Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

[quote=paulskinsfan;374323]Ditto, ditto, and ditto. I love how "some people" bitch about people bitching about the Skins. Why do hardcore Skins fans bitch about their team being 5-3? Because the Skins are NOT a good team. This team barely beat the freakin Dolphins and the Jets. The offense is sad, and the defense is only slightly above average. Good forbid we call a spade a spade. We are all fans of a very very mediocre team, in an extremely mediocre division. But for heavens sake, dont bitch, just ask for a refill of the Kool Aid cause Gibbs and Company will turn it around!

By the way, why does it say "Paulskinsfan is in danger of being benched" under my avatar? While I'll disagree with some of you, I usually have the stats or at least a logical argument to back it up, so what's up with that?[/quote]

So barely beating a bad team means your a mediocre team? So does that mean Dallas narrowly, and I mean NARROWLY, escaping defeat at the hands of the Bills makes them mediocre. What about New England who had to use all 4 quarters to put the Browns away? The funny thing is when we lose to a good team like Green Bay, who beat us by a complete fluke of a play, were better than them and should have won, but when we beat teams that we should beat, no matter how you beat them, the team is criticized for not completely demolishing them. Were you the same fans complaining the year we made the playoffs after we loss to the horrible Raiders, crying that the season was over? Come on already, were two games over .500, completely in the thick of the playoff race and were considered mediocre because we dont crush teams.

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

[quote=GiantsSuck703;374800]So barely beating a bad team means your a mediocre team? So does that mean Dallas narrowly, and I mean NARROWLY, escaping defeat at the hands of the Bills makes them mediocre. What about New England who had to use all 4 quarters to put the Browns away? The funny thing is when we lose to a good team like Green Bay, who beat us by a complete fluke of a play, were better than them and should have won, but when we beat teams that we should beat, no matter how you beat them, the team is criticized for not completely demolishing them. Were you the same fans complaining the year we made the playoffs after we loss to the horrible Raiders, crying that the season was over? Come on already, were two games over .500, completely in the thick of the playoff race and were considered mediocre because we dont crush teams.[/quote]

Sigh. No sir, we are a mediocre team because as of today the Skins are the following:

22nd in the league in scoring
21st in the league in tds
20th in the league in yards per game
26th in the league in passing

The Skins are mediocre because they it took them overtime to beat 2 pathetic teams in the Dolphins and the Jets. AND the Skins are mediocre because they almost lost to the Cardinals who played Kurt Warner with 1 freaking arm and refused to blitz him the entire game. Do you want anymore reasons why the Skins aren't all that good or have I satisfied your curiosity?

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

amen PSU

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

[quote=paulskinsfan;374832]Sigh. No sir, we are a mediocre team because as of today the Skins are the following:

22nd in the league in scoring
21st in the league in tds
20th in the league in yards per game
26th in the league in passing

The Skins are mediocre because they it took them overtime to beat 2 pathetic teams in the Dolphins and the Jets. AND the Skins are mediocre because they almost lost to the Cardinals who played Kurt Warner with 1 freaking arm and refused to blitz him the entire game. Do you want anymore reasons why the Skins aren't all that good or have I satisfied your curiosity?[/quote]

Why didnt you put up defensive rankings, is offense the only side of the ball? So there mediocre because the Skins barely defeated the Cardinals, you do realize the Cardinals beat the Steelers, the third best team in the AFC. You give me no reasons at all, your using victories as the reason for the skins being mediocre. This is the NFL, were not going to blow out opponents week after week, it just doesnt happen like that. We didnt blitz Kurt Warner at all and guess what? he threw two picks, one of which went for a touchdown, not to mention Andre Carter sacked him and forced a fumble, so we were able to get three turnovers without blitzing, but obviously you know more about coaching defense than Gregg Williams. A win is a win, do you think Dallas is complaining about barely beating Buffalo?
If your going to use stats instead of wins to consider a team mediocre than your going about it all wrong, we set a league record for the least amount of offensive yards in the playoff game against Tampa Bay, and we still won, was anyone complaining and calling us mediocre then? Stats are for fantasy football

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

[quote=GiantsSuck703;374892]Why didnt you put up defensive rankings, is offense the only side of the ball? So there mediocre because the Skins barely defeated the Cardinals, you do realize the Cardinals beat the Steelers, the third best team in the AFC. You give me no reasons at all, your using victories as the reason for the skins being mediocre. This is the NFL, were not going to blow out opponents week after week, it just doesnt happen like that. We didnt blitz Kurt Warner at all and guess what? he threw two picks, one of which went for a touchdown, not to mention Andre Carter sacked him and forced a fumble, so we were able to get three turnovers without blitzing, but obviously you know more about coaching defense than Gregg Williams. A win is a win, do you think Dallas is complaining about barely beating Buffalo?[/quote]On the whole, we are perfectly average. The weakness in the offense nullifies any of the positives that the defense and special teams have.

We have a tough Philly team this week we will play for the right to stay out of the division cellar (or near it at least), so I'm hanging humble until we take care of business. Don't underrate this team, they are better than us in many respects.

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

I don't have much of an opinion about all of this, but I will say that the Redskins seem to be pretty mediocre. I am happy with th 5-3 record, and hopeful that we will finish the season out strong, and I believe we have a legitimate chance of going 10-6 this season which is about what I predicted after Pre-season.

BUT this team has done very little to inspire confidence, and I think it is just as likely we go 8-8, which would be a huge disappointment IMO.

There is a lot of football to be played, and as far as Gibbs goes I am a Kool Aid drinker. I think this team will have a better second half, especially if the running game builds off of this past weekend, that will hopefully give Campbell more time in the pocket to take more then one deep shot a game, and hopefully that will help him and Moss get on the same page.

Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

Its the Patriots

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

[quote=GiantsSuck703;374892]Why didnt you put up defensive rankings, is offense the only side of the ball? So there mediocre because the Skins barely defeated the Cardinals, you do realize the Cardinals beat the Steelers, the third best team in the AFC. You give me no reasons at all, your using victories as the reason for the skins being mediocre. This is the NFL, were not going to blow out opponents week after week, it just doesnt happen like that. We didnt blitz Kurt Warner at all and guess what? he threw two picks, one of which went for a touchdown, not to mention Andre Carter sacked him and forced a fumble, so we were able to get three turnovers without blitzing, but obviously you know more about coaching defense than Gregg Williams. A win is a win, do you think Dallas is complaining about barely beating Buffalo?
If your going to use stats instead of wins to consider a team mediocre than your going about it all wrong, we set a league record for the least amount of offensive yards in the playoff game against Tampa Bay, and we still won, was anyone complaining and calling us mediocre then? Stats are for fantasy football[/quote]


OK, have it your way. The Skins are, on defense:

18th in passing defense
23 in total yards allowed
15th in total scoring allowed
9th against the run

Im a fan, and Im a realist. If you cannot see that this team is a very mediocre team, then fine no one can convince you otherwise. There are several mediocre teams in the NFC. If you want to go strictly by wins then so be it.

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

[QUOTE=paulskinsfan;374941]OK, have it your way. The Skins are, on defense:

18th in passing defense
23 in total yards allowed
15th in total scoring allowed
9th against the run

Im a fan, and Im a realist. If you cannot see that this team is a very mediocre team, then fine no one can convince you otherwise. There are several mediocre teams in the NFC. If you want to go strictly by wins then so be it.[/QUOTE]

They're 10th in yards, not 23rd. The 15th in scoring is a very skewed stat; they've allowed an opposing offense to score 20 points just twice this season and, if you look at each game, they've held opposing offenses to [B]about 8 points [/B]under their average score. Aside from the Patriots game, the Redskins defense has been [B]allowing opposing offenses to score just 13 points per game[/B]. If you're not satisfied with a defense allowing 13 points per game, you're never going to be satisfied with a defense.

I'll freely admit that the offense leaves a lot to be desired, but the defense is pretty damn stout. Why is it that many "Kool-Aid drinkers" are willing to concede that the offense has serious problems, but many of the team's critics won't admit that the defense is good.

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;374946]They're 10th in yards, not 23rd. The 15th in scoring is a very skewed stat; they've allowed an opposing offense to score 20 points just twice this season and, if you look at each game, they've held opposing offenses to [B]about 8 points [/B]under their average score. Aside from the Patriots game, the Redskins defense has been [B]allowing opposing offenses to score just 13 points per game[/B]. If you're not satisfied with a defense allowing 13 points per game, you're never going to be satisfied with a defense.

I'll freely admit that the offense leaves a lot to be desired, but the defense is pretty damn stout. Why is it that many "Kool-Aid drinkers" are willing to concede that the offense has serious problems, but many of the team's critics won't admit that the defense is good.[/QUOTE]

The Patriots game skews the defensive stats like crazy. Obviously the stats are going to count every game and the Patriots were on our schedule, like it or not.

I think, however, that we can all agree that the Patriots are a rare exception in the league, not just this year either. Take out the Pats game and the defense is way up there.

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

This is interesting:

[url=http://coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/2_987_2007_Quality_Standings.html]Cold, Hard Football Facts.com: 2007 Quality Standings[/url]

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

[quote=paulskinsfan;374941]OK, have it your way. The Skins are, on defense:

18th in passing defense
23 in total yards allowed
15th in total scoring allowed
9th against the run

Im a fan, and Im a realist. If you cannot see that this team is a very mediocre team, then fine no one can convince you otherwise. There are several mediocre teams in the NFC. If you want to go strictly by wins then so be it.[/quote]

If you were a realist you would understand that were a mediocre offense with really good special teams and a very stout defense. The offenses inability to put teams away does not take away from the defense pretty much winning all our games for us. If Santana Moss doesnt fumble in the Packers game, and Joe Gibbs quits coaching like hes scared to run up the score than we crush the Giants, that would mean we would have 1 loss on our record, its amazing how two simple mistakes can make a good team look mediocre.

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

[quote=GiantsSuck703;375031]If you were a realist you would understand that were a mediocre offense with really good special teams and a very stout defense. The offenses inability to put teams away does not take away from the defense pretty much winning all our games for us. If Santana Moss doesnt fumble in the Packers game, and Joe Gibbs quits coaching like hes scared to run up the score than we crush the Giants, that would mean we would have 1 loss on our record, its amazing how two simple mistakes can make a good team look mediocre.[/quote]


You cannot factor "ifs" into the analysis. "If" Carlos Rogers made an interception 2 years ago against the Seahawks we might have gone to the Super Bowl. "Ifs" are part of the game.

Im not saying the Skins defense isn't solid, Im saying that as a whole its a bad offense with a slightly better then average defense, leaving us with a medicore team. The defense is now going to be worse since Rogers is out. The defense is the reason we are 5-3, but they are going to struggle more now that a dinged up Smoot is covering the No. 2 and Torrence is covering the ever dangerous slot receiver.

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

Matty - If Boller was the answer, Billick would have stuck with him during McNair's injury. Billick knows Boller isn't worth the Charmin Extra-Soft he wipes his butt with, and that McNair is his best chance to win.

As far as the Skins go, the defense has bailed the offense out more than once, and until the offense can continually produce as they did in the Lions game, it's going to be close games from here on out. Does that make them weak? No, just makes them aware that any mistake can be quite costly.

Re: Who is "weakest" team with winning record?
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;374946]They're 10th in yards, not 23rd. The 15th in scoring is a very skewed stat; they've allowed an opposing offense to score 20 points just twice this season and, if you look at each game, they've held opposing offenses to [B]about 8 points [/B]under their average score. Aside from the Patriots game, the Redskins defense has been [B]allowing opposing offenses to score just 13 points per game[/B]. If you're not satisfied with a defense allowing 13 points per game, you're never going to be satisfied with a defense.

I'll freely admit that the offense leaves a lot to be desired, but the defense is pretty damn stout. Why is it that many "Kool-Aid drinkers" are willing to concede that the offense has serious problems, but many of the team's critics won't admit that the defense is good.[/quote]I think if we are going to use scoring defense, we can't just throw the Pats game out. It did happen, and we didn't stop them.

I think we should treat that game as a 35 spot. After all, anytime a defense gives up more than 35 points, it's not really a game anymore.