Homer: Redskins versus Giants: by the numbers

[themurf]

(photo by Brian Murphy)

The New York Giants have been so dominant over the Washington Redskins in recent history that the burgundy and gold faithful has had to resort to moral victories.

You might remember that the Redskins lost 17-14 to the Giants in the 2010 season finale.

You might also remember that in the closing minutes of that game, the Redskins fans at FedEx Field did more than a little bit of celebrating once it was announced the Green Bay Packers beat the Chicago Bears 10-3 to make the playoffs and ensure the Giants missed out on the postseason.

That’s when ‘Skins fans erupted in cheers and began taunting the Giants and their fans in attendance. This was not lost on the players in the opposing locker room that day.

“Their fans were all cheering and whatnot,” said Giants defensive tackle Barry Cofield. “That shows you the state of their team, that they have to cheer about us failing. That’s when you have no success; those are the kind of things that excite you.”

Sadly, Cofield’s point can’t really be disputed.

Because the Giants have won nine of the last 10 games against Washington, the hometown crowd hasn’t really had much to cheer about when these two teams get together.

So basically, Redskins fans have to settle for cheering against the rest of the NFC East – especially since the rest of the division has been far more likely to be involved in meaningful games.

With the Giants dominating the Redskins for so long, I decided to dive into the numbers to see where things continue to go wrong.

For starters, New York has outscored Washington 242-134 over this 10-game span, which obviously works out to an average score of 24-13. Considering the problems the Redskins have had finishing drives in recent history, that’s not completely surprising.

But the one thing that really stands out in the box score is how the Giants have been able to jump out the gate quickly, build a lead and then coast to a relatively easy victory.

In fact, the Giants have outscored the Redskins 47-0 in the first quarter in their last six games.

Let me repeat that – the Giants have trampled the Redskins by a score of 47-0 in the opening quarter since 2008.

That suggests an apparent lack of preparation in the coaching department, which makes sense when you consider how stable one franchise is while the other seems to have a new game plan every time these two team square off.

For the purposes of this exercise, we’re breaking down Redskins-Giants games since 2006. During that timeframe, New York has had one head coach and one starting quarterback: Tom Coughlin and Eli Manning.*

The same cannot be said about the Redskins, who have trotted out Joe Gibbs, Jim Zorn and Mike Shanahan at coach and Mark Brunell, Jason Campbell, Todd Collins, Donovan McNabb and Rex Grossman at quarterback against the Giants over the last five seasons.

It’s kind of tough to develop any kind of stability and continuity with that many key pieces in constant flux.

*Technically, Giants backup David Carr did play against the Redskins in 2009, but he only played in the final minutes of the blowout because New York was cruising to a 45-12 victory.

In addition to having the same coach and quarterback throughout, the Giants have also had the same basic game plan – create turnovers with an aggressive defense and utilize the running game to wear down the opposition.

None of this is earth shattering and anyone who plays the Giants knows this is their preferred game plan, but the Redskins simply haven’t been able to stop them even though they know what’s coming.

On the subject of the ground game, the Giants ran the ball against Washington 324 times, compared to just 227 carries by the Redskins. Without even looking at the number of rushing yards each team accumulated, you can see how much more committed New York has been to this phase of the game.

Click here for the full article.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

“Their fans were all cheering and whatnot,” said Giants defensive tackle Barry Cofield. “That shows you the state of their team, that they have to cheer about us failing. That’s when you have no success; those are the kind of things that excite you.”

Sadly, Cofield’s point can’t really be disputed.

The hell it can't lol ...

Back when the Skins were winning division titles and Super Bowls, I still got excited and celebrated losses by our rivals. I'd still taunt fans of other teams when they'd get knocked out of the playoffs. I did it in good spirits and good-nature, but I still did it lol...the idea that the only fans who do that are fans that have nothing else to root for is asinine.

Newsflash for anyone else who may think this way: WE HATE OUR DIVISION RIVALS! We don't stop hating them when we're making the playoffs. In fact we may hate them more when we are lol...so it's more than OK to celebrate their failures. Doing so is divorced from how the Skins are presently doing, at least it is for most fans.

[themurf]

The hell it can't lol ...

Back when the Skins were winning division titles and Super Bowls, I still got excited and celebrated losses by our rivals. I'd still taunt fans of other teams when they'd get knocked out of the playoffs. I did it in good spirits and good-nature, but I still did it lol...the idea that the only fans who do that are fans that have nothing else to root for is asinine.

Newsflash for anyone else who may think this way: WE HATE OUR DIVISION RIVALS! We don't stop hating them when we're making the playoffs. In fact we may hate them more when we are lol...so it's more than OK to celebrate their failures. Doing so is divorced from how the Skins are presently doing, at least it is for most fans.

I hear what you're saying and respect your opinion, but I've always been someone who believes moral victories are for losers. It's always easier to root for someone else, but I'm tired of easier. I just want to see the hometown team finally give 'Skins fans something to cheer about besides the shortcomings of others. That's why I included that quote from Barry Cofield.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

On the subject of the ground game, the Giants ran the ball against Washington 324 times, compared to just 227 carries by the Redskins. Without even looking at the number of rushing yards each team accumulated, you can see how much more committed New York has been to this phase of the game.

That probably has something to do with this:

In fact, the Giants have outscored the Redskins 47-0 in the first quarter in their last six games.

Let me repeat that – the Giants have trampled the Redskins by a score of 47-0 in the opening quarter since 2008.

It's harder to be committed to the run game when you're falling behind almost right out of the gate.

---------- Post added September-9th-2011 at 07:08 AM ----------

I hear what you're saying and respect your opinion, but I've always been someone who believes moral victories are for losers. It's always easier to root for someone else, but I'm tired of easier. I just want to see the hometown team finally give 'Skins fans something to cheer about besides the shortcomings of others. That's why I included that quote from Barry Cofield.

I don't see cheering a division rival's failure as a "moral victory", though. I just see it as good times ...that's why you can be a fan of a team that just won the division and still cheer and celebrate a division rival's failure. I'm positive the Eagles and Giants had a crapload of fans who were celebrating the Cowboys' epic failure last year. And those teams both went 10-6.

[Botched]

It really has been incredibly one-sided. Doesn't matter who is on our team, the Giants just plain know how to beat us. Last season's finale was the closest game we've had against them in a while, usually they win with a two-possession lead.

If we win one game this year, I want it to be against the Giants.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Well, the Redskins have turned the ball over 20 times during this span, compared to just 10 turnovers by the Giants. In the last three matchups though, the Redskins have been even worse – turning the ball over 13 times, while New York has turned the ball over twice (two interceptions by Manning).

Holy ****!! :doh: :doh:

[themurf]

Doesn't matter who is on our team, the Giants just plain know how to beat us.

Isn't that part of the problem though? The Giants have had Tom Coughlin and Eli Manning for all 10 of these games, while the Redskins have had Joe Gibbs, Jim Zorn and Mike Shanahan at coach and Mark Brunell, Jason Campbell, Todd Collins, Donovan McNabb and Rex Grossman at quarterback against the Giants over the last five seasons.

[LD0506]

Perceptions aside, you just can't argue with those numbers, but how much of that was just one more sad symptom of the disastrous state this franchise has been in? We have had a slew of players that just didn't care, they got paid and that was all that really mattered. "Culture change" has been tossed around more than a frisbee at a concert, but IMO it is still the essential element in the Skins regaining any respectability. Shanny may not be able to turn this team into a consistent winner but I seriously doubt it will be because of any grabass frathouse antics in the lockerrooom or on the field. You have to learn to do it right before you worry about consistency.

I am looking forward to seeing how we do against the Giants running attack, it is a valid measure of the changes made in the D front. You can't go anywhere until you can generate success within your division.

[VRIEL1]

The hell it can't lol ...

Back when the Skins were winning division titles and Super Bowls, I still got excited and celebrated losses by our rivals. I'd still taunt fans of other teams when they'd get knocked out of the playoffs. I did it in good spirits and good-nature, but I still did it lol...the idea that the only fans who do that are fans that have nothing else to root for is asinine.

Newsflash for anyone else who may think this way: WE HATE OUR DIVISION RIVALS! We don't stop hating them when we're making the playoffs. In fact we may hate them more when we are lol...so it's more than OK to celebrate their failures. Doing so is divorced from how the Skins are presently doing, at least it is for most fans.

Let me ask you this......

Last year I made a comment on another board about Aikmen announcing Redskins games. I was politely told that Aikmen is Fox's top announcer and we should be happy we got him because that shows how important our game must be. I mentioned how I didn't care that I felt it was disrespectful and how FOX would do better to find a local announcer or an ex-Redskin to announce the games. I was basically laughed at.

I noticed he's announcing our game this weekend and again I made a comment about how I wish FOX would let him announce elsewhere and I got the whole.... "Not this crap again". Again informed that he is FOX's top announcer and I should just be thankful he's handling our game. They then went on to say if my bias is simply because he was a cowboy then I am wrong because he's a good announcer.

My bias has everything to do with the fact that he was a cowboy. During the 70's and 80's there was player loyalty. A Redskin would never even think about jumping ship and playing for Dallas. A cowboy would never jump ship and think about playing for the Skins. There was ownership/team loyalty. Owners made sure they kept their players and didn't let them get outbid for a player.

Then the 90's happened and players jump ship all the time, all the owners care about is the bottom dollar there is no player loyalty. Fans are forced to purchase new jerseys almost every year because said players come and go like the wind. and..... worst of all the media thinks it's wise to save a couple of bucks by simply putting their "top announcers" where ever they choose with out thinking about the team or fans. I personally feel Aikmen should be announcing any and all Dallas games if they like him but not Redskin games. I went and looked and if I'm not mistaken I think the Dallas game is being aired through CBS so I can understand Aikmen not announcing the game but the Skins vs. Giants game is the top game of the week? The lowly, misguided, last place in the division Redskins take top billing over the "Dream team" Eagles game? WTF?

Sorry for venting but your little pep talk about how we "hated our rivals" got be pissed again that Aikmen is yet again announcing our game Sat.

[themurf]

Let me ask you this......

Last year I made a comment on another board about Aikmen announcing Redskins games. I was politely told that Aikmen is Fox's top announcer and we should be happy we got him because that shows how important our game must be. I mentioned how I didn't care that I felt it was disrespectful and how FOX would do better to find a local announcer or an ex-Redskin to announce the games. I was basically laughed at.

I noticed he's announcing our game this weekend and again I made a comment about how I wish FOX would let him announce elsewhere and I got the whole.... "Not this crap again". Again informed that he is FOX's top announcer and I should just be thankful he's handling our game. They then went on to say if my bias is simply because he was a cowboy then I am wrong because he's a good announcer.

When it comes to former Dallas players announcing Redskins games, no one is worse than Moose Johnston. Not only is he with Tony Siragusa (who is the worst sports personality this side of Emmitt "He got blowed up" Smiff), but he's also still incredibly negative towards his former rival. Aikman is much more likely to complement Washington players and actually attempt to be impartial than Johnston is, so I'd much rather he be given 'Skins games.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Let me ask you this......

Um...did I miss the question in your post? ...

Sorry for venting but your little pep talk about how we "hated our rivals" got be pissed again that Aikmen is yet again announcing our game Sat.

No problem ...I, too, can get my division hatred riled up when I read a post from someone who--like me--has ZERO problem expressing hatred for division rivals and who doesn't look at it as a sad commentary on the state of affairs for the Skins, but as a natural, preordained right that all divisional fans possess and should express.

Truth be told, I LOVE the NFC East, love its history, love its rivalries, love the passion it contains, love the reputation it has as quite possibly the toughest, meanest, nastiest division in football. And I HATE the other teams that make it up lol ...

[TK]

Isn't that part of the problem though? The Giants have had Tom Coughlin and Eli Manning for all 10 of these games, while the Redskins have had Joe Gibbs, Jim Zorn and Mike Shanahan at coach and Mark Brunell, Jason Campbell, Todd Collins, Donovan McNabb and Rex Grossman at quarterback against the Giants over the last five seasons.

I'd have to look at the Skins D that allowed the Giants to run ruffshod all over them on their way to the end zone more then the Offense that couldn't find the end zone enough times to keep up.

I think that as the D adjusts better to the 3-4 this year & as long as they finish & wrap up tackles this year, the Gmen are in trouble.

[VRIEL1]

Um...did I miss the question in your post? ...

No problem ...I, too, can get my division hatred riled up when I read a post from someone who--like me--has ZERO problem expressing hatred for division rivals and who doesn't look at it as a sad commentary on the state of affairs for the Skins, but as a natural, preordained right that all divisional fans possess and should express.

Truth be told, I LOVE the NFC East, love its history, love its rivalries, love the passion it contains, love the reputation it has as quite possibly the toughest, meanest, nastiest division in football. And I HATE the other teams that make it up lol ...

LOL, sorry, the question was lost in the venting.

[pjfootballer]

Let me ask you this......

Last year I made a comment on another board about Aikmen announcing Redskins games. I was politely told that Aikmen is Fox's top announcer and we should be happy we got him because that shows how important our game must be. I mentioned how I didn't care that I felt it was disrespectful and how FOX would do better to find a local announcer or an ex-Redskin to announce the games. I was basically laughed at.

FOX sends their top announcing team to the top matchup that week. It has nothing to do with what uniform Aikman played in or what uniforms are on the field. And for the record, I was a comminucation/journalism major and my opinion of Aikman as an announcer is that he's not as good as people think. It has nothing to do with him being a Cowboy. I just don't think he's that good. And as far as I know, there are no ex-Redskins in announcing, unless you count Mark May who does college football or Matt Millen who was here for one year.

I noticed he's announcing our game this weekend and again I made a comment about how I wish FOX would let him announce elsewhere and I got the whole.... "Not this crap again". Again informed that he is FOX's top announcer and I should just be thankful he's handling our game. They then went on to say if my bias is simply because he was a cowboy then I am wrong because he's a good announcer.

Again, FOX makes the determination. It's not about Washington/Dallass. It has zero to do with him being an ex-Cowboy.

My bias has everything to do with the fact that he was a cowboy. During the 70's and 80's there was player loyalty. A Redskin would never even think about jumping ship and playing for Dallas. A cowboy would never jump ship and think about playing for the Skins. There was ownership/team loyalty. Owners made sure they kept their players and didn't let them get outbid for a player.

There was no free agency in the 70s and 80s, so the only way a player could move to another team was in a trade or if they were released (usually due to age or injury). Most players played with one organization during their career, so you would have better rivalries. And Calvin Hill played for both teams, so it does happen. So did Babe Laufenburg.

Then the 90's happened and players jump ship all the time, all the owners care about is the bottom dollar there is no player loyalty. Fans are forced to purchase new jerseys almost every year because said players come and go like the wind. and..... worst of all the media thinks it's wise to save a couple of bucks by simply putting their "top announcers" where ever they choose with out thinking about the team or fans. I personally feel Aikmen should be announcing any and all Dallas games if they like him but not Redskin games. I went and looked and if I'm not mistaken I think the Dallas game is being aired through CBS so I can understand Aikmen not announcing the game but the Skins vs. Giants game is the top game of the week? The lowly, misguided, last place in the division Redskins take top billing over the "Dream team" Eagles game? WTF?

Dallass is playing on NBC on SNF. But again, they don't hire announcers and match them up with their former teams. It's about the matchup. The Eagles play the Rams and they are not division rivals, so it's not as good a matchup as us. We are division rivals with the Giants even if we've sucked, so it is more appealing to FOX then the Eagles/Rams. These guys (Akiman) are hired and have to remain unbiased when doing the games. Most, including Aikman do a good job of not being biased. It would be hard to do, if you ask me. But some, like Moose Johnston are annoyingly biased.

Sorry for venting but your little pep talk about how we "hated our rivals" got be pissed again that Aikmen is yet again announcing our game Sat.

And fans are not "forced" to purchase new jerseys. When I go to the games I have Monk, Riggins, Green, Theismann and Cooley jerseys to wear. All but 1 of mine are authentics and the one that isn't was a free gift from the FO for being a season ticket holder (Cooley). I see ALOT of Redskin fans wearing jerseys from the older players.

[mi6]

This may be against the documented history ... But, I hope the Skins win, even if its by ONE SOLITARY point. Let's just get this thing DONE!

If we can't beat the Giants with all the injuries they have suffered ... I don't see how we will when they are full strength.