Redskins 7 - 9?

[luckydevil]

eagles will be 3rd in the division

[bulldog]

well, whatever the effect of transitioning ballplayers (sometimes it can be debilitating), there is no question in my mind that what the Redskins did the first 4 or 5 games of last season won't be repeated even if the team TRIES to play that poorly

the Redskins have a host of new players on offense, but as has been mentioned they have played in this system before for this coach and to some extent with each other.

the biggest transition is going to be the interior line. The Redskins will need to work in camp and the preseason in getting the timing and coordination down among 3 players who are all going to be new to the team AND to the system.

So, I expect some early miscues in pass protection and in the consistency of the run blocking.

That said, I don't expect to see the team throw for 100 yards in 4 quarters as it did in some games last year. And I expect the Redskins will score more than 3 and 0 points in the first two games.

The 16 game schedule has time enough for a team to come together and play well. Let's face it, the Patriots last year ended up with a qb that had not been a starter, a running back that had been in Buffalo, a leading wide receiver that was a first time starter, etc.......

We are not talking about a team with the pieces in place for 1-2 years before the improvement came.

At the same time I don't think the changes on defense are going to cause that kind of disruption.

The Cowboys are integrating 3 new starters on defense, 4 if you count Roy Williams.

The Redskins are integrating 4 as well in Wynn, Dotson, Armstead and Trotter.

So, neither team has an advantage on D in terms of fielding units that have a history.

I think it is a cop out to think that 11 starters on what is a veteran defense can't use training camp and 5 preseason games to get a good enough sense of what the gameplan is and then play effectively come opening Sunday.

So, contrary to some of my prior misgivings in April and May, I am now expecting the Redskins to field a competent team from the time the regular season starts.

That does not mean a championship team, but one that executes and plays competitively with the opponents it faces.

If we see the kind of disinterested, disorganized squad that allowed a 5-11 Chargers team to kick the stuffing out of it as happened last September 3, than I think there should be some answering for it.

Spurrier has had the chance to go out and get players on offense that may be more physically skilled and has in almost all cases refused, preferring instead to count on those who have the requisite familiarity with his system.

That familiarity should spell some organized September efforts, folks, or at least it should.

Because if it takes 10 or 11 weeks to get the bus started and rolling downhill then we could easily ask ourselves questions like whether it would have made more sense to sign a veteran like Chris Chandler to qb for a season and draft a successor in 2003, whether it would have been more expedient to sign a veteran receiver like Willie Jackson early on and not try to resurrect Reidel Anthony and then draft Cliff Russell, whether it would have been better to pass on Ladell Betts so high in the draft and secure an interior linemen or young DE/DT instead.

No, we don't want to go there..............

[Guest Goatroper]

Bulldog:

The Cowboys are integrating 3 new starters on defense, 4 if you count Roy Williams.

The Redskins are integrating 4 as well in Wynn, Dotson, Armstead and Trotter.

So, neither team has an advantage on D in terms of fielding units that have a history.

The difference is the Cowboys ADDED the new players to a pretty good unit (No. 4 defense in the league) while most of the Redskins' new guys REPLACED players who moved on.

So, while the Cowboys strengthened a good defense, the Redskins swapped players, upgrading in some instances, standing pat or possibly downgrading in others. Last year's Cowboys' starters are still around as quality backups.

But, just for the sake of argument, let's say every NEW player the Skins added was an upgrade. You are still looking at more of a "let's get acquainted" period for Skins than Cowboys.

Also, the Cowboys' defense and defensive coordinator remain the same, while the Skins have a new DC with a new system.

While I am sure we still disagree about which players at which positions are better, I must agree with Art that there is more familiarity and history and less readjustment needed for Cowboys than Skins.

[GatorEye]

What color is the sky in Vinny's world? It sounds like a fascinating place to visit.

7-9? Ridiculous unless we get wiped out by injuries. I say 10-6 maybe 11-5. I think the defense alone keeps us close in every game and by the end of the season the offense should be in high gear.

Everyone thinks SOS is unproven so we are looking at 7-9 compared to the 8-8 finish of last year. Has everyone forgot - Marty brought in a brand new system and with players of lesser calibre than we have now got us to 8-8 (which easily could have been 10-6). Now people think SOS and Marv are a downgrade from Marty and his brother and the talent isn't as good. Puuulease!

Please tell this guy to politely remove his cranium from his as$!

[bulldog]

Goatroper, I hardly see the difference.

Yes, Glover/Westbrook/Williams/Hardy are being ADDED to a defense that was in the same system, but now that chemistry/mix changes because of the unique talents and abilities of those 4 new players.

It doesn't really matter whether the players were acquired as upgrades on already decent players or whether they were acquired to fill clear holes, a change is a change..................

As far as the Redskins go, after week 5 when the team started to play NFL football, you won't find too many NFC teams that gave up fewer points over the last 11 weeks than the Redskins

We can quibble about defensive stats, but to me the #1 stat is points allowed.

Also factored in is the capabilities of the respective offense.

The Redskins had more three and out series last year than most teams and rarely registered more than 20 points in a contest.

The defense was often put in the position of being on the field for 60 plays.

You compare that to other defenses like the Rams that were often working with a 14 or 21 point lead and could look to make plays and close games out, it is a completely different proposition.

I think what has some people outside of Washington down on the Redskins defense is quite simply the lack of a recognized, all-pro sackmeister in the front four.

Marvin Lewis has proven in the past though that given some talent to work with he can organize and scheme to get pressure.

Wynn will post better sack numbers than Coleman did last season at RDE. With fewer reps as part of a rotation I think Smith will also do better as a designated rusher. You look inside and see a player in Wilkinson that in the past has had two 8 sack seasons as a DT and those numbers show given the right scheme he can get a push.

Lewis has already mentioned using the linebackers more effectively on the pass rush. Rhodes and Schotteneheimer did not attempt to augment the rush with a concerted effort off the edges from the LB's, something other teams with good athletes at LB try to do as a matter of course.

Armstead gives him one linebacker that does have experience as a rushman. Arrington is being given a shot to see what he can do as a standup end playing on passing downs.

You factor these efforts into an overall system concept and I can see an effective rush. No, the Redskins won't lead the NFC in sacks, but with the corners in solid man coverage down the field, the front seven will get the extra second or two of hesitation from many qb's to make plays in the backfield.

[88Comrade2000]

Just win BABY

You want the media, etc.. to show the Skins some respect, earn it.

That's right. Until the Washington Redskins make the playoffs on a consistant basis and that means 2 years in a row at least; then you won't earn any respect.

The Skins have one playoff season since 1992 and they probably overachieved and had luck. Remember 1999 saw 2 .500 teams make the playoffs in the nfc. So it was bound to happen that Norv actually gets a team into the playoffs.

The Skins have been mediocre for so long. Until we see something different, don't expect anything.

I know many assume that because we went 8-8 with no offense and no qb's that we can win more games this year. That's not necessarily so.

We don't have a franchise QB. We have two NFL backups who are familiar with Spurrier. We have 2nd year player who'll probably get cut if he can't beat out Danny. Then we have our designated franchise QB of the future- though we really don't know if that will happen. WE have an uncertain WR core. Weaknesses on the lines. Also, we have a new coach; new to the nfl. I can see why the Skins aren't rated to high.

We will see what happens. I think that the team we see in September will be nothing like the team we see in December. This team will struggle early but will get better as the season goes on.

[PCS]

Here ya go B.D. The pts allowed stats by the 'Boys.

Pass defense Allowed 20 Td's ranking 17

Run defense allowed 12 TD's ranking 18

total points a game 21.1 Ranking 19

int's 9 ranking 29

fumbles 16 ranking 5

overall turnovers 25 ranking 23.

Misc. stuff

Played top 10 Pass offenses 4 times 1-3

Season avg. 180.6 passing yds a game.

Against top 10 213 yds a game.

San Diego Ranking 11 allowed 353 yds goes on from there

[davidyee]

Guys, articles like these carry as much weight as the paper they are written on. Considering that it came over the net, I rest my case.

Being a Cowboys fan I predicted a 7-9 season for us. For the majority of the league under a few teams 6-10 wins is going to be our zone. That's going to encompass alot of the league.

For the Skins the whole secret comes down to Matthews, Spurrier and your WRs. If they can communicate and stay on the same page there will be some success.

What will actually happen...that's why we actually watch the games.

I'm fairly certain that this year's Cowboys Redskins matches will be very entertaining and not be the brunt of the league's jokes as last year's Monday Night idiotcy by Miller and company.

[Guest Goatroper]

Bulldog,

I admire your relentless optimism; I really do.

But in terms of having to make adjustments and mix the chemistry for a unit "comfort zone" among players, coaches and system, I think your Redskins have a steeper curve ahead of them than my Cowboys.

Sure, they will come together at some point and have a roaring defense. How many games that will take remains to be seen.

Joining a cohesive group is different from creating a cohesive group. Having watched the Cowboys DL in training camp in Wichita Falls and followed them through the season, I see a sturdy bunch with strong field and locker room leadership.

They have grown confident with Zimmer's scheme, made tremendous strides in improving their run defense (from very bad to very good) and know their greatest need this year is an improved pass rush. Enter Glover, Hardy and Roy Williams (plus the return of a rehabbed Ekuban).

Best news: We still have all the guys from last year as rotation depth. Myers is still here to push Glover in camp and spell him during the season. Ditto Zellner for Ekuban. With all due respect, the Skins don't have a comparable bench behind their starters.

Skins are thin on the DL. Lang and Coleman are gone, which represents a loss in production and leadership no matter how you spin it.

Skins aren't picking up where they left off last year, they are reinventing the team with new offense, new defense, new guys and -- here is the key -- loss of productive veterans. When you overpay for a superstar, you have to cut good, productive team players to meet the payroll.

While Skins cut good players for CAP reasons, the Cowboys (having already passed through cap hell) culled players on the basis of performance, not paycheck.

I hope the Skins emerge as a contending team so it will mean more when we stomp your butts twice a year. But I think some of you are underestimating the time it will take to adjust to the changes you are seeing this year. Going from Schottenheimer to Spurrier is a pretty good hop.

Plus I think you are underestimating the significance of depth on the DL. Time will tell which of us is right.

Good luck. See you on Turkey Day.

[Qcard]

Goatroper,

Come Turkey Day, Skin fans will face the wrath of a resurgent Cowboy team.

[OrangeSkin]

Qcard - It looks like Quincy is taking a dump in your sig.

[NavyDave]

Will someone explain to me how a 5-11 team is more cohesive than an 8-8 team hamstrung by an idiot at coach who spotted the league 5 losses opening the season?

Some of you want to compare Jimmy Johnson's first year with the poke with S Doubles.

This doesnt make since considering that JJ didnt have Emmit Smith his first season and we have our version for S Double to use, JJ didnt have an all pro group at linebacker and Corner like we do, JJ didnt have bookend Tackles like we do, JJ didnt have an assistant head coach who was actually the coach of the Ravens that won the superbowl with an credit stealing offensive coordinator.

How much chemistry do we need after five frigging preseason games and the camps prior to that?

This stuff is over rated.

9-7 atleast including injuries and potential brain farts by the QB and receivers.

[bulldog]

of course the one variable that is left out this equation is the fact the Cowboys outside of Glover don't have another proven rushman either.

secondly, their secondary at corner is suspect. Edwards is a youngster and Westbrook is a question mark coming off 2 injury plagued years in Detroit in the past three.

so, given a decent to good rush from the down linemen in their rotation, the Cowboys still have some work to do in the secondary to prove they can hold up.

you don't win in the NFL without cornerbacks and quite frankly the Edwards/Westbrook combination has to rank as the the weakest among the NFC East tandems, at least until proven otherwise.

you look at the Eagles with Vincent and Taylor and the Redskins with Bailey and Smoot and there is a world of difference.

I would also beg to differ that the trade of Coleman and Lang for Wynn and Dotson is one where the team is demonstrably worse off.

Lang was playing OUT OF POSITION last year at DT at 279 pounds. The reason he didn't want to resign here was he wanted to move back to DE where he wouldn't be beaten up by the grinders inside.

So, to me trading a player not suited to the DT spot by his own admission and a clear question mark against the run, for a veteran we know can be effective against the run is a net positive for the team.

Likewise at end, Coleman at 32 is just not the same player he was 2 or 3 years ago. The Redskins got a steal in 1999 by signing Marco for under $1 million at age 29 at DE after he was released by San Diego.

His 2000 season where he had 12 sacks was a career year and an aberration as he never had more than 6 before or afterward.

You have to consider what a given player is going to contribute THIS season on the field and not merely what he did in the past and then project optimistically.

Jacksonville got a good deal on Marco because at the price he was signed he was a reasonable risk. At $5 million for 2002, he was not worth the cap number here in Washington.

I think it has been the tendency of fans of other teams AND fans of the Redskins to overrate the abilities o some of the players on this team in the past.

Just because guys like Westbrook, Connell, Skip Hicks and Kenard Lang are good athletes and have impressive measurables in speed, agility, etc.....doesn't mean they are going to be highly productive football players.

When I look at the defense I would have said the primary reasons the Redskins were vulnerable against the run at times was because of a lack of size and experience in some members o the front seven.

We have replaced Barber (229) with Armstead (240+) at weakside, replaced Derek Smith (235) and Kevin Mitchell (250) with Jeremiah Trotter (261), replaced Marco Coleman (267) with Reynaldo Wynn (287), and Kenard Lang (277) with Santana Dotson (289).

I think from a qualitative as well as a quantitative perspective these moves on their own and in combination add up to a much better defensive team.

Perhaps I am alone in that belief. We shall see.

[NavyDave]

You are alone in your assessments BD.

AT QB you wont see the numerous timeouts or 6 secs before the play is sent in.

Audibles are an option

A spread offense so S Davis can get his yards.

[Art]

It is fairly obvious Cowboy fans don't care to pay attention to the facts of the Redskins any more than some of us care to pay attention about them. For Goat to cite Lang and Coleman as losses in terms of leadership and then leave the remainder of the facts out, tells me he's either not aware of the leadership of Dotson and Armstead, or, he doesn't care.

It's of no consequence though. I like what the Cowboys have done, keeping together the players of importance while adding some key pieces. But, what any fan knows, the key difference between the Redskins and the Cowboys is high-level young talent.

No matter what the Redskins may be going through in terms of coming together as a team, the fact is, Arrington, Trotter, Bailey, Smoot, Samuels and Jansen are young, rising stars. While the Cowboys have some youth, the fact is, they have nothing like what we have in terms of proven, high-level, young talent and this is where the two teams shall separate over the years.

The Cowboys have hope for Carter and Williams, but neither is a young player who has actually proven anything. None of the Cowboys young talent has flashed any signs of greatness. Hell, Cowboy fans still pump Ellis as a good young player and in his best year, he wasn't all that much better than Bruce Smith in his worst.

The real difference between the Redskins and the Cowboys is the level of young, rising talent. Other than Carter and Williams, there really isn't a young, rising player the Cowboys can point to and even indicate they have much hope for greatness. They'll quickly jump in here and add Gurode (perhaps they are correct) and they'll lump Dat (not really) and perhaps even Hambrick, but, those are all reaches. While the Redskins list has those reaches as well, in Ramsey, Gardner and Bryan Johnson, the fact is, the Cowboys have no where near the young, rising yet proven talent the Redskins have.

So, while I like what the Cowboys did in the offseason, the fact is, they don't have the ability as their present roster is comprised, to be much more than a competitive team. The Redskins, due to the high level and number of younger stars, need only to add the right ingredients around them to be something more. Is Spurrier and his Florida boys the right surrounding cast? We'll know soon enough.

[Qcard]

Originally posted by Art

It is fairly obvious Cowboy fans don't care to pay attention to the facts of the Redskins any more than some of us care to pay attention about them. For Goat to cite Lang and Coleman as losses in terms of leadership and then leave the remainder of the facts out, tells me he's either not aware of the leadership of Dotson and Armstead, or, he doesn't care.

It's of no consequence though. I like what the Cowboys have done, keeping together the players of importance while adding some key pieces. But, what any fan knows, the key difference between the Redskins and the Cowboys is high-level young talent.

No matter what the Redskins may be going through in terms of coming together as a team, the fact is, Arrington, Trotter, Bailey, Smoot, Samuels and Jansen are young, rising stars. While the Cowboys have some youth, the fact is, they have nothing like what we have in terms of proven, high-level, young talent and this is where the two teams shall separate over the years.

The Cowboys have hope for Carter and Williams, but neither is a young player who has actually proven anything. None of the Cowboys young talent has flashed any signs of greatness. Hell, Cowboy fans still pump Ellis as a good young player and in his best year, he wasn't all that much better than Bruce Smith in his worst.

The real difference between the Redskins and the Cowboys is the level of young, rising talent. Other than Carter and Williams, there really isn't a young, rising player the Cowboys can point to and even indicate they have much hope for greatness. They'll quickly jump in here and add Gurode (perhaps they are correct) and they'll lump Dat (not really) and perhaps even Hambrick, but, those are all reaches. While the Redskins list has those reaches as well, in Ramsey, Gardner and Bryan Johnson, the fact is, the Cowboys have no where near the young, rising yet proven talent the Redskins have.

So, while I like what the Cowboys did in the offseason, the fact is, they don't have the ability as their present roster is comprised, to be much more than a competitive team. The Redskins, due to the high level and number of younger stars, need only to add the right ingredients around them to be something more. Is Spurrier and his Florida boys the right surrounding cast? We'll know soon enough.

It is hard to argue with most of your points which are factual. The young talent in Dallas are yet to prove they can play at an elite level.

So, while I like what the Cowboys did in the offseason, the fact is, they don't have the ability as their present roster is comprised, to be much more than a competitive team.

Once again this where you try to change your OPINION into FACT.

Dallas just like the Rams(99), 49ers(00), Ravens(00), Falcons(98), Skins(99) and Patriots(01) has the ability to be very competitive. Prior to their succesful seasons, all the teams listed above had sub-par seasons the year before. So before you put limitations on the 2002 Cowboys based on their present roster check your history and note that many suspect teams the year before were able to much more than being a competitive team.

Did you ever or even factor in the idea that some of our young talent have the chance to be great.

[bulldog]

well, that's correct QCARD. But let me also add that it is a fact that a lot of people around the NFL and in the NFC East don't want to see Spurrier come in here and have success right off the bat or even in 2003.

they like to hold to the notion you have to got through 3-4 years of paying your dues before anyone should recognize your talents and abilities.

this in large part is some of the media bias against the Redskins.

They see a veteran defense coached by a well-respected coordinator and a conference leading rusher who is only 28 years old and just entering his prime, yet they somehow come up with the Redskins finishing in last place in the East? :laugh:

Come on.

My grandmother is more subtle than that.

The fact remains the Redskins are a strong team on defense and have an elite back and the one area of the team that has shown to be lacking, the passing game, is Spurrier's stock and trade.

People denigrate Shane Matthews, but can anyone argue that going into the 2002 he is in any worse position playing in a system suited to his abilities than Jon Kitna, Jim Miller and Jay Fielder were the past couple of years when they lead their teams to playoff berths?

[Qcard]

Originally posted by bulldog

well, that's correct QCARD. But let me also add that it is a fact that a lot of people around the NFL and in the NFC East don't want to see Spurrier come in here and have success right off the bat or even in 2003.

they like to hold to the notion you have to got through 3-4 years of paying your dues before anyone should recognize your talents and abilities.

this in large part is some of the media bias against the Redskins.

They see a veteran defense coached by a well-respected coordinator and a conference leading rusher who is only 28 years old and just entering his prime, yet they somehow come up with the Redskins finishing in last place in the East? :laugh:

Come on.

My grandmother is more subtle than that.

The fact remains the Redskins are a strong team on defense and have an elite back and the one area of the team that has shown to be lacking, the passing game, is Spurrier's stock and trade.

People denigrate Shane Matthews, but can anyone argue that going into the 2002 he is in any worse position playing in a system suited to his abilities than Jon Kitna, Jim Miller and Jay Fielder were the past couple of years when they lead their teams to playoff berths?

Well in my opinion, like I have stated before SS will be a successful Coach in the NFL. I just don't think he will be able to totally implement his scheme this year with the personnel available on offense.

It is a well known fact that early in the season defense around the league have an advantage over the offenses. I believe the Redskins offense will struggle early and often. Why? Based on my initial point and also the bull-eyes SS and media have painted on his chest. No thanks to Dannyboy either. Teams will get up every Sunday for the Redskins this Season. I believe very many players in the NFL have been destroyed by SS Gator attack during their collegiate years. Dallascowboys have dealt with this kind of situation for decades. Welcome to the club.

I am a SS fan. I never really cared for the Gators, but watching SS destroy collegiate teams was a great Saturday afternoon pass time. I hated the day danny boy opened his wallet.

I totally understand the optimistic views in this forum based on SS capabilities, but I think this year he has too many ?? going into the season.

Adjusting to a 16 game NFL season as a Headcoach and O/C, adjusting to NFL players, implementing his system with average talent, media hype, growing pains and the DannyBoy factor(chameleon).

[Posse81]

This is where Marvin Lewis' experience will be worth its weight in gold...

[bulldog]

well, I have seen the Redskins finish with a 5-11 or 6-10 record and this team has a lot more talent on it than those teams did even with the question marks at quarterback and receiver, so we will have to see.

I know that not all fans rate the Skins that poor in terms of anticipated record while at the same time admitting they think there will be an adjustment period.

A point I agree with, although to a more limited extent.

But even going back to the Cowboys experience of 2000 and 2001, to finish 5-11 you have to play some poor ball along the way.

Clearly, Dallas has hopes for a much better record than that in 2002.

I think Philly will be the same, Dallas and Washington will be better and the Giants will be slightly worse.

But the Skins should be safely above 5-11, which is the record I saw posted either on ESPN or the Sporting News a week or two ago.

[Guest Goatroper]

Bulldog,

But even going back to the Cowboys experience of 2000 and 2001, to finish 5-11 you have to play some poor ball along the way.

Agreed. Cowboys had a pathetic passing game due to musical chairs at QB, where Mister Jones decided he was going to shove the rookie in to sink or swim.

Nobody argues that Dallas' success this year depends on anything but a vast improvement in our QB play and our offense generally. Got to have QC come on big or we are toast.

Galloway and Rocket are still waiting for a passer to get them the ball. We hope that happens this year.

Antonio Bryant heads a list of eager young WR's who will battle for a job in camp. You guys may want to watch the wire and pick up the ones we cut.

Cowboys offense SUCKED last year. No question. That is probably why Mister Jones got a new and improved offensive coordinator (one who has had some success in the NFL, BTW).

Three of those 11 losses came at the expense of our broke-down kicking game -- the not-ready-for-prime-time long snapper whose incompetence caused us to lose our starting PK for half the year.

Running game suffered from absence of our FB, causing our backup RB to grind it up as a lead blocker much of the year. Same guy had to spell No. 22, our ancient warrior, when he needed a blow. Fullback Robert Thomas is back with some stiff competition from a promising rook. Oh yeah, we also picked up a veteran TE to add to the mix.

Our defense kept us in most games, but our offense didn't close the sale. But the defense could be better, namely needs a pass rush. Ekuban is back. Glover and Hardy have arrived. Oh, yeah, keep an eye on the rookie name of Roy. I haven't seen Ellis compared to B Smith; mostly compared to Jim Jeffcoat. I will take that, thank you.

In other words, yes, we all are aware of the 5-11 and have a pretty good idea what has to happen to improve on that. Stay tuned to see if we succeed.

Meanwhile, you guys were a stellar 8-8, and did some subtle fine-tuning to improve on that by...

* Firing the HC/GM with an offensive wiz who plans to lay waste to the NFL starting in his very first NFL game, which will come later this year. Go, Bawlcoach! Beat Tech!

* Firing the DC and replacing him with a proven defensive master (with solid NFL credentials, no less). It's a new world.

* Spending the big bucks on the one position that kept you out of the SB last year -- MLB.

*Dumping guys who played pretty well but cost too much money and replaced them with guys who play pretty well and cost maybe not quite so much money (or at least not so much long term).

* Placed want ads for somebody to play QB for Bawlcoach and got a couple who are arguably less skilled than those clowns who played on last year's 8-8 juggernaut. Gator Aid. Is it in you?

Come to think of it, you fixed all the problems that held you to 8-8, and you are ready to soar into the playoffs.

I hope and pray your playoff berth comes down to your LAST GAME of the regular season. Please, Lord.

[Skins24]

Meanwhile, you guys were a stellar 8-8

Man, I can't tell if you're serious or not.

If you are serious, then....what are you doing on this board? You obviously know nothing about the Redskins. If you're going to be on here you should at least know something....

Placed want ads for somebody to play QB for Bawlcoach and got a couple who are arguably less skilled than those clowns who played on last year's 8-8 juggernaut

See above.

Same guy had to spell No. 22, our ancient warrior, when he needed a blow.

So you guys sucked because your back up RB had to blow your "ancient warrior"?

:doh:

We have done nothing but improve this offseason. Even in the positions with question marks, there are people able to fill those spots who are no worst than last years crew. There is no physical way we will be worst than last year. Too many of these "experts" write by feeling and not by facts.

[bulldog]

I would argue that signing a baseball player like Chad Hutchinson to a contract that includes a $3 million bonus despite the fact he hasn't thrown a football in 2 years is something of a off color gambit wouldn't you say?

And the fact may be that Carter will not improve that much. Heath Shuler had three or four very good games at the end of the 1995 season and there were big hopes for him come the next training camp. He arrived and promptly lost the starting job to Gus Frerotte over the next several months.

So, we could be sitting here next year at this same time introducing ourselves to a new Cowboys' quarterback.

Regarding your comments about the Redskins I would say:

1. Hiring Marvin Lewis and looking to shore up the middle of the defense by signing Jeremiah Trotter and Santana Dotson to stop the run and to get better size by swapping Wynn for Coleman on the outside hardly seem like big gambles or foolhardy moves. In fact they seem quite sensible given the contract that the Browns threw at Kenard Lang the misplaced DT, who in 5 years failed to show he could establish himself at his natural position of DE with the Redskins and yet couldn't stand in at 275 inside.

2. Joe Gibbs won a Super Bowl with Alvin Garrett and Charlie Brown as his starting receivers. Bill Parcells won the Super Bowl with Lionel Manuel and Mark Ingram as his starting receivers. New England won last year employing the previous year's #3 and punt returner, Troy Brown, as the #1 receiver.

So, I would not be so quick to downgrade the Redskins players at WR that far just yet. The truth is Jacquez Green has caught more balls than Joey Galloway over the past 3 years and that was in a system that supposedly didn't know how to use him properly.

Gardner ranked second to Chris Chambers in rookie receptions and yardage in 2001 and that was with an offense with as poor a set of qb's as any we have seen in town in years. :laugh:

The other factor here is that unlike the Redskins, who haven't spent the farm on receiver's salaries, the Cowboys have a mint invested in two older players Galloway and Ismail that are at a point in their careers where because of age and cumulative injuries may produce diminishing returns.

Bryant may be a long-term answer, but he is a raw talent and if Dallas fans are going to pooh-pooh Gardner's rookie season where he put up decent numbers than I am going to have to say to them to prove first that Bryant is a player before they count him as an asset on their side of the ledger.

3. Each head coach/OC has his own ideas and hires his own people. Dick Jauron picked Jim Miller as his starting quarterback in 2001 and Anthony Thomas as his starting running back, moving 1,200 yard rusher James Allen to the bench. The Bears finished 13-3. Ditto in Oakland where Gruden replaced most of the offensive skill players with his own guys. Who thought Rich Gannon was a player before he went there? The Chiefs cut him loose. The Giants gave up on Tyronne Wheatley and Gruden brought him in and he ran for 1,000 yards. Again, another player most NFL fans would have said was a scrub.

I can go on and cite other teams such as Miami that got playoff berths depending upon career backups such as Jay Fiedler and Lamar Smith, etc.......................

Is the idea of starting Stephen Davis, Rod Gardner, Jacquez Green or Willie Jackson, and Shane Matthews guaranteed to land the Redskins in the NFC East cellar?

I would doubt that it does. In fact a scenario where Gardner improves as a second year player in a more coherent system and Green puts up his best numbers with coaching he is comfortable with, is distinctly possible.

And then where are the doom and gloom prophets?

Back to watching Joey Galloway play 8 or 9 games and Rocket Ismail pulling his hamstring and being listed as probable or questionable for another stretch of games just like most of his seasons in the NFL.

[Guest Goatroper]

So you guys sucked because your back up RB had to blow your "ancient warrior"?

Does your junior high have a Mensa Club? You should apply.

[Skins24]

Um....no goatraper, no.

I want you to try again. This time be funny, or witty...not stupid.