![]() |
|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 45
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
Quote:
1.) Pittsburgh 2.) Baltimore 3.) Philadelphia 4.) WASHINGTON 5.) New York Giants. (you can google that) I never said we had elite talent, or that guys didn't get beaten, picked on or hurt last year. I never said we got a lot of sacks or any other stat you find important. I said when looking at this football team over the past few years you really had to play with the numbers to blame this defense for the teams woes (or you have to have an axe to grind.) As far as the "bottom line" statistic when talking about defense there is only one that matters: points allowed. Point Blank Period. If your defense finishes third in that category and you finish 8 and 8 and miss the playoffs. don't start lecturing us about sacks or quarterback pressures or takeaways. Defense is Defense it is not Offense. It is great when Defense can help put points on the board but their primary job is keeping points off the board. This defense finished third in that category last year. Find a new subject. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
The Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,373
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
Quote:
Nicely done. ![]()
__________________
But there's booze in the blender. And soon it will render. That frozen concoction that helps me hang on. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 58
Posts: 21,699
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 45
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
Quote:
Remember to try not to take things too personal though
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Fire Bruce NOW
![]() Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 11,434
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
Quote:
Pitt 13.9 Tenn 14.6 Balt 15.3 Phil 18.1 NYG 18.4 Wash 18.5 Technically, then, we were not in the top 5 in terms of points allowed. Further, the top 3 defenses were at least a field goal better per game than we were, which argues that we were not "elite," perhaps. Like I said, I agree with you in essence. A defense which finishes #6 in points allowed is a very good defense. But let's get the facts straight.
__________________
Bruce Allen when in charge alone: 4-12 (.250) Bruce Allen's overall Redskins record : 28-52 (.350) Vinny Cerrato's record when in charge alone: 52-65 (.444) Vinny's overall Redskins record: 62-82 (.430) We won more with Vinny |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 45
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 58
Posts: 21,699
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
Quote:
2 - If they had lower per game numbers including playoffs (Top competition, i think we all agree) and their numbers are still lower then ours, I would argue that makes Lotus' point more true not less. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Fire Bruce NOW
![]() Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 11,434
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
Quote:
NFL Stats: by Team Category Notice that these stats are league-wide for the 2008 regular season.
__________________
Bruce Allen when in charge alone: 4-12 (.250) Bruce Allen's overall Redskins record : 28-52 (.350) Vinny Cerrato's record when in charge alone: 52-65 (.444) Vinny's overall Redskins record: 62-82 (.430) We won more with Vinny |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 37
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
Quote:
I think a lot of people agree with you, but I do not and will not because this argument simply doesn't hold very much water with me. I completely understand where you are coming from, re: points are points, but that simply doesn't tell yo enough to draw a realistic conclusion from on the strength of the defense. You may think it's the only thing that matters, but then we're just not looking at the same things. I don't really even looked at points scored when determining defensive quality. That's how irrelevant it is to me. So to say that your "use all" way of determining the good from the bad doesn't matter to me would be an understatement. I could care less how many points we give up this year if we make a measurable improvement over last year. We could conceivably finish 9th or 10th in points allowed and make a big defensive jump--but you might have to be able to look past PA to see that. You know there's little that gets under my skin more than "I disagree because I'm too lazy to think past this point", but understanding that my opinion is in the minority and that it writes a pretty good narrative to just blame the offense for everything, I'll not carry out the point too long. The bottom line though, is that the defense has plenty of room for improvement. We're definately improved in the front seven, so it's on the secondary if we get a better effort this year.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 45
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
[QUOTE=GTripp0012;581805]It's difficult to take you too seriously if we're ahead of double digit win teams like Tennessee and Minnesota on defense, despite all the offensive issues that those teams had as well (aside from the fact that one of those teams was a better offense than us, the advantage was on defense).
I think a lot of people agree with you, but I do not and will not because this argument simply doesn't hold very much water with me. I completely understand where you are coming from, re: points are points, but that simply doesn't tell yo enough to draw a realistic conclusion from on the strength of the defense. You may think it's the only thing that matters, but then we're just not looking at the same things. I don't really even looked at points scored when determining defensive quality. That's how irrelevant it is to me. So to say that your "use all" way of determining the good from the bad doesn't matter to me would be an understatement. I could care less how many points we give up this year if we make a measurable improvement over last year. We could conceivably finish 9th or 10th in points allowed and make a big defensive jump--but you might have to be able to look past PA to see that. You know there's little that gets under my skin more than "I disagree because I'm too lazy to think past this point", but understanding that my opinion is in the minority and that it writes a pretty good narrative to just blame the offense for everything, I'll not carry out the point too long. GTripp, GTripp, GTripp, you really ought to write a book. I didn't know what part of that rant to quote, it's hard to take me seriously and it gets under your skin when a person "is to lazy to look past one point," well sir practice what you preach. Yes, this defense has room to improve but the fact that you don't know if the defense is to blame for the offensive woes, and that you could care a less about points allowed as long as we improve, and all this logic stuff tells me that it is probably best that you remain a sports blog philosopher/bully and not a football coach because at the very end of the day it is about wins and losses and defenses help teams win by keeping points off the board. You can miss the forest for the trees and worry about how statistically sound we are I'll take a defense that gives up 18.5ppg and an offense that can score 19. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 37
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Redskins' Secondary Woes
Quote:
I also would take a defense that gives up 18.5 PPG and an offense that scored 19. Except that just makes you an 8-8 team. Which is what we were last year. The key is to improve both units so the defense gives up 16 PPG and the offense scores 20.5 PPG. That's an 11-5 team with two top ten units. Wouldn't we all get along so much better if that was the case? If it's about wins and losses, 11-5 would be better than 8-8.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|