The difference between 10-6 and 6-10

Paintrain · 07-14-2008, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacobylookalike

I'm not much for the West Coast Offense except to say that it severely diluted what Art Monk accomplished in 1984. Thank God that has been rectified.

I will be looking for that run game to spite the dink 'n dunk passing game. Something along the lines of what Sean Alexander was in '03-'05 until we ended his career. I think that is what will make Zorn a good to great coach. In fact, it would be cool if he could develop an effective heavy package, using those big receivers, JC could option into when short yardage was all that was needed.

I'd rather see a jumbo light package with 2 TE (Cooley, Davis, Yoder) and 3 RB (Portis, Betts & Sellars), that'd screw the defense up.. They'd send in the goal-line defense, then Cooley and Davis could split out wide, Portis and Betts in the slots and Sellars at TE.. Talk about a D. coordinator crapping his shorts with his LB matched up in space with that corp? A coach would burn a time out instantly!

SBXVII · 07-14-2008, 05:40 PM

Dyslexia?

HughHog · 07-14-2008, 06:51 PM

I think it all depends on how quickly Jason Campbell learns the system

backrow · 07-14-2008, 10:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I'd rather see a jumbo light package with 2 TE (Cooley, Davis, Yoder) and 3 RB (Portis, Betts & Sellars), that'd screw the defense up.. They'd send in the goal-line defense, then Cooley and Davis could split out wide, Portis and Betts in the slots and Sellars at TE.. Talk about a D. coordinator crapping his shorts with his LB matched up in space with that corp? A coach would burn a time out instantly!

Paintrain, you just turned that play into a thinking man's game! I hope JZ picks a spot to do just that!

memphisskin · 07-14-2008, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Dyslexia?

Very ogod post!

70Chip · 07-14-2008, 11:17 PM

Good thread.

The difference between 6-10 and 10-6 this year may be a coach who is used to having division games be the easy ones. Going to Philly aint like going to Pheonix. That sounded somewhat Han Soloesque I think.

GTripp0012 · 07-15-2008, 03:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Then what happened in 2006? Having talent and going to the playoffs don't necessarily go hand in hand. It's certainly tough to make the postseason if you don't have talent, but talented players can underperform (Santana Moss is Exhibit A), injuries can take a toll, and then there's coaching.

Do the national publications have a point when they express doubt that there will be a seamless transition from the Hall of Fame legend Joe Gibbs to the completely unproven Jim Zorn? Couldn't it be argued that we as Redskins fans aren't giving enough credence to this fact?

Also, consider that there have been no significant upgrades on either side of the ball; Carlos Rogers and Rocky McIntosh are coming back (we hope) from devastating injuries; and we just saw aging, battered, limping and hobbling offensive line get shuffled around week after week with only the hope that nothing like that will happen again, because, as many people seem to say, Murphy's Law just CAN'T be as bad this year .... right?

Call me a pessimist, and some no doubt will question my status as a "real fan", but is it impossible for anyone else to see how the 2008 season can totally blow up in our face? To me, there are very legitimate concerns everywhere for this team.

Totally blow up? Almost certainly not, assuming that's referring to a 4 or fewer win season.

Too many veteran players we can rely on for that to happen. As much as we need Campbell to break out to make a playoff run, he would have to be substantially worse than his prior season and a half for us to totally collapse.

Portis figures to have a rebound year of sorts, so theres that, and although the pass defense is only one year removed from being the worst pass d of the last ten years, it's a pretty safe bet that they will finish somewhere in the top 20. On third downs alone, the team figures to improve somewhat simply because Grilliams' schemes were pretty historically bad at preventing third down conversions.

So even though I think 8-8 would be somewhat optimistic thinking, I would think 3-13 or 4-12 would be pretty downright weak predictions. I mean, we play the Lions, Browns, and Niners for crying out loud, and though I'm not going to use the phrasing "automatic win" (because such a thing doesn't exist in the NFL), even at our worst, we'd be favored to beat those teams.

Beemnseven · 07-15-2008, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Totally blow up? Almost certainly not, assuming that's referring to a 4 or fewer win season.

Too many veteran players we can rely on for that to happen. As much as we need Campbell to break out to make a playoff run, he would have to be substantially worse than his prior season and a half for us to totally collapse.

Portis figures to have a rebound year of sorts, so theres that, and although the pass defense is only one year removed from being the worst pass d of the last ten years, it's a pretty safe bet that they will finish somewhere in the top 20. On third downs alone, the team figures to improve somewhat simply because Grilliams' schemes were pretty historically bad at preventing third down conversions.

So even though I think 8-8 would be somewhat optimistic thinking, I would think 3-13 or 4-12 would be pretty downright weak predictions. I mean, we play the Lions, Browns, and Niners for crying out loud, and though I'm not going to use the phrasing "automatic win" (because such a thing doesn't exist in the NFL), even at our worst, we'd be favored to beat those teams.

The Redskins have consistently been one of the teams that has a significant veteran presence over the past five years or so. So much so, in fact, that people often use the term "old" when describing this team. With more of an emphasis on the draft, I expect this to change with more of a blend of savvy vets with young, upstart talent from the college ranks. Nonetheless, all the veterans we've had -- the "locker room leaders" we hear so much about -- gave us a 30-34 record under the guidance of a living legend in Joe Gibbs.

So you'll have to forgive me if I believe the possibility exists that things might not go quite the way most everybody here thinks.

The Goat · 07-15-2008, 10:46 PM

All compliments to Paintrain for this high quality thread.

The one thing I'd say about explosiveness on offense is the probability seems low in the first half of the season. We've got rookies in 3 of our 5 biggest receiving targets and a new offense to learn for everyone. Me thinks we'll have to rely on the monster rushing attack for those first 7 to 9 games. Personally, I think CP is more fit for the challenge than anyone is predicting, so my hope is our line can hold together and dominate. In the second half of the season I really hope the chemistry between JC and the supercharged 6 (my lame nickname for Thomas, Kelly, Davis, Cooley, Moss and El) explodes into 3 or 4 TD passes per game.

Defensively I agree Landry should be a gamechanger, but A. Montgomery is more likely to be the other breakout guy (than Rocky). Rocky should be solid @ OLB but only for a few years IMO. His knees will deteriorate quickly. AM learned how to stop the run last year - this year he'll be pressuring the QB too. D-line will be better than most people expect.

07-14-2008, 05:40 PM	#17
SBXVII Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Virginia Posts: 7,498	Re: The difference between 10-6 and 6-10 Dyslexia?

07-14-2008, 06:51 PM	#18
HughHog Camp Scrub Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 28	Re: The difference between 10-6 and 6-10 I think it all depends on how quickly Jason Campbell learns the system

07-14-2008, 11:17 PM	#21
70Chip Playmaker Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Manassas Age: 42 Posts: 3,048	Re: The difference between 10-6 and 6-10 Good thread. The difference between 6-10 and 10-6 this year may be a coach who is used to having division games be the easy ones. Going to Philly aint like going to Pheonix. That sounded somewhat Han Soloesque I think. __________________ This Monkey's Gone to Heaven

07-15-2008, 10:46 PM	#24
The Goat Pro Bowl Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 5,021	Re: The difference between 10-6 and 6-10 All compliments to Paintrain for this high quality thread. The one thing I'd say about explosiveness on offense is the probability seems low in the first half of the season. We've got rookies in 3 of our 5 biggest receiving targets and a new offense to learn for everyone. Me thinks we'll have to rely on the monster rushing attack for those first 7 to 9 games. Personally, I think CP is more fit for the challenge than anyone is predicting, so my hope is our line can hold together and dominate. In the second half of the season I really hope the chemistry between JC and the supercharged 6 (my lame nickname for Thomas, Kelly, Davis, Cooley, Moss and El) explodes into 3 or 4 TD passes per game. Defensively I agree Landry should be a gamechanger, but A. Montgomery is more likely to be the other breakout guy (than Rocky). Rocky should be solid @ OLB but only for a few years IMO. His knees will deteriorate quickly. AM learned how to stop the run last year - this year he'll be pressuring the QB too. D-line will be better than most people expect. __________________ Sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes he eats you.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The difference between 10-6 and 6-10

Redskins Locker Room