The first "official" Redskins SB Pick
 

[url]http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/fantasy/story/7390830[/url]

[QUOTE]The Broncos are the only team to win back-to-back titles in the past decade, and three of the past four champs didn't qualify for the playoffs the previous season. Taking those facts into account, this columnist predicts that coach Joe Gibbs will lead the Redskins over the Indianapolis Colts for their fourth NFL title. [/QUOTE]

wow thats a bold prediction, i hope hes right!

It does kinda follow the 'Worst to First' trend but it is a stretch. One I love, however.

Wow, thats awesome. it makes me so happy to read that people are putting faith back into the skins. We have a lot to prove its just nice ot have someone that instantly demanded respect

Coach Gibbs gives instant credibility to what was fast becoming a joke franchise. I still have trouble believing it's true.

He took the words right outta my mouth!

That is straight up craziness!

Ok, so now that we know we're gonna beat the Colts in the SB, we should start a thread predicting what the score will be. :D

This is my new favorite sports writer.

hahaha same here

That is great. Maybe we can even go 16-0 baby!

[QUOTE=FRPLG]That is straight up craziness![/QUOTE]

I agree!!!! We will beat KANSAS CITY in the SB!!!!

kansas city? no way, they wont be there. Holmes and Green are goin on the decline and their d didnt get any better really, siiavi wont help them enough to take them to the next level

Big C: I was being facetious in response to an earlier post. It did not matter what AFC team I mentioned - it could just as well have been the Chargers. But since you bring it up, I actually DO like the Chiefs or Colts to make it to the Super Bowl. I FOR SURE have not seen the decline you are talking about!! (Holmes coming off injury: 2110 combined yards!!, career best 27 TD's; Green: career best 63.1% completions, career best 4040 pass yards, 26 TD's - 1 less than career best). If they can fix that problem defense, they will be right in the thick of it for the AFC championship. If you want to pick at them, the offense is not the place to start. They had way more points than any other team in the NFL last year, and show no signs at all of letting up.

the fact is, the two are past their prime, both are aging, i think green will be 35 this season, and holmes 33. I dont believe they can both continue to produce as they have been. They also lost John tait, their right tackle, so their offensive line will be weaker, and their recievers are mediocre at best

wow priest holmes is actually only 30 years old...nvm

That's right, BigC, your facts of 33 and 35 were both off a bit. Holmes is 30, Green 33, and neither has shown signs of a dropoff - they each had their best season ever last year. As far as the weak receivers, I agree. However, with those same weak receivers the Chiefs clobbered every other NFL team last year in points and yardage. All of the experts I read do not expect that huge letdown by their offense that you mentioned.

And as far as age being a definitive indicator of performance, consider this: John Riggins had his best year ever in 1983 with 1347 yards for 24 TD's in 1983. He was 34 years old. And his second best year in both categories was 1984 at 35. Power backs like Holmes and Riggins seem to enjoy a longer NFL career than the shifty runners like Gayle Sayers. And QB's often enjoy great success until past 35. And even at 34, Riggo could carry over 30 times in a game and just seem to get stronger as the game went on. His big yardage was often in the 4th quarter.

still think theyll have a dropoff...ok i messed up...maybe though, just maybe

I hear you, Big C. We all think we know what's gonna happen, especially the experts. But your opinion is as valid as any of them...

hell with just mentioning carreer best years, didnt Priest break the all time touchdown single season mark last year? The Chiefs and Packers did put up yards but it game from their hbacks, niether had great receivers. In fact id say the Chiefs have one of the weakest receivign cores in the league, but they do have Tony. And the packers had so many injuries last year. At one point wernt their three starting receivers all injured. Wasnt it Driver that had a neck injury? I had Priest and Ahman on my fantasy football team last year and thast why i won my league, they both know how to score when it coutns.

Yeah, but did they fix their D? That's their achilles heel.

Still, it's nice to see that the skins are mentioned at all in relation to the SB. Of course, it means nothing, but given the amount of negative press we get, I'll take it!

Colts? I'm sorry but this SOB is crazy!

I dont think the Chiefs really added much on the Defensive side besides ol' Lional Dalton and their 2nd rounder Junior Siiavi

[QUOTE=Big C]I dont think the Chiefs really added much on the Defensive side besides ol' Lional Dalton and their 2nd rounder Junior Siiavi[/QUOTE]

Wow, I could not disagree with you more than I do on THIS one. The Chiefs made the most improtant upgrade to their defense that a team can make. Do you have any recollection of our Defense under Rhodes, and the sorry excuse for a defense we had the year before? Same thing here. They have replaced the defensive coordinator. The new guy, Cunnningham, was the D coordinator for the Chiefs from '95 to '98 - they had an absolutely ferocious defense. In their 13-3 season, they did it on HIS defense with a very sorry offense. One thing you should know by now from following the Redskins the past several years is that coaching is 90% of the game on defense. It has been proven over and over and over throughout the NFL through the years. When a quality DC leaves for a HC job, the D quickly goes to pure crap (unless the team is lucky enough to find another great D coach). There are just a few really good ones in the NFL. We have one again, and so do the Chiefs. Watch them and be surprised this year.

Here you go Hogskin and Big C... [URL=http://www.foxsports.com/content/view?contentId=2487852]here's a great article[/URL] from FoxSports.com about the return of Cunningham.

It pretty much nails it!

Of course they are going to say that hes strict and a good organizer and that kind of stuff. They are not going to bash him until the season if he doesnt succeed. The main problem with the D i see is the secondary. Theres 2 good safeties in woods and wesley, but the CB's are average at best. The linebackers, save fujita, are aging, and they have 1 proven DT in Sims.

Big C, I completely disagree with your statement. I realize you may not have been watching football when Cunningham was the defensive coordinator for Schottenheimer, but those defenses were brutal. Unlike the Chief's 13-3 offensive juggernaut team from last year, the Schottenheimer/Cunningham 13-3 Chiefs team were led by defense and almost no offense to speak of. The Chiefs can thank Cunningham for those teams.

Using your implied logic that the coach will have nothing to do with the outcome on the field since their players are poor, the inverse must be true. We should have kept George Edwards from last year then. After all, unlike the Chiefs, we mostly have the players, so the defensive coach obviously shouldn't mean jack.

A good coach can help a team greatly, i know this, but i still believe that even with their new d cord., i dont think it will be enough to put them into the Super Bowl, of course they will make the playoffs, and be around 11-5, 12-4, but they will not make it far in the playoffs without some playmakers besides their safties. I understand your argument perfectly though

Big C: It seems that you still do not realize the impact that a top DC makes on a team. Go back and look at the Skins before Rhodes, under Rhodes and after Rhodes with pretty much the same guys. Look what happened under Marvin Lewis. Look at the 85 Bears D under Buddy Ryan. Look what happened after he left. Look at defensive situations and DC's throughout the NFL over the years. Yes, coaching is very important in the NFL. But on defense it is absolutely CRITICAL, and the single most important factor.

Now to the Chiefs. They have outgained and outscored everyone in the NFL for 2 straight years (amazing!!). And they were 13-3 last year EVEN with a defense that was a laughing stock - especially in the last half of the season. Now, they have "apparently" fixed the defense. But you seem to be sticking to your statement that "KC will not be there - no way". You say an improved D will not help them. I can't imagine what else they need. Of course there are no sure things, but to me, it seems they have to be a favorite to make it.

DaveButz: Just the thought of the Redskins going into this season with Edwards makes me shudder and puke!!!!

LOL - Can't wait for September!!

hogskin, i understand the impact it can make. it is my opinion that they will still not make it to the super bowl. obviously you dont agree, and thats fine, let it be

The Chiefs defense should improve, although I'm not sure that Gunther Cunningham is the right guy. His first go round he had some awfully good players there and I tend to agree with Big C in that they didn't really address the defense much this year. There isn't a whole lot of talent on that defense, the whole unit has been pretty much an afterthought this offseason except for bring back Cunningham. That 13-3 team did have a little offense, unless you think Joe Montana suddenly morphed into some ordinary Joe in KC. They also had the Nigerian Nightmare and Barry Word, monsters on Madden back in the day.

Back on the topic of that article......

RIGHT ON!

Gibbs & Bugel '04
Return to Glory!

[QUOTE=memphisskin]The Chiefs defense should improve, although I'm not sure that Gunther Cunningham is the right guy. His first go round he had some awfully good players there and I tend to agree with Big C in that they didn't really address the defense much this year. There isn't a whole lot of talent on that defense, the whole unit has been pretty much an afterthought this offseason except for bring back Cunningham. That 13-3 team did have a little offense, unless you think Joe Montana suddenly morphed into some ordinary Joe in KC. They also had the Nigerian Nightmare and Barry Word, monsters on Madden back in the day.[/QUOTE]

HOLY COW!!! Some of the folks here just amaze me with the "facts" that they throw out. Cunningham was with the Chiefs (as I mentioned in the earlier post) from from 1995 to 1998. I have been under the impression for quite some time that Joe Montana retired after the 1994 season. And as for Word (who also retired after 1994 season), he left the Chiefs after the *1992* season!!??!! The best record they had while Joe was there was 11-5. He never led tham to a 13-3 record. (And I REALLY like Joe - but he should not be in this discussion LOL)

They had 2 13-3 seasons in Cunningham's tenure. I was referring to the second one, 1997 with Grbac at QB. Their top WR was Rison. Number TWO was Kimble Anders with 453 yards receiving. Their top rusher was Greg Hill with 550 years. Their offense sucked. Most of their skill position starters were out of an NFL job in the next year or two. Cunningham's defense was the reason they were 13-3 in 1995 and 1997.

Now, after correcting all of that, why was it even pertinent? The thing is, Cunningham DID have a Killer defense in 1995-1998, regardless of who was playing offense for the team.

Hogskin, do you think Cunningham can turn Shawn Barber into another Derrick Thomas?

Smack, Welllllllll, I wouldn't go THAT far, but I really do like Barber, and was dissappointed when he left to be replaced with Trotter. I think he will utilize the guys he has and maximize their talents. Under his coaching, you did not see the high individual stats, but the team concept was excellent. I would expect the fire drill in the Chiefs' defense to suddenly become a thing of the past. Just as I feel the Redskins defense will again play up to it's potential this year, after 2 years of horrible coaching.

SUPER BOWL, Redskins!!!! This is the year!