Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Offensive Review: Giants

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-16-2009, 08:33 PM   #1
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Offensive Review: Giants

Another game, another 17 point day. You can win games with 17 points, but if the goal remains 21 PPG, then, well, there's a little bit more work here before they realize their true potential.

When the Redskins aren't throwing interceptions or fumbling, it makes sense to say that the defense needs to do more to help them. And the way that the defense gave away third down conversions and field position, well, yeah, the offense was going to need to be darn good to score more than three times.

But the when the offense commits two turnovers, then they are putting the defense in bad situations. It just so happened that Osi Umenyiora's strip-sack-recovery-touchdown was a worst case scenario that prevented the defense from going out there to get a stop, so the defense never inherited a bad situation. The offense fumbled, and it's inherent in the nature of football that every so often, innocent mistakes become 10-14 point swings.

Do the Giants win if Jason Campbell never fumbles? Are the Redskins ever in the game if Eli's fumble was properly called a 15-yard facemask on Andre Carter? This review will answer half of that question, and the defensive review will attempt to answer the other half.

But first, I think we'll start up front.

Experimental Lineman Yards

This year, instead of running play success rate, I'm going to be calculating a highly experimental stat that can only be done with game film: lineman yards. The goal is to borrow the adjusted line yards concept from football outsiders, and instead of calculating how well the line does as a whole independent of long runs, I'm going to try to divide the yards gained by the blocker who earns them. Ideally, I'll be able to make a statement like: Derrick Dockery is worth 4.5 YPC on front side runs. But again, it's going to be a lot of work for something that probably won't hold up as a legitimate evaluation method, so I might ditch it.

Right now, I don't feel comfortable saying that I won't change the methodology ever so slightly to make this feel more accurate. The idea for lineman yards is borrowed in part from Football Outsiders (the Adjusted Line Yards calculations they do provide baselines for my work here) and also from KC Joyner's POA metrics, but as far as I know, I'm the first person to try to do this at an individual level.

I'm currently developing a methodology for downfield blocking that I hope to introduce next week. Here's the Lineman Yards from the Giants game, displayed in a yards per carry form of sorts:

  1. Derrick Dockery 4.22 (9 attempts)
  2. Fred Davis 4.00 (3 attempts)
  3. Mike Sellers 3.88 (8 attempts)
  4. Chris Samuels 3.73 (11 attempts)
  5. Randy Thomas 1.38 (2 attempts)
  6. Chris Cooley 1.33 (3 attempts)
  7. Casey Rabach 0.95 (5 attempts)
  8. Stephon Heyer -0.88 (4 attempts)
The Redskins still run almost exclusively to the left, which makes sense, since Chris Samuels is their best blocker. The Redskins also run all their plays off tackle or end, which skews Rabach's numbers, since he's only at the POA if Portis has to cut back. Heyer suffers from a sample size issue, since if you allow one six yard loss in only 4 runs, it's going to look really bad.

In pass protection, Heyer may be the weak link of the group, but he held up pretty well against Justin Tuck all things considered. What was really impressive about the Redskins offensive line is that all of the cohesion problems of last season appear to be in the past. The offensive line only had one or two hits on Campbell that could have been picked up, which is roughly 500% better than it was last year.

Randy Thomas and Casey Rabach were major culprits last year, but Rabach has been a bit improved over what I saw last year from the preseason through week one, and Thomas just looks like a leader on this line. Heyer made some mental errors, some misreads, but Thomas always seemed to have his back. Randy Thomas might not have had many oppertunities to blow open a hole for Portis, but his job on the line in pass pro was the difference between a winning pass blocking unit, and the Giants being able to confuse Stephon Heyer with exotic rushes. With his physical abilities in decline, it was a real positive to see him take up for the 25 year old like that.

Passing Game

Both of the big errors came in the passing game. If the Redskins were going to lose the game, it's probably a good thing that Jason Campbell's mistakes actually resulted in turnovers. He's getting pretty close to realizing his true potential, and if stepping up in the pocket away from the Giants DE duo is the difference between winning the division and not winning it, it will be a tough pill to swallow. But you have to think that the next time a similar situation occurs, Campbell will approach it differently.

Let me take you through that decisive play. The Redskins are near midfield after converting a critical third down pass. It's first and ten, and Zorn is looking to attack the defense. They are already trailing 10-0 and last drive, Campbell was intercepted. So you can imagine how the team is looking for a score.

They come out in a power formation, with Fred Davis and Chris Cooley to the right and Santana Moss split to the left with Portis and Sellers in an I-Formation. Campbell takes the snap, play actions a lead play to Portis (the Redskins never actually run a lead play though), and sets up deep, about 9 yards behind the Center.

Here are the routes: Moss is running a skinny post, and is double covered. Fred Davis is running a drag and is not open. Chris Cooley made an outside release and is running the over (the middle) route at about 12 yards. Campbell wants to go to Cooley with the football, and sets up waiting for him to come open. Except, as Cooley heads across the middle of the field, he never does come free. With only 3 receivers in downfield patterns, the Giants have the play defended.

Campbell has room to step up and run with the football for at least three or four yards, but never steps up. At the last second, his eyes go to Mike Sellers to check the ball down in the middle of the field, but as soon as his hands break, Osi gets to the ball and strips him. Normally, the Redskins have a back in the backfield to make the recovery or at very least, the tackle, but on this particular play, both backs were in check down routes. Once the ball is stripped, and Umenyiora got it quickly, there was no one on their feet in position to make a play.

I don't feel Samuels did anything wrong on this play. He did get beat, but I think after Campbell realizes that none of his receivers are going to be open, stepping up in the pocket should be a natural reaction. A checkdown can be thrown on the run.

This play, I think, detracts from the numbers the Redskins passing game produced against what I consider to be the top defense in the NFC East:

  • 2 sacks given up (not including Randle El's sack)
  • 73% of passes completed
  • 8.1 yards per attempt
  • 6.1 adjusted yards per attempt
Here's the statistical truth: a passing offense that gains 8.1 yards per play and turns the ball over twice per game wins between 10-10.5 games a season given adequacy in every other phase of the game. So if we want to figure out if the Redskins are in trouble, we will need to look elsewhere.

The Final Word

I thought the playcalling left a lot to be desired in the second half initially, but a closer look shows that Jim Zorn did make a half time adjustment to try to force the the Giants defense out of having it's best players on the field: he moved to a series of 3 WR sets. 23 out of 28 offensive plays were run with 3 WRs on the field. What this did was it forced the Giants to take a linebacker off the field on those 23 plays, and put an extra defensive back (rookie CB Bruce Johnson) on the field.

The problem is that no matter what Zorn ran in the second half, the Giants just never seemed to let the Redskins isolate Johnson. He was lined up against Malcolm Kelly most of the game and was given a safety over the top on virtually every play. That meant that Corey Webster was not getting safety help against Santana Moss, making it the key match-up in the game. Moss' stat line: 5 targets, 2 catches, 6 yards, no TDs, one pass intercepted (by Webster).

The third down play at the 8 yard line in the third quarter on which Campbell was sacked by Justin Tuck, Moss completely gave up on route. He drew a safety as well as Terrell Thomas, made a cut to the inside, and kind of jogged over the middle while Campbell went down. I guarentee you Zorn didn't call that route, and Moss' complete lack of effort is very disheartening.

Antwaan Randle El is carving out a niche as a third down machine. You know what, we can sit him on the bench for the first two plays of every series if he can come off of it and extend a drive for us from the slot. The reason the Redskins got more than 8 yards a pass attempt? The complete domination of Terrell Thomas by Randle El. Keep him in the gameplan.

Cooley's seam route for the touchdown was a perfectly executed thing of beauty. Both of Campbell's last two throws on that drive were into a tight defense. Trailing by 13 points, of course the Giants would have let Jason Campbell dink and dunk down the field. But his final two throws of the drive were big time throws against a first string defense trying to close out the game, and can not be discounted by even Campbell's harshest critics. The throw to Randle El was made into the teeth of a Giants blitz, not a prevent defense.

Here are the final numbers for the game offensively:

  • 5.47 yards per play
  • 41% success rate
  • 2 turnovers
  • 0 offensive penalties
  • Only 3 successful runs
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 09-16-2009, 08:44 PM   #2
Gamebreaker
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,542
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

As always, your use of numbers and your ability to describe a fast flowing professional game in terms and ways I can understand is very appreciated. Can I ask, did the Giants do something schematically to limit runs or were they winning the one on one matchups
CRedskinsRule is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 08:48 PM   #3
The Starter
 
GridIron26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,596
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Nice read!
GridIron26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 08:53 PM   #4
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
As always, your use of numbers and your ability to describe a fast flowing professional game in terms and ways I can understand is very appreciated. Can I ask, did the Giants do something schematically to limit runs or were they winning the one on one matchups
They were running a very schematically similar defense to ours. Not a whole lot of 8-in-the-box fronts (unlike us), but certainly using a run-first gap scheme with their front seven.

What happened on the 37 yard run was that 1) Samuels got two guys, and 2) Kenny Phillips ran up to Cooley, effectively taking himself out of the play as Portis ran right by him.

In general, we lost the one on ones in run blocking. There were also plays where we won our blocks, and Portis/D. Thomas took it where the hole was not. But for the most part, holes were just not there.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 08:56 PM   #5
Pro Bowl
 
53Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,391
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

I enjoy your reviews GTripp, keep up the good work! I hope you keep the Lineman Yards for awhile, I find it interesting. I was surprised there were so many 3 WR sets in the 2nd half. I guess I didn't notice because Kelly was shut down so often. ARE is where he's always belonged and JC is going to be just fine. I'm really disappointed in Moss.
__________________
"Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"
53Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 08:58 PM   #6
Gamebreaker
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,542
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
They were running a very schematically similar defense to ours. Not a whole lot of 8-in-the-box fronts (unlike us), but certainly using a run-first gap scheme with their front seven.

What happened on the 37 yard run was that 1) Samuels got two guys, and 2) Kenny Phillips ran up to Cooley, effectively taking himself out of the play as Portis ran right by him.

In general, we lost the one on ones in run blocking. There were also plays where we won our blocks, and Portis/D. Thomas took it where the hole was not. But for the most part, holes were just not there.
I did notice several times where I thought that Portis ran right up the back of a blocker, seemed odd, and I don't think that will happen as much going forward.
CRedskinsRule is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 08:59 PM   #7
Pro Bowl
 
53Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,391
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
I did notice several times where I thought that Portis ran right up the back of a blocker, seemed odd, and I don't think that will happen as much going forward.
During the game my GF and I talked about that a couple of times. I even commented that I wonder if Portis closes his eyes when he runs.
__________________
"Cautiously And Optimistically... Looking Forward To Change"
53Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 09:25 PM   #8
Registered User
 
SBXVII's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,766
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

This was a pretty good break down on Serius Radio by Tim Ryan:

Sirius Radio: Tim Ryan Breaks Down Skins vs Giant Tape - EXTREMESKINS.com
SBXVII is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 09:56 PM   #9
MVP
 
Chico23231's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 37
Posts: 11,338
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Great post and insight. I still think though the offensive stats and score itself seem to say "hey Redskins offense was actually pretty good, just a couple plays here, less mistakes there...etc. the game was actually close." What I saw was really pathetic and granted the Giants defense is one of the best, I still feel the offense should have played much better. Im not going to say JC is the problem, or the line is, CP, or the just the coach...but everyone in that game needs to step it up. Our only touchdown besides garbage time was a fake punt. And that last touchdown was in garbage time, the giants werent playin as hard and the game was won. We need to put it behind us, improve, and come ready to play this Sunday or Im really going to worry if the offense plays like that again because the Rams are F-ing horrible.
Chico23231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 10:09 PM   #10
Most Interesting Man in the World
 
hooskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Age: 27
Posts: 8,606
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Gtripp, always great stuff. I really hope your Olineman stat works out.

I would be very interested in seein the result at the end of the year. Even Samuels sample size isnt high enough. The rule of thumb is 30, but in this case it depends on N(the number of time Samuels will run block in his career) to calculate a decent sample size to potentially make an accurate statement about each lineman. Yeah, I took a ton of stat classes.

If you are interested in football stats, look into take some multiple regression/econometrics classes. You could compile a bunch of stats, try to isolate vars and reach some meaningful conclusions.
__________________
Vacancy
hooskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 10:18 PM   #11
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by hooskins View Post
Gtripp, always great stuff. I really hope your Olineman stat works out.

I would be very interested in seein the result at the end of the year. Even Samuels sample size isnt high enough. The rule of thumb is 30, but in this case it depends on N(the number of time Samuels will run block in his career) to calculate a decent sample size to potentially make an accurate statement about each lineman. Yeah, I took a ton of stat classes.

If you are interested in football stats, look into take some multiple regression/econometrics classes. You could compile a bunch of stats, try to isolate vars and reach some meaningful conclusions.
Yeah, it takes about 3 games before I'll have any semblance of a meaningful sample on the left side of the line, and probably about twice that for anything on the right side of the line.

I also might run into a problem where Guard numbers are just higher than tackle numbers, figuring that if a running back can ever find a hole off guard, he probably won't run to the tackle.

In the end, when I have a significant sample size, I'll probably adjust the numbers so that the mean lineman yards figure equals the yards per carry average for the Redskins backs. Right now, it's just a very raw average without any context.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 10:40 PM   #12
Most Interesting Man in the World
 
hooskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Age: 27
Posts: 8,606
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Yeah, it takes about 3 games before I'll have any semblance of a meaningful sample on the left side of the line, and probably about twice that for anything on the right side of the line.

I also might run into a problem where Guard numbers are just higher than tackle numbers, figuring that if a running back can ever find a hole off guard, he probably won't run to the tackle.

In the end, when I have a significant sample size, I'll probably adjust the numbers so that the mean lineman yards figure equals the yards per carry average for the Redskins backs. Right now, it's just a very raw average without any context.
Yeah, but it's great stuff nonetheless. I guess overall it wouldn't make sense to compare the number for a G vs an OT just straight up. Rather we could use other factors, or just use the raw stats and compare tackles to tackles, etc.


Imagine at one point we might even have a formula, with which we could calculate how effectively(on avg) the Oline could be. I am thinking a y= Ax+Bx+Cx+....obviously not just linear, and even vars to calculate each of the dlineman, and their impacts on the olineman too. Obviously this is all theory but is it nerdy to get excited over this? lol.......
__________________
Vacancy
hooskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 10:41 PM   #13
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by hooskins View Post
Yeah, but it's great stuff nonetheless. I guess overall it wouldn't make sense to compare the number for a G vs an OT just straight up. Rather we could use other factors, or just use the raw stats and compare tackles to tackles, etc.


Imagine at one point we might even have a formula, with which we could calculate how effectively(on avg) the Oline could be. I am thinking a y= Ax+Bx+Cx+....obviously not just linear, and even vars to calculate each of the dlineman, and their impacts on the olineman too. Obviously this is all theory but is it nerdy to get excited over this? lol.......
Not until it's proven pointless!
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 10:58 PM   #14
Playmaker
 
Slingin Sammy 33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 4,341
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
In pass protection, Heyer may be the weak link of the group, but he held up pretty well against Justin Tuck all things considered.
First off, great job as always GTripp, good read.

IMO, Heyer must do a better job of aggressively working to engage the DE. Again, I know he was going against Tuck and likely not wanting to whiff, but his backpedaling hurt us. Especially on the 3 & GL from the 6 in the 2nd half, where JC didn't have time to hit the open China route by ARE behind Cooley's seam.

Quote:
What was really impressive about the Redskins offensive line is that all of the cohesion problems of last season appear to be in the past. The offensive line only had one or two hits on Campbell that could have been picked up, which is roughly 500% better than it was last year.
Agree, overall pass pro was very good. Run game not so much, but part of this was due to playcalling. Note to Zorn, there are other run plays than the Stretch and not every play needs to be Zone blocked. A trap or counter never hurt anyone, especially out of a spread set.

Quote:
Passing Game
......They come out in a power formation, with Fred Davis and Chris Cooley to the right and Santana Moss split to the left with Portis and Sellers in an I-Formation. Campbell takes the snap, play actions a lead play to Portis (the Redskins never actually run a lead play though), and sets up deep, about 9 yards behind the Center.

Here are the routes: Moss is running a skinny post, and is double covered. Fred Davis is running a drag and is not open. Chris Cooley made an outside release and is running the over (the middle) route at about 12 yards. Campbell wants to go to Cooley with the football, and sets up waiting for him to come open. Except, as Cooley heads across the middle of the field, he never does come free. With only 3 receivers in downfield patterns, the Giants have the play defended.

Campbell has room to step up and run with the football for at least three or four yards, but never steps up. At the last second, his eyes go to Mike Sellers to check the ball down in the middle of the field, but as soon as his hands break, Osi gets to the ball and strips him. Normally, the Redskins have a back in the backfield to make the recovery or at very least, the tackle, but on this particular play, both backs were in check down routes.......
Just to add a little to this, the drag by Davis and Over by Cooley are a very common route combo used in a basic play called Waggle. It is designed to put the LB in no-man's-land. If JC remembered his fundamentals and kept the ball at mid-chest or shoulder level and stepped up in the pocket he would've had the extra half second for Davis to clear the LB, and with Moss' clearout, Davis or Cooley would've come open.

Quote:
I thought the playcalling left a lot to be desired in the second half initially, but a closer look shows that Jim Zorn did make a half time adjustment to try to force the the Giants defense out of having it's best players on the field: he moved to a series of 3 WR sets. 23 out of 28 offensive plays were run with 3 WRs on the field. What this did was it forced the Giants to take a linebacker off the field on those 23 plays, and put an extra defensive back (rookie CB Bruce Johnson) on the field.
Zorn's personnel selection was good. I saw a few mentioning the lack of 2TE sets. Zorn actually ran a decent amount of 2TE sets.

However on the negative side
- The ARE reverse couldn't have been in the script, very bad call. Even after the big run....stay on script. A good OC has his script designed to probe the D and set up plays later in the game, exploit weaknesses seen on film early, and see how the D reacts to certain plays/sets.
- No need for JC to be under C with an empty backfield. It's just unnecessary. JC has good speed, but not real quick feet or excellent footwork. Zorn has to see this and must make that change to help JC. Gun allows him to see the field better.
- On consecutive series in the 2nd half, Zorn calls a 3WR, I-form set, Sellers motions to a TE and they run a Stretch. Next play is a 3WR, I-form A-gap lead. First series the two plays work, on the second series of course they're unsuccessful.
- WR screen on the +6 ?????
- When the run isn't consistently successful and the OL isn't moving people off the ball, you've got to go to the air. The passing game was pretty solid outside of the big mistakes (fumble/INT).

Overall I'd give the playcalling a C-

A couple of other thoughts:
Moss: Bad game.
- Awful effort on deep comeback (JC INT). The route he was running on this play was a deep comeback and is part of a different variant of the Waggle play mentioned earlier. Moss isn't a primary on this play but a 3rd read. He is supposed to sell the Go and break it off into a 18 yd Comeback. His effort was embarassing.
- Late Post break 25 yds downfield after a weak sell of the Go route. Then he looks back at JC like it's JC's fault????
- Penalty with Webster (on which he got the worst of the exchange). Moss is a veteran and should be able to bait defenders into penalties and mistakes, not the other way around.

JC - must eliminate mistakes and improve play.
- It's OK to run and take 7-8 yds. Don't force the ball (INT targeting Moss).
- It's also OK to tell Moss to stop whining and looking frustrated for not getting the ball. Tell him to STFU, run his routes hard and correctly, and he'll get the ball. If he's going to give half-ass effort, make sure he knows you'll make even less effort to get him the ball.
- Still the damn tendency to drop the ball to his waist and double pump before releasing. It's not even a "pat", it's a full pump and completely wasted motion (time).
- Throw behind Moss on drag behind ARE's clearout on key 3rd down. Got to make that play if you're "The Man".
We'll see how JC performs over the next 5 games, hopefully well. I'm optimistic. If he can get his confidence up and be more consistent he can be a top QB and will earn himself a big payday.
__________________
"I would bet.....(if), an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything] in the world you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' Jack Kent Cooke, 1996.
Slingin Sammy 33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2009, 11:04 PM   #15
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,849
Re: Offensive Review: Giants

Should there be any concerns about Cooley fumbling the ball once (which went out of bounds) and almost fumbling it later on (his knee hit the ground about a millisecond before the ball came loose)? He's such a good target, but I really thing he needs to hold on to that ball...I mean I don't know if this just the Giants being good at stripping the ball, but I was a bit disturbed about that.
__________________
R.I.P. #21

New words created on The Warpath:
Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory
Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota
Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual
Stroried

"Give an opinion and move on. Your life doesn't depend on winning the internet." -FRPLG
Ruhskins is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.52750 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25