View Single Post
Old 12-28-2006, 11:08 AM   #63
freddyg12
Playmaker
 
freddyg12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,540
Re: Worst Defense in the NFL

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Huddle View Post
Or if we had 3-4 more touchdowns instead of field goals the right places, we'd also have 3-4 more wins.

Just for the hell of it I'll sat 58% offense, 42% defense but I really think this is missing the point. I know my opinion is in the minority, and I'll likely get flamed for saying this, but I think the idea that this team is just some defensive tinkering away from being a legit contender is flat out laughable. However, I do agree that the team should and will spend most of its off season addressing defensive personnel issues. My concern is that they will likely go about this in the same ham-handede manner as they have approached other issues the last decade or so no matter who the coach has been- by throwing gobs of money at overpriced free agents who are either past their prime or were never actually that good to begin with. This is the same approach that brought such spectacles as the spectacular failure of the 2000 Redskins, not to mention this year's woefully disappointing offense.

I guess I'm pretty far off topic now, but one of the things about we Redskins fans is that we have been perpetually guilty of deluding ourselves as to how close our team is to actually returning to the top of the NFL heap. I think the Redskins are structurally flawed as an organization, and until significant changes are made in the way this team is assembled (GM or some significant counterweight to Gibbs) then Gibbs II will continue to sputter in the "one step foward, one step back" manner we'vce seen so far. There's nothing especially impressive about one playoff appearance in three years (come on- was last year's team really that good?), much less a 21-27 record, or suddenly being forced to start a neophyte at quarterback halfway through year three of what presumably was a five year plan, or expensive wideouts who put up pedestrian numbers, or exalted offensive "gurus" whose unit can't manage a paltry 20 points per game.

I think there is a lot more wrong with the Redskins than needing a few new faces on defense.
I can't argue w/the general summary of this post, but I think the intent of this thread is not that we're a "few new faces on defense" away from being a "contender," rather the D is our biggest issue & given limited resources, i.e. cap space, that's what the offseason will focus on.
I also agree that many seem to overestimate the Skins' potential every year, even Jurgensen & Huff do. But on this site I think the majority understand that the O is a work in progress, could make great strides next year, and we DEFINITElY need some new blood on D. That said, I'll think of this offseason as just improving to the best of the team's ability, not making those aquisitions that will get us to the super bowl, as we thought last offseason. This team can be a playoff team next year w/some tweaking of the D, IMO. Not talking super bowl (yet!). If I'm one of those fans w/unrealistic expectations, so be it, I have to have something to look forward to & be positive about this offseason.
freddyg12 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.30856 seconds with 10 queries