Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us

SmootSmack · 11-18-2008, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

SBXVII:

Sorry, but I only had enough bile to hurl to cover one of the really bad NFL teams and to compare their ability to score TDs with the 2008 Redskins.

You are correct. The Dolphins have a new QB and a new system and seem to be handling business well. They average about 3 points a game more than the Redskins.

The Falcons have a rookie QB and a new coach and they have outscored the Skins by 50 points this year.

The Ravens have a rookie QB and a new coach and they have outscored the Skins by 31 points this year.

This might take too long so ... Let's make a list of the teams who have scored FEWER points than the Redskins this year:

Cincy Bengals

KC Chiefs

Oakland Raiders

Detroit Lions (more TDs but fewer total points)

St Louis Rams.

That's it! That's the list!!

Those five teams are all AWFUL; they are not ones who are having a bad season or ones that have had misfortune ruin their hopes for the season. Those teams STINK.

And they are the only teams that have scored fewer points than the Redskins have scored in 10 games this year.

I don't get it. I thought once Old Man Gibbs and his conservative ways left the hounds would be unleashed and we'd enjoy 40+ point games on a weekly basis.

What happened?

GTripp0012 · 11-18-2008, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

SBXVII:

Sorry, but I only had enough bile to hurl to cover one of the really bad NFL teams and to compare their ability to score TDs with the 2008 Redskins.

You are correct. The Dolphins have a new QB and a new system and seem to be handling business well. They average about 3 points a game more than the Redskins.

The Falcons have a rookie QB and a new coach and they have outscored the Skins by 50 points this year.

The Ravens have a rookie QB and a new coach and they have outscored the Skins by 31 points this year.

This might take too long so ... Let's make a list of the teams who have scored FEWER points than the Redskins this year:

Cincy Bengals

KC Chiefs

Oakland Raiders

Detroit Lions (more TDs but fewer total points)

St Louis Rams.

That's it! That's the list!!

Those five teams are all AWFUL; they are not ones who are having a bad season or ones that have had misfortune ruin their hopes for the season. Those teams STINK.

And they are the only teams that have scored fewer points than the Redskins have scored in 10 games this year.

Remember that prior to the Steelers game, the offenses' total dominance of TOP is what allowed the defense to give up very few points.

If you put stock in drive stats, the Redskins rank 22nd in Pts per drive, and 23rd in TDs per drive (and there's usually a strong correlation between those two stats obviously).

We also rank 1st in interception per drive, 2nd in turnovers per drive, and 13th in yards per drive.

FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

So while we are punting far too much, we're not giving opposing offenses the short fields to kill our defense with. So our defensive numbers are VERY assisted by our "responsible" offense.

We've been creating more turnovers recently, so it will be interesting to see if this improves our PPG. If it doesn't then we have a huge problem. But I definately expect it to.

dmek25 · 11-18-2008, 12:24 PM

the first drive against Dallas was fantastic. then it all went down hill. partly because of play calling. but the play calling was a direct result of our o lines inability to block anyone. thank god for Chris Samuels. he is the only consistent lineman we have. anyone that doesn't see that isn't looking hard enough. the receiver argument is a joke. it could be Jerry Rice on one side, and Charlie Taylor on the other. don't really make a difference. without time, we might as well load up with tight ends, and try power football. it might be a better option

GTripp0012 · 11-18-2008, 05:13 PM

Now remember the benefit that is NOT scoring. Yes, there actually is a benefit to not scoring: it's that you don't have to kick off. The Redskins rank 6th in starting field position for the defense and consequently, lead the league in punts forced per drive.

So while we make fun of the offense for not getting into the end zone, which is a problem, realize at least that Zorn is smart enough to not attempt the long FG, which is generally a worse play than going for it, make or miss it (unless time is a factor).

Now, obviously, not kicking the field goals hurts us in PPG. But remember always and never forget: The goal of football is not to score as many points as you can. It's to score as many points as you can more than the other team.

So the fact that our offense, even when it doesn't score, consistently helps out the defense (well, not so much of late, but that's another story) you are seeing a lot of positives effects of Zorn's offense in the low PPG number for the opponent.

Now...if we could only get into that endzone...

GTripp0012 · 11-18-2008, 05:21 PM

The average drive against our defense starts at the 28 yard line, encompasses 26 yards, and ends in a punt more than half the time. But think about that. If an average drive against the Redskins starts at the 28 yard line, goes 26 yards (to our 46 yard line), and then ends in a punt, what kind of field position is that going to give the offense? This is an average drive for the defense.

The point is: theres a lot of hidden yardage in football that isn't seen in points per game, and it's totally misleading to compare our offense to the Lions offense.

sportscurmudgeon · 11-18-2008, 10:22 PM

GTripp0012:

You are ABSOLUTELY correct. I was not even trying to hint that the Lions' offense was equivalent to - let alone superior to - the Redskins' offense. It is NOT! There are plenty of problems regarding the Skins' offense, but the worst of the Skins' problems pales in comparison to the cesspool that is the Lions' offense.

My point was that after ten games, the Skins have scored fewer TDs than the worst team in the league - - and no matter how anyone wants to parse the statistics, that cannot be a good thing.

I think the Skins' offense has four strength areas:

Excellent running backs

Excellent Tight End

Better than average QB

Good run blocking OL plus H-back.

I think the Skins' offense has three areas of weakness:

Bad pass blocking OL - particularly up the middle.

Mediocre corps of WRs - not helped by the non-productivity of any rookies.

Way too much "specialization" - - requiring "personnel packages" and "formation orientations" to run various plays.

Believe me, the Detroit Lions would love to have those as their only weaknesses on offense...

JLee9718 · 11-24-2008, 04:27 PM

Every team we've faced this year has either one or two Riggins type running backs (well, there's really no comparison to Riggins, but I'm just making a point). We need to draft somebody like that to help spell CP. Take a look at the Giants, Cowboys, and Steelers. I didn't hear our middle linebacker's name called out too many times in the Seattle game, and why wasn't Horton playing more?

WaldSkins · 11-24-2008, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JLee9718

Every team we've faced this year has either one or two Riggins type running backs (well, there's really no comparison to Riggins, but I'm just making a point). We need to draft somebody like that to help spell CP. Take a look at the Giants, Cowboys, and Steelers. I didn't hear our middle linebacker's name called out too many times in the Seattle game, and why wasn't Horton playing more?

Because Springs was playing a lot of safety.

TheSmurfs22 · 11-24-2008, 04:46 PM

I do think we may need to look at another WR upgrade in the offseason however I see our O line and D lines as taking priorities.

Bubba305-ST21- · 11-24-2008, 06:11 PM

springs wasnt playing any safety

SBXVII · 11-24-2008, 06:17 PM

If we are satisfied with the smaller speedier DE then we are set at DE. We just need to build up or bulk up or DL...the middle. We need at least one maybe two OL. I can see us picking up another WR late in the draft. It would be nice to find a nice size FB to replace Sellers, cause I just don't think Broughten is the answer. He has not been since he came. Always injured. We will need to draft a good RB in later rounds and hope he pans out for the future. Clearly SA(aka...TTB) is not the answer or they are not using him to his strengths as I have said all along. He is not a between the tackles type of RB.

JLee9718 · 12-01-2008, 04:31 PM

The redskins' offensive line has a lot of slow thinkers because sometimes they're looking around for somebody to block and they let a guy zero in on JC. I think JC needs to get upset and start yelling at his blockers in the huddle. On the other hand, JC could speed up his delivery a little more.

11-18-2008, 12:24 PM	#3
dmek25 MVP Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: lancaster,pa Age: 63 Posts: 10,672	Re: Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us the first drive against Dallas was fantastic. then it all went down hill. partly because of play calling. but the play calling was a direct result of our o lines inability to block anyone. thank god for Chris Samuels. he is the only consistent lineman we have. anyone that doesn't see that isn't looking hard enough. the receiver argument is a joke. it could be Jerry Rice on one side, and Charlie Taylor on the other. don't really make a difference. without time, we might as well load up with tight ends, and try power football. it might be a better option __________________ "It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt." courtesy of 53fan

11-18-2008, 05:13 PM	#4
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Evanston, IL Age: 37 Posts: 15,994	Re: Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us Now remember the benefit that is NOT scoring. Yes, there actually is a benefit to not scoring: it's that you don't have to kick off. The Redskins rank 6th in starting field position for the defense and consequently, lead the league in punts forced per drive. So while we make fun of the offense for not getting into the end zone, which is a problem, realize at least that Zorn is smart enough to not attempt the long FG, which is generally a worse play than going for it, make or miss it (unless time is a factor). Now, obviously, not kicking the field goals hurts us in PPG. But remember always and never forget: The goal of football is not to score as many points as you can. It's to score as many points as you can more than the other team. So the fact that our offense, even when it doesn't score, consistently helps out the defense (well, not so much of late, but that's another story) you are seeing a lot of positives effects of Zorn's offense in the low PPG number for the opponent. Now...if we could only get into that endzone... __________________ according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

11-18-2008, 05:21 PM	#5
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Evanston, IL Age: 37 Posts: 15,994	Re: Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us The average drive against our defense starts at the 28 yard line, encompasses 26 yards, and ends in a punt more than half the time. But think about that. If an average drive against the Redskins starts at the 28 yard line, goes 26 yards (to our 46 yard line), and then ends in a punt, what kind of field position is that going to give the offense? This is an average drive for the defense. The point is: theres a lot of hidden yardage in football that isn't seen in points per game, and it's totally misleading to compare our offense to the Lions offense. __________________ according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

11-18-2008, 10:22 PM	#6
sportscurmudgeon Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,159	Re: Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us GTripp0012: You are ABSOLUTELY correct. I was not even trying to hint that the Lions' offense was equivalent to - let alone superior to - the Redskins' offense. It is NOT! There are plenty of problems regarding the Skins' offense, but the worst of the Skins' problems pales in comparison to the cesspool that is the Lions' offense. My point was that after ten games, the Skins have scored fewer TDs than the worst team in the league - - and no matter how anyone wants to parse the statistics, that cannot be a good thing. I think the Skins' offense has four strength areas: Excellent running backs Excellent Tight End Better than average QB Good run blocking OL plus H-back. I think the Skins' offense has three areas of weakness: Bad pass blocking OL - particularly up the middle. Mediocre corps of WRs - not helped by the non-productivity of any rookies. Way too much "specialization" - - requiring "personnel packages" and "formation orientations" to run various plays. Believe me, the Detroit Lions would love to have those as their only weaknesses on offense... __________________ The Sports Curmudgeon www.sportscurmudgeon.com But don't get me wrong, I love sports...

11-24-2008, 04:27 PM	#7
JLee9718 Impact Rookie Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 573	Re: Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us Every team we've faced this year has either one or two Riggins type running backs (well, there's really no comparison to Riggins, but I'm just making a point). We need to draft somebody like that to help spell CP. Take a look at the Giants, Cowboys, and Steelers. I didn't hear our middle linebacker's name called out too many times in the Seattle game, and why wasn't Horton playing more?

11-24-2008, 04:46 PM	#9
TheSmurfs22 The Starter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Staunton, VA Posts: 1,261	Re: Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us I do think we may need to look at another WR upgrade in the offseason however I see our O line and D lines as taking priorities.

11-24-2008, 06:11 PM	#10
Bubba305-ST21- Impact Rookie Join Date: Apr 2008 Age: 37 Posts: 683	Re: Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us springs wasnt playing any safety __________________ never another.....R.I.P. Sean T #21

11-24-2008, 06:17 PM	#11
SBXVII Franchise Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Virginia Posts: 7,766	Re: Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us If we are satisfied with the smaller speedier DE then we are set at DE. We just need to build up or bulk up or DL...the middle. We need at least one maybe two OL. I can see us picking up another WR late in the draft. It would be nice to find a nice size FB to replace Sellers, cause I just don't think Broughten is the answer. He has not been since he came. Always injured. We will need to draft a good RB in later rounds and hope he pans out for the future. Clearly SA(aka...TTB) is not the answer or they are not using him to his strengths as I have said all along. He is not a between the tackles type of RB.

12-01-2008, 04:31 PM	#12
JLee9718 Impact Rookie Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 573	Re: Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us The redskins' offensive line has a lot of slow thinkers because sometimes they're looking around for somebody to block and they let a guy zero in on JC. I think JC needs to get upset and start yelling at his blockers in the huddle. On the other hand, JC could speed up his delivery a little more.

Our lack of a secondary receiver is killing us

Locker Room Main Forum