Oldfan Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 We finished 8-8 this year. How much credit or blame should we distribute to the offense and defense? I think the majority of posters in this forum are over-valuing the defensive effort and under-valuing the offense. Some of this is surely due to hidden agendas in debate; labeling the offense as "horrible" is consistent with arguments to discredit Jason Campbell or Jim Zorn. However, some of it is likely due to lack of basic football knowledge and misuse of statistics. On that score, I have these thoughts to offer: Football is the supreme example of team sport. This makes gathering useful statistics a difficult math problem because the performances of 11 players each on offense, defense and special teams are involved. In order to measure something it must first be isolated from everything else, that's tough to do in football. My first suggestion is that a well-informed fan should ignore the rankings on nfl.com. The stat guys at footballoutsiders.com offer the most intelligent, statistics-based rankings available right now. High-scoring offenses are overrated by most fans. Norv's offense in San Diego is an example. His Coryell-type passing game makes for a quick-strike offense which averaged 27.4 points a game this season, but due to injuries to LT and on the O line, the running game wasn't much help in taking time off the clock. Jim Zorn's underrated offense, in contrast, scored just 16.6 points a game, but did well in the ball control/field position game. Passive defenses that are good in the red zone are overrated by most fans because their stats look good. However, the bend-but-don't-break strategy allows the opponent to control the football, it doesn't do well in creating turnovers and it doesn't help the offense play the field position game. Most of the credit for the turnaround in San Diego's season goes to Ron Rivera who took over as the DC in mid-season and has his unit playing a more aggressive style of defense. At one time, I thought that Greg Blache's passive approach was forced on him by lack of talent in the secondary, particularly at the corners. I've changed my mind. Had we played more aggressively on defense, we would have been involved in higher-scoring games, but I think we could have won another game or two with the talent on board. Greg seems to have his defense playing even more passively at the end of the half and at the end of games -- which I find maddening. Posters have been sharply critical all season of third-down pass plays short of the marker by Zorn's offense -- justifiably so, in my opinion. But, let's limit the criticism a bit. On third and 20, a 15-yard gain is a very good result in most game situations because it's 15 yards of field position. While on the other side of the ball, when our defense has the opponent in third and 20, a 15-yard gain is a bad result even if they got a three-and-out. Now, it seems to me that our defense was much too passive in these situations , giving up field position while settling for the three-and-out . I think the Skins defensive unit was better than its offense, but not that much better. The rankings published on footballoutsiders.com confirm what I saw on the field this season: This is how they rank the Redskins: Offense # 15 Defense # 11 Special teams # 25 Team # 18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slateman Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I would agree with those rankings. Actually, I think you have overrated the defense a little. We were poor against the run in the fourth quarter. Several teams were able to run out the clock in the game with their running game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I think the Skins defensive unit was better than its offense, but not that much better. The rankings published on footballoutsiders.com confirm what I saw on the field this season: This is how they rank the Redskins: Offense # 15 Defense # 11 Special teams # 25 Team # 18 I couldn't agree more. I don't have the stats on hand, but I think our offense was very good at not turning the ball over, and our defense very poor (again) at creating. And for my money, that's a pretty damn important stat (for both sides). I think the team that wins the turnover battle wins some enormous percentage of games. Can't blame our offense for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kubstix Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 LOL is this post for real? Your going to downplay our Top 5 Defense and yet doesnt have a pass rush? If your going to bring lack of "football knowledge" into your post then you should have re-evaluated the fact that in the second half of the season our defense was on the field most if not the entire second halves of games cause our offense was and YES WAS HORRIBLE. Do you know what that does to a defense who is consistently on the field because our offense cannot convert a 3rd down? I honestly cannot believe posts like these but yet you must have that insane 'football knowledge' that you speak of. Our offense may have not turned the ball over, our running game was good the first half of the season, but the bottom line is our offense SUCKED this year and couldn't convert 3rd downs to save our lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raub Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 When your offense only scores 16 points a game, the opposing team doesn't need to rack up very many points against your defense to beat you...that's going to lead to an overrated defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I agree that Blache should be more aggressive on defense (sending extra guys on blitzes as opposed to a 4-man rush) but being in the top of the league in forced 3 & outs is still very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCranon21 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Good post OF. Also, another example of this will be the Saints. Quick strike offense, but no defense or running game. Ask Drew Brees what he would rather have more. It's cool to see a lot of points being put on the board, but if your defense can't hold it's ground, then all of those yards go for nothing. I think the Saints were in the bottom tier of their rushing attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 LOL is this post for real? Your going to downplay our Top 5 Defense and yet doesnt have a pass rush? If your going to bring lack of "football knowledge" into your post then you should have re-evaluated the fact that in the second half of the season our defense was on the field most if not the entire second halves of games cause our offense was and YES WAS HORRIBLE. Do you know what that does to a defense who is consistently on the field because our offense cannot convert a 3rd down? I honestly cannot believe posts like these but yet you must have that insane 'football knowledge' that you speak of. Our offense may have not turned the ball over, our running game was good the first half of the season, but the bottom line is our offense SUCKED this year and couldn't convert 3rd downs to save our lives. When your offense only scores 16 points a game, the opposing team doesn't need to rack up very many points against your defense to beat you... No offense, but I think you guys are looking at the wrong stats. Like Errors in baseball isn't the best (or even a good) value of a player's defensive ability, yards per game is not that good either. You can't say our defense was tired either because we consistently led in ball control on a week to week basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kubstix Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 No offense, but I think you guys are looking at the wrong stats. Like Errors in baseball isn't the best (or even a good) value of a player's defensive ability, yards per game is not that good either. You can't say our defense was tired either because we consistently led in ball control on a week to week basis. Yes, the FIRST half of the season. You are basing statistics off of 1/2 of the season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipwhich Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I think the Skins defensive unit was better than its offense, but not that much better. The rankings published on footballoutsiders.com confirm what I saw on the field this season: This is how they rank the Redskins: Offense # 15 Defense # 11 Special teams # 25 Team # 18 Agree whole heartedly. All you have to do is watch the Ravens defense or the steelers defense play week in and week out and you will realize how laughable it is that we are ranked next to them. #11 seems more appropriate. On offense, we had lots of games with yards and ball control. But the absolute inability to score makes me put the above #15 ranking about 10 spots too high. Zorns offense had it's good days, just not for points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooley4President Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I agree with what you said about the offense being good with regards to time of possession relative to our points scored. However, you can't take any consolation in helping in the ball control/field position game when in the critical part of the season you lose games scoring 6, 10, 7, 10, and 13 points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Yes, the FIRST half of the season. You are basing statistics off of 1/2 of the season? No. We either led in ball control or were in a minute or two in every game in the second half of the season except v. the Giants and the Steelers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Good post OF. Also, another example of this will be the Saints. Quick strike offense, but no defense or running game. Ask Drew Brees what he would rather have more. It's cool to see a lot of points being put on the board, but if your defense can't hold it's ground, then all of those yards go for nothing. I think the Saints were in the bottom tier of their rushing attack. They were near the bottom of the rushing attacks in the NFL but they had some serious injuries on the RB front. Reggie Bush, Deuce McAllister and Pierre Thomas all missed significant playing time this season. But I agree, they're kind of like the Colts of 2003-2004 with a high-octane offense but a defense that got worked on the ground every game. I'd much rather have an elite defense than an elite offense but you have to have an offense that can put up more than 20 points per game and sustain drives to be successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goaldeje Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Interesting take, Oldfan. What can/will we do to fix it? Seems to me that GW and Blache both do not place a huge emphasis on turnovers. I am not sure I see this changing any time soon, unless an entirely new defensive crew is brought in. Your point is well taken with the offense. I agree that our offense is better than people think. Playing the field position game is boring football to most fans. However, it does win games. I would argue that Zorn probably wanted to be a bit more aggressive this year, but may not have had the talent in place to do so. I do not know what Blache's excuse would be. He has talent on the defensive side of the ball. He just doesn't want to take chances. Look at Jim Johnson for the last decade +. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 Interesting take, Oldfan. What can/will we do to fix it? Seems to me that GW and Blache both do not place a huge emphasis on turnovers. I am not sure I see this changing any time soon, unless an entirely new defensive crew is brought in. Jim Zorn's the head coach. He has to tell Greg he wants the defense ramped up next season. Greg's a good soldier. I think he'll do his best to comply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWANTOBEGM Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 True it's a team game but you have to score more than the other team to win. The skins as a team were 6th in pts allowed per game and what 28th in scored? Not going to get it done. The other 6 teams in the top seven in pts allowed are in the playoffs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE OUTSIDER Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 This is the problem with football fans, especially those on this site. They over think everything. All I know is that the defense, for the most part, kept teams from scoring while our offense couldn't score on nobody. ONLY THE RAMS SCORED LESS THAN THE SKINS IN THE NFC!!!! OK OP, respond to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spear Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 One trend that really angered me about the defense was that they seemed to string all their bad plays together in the same drives, resulting in TD's that looked way too easy. Missed tackles, exploited blitzes, gashing runs up the middle, easy completions, all seemingly back-to-back, when one or two decent plays thrown in could have stopped the offense or at least forced a field goal. We'd go from lights out to lit up in the blink of an eye. And it always seemed to be after the offense had finally done something right for a change. A team's offense and defense are supposed to feed off of each other and it turned out that ours were cannibalizing themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 This is the problem with football fans, especially those on this site. They over think everything. All I know is that the defense, for the most part, kept teams from scoring while our offense couldn't score on nobody. ONLY THE RAMS SCORED LESS THAN THE SKINS IN THE NFC!!!! OK OP, respond to that. I kind of agree with you here. At the end of the day it all comes down to scoring more points than you opponent. I felt like our defense kept most teams' point totals low enough for a decent offense to overcome but our offense just couldn't do it. Another thing to consider is, if the offense sustained more drives and scored more points, our opponents likely would have lower point totals because of time of possession, our defense staying fresh, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
endzone_dave Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Our offense wasn't underrated. How many times was it 3rd and 8 and JC would throw a 6 yard pass. I swear half of his passing yardage was pure garbage, just yards the other team was willing to give the Skins on 3rd down before the first down marker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I like OF's posts but the argument about a high-scoring offense maybe not being as good as thought because of quick-strike scores reminds me of when a team scores late in a close game and an announcer might say "But they might have scored too early!" Hogwash. The Skins offense was good in the first half of the season and probably deserves a B for that timeframe but for the second half gets nothing better than a big fat D. With the performance of the D, if we had a decent offense in the second half of the season, we're still playing this weekend. End of story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 For the first half of the season, I think this post is dead-on. Our offense didn't score much, but controlled the clock and kept our defense off the field. Our wins over Dallas and Philly were more dominating than the score indicated because our offense kept the ball and provided two score leads late in the game. However, as the season wore on, the offense just got flat-out bad. Our defense was good enough to compliment a low-scoring, ball control offense like that, but it was not dominating enough to carry the team alone the way Baltimore's and Pittsburgh's defenses can. In my opinion the reason for this was not bad scheme, but inability to generate any pressure from the front four. I think if you look it up you'll see that we blitzed more than most teams. And I think that's because we couldn't get pressure on the QB any other way. This team, in my opinion, REALLY needs to focus on the lines in the draft this year. Especially the DL. Especially DE. Especially a pass-rushing DE. Some of us have been saying this for years. And honestly I can't remember the last time we drafted a pass-rushing lineman on the first day. I was probably in high school. (The closest I can think of off the top of my head is Lang in 97, but he was a run-stuffer. And the only one I can think of since Gibbs left the first time. That's sad.) So, I guess I agree with Oldfan here. That said, our offense really did start to be pretty awful come November. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 No. We either led in ball control or were in a minute or two in every game in the second half of the season except v. the Giants and the Steelers. Part of the problem is that many fans have short memories. In addition to the tougher defenses of the Giants and Steelers, we have the double injuries to Samuels in the second half, so the good first-half memories faded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE OUTSIDER Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Part of the problem is that many fans have short memories. In addition to the tougher defenses of the Giants and Steelers, we have the double injuries to Samuels in the second half, so the good first-half memories faded. We struggled even when Samuels was in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 We struggled even when Samuels was in. We struggled to a 6-2 first half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.