Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

If the Eagles/Cowboys end up as good as they were in 2003......


NoCalMike

Recommended Posts

Does this hurt the Skins chances for the playoffs? Personally, I believe the Cowboys will be about two games behind what they were last year, and the Eagles I am not quite ready to make a judgement call on yet.

I don't doubt Gibbs for one second, but he is going to have to overcome a tougher division then Parcells did in his first year with the cowboys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well here is the thing. Realistically, we need to improve about five games on last year, to finish 10-6. It is possible, and I think the Skins can do it, but it isn't something the odds agree with, unless you take into account the NEW SCHOOL NFL, where teams go from losers to NFC championship games in a single season.

Now with that said, If the Eagles still finish 11-5 or better, they would win the division, and then it really depends on how much Dallas regresses.

The NFC East is going to be a very tough division nexy season, and even though I think the Skins are capable of getting into the playoffs, I still quite honestly would be satissfied(for Gibbs first year back) simply for the Skins to achieve a winning record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the past when knowing what Gibbs has done in a tough division.

In 1983, three teams in the East were better than .500 and the Cowboys finished second with a 12-4 record.

In 1984, FOUR teams in the East finished better than .500, with the Skins winning the division for the third straight year.

In 1985, three teams finished with 10 wins, and we missed the playoffs in that season if I remember correctly.

In 1989, 1990 and 1991 you had three teams in the East with double-digit wins (the Skins being one each season) and in two of those the fourth place team was 7-9 or 8-8. Gibbs has cut his teeth in a HIGHLY competitive division. A couple of times he's had good winning years and lost out of the playoffs because of the strength of the division.

By in large though, Gibbs did well in the strongest of divisions as it's this type of competition Gibbs always was able to use to get his teams playing superior football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Art

Look at the past when knowing what Gibbs has done in a tough division.

In 1983, three teams in the East were better than .500 and the Cowboys finished second with a 12-4 record.

In 1984, FOUR teams in the East finished

All of that means absolutely nothing. The NFL is a completely different game than it was back then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7-9, you guys are homers.

If we had a time machine and went back a year and took your present team with us and made them play Dallas. Yall would still lose.

DALLAS HAS NOT REGRESSED! You cant regress by gaining KJ, MW, and DH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes u can....u named a selfish reciever who will not be able to stand up to the NFC easts DBS, a a DE who had a total of 9 sacks the last 2 season (unfortunetely, thats still better than us), and a baseball playing quarterback who has yet to play a down in the nfl. either you stay the same, progress or regress, but ou can't just throw out one because of no-name aquisitions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the cowboys couldve easily finished 7-9 last year and if our team was more disciplined and knew how to close out games (which we will do now that gibbs is in the house) we couldve been at least 9-7 last year. CAR, NO, MIA, NYG....are games that first come to mind that we SHOULDVE won. we werent even as talented as we are now. the eagles.....we will see. theyve lost some key players, but have also added a few. but choking 3 years straight has got to catch up to them at some point, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think one thing we have to consider is the new playoff format, where it is very important to win your division in order to get into the post-season. Therefore, I believe that if the Boys and Eagles duplicate their performance from a season ago (despite being in an improved division with solid coaching all around) our road to winning the division will be made VERY difficult. However, I don't necessarily think it hurts our chances of grabbing a wild card.

Realistically, we have to start by reversing our dismal performance within the division that we have witnessed over the years. With Gibbs on board, we can be sure that the Cowboys, Eagles and Giants will not have a free pass anymore. Ultimately, if we can go .500 or better in the East, I think Coach Gibbs will have us in as good a position as any other team in the NFC to grab the 5th or 6th playoff spot.

While it remains to be seen if we have closed the gap enough to compete for a division title, I think that the presence of Joe Gibbs singlehandedly puts us on equal footing with any other team forced to compete for one of the two wild card spots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest SkinsHokie Fan

The closer we get to the season and the more I read the more confident I get in this team.

Honestly broker, in 12 years how much has the NFL really changed? You still gotta block, tackle and catch. You can come up with the craziest schemes but football still comes down to who blocks, tackles and catches better. And Gibbs' teams usually did all 3 of those better.

With the talent the Redskins have on both sides of the ball and the coaching staff's approach this team will be fundamentally sound. The Eagles and Cowboys can play as well as they did in 2003 and I still think the Redskins will be right up there, competitive and beating them.

There is no reason not to be confident in this Redskins team

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by RF4L

The Redskins will be the most improved team in the NFL.

Better players than last year and an infinitely better coaching staff.

Playoffs are a reasonable goal.

My vote goes to the Atlanta Falcons, with the NY Jets #2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Football is the same, the NFL is different. Teams dont win 10 games a year for 5-6 years in the row anymore. It's basically an impossibilty in the free agency area. (I love when a guy will cite *ONE* example or something like that, like that buffoon did regarding the Titans last year, sure anyone can find ONE example of something, its just not the norm or likely. If he wanted to prove his point he'd show me DOZENS of examples, not ONE to indicate that this still happens like it did in the 80s).

The games are a lot tougher and every team week in and week out has roughly the same amount of talent as compared to the 1980s where the talent pool was decided more based on what franchises had the biggest pocket books (Washington was always near the top in the NFL).

It's simply a different league now.

First of all, it's always possible for teams to play better. We won't know until the Fall. And I think the Eagles could be an even better team (not just "play as well as they did in 2003

--- My apologies, NB. I accidentally edited this post. Feel free to re-write it as you see fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by newsbroker

All of that means absolutely nothing. The NFL is a completely different game than it was back then.

NB,

All of that means a tremendous amount. You're correct the NFL as a league has changed. It has changed, however, in a way that seems to suit the strengths Gibbs has as a coach. Gibbs has a strength as a coach of being adapatable to various situations as he's proven.

But, the fact remains, in the most competitive of situations within the division, Gibbs frequently had his team at or near the top. This is tremendously meaningful when considering how he might do in an improving and more competitive division as the East is and will be.

Your statement later in this thread is false. You wrote teams don't reel off numerous successful seasons anymore. That's abjectly false because as you pointed out, someone enlightened you on the Tennessee situation. Per your normal method of operation, any bit of factual information that is inconsistent with one of your previous blanket statements -- factual information that renders your blanket statements false -- is dismissed as irrelevant.

It's not irrelevant that you can point to at least one team which has enjoyed a great deal of consistent success right now. I'd be willing to be there are other teams that have produced consistently winning organizations for a relatively long period, and where a "down" year happened, it may have happened in the .500 range.

Tampa, for example, just had a six year stretch with five winning seasons (4 with double digit victories) and one .500 year prior to last season where they fell to 7-9. Miami has never had a losing record in the cap era. Since 1993, the Dolphins have had one .500 record and have had winning years every other year, including three double digit winning years in four with a 9-7 record in there for good measure.

St. Louis has had four seasons with double digit win totals in the last five. Philly has had four seasons with 11 victories or more in a row. Since the cap came into play, Green Bay has, like Miami, had one .500 record and the rest of the years were winning ones, including seven seasons with double-digit wins.

Teams may not run off a stretch like the Niners had in the pre-cap era, but, that doesn't mean teams can't be consistently good, winning organizations for long periods of time with a relatively short period of average play. In fact, the run the Niners had is more the exception to the rule than what you are painting things as. The examples here are very similar to the types of runs you saw in the 80s, excluding the Niners who were consistently very good without any down season.

The best teams in the 80s land early 90s ike the Skins, Giants, Broncos, Bears and Bills all had several good years, followed by a relatively middle of the road one sprinkled within. When you look at team by team records over the years, you really don't see how sustainable victory is any more unreachable now than it was.

The difference now is sustainable victory usually comes when a team finds a franchise QB. Not in every case, obviously, but, where a team has that player, the rest falls into place. You are much more prone to down years due to injury now than in the past. But, good coaching and good quarterback play can make a team a very consistent winner in today's NFL.

Not sure why you'd think otherwise given the obviousness of these facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe an 8-8, or 9-6 record is realistic for Gibb's first year back, considering what we see happening with the defense. Still there are a lot of twists and turns in a NFL season. Such twists allowed us to go 3-1 early last season. I'm happy with the knowledge that as such 'breaks' present themselves, we have a coach who'll be on it like flies on some stank. Right now I see the Redskins as the KC Chiefs of a few years ago. Strong offense, but struggling defense. Actually I think our D is better, but I want to keep expectations in check. Cheers!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by fmorris

I believe an 8-8, or 9-6 record is realistic for Gibb's first year back, considering what we see happening with the defense. Still there are a lot of twists and turns in a NFL season. Such twists allowed us to go 3-1 early last season. I'm happy with the knowledge that as such 'breaks' present themselves, we have a coach who'll be on it like flies on some stank. Right now I see the Redskins as the KC Chiefs of a few years ago. Strong offense, but struggling defense. Actually I think our D is better, but I want to keep expectations in check. Cheers!!

When Gibbs was initially signed I kind of felt he would wind up with a 6-10 or 7-9 record given how difficult it is to expect him to be at full speed right away after such a long layoff. As we've added players and improved every level of the team in the offseason, I've come up to 8-8 or 9-7 thinking even with some struggles, the staff around him is excellent, we have pretty fair depth in most areas, and the schedule does not appear all that daunting looking at the teams.

I'm going to probably stick in this area because I think we can't help but lose some games this year we probably wouldn't if they were played next year. Still, one thing keeps sticking at me with regard to how well we could potentially do. The number of teams playing young, inexperienced QBs against us appears to be astoninshingly high if it falls out how it could. With the number of looks Williams will put on those teams, and the good depth he has in the secondary and back seven with speed and versatility, I can see some games falling to our favor I might not see fall that way if the other team had a veteran QB going against us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at the past when knowing what Gibbs has done in a tough division.

Wow. I know you were only posting the successfull seasons for us, but those were cool stats. It does seem as though it takes the Redskins to raise the level of division play. It seems, SEEMS I say, that as the Skins go, so goes the NFC East. (I await the jabs from Dallas, NY and Philly fans who will recoil, insulted.)

I am worried sick, quite frankly, that Dallas WILL remain strong this season. We are talking about Bill Parcells, folks. He makes bad players good and good players great.

I am almost positive that Philadelphia will win the NFC East title and lose in the NFC Championship game. ;)

I'll state again here that the New Yawk Football Giants have a GOOD coach. Just ask Mark Brunell, who flourished under Coughlin. We may be getting Brunell on the bad end of playing so long for such a physically demanding coach. But he was great as a Jaguar and Eli Manning should become pretty good after his first year. The G-Men will be the team that everyone MUST take advantage of in order to rack up division wins. Not that I'm saying they "suck", Giant fans. Tom. :) I just mean that they will be vulnerable, at least for 8-9 games. The Skins, Boys, and Iggs figure to beat eachother up and had BETTER beat up on NY this season, because it could mean the edge at the end. If NY turns out to be a surprise, it won't surprise me. I just think they will be the team with the most to expose, with Manning at the helm and the players grumbling about Coughlin early on.

We will need a wild-card spot to get in this year and we'll be right alongside Dallas, chasing Philadelphia.

:point2sky

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still see the skins having a realistic chance of going 10-6 or better.

We improved personell and coachingwise over the past year and given the pathetic way we gave away games I don't see how a well coached team will not win 60 percent of those games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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