themurf Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 (photo by Brian Murphy) When it comes to the 2009 Washington Redskins, we’ve been operating under two truths – the offense stinks and the defense dominates. During the first half of the season, when the Redskins faced four of the five worst teams in the league, the Washington offense was nearly nonexistent. Through the first six games, the Redskins averaged an anemic 13 points per game and were held without a touchdown against St. Louis and Kansas City (who are a combined 4-20). Meanwhile, the Redskins still had a chance to wins these games because the defense was playing at such a high level. The Redskins’ defense, as usual, was ranked in the top 10 while allowing only 16 points per contest. As an added bonus, they also boasted the top-ranked passing defense. But a funny thing has happened over the last three weeks – against playoff-caliber opponents in Dallas, Philadelphia and New Orleans, no less – the offense has started to come into its own, and now it’s the defense that is costing the team victories. Redskins quarterback Jason Campbell, who half the fanbase simply cannot wait to run out of town, has completed 76 of 116 passes for 854 yards with five touchdowns and four interceptions and a QB rating of 87.3. He also ran for a touchdown against the Eagles. With Campbell performing at a higher level, youngsters such as wide out Devin Thomas and tight end Fred Davis have also seen a spike in their production. Thomas has posted 14 catches for 179 and two touchdowns the last three weeks. Davis has 11 catches for 120 yards and two touchdowns. That’s a combined 25 catches for 299 yards and four scores over the last three weeks from two young players who “experts” had already rushed to label as busts. Due to injuries to Clinton Portis and Ladell Betts, the Redskins have been forced to go running back by committee, so we’ll combined the production of Quinton Ganther and Rock Cartwright. Some quick math shows that the “Q-Rock” combo has 56 carries for 228 yards over the last three games, which is more than four yards per carry. And most importantly, the offensive line, which was dreadful earlier this season seems to have finally found a rhythm. The run blocking has improved drastically, which is why lesser backs like Ganther and Cartwright have, at times, looked better than established guys like Portis and Betts. But the biggest surprise has been the team’s improved pass blocking. Over the last three games, Campbell has been sacked just twice. This from an offensive line that allowed Campbell to be sacked 28 times the first nine games. So, over the last three weeks, the Redskins offense has scored an average of 20 points per game and racked up 1,082 total net yards (which equals 360 yards per game). That’s an improvement of a touchdown more per game and enough total yards to rank 10th, if they were able to maintain that pace over the course of the entire season. It’s safe to say they’re getting it done these days. If the defense resembled anything remotely close to a top 10 unit, the Redskins would be on a three-game winning streak, or at worst, 2-1 in their last three games. And yet, the Skins have lost three straight, by a combined seven points. All three games share one maddening trait – with the game on the line, the Redskins defense simply could not get off the field. Click here for the full article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRobi21 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Why can't we ever show up as a complete ****ing team?!?! If the defense is playing well, the offense sucks. If the offense picks it up, the defense lets us down. If offense and defense have great games, we give up a big return on special teams, or miss a field goal or something. Ugh, I HATE it! /rant. Good stuff murf. I was pretty mad when LaRon was doing that gesture, the one in your pic. He made a semi decent good play, but started doing the waving thing to the crowd, and it went on wayyyy too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmiJo Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Make sure you read the rest. It gets better. http://www.homermcfanboy.com/2009/12/09/offense-thrives-defense-not-so-much/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 In the first four games of the season, the defense allowed 12 long, clock-eating drives while playing bend-but-don't-break -- while keeping our offense on the sidelines. One of the reasons (which implies not the only reason) for the improvement of the offense is that Blache threw himself under the bus and started getting more aggressive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahons21 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Great article as usual, but I don't think you can blame the defense for the loss in DAL. Holding a top ranked offense to 7 points, is an accomplishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 In the first four games of the season, the defense allowed 12 long, clock-eating drives while playing bend-but-don't-break -- while keeping our offense on the sidelines. One of the reasons (which implies not the only reason) for the improvement of the offense is that Blache threw himself under the bus and started getting more aggressive. Well, since Blache threw himself under the bus and everyone on the defense said that they had to step up to make up with the shortfalls of the offense, they in fact have not. When the defense has to make One More Stop, they don't. It is frustrating as hell when they otherwise play a good game. It is a sobering thing to think that if this defense just could hold a lead, we'd be 7-5 right now. Against Carolina, the Eagles, the Cowboys and the Saints, the defense had an opportunity to stand up and shut the game down and in all 4 cases they failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFresh Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Honestly, it’s so bad that we’re convinced if Carlos Rogers and LaRon Landry had us trapped in a dark alley, all we’d have to do is a double move and we’d get out of there free from harm.:hysterical::hysterical: Classic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Well, since Blache threw himself under the bus and everyone on the defense said that they had to step up to make up with the shortfalls of the offense, they in fact have not. When the defense has to make One More Stop, they don't. It is frustrating as hell when they otherwise play a good game. Your point isn't relevant to the point I made, which was that the defense's curbing of their tendency shown in the first four games to allow so many long, clock eating drives has benefited the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PorkSkins Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Good thread. I think that statistics never tell the whole story. Like passing yardage. You can rack up a lot of passing yardage when you are losing and playing against a soft zone coverage or prevent. The only stats that matter are the W's and L's. All other stats are just fodder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ST is my boy Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Good stuff murf. I was pretty mad when LaRon was doing that gesture, the one in your pic. He made a semi decent good play, but started doing the waving thing to the crowd, and it went on wayyyy too long. I dont get why this pisses so many people off. The guy is out there fired up. Thats what you want from your defense. Guys like Dawkins do this all the time......yes I know Dawkins is a better player yada yada....... It doesnt bother me at all when guys are out there showing emotion personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 Your point isn't relevant to the point I made, which was that the defense's curbing of their tendency shown in the first four games to allow so many long, clock eating drives has benefited the offense. I think it is more relevant to the OP than yours. The only effect that it has on the offense is that they get the ball more often, which if the offense can't move the ball, doesn't do a lick of good. (See the second half of many of Gibbs' games.) Also, I'd argue that we haven't really solved that problem as well as you suggest. In the past three games it has been the other team that has won time of possession. Part of that is because our running game isn't the greatest right now, but part of it is that teams have been able to run on us. That I think is a factor in our late game meltdowns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins island connection Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 If the offense could consistantly put up 24+/game we would be 10-2 or 11-1. Truth is the defense has kept them in the game most every time, but the conservative offense doesn't score any points to help out. The defense even giving up the big plays that they have would still not be so much an issue if the offense could half-way match the intensity. Seems that Zorn only knows one thing when he gets to the goal line; run, run, and run again! This is another reason why the record sucks; With an O-line that wasn't working well together earlier, Zorn kept running the bland offense; N.O. comes into town, and its play-action pass most of the game, which IS why we almost won/should have won, and something they should have been doing all season... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 I think it is more relevant to the OP than yours. I don't really care. You quoted me and your point wasn't relevant to mine. The only effect that it has on the offense is that they get the ball more often, which if the offense can't move the ball, doesn't do a lick of good. That statement is just plain dumb. I shouldn't need to explain why. Also, I'd argue that we haven't really solved that problem as well as you suggest. Since I only said the defense had curbed the tendency that resulted in 12 long drives in the first four games (three of those games against bottom feeder teams), I don't know how you can possibly argue the point. You seem intent on pointing out other failures of the defense which are not relevant to the point I made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share Posted December 9, 2009 Great article as usual, but I don't think you can blame the defense for the loss in DAL. Holding a top ranked offense to 7 points, is an accomplishment. I agree with the notion that holding the Dallas Cowboys offense, which is ranked third in the NFL and averages more than 23 points per game, to seven points is great. But in the context of that particular game, allowing those seven points when they did, was a problem. If the defense makes the stop there, the game is over and the Redskins win. The don't, and therefore the Redskins lost. Now, if the Dallas game was an isolated instance, then sure, I'd give them a pass. But viewed with the Philly and Saints games, it illustrates a larger problem - the Redskins' defense, at this time, is not clutch and cannot close out a game. People say it all the time about Jason Campbell. I just wanted to show that he's not the only one on this roster who has trouble in the final minutes of a tightly-contested game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share Posted December 9, 2009 If the offense could consistantly put up 24+/game we would be 10-2 or 11-1.Truth is the defense has kept them in the game most every time, but the conservative offense doesn't score any points to help out. The defense even giving up the big plays that they have would still not be so much an issue if the offense could half-way match the intensity. You know what they say - if grandma had balls, she'd be grandpa. That's what 'ifs' get you. But since you're playing hypothetical, I'll fire this one back at you - over the last three games, the Redskins offense has averaged 20 points per game. The Redskins defense, for the year, gives up 16 points per game. So really, if the defense was only playing as well as they were earlier this year, the Skins would be 2-1 over the last three games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 You know what they say - if grandma had balls, she'd be grandpa. That's what 'ifs' get you. But since you're playing hypothetical, I'll fire this one back at you - over the last three games, the Redskins offense has averaged 20 points per game. The Redskins defense, for the year, gives up 16 points per game. So really, if the defense was only playing as well as they were earlier this year, the Skins would be 2-1 over the last three games. Course, the problem with that hypothetical is that we've played a higher level of competition the past few weeks. Course, that's the problem with any hypothetical. Coulda, shoulda, woulda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 themurf to SIC...But since you're playing hypothetical, I'll fire this one back at you - over the last three games, the Redskins offense has averaged 20 points per game. The Redskins defense, for the year, gives up 16 points per game. So really, if the defense was only playing as well as they were earlier this year, the Skins would be 2-1 over the last three games. I don't grade defenses or offenses based on the points stat. I think both the offense and defense are playing better. Giving up the big play has hurt the scored-against stat, but the defense has done a better job of helping the offense score by not allowing the opponents so many long drives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share Posted December 9, 2009 Course, the problem with that hypothetical is that we've played a higher level of competition the past few weeks. Course, that's the problem with any hypothetical. Coulda, shoulda, woulda. I completely agree. But if he wanted to throw out a blanket statement saying the Redskins would be 10-2 if the offense did its job, I just wanted to point out (using the same flimsy logic) that the team would be 2-1 over the last three weeks if the defense did its job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADF Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 The defense seems to give up just enough points to lose. The offense scores 17 then they'll give up 20 or 24. The offense scores only 6, they'll give up 7. The offense scores 24 and 30 points but the defense gives up 27 and 33 points. If Kyle Orton doesn't go down, does the defense still hold the Broncos to under 27 points? Is this a coincidence or a sign of another problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaught76 Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 The overall inconsistent nature of this franchise is just dumbfounding. "IF" has been this team's logo for quite sometime now and will continue to be so until Dan Snyder starts letting football people (that does not include Cerato) run his business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins island connection Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 You know what they say - if grandma had balls, she'd be grandpa. That's what 'ifs' get you. But since you're playing hypothetical, I'll fire this one back at you - over the last three games, the Redskins offense has averaged 20 points per game. The Redskins defense, for the year, gives up 16 points per game. So really, if the defense was only playing as well as they were earlier this year, the Skins would be 2-1 over the last three games. UNLESS grandma was a shemale... Anyway, I agree the offense has picked it up some the last few games, but you can't put the losses solely on the defense; yes, keeping a team scoreless would have been nice and would have won those games, but at some point the offense HAS to score points, and squeaking by in a 7-6 game will not go far, especially in playoffs. The offense only started thriving since the playcalling was taken away from Zorn, at least thats the way it looks. Whether its Sherm or not, production has improved, but in every season when offenses get in a rut, defenses usually pick up the slack, and vise-versa; in the Skins case, the defense has kept them in every game, but the offense hasn't produced. Normally I would agree with you, but anyone putting the blame on the defense should go back and view the Lions or Chiefs games; perennially poor defenses that managed to hold the Skins offense to an idle. They cannot keep putting the onus on the defense to win the game, just as they cannot put it on a kicker because the lackluster offense cannot move the ball 4 friggin' yards... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share Posted December 9, 2009 UNLESS grandma was a shemale...Anyway, I agree the offense has picked it up some the last few games, but you can't put the losses solely on the defense ... I never said the losses fall solely on the defense. I'm simply saying, everyone is quick to crush Jason Campbell and the offense, but over the last three weeks, the defense has been just as much to blame, and yet, you're not hearing anything about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 If the offense could consistantly put up 24+/game we would be 10-2 or 11-1. The offense put up 24+ points in 3 of the last 4 games...that qualifies as "consistently" over the last 4 weeks. We're 1-3 over that stretch. So I think you're, um, "mistaken" there. Truth is the defense has kept them in the game most every time, but the conservative offense doesn't score any points to help out. Truth is, the offense has given the defense leads of 8 points or more in the 4th quarter in four separate games this season...and 3 of those 4 times the defense couldn't hold that lead. The only time they could was when Chris Simms was QB. That should tell you a ****load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted December 9, 2009 Share Posted December 9, 2009 If the defense resembled anything remotely close to a top 10 unit, the Redskins would be on a three-game winning streak... Actually they'd be on a four game winning streak lol ... And actually, they still would have lost to the Cowboys, because that's the only game in which they resembled a top 10 defensive unit. It was the offense that day that lost the game for us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themurf Posted December 10, 2009 Author Share Posted December 10, 2009 Actually they'd be on a four game winning streak lol ...And actually, they still would have lost to the Cowboys, because that's the only game in which they resembled a top 10 defensive unit. It was the offense that day that lost the game for us... Damn ... you got me. Completely dropped the ball on including the Denver win in my made-up streak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.