Can we stop pretending now?

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

39 minutes ago, OVCChairman said:

 

Our advantage there is that the majority of our talent is home grown, or developed here.  Even Brown and Foster have been in the system for a few years.  DJ appears to be here for a while, as well as all CBs not named Josh Norman.  The entire D-line is essentially home grown talent.  Jax was reliant heavily on free agents last year with only have drafted a couple themselves.  That feels more flash in the pan to me than what we have.  

Jax could totally be a flash in the pan.  But their expensive defense last year was significantly better than our defense now.  When I look at Jacksonville this year, I look at a team falling apart when things don’t roll their way and acceptance of the suck that is extending Blake Bortles.

[Koolblue13]

Just now, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yep, a serious addition or two like Jax when they signed Calais Campbell or how the Rams were aggressive this off season.  In the draft, I go back and forth on corner, pass rusher, explosive WR, TE, OG.

 

My most optimistic hope is maybe Cooper establishes himself at LG leaving that spot less desperate to fill.  I am a BPA guy and on that front, we probably have a good shot at a good pass rusher, CB.   Though I am intrigued at TE -- got some good possibilities likely right around the spot we pick, and love Marquise Brown at WR.   With Alex at the helm, Jay's been using more 3 TE sets.  Sprinkle seems to be used almost purely as a blocker.  Be intriguing to have a TE like Irv Smith who can do it all.

Irv and Polite are probably the two at our spot that I'd like. I'd be happy moving up in the second for Ximines. No way do we not come out of the first two rounds without a speed rusher. It's a huge need, will probably be BPA considering how loaded the draft is and we've got the picks to move around.

 

The thing with a position loaded draft is this. If you've got 10 guys at one position who would be first rounders in most drafts, some will fall out, because need will dictate other teams to reach for positions like qb, Wr, CB,OT.  We are positioned to have an extremely productive draft this year and should have the cap capital to be moderate players in FA.

 

I think this season is the base line for us. Next year is the run/hot seat season. 

[Renegade7]

31 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Jax could totally be a flash in the pan.  But their expensive defense last year was significantly better than our defense now.  When I look at Jacksonville this year, I look at a team falling apart when things don’t roll their way and acceptance of the suck that is extending Blake Bortles.

 

That was arguably the worst FA move ive ever seen in context, especially considering how many QB were hitting FA that offseason 

[skinny21]

I’m still really bummed about our run D. For a time there, I thought we could really take away the run which leads to more 3rd and longs, which in turn allows us to let our pass rush loose and ups our chances at turnovers/stops.  I’ve lost a lot of that confidence.  I’m worried that teams have figured they just need to not run up the gut and they can pick up large chunks.  If we alter our D to account for that, we’re exposed in other ways and then it feels like we’re playing catch-up as opposed to dictating.  I don’t know.  

 

As I said in another thread, turnovers are great, but I’d like to have something else to hang our hat on.  The good news (on top of turnover differential) is 1) ST have been competent, 2) we’ve shown the ability to run the ball well at times, 3) we’ve shown the ability to stop the run (mostly?), 4) Smith has shown some improvement in the passing game - not enough to rely on, but enough that we can convert 3rd downs a bit more often, sustain more drives, etc.  

 

The bad news is that we’ve struggled running against some poor Ds, have shown cracks in our run D, and our secondary is looking like Swiss cheese against good passing offenses.  The inconsistency in the first two points and consistency in the third point make me really nervous.  

[OVCChairman]

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Jax could totally be a flash in the pan.  But their expensive defense last year was significantly better than our defense now.  When I look at Jacksonville this year, I look at a team falling apart when things don’t roll their way and acceptance of the suck that is extending Blake Bortles.

 

 

Not to mention losing all his weapons on the outside... you think we had a dropoff at WR when we let Jax and Garcon walk... yeesh.  The sad thing is I REALLY wanted us to make a play for Moncreif... 

[NoCalMike]

I think part of the pumping of the brakes on the defensive praise is just them coming back to earth a bit, and more aligning with what the original expectations were before the season started.  Most of us assumed the defense would be improved, but nowhere near the dominant way they looked early on.  This is the NFL, teams will watch tape, come up with a plan of attack to counter what you do well.  Fact is this unit is not a complete machine at this time.  It doesn't mean they haven't improved but there are still holes.

 

The bigger issue for now though is that they have zero margin for error due to the offense's inability to score.  If the offense was scoring an additional TD more then they currently are, it would be putting some of these close games out of reach or at the least forcing the hands of opposing teams to take more risks in the 4th quarter, which would in turn help the defense out with their attack to close out games.

[NikeRedskin7]

On November 13, 2018 at 7:26 AM, kingdaddy said:

6 wins is just that, 6 wins...no luck, bad schedule, played an injured team, etc....6 wins in 9 games is very good. Getting #7 this week would be huuuuuuge.

 

Hey 6 wins in our case with our personnel is pretty damn good, no doubt.  But I guess we disagree on the no luck, bad schedule played an injured team not being a benefit to us.

 We beat a very good Carolina team, then.....     A weak Cardinals team that we dominated like we SHOULD have, a injured Rodgers led team, a below average Cowboys offense, a horrible Giants team, and a below average Bucs team that we that did pretty much deliver us a victory on a silver platter, and I'm not the only one here that saw that.  I gladly will take that W though!!!

 

If our six wins had been Saints, Rams, Chiefs, Panthers, Falcons and somebody like the Vikings, I would say this team is for real!!!!  Do anybody in their right mind believe if these teams I just stated were on our schedule, we would still be a 6 win team???  Hell no.  So yes, our schedule wasn't a bad schedule, but it's pretty damn mediocre and we were fortunate to have gotten the wins we got in some games and took care of business in other games.

 

As far as playing against an freshly injured A. Rodgers, don't act like he was himself, because film backs up that argument and even the guys announcing the game pointed out how Rodgers couldn't escape the pocket, make off schedule plays and pass with normal accuracy like he normally does.

 

We've played incredible up front with an injured O-line but in some games it will hurt us.  Injuries DO matter.  If we lose a game because we had a good QB who was playing badly hurt that is the first thing we all will mention as a key to our loss.

 

But when we beat a team who has the best QB on the planet who plays badly injured, all of a sudden, it doesn't count as a benefitted bonus?  Please...  It works both ways.

[Koolblue13]

I think most of us expected 6 wins this year and we already got them. It's all gravy from here on out.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

@NikeRedskin7 I don't disagree with some of what you posted. I think the Giants and Cardinals both should have been blowout wins given how they've looked most weeks. I also think the Cowboy game was a push because we are basically the exact same team (and I think we outplayed them more than the score indicated). 

 

The game that continues to get overlooked and dismissed that confuses me is the Packers game. Of course I realize the Rodgers were banged up, but he had just come off two impressive games against decent teams (Bears and Vikings) and played well in the two games after us. If somehow he was most banged up in the middle of that 5-game stretch, I'd see your point.

 

We deserve more credit for the Packers game and possibly a little less credit for the Panthers game since they handed us that big lead that we clung to in the closing minutes. 

[MisterPinstripe]

35 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

@NikeRedskin7 I don't disagree with some of what you posted. I think the Giants and Cardinals both should have been blowout wins given how they've looked most weeks. I also think the Cowboy game was a push because we are basically the exact same team (and I think we outplayed them more than the score indicated). 

 

The game that continues to get overlooked and dismissed that confuses me is the Packers game. Of course I realize the Rodgers were banged up, but he had just come off two impressive games against decent teams (Bears and Vikings) and played well in the two games after us. If somehow he was most banged up in the middle of that 5-game stretch, I'd see your point.

 

We deserve more credit for the Packers game and possibly a little less credit for the Panthers game since they handed us that big lead that we clung to in the closing minutes. 

When you are negative on the team you excuse wins as if they are easy to come by, meanwhile any loses are SEE??. For example, the Bucs average 30 points a game and we held them to 3. But thats just because the Bucs GAVE us the win. Its not that our defense went out and made plays and TOOK the ball from them. Rodgers may have come back and beaten the Bears but against us it was like we were playing Bradford and the Cardinals, etc ,etc.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

11 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

When you are negative on the team you excuse wins as if they are easy to come by, meanwhile any loses are SEE??. For example, the Bucs average 30 points a game and we held them to 3. But thats just because the Bucs GAVE us the win. Its not that our defense went out and made plays and TOOK the ball from them. Rodgers may have come back and beaten the Bears but against us it was like we were playing Bradford and the Cardinals, etc ,etc.

 

It really is odd that every game in the NFL is its own entity. I suppose that's the case across all sports, but the other leagues play SO many more games that trends are more apparently and more easy to bank on over time. You can more easily come up with a "typical game" from teams when they play 80 or 160 games. 

 

Each and every NFL game is its own unique work of art. It even can change on the smallest of plays or moments. It's also much more impacted by single plays as there are fewer "touches" or possessions than any other sport. 

[MisterPinstripe]

16 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

It really is odd that every game in the NFL is its own entity. I suppose that's the case across all sports, but the other leagues play SO many more games that trends are more apparently and more easy to bank on over time. You can more easily come up with a "typical game" from teams when they play 80 or 160 games. 

 

Each and every NFL game is its own unique work of art. It even can change on the smallest of plays or moments. It's also much more impacted by single plays as there are fewer "touches" or possessions than any other sport. 

Yep....

 

Ill say, I dont give a crap how ugly we win as long as we win. If we are the ugliest and called the worst team to ever win a Super Bowl I couldnt care less, as we would have done it. Im frustrated with the offense production in that it does hold back the team, but in the end as long as we win Im good. Its not easy to win in the NFL as we have all experienced. We are 6-3 with a 2 game lead on everyone else in the division and we are blown off and every talks as if the division is between the Cowboys and the Eagles. The Cowboys beat the Eagles who havent been good, so they have one win "in a row" and yet now they are on a roll and favorites to win the division. Because they play defense and can run the ball......... Hello? Bueller?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

1 minute ago, MisterPinstripe said:

Yep....

 

Ill say, I dont give a crap how ugly we win as long as we win. If we are the ugliest and called the worst team to ever win a Super Bowl I couldnt care less, as we would have done it. Im frustrated with the offense production in that it does hold back the team, but in the end as long as we win Im good. Its not easy to win in the NFL as we have all experienced. We are 6-3 with a 2 game lead on everyone else in the division and we are blown off and every talks as if the division is between the Cowboys and the Eagles. The Cowboys beat the Eagles who havent been good, so they have one win "in a row" and yet now they are on a roll and favorites to win the division. Because they play defense and can run the ball......... Hello? Bueller?

That's where I'm at....

 

I get frustrated by the offensive production not because of aesthetics or style points, but because I fear that eventually it will come back to bite us. Like you, if we won a Super Bowl with this formula winning playoff games 16-10, 13-9, and 8-4 I wouldn't care one bit! Because once it's over and we won, I would have nothing left to be concerned about projecting forward. 

[NikeRedskin7]

1 hour ago, MisterPinstripe said:

When you are negative on the team you excuse wins as if they are easy to come by, meanwhile any loses are SEE??. For example, the Bucs average 30 points a game and we held them to 3. But thats just because the Bucs GAVE us the win. Its not that our defense went out and made plays and TOOK the ball from them. Rodgers may have come back and beaten the Bears but against us it was like we were playing Bradford and the Cardinals, etc ,etc.

 

Some call it being negative, some call it being cautiously optimistic.  Some are Larry Michael type of fans who think we are better than we really are and some are the Doc Walker/Brian Mitchell type who can give their own honest assessment of the state of the team and don't give a damn who calls it being negative just because they are giving THEIR honest take on what they see.

 

We are definitely a solid team at best but we aren't a good team just yet.  I believe we will be a good team when we get a real QB on our roster.  I say we aren't a good team YET because good teams don't get blown away by other good teams.  Good teams don't struggle with bad teams on a regular.  A good team knows how to exploit the horrible defenses we have faced, not struggle against them.  Now a good team will fall once or twice oddly to a bad team here or there, but good teams have offensive schemes to dominate bottom five defenses not make them look like pro bowlers.

 

Good teams don't dink and dunk 6 yard passes when they are down by 14 in the fourth quarter.  We are a solid team and getting better.  I won't get ahead of myself thinking we are better than we really are.  That's not being negative, that's being realistic.

[TheShredder]

59 minutes ago, NikeRedskin7 said:

I believe we will be a good team when we get a real QB on our roster.

Alex Smith is a good QB.  He's had a PAR first half of the year.  Go back and look at his history.  The key here is that he's a winning QB.  He's not been given any real weapons to practice with enough to develop any chemistry.  Redskins don't have a #1 WR.  Their #1 receiver is their TE.  Smith to Reed hasn't developed enough chemistry to approach filling the void of a #1 WR target.  For what it's worth, Smith is doing a decent job for #1 - What he's been asked to do.  #2 - What he's been given to work with.  The 3rd tangible is his ability to take it all in and deploy a game plan. For the Skins to take a step, it doesn't require replacing what they have at QB.  They should look for a future replacement in the years to come. Very much like KC has done. 

7 hours ago, skinny21 said:

I’m still really bummed about our run D. For a time there, I thought we could really take away the run which leads to more 3rd and longs, which in turn allows us to let our pass rush loose and ups our chances at turnovers/stops.  I’ve lost a lot of that confidence.  I’m worried that teams have figured they just need to not run up the gut and they can pick up large chunks.  If we alter our D to account for that, we’re exposed in other ways and then it feels like we’re playing catch-up as opposed to dictating.  I don’t know.

I think your perception is skewed.  There have been opponents and game plans that called for #1 priority of stopping the run.  While other games haven't called for this priority.  Take the last game for an example vs TB, it was revealed that the Skins D game plan was to play off the WR's and not get beaten over the top. They knew TB would turn the ball over at least 2 times (they turned it over 4x).  Basically crippling the TB offense when they get into the redzone.  They were prepared to give up 5 FGs and wiin the game by scoring more than 15 points.  That was the game plan.  It worked.  There's nothing wrong with the run defense.  It's drastically improved and intact.

[Thinking Skins]

 

[Koolblue13]

Damn, that's great about Stroman. His first week they had him outside and it wasn't pretty. They flipped him and Moreau and looked much better.

[bakedtater1]

15 hours ago, NikeRedskin7 said:

 

Some call it being negative, some call it being cautiously optimistic.  Some are Larry Michael type of fans who think we are better than we really are and some are the Doc Walker/Brian Mitchell type who can give their own honest assessment of the state of the team and don't give a damn who calls it being negative just because they are giving THEIR honest take on what they see.

 

We are definitely a solid team at best but we aren't a good team just yet.  I believe we will be a good team when we get a real QB on our roster.  I say we aren't a good team YET because good teams don't get blown away by other good teams.  Good teams don't struggle with bad teams on a regular.  A good team knows how to exploit the horrible defenses we have faced, not struggle against them.  Now a good team will fall once or twice oddly to a bad team here or there, but good teams have offensive schemes to dominate bottom five defenses not make them look like pro bowlers.

 

Good teams don't dink and dunk 6 yard passes when they are down by 14 in the fourth quarter.  We are a solid team and getting better.  I won't get ahead of myself thinking we are better than we really are.  That's not being negative, that's being realistic.

And this here is what makes for this place great to visit.

[RandyHolt]

On 11/13/2018 at 11:30 PM, Bifflog said:

Someone will win the doom and gloom roulette game eventually and start the thread that immediately proceeds the downfall of the season, but considering that it's not the case just yet I wonder what the etiquette is for repeat attempts.  Will definitely need to work in shifts.

 

Post of the week candidate

 

We keep waiting for the wheels to fall off, but Alex Jay and Defense say otherwise.

[RandyHolt]

17 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

It really is odd that every game in the NFL is its own entity. I suppose that's the case across all sports, but the other leagues play SO many more games that trends are more apparently and more easy to bank on over time. You can more easily come up with a "typical game" from teams when they play 80 or 160 games. 

 

Each and every NFL game is its own unique work of art. It even can change on the smallest of plays or moments. It's also much more impacted by single plays as there are fewer "touches" or possessions than any other sport. 

 

Great post. I realized it too, a while back. Right before kickoff, try to envision what is going to happen, the big plays, anything. It's totally random what happens.  Bad snap fumble tip drill INT a guy injured on the first play cough Krumrie'd long TD pass to WR4...  at the end of every first quarter I can almost always say, who could have seen all that coming.  About the only thing you can possibly predict is a ball bark score. 10-3.

 

[MisterPinstripe]

16 hours ago, NikeRedskin7 said:

 

Some call it being negative, some call it being cautiously optimistic.  Some are Larry Michael type of fans who think we are better than we really are and some are the Doc Walker/Brian Mitchell type who can give their own honest assessment of the state of the team and don't give a damn who calls it being negative just because they are giving THEIR honest take on what they see.

 

We are definitely a solid team at best but we aren't a good team just yet.  I believe we will be a good team when we get a real QB on our roster.  I say we aren't a good team YET because good teams don't get blown away by other good teams.  Good teams don't struggle with bad teams on a regular.  A good team knows how to exploit the horrible defenses we have faced, not struggle against them.  Now a good team will fall once or twice oddly to a bad team here or there, but good teams have offensive schemes to dominate bottom five defenses not make them look like pro bowlers.

 

Good teams don't dink and dunk 6 yard passes when they are down by 14 in the fourth quarter.  We are a solid team and getting better.  I won't get ahead of myself thinking we are better than we really are.  That's not being negative, that's being realistic.

I have no issue with honest assessments of the team, I have said myself that the offense needs to improve even though I am very happy with the lack of turnovers.

 

What I hate is those with a negative view dismissing our wins as if we didnt deserve them and then point to the losses as the reason to justify their negativity. The Packers game as I explained above for example, gets the 'oh we still stuck, we only beat the Packers because Rodgers was injured'. Meanwhile, the Packers beat the Bears who are rather good with that injured Rodgers, should have beaten the Vikings if the refs didnt screw them over AND their kicker miss, and went on to destroy the Bills with that same injured Rodgers. For some reason that too injured to play Rodgers played rather well in all of those other games.

 

I think our defense stepped up and beat the Bucs who have been scoring 30 points a game by holding them to 3 points. The same people who say we were lucky to beat the Packers say the same thing about the Bucs. Its hard to win games in the NFL and we have won 6 out of 9, thats pretty darn good. I dont think we are making a deep run in the playoffs because I can look at the offensive output and honestly say thats not good enough to do it. But I dont, and dont need to, excuse our wins to be honest.

 

Dismissing our wins like that just come across as doing anything to back up their initial negative views of the team, to the point they cant enjoy or accept that we can beat teams.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

1 hour ago, RandyHolt said:

 

Great post. I realized it too, a while back. Right before kickoff, try to envision what is going to happen, the big plays, anything. It's totally random what happens.  Bad snap fumble tip drill INT a guy injured on the first play cough Krumrie'd long TD pass to WR4...  at the end of every first quarter I can almost always say, who could have seen all that coming.  About the only thing you can possibly predict is a ball bark score. 10-3.

 

 

Yep, it's so odd. It's such a fluid game and scoring plays make SUCH a difference. The Green Bay game was a perfect example...we hit on a couple big plays that weren't even executed all that well (the pass to Richardson wasn't a great throw) and suddenly it's a completely different game and they are fighting uphill the entire time. 

[NoCalMike]

The thing about the NFL is that it is such a week to week league that bounces go for and against every team so much. Unless you are a juggernaut of a team like the Saints or Rams or Pats (usually), there are going to be a lot of close games mixed in there.

 

Of course I am cautiously optimistic that this team can challenge for the division, but the whole "pretending" thing I don't agree with because how would that be any different than previous seasons where the team is say 3-6 but 4 of 6 losses were by a FG or less?  I guarantee if you go look at those post-game threads it will be littered with a lot of us saying "we aren't this bad" and then give a laundry list of reasons why the close losses show an overall bright picture for the future.

 

In the NFL the majority of teams are in that 7-9 to 10-6 gray area of mediocre - good.   Sometimes a missed FG in a random game comes down to missing the playoffs.  Sometimes injuries are too much to overcome.  The line between mediocre and good is very small in the NFL, but one thing you definitely can't do is pretend to win games.  Those previous seasons where this team was .500 or just under, and people pondered what it would look like if they had one less turnover, or one less missed field goal?  You are looking at it right now.  This 2018 squad isn't great, it is about middle of the pack, but some of the small things have gone right so far to get them to 6-3 and set themselves up for an exciting final month and a half of the season.

[Koolblue13]

I hate seeing this thread title. We're 6-3 and firmly in first. We're doing. We're good.

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

I’m going to just enjoy having meaningful games late in the year 

 

but in general, I’m process over results kinda person and our process doesn’t match our results at all