bulldog Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 the Redskins individual offensive stats on the surface would lead you to believe this is a team that is a clear playoff contender. What the stats don't show you is when in each game the stats are accumulated and how the productivity of the offense falls off significantly in the fourth quarter. It really is a strange situation, among the strangest I have seen in watching this team for over 30 years: Moss: #4 in NFC with 63 catches for 1,053 yards and 6 touchdowns. Portis: #4 in NFC with 222 carries for 944 yards and 5 touchdowns. Brunell: #5 in NFC with over 2,300 yards, 15 touchdowns and 5 interceptions. You of course have to factor in the turnovers on sacks and hits that we have seen from Brunell and Portis putting the ball on the ground. But, overall the numbers suggest our skill players do have sufficient talent to be starters on a playoff club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnFoRcEr_uPu Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 That's something I've known for a while, and you're exactly correct on. The only problem is WHEN we put up those numbers. If we could just play the same in the 4th quarter as we do for the first 3, we can win all 5, no matter what the negative people say. We've shown more than enough ability, now we need to put it all together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 I don't think I've ever seen a better offensive team score fewer points in the history of my watching football. I guess it is a result of never having turnovers where we get the short field. It is definitely odd. ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 1, 2005 Author Share Posted December 1, 2005 whenever you have a 1,000 yard back, 1,000 yard receiver and a quarterback who is 3:1 in terms of touchdown to interception ratio, you are usually travelling in rarefied air in the NFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 Our stats have been skewed by that all important turnover ratio and the difficulty of our schedule. They do give us a reason to be hopeful, though. We can hope for some success headed into the soft part of our schedule. We can expect success in the future. Clearly, this team is improving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drex Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 As well all know, offense is just one of three components of the game, with of couse, the others being special teams and defense. Defensively, we've taken a step back this season. Yes, we are currently the 10th ranked defense in the league. However, one glaring statistic is the amount of big plays this defense gives up. We are 21st in the league in giving up plays 20-39 yards, with 30, and we are 27th in the league in the category of big plays over 40 yards, with 7. The offense has improved since last year. Unfortunately, the same can not be uttered in regards to the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted December 1, 2005 Author Share Posted December 1, 2005 but the offense did manage just 17 against the Eagles and Chargers, 13 against the awful Raiders and 0 against the Giants correct? it's not only the defense. it is an offense that moves the ball up and down the field but doesn't score enough points. part of it may very well be a lack of willingness to take some risks to score points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drex Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 but the offense did manage just 17 against the Eagles and Chargers, 13 against the awful Raiders and 0 against the Giants correct?it's not only the defense. it is an offense that moves the ball up and down the field but doesn't score enough points. part of it may very well be a lack of willingness to take some risks to score points Oh, I agree that the offense, despite it's stats, is inconsistent in terms of scoring. The bottom line is that the goal associated with winning football games is to score points, not put up the most yards. Usually, there is a correlation between high point totals and high yardage but unfortunately, as you pointed out, that does not exist with this ball club. However, the defense is also to blame in terms of attempting to explain why this team is a fringe playoff contender. A defense that gives up less big plays is usually a good complement to a team consisting of an offense that puts up the yardage totals that we put up. I also agree that playcalling is an issue as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 Need to get rid of the 29th in Punting. Need for the kickoffs NOT to be caught on the run at the 12.... Need to get rid of the 20+ in turnover ratio Need to get rid of the pts per game 16average All in all though I think if Carlos replaces Walt and we run Rock just a little more I think we'd be o.k.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Kenzo Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 This shines light on the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neophyte Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 Our stats have been skewed by that all important turnover ratio ... A very large part of this has been the inablity to take the ball away from opponents. It is not like the offense is turning the ball over an excessive amount compared to other clubs but rather that our defense is well below average in take-aways. If we could just get one more per game we would be about even for the season instead of -10 (I think this is right after the Charger game) on the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 but the offense did manage just 17 against the Eagles and Chargers, 13 against the awful Raiders and 0 against the Giants correct?it's not only the defense. it is an offense that moves the ball up and down the field but doesn't score enough points. part of it may very well be a lack of willingness to take some risks to score points You're right that the statistics you quoted earlier are deceptive. The objective of an offense is to put points on the board. We have scored 214 points for the season, 52 of them against the 49ers and an average of 16.5 points against the others. Furthermore, the Brunell-Moss connection, which erupted in the fourth quarter of the Dallas game has been effectively neutralized since the Giants game. We controlled the ball well against Seattle, Denver, Kansas City, and San Franscisco but we've been inconsistent since. I don't think it's lack of willingness, bulldog. I think the problem is basic: weaknesses in both talent and scheme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 scoring points is more important than stats. i think i heard portis say "stats are for losers". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 scoring points is more important than stats. i think i heard portis say "stats are for losers". You've probably heard that there are three kinds of lies.... lies, damned lies, and statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fdarugar Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 Furthermore, the Brunell-Moss connection, which erupted in the fourth quarter of the Dallas game has been effectively neutralized since the Giants game. Moss has still been making plays against strong double teams. Its not like the guy has just fallen off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 Moss has still been making plays against strong double teams. Its not like the guy has just fallen off. Did you read "effectively neutralized" to mean that I had stupidly written that his production had fallen off to nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a_good_brotha Posted December 1, 2005 Share Posted December 1, 2005 One thing I've noticed about this offense is it seems like they can't recover from one bad play. I've seen so many times that the offense will be driving the ball into the red zone or close to it. Then suddenly on one play, they would get a penalty, drop a pass, or a block gets missed resulting in 0 or negative yards. All of a sudden a potential touchdown drive turns into a field goal attempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonkeyTeeth Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 We also have solid team stats in terms of time of possession, 3rd down conversions, yards per play, etc. All marks of a potential playoff team. Unfortunately, our collective brains and luck seem to have both disappeared during 4th quarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzzah Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 That's something I've known for a while, and you're exactly correct on. The only problem is WHEN we put up those numbers. If we could just play the same in the 4th quarter as we do for the first 3, we can win all 5, no matter what the negative people say. We've shown more than enough ability, now we need to put it all together. Exactly... if we had these numbers in the 4th these guys would be #1 and 2 instead of #4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 What are the red zone stats? Anyway, I think the key to everything is the turnover margin. No offense, not even Indy, can score a ton of points if they have to go 80 or 90 yards every single time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 Did you read "effectively neutralized" to mean that I had stupidly written that his production had fallen off to nothing? A chicken and egg debate for sure, but I think a lot of Moss's production can be attributed to playcalling. In the 2nd half of the Chargers game we ran it almost every down. I think if they had kept throwing Moss would have had well over 100 yards receiving. I think when you really look at it, there have only been a handful of games where Moss has truly been 'neutralized'. But this happens to ALL wide receiver / QB combos... they can't be good every week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtbag 28 Posted December 2, 2005 Share Posted December 2, 2005 whenever you have a 1,000 yard back, 1,000 yard receiver and a quarterback who is 3:1 in terms of touchdown to interception ratio, you are usually travelling in rarefied air in the NFL Great post man!!!:applause: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.