Much to Robs chagrin, the Skins come back from St. Louis victorious. TREMENDOUS defensive effort as they just dominated the game. Here are my thoughts:
1. DEFENSE: Haven't seen that kind of defense from the Skins in a LONG time. We shut down Jackson holding him to 45 yards on 17 carries. We forced them to pass and we were on Bradford all day recording 7 sacks. Orakpo in on 2.5 of them. Good to see the addition of Bowen in on 1.5 of them and Kerrigan is making a claim to be defensive ROY by getting one sack and getting a forced fumble. Can't say enough about their effort yesterday. They kept the Rams to less than 100 yards total offense until well into the fourth quarter. They also stood tall on a number of occasions when the offense put them in tough spots.
2. Riding the Crazy TO-RAIN!: Torain got his first extended action yesterday and took full advantage. He ran hard all day and finished with 135 yards on 19 carries. Helu and Hightower also contributed giving the Skins nearly 200 rushing yards on the day. Still, Torain was the story as he just pounded the ball when he got in there. Looks like we have a 3 headed monster with our running back corps.
3. Special teams average: Nothing bad but Gano wasn't getting his kicks into the end zone as often. Banks looked like he was doing his ARE impression. Seemed to be doing more hopping than running. Still, they didn't do anything bad so I was fine with them.
4. Rexy struggled: Was okay. Made some solid throws but they were throws most QBs should/would/could make. However, similar to last week, it looked like he had that tentative/scared look late in the game. I really don't like seeing that. Then he make a few really poor decisions that could have cost us the game. The plays that really bothered me included:
- The INT to Laurantis (sp?). Just like last week, he did not pay attention to the LB dropping back in coverage. Again, he threw out to his left and it was an easy shift for the LB and a throw right to him. It was Lee last week and Laurantis this week. Just a terrible decision. He ended up running it down to our 19 yd line but thanks to two sacks from our defense, we were able to take them out of FG range.
- The last drive deep in our territory. We get a couple of first downs and we can run the clock out and close out the game. After two runs, it sets up a 3rd and 3. Moss does a quick button hook right at the first down marker and is wide open. It's a short/easy pass and Rexy sails it well over his head. That was a tough play because we could have gotten a first down and knocked even more time off of the clock. Again, thanks to the defense for stepping up and ending the game.
- Third quarter, Rexy goes play action and rolls out to his left. It's a tough play because he is right handed and going to have to throw across his body. His primary targets were covered and instead of running it or throwing it out of bounds Rexy stops and then awkwardly throws back towards the middle of the field for a near INT.
- The botched snap in shotgun. From all accounts, it seemed as though Montgomery looked back at Rexy and got the okay to snap the ball. When Montgomery put his head down, looked like Rexy was calling an audible after telling Montgomery he was good to snap. Montgomery snapped it to Rexy who wasn't ready but fortunately we were able to cover the ball. Not sure who was at fault but certainly Rexy deserves partial blame.
We won and that is a good thing and at 3-1 I am not looking to make any changes but Rexy certainly needs to improve his game.
The good news is that again, we are 3-1. If someone were to tell me at the beginning of the season that we would be 3-1 after four weeks and heading into the bye week, I would take it in a heartbeat. I feel pretty good about the team and we certainly look like a team that can compete each week. Again, great to come out with a victory and be atop the East.
HAIL SKINS!!!
101 comments:
Yesterday's game proved a lot to me. Here are the take home points from week 4:
1. The Skins are clearly better than in previous seasons. The running game is solid due to great depth at RB. I think Hightower is going to become the 3rd down back before the season is done. Helu and Torain are clearly better runners, but Hightower is a solid blocker and receiver.
2. The defense is starting to gel into a real strength. Some want to say there is no talent on this team, but that's just a preconceived notion based on the rosters from previous seasons. The front 7 is VERY good and we have depth with guys like Jackson, Riley, Alexander, Golston, etc. not even starting. The D is now ranked 5th and we're 3rd in points allowed.
3. Rexy...We've identified our weak link. He's unable to get through a game without committing less than 2 turnovers. He is the reason why we couldn't put the Rams away yesterday. The D bailed him out.
4. The WRs struggled and we had no deep pass attempts all game. Armstrong would have helped stretch the field, so I hope to see more deep plays after the bye because his hammy should be healed by then. People are blaming Moss for tipping the ball up to cause the first INT. The throw, however, was rushed and thrown way too hard. Moss could have caught it, but when I saw the replay, I thought Rexy could have thrown better.
I actually predicted a 3-1 start after seeing how the team was looking in the preseason, so we're right where I thought we'd be. I figured the team would struggle as the schedule gets tougher, but each week is unique and it's not easy to predict what will happen against the Iggles in two weeks. I do know this though. We're not going to give up 59 points to them again. This D and running attack ensure that we'll be in the game until the end every week.
HAIL SKINS!
It's not to my chagrin - I couldn't care less that they beat the lowly Rams.
The Deadskins still looks like a team that stinks. Nothing has changed. Holding on to beat the Rams, losing to the completely inept Cowboys, struggling to beat the Cards, and beating a beat up Giants team has allowed the team to go 3-1.
You are your record in the end, and I expect the team to lose a lot of their upcoming games.
The next four are Philly, at Carolina, at Buffalo, and then San Francisco. If the Deadskins go 2-2 in those games, I'll be surprised
Deepie, to your points:
1. I agree that Hightower could become the third down back. Will be interesting to see how the RB situation plays out. Clearly, the Shannys go with the hot hand and yesterday it was Torain. It's a good problem to have.
2. Robs was trying to say last week that the Skins personnel are better suited for the 4-3. I was telling him we are fine. Given their dominance yesterday and the fact that we are ranked 5th (especially coming off of a season where we were ranked last) lets you know that the personnel and scheme are just fine.
3. Rexy wasn't great but I am okay with him. We did a lot of roll outs yesterday and he doesn't see well suited for that. Beck certainly is much more mobile and better at that. However, I am still fine with Rexy. He needs to improve but we are still 3-1 with him steering the ship so I don't want to make any changes.
4. WRs were fine. The play to Moss was Moss's fault. He knows the play. He knows the ball is going to come out quick. It hit him in the hands in stride so that is on him. I'm sure if you ask him, he would admit that he was to blame for that INT.
Each week presents new challenges. However, after 4 weeks I think we can see that the defense is much improved (which is what I wanted to see given what we invested in them during the offseason). We can also see that the O line is MUCH better. Rexy never seemed to be under much pressure yesterday and has had pretty good time all season. They also seem to be doing a better job in run blocking. The attitude is much better this season. We have had close games this year and we are finding ways to win whereas the M.O. previous seasons was finding ways to lose.
I am not saying playoffs. We are not a great team but we certainly seem like a different team than previous seasons and it looks like we will be able to compete week in/week out.
HAIL SKINS!!!
OH MY GOD!!! I am laughing right now because I expected nothing less from Robs.
Deepie sent me an email yesterday on what Robs would say today regarding the Skins. I wrote that Robs would say something like, "...the skins beat a sucky team so what the skins still suck."
No credit. Robs thought we would get spanked and that Jackson would have a big day and Hall and Atogwe would give up some big pass plays. It didn't happen. The defense dominated the game. If anything, it was Rexy that caused the game to be close.
Whatever. We come to expect no credit from Robs. I am sure he is just upset because his Pears don't look that great.
Robs wasn't impressed when we were 2-0. Sounded like he was saying something to the effect that he would be surprised if we could even keep it close against Dallas. He thought we would lose to the Rams. Every time we prove him wrong, it's just that the other team sucks.
Can't expect much in the way of credit from Robs. C'est la vie.
I'm reaching a point where I will simply refuse to respond to Robs when it comes to the Skins. All last week he posted strong comments about how bad the team is. Now he "couldn't care less" that we beat the Rams. Robs is proving to be a professor in the art of backtracking, which makes debating the issues that our teams present with him completely pointless.
The Skins are going to be ranked around 15 in the power rankings. We'd be higher if Rexy could improve even marginally, but he's proving to be exactly what we've known him to be. He is who we thought he is. Despite Rexy, we're far from the stinker of a team Robs constantly claims we are. We dominated the game with solid D and with the run game. Robs can ignore the strengths of this team all he wants (and continue to believe that Rexy is a good NFL QB), but it just goes to show that his "analysis" of the team is completely baseless and laughable.
You guys are funny. Are you suggesting that the Deadskins are going to now be much better than 7-9? Is holding on to beat the Rams really that impressive?
If you still think the Deadskins are going to end up around 7-9, then we still share the same view.
It is not surprising that Deeps wrote that I would say the Deadskins stink and they played a sucky team - BECAUSE THAT IS EXACTLY TRUE AND THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED.
Deeps, how is it backtracking to say I couldn't care less? When I made my prediction that the Rams would win, I didn't care whether they won or not, that is just what I expected to happen. I like to see the Deadskins lose, but if they win a couple of games why would I care?
You are like a couple of dorks sitting in the corner and giggling because the pretty girl in the room just smiled at you. I'm the guy who is telling you you are dorks and you have no shot at taking the girl home. So you are mad and have now decided to giggle at me. In the end you are going to go home with each other, strip down, rub tapioca pudding all over each other and wonder why the pretty girl didn't come home with you.
Sad comments from a sad man. Robs, you are the guy sitting in front of his computer with your Hong Kong Phooey underoos dropped to your ankles and an authentic kids medium size Austin Powers penis pump strapped on getting off every time the Skins lose.
The problem is your analysis is for shat. Your hatred makes you delusional. We get it. You love the Pear and hate the Skins and will claim objectivity but your analysis again, is for shat. Like Deepie, I pretty much discount all your comments. They are so off but they do provide some entertainment.
BTW - it was Deepie who sent me the email yesterday wondering what you would say today and me responding with what I said. Again, you have difficulty following the trail. Nothing new.
Man, if you think the D personnel is better suited for the 4-3 and would be better in that scheme, they should be ranked #1 in your mind.
Nice opinions and it's good for a few laughs but in seriousness, your analysis is for shat.
No Robs. I'm the one enjoying the company of an average but improving with age girl that I'd be happy to bring home to mom. You on the other hand are dealing with the hard reality that the girl you've had your eye on for years ended up missing a few teeth and has kanckles.
LOL what are you guys talking about? If I were a Skins fan, I would have been sick to my stomach at the end of that game. You can bring out your points and analyze each small facet of the game if you want but the overall picture in the end is what counts. And that is that the Redskins didnt finish strong against a crappy Rams team. They barely escaped a Rams comeback. The Redskins are very very very fortunate the Rams Stink so bad that they couldnt get out of their own way. The Redskins did nothing to win that game. It was the Rams who continued to drop passes and commit penalties and lose the game on their own. But it is what it is. The Redskins won a game. The fact that they couldnt put away a pretty sh-tty team away is a red flag. It pretty much looked like two bad teams battling it out for a victory. Both teams played poorly and had either the Rams or Redskins been superior to the other, it would have been a blowout. It was two teams basically on the same level in a game that could have gone either way. It was ugly game.
If they keep up the same level of play, itll be interesting to see how bad the Skins get drubbed when they play some of the better teams in the upcoming weeks.
JSR...What you're saying is definitely a concern. I was ready to throw stuff at the screen when we couldn't wrap up the game. In fact, after the game, most of the players were saying the same thing. We should have put them away, but when your QB throws two picks in the fourth that puts the opposing team in your half of the field, you're going to give up some points. The fact that the D was able to stop Jackson and was able to sack Bradford 7 times is why we won. The D had to bail out Rexy.
I'm not ready to say the Skins are going to win many more than 4-5 more games because I see how our QB keeps putting the team in a difficult position. At least the D and running game are vastly improved over last season. Those are the reasons for optimism. A ground attack and defense will keep you in games, so the chances of pulling out a few surprise wins will exist.
JSR, what are you talking about. Until mid way through the 4th quarter, we dominated that game. We owned time of possession. We wre crushing them in yardage. We shut down Jackson. We had Bradford running for his life. The Rams weren't able to muster 100 yards of total offense until midway through the 4th quarter. The defense was dominating.
The problem was Grossman couldn't close out the game. He threw a terrible INT in our zone. He couldn't complete an easy 3rd down conversion at the end. The other INT through Moss's hands was unfortunate. It happened but if Moss catches that, it most likely is a blowout.
Look, it's fine. The Skins have a ways to go. No one is saying that they are a top tier team but there is no question they have shown significant improvement in these first 4 games compared to last season.
We'll see as the season progresses how it unfolds.
Overall, I agree with JSR. That being said, the Skins are trying to establish building blocks that they have been unsuccessful at doing over the past several years. The defense is strong, but I'm really worried about the passing attack and turn overs. Rexy's confidence is spiraling downward. Shanny has a difficult decision on the horizon. Hopefully, Rexy can leave his recent performances behind him; if not, let the Beck transition commence. Shanny has benched a starting QB when Denver was 2 games over .500. Good luck to you Rexy!
If I wrote what Scott just said, I would be dismissed as a hater.
Why would you be considered a hater? The bulk of Scott's comments were about Rexy. I agree with some of Scott's comments. I agree that Rexy is a concern. He hasn't looked the samed in the last two games. He hasn't shown that confidence of a guy that believes we will win the East. He looks tentative and a guy scared to make a mistake.
However, I say stick with Rexy until he starts blowing games. If we are winning, I don't care TOO much. However, if he starts costing us games, I will say it is time for a change - although I still don't like Beck.
Again, Robs, how is that being a hater?
Scott agrees with JSR - who I agree with. It is pretty simple and clear that Scott is not as enamored with the Deadskins as you are.
Robs. JSR made some very valid points, but the one thing he's absolutely wrong about is that the Skins did nothing to win. We dominated the entire game, but let the Rams back in it with Rexy's INTs. Sure the Rams had penalties and drops, but a lot of that can be attributed to them being intimidated by a defense that had 7 sacks and held them to 45 yards rushing.
I agreed with JSR that not being able to win that game by 20 points is a concern, which is why I still don't see more than 4-5 more wins. The problem with JSR is that he's making a generalized statement that the team is lousy, when in fact it was Rexy who was lousy down the stretch. If you can't recognize the strengths of the team and understand that a strong running attack and solid defense will keep you in any game any week, then you just don't understand football.
We'll see how good the defense is and how good the rushing attack is when they are playing teams other than the Rams.
The D looks better than last year, but that is not saying much given where they were last year.
We've all seen the Deadskins start fast or have a couple of big wins early and then fade back to their normal bad to possibly mediocre selves. I haven't seen anything as yet to make me change my mind.
Robs - Do you still believe the Skins are no better than the Rams? You were convinced we would lose badly and that wasn't the case...not even close.
Answer the question or don't. My point is, the Skins are no worse than a middle of the pack team - not the bottom of the barrel scum they clearly were at the end of last season and in previous seasons.
I agree with Deepie's comments. JSR does bring out valid points and it is a concern that we couldn't put the game away. Honestly, if Moss holds on to that ball, it's probably a blow out but it didn't happen and then Rexy struggled.
However, JSR, like you, seem to be making the generalized comment that the Skins suck and I don't believe that to be the case.
I spoke to Scott to get clarification and Scott is free to chime in but he seems to have the same feelings has Deepie and myself. That the team is improved but Rexy is a concern and the offense at critical points is a concern. What Scott is saying is different than what you and JSR is saying. Scott is typically all about the QB and the offense and the passing game. Rexy struggled late as he did in the Dallas game. Also, our red zone offense needs to improve but again the feeling I believe Deepie, Scott, and myself have is that this is an improved team whereas you and JSR just say that we are lousy. That is the difference b/t you and Scott.
The funny thing is Robs is trying to find that thing to pick on. Before it was Haynesworth, then it was Malcolm Kelly, then he wanted the O line to be bad, then he complained about the personnel on the defense, then it was D. Hall, then it was Atogwe.
The thing is after MK, so far all those pieces have been by and large successful and he doesn't know which piece to go after next.
Why not go after Rexy? He is the guy that seems to be struggling the most right now.
JKSD - you have a problem. For some reason you always have to couch things into what I think. Just look at this post - "To Robs' chagrin . . ."
You go back to arguments from past years to try to make some larger unknown point. Look at Haynesworth and MK - I was right about them. You were the one saying they were good pickups that would help the Deadskins.
Deeps - I didn't say the Rams are better than the Deadskins. I expected them to win at home against what I perceive to be a subpar Deadskin team. They didn't. It is no big deal.
If we agree that the Deadskins are a 7-9 team then there are going to be some surprise wins and some bad losses. The only thing I was surprised by this past week is how bad I think the Rams are. This was a team that many thought would challenge in the lowly NFC West.
Yeah. Sure. Robs won't criticize Rexy any sooner than JSR will say Favre was an average QB.
I will have to pinch myself the day I see any real analysis of the Skins out of Robs to make sure I'm not dreaming - or having a nightmare.
I liked the pickup of Haynesworth when it happened. I wanted to see what MK was capable of. However, it was clear Haynesworth sucked and I'm glad we rid ourselves of him. I didn't want him on the team this season.
MK was disappointing because he couldn't stay healthy. I am fine with admitting that you were right in how brittle he is. I am not so proud that I am incapable of admitting I was wrong or that I can change my opinion as players/games play out.
Again, I am pulling for Rexy but he definitely needs to improve. You seem to think the Skins suck but Rexy is the reason we are winning. Rexy had a chance to win the Cowboy game for us. He had a chance to put the Rams game away. He did neither. He is not solely to blame for those things but to think he has been stellar and that there should be no concerns with his play, is not being objective.
The play of the other 21 starters has been solid. If Rexy can improve, we will be a much stronger team.
BTW - so what if I wrote "To Robs chagrin?" You admittedly hate the Skins and I'm sure you are happy when they lose. You predicted them to be beaten pretty badly so saying our win was to your "chagrin" seems fairly accurate.
So basically youre saying that I am making general statements about the team.
I don’t know how a generalization can be made when referring to a specific team and their performance on the field and what they are. If youre saying that im not looking at statistics, youre right. I am not. All I am looking at is what happened and what I perceived.
That being said, I don’t see them as more than mediocre. They are not a good team. They actually do “suck” right now. Im sorry but only being able to put up 17 points against basically an inept team is not the sign of a good or even consistently mediocre team. Stats are BS. I am looking at the overall performance and what I saw. They did not beat the Rams. The Rams made many miscues and mistakes which they could not overcome hence the Rams lost the game. Yeah sure the Redskins made some plays. But so did the Rams. In every game more likely than not, both teams will make some plays. That’s football. If you want to say this team does not “suck” then the Redskins would have had to dominate the Rams and have beaten the inferior opponent convincingly. This team is still in the early stages of their rebuilding and changing the way they do things. BTW, before anyone gets on my case, let me say again, The Redskins are a better team than last year. They are much improved.
I do understand JSK Dad and Deeps point of view. You guys are Redskins fans. You will continue to be blindely optimistic about your team and that’s fine. I don’t expect you guys to say “did you see the Redskins? Yeah they won! But they sure stink cus they barely beat the Rams. Hail Skins!!!”
I see myself as indifferent to the Redskins. If they do good, ill say they look good. They looked good against the Giants and to a lesser degree the Cardinals and lesser to the Cowboys and basically pathetic against the Rams. One could say they are playing worse and worse as the season goes. Not good since they will be facing some juggernauts in the upcoming weeks. And this isn’t Snyderitis either. Anyone who knows anything about football, professional sports, and business knows this guy is a damn fool. Hes ruined a once proud franchise. A team I used to love. I was as die hard as could be, but he has hijacked the team and is now extorting current fans. I refuse support him and his crap he puts on the field year in and year out because of his selfishness and impatience. But I will acknowledge when they play good and when they are on the right path. Overall they are on the right path by improving this year, but they still “suck”
JSR, you "don’t know how a generalization can be made when referring to a specific team and their performance on the field and what they are?" It's easy to do because you did it.
I suppose what would be nice is to better understand your reasons for saying they "suck?" You admittedly don't look at stats and are just going with your perception. So what is it that makes you feel the way that you do?
Is it the defense? Is it special teams? Is it the offense? Is it coaching?
It's fine to have the feelings you do towards Snyder. Many of us do (to varying degrees). However, lets not let that blind us as a reason for saying the team "sucks." Would be nice to have something more concrete.
Neither Deepie nor I are saying that this is a top tier team. All I am looking for is some more perspective on why you think the way that you do.
From what I gather, we all agree (except for Robs) that the team has improved. I believe Deepie and I believe the team is competitive and taking steps in the right direction and it has been a great first step in building something. JSR thinks they have improved but still "sucks" and can hopefully provide some reasons. Scott thinks the team has improved but is largely concerned with Rexy and the passing attack. Robs just think they stink altogether but that Rexy has been a strong point. I am trying to encapsulate the different perspectives and everyone is free to chime in if I have misrepresented them.
Ok here are a few reasons the Redskins still suck
They barely beat a bad Rams team.
They have a serious problem at QB.
They have nonexistent receivers.
Their opponents have a combined record of 6-10 therefore they have proved that they can hang with the weakest. That leads me to ask if this defense is really any good or is it because of the offenses being so bad that they are making the Skins d look good. I don’t think anyone one can say that the Skins defense is any good after the watching the Rams or Cowboys game. Both teams were making major miscues and screwing themselves over with drops, penalties, bad snaps, receivers not knowing what to do. Those are all things that weren’t controlled by the Redskins defense.
15th in nfl in total yards gained against current set of teams played (6-10).
Interesting on NFL.com today.
“To review, the division-leading Redskins, to their credit, took care of a beaten and thin Giants team in the home opener. They then had to scramble to save a game at home against lowly Arizona, gave a game away at Dallas via some vintage Rex Grossman (plenty more on him to come) and then tried like heck to give away a 17-0 lead Sunday at winless St. Louis, thanks in large part to another hefty serving of Sexy Rexy's shenanigans. And, thus far, that's the class of the division.”
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d822cf8a7/article/nfc-least-division-has-failed-to-deliver-on-high-expectations?module=HP11_cp
JSR, to your points which are largely useless:
I won't make any apologies for a victory. A win is a win is a win. I don't care if you win by 1 or 50 points, it still only counts as 1 victory. We were a Moss completion away from a blowout. Sure, I didn't like the finish but if you watched the entire game, I think it is safe to say that we dominated for 3+ quarters.
QB is an issue but Rexy is still 3-1 as a starter this year. He has made some nice throws but he has made some bad mistakes. Still, he should be measured by wins. Until he starts costing us games, I am fine with him as our starter.
What do you mean nonexistent receivers? Moss and Gafney each average 4-5 catches per game. The ball is spread around plenty. What evidence do you have of them being "nonexistent?"
We don't set the schedule. We play who we play. The Puckers opponents thus far are 7-9 so what?
We can pull out any stat of any team (e.g., GB has the 28th ranked defense).
Look, I think GB is the best team in the NFC right now but your points are largely useless.
Again, you seem to agree that the Skins have improved but you say they still "suck." It isn't based on anything more than your opinion. That's fine.
Again, I am not saying that they are a great team but for the first time in a long time they seem to be taking the necessary steps to build sustainable success (ridding themselves of overpriced, older divas, focusing on the draft and younger players and building depth, finding character guys that fit the scheme). Is everything going to come together overnight? Of course not. However, we seem to be in a much better place today then we have in years. The team certainly looks like it can compete.
I can respect your opinion as just that your opinion but it isn't based on much. If that is all you are providing then fine, I will take your opinion and leave it at that. Otherwise, come back with something more.
The proof is in the pudding. They just dont look good. Anyone outside of the redskins fan base and redskins park can see that. See the link i sent. They are improved but not enough to be considered good by any means. They struggled against a crappy Rams team. That iss a fact.
Take what u want from that lackluster performance against perhaps the worst team in the nfl.
No one here is debating the Packers.
Everything we write on these blogs is our opinion. My opinion is the Deadskins stink. Your opinion is that the Bears are mediocre.
JSR gave you a list of items that you don't fully agree with. You have reasons that you say the Bears are mediocre that I don't fully agree with.
I accept that you have a different opinion, but you will just dismiss me as biased or simply a hater. Whatever.
JSR, did you watch the entire game? Did it appear that the Skins dominated the first 3+ quarters?
"Anyone outside of the redskins fan base and redskins park can see that." Most power rankings have them in the top 13. Again, these are signs of a much improved team.
JSR and Robs you say they "suck" but it is based on nothing but your opinions. That's fine. I can accept that for what it is but there is no substance behind it.
Robs, I say the Pears are mediocre because they are one of the most sacked teams in the league. Their WRs drop a number of passes. Jeff Cutler looks scared in the pocket and his rating supports his poor performance. The power rankings have them in the lower half of the NFL. They are 2-2 and have not looked overly impressive in games. Their secondary has been torched. Their offense is ranked 25 and their defense is ranked 31. These are points that suppoort my opinion.
The Bears are 2-2 playing 4 of the best offenses in the NFL. The Power Rankings are of no concern to me. I also don't agree with many of your views as I have pointed out in the past.
I will just comment on the O-line. I have said that it is vastly improved over last year and I have also said that it is a young and physical team that needs to gel. It certainly looks like that is happening and I expect it to be one of the better lines in the NFL as the season wears on.
JSR gave you a list that you don't agree with. Please stop saying that there is no substance.
To just say there is no substance shows your contempt - but it doesn't reflect reality.
The Bears?? there is no comparison in the opponents the Bears have played VS the opponents that the Skins have played or really most other teams have played. Do you even know what a Power Ranking is??? Its opinion!! Just like everything else on here.
FYI... the past 8 quarters the redskins have produced 3 TDs and only 33 points. All of that against teams with a combined record of 2-6. Pathetic if you ask me or anyone who knows anything about football. They are averaging just over 4 points a Quarter.
Redskins nation and the organization can continue to place a high value on Past stats(even as close as these past 4 weeks), players that have proveN in the past, and what the team has shown. They pay no regard to what the team really is and how all of the parts fit together to build a real championship caliber team. Whether they do this year or next is to be seen but there is more to winning than just putting up stats and climbing power rankings. You have to look at the circumstances of their success or failures (close victories against crap teams, dan snyder firing norv turner, picking up Don McNabb, picking up A Hay.) Buying a big name, or have a good third down percentage, or having a defense that ranks high does not exclusively equal to success. There are other factors that have to be considered. More specifically circumstantial factors. That is what I am looking to form my opinion.
Deadskin lovers - there are about 12 years of your misery that informs my opinion of the Deadskins.
Just like I posted on my blog, JKSD says the Deadskins are changing and getting better every year. But then they still suck. We'll see if things change this year.
"To just say there is no substance shows your contempt - but it doesn't reflect reality."
That is just plain nonsense.
Robs, JSR provided opinions but the facts don't support the opinions.
I responded to each of his points.
Again, he said that we struggled against the Rams. We dominated for 3+ quarters. The stats support that. We thoroughly outgained them. We crushed them in time of possession. If Moss makes that catch, it's a blowout. Whatever. We can disagree and say that the Rams played us evenly but the numbers don't support that.
He says we have a serious QB issue. I admit that I am concerned about Rexy. I have said that he is looking tentative out there and he has more turnovers than he does TDs. He is the 25th ranked QB and he has been progressively looking worse. His turnovers are bad turnovers but I am pulling for him and we are still winning with him in there. Until he costs us wins, I am okay with him.
He said that we have non-existent WRs. Moss has 21 catches and Gaffney has 17. Greg Jennings has 25 catches and Jordy Nelson has 15. The numbers don't support JSR's opinion.
Our opponents are 6-10. So what? We don't set the schedule. We have no say in that matter. I have mentioned that the Puckers opponents records are 7-9. What's the difference? That is meaningless.
We have the 15th ranked offense. Okay. It's middle of the road. That's fine. We also have a top defense in the league. We are leading in sacks. We are leading in getting off the field on 3rd down. I have never said that we are a top ranked team. I have said that we are making improvements and taking steps in the right direction and that it looks like we can compete strongly in this league.
JSR's list is simply opinions unsubstantiated by any facts. He says that no one outside of Redskin nation thinks much of us. He provided one columnist's comments. There are several columnists that say that they are good. The power rankings say they are just outside of the top 10. I don't particularly buy into most of the columnists saying we are great. Again, all I am saying is that we are improved, taking steps in the right direction, and can compete.
Regarding the Pears, I largely gave you opinions SUPPORTED by facts. If you can't tell the difference than you either choose to ignore the difference or you aren't as bright as you think you are. If you can tell the difference than you are just being an arse and should STFU!
JSR, I have no idea what you are talking about when you say "there are other factors that have to be considered. More specifically circumstantial factors."
Also, of course I know what power rankings are! Yes, they are largely opinions. You said that almost no one outside of Redskin nation thinks much of them. I am telling you it's not true and power rankings is a factual way of proving that other independent individuals opinions differ with what you are saying.
Robs, you say the Pears are contenders. The stats and play do not support it. I have told you their issues and the stats largely support my "opinions."
Guys, we can leave it at this...lets see how it plays out. Robs says that the Pears are contenders, we'll see. Deepie and I say that the Skins have improved and can compete in this league, we'll see.
No, you just disagree with the premise of many of the items.
For example, 17-10 against the Rams shows struggles. You say you dominated for 3 quarters - the game is 4 quarters long. Moss didn't catch the ball. If the Rams didn't drop 5 passes maybe they would have won - but they didn't.
JSR and I think the opponents the Deadskins have played are a major factor in both their record and their rankings.
The QB issue is an issue.
Moss and Gaffney are comparable to Jennings and Nelson. Are you out of your bloody mind?
Those are substantive comments that you just disagree with and want to dismiss.
Robs, I said I agree with the QB issue. That is basically the only issue I agree on with JSR. Deepie agrees with that. Scott agrees with that. Seems like even you recognize Rexy is a concern (so I guess you now say that he can't play). No one is disputing that Rexy is a concern.
Because of him, the Rams game was much closer. Still, I can't say that that was an evenly played game. We dominated them for much of the game. The numbers support that. Rexy threw a terrible INT in our zone and he could not complete a simple 3rd and 3 button hook. Again, Rexy made that game much closer than it needed to be. However, the other 21 guys largely dominated that game. It's fine. We can agree to disagree. You guys think it was an evenly played game. The numbers don't support that and I will disagree.
It's fine that you guys think that our opponents play a part in our record/rankings. You would say with the Pears that the schedule is something you can't control. I'm telling you we can't control that. All we can do is play the guys that are on our schedule and try to win. Nothing more. Don't know what you want me to say here.
I'm not saying that Moss is as good as Jennings. JSR said that our receivers are non existent. I am giving stats that they are getting the ball. Also, it helps when you have arguably the best QB in the league throwing you the ball as opposed to Rexy.
I'm not dismissing the comments. I addressed each one of them and again, they aren't supported by anything.
Again, you say the Pears are contenders for the Super Bowl and I have told you they are mediocre. I gave you my "opinions" on the Pears and they are supported with facts. BIG difference.
No point in discussing more. It's pretty simple. The play on the field will determine if the Pears are Super Bowl contenders and if the Skins can continue to compete.
The fact that you disagree with the comments does not make your view valid. That's just your opinion.
”Again, he said that we struggled against the Rams. We dominated for 3+ quarters. The stats support that. We thoroughly outgained them. We crushed them in time of possession. If Moss makes that catch, it's a blowout. Whatever. We can disagree and say that the Rams played us evenly but the numbers don't support that.”
The game is not about numbers. Its about performance and wins. Its about the end result of what happened. For all we know, not playing the first 3 quarters and unleashing all of their efforts in the 4th quarter could have been in the Rams strategy. We don’t know what they gameplaned. If moss makes that catch, then it’s a blowout. If, should haves, would haves, could haves don’t carry any value. If the cardinals receiver doesn’t fumble in week 2 4th quarter drive, the Cards may have got a field goal and won. If Kerrigan doesn’t tip Mannings pass and intercept, the game is closer and maybe the Giants change their plan of attack and win. I did not say the Rams played the Skins evenly. I just said the Redskins didn’t beat the Rams as a good team would have. It was the Rams own faults that caused them to lose the game. Because the Skins were not able to dismantle a BAD Rams team, that leads me to believe that this Redskins team is not that great. Its improved from last year but not a good team yet. I don’t need stats to justify any of this.
”He said that we have non-existent WRs. Moss has 21 catches and Gaffney has 17. Greg Jennings has 25 catches and Jordy Nelson has 15. The numbers don't support JSR's opinion.”
Receptions is the least important stat for a receiver. I give more credit to what you can do after you catch the ball with stats like yards per catch and TD’s in which the Redskins WRs don’t even come close to comparing to Jennings and Nelson. Greg Jennings and Jordy Nelson together have 40 catches for 658 and 6 TD. The Skins Duo has 38 catches for 484 yards and 3 Tds. The Key stat here, 6 TDs vs 3 TDs. Jennings and Nelson are averaging 1.5 TDs per game where as the Skins are not even averaging 1 per game. Even more, the Packers with all of their potential Recievers have 12 TD in 4 games, that’s 3 a game and the Skins have 6 TD between all of their receivers, that’s 1.5 per game. You get the idea.
”JSR's list is simply opinions unsubstantiated by any facts. He says that no one outside of Redskin nation thinks much of us. He provided one columnist's comments. There are several columnists that say that they are good. The power rankings say they are just outside of the top 10. I don't particularly buy into most of the columnists saying we are great. Again, all I am saying is that we are improved, taking steps in the right direction, and can compete.”
Direct me to one columnist outside of the DC area who has said the Redskins are “good”.
”JSR, I have no idea what you are talking about when you say "there are other factors that have to be considered. More specifically circumstantial factors."
When I referred to Circumstantial factors I mean you cant just look at the way the redskins played this set of bad teams and come out and say that the redskins are a good team. You have to consider how they won, what transpired, the mentality of the players and how they will stack up against better opponents. These are things that can be taken away from the games they’ve played so far. To compare records and power rankings with the Bears who circumstantially had to play exponentially tougher teams up to this point
Is just plain ignorant.
We will see how this all turns out. I cant wait to see the Eagles come to town and what they do this year to the Skins. It was pretty bad last year I remember. Itll be a real test and will really show how far this team has come.
Robs, I have given facts that support my opinions. JSR is talking about "circumstantial factors." Let me ask you this. Do you even understand what he is talking about with "circumstantial factors?" Even better, do you agree with that?
Robs, do you think 40 catches compared to 38 catches is widely disparate? Would you say that the Redskin WRs are non existent?
Robs, a couple years back, I came down on the Pears for their lackluster victories against what I considered softer teams. You made no apologies about it and said the schedule is what it is and you came away with the W. Now you seem to be taking the opposite stance you took before. Seems like hypocrisy to me.
JSR, so I understand that you believe that the game wasn't evenly played. I get that we can't get into "ifs," "would'ves," "could'ves," etc. I agree with your point on Rexy being a concern. In fact, I think we all agree (I believe including Robs now who has come around - Robs please correct me if I am wrong) that Rexy is an issue. Again, we dominated for 3+ quarters and Rexy made that a much closer game. Thankfully, the other 21 guys kept the game safe. Look, I'm not going to get into it anymore on this. It was a closer game in the end than it should have been but for the bulk of the game we dominated it. We can agree to disagree on this subject. Again, I am fine with Rexy until his mistakes cost us games. If he had cost us the Rams game, there would be a whole lot more backlash than there already is right now.
Regarding the WRs, the catches are almost even. Sure, the GB receivers have more TDs. They also have arguably the best QB in the league whereas we have Rexy. However, the numbers aren't so skewed as to say that the Redskins WRs are "non existent." It's fine if you want to believe that and again, we will have to agree to disagree.
JSR, I take offense to the ignorant claim. Follow the discussion. I am NOT comparing the Redskins with the Pears. Robs, says that the Pears are Super Bowl contenders. I am not saying that the Skins are Super Bowl contenders. We are NOT comparing the two. Let me ask you. Using your "circumstantial factors," do you believe the Pears are Super Bowl contenders?
FINALLY, for the umpteenth time, I am NOT saying that the Redskins are a top tier team. Perhaps you believe most in Redskin nation is saying that we are playoff bound and making a run at the Super Bowl. I have never said that. I am pleased with the direction of the team. I think we have taken great first steps in improving by focusing on the draft. Getting rid of older, higher priced divas/distractions. Getting younger and building depth. Finding players that are character guys and can fit the schemes and excecuting properly. We have not done that in the past. Previously, under the Snyderatto regime it was go out and get the biggest name in FA no matter what the cost and no matter if he fit the system. The changes is culture and approach seem obvious.
I can't tell if you guys think that me (and Deepie) believe that we are going to the Super Bowl that is why I have to continuously explain what I (we) believe.
As we all say, the best way to figure things out is the outcome on the field. I am not saying we are going undefeated from here on out. Only that we can compete in this league and certainly can't be taken lightly.
Again, appreciate if Robs you answer my questions and JSR you tell me if you think the Pears are a Super Bowl contender.
SSDD. JSR has given facts also. You just choose to ignore them.
The Deadskin receivers don't scare anyone and don't make many big plays.
I haven't seen anything to make me change my mind that the Deadskins are a 7-9 team.
It is good to see that you now admit that you have changed and now see that I did not need to apologize for Bears' wins. YOU HAVE CHANGED. Here is the difference. I think the Deadskins stink and don't see any reason to change my mind. You were criticizing and the Bears went to the Super Bowl. I was right then and we'll see this year.
Robs, pretty amazing. I don't think you answered a single one of my questions.
YOU HAVE CHANGED on your interpretation of schedules and wins.
YOU HAVE CHANGED in your thinking of Rexy.
Thanks for (not) answering my questions.
JSR, here are a few articles about the Skins:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/876295-nfl-power-rankings-week-5-which-5-surprise-teams-are-destined-for-greatness#/articles/876295-nfl-power-rankings-week-5-which-5-surprise-teams-are-destined-for-greatness/page/6
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/10/04/Bucs/index.html
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/don_banks/09/28/week.3/index.html
http://dc.sbnation.com/washington-redskins/2011/10/4/2467672/washington-redskins-defense-stephen-bowen-barry-cofield
If you want more, I can get them for you.
JSR, again, you didn't follow that I was NOT comparing the Skins with the Pears. Let me know if you think the Pears are Super Bowl contenders.
No, you have changed friend. No matter how many times you say it, that is still the truth.
I haven't asked you to apologize for winning and I know Rex can play - haven't changed my views and I am not sure what you are referring to.
I believe I have responded appropriately to your questions - you just choose to ignore my responses. Nothing new there. You just become selective in your comments and discussion.
Just to show you the difference in how we comment - I went back to a couple of posts. Have a look:
Bears - Cards
Bears - Vikings
Notice in the second post how you made a mistake and made stuff up about me "sugar-coating" about Rex. At least you apologized.
I'm not really sure what you are referring to about me changing my mind about schedules and wins. You are the one who has clearly changed on that - you admit it yourself above.
Robs, here are my questions AGAIN:
Do you even understand what he (JSR) is talking about with "circumstantial factors?" Even better, do you agree with that?
Robs, do you think 40 catches compared to 38 catches is widely disparate? Would you say that the Redskin WRs are non existent?
Robs, you said the "QB issue is an issue." So what are you saying that Rexy is a good QB or what? I can't follow.
I agree with you that we don't set the schedule. A win is always a win. You don't get points for style. Frankly, I will maintain my position and say that we dominated that Rams game and if not for Rexy (who I can't figure out what you feel about him now) there would be no question we dominated them.
One final note to JSR, if you look at the Pear WRs (Williams, Hester, AND Knox) - combined they have fewer catches than Greg Jennings AND have ZERO TDs. To me that is a better definition of non-existent.
Robs, in your Bears - Cards link, I say that the Pears were lucky but they won and they are 6-0 and that is all that matters. What is the difference with what I am saying now? Frankly, in that Bears/Cards game, the Bears were beaten but came out on top. I would say that the Cards largely controlled that game but still lost. I don't know what the difference is in my opinion then and my opinion now.
If we lost the Rams game, I would have said that we dominated the game but the Rams got the W and that is all that matters.
Robs, your Bears - Vikings link, I said, "I actually agree almost entirely with your original post (shocking!)." I apologized MULTIPLE times for not understanding you initially. What's your point?
Again, maybe you can answer my questions for once.
I said, you have ignored JSR's facts. Sure he provided some circumstantial stuff - as did you.
I've never said the Deadskin WRs are non-existent. I said they don't scare anyone and don't make big plays. JSR gave you numbers in response to your comparison of Gaffney and Moss to Jennings and Nelson that I think demonstrate this point. Assuming JSR's numbers are correct, I think they show that the Deadskins receivers aren't really doing much.
Rex can play and I would play him before Beck - but that doesn't mean he doesn't need to improve. There is no inconsistency in how I view Rex. In the Super Bowl year for the Bears I criticized Rex appropriately also - contrary to what you may believe.
I have never asked you to apologize for a win. But CLEARLY YOU NOW UNDERSTAND MY LONG HELD VIEW THAT STYLE POINTS DON'T MATTER. You have changed, right friend?
I have explained that when you criticized the Bears for lackluster wins during their Super Bowl run it did not change my mind and we still made the Super Bowl. A lackluster win by the Deadskins doesn't change my mind that this year's Deadskins still stink. Totaly consistent.
The Bears WRs have largely been non-existent. I am not sure why you are bringing that into the discussion. It seems completely irrelevant to this discussion.
How have I ignored JSR's facts? Please explain.
JSR has largely arrived to his conclusion based on circumstatial factors. Do you agree with that?
I have never said that Moss and Gaffney are just as good as Jennings and Nelson. I was arguing whether they are non existent. I assume you disagree with JSR's comment of them being non existent.
I don't understand your views on Rexy. I think we agree on our views on him. That he is inconsistent and makes some very bad plays that can cost us football games. That is what I have been saying for years.
I gave you my comments about style points and a W is a W is a W. My opinions have not changed.
The introduction of the Pear WRs was for JSR's benefit to better understand what non existent WRs are.
The fact that you cannot understand that I am answering your questions is not my problem. You need to read.
Also, in both examples I put up you can see how much of an a-hole you were. You unnecessarily chose to repeat yourself a bunch of times in the Cards thread, and then you made stuff up - as usual - in the Queens thread.
First thing is that i apologize. i did not mean to offend. I just was saying that comparing the two teams at this point based on power ranking and not considering the circumstances of their games ie opponent strength would be comparing apples to oranges. It seemed to me that there was a comparision made between the bears and redskins.
Receptions isnt an indicator of a receivers capabilties. Yards and TD mean infinetly more. Just as u say jennings and nelson have the beat qb in rodgers throwing to them so to i cud say that grossman isnt perfirming because he has crap recievers. I wont say that though. It goes hand in hand. Qb and receiver complement eachother.
We werent talking about bear receivers. And yes i do consider them a contender. I dont believe that in 9 months time all of a sudden you go from nfc championship game to non contender unless uve had major changes made in offseason which the bears didnt have.
Regarding the articles i have not read them yet but i will when i get to my desk.
Ladies! I've been entertained by your cat-fighting over the past 24 hours. Let me take a stab at clearing up all of the confusion.
1. Robs - your "LONG HELD VIEW THAT STYLE POINTS DON'T MATTER" may be long held, but the way you apply your view to the Pears and to the Skins is highly inconsistent. Why does a lackluster win by the Pears lead to "a win is a win" whereas a lackluster win by the Skins has you saying it doesn't matter, they still stink? The only conclusion JKSD and I can come up with is your bias is clouding your ability to analyze the Skins, which is why we say your analysis is baseless.
2. JSR - JKSD and I have agreed that some of your critiques of the Skins are valid. The only issue is you consistently say the Skins "suck" but show no regard for a vastly improved defense and signs of overall organizational improvement. Better D, solid running, and an improved front office doesn't mean the team will go to the playoffs. Neither JKSD nor I have ever claimed that we will be a playoff team this season. My point all along, and I believe JKSD can agree with this, is that there is a huge difference between a team that sucks (Rams) and the Skins. The Skins have talent and depth at many positions. We have shown that we can compete due to solid defense and time of possession. (Even last year, we played 12 games decided by no more than one score.) These are not signs of a team that sucks and I am high on this team only because I believe we are headed in the right direction. All that means is the team is better than you or Robs are willing to admit. Your inability to acknowledge the improvements and obvious signs that the team doesn't belong in the bottom 20s or lower in the rankings is why we continue to have to re-explain our point of view.
The team is improved i acknowledge that but our diagreement comes down how much the team is improved. I still think they are not a good team and i wont change opinion until they win against some better opponents. That ofcourse does not mean that they are not improved.
There's a HUGE difference between great teams (Packers), very good teams (Patriots), teams that "suck" (Rams), and the rest of the league. Teams that fall in the "rest of the league" category have a bunch of questions and kinks to work out. If they do, they can make some noise.
Right now the Pears and Skins have lots of questions that need to be answered. To say one is a good team and one sucks is ridiculous because they're clearly in the same boat. That's what I've been trying to make you Skins-haters understand.
JSR has acknowledged that the Skins have improved. How much we've improved is debatable, but what's not debatable is that the Skins are going to be competitive this season. If Rexy can eliminate, on average, one major mistake per game, we will be that much closer to making some serious noise. Call me crazy if you want, but it's true.
I'm with JSR.
I've explained the difference in lackluster wins. Every team has them. When the Bears had them they still were a good team and made the Super Bowl. When the Deadskins get one they are still a bad team. There is no inconsistency.
JSR - "I dont believe that in 9 months time all of a sudden you go from nfc championship game to non contender unless uve had major changes made in offseason which the bears didnt have."
Here's the problem with your approach. Last season, JKSD and I praised the Bears for getting as far as they did, but we constantly pointed out to Robs that the team has flaws (QB, secondary, lack of depth on o-line/d-line). The Pears made it to the NFC Championship game despite these significant flaws that are surfacing this season. Last year's performance doesn't make a team good this season. The Pears have fallen into the middle of the pack and if you take all things into account, it should be obvious that they are no where near the class of good to very good teams right now.
Long story short...Take all factors into account and don't ignore the obvious. If critical factors such as the Pears inability to protect Jay George because guys like Gay Creamy and other o-linemen on an already average o-line are out, then take that into account when analyzing the team. If the Skins D is playing well and they show they can control the clock with their running game, then don't be surprised if someone tells you you're crazy to say the Skins would lose by 20 to the Rams who are clearly in the "suck" category of teams.
Sorry. JSR said they'd lose by 2. Not 20. Regardless, my point still stands.
With all those flaws they hosted the NFC title game and lost by 7 to the Pack.
Robs - your opinion about each team remains consistent, but your approach to arrive at those conclusions is highly inconsistent. You've settled on the outcome of your "analysis" before applying a consistent approach to arrive at your conclusions. JKSD's observation that your approach is hypocritical is valid.
I'm surprised by your insistence that you're analysis is valid and objective. I figure that you, of all people, would understand that you can't consider any sort of test/research/analysis valid if the approach/factors are not consistent. Outcomes change based on how you arrived at that conclusion - not the other way around.
Ok. First thing, The Bears made the NFC championship game last year! The did so because they were a good team last year. Every team has flaws. The good teams overcome them, Like the Bears did. They were a game away from the Superbowl 9 months ago. How in the world you lump the Championship caliber Bears (who are basically the same team from 9 months ago) into the the same category as a rebuilding Redskins team is beyond me. Again you cant make a comparison and say that the Bears are in the same boat now as the Skins just based on these past 4 weeks. The Bears have played much tougher opponenets (all superbowl contenders). The Redskins have played teams in the "Suck" category as you have stated.
Ill agree with you that the Redskins are going to be competitive this year based on their performance against the "suck" teams that theyve played in the past 4 weeks, but upto this point ill say that they are ONLY going to be competitive against "suck" teams until they can prove otherwise (They have not proved anything yet by beating/struggling against "suck" teams, but you guys seem to think that they have).
And...Robs - What the hell does last season's run to the NFC Championship have to do with how the team performs this season? That's my point. You're ignoring the obvious weaknesses that were present last year, but did not surface until now and extrapolating that the Pears are still a very good team. That's utter B.S.
I am now understanding why you can't see that the Skins are no longer a team that "sucks." You won't take current factors into account when assessing the quality of a team.
Dude, I can't be blamed for thinking the Deadskins suck when they have been the cellar dweller of the East for 3 straight years and 4 of the last 5 years.
The Bears have won the North 3 of the last 6 years and have gone to the Super Bowl and hosted 2 NFC title games in the last 5 years.
You're saying your opinions of the teams are based on previous years' performances. Then why do you continue to critique these teams each week when you admittedly will not provide a current analysis? You're not analyzing anything then. You're just providing an outdated, baseless opinion.
Prior years' records is not the only factor, but it is a factor. I think you would agree that there is a statistically significant correlation between a team making the playoffs and making it again the following year, just as there is a correlation between not making the playoffs and not making it the next year.
I have no real issue with the Bears at 2-2 given who they have played. If they had played the Giants, Cards, Cowboys, and Rams and were 2-2 I might be concerned. So there is nothing that makes me worry that this is not a team that will challenge this year.
For the Deadskins, I have not seen anything in their 3-1 record and how they have played to make me think they are anything other than a 7-9 team.
What I don't understand about any of your comments is how I am biased or not being objective when you and JKSD also believe the Deadskins are a 7-9 team.
Frankly, I think your problem is that you don't like hearing that your team sucks - even though you pretty much think the same thing.
http://thebiglead.com/index.php/2011/02/09/steelers-fans-fear-regression-to-the-mean-but-not-a-super-bowl-losers-curse/
Point #1:
Since 1978, 30% of Super Bowl losers didn't even make the playoffs the next season. The stat has become more prevalent recently. Since 2000, six Super Bowl losers haven't made the playoffs the following season.
Since 1978, 50% of teams that have a division round playoff game don't make the playoffs the next season.
Conclusion - Teams that make the playoffs but don't win it all one year aren't automatically going to be good teams the next season. I say your Pears are not very good. They beat a struggling Falcons team, then got pummeled by the Saints, humbled by the Packers, and eeked out a win against a rebuilding Panthers team. You disagree because they made it to the NFC championship game last season and went to a Super Bowl 5 years ago. Whatever.
Point #2:
Our definitions of "suck" are different OR you use the team to liberally when describing the 2011 Skins. We're all still saying 7-9 is likely. As a fan, I see vast improvements, which make me take them out of the "suck" category that we were in last season. You chose not to. Fine.
Overall conclusion...We're each a fan of our own team and we each are optimistic about our own teams. The difference is JKSD and I are just as likely to praise the Pears as we are to bash them based on factual analysis. Robs and JSR seem to enjoy saying the Skins suck for their own enjoyment. Their use of the term "suck" is based on opinions defined by prior year performance, which point #1 above proves is a poor approach for analyzing a team's capabilities in the current season.
Dude - you are making my point with point 1 - The majority of playoff teams do make it to the playoffs the next year. I never said ALL PLAYOFF TEAMS MAKE IT.
Given that there are only 12 slots for the playoffs, if 7 of the slots are taken up by the 12 teams that made it the prior year and just 5 are taken by the 20 teams that didn't make it I am totally correct. Do the math son, it is a clearly objective reality.
OK - I say "suck" you say "bad" or "mediocre" or whatever you want to say. If the Deadskins finish last in the NFC East for the fourth time in a row, I would say "suck" is an appropriate term.
As to your final point - history continues to point to the fact that the Deadskins stink. That is not bashing it is a fact. The last time the Deadskins won the NFC East is 1999. You can say I am bashing - it doesn't matter to me. But that doesn't change the fact that it is true.
Look at your nonsense about how the Bears were lucky to get to the NFC title game given their significant "flaws". Give me one other team that you believe had significant flaws and just got lucky to win their division, host a conference title game, and barely lose to a team that is widely believed to be a juggernaut.
Just one Deeps. Otherwise it is pretty easy for me to say that you are just biased against the Bears.
Robs...Son. You, once again, missed the point. Last season JKSD and I pointed to the Pears' flaws that could have surfaced at any time. We talked about the o-line, the secondary, and Martz. They made it through the season with all of those potential issues lying dormant and you had success. All of those factors have surfaced this season. As a result, the Pears are not a significant contender THIS SEASON! If Gay Creamy heals and Major Harris learns how to play football, and Martz can get his head out of his arse, the Pears can contend again and I will adjust my critique of the team accordingly.
Regarding the stats on playoff team success...Again, you missed the point. Since 1978 50% of teams that have a home playoff game, but don't win it all DON'T MAKE THE PLAYOFFS the next season. There is no statistically significant stat showing that teams like your Pears are going to have success the year after they go to the playoffs. To automatically assume they are a good team this season because they had a good year last year is a flawed approach to analyzing the team.
Get off your high-horse and quit with the know-it-all attitude, son. An inkling of showing an open mind would be appreciated.
Other teams that had flaws and won their division:
The '09 Bengals
The '10 Seahawks
The '10 Chiefs
The '07 Cowboys
The '05 Buccaneers
Your Pears were fortunate to play the very flawed Seahawks to host that game against a real contender. Hang your hat on that tremendous achievement if you want, but don't blame me for making it clear that the Pears aren't that good this season.
You obviously don't understand the stats that you are presenting.
They clearly show that if you made the playoffs the year before, you are much more likely to make the playoffs than if you did not make the playoffs.
That is exactly what I have been saying. I'm not on any high horse - your own statistics support my objective reality.
I didn't say just winning the division, I said winning the division and hosting a title game. I guess you don't have an example of a team like the Bears last year - so you must be biased.
Remember, we hosted Seattle and then we hosted the NFC title game.
I'll wait for your example of another team like that.
We will see what happens. I just wish the Skins were playing this weekend.
FYI i dont enjoy watching the skins lose or saying they suck. I enjoy watching the Packers win. But if I believe the skins suck, I will say it. And right now, theyve done nothing to show me that they are any better than "suck". They are improved from last year in which there were probably the worst team in the NFL. If they win a few more games against the Bills, Eagles, 49ers, Patriots, Jets, then Ill def admit they are not in the "suck" group of teams.
I do enjoy watching them lose because I think Snyder is an arse.
I enjoy saying they suck because they do and because I think Snyder is an arse who has destroyed a once great NFL franchise.
That said, there is plenty of objective evidence to support the fact that they lose, they suck, and it is Snyder's fault. There is also a lot of objective support for my claim that Snyder is an arse.
Again, regarding the playoff stats, you must be suffering from some sort of brain fart. It clearly shows 36 teams that hosted division round games. 18 did not make the playoffs the next season. Your 2010 Pears did not make it to the Super Bowl, so those numbers are moot. 50% of the teams similar to your Pears did not make the playoffs the next season. In other words, you can't assume that last year's success will amount to anymore than a 50% chance of returning to the playoffs.
What does finding another team with a similar situation as the Pears have to do with critiquing this year's Pears team?
When you can stop twisting the debate to make lame attempts to debunk my facts, we can resume a real discussion.
Deeps, you either completely do not understand basic probability and statistics, or you are an idiot.
Let me lay it out for you. If 50% of the teams that host a divional round playoff game make the playoffs the next year then that is a good sign for the Bears.
That means that 2 out of the 4 teams that hosted last year should make it again this year (50% chance of making it according to history).
Only 10 out of the other 28 teams that did not host a divisional game will make the playoffs (36%).
What don't you get?!!!! What math are you doing?
Yeah true. Actually I change my statement, I do enjoy watching the Skins lose because of Snyder.
Deeps, I apologize for the "idiot" portion of my comment. But you seem to not understand your own numbers. They support my view about past playoff appearances boding well for the following year.
Robs, your own beloved Pears went to the Super Bowl in 2006 and the following year they went 7-9.
You and JSR say they suck. You, me and Deepie may agree that the Skins are a 7 or 8 win team. The difference is that right now Deepie and I feel like we can compete and play hard in each game. Whereas in previous years, we may win 6-7 games but we would get thrashed in a few games and certainly didn't look like a team that could compete week in/week out and wasn't building for anything. We patched a group of players together that weren't able to play as a team and didn't fit the schemes. It was simply a collection of players (some talented) and thrown out there. There is a difference with this group in that IT APPEARS we are building something. Again, it started with the offseason and instead of going after the high priced/big name vet, we focused on the draft. We traded down for more picks. By all accounts thus far, we had a successful draft. Instead of taking a bunch of receivers like in the Thomas, MK, Fred Davis draft, we drafted for need. We built up our defense. We were conservative in our approach to FA. We brought in character guys that fit the scheme. These are things that we did not do in the last several years. We were much smarter in our approach. The difference is apparent thus far in the games we have played.
Again, we probably won't turn things around overnight but we took good steps in the right direction and can hopefully have another year or two of similar type of offseason building success so that we can build a sustainable winner. This is the difference in the 7 or 8 wins Deepie and I are talking about and you saying that it is just more of the same.
As far as the Pears, we'll see if they are Super Bowl contenders. We'll see if they can beat the Lions on Monday night when we will all be watching.
It's funny with you and JSR because it's almost as though you enjoy watching the Skins lose as much (if not more) than your own teams winning.
Robs, you never directly answered my questions. You did what you do best and dance around things and some where buried in there are half answers. A simple "yes" or "no" suffices and would be more appreciated.
Guys, I have said it before, lets leave it and see how things play out on the field. That is really the only way we can determine anything.
I did answer your questions. I answered them several times. I don't know what more you expect.
Oh yeah, you are just flat out wrong about me enjoying a Deadskin loss as much as a Bear win. No comparison.
No comparision to a Packers win.
Sounds good. Always fun guys. Well see what happens on the field.
Robs, amuse me. Please show me where you answered "yes" or "no."
That's all I need. Don't tell me you already answered "yes" or "no."
Either show me where or even more simply just answer it again. Why are you afraid to answer "yes" or "no?"
I answered your questions. Give them again and I'll cut and paste my answers.
Robs - Regarding the idiot comment, no offense taken. I know it's difficult to defend your "analysis" and the fact that you snapped is no surprise.
I wasn't aware that a 50/50 shot at making the playoffs would be a good thing in your mind. To me that just means your team is equally as likely to miss the playoffs as it is to make it to post-season play. That's not exactly a compelling argument, nor one that supports your claim that the Pears are a good team right now. In fact, it has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the current team.
Peace out!
Honestly Deeps you must not understand the facts or what I have said. It is clear that the chances of making the playoffs are much higher for teams that were in the playoffs the previous year. It is an objective fact that is completely supported by your numbers.
If you do not agree or do not understand then I will have no choice but to question your educational achievement.
Robs, here are my questions FOR THE THIRD TIME:
Please no dancing. Just simple answers will suffice. I've tried to make this very simple for you to follow.
Do you even understand what he (JSR) is talking about with "circumstantial factors" (Please answer "yes" or "no")? Even better, do you agree with that (Please answer "yes" or "no")?
Robs, do you think 40 catches compared to 38 catches is widely disparate (Please answer "yes" or "no")? Would you say that the Redskin WRs are non existent (Please answer "yes" or "no")?
Robs, you said the "QB issue is an issue." So what are you saying that Rexy is a good QB OR bad QB? I can't follow. (Please answer "good" or "bad")
Also, your own beloved Pears went to the Super Bowl in 2006 and the following year they went 7-9.
I understand that the likelihood of your Pears making the playoffs this season based on last season's success is statistically higher than it would be had they not made the playoffs. I also understand that we're four games in and your team is struggling to find an identity on offense, struggling to protect its QB, struggling to stop opposing passing attacks, and struggling to win! Apparently you don't understand that.
Stick by your 50/50 guns. It means nothing when it comes to analyzing this year's team, but I'm happy that you can find solace in useless numbers.
Peace out!
Here is what I wrote (cut and paste):
I said, you have ignored JSR's facts. Sure he provided some circumstantial stuff - as did you.
I've never said the Deadskin WRs are non-existent. I said they don't scare anyone and don't make big plays. JSR gave you numbers in response to your comparison of Gaffney and Moss to Jennings and Nelson that I think demonstrate this point. Assuming JSR's numbers are correct, I think they show that the Deadskins receivers aren't really doing much.
Rex can play and I would play him before Beck - but that doesn't mean he doesn't need to improve. There is no inconsistency in how I view Rex. In the Super Bowl year for the Bears I criticized Rex appropriately also - contrary to what you may believe.
You want yes or no answers:
1. Yes
2. I cannot answer this as a simple "yes" or "no", but I suppose "No" is more appropriate. JSR provided circumstantial points in response to your circumstantial point about Moss dropping the pass that would have made it a blowout. He was making a point that you were being silly. I honestly don't think you understand that.
3. No
4. No
But I think you miss JSR's primary point about the weakness of the Deadskin WRs - which I agree with.
5. Good QB, but he needs to improve. I have spoken at great length about Rex and have never changed my mind about him.
Robs - Despite the name calling and the blatant disregard for any opinion that doesn't align with your own, I know you to be a very intelligent dude. That's why, for the life of me, I can't understand why your not understanding what I'm saying. For the umpteenth time, you have identified some piece of information that sort of supports your position and, thus, you are completely ignoring everything else that is being said.
The numbers I provided show the percentage of teams that make the playoffs the following season - a stat that essentially becomes irrelevant after the following season begins. I pointed this out when I provided the numbers. We are 4 weeks in now. Your team is 2-2. The likelihood of a 2-2 team making the playoffs is what is relevant at this time.
Take a look at this site:
http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NFL.html
Sure the Pears were 11-5 last season and sure you hosted the NFC Championship. I'm happy for you and your team's success last year, but it has nothing to do with their 2-2 start and their 17.6% chance of making the playoffs THIS SEASON.
I still question your objectivity. Your comments on Snyder call your objectivity into question even more. The only thing that is consistent about your "analysis" is that you always believe the Pears are on the verge of greatness and you never give the Skins a chance. That's not objectivity. That's blind disregard for facts and a fan-boy mentality. As such, it's clear to me that there's no point taking your football analysis seriously.
Oh Deeps - now you are changing your discussion. I think you now understand that past playoff appearances are statistically significant predictor of appearing the following year.
I'm not blind to flaws the Bears have, but I don't view them as negatively as others do. For example, my contention is the O-line is vastly better than last year. We'll see if I am correct.
At 2-2 with losses to the Saints and Pack (both playoff teams from last year who are projected to win their divisions), I'm not worried. In two weeks after the Bears beat the Lions and the Vikings we will be 4-2 and our chances of making the playoffs will jump to 50+% THIS SEASON.
By the way, if you are going to be snippy and accuse me (falsely) of not being able to defend my analysis and "snapping" then don't be surprised if I return fire with snippy comments of my own. Don't dish it out if you cannot take it back.
My discussion has never changed. When I posted the original numbers, I said the following, which is completely consistent with what I'm saying now - your opinions are based on prior year performance, which is completely irrelevant 4 weeks into the season:
"Teams that make the playoffs but don't win it all one year aren't automatically going to be good teams the next season. I say your Pears are not very good. They beat a struggling Falcons team, then got pummeled by the Saints, humbled by the Packers, and eeked out a win against a rebuilding Panthers team. You disagree because they made it to the NFC championship game last season and went to a Super Bowl 5 years ago...
...Robs and JSR seem to enjoy saying the Skins suck for their own enjoyment. Their use of the term "suck" is based on opinions defined by prior year performance, which point #1 above proves is a poor approach for analyzing a team's capabilities in the current season."
Now I give you more numbers that support my claim that the Pears' chances are no longer 50/50.
If your response to the information I provide is just going to be more name calling or questioning of others' intelligence and/or complete disregard for valid points that oppose your own, keep it to yourself.
Actually...don't keep it to yourself. I want to see us get to 100 comments for no reason other than we've never hit that mark before.
HAIL SKINS!
Robs, regarding JSR's circumstantial factors comment was not simply talking about the "ifs," "would'ves," could'ves" plays. I get that. Most football games come down to a handful of plays and depending on what happens, a team wins or loses. In the end, you can't dwell on those plays and say "well, if this happened, then..." I get that.
JSR said "When I referred to Circumstantial factors I mean you cant just look at the way the redskins played this set of bad teams and come out and say that the redskins are a good team. You have to consider how they won, what transpired, the mentality of the players and how they will stack up against better opponents." What I gather from that response is his own opinion of the quality of opponents played, his own opinion of the mentality of they players (not sure how that can be understood). How the game was won.
I was saying that the Skins dominated for 3+ quarters. It seemed obvious. In fact, it was a boring game during that time because it appeared so one sided. Yes, Moss slipped on his route and dropped the ball. Yes, he didn't catch it. If he catches it, we aren't having this discussion because it most likely is a blowout and the domination would be complete. After that, Rexy started to crumble. Thankfully, the defense continued their domination and we won. My point is that I agree with JSR on Rexy being an issue. I brought that up in the original posting. He is a concern. He has played worse in the last two games and if that continues, he will end up costing us games despite the play of the rest of the team. If we had lost, it would have been a shame as we dominated the game for the bulk of the time but St. Louis would have come away with the W and that is the one stat that counts. I'm not sure I am getting my point across but it's fine. You think the Redskins as a whole struggled against the Rams and I don't.
So you agree that the Skins WRs are existent. To say they are non existent is silly. If the Skins WRs are non existent how would/could you characterize the Pear WRs? I fully understand JSR's points and I can readily admit that they aren't the most dangerous group. We don't have a Johnson or Fitzgerald but it's a solid group and I don't have a real problem with them. They have enough talent to get the job done. They average 5 catches per game and I'm good with that. Anthony Armstrong is our deeper threat and we haven't thrown deep balls since he has been out. He had opportunities the first two games and Rexy missed him. I am good with our receivers.
As far as Rexy, you say he is a good QB. The trend he is on right now, he could become a real liability. He has more turnovers than TDs. He has had bad turnovers in each game. He threw a bad INT on the 5 yard line of the Cardinals game that was nearly run back the length of the field for a pick 6. He had a chance to drive down and with the Dallas game and he took a bad fumble. In the Rams game, he threw a bad INT and could not convert an easy 3rd and 3 pass late in the game. I can accept turnovers but it's not just turnovers. He is making poor decisions. Again, I am pulling for the guy and I agree that I believe he is better than Beck (I don't think much of Beck) but it's not like I am sold on him. He has not shown at any time in his career that he can be a consistently good QB and has never shown that he has learned from past mistakes regarding turnovers. It's this that bothers me most. I am largely fine with him until he starts costing us games.
Also, your own beloved Pears went to the Super Bowl in 2006 and the following year they went 7-9. Pears went 7-9 and then went to the NFC Championship game. That is the nature of the NFL. If you want to live in the past, go ahead.
I am hoping we get to 100 also - that has to be a record.
Deeps - you say I have no other evidence. Simply not true. I believe the Bears are a good team that will contend. They have playmakers and game changers throughout their team. Just having Devin Hester and our special teams means that we can come back at any time with just one play.
The discussion about past playoff experience clearly shows that if you make the playoffs the prior year there is a statistically significant chance of making it the following year. I have never argued it is automatic. The objective evidence is clear - and specifically with the Bears, I am not worried because their two losses are to the teams that are the favorites to get to the NFC title game.
JKSD - I'm not even sure what to say. There are some things that I could point out are incorrect in what you think I think, but it is just so long a post that I don't want to bother.
You QUIT! I WIN!!!!
No! No one has won yet. We still have 4 more comments to post to hit 100!
I'm done - too bad, we came up a little short.
its only week 5 coming up and weve got to 98 comments ( at the time im writing this) im sure with what will transpire in the upcoming weeks, we'll have plenty to talk about and will get to way over 100 comments... especially if the skins start crumbling against better teams which i totally expect they will do.
Final thoughts...
The Pears have potential for 10-11 wins, but only if Martz, the O-Line, and the secondary take care of themselves. The Lions game will tell us a lot about what the team is capable of. A loss and the Pears will clearly be the 3rd best team in the division, making their playoff hopes even dimmer. A win where solid running and solid D are showcased and their back in it.
The Skins have started fast, which is nothing new. The difference this season is strong D and solid running (Do you see a trend?). Unfortunately, we have Rexy. He will need to cut his mistakes by 50% per game to give us a shot at anything better than 4-5 more wins this season. The schedule is tough, but with the D and our 3-headed running attack, we can hang with anyone. The Iggles come to FedEx a week from Sunday. They'll be desperate and a win against them will be a good litmus test for predicting what happens down the road.
HAIL SKINS!
Wow. 100. We're a bunch of losers, but it's fun.
My use of they're, their, and there is embarrassing. Please forgive the typos.
Congratulations for achieving this momentous milestone! Now, you need to come back to Earth.
I don't profess to have read each of these posts, but I think it's funny how JSR has been so attracted to the dark side. As the Pears are in the Packers division, you would think that he would have much more criticism of the Pears and less on the Skins. Just remember, the lowly Skins beat the Packers in their last game and it can and will happen again.
Post a Comment