Warpath  

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




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Where are the Warpathers Who Predicted a 10-6 Record?

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-31-2004, 09:57 AM   #16
The Starter
 
GoSkins!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Yorktown, Va
Age: 45
Posts: 1,587
Looking back I don't think that I would have changed my preseason prediction of 9-6 or better. We are 5-9 now and could win this game. Even with a lose, I thought that we would beat the Brown, Bengals, Cowboys (one time), and Giants (both times). Brunnel cost us a few, but I saw the preseason and I really don't think that Ramsey was ready for Gibbs system early in the year. Unfortunatley, Brunnel wasn't ready for any system. OK, with the games that we did win, and the games I expected to win, we would be 9-6. Any upsets (Packers, Viks, Ravens) would put us at 10 or more wins.

One thing that would have helped us would have been to play some of the really tough games early in the year (Pittsburg, Philly) to give Gibbs a little trial by fire.

We were in every game this year and except for a couple of games, a couple of penalties or plays would have changed the outcome of the game and we would be going to the playoffs. Even with the season going badly, I think that I feel better about the Skins than I have in a while.
__________________
Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. A. Einstien
GoSkins! is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 12-31-2004, 10:52 AM   #17
Playmaker
 
skinsfanthru&thru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 33
Posts: 3,710
I believe I had the skins having atleast a 10-6 record, if not better, but I never thought in a million years that any professional qb with the production Mark Brunnel has had could play so terribly. Injuries and blown calls were out of the hands of the team but the pathetic playcalling and clock management was a problem all season long. I don't think it's as ludicrious(Sp?) as some people are making it seem to try and upgrade at a couple positions on the offense if it's possible because the offense was our obvious achilles heel. Whether it be a more modern offensive cordinator or a playmaking wr or an upgrade or 2 on the o-line or not handing the starting qb job to a player that hasn't truly shown that he is deserving of a 100% gurantee of said job next season, something needs to be done to the offense and hoping that another year with the same players under the same system will make it all better is highly unlikely. I also remember I was one of the few people before the beginning of the season who said Greg Williams could take the players we have on defense and make it a pretty darn good one, and he did it without any super stud d-lineman(although if griffin plays like this next year, he'll move into that category) and 2 of our best linebackers. I love Smoot and hope that he stays, but from the rumors about what he's asking for, nobody can be making it seem like Gibbs and Snyder are the only ones who might be a little less than comprimising.
Sure some people are taking their fantasy fix up job of the team to a bit of an extreme but all of us just want the team to be better practically by any way possible.
skinsfanthru&thru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2004, 11:31 AM   #18
New HC, new hope!
 
RedskinRat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: I'm in LA, trick!
Posts: 8,702
I was one who thought we'd be better than 10-6. Why, are you handing out demerits?
RedskinRat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2004, 11:47 AM   #19
Franchise Player
 
Sheriff Gonna Getcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 35
Posts: 8,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by frogprincess
Yes, I'm one of those fans who thought we would go 10-6. But I'm not criticizing now. I'm not nearly smart enough to say what should be done to fix things. I only know that I'm sick about how our season progressed (or rather DIDN'T progress) and, once again, I'm looking forward to next year. It seems like I've been doing that for a lot of years now. But in my humble opinion, I think Gibbs needed a year to get comfortable with all of the changes. I do think he will be able to learn and adapt and that we will be much improved next year. I've been a loyal Redskins fan for about 50 years, and I'll stick with them, win or lose.
You and I are in complete agreement. That's exatly why I don't want wholesale changes to our roster.
Sheriff Gonna Getcha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2004, 11:49 AM   #20
Franchise Player
 
Sheriff Gonna Getcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 35
Posts: 8,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by celts32
To respond to the rest of your email, I do not want this team dismantled. The only rant I fess up to is that I do want Coles replaced as the #1 WR and if I end up wrong on that i will admit it. I want few additions elsewhere except in the offensive line and defensive line. I would like the Skins to have Mike Williams, but if they can get a dominating lineman instead I will be happy as a pig in sh*t with that...

IMO perhaps the biggest need on the team is a new starting center, but they are generally drafted much lower than the top 10 of round #1. And I agree that if you gave Greg Williams a dominant pass rushing end the results could be devastating for the rest of the NFC East...
I definately agree with you about the new center. Fair enough re: Coles. I can understand why people want help at WR, I just strongly disagree with that.
Sheriff Gonna Getcha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2004, 11:50 AM   #21
Franchise Player
 
Sheriff Gonna Getcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 35
Posts: 8,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoSkins!
We were in every game this year and except for a couple of games, a couple of penalties or plays would have changed the outcome of the game and we would be going to the playoffs. Even with the season going badly, I think that I feel better about the Skins than I have in a while.
So if we were just a few plays away from a completely different record, is it wise to dismantle the offense?
Sheriff Gonna Getcha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2004, 01:50 PM   #22
Impact Rookie
 
hurrykaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Washington, D.C.
Age: 41
Posts: 762
"You want better play at WR, QB, and O-line. So basically you want a whole new offense? What exactly would you like to see?"

No, you misunderstand. The offensive playbook fundamentally stays the same (running to set up the pass), but with a lot more 3 receiver sets, downfield passing (instead of short screens). I'd use the analogy of switching from regular fuel to premium (instead of the engine analogy). If that means getting 3 new offensive players ( 2 linemen and a WR), then so be it. The core - Portis, Ramsey, Jansen, Thomas, Cooley, LC stay the same. But there better be improvement in offensive execution.

"I don't think either INT in last Sunday's game showed a serious lapse in judgment. His first INT was all on Kozlowski. His second INT looked like it was either the result of Coles slipping or a miscommunication. I don't completely absolve Ramsey of either pick, but I don't think he's been piss poor."

When was the last time you saw Ramsey hit a receiver in stride for a TD, or a big gain?
When was the last time you saw him throw a slant for a completion?
When was the last time you saw him throw a fade into the endzone?
Has Ramsey ever engineered a come from behind win?
Have you ever seen him win the game for us with 2 minutes remaining?

He's not piss poor, but he's not that great, either. This far he's been average in the NFL. People are rightly excited by his big arm, but this far he hasn't lived up to the upside everyone said he has. So pardon me for not being too high on him. The only reason I'd want Ramsey here next season is for the sake of continuity (and that's it). You can defend his INTs all you want, but Ramsey and Coles have played together the better part of 2 seasons and 2 training camps - and they hooked up a hell of a lot better last year than this year.

"I like your argument that I am a salary cap doomsdayer. So if we don't resign Smoot, does that mean that Gibbs is a friggin moron? I mean, we don't have any salary cap issues (according to you) and Smoot wants to be here. So, as long as Gibbs wants Smoot here, he'll be here right? If he's gone are you prepared to rail Gibbs?"

Wrong, and wrong. You jump to extremes like its all black and white. There's a big middle ground between cap hell and cap heaven. We're not in cap hell because of the increases in the cap forthcoming in the next 2 years. However, I do have complaints about how our cap is being used...like Brunell's expensive deal, dead money from former redskins, etc. Does this constrain us from pursuing a Dwight Freeney? - sure it does! But it DOES NOT, I repeat, DOES NOT prevent us from resigning Smootie, Pierce, a high draft pick, and a couple of Free agent O-linemen.
hurrykaine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2004, 02:00 PM   #23
Franchise Player
 
Sheriff Gonna Getcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 35
Posts: 8,317
I don't talk about things in black and white like a moron hurrykaine. You are the one who said I was a salary cap doomsdayer (talk about black and white).

I don't understand how the salary cap affects our ability to sign free agents, but it doesn't affect our ability to re-sign players. You have some splaining to do hurrykaine.
Sheriff Gonna Getcha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2004, 02:03 PM   #24
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,672
yeah you kinda lost me on your cap math, hurrykaine.

We can't pursue Freeney, but we can sign a #1 pick, our own free agents, and a couple of FA lineman?
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2004, 02:12 PM   #25
Playmaker
 
sportscurmudgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,159
Ramseyfan:

Tony Kornheiser had it right when he wrote about how silly it was for Skins' fans to delude themselves into believing that the offense was just ever so short of being able to have this team in the playoffs. As he said, "if the Skins had scored 20 point per game..." is like saying " if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a bicycle". Then he said the simplest and most profound thing of all:

The Redskins did not score 20 points in any game - save one now - because they weren't able to do it. Not being able to do it means they are not good enough to do it. They were TRYING to score and the defenses they played were able to prevent them from doing it. That means:


The 2004 Washington Redskins' offense is not good enough to be carried forward into 2005. That will give you the same results.


The Ravens won a Super Bowl with a great defense. The Bucs won a Super Bowl with a great defense. The Panthers got to the Super Bowl with a great defense. But all of those teams had offenses that although they were below average, they were still good enough to score sufficient points to be able to utilize the defensive strengths of the team.

The 2004 Washington Redskins' offense played with a defense that was in the top 5 in the league all year long but the offense could not muster enough points to win all the games when the defense held the opponent under 14 points. The word you are looking for to describe such an offesne is:

a. substandard
b. unacceptable
c. insufficient
d. incapable

or my favorite:

e. all of the above
__________________
The Sports Curmudgeon
www.sportscurmudgeon.com
But don't get me wrong, I love sports...
sportscurmudgeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2004, 02:35 PM   #26
Franchise Player
 
Sheriff Gonna Getcha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 35
Posts: 8,317
The offense certainly was awful SC. I don't differ with you on that point. I don't think the offense is as bad as people think. I think a few small roster changes and a few changes to the playbook (not philosophy) will result in dramatic improvements.
Sheriff Gonna Getcha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2005, 02:45 PM   #27
The Starter
 
monk81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 2,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramseyfan
The offense certainly was awful SC. I don't differ with you on that point. I don't think the offense is as bad as people think. I think a few small roster changes and a few changes to the playbook (not philosophy) will result in dramatic improvements.
I agree not a dismantling just a tweaking of personnel on offense and the return of a healthy Jansen will help tremendously......I think we need a new center.......and for how long can you rely on 42 year old lineman Ray Brown....I think we need to cut Gardner and draft a WR AFTER a DE and upgrading the line...........Gibbs opened it up against the Vikings and I think this is a taste of good things to come in 2005!
monk81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2005, 02:48 PM   #28
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,672
We're definitely not going to blow up the offensive personnel, we've made some gradual progress over the course of the season and we just need to add a few guys here and there, tweak the offensive schemes and continue to grow next year.
Mattyk 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 02:32 PM.


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 0.29699 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