Is it still early?

[Spaceman Spiff]

Well, why play the ****ing games then?

 

 

[CutPryorNow]

10 hours ago, dyst said:

Back in July, USA Today predicted the Skins to finish with only 5 wins. The subsequent thread had many people who couldn't believe such a prediction would be made. The Redskins had just signed Terrelle Pryor, DJ Sweringer and Zach Brown. No longer were we shackled by an inept defensive coordinator and our franchise QB was only getting better. This was just another hit-job by the media who forever hates the team. Yet here we are, sitting at 5-8 with three games left in the season. 

 

       

     

           This feels like a "I told you so piece" or a validation of your feelings towards the team just because they are 5-8. As others have pointed out during this thread we will most likely finish at 7-9 so I think validation is still too early.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 hour ago, Burgold said:

All I really know is that for two weeks, the Redskins haven't come to play and just looked terrible, unprepared, incompetent, and uninspired.

 

The Dallas game was worse because the Cowboys tried their hardest to give us the game and quit themselves until we offered them one too many chances. 

 

I have to disagree about the Dallas game.  Jamison Crowder single handedly took the honor of sabotaging the team's chances.  You simply cannot turn the ball over in the red zone, have our defense get a stop, and then hand the ball right back to the other team back to back, in their house.  I think that alone deflated any shred of belief this cast of misfits had that they could win the game.  From that point on Dallas had all the momentum and I'm not sure there is any type of rah-rah stuff a coach or player can do to recapture that momentum.

 

I'll give you yesterday's game, the entire team and coaching staff appeared to play like they couldn't wait to get the heck out of LA.  The negativity is festering in Ashburn and it showed it's ass yesterday.

[dyst]

1 hour ago, CutPryorNow said:

     

           This feels like a "I told you so piece" or a validation of your feelings towards the team just because they are 5-8. As others have pointed out during this thread we will most likely finish at 7-9 so I think validation is still too early.

I can understand why some might feel this way, but that is not my intention. I will also understand if the moderators prefer to lock the thread due to your concerns. It's very reasonable. I just hope enough people read the thread so next year when the media picks against us, we learn to acknowledge the reality of the situation rather than assume the media is just hating on the Redskins. I think if the team can have two double digit winning playoff seasons in a row, they will garner the respect the deserve. As it stands, when you constantly lose more than win, or continue to lose more the following year compared to the previous, it makes it very difficult to find fault in the off season predictions.

[Idaho fan]

11 hours ago, c slag said:

I think loosing Monday night at Philly and the following week loosing to Dallas at home really crippled the season and the final knockout blow was the ot loss in New Orleans 

The loss to the Saints was for sure (for me anyway) the final point where the season went under.  I think the players and coaches knew after that loss that the season was over - based on their play there has been nothing to play for since.

[TheGreek1973]

Lets be real here.  We have had an incredible amount of injuries to some very key people.  Now, look how GB is doing after Rodgers went down.  Barely beat the Browns.  Lets see how the Eagles are going to be doing now that they don't have the miracle kid at QB.  Yes  both of these teams lost their QB, when you have 11 starters on IR like we do, well then lets just say its even.

[Darrell Green Fan]

11 minutes ago, TheGreek1973 said:

Lets be real here.  We have had an incredible amount of injuries to some very key people.  Now, look how GB is doing after Rodgers went down.  Barely beat the Browns.  Lets see how the Eagles are going to be doing now that they don't have the miracle kid at QB.  Yes  both of these teams lost their QB, when you have 11 starters on IR like we do, well then lets just say its even.

 

You are correct, no team could withstand this amount of injuries.  And referencing a previous post I DO believe we were playing well when healthy.  We took it to Oakland, who is not a bad team. We also played right with KC in their house when they were at the top of the league. Even with the obvious holes at RB, WR etc our defense was clearly improved and we were a legit playoff contender.

 

But also as I posted once the injuries hit and we were playing backups such as Deshazor Everett we are learning that even our first level backups just aren't good enough.  

[Smurf3]

The injuries are a result of Gruden's non competitive training camp in Richmond and way too may walk through practices. Can't go through a week or more of **** footing around and then go all out in games without injury especially with all of the weight training and bulking up they do. The Richmond so-called training camp is nothing more than a big fan/media event and a bunch of players standing around signing autographs. Gruden tries to be the players' friend instead of their coach. Listen to Brian Mitchell and learn something.

[Voice_of_Reason]

10 hours ago, dyst said:

Regarding the difficult schedule, it's only difficult because they are better then us. Try that on for size

 

I made this point about the schedule hand-ringing earlier this season: Does it matter if you play tough teams if you are a tough team?  No,  Does it matter if you play tough teams if you are average or stink?  Yes. 

 

So, the best way not to have a brutal schedule is to be a good team.

 

We're not.  

[NoCalMike]

My prediction prior to Week 1 was 8-8. I felt that 2017 could be a season that the team was actually better than 2015/2016, but the brutal schedule would take it's toll.  Early on, when the team was relatively healthy, that prediction seemed pretty right on, then more injuries kept piling up and now the bottom has fallen out.  Hard to predict injuries and/or take them into account before the season starts.

[Voice_of_Reason]

6 minutes ago, Smurf3 said:

The injuries are a result of Gruden's non competitive training camp in Richmond and way too may walk through practices. Can't go through a week or more of **** footing around and then go all out in games without injury especially with all of the weight training and bulking up they do. The Richmond so-called training camp is nothing more than a big fan/media event and a bunch of players standing around signing autographs. Gruden tries to be the players' friend instead of their coach. Listen to Brian Mitchell and learn something.

I blame Gruden for a lot of stuff, but the injuries I'm not going to blame him for.  Most of the injuries this year are broken bones, torn ligaments, that kind of thing.  That just happens.  You can work on flexibility to help a little bit for ligaments, but there's just not much you can do if a guy break's his hand or leg.

 

The injuries that drive me crazy are hamstring pulls.  See Reed, Jordan.  Most of the times those are conditioning type things.  I know Reed couldn't train the way he wanted to with the toe injury in the off-season, then he had an upper body injury, and now he's got a hamstring. Which was probably the result of him trying to hard without being prepared.  

 

I'll give Gruden grief for a lot, but hes not responsible for the injury stuff.  

[Reaper Skins]

I'm pretty sure our record has been worse since the "easy" part of our schedule has started....

[CTskin]

13 hours ago, dyst said:

After the loss against the Chargers today, I wanted to create a thread that I hope can prepare us for the offseason. It's very likely the thread might not get the participation needed to stay relevant going into next year or worse yet, it ends up being locked, but I hope for even a brief moment in time, it opens the mind of a few people. 

 

This thread is for all fans, but more specifically, for the "it's still early" crowd. That small but very vocal subset of Redskins fans who either through their passion or unwavioring hope for this team, just refuse to see the Redskins for what they are and in turn let their passion negatively impact their relationship with other less enthused fans.

 

Back in July, USA Today predicted the Skins to finish with only 5 wins. The subsequent thread had many people who couldn't believe such a prediction would be made. The Redskins had just signed Terrelle Pryor, DJ Sweringer and Zach Brown. No longer were we shackled by an inept defensive coordinator and our franchise QB was only getting better. This was just another hit-job by the media who forever hates the team. Yet here we are, sitting at 5-8 with three games left in the season. 

 

Fast forward to the preseason and it was obvious the team was struggling, more specifically the WRs and Kirk. Several of us saw the struggles and pointed them out, but alas the "it's still early" crowd, assured us it was only preseason, and way to early to panic. The team was just keeping it vanilla, we didn't want to show our magical hand to the rest of the league and the fury that would be unleashed by this organization once the real games begun! Except the regular season started and the WRs continued to suck and Kirk came out the gate slow, again. Okay, not a big deal, we'll chalk it up to early season jitters. 

 

Then there was the discussion about our WRs. Remember this thread? We had guys in there who were flabbergasted that some of us thought the receiving corps was a concern. We didn't need Jackson or Garcon because Pryor and Doctson were about to take the NFL by storm and who can forget Crowder, I mean this guy almost had 1000 yards last year and if it wasn't for Garcon and Jackson, he might have gotten it. Those two were only holding him back. The "it's still early" crowd told us to relax after the first game when Pryor didn't look like an NFL wide receiver. Okay, so preseason and one official game isn't enough to judge the talent on the field but 4 or 5 weeks certainly should right? Nope, it was "still to early" to judge.

 

Remember how some of us dread primetime games, or meaningful games because its typically when the Skins seem the most inept? Well the "it's still early" crowd told us this year was different. We feared Kirk in big moments because it seemed like he always had too many turnovers or game changing plays. We even had a concern that Jay Gruden, did not seem to have his team ready to play when it mattered most. Don't panic, it's too early we were warned and yet here we are, another mediocre year where we lose in big games with our QB making in opportune mistakes and our coach seemingly getting out coached.

 

Typically during the course of an offseason, preseason, first play, first series, first game, several games and several YEARS...you can get a feel for a team and this team is not ready to compete. So next time, when it's the 1st quarter and we drop a pass, and a guy seems negative, it's very likely that negative guy is going to be correct more often than not about this team...because they just aren't any good. It's not a revelation, it's just factual. The team is not good, but very mediocre. It's call purgatory. Can't bottom out nor get into heaven. 

 

Basically, everyone should be ready for next offseason when the media hit-jobs continue to rank us near the bottom of the NFL and rightfully so.

 

So your OP is essentially a long-winded way of taking a jab at any Skins fans who were optimistic going into this year... We all had our issues with how certain personnel decisions were handled, but this "I/We told you so" piece is garbage.

[dyst]

21 minutes ago, CTskin said:

So your OP is essentially a long-winded way of taking a jab at any Skins fans who were optimistic going into this year... We all had our issues with how certain personnel decisions were handled, but this "I/We told you so" piece is garbage.

I can see why you would take it that way, but that was not the purpose of this thread at all. I don't need this year to create an "I told you so" thread. Any one of these games, years, or decades could have been the foundation for such a thread you speak of. That was not the point.

 

What I hope to accomplish, is that next time a guy like Jason Reid says "the Skins aren't good", hopefully we don't personally attack his character and call him a hater. Hopefully the next time USA Today predicts the team won't be any good and forecasts them at 5 wins, we don't suggest the media is "out to get" the franchise. Hopefully the next time the Washington Post, Howard Eskin or dudes from ESPN choose against the Redskins  maybe we can acknowledge that it's a possibility they will be correct in their assessment.

 

Hopefully if we stop enabling the franchises mediocrity, it might actually take a step in the right direction.

[Wildbunny]

4 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

In a lot of cases we are not.  McLain, McGee, Hood, etc are all rotational guys, they really aren't even backups and they stink.  . D. Everett and D Hall were primary backups at safety. Every time I see them they are chasing someone.  Chase and Ty are decent enough backup OL, all the rest are simply not good enough to be in the league. The depth on this team, even the primary backups, are not nearly good enough across the board.  

 

Rotational guys are what they are: rotational guys. They're good in specific packages, and not good in others. Just like AJ Francis is good against the run and Lanier is good against the pass, but the opposite is not true.

Everett was in fact the 3rd stringer as I believe Cravens was the starting Safety. Nicholson stepped in really well, but Nicholson was already the backup.

 

I believe that our depth is quite good in fact. But we're playing so many of them at the same time, all the time, that at some point you have to feel the difference.

Sure the depth on DL is really thin, I agree wholeheartedly here, but depth in the secondary is actually good. LBs? I think it's OK. We're just happening to play the 4th stringer next to an injured Zach Brown. And ILB is not a small spot duty. I'm pretty sure Vigil could look decent if the line wasn't hurt. But behind Hood, McGee and Lanier, sure he'll gets exposed.

[Veretax]

When is the last time we won a opener?
HAd a winning record at home?
Went on the field after going down in the 4th Quarter to forc ethe other team to keep pressing on us?


I think the last happened once this season.  Only once.   I agreed with callers to smoots show last night.  Personnel is the problem.  Wrong people for the schem (or wrong coaches for the personnel.)  Who makes those decisions? Bruce Allen.  I'm expecting Jay to resign if we put another effort like that in, and then Bruce getting fired.

[Monkman56]

18 hours ago, dyst said:

Regarding the difficult schedule, it's only difficult because they are better then us. Try that on for size

Just about every team IS better than us. We win when the other guys have an off day and we don't self destruct. That type of football will never amount to a serious  run at the playoffs. As usual, I'm already locked into hockey season.

10 hours ago, CjSuAvE22 said:

I’m surprised at how many people think we “looked good” before the injuries it’s simply not true our leading receiver was a running back the defense was still getting gashed good teams can run the ball we couldn’t...yeah they played very well vs the Raiders but a good team would have won the Chiefs game, this team was competitive early on not because we were a good team but because the defense could get pressure more times than I’ve seen in years the qb play was decent I’ll give Gruden credit he’s taken this sub par roster as far as he could to keep us competitive early on, however I don’t think we ever looked good for more than a few quarters of football at a time that does not resemble a “good” team and yes injuries have caused a good deal of issues but a good team would have found a way to be competitive the redskins instead are looking for a scape goat...

All preseason I kept hearing how "deep" this team has gotten on the bench. Certainly doesnt look that way now.

[hail2skins]

6 hours ago, dyst said:

What I hope to accomplish, is that next time a guy like Jason Reid says "the Skins aren't good", hopefully we don't personally attack his character and call him a hater. Hopefully the next time USA Today predicts the team won't be any good and forecasts them at 5 wins, we don't suggest the media is "out to get" the franchise. Hopefully the next time the Washington Post, Howard Eskin or dudes from ESPN choose against the Redskins  maybe we can acknowledge that it's a possibility they will be correct in their assessment.

 

I think there has to be a happy medium in general.  Here are some preseason predictions I just pulled:

 

Sports Nation: 5-11 (date prediction made unknown)

Bleacher Report: 6-10 (4/20/17)

CBS: 7-9 (August)

Sports Illustrated 6-10 (May)

 

Now, this was a team that had just gone 9-7 and 8-7-1.  Were the lower predictions mainly a reflection of the Skins losing Garcon and Jackson? Who knows.

 

But even given the departures, I would've picked the Skins in the 7-9 win range instead of 6-10. I do think that some writers have a bit of a bias toward the Skins, but a lot do give more unbiased opinions, and unfortunately most of the past 20 years of history has tended to back up the more cynical predictions.

 

If the Skins want more respect from the media, only way they are going to do it is to build up a longer track record of winning. 

 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

Bring on the offseason. It’s the best part about being a Redskins fan.

 

Suck up on hope like a gambler throwing down his last $1000 on the table, knowing full well he’s going to lose it and not be able to pay his rent but that rush of excitement where he thinks “just maybe, this could be it” is enough to keep you going thru the inevitable numbness of the actual season 

[Darrell Green Fan]

17 hours ago, Wildbunny said:

 

Rotational guys are what they are: rotational guys. They're good in specific packages, and not good in others. Just like AJ Francis is good against the run and Lanier is good against the pass, but the opposite is not true.

Everett was in fact the 3rd stringer as I believe Cravens was the starting Safety. Nicholson stepped in really well, but Nicholson was already the backup.

 

I believe that our depth is quite good in fact. But we're playing so many of them at the same time, all the time, that at some point you have to feel the difference.

Sure the depth on DL is really thin, I agree wholeheartedly here, but depth in the secondary is actually good. LBs? I think it's OK. We're just happening to play the 4th stringer next to an injured Zach Brown. And ILB is not a small spot duty. I'm pretty sure Vigil could look decent if the line wasn't hurt. But behind Hood, McGee and Lanier, sure he'll gets exposed.

 

This is a pretty good argument. We agree once you get past Allen and Ioanidas the DL is bad, we knew that going in. When those 2 went down they had little at the position, that's a depth issue.   Cravens was only penciled in, he had not earned the job and we had no idea if he could play the position full time.  By the way if you think the team quit in LA, which they did,  imagine how a guy with no heart to begin with would have performed in that game.  LOL  . And Hall and Everett were projected as key backups and they gave us nothing. When was the last good game D Hall had?  I can only think of one and it required the help of Jay Cutler in Chicago many years ago.  The OL has 2 good backups, you obviously need more.  And once you get past those 2 the rest do not belong in the league.