group and establishing an identity will help the Redskins be the team of the Decade 2010-2020, of course if the world exists after 2012

Comment 27 comments  |  3 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Yes, very good point

as one is not linked with the other…

by dr WNC on Feb 11, 2010 6:28 PM EST reply actions  

i can edit and change if you want

"I am excited about starting 2009. We are looking forward to an outstanding year. We're on our way. We have a lot of healthy players this year." - Vinny Cerrato

by Kevin Ewoldt on Feb 11, 2010 7:05 PM EST up reply actions  

No thanks

I like the contradiction

by dr WNC on Feb 11, 2010 8:33 PM EST up reply actions  

dr, What was Rich Tandler thinking about, or was he thinking at all. The Saints would not even be in the Super Bowl, if it were not for big plays by playmakers all season long.

It is amazing everytime I read his articles, I find something that makes very little sense at all. By the way I had already posted on his article about this, we don’t need playmakers crap.. To think that we do not need playmakers is pure stupidity.

by LETJASONPASS on Feb 12, 2010 4:13 AM EST up reply actions  

none

BECAUSE OF THE DAMN BLOCKING AND LINE! STUPID

How many game winning drives did Campbell complete?
None! BECAUSE OF THE DAMN LINE!

all the arguments go together with a team or it does not…
Moss, Thomas, Kelly all have the potential to be playmakers with a line which can block, and given the opportunity to return Kickoffs and punts…THE COACHING STAFF WAS THE OTHER ISSUE!

by dr WNC on Feb 12, 2010 1:03 PM EST up reply actions  

dr, what does short passes for Td's have to do with the line. That is on the receiver breaking tackles and making people miss. (miles austin) Blocking on kick and punt returns has nothing to do with our offensive line

that is special teams. (it has more to do with coaching) how many starting offensive linemen play on returns teams ?? What does interceptions for TD’s have to do with blocking or coaching? Jason Campbell passed for over 3,600 yds. That is alot of yards, how many times did you see a receiver make someone miss or break a tackle and score for 20,30,40 or 50 yds. Thank you for making my point for me. Jason had no blocking and still performed well. He also had very little help by players making plays once they got the ball in their hands. By the way the is what play makers do S-T-U-P-I-D.
By the way I think I did a fan post about Devin Thomas being on our return teams. LOL

by LETJASONPASS on Feb 14, 2010 3:26 AM EST up reply actions  

And agree on Devin Thomas

Big plays are one and done, they are special and do what?
-Allow a Redskins team to beat Dallas
-Make fans feel better and get excited
-Help fantasy football stats

No Big plays in the Superbowl, and all the Big play teams were at home watching the Superbowl

by dr WNC on Feb 14, 2010 7:42 AM EST up reply actions  

whaaat...???

Indy and the saints are both big play teams. what are you talking about?

by tw10 on Feb 22, 2010 5:10 PM EST up reply actions  

And they had none

Zero, Zilch, nada, zero in the Superbowl

by dr WNC on Feb 22, 2010 7:30 PM EST up reply actions  

thats true

the longest play from scrimmage I beleive was a 26 yard run

also I can not remember a complete pass of longer than 10 yards in the air, yes there were a couple of catch and runs, but I do not remember Brees airing it out deep other than the dropped pass on 3rd down on the first drive

Pommylee

by Pommylee on Feb 24, 2010 11:48 PM EST up reply actions  

Without an offensive line

(and you should know this, LJP) you cannot run a systematic offense, much less use all the plays in your playbook. When you are doing repeated 3 and outs, you cannot set up big plays. No playmaker is going to score reliably on dinks and dunks, WR screens, HB screens when the D knows you cannot run and they are going to be in the backfield before your receivers get down field. Isn’t this the same argument you used to defend Jason? Doesn’t work both ways.

KO returns and Punt returns are another matter.

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

by Scott E on Feb 16, 2010 9:35 AM EST up reply actions  

back to my favourite discussion points of the SB

I may have made them elsewhere and if so I apologise.

The 4th and 1 call WAS WITHOUT DOUBT THE CORRECT CALL REGARDLESS OF OUTCOME.

These were the scenarios that could have played out

He Kicks the FG, Peyton gets the ball back around 2mins left, 3 Timeouts, basically a guaranteed 3 points, but more than likely 7 (check the Stats)

So in this scenario, from kicking the FG, New Orleans are a net 4 pts down thanks to the FG or at best even but without momentum

The second option New Orleans get the TD, then Peyton does as above, so best scenario, NO are a net 4 pts up, but likely even

The Third and most likely scenario is what happened. net result NO 3 pts up (so as good basically as getting the TD) and have momentum,

The 4 scenario a stop followed by 99 yard drive is very unlikely especially as Indy would (as they did) run down the clock to stop Brees having a chance to get the ball with 3 TO’s and 1:50 at the halfway line. Remember Indy were in the lead therefore it was wise for them to play conservative (or so they thought)

The Onside kick, is well covered in the post for the reasons why I supported

Be Bold Coaches and ye shall be rewarded

Pommylee

by Pommylee on Feb 11, 2010 11:37 PM EST reply actions  

great post

a lot of good points to consider, especially they way that New Orleans defeated the Colts. I thought it was ironic that after all the hype on our blogs about Reggie Bush that in the game he was vastly over shadowed by Thomas. If I could grab 1 of those backs it wouldn’t be Bush – he’s good for a couple highlight reels but not for dominating a game.

by aFan4Life on Feb 12, 2010 8:42 AM EST reply actions  

good point

the Raiders have been looking for the big play for 20 years

by terpsez11 on Feb 14, 2010 11:03 AM EST reply actions  

I think the "Home Field Advantage"

made an impact on the game and contributed to Sean Payton’s play calling. It made it easier for him to be aggressive.

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

by Scott E on Feb 16, 2010 9:38 AM EST reply actions  

Or just simply

Sean Payton’s aggressive play calling out coached the Colts…
In my opinion on the field both teams were evenly matched as far as play, the difference in this game was the coaching…

by dr WNC on Feb 16, 2010 12:07 PM EST up reply actions  

Williams' aggressive

D packages and the setup for the game changing pick six. Gotta include that.

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

by Scott E on Feb 16, 2010 1:20 PM EST up reply actions  

An Aggressive 3-4, nope

It was a 4-3 base, which worked as a 3-4 or 2-5 or whatever.
I hope the Redskin remain a base 4-3 but are able to shift similar to William’s shift the Saints D.

by dr WNC on Feb 16, 2010 3:17 PM EST up reply actions  

I didn't specify

but apparently his schemes for shifting in and out of basic packages was genius, because it fooled Peyton Manning – and he’s hard to fool.

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

by Scott E on Feb 16, 2010 4:35 PM EST up reply actions  

Brandon Graham

and a trade for an NT would fit the bill.

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

by Scott E on Feb 17, 2010 10:58 AM EST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Media Requests please email hogshaven@gmail.com

Managers

Superbowl_small Kevin Ewoldt

Riggins_small Ken Meringolo

Editors

Sb_small Parks Smith

Small Steve Shoup

Chalkboard_football-opt403x300o00s403x300_small UkRedskin

Washington_redskins_helmet_small Redskins News

Authors

Badshirt2__2__small fatpickle

Family_in_disney_small Tiller56

Rg3super_small HTTR4LIFE

Hh_small Ronnie Adkins