For Redskins, same problem; RGIII...

[Beta]

I dunno. I think the D is really improved and that plus even half decent special teams makes pretty much anyone 8-8.

I'm down on Bob3 (love that!) but, as you mentioned, they can run it and if he can get a rhythm going with those receivers, this team has the talent to score.

If they can be a 17 point defense and not give up big plays on punts and kickoffs, I think they can score 21 against better teams.

I'd like to think 8-8 is reasonable.

Larry....

The average team gave up 24 points/game last season. 17/game would have been 3rd best in the NFL last season, tied with the 49ers. The Skins defense isn't as good as the 49ers. How much has that defense REALLY improved? It was 30th (2 points from worst) in the league in points given up last season at nearly 30/game. That takes a significant amount of improvement. I think the defense could be middle of the road, but asking for much more than that isn't reasonable.

As for offense, 21/game averages 336 points. The Skins scored 334 last season. If RGIII improves his health, that number should go up. If there's a league average defense behind him and he does well, like he did in 2012, then the Skins could win 10 games. The Skins were the #4 offense in his rookie season, averaging over 27/game. They game up just over 24/game that season, so realistically if they can improve to league average and RGIII gets back to where he was his rookie season, you're back to 10 wins.

Scoring 21 points doesn't win many games, so don't hang your hat on that. I've watched too many seasons where teams with top 10 defenses and top 15 special teams end up with between 5-7 wins because their offense can't move the ball. But it certainly is possible to get 8 wins with a team like that -- just not likely.

 

[Larry Gude]

Larry....

The average team gave up 24 points/game last season. 17/game would have been 3rd best in the NFL last season, tied with the 49ers. The Skins defense isn't as good as the 49ers. How much has that defense REALLY improved? It was 30th (2 points from worst) in the league in points given up last season at nearly 30/game. That takes a significant amount of improvement. I think the defense could be middle of the road, but asking for much more than that isn't reasonable. .

I should have looked it up. I thought, wrongly, that 21 or so was average and would argue they have the makings of an above average D.

So, would you think they might be a 21 point D?

 

[Monello]

Improved special teams will help in not giving the opposing team great field position all the time. That should help the D keep the average score down.

If Morris can get 4+ per carry then you face more short yardage 3rd downs. It's easier to complete a 5 yard pass than it is a 15 yard pass.

The new bump rules will create a lot of defensive penalties but that can easily affect both teams.

2014 won't be DC's year to make a huge splash in the NFL.

 

[Beta]

I should have looked it up. I thought, wrongly, that 21 or so was average and would argue they have the makings of an above average D.

So, would you think they might be a 21 point D?

Good question. 21/game is a top 10 defense. I'm not sure if the Skins have it in them. As far as acquisitions go, Hatcher had a solid year last year, but it was just 1 season...can he do it again? He's 32 so it doesn't seem like his career is on the upswing. Clark is a good acquisition, but he's 34 and might slow down. Sharpton might be an up & comer but I'm not even sure if he's starting. Middle of the road is very reasonable, but I don't know about top 10.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

I think a fact that gets overlooked a lot is a defense that is on the field a lot due to offensive incompetence gets scored on more than one who has an offense that holds the ball for 10 minutes at a time.

A lot of college teams that get accused of having a poor defense actually just have an offense that scores too fast, when the offensive drive only takes 2 minutes the D never gets to rest.

 

[kom526]

After watching the pre season games this year 8-8 would be nothing short of miraculous. Piss poor decision making on the part of #10, just throw the damned ball away and stop telegraphing the pass. I hate to think of myself being on the "Blame the owner" bus but Dan Snyder really has to let his coaching staff make what they think is the best decision for the team and rumor (ESPN, DeadSpin) both say that there may be a #10 sighting in Thursday night's game vs. TB. One more chance to Bradford a knee.

 

[Larry Gude]

I think a fact that gets overlooked a lot is a defense that is on the field a lot due to offensive incompetence gets scored on more than one who has an offense that holds the ball for 10 minutes at a time.

A lot of college teams that get accused of having a poor defense actually just have an offense that scores too fast, when the offensive drive only takes 2 minutes the D never gets to rest.

That is something the Eagles will have to figure out, for sure.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

That is something the Eagles will have to figure out, for sure.

These offenses are very fun to watch but the wheels totally fall off the bus once they fail to score in more than one drive. Coaches always fall into one or the other category, I want to see someone who runs a game with an air raid style offense mixed in with some Power I running for an entire series or two. I think this would tire out a defense more than the either or approach.

 

[Monello]

If the defense is getting tired then the opposing team's offense is also getting tired. I never bought that argument. Players want to play. Football is very emotional. These athletes are in top condition. A good defense will cause a lot of 3 and outs. If the D is getting tired then they don't have the correct players on the field.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

If the defense is getting tired then the opposing team's offense is also getting tired. I never bought that argument. Players want to play. Football is very emotional. These athletes are in top condition. A good defense will cause a lot of 3 and outs. If the D is getting tired then they don't have the correct players on the field.

I am of the school that believes that defense requires more energy than offense. The reason being that you are not doing your thing you are reacting to someone else doing their thing. Its like driving to the basket in basketball vs trying to guard someone doing the same, it takes more work.

 

[Larry Gude]

I am of the school that believes that defense requires more energy than offense. The reason being that you are not doing your thing you are reacting to someone else doing their thing. Its like driving to the basket in basketball vs trying to guard someone doing the same, it takes more work.

That is the Joe Gibbs School of Tear Your Heart Out.

It is why, in war, your seize the initiative and you try to never let it go.

 

[Hank]

I am setting the over/under at 5 games before RG3 is handing out Gatorade on the sidelines.

 

[Larry Gude]

I am setting the over/under at 5 games before RG3 is handing out Gatorade on the sidelines.

I got the under.

 

[Monello]

I am of the school that believes that defense requires more energy than offense. The reason being that you are not doing your thing you are reacting to someone else doing their thing. Its like driving to the basket in basketball vs trying to guard someone doing the same, it takes more work.

The same amount of energy is expended per play. It may vary by position but the duration of the play is equal for both sides. Now a well conditioned team could run a poorly conditioned team into the ground. The well conditioned players would have the advantage on both offense and defense.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

The same amount of energy is expended per play. It may vary by position but the duration of the play is equal for both sides. Now a well conditioned team could run a poorly conditioned team into the ground. The well conditioned players would have the advantage on both offense and defense.

It may have been more or less equal back in the 70's and even 80's but since all of the rules that favor the offense the defense has to work that much harder to accompolish the same thing.

 

[Beta]

JFC, you'd think RGIII was the devil and Cousins was the savior by reading this thread. Do any of you have a memory? Maybe it's selective. Allow me to help.

In 2012, your beloved Skins went 10-6 when RGIII was healthy, won their division, and had a top 5 offense. His QB rating for the season was 102.4.
In 2013, RGIII was hurt and the offense suffered. His QB rating for the season was 82.2. The Skins went 3-10 when he started.

In 2012, Cousins rode the bench. In his brief appearances, he did relatively well, with a 101.6 rating (3 INTs in 48 attempts, 2 short of RGIII with ~350 fewer attempts).
In 2013, Cousins started 3 games and the Skins went 0-3. His rating was an abysmal 58.4 and he threw 7 INTs (5 short of RGIII with 300 fewer attempts).

So what you're all clamoring for is a backup who has never outperformed RGIII in the regular season, doesn't offer any dual threat capability, and is quite literally an INT-machine?

You're all ####ing nuts. This is blatant "the grass is always greener" bull####. Be happy you have a QB that did a great job in 2012 that, should he get healthy again, gives you a chance to be competitive in the East. It's pretty apparent Cousins hasn't outperformed him in REAL gameday situations yet. Maybe he should try to get a WIN first and stop giving the other team the ball.

 

[Hank]

JFC, you'd think RGIII was the devil and Cousins was the savior by reading this thread. Do any of you have a memory? Maybe it's selective. Allow me to help.

In 2012, your beloved Skins went 10-6 when RGIII was healthy, won their division, and had a top 5 offense. His QB rating for the season was 102.4.
In 2013, RGIII was hurt and the offense suffered. His QB rating for the season was 82.2. The Skins went 3-10 when he started.

In 2012, Cousins rode the bench. In his brief appearances, he did relatively well, with a 101.6 rating (3 INTs in 48 attempts, 2 short of RGIII with ~350 fewer attempts).
In 2013, Cousins started 3 games and the Skins went 0-3. His rating was an abysmal 58.4 and he threw 7 INTs (5 short of RGIII with 300 fewer attempts).

So what you're all clamoring for is a backup who has never outperformed RGIII in the regular season, doesn't offer any dual threat capability, and is quite literally an INT-machine?

You're all ####ing nuts. This is blatant "the grass is always greener" bull####. Be happy you have a QB that did a great job in 2012 that, should he get healthy again, gives you a chance to be competitive in the East. It's pretty apparent Cousins hasn't outperformed him in REAL gameday situations yet. Maybe he should try to get a WIN first and stop giving the other team the ball.

So, you have the over.

 

[Grumpy]

So what you're all clamoring for is a backup who has never outperformed RGIII in the regular season, doesn't offer any dual threat capability, and is quite literally an INT-machine?

RGIII wants to be a pocket passer (his daddy said)..and if he wants to be a dual threat, how soon before one of his legs get ripped off?? RGIII can only be effective being what he is, and for what he is, his body won't hold up. He is a joy to watch and devastating to defenses, when healthy. He's welcome to prove me wrong, but he will not make it being a pocket qb. He will be no different than Heath Shuler, healthwise, an injury will end his career this year or next. My vote is to get out of the RGIII biz now, trade him.

As for Cousins' 3 games last year..with a team and managerment that was mailing it in?? Shirley you jest.

 

[PeoplesElbow]

JFC, you'd think RGIII was the devil and Cousins was the savior by reading this thread. Do any of you have a memory? Maybe it's selective. Allow me to help.

In 2012, your beloved Skins went 10-6 when RGIII was healthy, won their division, and had a top 5 offense. His QB rating for the season was 102.4.
In 2013, RGIII was hurt and the offense suffered. His QB rating for the season was 82.2. The Skins went 3-10 when he started.

In 2012, Cousins rode the bench. In his brief appearances, he did relatively well, with a 101.6 rating (3 INTs in 48 attempts, 2 short of RGIII with ~350 fewer attempts).
In 2013, Cousins started 3 games and the Skins went 0-3. His rating was an abysmal 58.4 and he threw 7 INTs (5 short of RGIII with 300 fewer attempts).

So what you're all clamoring for is a backup who has never outperformed RGIII in the regular season, doesn't offer any dual threat capability, and is quite literally an INT-machine?

You're all ####ing nuts. This is blatant "the grass is always greener" bull####. Be happy you have a QB that did a great job in 2012 that, should he get healthy again, gives you a chance to be competitive in the East. It's pretty apparent Cousins hasn't outperformed him in REAL gameday situations yet. Maybe he should try to get a WIN first and stop giving the other team the ball.

I think it has more to do with the game plan associated with each. The pocket passer plan is proven in the NFL, the dual thread QB has time and time again proven to be nothing but a way to have to replace your starting QB halfway through the season. How often was McNabb and Cunningham hurt? Name me one running QB that has been durable.

If any team wants to follow that model then they need to build their backup plans with similar QB's. the Redskins should have traded Cousins picked up another running QB for 2nd string and possibly held onto Pat White for 3rd string.

 

[Larry Gude]

So, you have the over.