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

2021 Season Report Card

method man

By method man
in The Stadium

 Share

Recommended Posts

stoshuaj

stoshuaj

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, MrJL said:

 

it's grading the individual players not the games.  To me that makes sense.  I mean why should Joey Slye get a D when he was only on the roster for a few games, for example


The original OP gave grades to overall groups.  🤷‍♂️
 

As a group, we stink and not close to honor roll material 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDawg

KDawg

Posted
Posted (edited)

I’m noticing the thumbs downs I’ve been getting around here are from the town homers that think the team is fine. That’s cool. I don’t mind the thumbs downs. But bring some substance with it if you’re going to do it @carex

 

I have a crew of 3-4 that follow me around and thumbs down me as often as they can :ols:

Edited by KDawg
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skinny21

skinny21

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 1/4/2022 at 11:22 AM, KDawg said:

I’m noticing the thumbs downs I’ve been getting around here are from the town homers that think the team is fine. That’s cool. I don’t mind the thumbs downs. But bring some substance with it if you’re going to do it @carex

 

I have a crew of 3-4 that follow me around and thumbs down me as often as they can :ols:

I did not give you a thumbs down, but I’m curious about your running backs grade.  In my mind, McKissick is somewhere in the B range (and obviously I’m including receiving, running and pass pro) and maybe we weight his score a bit differently since he was more of a change up/3rd down back for us (ie weighting his receiving over his running).  So I guess what I’m asking is - 1) do you see McKissick the same way I do, and 2) does this mean the other backs were in the F range (and McKissick lifts the group to a D)?  

 

 

This part isn’t directed at you - 

I think it makes sense we have some disparity (in some cases glaring ones) about certain facets.  Take TE for example.  If I’m rating Bates as a rookie TE, I think he surpassed what you’d expect from a rookie and surpassed what we expected from him as a player… but do I include those things when rating him?  Tricky.  Similar issue with RSJ - he performed better than expectations, so I might give him a score in the B range, but if I rank him compared to other #1 TEs across the league, he’s probably in the D range.

 

So all in all, while I might give Thomas an B+, Bates a B, and RSJ a C+, if I’m rating the production we got out of the spot for the year, I might give them a C or C+ (which of course doesn’t match their individual grades).

 

 

I’ll add this - this is obviously a subjective exercise, so I can actually understand people giving ratings that exceed our end product (record), because other factors weigh in - schedule strength, injuries, covid, kicker carousel, etc.  McLaurin is a great example - his production likely doesn’t match people’s grades, but that’s likely due to a consideration of other factors like not having a strong armed/accurate qb, not having a #2 to take coverage away, etc. 

Edited by skinny21
Link to comment
Share on other sites
KDawg

KDawg

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, skinny21 said:

I did not give you a thumbs down, but I’m curious about your running backs grade.  In my mind, McKissick is somewhere in the B range (and obviously I’m including receiving, running and pass pro) and maybe we weight his score a bit differently since he was more of a change up/3rd down back for us (ie weighting his receiving over his running).  So I guess what I’m asking is - 1) do you see McKissick the same way I do, and 2) does this mean the other backs were in the F range (and McKissick lifts the group to a D)?  

 

 

This part isn’t directed at you - 

I think it makes sense we have some disparity (in some cases glaring ones) about certain facets.  Take TE for example.  If I’m rating Bates as a rookie TE, I think he surpassed what you’d expect from a rookie and surpassed what we expected from him as a player… but do I include those things when rating him?  Tricky.  Similar issue with RSJ - he performed better than expectations, so I might give him a score in the B range, but if I rank him compared to other #1 TEs across the league, he’s probably in the D range.

 

So all in all, while I might give Thomas an B+, Bates a B, and RSJ a C+, if I’m rating the production we got out of the spot for the year, I might give them a C or C+ (which of course doesn’t match their individual grades).

 

 

I’ll add this - this is obviously a subjective exercise, so I can actually understand people giving ratings that exceed our end product (record), because other factors weigh in - schedule strength, injuries, covid, kicker carousel, etc.  McLaurin is a great example - his production likely doesn’t match people’s grades, but that’s likely due to a consideration of other factors like not having a strong armed/accurate qb, not having a #2 to take coverage away, etc. 

I like McKissick. But I think he is our best back and he wasn’t used enough to raise the grade of the group. Gibson had moments of brilliance but he was overused and therefore his performance was underwhelming.

 

I graded based on results. So naturally coaching and scheme/ideas plays a factor. 
 

But I can’t give the RBs a B when Gibson averaged under 3.8 a carry and had double the total carries McKissick and Patterson had combined. Both of whom had a higher YPC than Gibson.

 

McKissick had 48 carries. Despite the fact that I think he’s our best overall back, does his 48 carry 43 reception season overcome the disappointing season from the group as a whole? I’d say no.

 

Remember this isn’t individual player grades. It’s the group and their output. It also isn’t a “talent” score. It’s performative.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
method man

method man

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 1/8/2022 at 4:09 PM, -JB- said:

OK now let’s be realistic here.  Those grades are not even remotely close to realistic.

 This season was a D or D-

QB’s - B- ??? Are you nuts??? That is ridiculous.  C- and that’s being generous.  The QB these past few weeks has been atrocious more like D-

 

 


It is frustrating how things broke down at the end but remember that this team was in the playoff hunt until last week without its starting QB for essentially the season. I graded Heinicke like a backup QB, which he came into the season as

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
profusion

profusion

Posted
Posted

D+

 

They might have snuck into the playoffs again if the Covid bug and a whole bunch of injuries hadn't decimated the team at key positions in the final third of the season. Maybe better they didn't--no way this team was going to the Super Bowl, and they gained a few placed in the draft order by not making it.

 

Talent level at the skill positions on offense is still thin, and the linebacker situation needs to be addressed for real this offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burgold

Burgold

Posted
Posted

This season, when Washington was good they played average and when they were bad they played truly awful. There really were very few games to get excited about with the possible exception of the Bucs and maybe one other. Even during the four game winning streak, none of the previous games put me in a frame of mind where I thought this team has gotten its act together and is ready to roll. 

.

What this suggests to me is a C-/D+ season.

 

We need to raise both the floor and the ceiling of this team because it's not hard to imagine this team being a 3=11 team and it's very hard to imagine this team being better than 9-8.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ColonialWBSkinsFan

ColonialWBSkinsFan

Posted
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Burgold said:

This season, when Washington was good they played average and when they were bad they played truly awful. There really were very few games to get excited about with the possible exception of the Bucs and maybe one other. Even during the four game winning streak, none of the previous games put me in a frame of mind where I thought this team has gotten its act together and is ready to roll. 

.

What this suggests to me is a C-/D+ season.

 

We need to raise both the floor and the ceiling of this team because it's not hard to imagine this team being a 3=11 team and it's very hard to imagine this team being better than 9-8.

 

A solid QB1 (however we get it) and a solid MLB would very quickly raise the floor and ceiling... just not confident in the FO's ability to evaluate and acquire said assets...

Edited by ColonialWBSkinsFan
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
No Nonsense

No Nonsense

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Burgold said:

This season, when Washington was good they played average and when they were bad they played truly awful. There really were very few games to get excited about with the possible exception of the Bucs and maybe one other. Even during the four game winning streak, none of the previous games put me in a frame of mind where I thought this team has gotten its act together and is ready to roll. 

.

What this suggests to me is a C-/D+ season.

 

We need to raise both the floor and the ceiling of this team because it's not hard to imagine this team being a 3=11 team and it's very hard to imagine this team being better than 9-8.


Simple. We have to find a QB. And it can’t be someone like Mariotta or Trubiski. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burgold

Burgold

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, ColonialWBSkinsFan said:

 

A solid QB1 (however we get it) and a solid MLB would ver quickly raise the floor and ceiling... just not confident in the FO's ability to evaluate and acquire said assets...

There's the hopeful side:

 

I can imagine an offense with McClaurin, Gibson, Logan Thomas. McKissic and and Curtis Samuels to be pretty good with "solid" QBing. There were times under Heinike where the offense was really good at moving between the 20's. So, an upgrade at QB even if we keep everything else the same probably provides a good jump in production. Mind you, Heinike also would have benefited from having McKissic, Thomas, and Samuel on the field and you saw how his production dropped once he lost McKissic. Still, that's half of the equation.

 

I also think that the D needs to be seriously evaluated. It underperformed so badly. There, we need to get Jackson up to speed or call a defense that Jackson can play. We need to upgrade our linebackers, and get Young and Sweat to play at least as good as their backups.

Edited by Burgold
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Voice_of_Reason

Voice_of_Reason

Posted
Posted

There are things about this season where you have to consider "context." 

 

Then there are things which are in your control and you blew it.

 

Let's start with the second category first, things which were in their control and they blew it:

 

Everything that happened on the defense in the first 8 weeks of the season. 

- The defense was mostly healthy through that period.

- They were playing undisciplined football, particularly with the DEs, and were getting run on and passed on. Particularly

- The coaching staff completely blew up whatever chemistry the secondary had by essentially benching Cam Kurl, playing Collins as a safety, screwing around with Fuller, moving him inside and out, playing a rookie (St. Juice) who was still developing, and replacing Darby with WJIII.  They didn't HAVE to do any of that.  (Well, maybe the Darby thing, they needed to resign him or get a replacement.)  But they completely broke the secondary for no reason, and that's on them.

- Thinking John Bostic was a good enough MLB for this defense until Jamin Davis could take over.  This was wrong on 2 points:  1.  Bostic isn't good enough and 2. They mis-evaluated Davis, he's not a MLB.  Ooops.

 

The mis-use of offensive skill position players throughout the season/General offensive game-plam

- I get the injury situation, but the idea you can just slam Gibson into the line a whole bunch was a terrible idea.  

- They didn't make enough of an effort to get the ball to McLaurin.  That's basically lasted the entire season until yesterday.

- The approach was so overly conservative, with so many first down runs, etc.  This made their margin for error virtually zero.  

 

Now, on the flip side, things they really didn't have a lot of control of:

- They lost their starting QB in the first half of the first game of the season.  I know there were some that thought TH should have been the starter, but he never even really pushed Fitzy in TC.  Losing Fitz that early in the season was a huge blow.  Say what you want about him, but he's a professional NFL QB with an adequate arm strength.  

- I think the Samuel, McKissic and Thomas injuries were absolutely huge for this team.  They went into the season thinking they had McLaurin, Samuel, Thomas, Gibson, McKissic and Brown all as primary targets, with guys like Hump, Cam Sims and Milne as secondary.  Losing Samuel for the entire season, Thompson for the most of the season, McKissic for more than half the season, Gibson getting banged up.  These are all huge losses, and you can't minimize them.

- I think the OL held up well for a lot of the year, but losing 3 centers, a couple starters and a primary backup has really taken a toll.

- The COVID situation going into the Dallas game  and then the Philly game was absolutely horrendous.  There's nothing you can do about that.  But it was impactful.

- There was significant tragedy to players on the team, with Deshazer's car accident and Sweat's brother, (and I think I'm forgetting one...)  Those things all take a toll on the team.  

 

You can't do anything about injuries and COVID and personal tragedy.  

 

You CAN do something to make sure you have depth, coaching and scheme. 

 

I think it was a very mixed bag of a year.  I can forgive the late season slump because of the "not able to control" things, but I can't really forgive the early season disaster which was mostly of their own making.  

  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Warhead36

Warhead36

Posted
Posted

The biggest disappointment is that other than Jon Allen, we didn't really see any big time improvement from anyone. I mean guys like McLaurin, Gibson, Payne etc. were still good players. But none of them broke through. It almost feels like a wasted season for so many guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
method man

method man

Posted
  • Author
Posted
16 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

The biggest disappointment is that other than Jon Allen, we didn't really see any big time improvement from anyone. I mean guys like McLaurin, Gibson, Payne etc. were still good players. But none of them broke through. It almost feels like a wasted season for so many guys.


I agree for the most part. Maybe you count Schweitzer. Holcomb grew this season also - his pass coverage in the second half of the season improved. He looks like a legitimate starting outside linebacker next year

 

Fuller also played at an elite level when he was moved back outside

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Malapropismic Depository

Malapropismic Depository

Posted
Posted

Who would have guessed that a guy that bounced around a half dozen teams, and hardly caught a pass, ever, and signed a one year minimum wage contract, would be far more productive than Samuel and his crazy package of millions ?

And who would have guessed Carter would have been our 2nd best WR.

With guys like Carter and McCain, we did well with getting production out of low cost FA's.

Hope we can bring them both back.

Next year, looking forward to having Bates and Thomas on the field at the same time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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