SB Nation DC: 2010 Is The Year Of The Offense For Redskins

[themurf]

(courtesy photo)

[Editor's note: For those who haven't heard the news, I've started writing a weekly sports column for SB Nation DC. Since this one focuses on a topic near and dear to many of you, I figured I'd share it with the class. As always, your feedback is greatly appreciated.]

I know this is going to sound crazy, but hear me out. Could it be possible that, for the first time in recent history, the Washington Redskins have a better offense than defense?

While it's completely foolish to make bold declarations based on summer football being played in shorts and no pads, I can't help but think the 2010 Redskins will be carried by their offense for a change, as opposed to the top-10 defense that has kept the team in games for most of the last decade.

By the numbers, here's how the Redskins have stacked up in total offense over the last decade: 22nd, 19th, 15th, 13th, 11th, 30th, 23rd, 20th, 28th, 11th.

Conversely, here's their total defensive rankings over the same span: 10th, fourth, eighth, 31st, ninth, third, 25th, fifth, 10th, fourth.

Doing some quick math, the 'Skins have averaged the 19th-best offense in football since 2000 while failing to crack the top 10. The defense, even after finishing 2006 with the second-worst defense in football, still averaged 10th place in the NFL over the last decade, thanks to eight top-10 finishes.

And yet, I'm still of the mindset that this year the offense will outperform the defense. Why? That's where all the time,money and resources have been spent this offseason.

First, the team added Mike Shanahan. Dude's a two-time Super Bowl winner who just so happens to be an offensive-minded coach. And nothing against Jason Campbell, who was serviceable, but the huddle is now being run by Donovan McNabb - easily the best quarterback the Redskins have had in 20 years.

Even at 33, McLovin' is still a top-10 talent in a league where quarterbacks matter most. Just having him around is going to make a difference because younger players have seen him lead his teams to countless NFC championship games. Sure, he's only been in town for 10 minutes, but his words are already going to carry more weight than most in that locker room.

At running back, the team has Clinton Portis, Larry Johnson and Willie Parker. I fully concede that this isn't 2006 and no one can say for sure that any of these guys has much left in the tank, but at least Shanahan and friends have been smart enough to stockpile these aging veterans. I am of the mindset that Portis will do just fine as the every-down back with Johnson excelling as the short-yardage/goal-line back, but that's far from a certainty at this point.

But here's why I'm feeling good about the running back rotation: if one guy (i.e. - Parker) doesn't have it anymore, there are two other established vets who can step up and make plays. If they still don't feel like there's enough there to get through the season, Brian Westbrook is only a phone call away. This isn't a situation where a coach foolishly ties his season to an over-the-hill running back. No, what we've got here is a guy bringing in anyone who might be able to contribute and saying: "It's your job to lose. Make plays or we'll find someone else who can." Now, you tell me that when your livelihood is at stake you wouldn't step up your game. I know I would.

Click here for the full article.

[ACW]

"Servicable" is the PERFECT way to describe JC.

How are you using rankings? PPG or YPG?

EDIT: Oh, and good piece

:fingersx: it works.

No mention of Kyle though?

[themurf]

"Servicable" is the PERFECT way to describe JC.

How are you using rankings? PPG or YPG?

EDIT: Oh, and good piece

:fingersx: it works.

No mention of Kyle though?

When you mention Kyle, I take it you're referring to Kyle Shanahan, right? He's kind of the point of the entire column. Click the link and you'll read lots of nice words about him.

And for your question, I went with total offense (i.e. - yards). But breaking down points scored for/against over the last decade isn't any different:

Redskins points per game rank on offense: 26, 28, 18, 20, 13, 31, 22, 25, 28, 24

Redskins points per game rank on defense: 18, 6, 11, 27, 9, 5, 24, 21, 13, 7

Different numbers. Same results.

[BigMike21]

Good article. Although it actually made me worried about the defense for sure!

[ACW]

When you mention Kyle, I take it you're referring to Kyle Shanahan, right? He's kind of the point of the entire column. Click the link and you'll read lots of nice words about him.

That's what I get for only reading your post and not the whole piece

Redskins points per game rank on offense: 26, 28, 18, 20, 13, 31, 22, 25, 28, 24

Redskins points per game rank on defense: 18, 6, 11, 27, 9, 5, 24, 21, 13, 7

Different numbers. Same results.

Good job :thumbsup:

EDIT: PortaJohn

[dfbovey]

If the defense slips in ranking, hopefully it makes up for it by causing turnovers in a more aggressive system.

I don't really care as long as they outscore their opponents.

[SkinsTribeVA]

I've got similar feelings about both squads. As long as our defense can be half as good as last season in terms of forcing teams to work slowly, but generate a lot more turnovers to put the ball in our offense's hands more often, then we should be good enough to be in the hunt for the division title, and that's more than most can ask for after a 4-12 season. I have faith that ShannAllen will begin filling our 3-4 defensive squad next offseason and the unit will only improve.

[SkinsTribeVA]

Oh, and something not many have been talking about--I think the amount of emphasis Shanny has put on finding some game-changing return men might pay off veerrry well for the Skins this season.

[SWFLSkins]

Great article I think. :hump:

Brian Murphy

Columnist

Brian Murphy is an award-winning journalist who loves D.C. sports and sometimes goes by the name Homer McFanboy. And yet, he still doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There are many questions on D, like does the team know what the hell they are doing? Maybe they do. At least on O it would seem the right coaches are there and the scheme most likely will be better. I don't agree with you or many that the wideouts are that big of a question mark, considering what Kyle has done recently with the Texans. I also like Bobby Wade and maybe alone in that, but the guy is not over 30 yet and still has speed, knows the WCO well and only sucked last year playing for KC. As well as you mentioned the two TE sets will only help the wideouts. DT is going to be the no. one.

Thanks for posting that here.

[themurf]

There are many questions on D, like does the team know what the hell they are doing? Maybe they do. At least on O it would seem the right coaches are there and the scheme most likely will be better. I don't agree with you or many that the wideouts are that big of a question mark, considering what Kyle has done recently with the Texans. I also like Bobby Wade and maybe alone in that, but the guy is not over 30 yet and still has speed, knows the WCO well and only sucked last year playing for KC. As well as you mentioned the two TE sets will only help the wideouts. DT is going to be the no. one.

Thanks for posting that here.

Bobby Wade was the one guy who really intrigued me as far as the stable of veterans they brought in, but I haven't seen a single play from him in any of the practices that are open to media to say with any confidence that he's going to be dependable on Sundays.

I still think Joey Galloway is only good for one thing - going deep. But everyone I talk to seems to think he's more of a lock to make the final roster than Wade is.

[PorkSkins]

I can't see how you can back up any of the hype until we actually take the field. IMO, the defense is going to drop off based on the facts of having a new scheme, new DC, and very few players with 3-4 experience (especially at OLB). As for the offense, there is nowhere to go but up. However, I can't see any of the WR's catching more than 50 passes. I pray that Cooley becomes a 100 catch TE and Davis gets 30+. I would expect someone to catch double digit catches out of the backfield. McNabb can work wonders with little talent on offense so I hope he can continue to improve a lackluster offense of yesteryear.

[#98QBKiller]

I hope the defense holds up but more than anything I hope we have a capable offense. It's been years since I can remember or offense being able to move the chains effectively on consecutive series in a game.

Watching a team with a bad defense is tough though. I remember watching our defense get manhandled in 2006 and it was frustrating as hell. But I'm almost to the point where I'd trade our high ranked defenses for a real offense for once.

[oraphus]

What the guy forgot is that a good Offense makes the Ds job easier. By scoring more points on Offense and controlling the clock, allows more opportunities for D to shine as the other teams are playing catchup and are forced to pass the ball and make high risk throws and plays.

So the defense can actually look better next year while still not having the correct personnel or playing optimally.

[Hitman21ST]

Could it be possible that, for the first time in recent history, the Washington Redskins have a better offense than defense?

By the numbers, here's how the Redskins have stacked up in total offense over the last decade: 22nd, 19th, 15th, 13th, 11th, 30th, 23rd, 20th, 28th, 11th.

Conversely, here's their total defensive rankings over the same span: 10th, fourth, eighth, 31st, ninth, third, 25th, fifth, 10th, fourth.

I'm just nitpicking, but "the first time in recent history" should be more than four years removed...

[themurf]

I'm just nitpicking, but "the first time in recent history" should be more than four years removed...

Over the decade, the defense ranked in the NFL's top 10 eight times. The offense hasn't been in the top 10 since 1999. My stance for this column is that the offense will finish with a better ranking this season, and not because the defense completely falls apart. They'll actually earn it.

[bikie]

unlike the other pessimistic article writers on this board, I agree with this take... I am very optimistic about the O this year, and weary of the D... we have upgraded the two more important positions: QB and Oline, and if they can stay healthy, I see no reason why they will not be productive.. not to mention the leadership they have behind them in the film room...

the D worries me with the new scheme and questions on the D-line as well as fletcher and macintosh fitting into a 3-4... the safeties are also a concern with me...

I agree that we'll see a reversal of power between the two units and could be left saying, "just when we get an O, our D fails us"...

[boobiemiles]

We better score a lot, because if our defense slips, then we will have to score a lot.

[sportjunkie07]

i agree with your article almost entirely.

i also think the best move the redskins have made in years is the pickup of kyle shannahan.

[Hitman21ST]

Over the decade, the defense ranked in the NFL's top 10 eight times. The offense hasn't been in the top 10 since 1999. My stance for this column is that the offense will finish with a better ranking this season, and not because the defense completely falls apart. They'll actually earn it.

Fair enough. It's a really well done article, I just put on the Nitpicking Nazi pants for a second there.

That, or I misunderstood what you meant by it

[themurf]

Fair enough. It's a really well done article, I just put on the Nitpicking Nazi pants for a second there.

That, or I misunderstood what you meant by it

I didn't take your comment as disrespectful or anything like that. Honestly, I enjoy the feedback and the dialog after writing something like this.

[skins2victory]

I am very excited for this football season! Im pretty sure the skins will defenetly be scoring more points than they had in quite some time.