Definately, D is the problem

[rustycorr]

I think the biggest problem with the D is the secondary. The line is tolerable (I would like to see more of a pass rush), the LBs are very good, it's the secondary. I can’t believe the cushion they give receivers. The O has to stay on the field longer.

[tr1]

In the following quote, where do you include the offense? In fact, you state that the responsibility is on the defense. That seems to exclude the offense.

Yes, giving you offense only 8 tries a game is bad defense. I didn't say anything about the offense. We already know they have problems scoring...but IF THEY HAD MORE CHANCES the odds are they MIGHT score more.

I don't think the problem is my comprehension skills, but your inability to comprehensively state something.

Edit:

And looking back through your posts on this thread, you have yet to include the offense until this point.

In fact, several of your posts have defended the offense in favor of putting the blame on the defense.

So...as far as comprehension...it is hard to comprehend what is not there.

Look, you seem to be a nice enough guy...did I respond adequately for your needs above?

If not, let me know, and I'll try to get you what you need.

[Sekhmet728]

Because we don't get the ball back each time. :dunce:

Besides, the Lions only scored 13, Zorn gave them an extra drive and they scored 7. Not only did he take 3 off our scoreboard he added 7 to theirs.

The guy is brilliant (In a Short Bus kinda way).

Please explain to me how giving the Lions the worst field position possible contributed to them getting a touchdown on their next drive?

Newsflash! The opposing team still gets the ball back after we score! And there's a 99.999% chance they get better field position!

You shouldn't be making any comments about the short bus. Zorn at least has more football knowledge than you.

[tr1]

I think the biggest problem with the D is the secondary. The line is tolerable (I would like to see more of a pass rush), the LBs are very good, it's the secondary. I can’t believe the cushion they give receivers. The O has to stay on the field longer.

It would be nice to blitz a bit...especially rookie qbs, eh?

[tr1]

you must beware, for we are in the presence of the almighty tr1. cower before his gargantuan post count and unique avatar. his opinions are more righteous and devout than yours, peon, and he will remind you of it with copious amounts of sarcastic "rofl" emoticons.

Do I know you?

:rotflmao:

[Sekhmet728]

It would be nice to blitz a bit...especially rookie qbs, eh?

Contrary to popular belief, Greg Blache does call blitzes. We've sent 5+ guys on rushes several times during the last two games.

The problem? Almost every blitz gets picked up long enough for the QB to make a play. I don't know the last time I've seen more ineffective blitzing in my life (well, maybe at Maryland games...). Every time we send the extra guys they inexplicably get stuck on the blockers for 5 seconds. It's ridiculous.

I'm sick of Blache's simplistic blitz packages doing nothing but robbing us of coverage.

[tr1]

Contrary to popular belief, Greg Blache does call blitzes. We've sent 5+ guys on rushes several times during the last two games.

The problem? Almost every blitz gets picked up long enough for the QB to make a play. I don't know the last time I've seen more ineffective blitzing in my life (well, maybe at Maryland games...). Every time we send the extra guys they inexplicably get stuck on the blockers for 5 seconds. It's ridiculous.

I'm sick of Blache's simplistic blitz packages doing nothing but robbing us of coverage.

I should have said 'effective' blitzes.

Williams used to shoot a CB or safety on occasion....I don't recall us doing that with Blache. I'm probably wrong, though.

[gca61087]

Do I know you?

:rotflmao:

you may refer to me as "he who has an image that has been moved or deleted"

[jkypoo]

Yes, giving you offense only 8 tries a game is bad defense. I didn't say anything about the offense. We already know they have problems scoring...but IF THEY HAD MORE CHANCES the odds are they MIGHT score more.

Look, you seem to be a nice enough guy...did I respond adequately for your needs above?

If not, let me know, and I'll try to get you what you need.

I don't want to get into a debate about semantics or technicalities in what was written, but the "reading comprehension is your friend" line only works when someone has failed in that department.

I didn't say anything about the offense.[/Quote]

By definition, not including something is excluding it.

But now that I know where you stand, due to your previous post, I have nothing to disagree with you about. I agree that both sides of the ball have major issues right now, but I spent too much time earlier in this thread trying to argue why the offense deserves more scrutiny. So, instead of retreading....

[jkypoo]

Contrary to popular belief, Greg Blache does call blitzes. We've sent 5+ guys on rushes several times during the last two games.

The problem? Almost every blitz gets picked up long enough for the QB to make a play. I don't know the last time I've seen more ineffective blitzing in my life (well, maybe at Maryland games...). Every time we send the extra guys they inexplicably get stuck on the blockers for 5 seconds. It's ridiculous.

I'm sick of Blache's simplistic blitz packages doing nothing but robbing us of coverage.

My seven year old niece can sit on the couch next to me during a 'Skins game and point at the television and ask, "Are they blitzing."

If she can do it, any QB that has signed a contract in this league can do it.

A good part of a successful blitz is deception.

If everyone knows it's coming, there isn't much to hope for.

[tr1]

I don't want to get into a debate about semantics or technicalities in what was written, but the "reading comprehension is your friend" line only works when someone has failed in that department.

By definition, not including something is excluding it.

But now that I know where you stand, due to your previous post, I have nothing to disagree with you about. I agree that both sides of the ball have major issues right now, but I spent too much time earlier in this thread trying to argue why the offense deserves more scrutiny. So, instead of retreading....

I'd only remind you that the thread was about the D...not about the offense...maybe that's why I didn't tee off on the WRs earlier.

:rotflmao:

[jkypoo]

I'd only remind you that the thread was about the D...not about the offense...maybe that's why I didn't tee off on the WRs earlier.

:rotflmao:

I actually read the OP as a backhanded attack against the offense that was dripping with sarcasm. That's why I began trying to critique the D, but no matter how bad the D's other stats have been, only allowing 16 a game should not be tossed aside. Our offense should be able to average 17 ppg and score 20 against the Lions. And, ultimately, the score at the gun is the only thing that matters.

Alas...I have retreaded.

But I will not defend it.

[SkinsFTW]

Please explain to me how giving the Lions the worst field position possible contributed to them getting a touchdown on their next drive?

Newsflash! The opposing team still gets the ball back after we score!

The defense gave up 1 ****ing TD in that game. Zorn gave them a free one later. They must not matter that much. If we score 20 points, against the ****ing lions, we win.

18 of the 19 teams in their losing streak agree. Score 20 on the Lions and you win. It's ****ing Rocket Science, right?

1 team actually beat them 12-10. Every other team dating back to Nov 18th 2007 scored 20 on the Lions. 23 of the past 24 teams managed 20+ on the Lions. We could only manage 7 before the game was effectively over on the other hand.

Yep, that smells of defense to me. The Lions averaged 16-17 a game, our defense held them to under that. What else do you want?

Newsflash! The opposing team still gets the ball back after we score!

NEWSFLASH we didn't score until the 2nd half. But that's not the real problem. The real problem is that we didn't score on 8 of 10 drives, and guess what? They also got the ball back after those as well, except for the last one.

[Sekhmet728]

The defense gave up 1 ****ing TD in that game. Zorn gave them a free one later. They must not matter that much. If we score 20 points, against the ****ing lions, we win.

18 of the 19 teams in their losing streak agree. Score 20 on the Lions and you win. It's ****ing Rocket Science, right?

1 team actually beat them 12-10. Every other team dating back to Nov 18th 2007 scored 20 on the Lions. 23 of the past 24 teams managed 20+ on the Lions. We could only manage 7 before the game was effectively over on the other hand.

Yep, that smells of defense to me. The Lions averaged 16-17 a game, our defense held them to under that. What else do you want?

You didn't answer my question. I was pointing out the flaws in your post because that was an especially bad one.

NO ONE here is saying the offense is good. What we are saying is that the defense is bad. One does not preclude the other.

The other TD was in fact Zorn's fault, but it does not excuse the defense giving up a first down on 3rd and 13, 1 of 10 3rd down conversions allowed during the game.

NEWSFLASH we didn't score until the 2nd half. But that's not the real problem. The real problem is that we didn't score on 8 of 10 drives, and guess what? They also got the ball back after those as well, except for the last one.

Guess what? The if the defense actually prevents 1 field goal or turns 1 touchdown into a field goal, we get to kick a field goal on the last drive and win the game!

Don't tell me the offense is the "real" problem. It's A problem. The defense is another.

[jkypoo]

Guess what? The if the defense actually prevents 1 field goal or turns 1 touchdown into a field goal, we get to kick a field goal on the last drive and win the game!

Well if we're going to play the "what if" game:

The D did hold them to a field goal attempt, but Zorn accepted the penalty.

Subtract 4 from their total: 15-14.

If we take 3 on the 4th and 1 instead of another attempted stretch play...

Add 3 to our total: 15-17

All the sudden, if the coach makes the right calls, we win the game!!!

But the offense still should have dropped 20+ on the ****ing Lions...

For ****s sake.

[gca61087]

NO ONE here is saying the offense is good. What we are saying is that the defense is bad. One does not preclude the other.

the point most of us "defending" the defense are making is that they aren't bad, but rather underperforming and more along the lines of average.

i feel, as many others taking this stance, that scoring defense is the most important aspect of the defense. while allowing 16 points per game, the redskins are playing at an elite level in this respect. however, their shortcomings in third down and run defense are lowering them out of this elite range, down to what I think is average. again, this is subjective.

when you take blache's philosophy into account (whether you agree with it or not), he is sacrificing aggression to keep scores low. i personally don't have a huge problem with this, others do. i can understand arguments either way.

what the defense is expecting from the offense is to score 20 points per game. by today's nfl standards, that is a low expectation. yet, despite the very low expectations, the offense can't meet them. that is why we see the offense as the area needing the most improvement.

i think if the redskins offense could step up the point production, this team would look a little more legitimate.

granted, if the defense stepped their game up and became an elite defense, combining those elements of third down and run defense together with the scoring defense, we might look more legitimate too.

however, i think asking the offense to meet what i consider to be reasonably low expectations is more reasonable than asking a defense to play at an elite, even legendary level.

[THE HAMMER'IN HOG]

It wasn't a garbage TD...ask Coughlin. Look at his face when we scored. :doh:

I thought you were smarter than this.

Eight and 10 possessions...for each game!

Remarkable.

Look at our opponents' TOP...

You can't score if you don't have the ball.

Football 101.

Ask Coughlin which QB he would want to face every sunday? Do you think he could pronounce Campbells name while his mouth is cheek to cheek with a smile?

[SkinsFTW]

You didn't answer my question. I was pointing out the flaws in your post because that was an especially bad one.

That wasn't a question. It made no sense and there was nothing weak in my post. Our defense gave up 1 TD the entire game. Zorn gave them a free one later. Them driving 99 yards sucks, but it was still only 7 points. Our defense gave up 13 total, to the Lions.

NO ONE here is saying the offense is good. What we are saying is that the defense is bad. One does not preclude the other.

Bad defense. Gave up 13 to the Lions. Most Super Bowl winning teams had defenses that gave up a lot more than 13 a game. Yeah, it's the defense. They gave up a TD. Our Defense sucks.

The other TD was in fact Zorn's fault, but it does not excuse the defense giving up a first down on 3rd and 13, 1 of 10 3rd down conversions allowed during the game.

We had the ball 10 times. TEN TIMES. We did nothing but turn it over on downs, INT, and Punt on 8 of those. Sure, the defense gave up some yards. Who ****ing cares? WE HAD TEN (10) OPPORTUNITIES OURSELVES. No Lombardi Trophy has ever been handed out based on yards. If they were then the Arizona Cardinals were robbed of theirs. Get off the pointless argument about something that doesn't matter. We had the ball 10 times. Thats what matters. We gave up 13 points on D, that also matters. Yards, Smards. I couldn't care less about yards.

Guess what? The if the defense actually prevents 1 field goal or turns 1 touchdown into a field goal, we get to kick a field goal on the last drive and win the game!

Don't tell me the offense is the "real" problem. It's A problem. The defense is another.

OK, I see. 13 points isn't good enough. The Defense needs to hold teams to single digit scores.

You are right though. If the defense doesn't give up that 1 TD we might end up winning like we did against the Rams. That's going to work out well for the rest of the season, right? Winning games 7-6 or 9-7 all year.

[SkinsFTW]

when you take blache's philosophy into account (whether you agree with it or not), he is sacrificing aggression to keep scores low. i personally don't have a huge problem with this, others do. i can understand arguments either way.

Exactly. If our offense starts scoring points, and are consistent about it, our defense would look better than it did at the end of 2005. You can't be aggressive when your offense cant score at all in the first half of any game. Our Punter has our only 1st half TD, desperate much? Is Blache supposed to get behind that and risk giving up 30 to a team so they can just run on us more because we don't score points?

[Sekhmet728]

That wasn't a question. It made no sense and there was nothing weak in my post. Our defense gave up 1 TD the entire game. Zorn gave them a free one later. Them driving 99 yards sucks, but it was still only 7 points. Our defense gave up 13 total, to the Lions.

Because we don't get the ball back each time. :dunce:

Besides, the Lions only scored 13, Zorn gave them an extra drive and they scored 7. Not only did he take 3 off our scoreboard he added 7 to theirs.

The guy is brilliant (In a Short Bus kinda way).

Ok, I see it now. The weakness was your phrasing. You made it seem like you were talking about one drive when in fact you were talking about two separate occasions. That would lead to my question regarding how the worst field position possible would've contributed to a touchdown.

Bad defense. Gave up 13 to the Lions. Most Super Bowl winning teams had defenses that gave up a lot more than 13 a game. Yeah, it's the defense. They gave up a TD. Our Defense sucks.

First off, if we're giving credit where credit is due, the defense gave up 16 points minimum:

-99 yard drive, TD -- but Zorn messed this one up -- 3 points for what would've been a field goal

-2 Field goals on the next 2 drives, 6 points

- Last Lions TD, 6 points, but a possible 7 points. It just happened that it was the right place to go for a 2 pt conversion instead of the kick.

Total: 16 points

Second, I'm sure those "super bowl winning teams" cause at least ONE turnover in most of their games. They were able to give up more points because they also gave their offense better opportunities. Turnovers lead to field position which leads to points. Had the defense just caused one turnover that lead to a field goal, we would've won (either we eliminate on of their scoring drives or we just kick an additional field goal on our last drive). Oh and guess what? We would've put up 20 points just like you wanted us to do.

We had the ball 10 times. TEN TIMES. We did nothing but turn it over on downs, INT, and Punt on 8 of those. Sure, the defense gave up some yards. Who ****ing cares? WE HAD TEN (10) OPPORTUNITIES OURSELVES. No Lombardi Trophy has ever been handed out based on yards. If they were then the Arizona Cardinals were robbed of theirs. Get off the pointless argument about something that doesn't matter. We had the ball 10 times. Thats what matters. We gave up 13 points on D, that also matters. Yards, Smards. I couldn't care less about yards.

OK, I see. 13 points isn't good enough. The Defense needs to hold teams to single digit scores.

You are right though. If the defense doesn't give up that 1 TD we might end up winning like we did against the Rams. That's going to work out well for the rest of the season, right? Winning games 7-6 or 9-7 all year.

The defense (being generous) allowed 16 points to the worst team in football. What happens when we play a real offense? Like it or not, this was not a good outing for them.

All the stats have been shown to you before, so I'm not gonna repeat anything.

Is Blache supposed to get behind that and risk giving up 30 to a team so they can just run on us more because we don't score points?

But consider this, the Lions were running the ball at will against us before Kevin Smith got injured. He was able to rush for over 100 yards in just one half. What would've happened had we not injured him? Do you really think our run defense was doing well? Do you think that performance by the defense is gonna be acceptable against a good opponent?

And you really need to stop talking about the offense unless it directly relates to the performance of the defense. A defense can give a good performance in a loss even when the offense sucks. This was not one of those games.

[Brett81]

DON'T BOTHER.

Don't bother looking for reasons to say why the D is inept or can't stop somebody from driving 95 yds down the field.

DON'T BOTHER.

Don't bother looking for reasons to say why the O can't manage to score a ****ing TD to save their lives or sustain multiple drives, not just one here and there, for more than a few plays and put themselves in scoring position.

DON'T BOTHER.

The facts are that as a team goes...we have yet to see the 2009 Redskins. What we have seen are a bunch of individuals being led in different directions by one man, correction *little boy with a big wallet*, while all trying to get to the same end goal but all by different means. Jason Campbell has played surprisingly well, but whether it's him or Zorn's playcalling, the REDZONE O doesn't even exist. Defensively, if Blache can't rip off some of Gregg Williams' old schemes and blitzes, he should start working on that resume.

I think there's still time for the Skins to turn everything around and put out a respectable product on the field on Sundays that we have all been expecting to see. But to blame one facet of the team over the other right now is completely assanine...because EVERYONE, including those on the practice squad, EVERYONE is to blame for what we have fans have had to lie to other fans about so far this year and say yes, "that's my team out there losing to the winless Lions, barely beating the Rams...that's my team".

That's not your team...just remember that, whatever that is on the field right now, it's not your team. It's stale bread...it's bad chinese leftovers, but it's definately not your, my, or our team. Our team will show up one day, until then...just tell everyone that the guys wearing the Skins' jerseys are kinda like a screen saver for a computer in sleep mode and we're all just waiting for it to boot up, and just like windows vista...our operating system seems to be working out the bugs right now.

[SkinsFTW]

But consider this, the Lions were running the ball at will against us before Kevin Smith got injured. He was able to rush for over 100 yards in just one half. What would've happened had we not injured him? Do you really think our run defense was doing well? Do you think that performance by the defense is gonna be acceptable against a good opponent?

And you really need to stop talking about the offense unless it directly relates to the performance of the defense. A defense can give a good performance in a loss even when the offense sucks. This was not one of those games.

I just think that this last game is a sign of the defense starting to get frustrated with the offense doing nothing. If it was one game where the offense sucks, the defense could make up the difference. When it's every single game that the offense refuses to score, gives away 3 by going for it and then fails on 4th down, then the HC, the offenses guy, gives the other team more time to score again by refusing a 4th down. I just think some of those guys are tired of it. We will start to give up more and more points too.

The opponent game plans around all this as well. If they know we can't score they can call any play whenever they want the entire game. When we are a threat to put up 30 points on them they will pass the ball, we will get more sacks and turnovers. That is why the defense in 05 went from OK to great at the end of the year. If you don't have that offensive threat it makes the defense worse.

[Burgold]

Except that if that were so, the defense got frustrated and fell apart after the Redskins O had a really good drive (they just marched 70 yards) Mind you, I was frustrated that they didn't punch it in, but I thought the drive boded well.

The defense sucked from start to finish. In fact, the Lion's first drive was stopped by a wide open dropped pass and not the D.

[redskins55]

Man... EVERYTHING is a problem right now!

[20April1980]

I just think that this last game is a sign of the defense starting to get frustrated with the offense doing nothing. If it was one game where the offense sucks, the defense could make up the difference. When it's every single game that the offense refuses to score, gives away 3 by going for it and then fails on 4th down, then the HC, the offenses guy, gives the other team more time to score again by refusing a 4th down. I just think some of those guys are tired of it. We will start to give up more and more points too.

The opponent game plans around all this as well. If they know we can't score they can call any play whenever they want the entire game. When we are a threat to put up 30 points on them they will pass the ball, we will get more sacks and turnovers. That is why the defense in 05 went from OK to great at the end of the year. If you don't have that offensive threat it makes the defense worse.

:hysterical:

So the defense respond tot he offenses 75 yard drive by letting the Lions go 99 yards and score a TD?

Wow.4 years of our defense being top 10 and our offense being sub par and now the defense got fed up?

Pay 60 million to add a corner and fat albert, use our picks for defensive guys and you think it is perfectly ok for the revamped #4 defense from last year to play poorly because the offense is struggling?

You make no sense. Your comments infact are getting crazier and crazier.

Let me get this straight

Offense sucks because we can't run the ball at all but we will blame JC

And because of this our revamped highest paid defense decides it doesn't want to play hard?

:hysterical:

You win. Running the ball does not matter, and the defense is not responsible for what they do on the field.

No matter that the defense has put the offense in a 10-0 hole before the offenses 3rd offensive drive in our 2 losses. Or that they gave up big drives in the 4th when we had a chance to tie or win to put games away. 66 yard drive by the Giants and a 8 play 85 yard drive against the Lions.

No those facts don't matter. Lets speculate and make **** up!!!!