Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Our offense will continue to be anemic until Anthony Armstrong gets on the field

Slateman

By Slateman
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

Brandon Lloyd Christmas

Brandon Lloyd Christmas

Posted
Posted
Are you kidding? Stop friggin exaggerating the other person's points like you always do, damnit. I never said it would "dramatically" improve the offense. You see, you always need to make those stupid statements so that your argument has a leg to stand on. Unfortunately, I'm going to call you on it. What I did say was this:

You can't argue against that statement, so you make it about something else. Yes, Anthony has speed. Yes, that forces D's to respect him deep and DBs can't cheat on routes. Yes, that will improve our offense. The fact is, no other WR on our team can do what he does for us right now. Gaffney and Moss can't explode past anyone and get deep quickly, they're best at the intermediate game. Stallworth has definitely lost a step. Austin may be the guy, but he doesn't play at the same speed as Armstrong and isn't as complete a WR. Banks is the only guys who can match Armstrong's speed, but he isn't a consistent route runner.

Could you please focus on those logical statements and not make it about anything else? Thanks.

so the thread is called "Our offense will continue to be anemic until Anthony Armstrong gets on the field" and me saying youre implying a dramatic improvement is exaggerating? lets split hairs here since thats what you seem to wanna do. please tell me exactly what our offense will become when armstrong gets back on the field. its "anemic" now, what will it be? average? good? id say going from "anemic" to either of those is a dramatic improvement.

ill stick with my point and keep it related to the original post: our offense will continue to be "anemic" when anthony armstrong returns. it will not change very much. if youd like to harp on me saying "dramatically improve" i wont stop you. our offense sucks, it will continue to suck. anthony armstrongs absence is quite minimal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TSO

TSO

Posted
Posted
so the thread is called "Our offense will continue to be anemic until Anthony Armstrong gets on the field" and me saying youre implying a dramatic improvement is exaggerating? lets split hairs here since thats what you seem to wanna do. please tell me exactly what our offense will become when armstrong gets back on the field. its "anemic" now, what will it be? average? good? id say going from "anemic" to either of those is a dramatic improvement.

ill stick with my point and keep it related to the original post: our offense will continue to be "anemic" when anthony armstrong returns. it will not change very much. if youd like to harp on me saying "dramatically improve" i wont stop you. our offense sucks, it will continue to suck. anthony armstrongs absence is quite minimal.

BLC, you responded to a post of mine that didn't say anything about what the offense was. Your response included putting words in my mouth. I never thought our offense has been anemic anyway... we've done some good things in every one of our games, with the Eagles game being our worst offensive performance to date. So now you're focusing on the thread title, but the fact is you wer responding to MY post in which I stated something very simple and logical... that Armstrong is a key part of this offense and will improve it when he's on the field, by sheer speed.

So, I can't answer your question because I don't think our offense is anemic. We can actually move the ball pretty well between the 20s and have done so every single game except the Eagles game.Our scoring has been the biggest issue, and a big part of that is a lack of explosive plays which Armstrong can provide. Can you argue against that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skinsinparadise

Skinsinparadise

Posted
Posted
I think at this point in his career, Tana is just a solid possession WR. He is still quicker then any of our WR's, but I don't know about his field speed still and what guy is actually going to admit.. "I think i'm getting a bit slower" lol

A speedy short WR known for being a deep threat, at 32, I can see losing a step but its tough for me to see Santana purely as an average speed possession guy now,

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brandon Lloyd Christmas

Brandon Lloyd Christmas

Posted
Posted
Thank you. I've been posting about this non-stop the last few weeks. He truly is the difference, just by sheer respect the DBs have to give his speed. Rex tried to get Gaffney and Davis more chances deep, but he failed to put the ball in the right spot with Gaffney and Fred didn't help him out when he did.

this is even funnier. "ive been posting about this non-stop the last few weeks"......but dont say i think itll dramatically improve the offense BLC, i usually spend lots of time posting "non-stop" about issues that really dont have as much bearing as you claim you exaggerating guy you!! haha

---------- Post added October-20th-2011 at 03:59 PM ----------

So, I can't answer your question because I don't think our offense is anemic. We can actually move the ball pretty well between the 20s and have done so every single game except the Eagles game.Our scoring has been the biggest issue, and a big part of that is a lack of explosive plays which Armstrong can provide. Can you argue against that?

offense is about scoring points. i could care less if we put up 4 billion yards a game. if those yards dont turn into points, we lose. football is not about how many yards you get, its about how many points you get. anthony armstrong has little to no bearing on our offensive point production, or frankly our offense in general. hitting on one deep ball every now and then with our limited QB play is nice and all, but its hardly a determining factor.

and id agree with the OP, our offense is anemic. were back to scoring around 18 points per game, league bottom as usual. our offense didnt score last year with anthony armstrong here either. so while hes a nice situational deep threat, hes not a game changing force that it would seem people are making him out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VRIEL1

VRIEL1

Posted
Posted

I'll agree that I don't think there will be much change simply by switching QB and putting in Beck because I too think the majority of the problems were not Grossman's fault but the receivers fault, but...... other then Moss, who has played well? Armstrong.

Stallworth has not impressed catching one ball a game, Gaffney is starting to play better but he had his drops in the Eagles game. Austin was playing well in preseason but nothing since.

At this point I'd like to see Austin, Hankerson, Paul get their shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TSO

TSO

Posted
Posted
this is even funnier. "ive been posting about this non-stop the last few weeks"......but dont say i think itll dramatically improve the offense BLC, i usually spend lots of time posting "non-stop" about issues that really dont have as much bearing as you claim you exaggerating guy you!! haha

No, actually, it's not funny. I've been posting how badly our offense needs Armstrong's deep threat speed again to open up the short-to-intermediate and running game more. That's it. Armstrong is a big part of opening those things up for us. Why is this hard to understand and why do you need to justify your exaggerations?

---------- Post added October-20th-2011 at 03:12 PM ----------

offense is about scoring points. i could care less if we put up 4 billion yards a game. if those yards dont turn into points, we lose. football is not about how many yards you get, its about how many points you get. anthony armstrong has little to no bearing on our offensive point production, or frankly our offense in general. hitting on one deep ball every now and then with our limited QB play is nice and all, but its hardly a determining factor.

and id agree with the OP, our offense is anemic. were back to scoring around 18 points per game, league bottom as usual. our offense didnt score last year with anthony armstrong here either. so while hes a nice situational deep threat, hes not a game changing force that it would seem people are making him out to be.

What a stupid thing to say. How do offense's score points?

By racking up yards. An offense that can get yards usually scores points. An offense that can't, usually doesn't. They are mutually exclusive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Diesel Hog

Diesel Hog

Posted
Posted

I don't think we're a hell of a long way off here....

This offseason, I'm hoping we see big time improvements on the O-Line (like becoming a top 5 O-Line team), and getting a QB. Hopefully Beck proves he can handle things at least at an above average level. This means he may have bough himself another year, we get a guy like Tannehill (TAMU), and give that next QB the keys when he's ready.

Either way...The offense won't be fantastic till we have a fantastic O-Line. Having the big uglies in place makes the QB, WR's and RB's jobs all easier, and makes them all look better. Have a top 5 O-Line, above average everything else, and this O can be good enough (like top 14 in offense).

Oh and to clarify on "above average" here is my legend:

Sucks

Not Good

Mediocre

Above Average

Good

Fantastic

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SwampEm

SwampEm

Posted
Posted

Oh and to clarify on "above average" here is my legend:

Sucks

Not Good

Mediocre

Above Average

Good

Fantastic

I used to work at a Chinese restaurant, and they had a similar grading system for NFL players and teams.

Very Good

Good

Suck

Very Suck

ie. Heath Shuler was very suck for the Redskins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BucketHTTR

BucketHTTR

Posted
Posted
I used to work at a Chinese restaurant, and they had a similar grading system for NFL players and teams.

Very Good

Good

Suck

Very Suck

ie. Heath Shuler was very suck for the Redskins.

LMAO! Man.. That was priceless.

I think our Oline is one of the strongest assets on the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brandon Lloyd Christmas

Brandon Lloyd Christmas

Posted
Posted
Ran the ball well. QB on his fifth start ever threw for 280 yards.

Far better offense than the previous three games.

yet not as good as the first two games we played.

and we were playing an abominable defense.

2 other teams havent dropped a 30 spot on carolina: Jacksonville with Gabbert, and the cardinals who put up 28.

this offense sucks regardless of armstrong. he made little to no impact today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...