ExtremeSkins Fan View: Humble Beginning

[JimmiJo]

You're paid to get carried away about hope and optimism.

Well....IF you were paid, you'd be getting paid to get carried away about hope and optimism

I'm willing to wager almost anything we're a 10 win team this season.

How dare you steal my thunder! I was asked by a reporter at mini-camp what I thought the record would be. "10-6, maybe 11-5" I announced proudly. I got some looks on that one, but I do believe it.

[SkinsHokieFan]

How dare you steal my thunder! I was asked by a reporter at mini-camp what I thought the record would be. "10-6, maybe 11-5" I announced proudly. I got some looks on that one, but I do believe it.

It is ALL about QB play. That is the NFL in the 21st century, more so then ever

If Jason Campbell is all we believe he can be, this team will be special. If JC can get 3-5 more first downs per game, either by his legs or standing in the pocket a second longer then MB would, the O will be on the field 33-37 minutes a game, wear down the opposing D and score points.

The D will be able to tee off and opposing offenses will be one dimensional. Fatiuge won't set in, and our D will be dictating.

[Tastes Like Chicken]

Great read, JJ. A lot of people, myself included, got carried away with the magic of '05. That made for quite a painful THUD last year. I have a really good feeling about this season, and most of it admittedly rides on Jason Campbell and his level of success as a starting NFL quarterback. My expectations are much more in check as compared to this time in '06 (I was checking hotel/air deals to Miami) so I am cautiously optimistic.

That being said, 10 wins is my gut feeling.

[tizzod]

That's my point.

Sorry, the 2005 playoff run where the team had to win the last 5 games out of complete desperation.... and a good run of bad teams (rams, cards, giants missing half their defense, the Cowboys missing half their o-line, and the Eagles missing the entire team).... those aren't the circumstances that good football teams require to be successful. Those were extenuating circumstances... and it showed last season. Heck, it showed in the playoffs that year.

Keep talking, my brother. I remember two years ago! (Two years ago?)

[SkinsManNJ]

That's my point.

Sorry, the 2005 playoff run where the team had to win the last 5 games out of complete desperation.... and a good run of bad teams (rams, cards, giants missing half their defense, the Cowboys missing half their o-line, and the Eagles missing the entire team).... those aren't the circumstances that good football teams require to be successful. Those were extenuating circumstances... and it showed last season. Heck, it showed in the playoffs that year.

The 2005 playoff run could have been somewhat avoided had we won the games we should have against the entire AFC West. In each of those games we had a chance to win and should have won.

As for the teams down the stretch they were teams that a playoff caliber team should win. You know beat who your supposed to beat, and that's what we did. So on that note I would have to disagree with you about those teams we beat down the stretch, those are circumstances that good teams win to be successful.

If any team that's supposed to be playoff caliber doesn't beat who they are supposed to beat why should they be a playoff team?

[s0crates]

Great article man! I really enjoyed it. I have the same feeling about this team. If they stay humble and work hard, then they have a lot of potential. Overconfidence and injuries hurt us a lot last year. The overconfidence problem seems to be remedied. Now if we can just stay healthy . . .

[Forever21]

Great Article JimmyJo.

I love the humble attitude of everyone. You can tell that things are different across the board this year from the coaches to the rookies to the trainers.

You can also feel the chip on everyone's shoulder. A lot of guys with a lot to prove this year.

[aussieskin]

Players who say little, tend to have a quiet determination about them, thats what I am looking for till the preseason, quiet determination, a sense of want, and self demand, an ability to know that sacrificing oneself for the club the fans the coaches and your team mates that is what makes for a great team, so go skins.

[JimmiJo]

Now if we can just stay healthy . . .

Ding Ding Ding!

[ldysknzfn1]

The defense on the other hand gave up the most points in 6 years (376 total), allowed a whopping 44% of 3rd down conversions, and allowed 67% of 4th downs to be converted! Our goal line and red zone stats are too ugly to even recite. We gave up more net yards last season than any of the past 6 previous seasons. Our sack (19) and interception (6) totals were the lowest they've been in 6 years. In short, our defense sucked. Thats not news, but I think until you really look at the numbers, you don't realize how bad it sucked. We couldn't stop the run, we couldn't stop the pass, we couldn't force turnovers, and we couldn't get off the effing field. Considering how bad the defense was, our offensive production was almost noteworthy.

:cry: Man...our D sucked! I mean I knew that...but I didn't realize how bad it was. Thanks for the #'s...I mean...there's no way to go but up right?

[Om]

Nice work, John.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. I am convinced that Joe Gibbs was affected last year by something non-football related. Something that, for the first time in his NFL career, was serious enough that it came between him and his greatest strength--his gift for bringing a team together and getting it to equal more than the sum of its parts.

Given that the end of 2005 was the probably the single greatest example OF that strength in his career, I've been a little surprised that more people who have watched the man closely over the years haven't spoken of it. To me, it was clear. The difference between the feel of the team that finished 2005, and the 2006 team that seemed to sleepwalk right out of the gate, was night and day.

For the record, no, this is not something I will try to support with facts here. I'm basing this on 1) my own observations, and 2) suggestions picked up in conversations with a couple of people whose knowledge and insight I trust.

Bottom line, as I wrote at season's end, I believe I saw signs towards the end of last year that Gibbs had faced whatever it was that affected him so, and made up his mind to take his team back. I thought I saw signs of exactly that happening late, despite the losses. It was just that by that time, the damage had been done, and the defense, already in trouble chemistry-wise, simply didn't have the bodies left (Washington, Springs, etc.) to get the job done.

Good news is we'll know very early in the season, probably no more than 2-3 games in, whether Joe Gibbs has his groove back. Meanwhile, we'll get to spend the rest of the offseason listening to people spout off about what "a bunch of losers" they all are.

Such is the internet.

[Taylor 36]

It is certainly easy to find 8-10 players that he made worse last season. Lining Rogers up 10 yards off the ball on 3rd and 3 was ignorant. If your cornerbacks suck--you had sure as hell better get to the quarterback. And his inability to work with Arch--when other coaches have had great success with him--is simply unacceptable.

He needs to be cut quickly.

Rogers had the option to line up where he did. It was Rogers choice/decision to give WR's half the field. That is the way GW's system has always been run, and, I might add, has been more than successful. One freakin' bad year with tons of injuries on the defensive side of the ball and everyone is out for blood. That is pathetic, and those posters should be "cut" from this board when we have a top 5 defense in 2007, which we will.

Going back to what went wrong last year, I do honestly think this whole attitude, we were lazy thing is a bit of a cop out. The team simply was not good enough at the most important position-QB

The DB corps was a disaster. Marcus Washington injured. As JJ said, it wasn't just one thing, it was a lot of things

What could go wrong did go wrong. That simple

I agree, we had a lot of issues last year, but QB play was not as big as people try to make it out to be. We gained more yards and scored more points last year than we had since Turner was our coach. Hell, Brunell broke a completion record last year. I know, some people will dismiss it with their screen pass jibes, but at this level that is a great accomplishment regardless.

I believe it was the complacency along with the hill-size mound of injuries we sustained, especially on defense, that did us in.

[Ax]

Good job JJ. Always good to get as much insight as is available.

I was gonna read this at home before I left for work this morning, but thought, "If this guy writes anything like Om, I should wait until the weekend so I'm sure to have enough time".

Anywho, you write well. Keep it up.

PS ~ Nothing but love for you Om. Nothing but love.

[redskin-one]

Coach Gibbs has allowed this to happen.

I agree with you on this. It is his ultimately his responsibility. Per Om's posting, was Gibbs distracted last year? I think he let the expectations get to him too. But I also agree with Om in that at the end of the season there was a fire in Gibbs that got relit.

It was Gibbs decision to bring in Al Saunders and a new offensive system. Trying to learn a new system clearly sets a team back one, but most likely two years.

Per Tarhog, you can see what happened to the defense.

I don't see an 11-5 team this year. I see a 9-7/8-8 team that is on the rise.

[JimmiJo]

I was gonna read this at home before I left for work this morning, but thought, "If this guy writes anything like Om, I should wait until the weekend so I'm sure to have enough time".

Good food takes time.

Me on the other hand am more of a short-order cook.

[JimmiJo]

Nice work, John.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. I am convinced that Joe Gibbs was affected last year by something non-football related. Something that, for the first time in his NFL career, was serious enough that it came between him and his greatest strength--his gift for bringing a team together and getting it to equal more than the sum of its parts.

Given that the end of 2005 was the probably the single greatest example OF that strength in his career, I've been a little surprised that more people who have watched the man closely over the years haven't spoken of it. To me, it was clear. The difference between the feel of the team that finished 2005, and the 2006 team that seemed to sleepwalk right out of the gate, was night and day.

For the record, no, this is not something I will try to support with facts here. I'm basing this on 1) my own observations, and 2) suggestions picked up in conversations with a couple of people whose knowledge and insight I trust.

Bottom line, as I wrote at season's end, I believe I saw signs towards the end of last year that Gibbs had faced whatever it was that affected him so, and made up his mind to take his team back. I thought I saw signs of exactly that happening late, despite the losses. It was just that by that time, the damage had been done, and the defense, already in trouble chemistry-wise, simply didn't have the bodies left (Washington, Springs, etc.) to get the job done.

Good news is we'll know very early in the season, probably no more than 2-3 games in, whether Joe Gibbs has his groove back. Meanwhile, we'll get to spend the rest of the offseason listening to people spout off about what "a bunch of losers" they all are.

Such is the internet.

Thanks man! I totally agree that Gibbs took his team back mid-season. IMO this is why they ran more and this is why Campbell started rather than Collins.

[budski]

I dont get these warm and fuzzy feelings as some other people might have. I don't get the their all losers either. I guess I'm the wait and see guy. I do expect alot more out of a Gibb's coached team that what I have seen.

[Die Hard]

Meanwhile, we'll get to spend the rest of the offseason listening to people spout off about what "a bunch of losers" they all are.

Such is the internet.

People didn't criticize the Redskins prior to the internet? Ironically, it's the internet that's allowed you to "spout off" even moreso... and the ham you are.... write an article every week because you love the audience. And I know how you like to be humble... by keeping your thoughts and ideas relatively short

Om, if anybody was a betting man.... and they were betting on your knowledge of the game... they would've lost the house, job, and family. But what do you care... because if Gibbs continues to lose and moves on.... you'll write this gloriously long article about how much you enjoyed watching Redskins football and Gibbs on the sidelines again... blah blah blah.

Dude, when people talk about fluff pieces on Redskins.com... they're talking about you.

[Monkart]

:munchout: ^ :chug:

[McD5]

Nice work, John.

I've said it before, I'll say it again. I am convinced that Joe Gibbs was affected last year by something non-football related. Something that, for the first time in his NFL career, was serious enough that it came between him and his greatest strength--his gift for bringing a team together and getting it to equal more than the sum of its parts.

Nascar. The guy has a ton on his plate. And he has tried to lighen that plate by passing off both the offensive and defensive play calling. And a few other things as well--like team meetings. I think these moves illustrate where his priorities have been.

The bottom line--which really comes first? The Washington Redskins, or Gibbs racing?

[McD5]

Rogers had the option to line up where he did. It was Rogers choice/decision to give WR's half the field. That is the way GW's system has always been run, and, I might add, has been more than successful. One freakin' bad year with tons of injuries on the defensive side of the ball and everyone is out for blood. That is pathetic, and those posters should be "cut" from this board when we have a top 5 defense in 2007, which we will.

Rogers lines up where Williams wants him. If he doesn't listen to Williams, he would be yelled at as he walked off the field, and then likely benched. See Arch. The "don't get beat deep" crap killed us. It killed Rogers....killed Sean Taylor too.

And if you have studied Williams career at all, you would know that his career record has been average. Not great--Not awful.

Like the rest of the Buddy Ryan disciples, he came into a team with a weak defense...instilled some discipline and raised hell--and it worked for a season.

The exact same thing with Jerry Glanville. Go to a crap defense...pump them up....and they will play for a year.

Then once everyone realizes you are an ass, and you disrepect and trade away great players....you are no longer a friend...you are now the ENEMY. You lose the locker room.....and fail miserably the next few seasons. Then you go to another team and do it again.

Rinse, Wash, Repeat.

The entire league knows that you can find great players on the Skins defense. Regardless of how they look with Williams as a coach. Whether Williams knows how to use these great players makes no difference. Because the coaches know when they get in a better situation, they are bonafide starters.

See Arch, Lavar, Pierce, Clark, Harris.

The bottom line--it can only be 2 things. It is either the horses, or the jockeys.

And we have some pretty good horses.

[JimmiJo]

Rogers had the option to line up where he did. It was Rogers choice/decision to give WR's half the field. That is the way GW's system has always been run, and, I might add, has been more than successful. One freakin' bad year with tons of injuries on the defensive side of the ball and everyone is out for blood. That is pathetic, and those posters should be "cut" from this board when we have a top 5 defense in 2007, which we will.

Rogers lines up where Williams wants him. If he doesn't listen to Williams, he would be yelled at as he walked off the field, and then likely benched. See Arch. The "don't get beat deep" crap killed us. It killed Rogers....killed Sean Taylor too.

And if you have studied Williams career at all, you would know that his career record has been average. Not great--Not awful.

Like the rest of the Buddy Ryan disciples, he came into a team with a weak defense...instilled some discipline and raised hell--and it worked for a season.

The exact same thing with Jerry Glanville. Go to a crap defense...pump them up....and they will play for a year.

Then once everyone realizes you are an ass, and you disrepect and trade away great players....you are no longer a friend...you are now the ENEMY. You lose the locker room.....and fail miserably the next few seasons. Then you go to another team and do it again.

Rinse, Wash, Repeat.

The entire league knows that you can find great players on the Skins defense. Regardless of how they look with Williams as a coach. Whether Williams knows how to use these great players makes no difference. Because the coaches know when they get in a better situation, they are bonafide starters.

See Arch, Lavar, Pierce, Clark, Harris.

The bottom line--it can only be 2 things. It is either the horses, or the jockeys.

And we have some pretty good horses.

We've also had a top 10 defense for two of the three years since Williams came.

You may wish to reserve judgement until the season starts.

I am.

[JimmiJo]

People didn't criticize the Redskins prior to the internet? Ironically, it's the internet that's allowed you to "spout off" even moreso... and the ham you are.... write an article every week because you love the audience. And I know how you like to be humble... by keeping your thoughts and ideas relatively short

Om, if anybody was a betting man.... and they were betting on your knowledge of the game... they would've lost the house, job, and family. But what do you care... because if Gibbs continues to lose and moves on.... you'll write this gloriously long article about how much you enjoyed watching Redskins football and Gibbs on the sidelines again... blah blah blah.

Dude, when people talk about fluff pieces on Redskins.com... they're talking about you.

For my money, nothing beats the bond of brotherly love we share here on ES...

[Om]

People didn't criticize the Redskins prior to the internet? Ironically, it's the internet that's allowed you to "spout off" even moreso... and the ham you are.... write an article every week because you love the audience. And I know how you like to be humble... by keeping your thoughts and ideas relatively short

Om, if anybody was a betting man.... and they were betting on your knowledge of the game... they would've lost the house, job, and family. But what do you care... because if Gibbs continues to lose and moves on.... you'll write this gloriously long article about how much you enjoyed watching Redskins football and Gibbs on the sidelines again... blah blah blah.

Dude, when people talk about fluff pieces on Redskins.com... they're talking about you.

The kind of people who would talk about what I write for .com as "fluff pieces" are generally the same kind of people who think in order to "keep it real" you have to huff and puff and curse and do things like call the professionals who run the team "losers" (blah blah blah), either actually believing or just pretending to have enough actual knowledge about what's going on at Redskins Park to seriously question/criticize every move the team makes ... so I don't take them particularly seriously either.

Anyone who's given my stuff a fair read (as you used to do before you became Angry Guy), knows I come it this from the standpoint of being unafraid to admit that I'm a passionate fan with a tendency to take the long view--nothing more, nothing less. I'm being honest with my readers, and honest with myself.

Try it sometime. It's quite liberating.

[Robbnva]

Super and Bowl might not appear in a sentance BUT Super and Smart sure do.