The Redskins are Better-Off Losing Some Consistency

[Thinking Skins]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/34009-the-redskins-are-better-off-losing-some-consistency

...

The fact is there were a lot of things that we wouldn’t want to be consistent. We really didn’t do very well last year. Sure, we made the playoffs, but as a wild-card ranked third in our own division with a 9-7 record. That doesn’t mean we were that good, it simply means that everyone else in our conference was that bad.

If you remove the last four games of the season, we were abysmal. We were plagued with injuries, we’d jump out to early leads and lose in the second half, and it often seemed like we beat ourselves. With four games left in the season we were 5-7, with no hope of making it into the playoffs. In order for us to make it we had to win all four and the right people had to lose. Just because that happened, doesn’t mean we were a great team, we just pulled it together when we needed to.

One of my biggest complaints of the previous coaching staff was that they seemed to believe solely in the system, irregardless of the players. I gotta admit that I was amazed to find that our defense was ranked 9th in the league considering how it seemed like we just let teams march down the field on us. When you line up your defensive backs 12 yards off the line of scrimmage, and have your safeties sitting in the front row end-zone seats, you are going to give up some yardage. It may only be a few yards here or there, but those yards add up. We certainly didn’t get beat deep very often, but we let teams march into the Red-Zone.

...

click on the link for the full article.

[Thinking Skins]

I thought this was an interesting article because some people have questioned Greg Blache's abilities as a defensive coordinator, and said that he shouldn't simplify the system and base it around the players strengths. This article kinda talks about how bad 'the system' was last year.

The funny thing is, I can remember sitting reading posts on here of members who were pissed at things like Rogers and Springs playing 10 yards off the line on third and 3. I note this because (a) its something brought up in the article and ( Blache has addressed stopping teams from converting on third downs as something the defense needs to improve on.

[TheLongshot]

"abysmal"? Not nearly. 2006 was abysmal. Last year was merely mediocre. There were a lot of games where we were a hair away from winning (and it goes vice versa with some games) but often we beat ourselves. But, the fact that we were in most of those games certainly rises up to the level of mediocre and almost to good.

I do agree with the heart of his post, tho, that some changes were definitely needed and some things were fine to stay the same. I don't know many who would argue that the offensive philosophy probably needed a brand new perspective, since the offense under Gibbs and then Gibbs and Saunders never seemed to operate smoothly.

Jason

[McD5]

Please don't post anything critical of our team last season.

We should have won the Superbowl.

Amazing we didn't go 16-0.

Thank You.

Edit: In all seriousness, we needed a huge overhaul, starting with the coaches.

"If it ain't broke, why fix it?" I believe was Danny's quote.

Well.....thank God we are fixing it.

[The Sisko]

One thing I think the author fails to take into account is that Grilliams switched from the blitz happy scheme he broght here to a hybrid Tampa-2 which is based on giving up the short stuff and making sure tackles to deny YAC. Given that, the DBs are supposed to play the way they did. I think our problem was that Williams didn't need a whole lot of DL pass rush in his prior system because he blitzed so much. However, DL pass rush is critical to the Tampa-2. Had he stayed, we'd have eventually addressed that shortcoming. I think that was the reason we brought in Wilson.

I agree though that we were a very flawed team. The late run was a product of unfamiliarity with Collins down the stretch and the Skins playing with a high level of emotion due to STs death.

I still see 7 or 8 wins for us this year with '09 being the year Campbell really comes into his own. Of course, knowing our fanbase he may not have any more than 2 games to start looking like Brady before the boos start. :doh:

[Redshu]

Anyone who uses the term "irregardless", loses me because it's a clear cut indicator that the individual in question has no business writing anything others are going to read.

[MassSkinsFan]

Thank you thank you thank you!!! :applause: :applause: :applause:

I was about to post that same thing. I had a boss who consistently said it and wrote it, even after several of his direct reports, including me, pointed out to him that it is incorrect. The fact that he has a PhD shakes my faith in the US higher education system.

Anyone who uses the term "irregardless", loses me because it's a clear cut indicator that the individual in question has no business writing anything others are going to read.

[JMUGator19]

this is absolutely the most nonsensical thing I have ever read... let's whip out the highlights.

"Sure, we made the playoffs, but as a wild-card ranked third in our own division with a 9-7 record. That doesn’t mean we were that good, it simply means that everyone else in our conference was that bad."

Last time I checked, in a regular season, you played 16 games. 6 of which were in division games. When three of those teams go into the playoffs, it is fairly safe to say that division was brutal. Of the other 10 games 6 were in the NFC 4 were in the AFC. So you are complaining about a 1 game advantage where it is "unevenly easy". Not to mention our division was easily one of the the two/three hardest in football.

"If you remove the last four games of the season, we were abysmal."

No kidding... If you remove a quarter of my leg, it's pretty hard to walk too. 1/4 of your games is not insignificant, and those four games were our BEST games. Let me rephrase that statement: "if you remove the four games before the 4 game winning streak, we were AMAZING." Thats right, we would have 9-3 for the year and thats not even marginalizing that embarrassing patriots game. Every Quarter counts, every game counts, good AND bad.

"In order for us to make it we had to win all four and the right people had to lose. Just because that happened, doesn’t mean we were a great team, we just pulled it together when we needed to."

Generally, good teams do what they CAN do, and leave the rest to god. the onlyl reason we needed the right people to lose was because we didn't have a single loser in our division. ANY other division and we would have handily got into the wildcard, maybe even won the division. Pulling it together when you need to is a sign of greatness not weakness.

PS, forget the emotional stress involved... If you were missing your best player on your team, would you be able to do it? Just how good are the Patriots without Tom Brady, or Colts without Manning. Maybe they arn't the same team without their superstar.

"One of my biggest complaints of the previous coaching staff was that they seemed to believe solely in the system, irregardless of the players. I gotta admit that I was amazed to find that our defense was ranked 9th in the league considering how it seemed like we just let teams march down the field on us. When you line up your defensive backs 12 yards off the line of scrimmage, and have your safeties sitting in the front row end-zone seats, you are going to give up some yardage. It may only be a few yards here or there, but those yards add up. We certainly didn’t get beat deep very often, but we let teams march into the Red-Zone."

Considering we went 9-7... maybe, just maybe we marched into their Red Zone more often than they marched into ours. The Redskins might have done some weird things and made mistakes, but more often than not they clearly did the right things.

:logo:

[JMUGator19]

the Skins playing with a high level of emotion due to STs death.

I am probably going to get alot of crap for this.

But high levels of emotion do not exude good play from everyone. Some people like Farve trancend their game through the emotion. Others lose focus and break down. Death is a very personal thing, and I think people react very differently to it. Therefore, for every person who is overacheiving because of this emotional surge, there is another player who can't focus on the game because his thoughts are with Sean Taylor instead.

There is a reason why many thought the team would crumble after his death. Usually from an experience like this, most take a step back away from the game to realize the value of human life instead of taking the game more seriously and playing through it.

I am very proud of the way the team played with all this on their hearts. It showed alot of character, resolve, and love. No one expected the Redskins to even win after Sean Taylor passed. A few emotions can be useful in a football game, example Anger, but it takes a great coach to harness anger and not let it explode into irrationally crazy. (Which is what I think happened.)

That being said, the Redskins were a worse team without Sean Taylor in there than if he had never died. We could have gone deeper in the playoffs with him than without. Period. I do believe that.

:logo:

[Sweet Sassy Molassy]

I too hate when people use that "word".

Regardless, the writer does make some good points. We were a team that I feel overachieved last season. We at times were a poorly coached team. Too many times did we have a lead only to sit back and watch the team comeback and win. Too many mental lapses, both on coaches behalf and players. I saw a lot of things that I liked about last years Redskins, but a lot of things I didn't like.

We had very stubborn coaching, in the sense that they wanted to force their system on the players, and while it works at times, you have to have a bit of flexibility as well. Otherwise you force guys to try to play to a system that isn't good for them, and they look like crap, when a little tweaking may do wonders.

I love Joe Gibbs to death, but I felt it was time for him to go. He was the absolute best person for us to have coaching the team after ST's murder, but after the emotion of Sean tragedy passed, I still felt that Joe just didn't have it in him to get us to that next level. Not hating on the man, I cried a little when he left, but when its time to go, its time to go.

While I feel Saunders is a great OC, I don't think he was a great fit either. So I was not sad to see him go, and I wish him the best in STL. This was just not his place.

As far as Williams goes, I wanted to see Williams get the job, but at the same time, I had my concerns, and while I wanted to see him get the job, I wasn't sure about how well he'd handle it. Him not being hired was neither a happy moment nor a sad moment as I felt he was a 50/50 shot regardless.

So I agree with the writer in some areas. We had two abysmal seasons, and two nearly devastating seasons only to be ressurected due to an amazing run at the end. If that's what consistency was going to get us, no thank you. We were an average/below-average team, and I personally felt like most of it was due to coaching ... especially on the offensive side of the ball. I feel this team has some solid talent, and I think they also have some great chemistry. That was evident in the 4 game run after the ST tragedy. I now hope the new coaching staff can do what the previous regime didn't do, and that's let the players play and put them on the right path. Gibb II helped build a solid foundation, but I truly beileve that Joe Gibbs was not the man to take that foundation to the next level.

[TheLongshot]

We were a team that I feel overachieved last season.

I think if anything, we underachieved because of the reasons you specified. I think in a lot of ways that the offense didn't play up to their capabilities. It is possible that the defense overachieved a bit, but that's as far as I go.

Jason

[hail2skins]

"abysmal"? Not nearly. 2006 was abysmal. Last year was merely mediocre. There were a lot of games where we were a hair away from winning (and it goes vice versa with some games) but often we beat ourselves. But, the fact that we were in most of those games certainly rises up to the level of mediocre and almost to good.

So if we were "abysmal" in 2006, and "mediocre to almost good" in 2007, what were we in 2003? Looking back at a lot of the scores from that season, seems like we were in a lot of those games as well (although the end of season home blowout losses to Dallas and Philly were glaring and can't be ignored):

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/was/2003.htm

I'm just trying to understand, given how we were in "a lot of games" in 2003, how we were this big "train wreck" before Gibbs took over.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

this is absolutely the most nonsensical thing I have ever read... let's whip out the highlights.

You saved me a bunch of typing lol...couldn't agree more. :applause:

[Califan007 The Constipated]

So if we were "abysmal" in 2006, and "mediocre to almost good" in 2007, what were we in 2003? Looking back at a lot of the scores from that season, seems like we were in a lot of those games as well (although the end of season home blowout losses to Dallas and Philly were glaring and can't be ignored):

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/was/2003.htm

In 2003 we lost four games by double digits: 22, 17, 27 and 24 points that season. In 2004, 2005 and 2007 combined we lost four games by double digits.

I'm just trying to understand, given how we were in "a lot of games" in 2003, how we were this big "train wreck" before Gibbs took over.

This is insanely easy to answer:

1) We had a roster of unmotivated and unfocused players when Gibbs took over. Jon Jansen was quoted as saying (paraphrasing here), "When we won, we figured it was just luck. The line didn't quite understand what we were doing on a lot of plays, so when things went right we just shrugged and kept going." The head coach was lazy and uninspiring, and it showed on the field.

2) Our QBs had consisted of Ramsey, Tim Hasselbeck, Shane Matthews, Danny Wuerffel and Rob freakin' Johnson.

3) In 2003 we had a roster of undisciplined players on offense. The Skins had the #6 most penalized offense in the NFL. After one year of Gibbs the Skins offense was the #15 most penaltized offense in the league. After two years of Gibbs the offense was the #21 most penalized offense...or should we say, the #11 least penalized offense.

4) In 2003 our #1 running back was Trung freakin' Candidate.

5) As the 2003 season wound to a close, the Skins and their head coach barely put out an effort, losing the last three games by a total score of 85-31. Simply put, the team and their coach just quit. By contrast, the Skins under Gibbs actually got better and performed better as the seasons came to a close. 3-2 record over the last five games in 2004. 5-0 record over the last 5 games in 2005. 4-1 record over the last 5 games in 2007. In those 15 games spanning those three seasons, the Redskins went 12-3...and their only three losses were by 3 pts, 3 pts, and 1 pt. That's how close they came to being 15-0 in those games.

I could go on, if you really want me to...

[MustangSteve]

this is absolutely the most nonsensical thing I have ever read... let's whip out the highlights.

"Sure, we made the playoffs, but as a wild-card ranked third in our own division with a 9-7 record. That doesn’t mean we were that good, it simply means that everyone else in our conference was that bad."

Last time I checked, in a regular season, you played 16 games. 6 of which were in division games. When three of those teams go into the playoffs, it is fairly safe to say that division was brutal. Of the other 10 games 6 were in the NFC 4 were in the AFC. So you are complaining about a 1 game advantage where it is "unevenly easy". Not to mention our division was easily one of the the two/three hardest in football.

"If you remove the last four games of the season, we were abysmal."

No kidding... If you remove a quarter of my leg, it's pretty hard to walk too. 1/4 of your games is not insignificant, and those four games were our BEST games. Let me rephrase that statement: "if you remove the four games before the 4 game winning streak, we were AMAZING." Thats right, we would have 9-3 for the year and thats not even marginalizing that embarrassing patriots game. Every Quarter counts, every game counts, good AND bad.

"In order for us to make it we had to win all four and the right people had to lose. Just because that happened, doesn’t mean we were a great team, we just pulled it together when we needed to."

Generally, good teams do what they CAN do, and leave the rest to god. the onlyl reason we needed the right people to lose was because we didn't have a single loser in our division. ANY other division and we would have handily got into the wildcard, maybe even won the division. Pulling it together when you need to is a sign of greatness not weakness.

PS, forget the emotional stress involved... If you were missing your best player on your team, would you be able to do it? Just how good are the Patriots without Tom Brady, or Colts without Manning. Maybe they arn't the same team without their superstar.

"One of my biggest complaints of the previous coaching staff was that they seemed to believe solely in the system, irregardless of the players. I gotta admit that I was amazed to find that our defense was ranked 9th in the league considering how it seemed like we just let teams march down the field on us. When you line up your defensive backs 12 yards off the line of scrimmage, and have your safeties sitting in the front row end-zone seats, you are going to give up some yardage. It may only be a few yards here or there, but those yards add up. We certainly didn’t get beat deep very often, but we let teams march into the Red-Zone."

Considering we went 9-7... maybe, just maybe we marched into their Red Zone more often than they marched into ours. The Redskins might have done some weird things and made mistakes, but more often than not they clearly did the right things.

:logo:

You got that right, we won 4 games against 4 teams fighting for the playoffs, and beat everyone including the world champs! Plain and simple you cant take that away, we earned the playoffs!

[elkabong82]

I agree with Califan. JMUGator19 saved me a lot of typing.