Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=dgack;593038]I'm surprised nobody has brought up parallels with the many Ravens teams that had anemic offenses and pretty much won due to defense and Matt Stover.[/quote]

As much as I tend to be optimistic (sp?) we don't have nearly as good of a defense as those Ravens.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

Dang some of you guys should just go slide down a razor into a bottle of alcohol, or just jab a pencil in your eye, maybe have a friend kick you between the legs. We won nothing else we can do but watch and enjoy the rest of the season. There are alot of things I could sit around and bitch about with the skins but what good does that do? Nothing, life is to dam short to get all mad over a win at that.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

It's not an either or situation. Would you rather have a dirt sandwich or a kick to the groin? Me, I'll take steak & eggs thank you very much. Until these guys start shitting out Tiffany cuff-links then they're going to get ragged on, strait up. The fans are fed up.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=GMScud;593016]Agreed about what history says. Speaking of history, going to back the second half of last season, we're 3-7, and seem to have all of the same problems with nearly identical personnel. Turnovers are few, sacks seem awfully tough to come by, we can't score touchdowns to save our lives, and we have an old, injury prone O-line with terrible depth.

I was listening to 980am today on the way home from BWI, and I've spent the last hour or so reading this board. I've seen and heard a bunch of "it's only 2 games" comments. It's not 2 games, it's 10. No more excuses. Kevin Sheehan said how "we're so close to finding those game changing sacks and turnovers," and "getting hung up on only scoring 9 points is a shortsighted view." I strongly disagree. The time is now. This current regime has had 9 preseason and 18 regular season games to figure it out, and it's not coming together.

[B]I'm SO SICK of hearing crap like, "gosh our offense can really move the ball, but..." No more buts. We don't score. We just don't. Points win games, not yards. It needs to change right away.[/B]

I think Zorn's leash can be measured in inches, not feet right now. Get it together or get out JZ. My patience is gone.[/quote]

we won didn't we?

last year at the end of the season, we were not moving the ball effectively, especially, from the 50 to the 20, and Zorn in the offseason said he was focusing on fixing that. we moved the ball effectively in both games in that area of the field.

I would call it medium rare right now. a little more seasoning, and we might get some well done out of it.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;593058]we won didn't we?

last year at the end of the season, we were not moving the ball effectively, especially, from the 50 to the 20, and Zorn in the offseason said he was focusing on fixing that. we moved the ball effectively in both games in that area of the field.

I would call it medium rare right now. a little more seasoning, and we might get some well done out of it.[/quote]I think it was you that mentioned this before, but there's a big difference between an offense that sees it's long drives fizzle out on the edge of FG range, and one that gets inside the ten before things fall apart.

The difference, of course, is that in spite of the playcalling, the Redskins got three throws into the end zone yesterday (1 of them by Portis), and had a 0% success rate. Keep getting 3-5 throws into the end zone a game and we're going to beat a lot of teams.

Last year, we usually had one or two drives into the red zone in a game, and thusly, 20 points would have been a solid effort. Now, we're on the verge of 3 TDs a game, and while that doesn't sound like much, it's the difference between 16 PPG (1 TD, 3 FG) and 24 PPG (3 TD, 1 FG), if we execute.

The point is we didn't just make it inside the red zone 4 times, we made it inside the ten 4 times.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;593029]I would rather be 0-2 if it got Zorn fired/demoted and replaced by Mike Holmgren.

Otherwise, no, 1-1 is better than 0-2. And, realistically, when we looked at the schedule when it was first released, atleast 90% of us thought we'd have a win over the Rams and a loss to the Giants at this point in the season. So, we're right where I, and most of us, thought we'd be - I just didnt think our offense would be this bad and Zorn would continue to challenge Steve Spurrier as the worst head coach the skins have had in my lifetime.[/quote]

So at the end of the day, you're really not rooting for the Redskins to win any games this year? What's more important to you is that we get Zorn out of here as soon as possible to get Holmgren?

Wouldn't you rather we win and be successful with who we have?

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

I will take all ugly W's but honestly we might as well have lost. The game is terrible sign of things to come, barring a miracle turnaround, which is what is needed for this season to make the playoffs. If you think it will be anything else, then you are strongly mistaken. I hope I eat crow but it does not seem likely.

The skins are 3-7 last 10 games and they havent scored over 20 in that span. No wait let's celebrate the win!!! Hah, pathetic.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=SmootSmack;593066]So at the end of the day, you're really not rooting for the Redskins to win any games this year? What's more important to you is that we get Zorn out of here as soon as possible to get Holmgren?

Wouldn't you rather we win and be successful with who we have?[/quote]

This is the ultimate question. Do you want Zorn to go 9-7 even if that is his peak and he sucks the year after? Isn't that delaying the inevitable?

^That isn't my position but it is many people. I haven't fully lost faith in Zorn and Co. but they are on a red hot seat.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;593058][B]we won didn't we?[/B]

[B]last year at the end of the season, we were not moving the ball effectively, especially, from the 50 to the 20, and Zorn in the offseason said he was focusing on fixing that. we moved the ball effectively in both games in that area of the field. [/B]

I would call it medium rare right now. a little more seasoning, and we might get some well done out of it.[/quote]

Sure, we beat a god awful team by 2 in our house and didn't score a TD. The week before we lost to a Giants team that played a pretty mediocre game. We play like this the rest of the way and .500 is a stretch.

From the 50 to the 20? So what? Again, points win games, not yards. Zorn should be focused on fixing moving the ball from wherever our possession begins to the endzone.

We were just barely good enough to beat a doormat. Even during our 6-2 start last year, our largest margin of victory was 8 over the winless Lions. Even when "successful" in this offense points have been scarce, and it doesn't look a ton better right now.

Moving the ball well outside of the redzone only to stall repeatedly doesn't exactly give me the warm and fuzzies.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=hooskins;593070]I will take all ugly W's but honestly we might as well have lost. The game is terrible sign of things to come, barring a miracle turnaround, which is what is needed for this season to make the playoffs. If you think it will be anything else, then you are strongly mistaken. I hope I eat crow but it does not seem likely.

The skins are 3-7 last 10 games and they havent scored over 20 in that span. No wait let's celebrate the win!!! Hah, pathetic.[/quote]
I don't think anyone on this board is celebrating, however, does anyone else remember the 0-2 Patriots right before 9/11. They went on to win the SB

or the 0-2 Giants, on the verge of being 0-3 and beating us:( and going on to win the SB.

We are 1-1, some "easier" games ahead of us. If Zorn is able to push through the redzone mental block we could be a contending team. Certainly our D looks like it could be good, and our O needs to shift gears, Like the Giants did, like the Patriots did, hell like the 0-5 skins did with Gibbs. Can it happen, I think so. Will it, we shall wait and see.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=dgack;593038]I'm surprised nobody has brought up parallels with the many Ravens teams that had anemic offenses and pretty much won due to defense and Matt Stover.[/quote]

The Redskins had a very good defense and a poor offense last year and failed to make the playoffs, and so far this year, it looks as if the offense might have actually taken a step back, so I'm not surprised parallels to the successful Ravens teams are not being drawn.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

I think the tone of this board today clearly takes into account that they did win yesterday. If they had actually lost to the Rams yesterday I think this board would have crashed from all the venom being spewed out.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=GMScud;593077]We beat a god awful team by 2 in our house and didn't score a TD. From the 50 to the 20? So what? Again, points win games, not yards. Zorn should be focused on fixing moving the ball from wherever our possession begins to the endzone.

We were just barely good enough to beat a doormat. Even during our 6-2 start last year, our largest margin of victory was 8 over the winless Lions. Even when "successful" in this offense points have been scarce, and it doesn't look a ton better right now.

Moving the ball well outside of the redzone only stall repeatedly doesn't exactly give me the warm and fuzzies.[/quote]

the goal is to win. we did that yesterday.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;593057]It's not an either or situation. Would you rather have a dirt sandwich or a kick to the groin? Me, I'll take steak & eggs thank you very much. Until these guys start shitting out Tiffany cuff-links then they're going to get ragged on, strait up. The fans are fed up.[/quote]

My favorite post of all time! God this is funny some reason. Don't know why, but it is.

Re: Would you rather be 0-2
 

[quote=dgack;593038]I'm surprised nobody has brought up parallels with the many Ravens teams that had anemic offenses and pretty much won due to defense and Matt Stover.[/quote]

Because those teams absolutely terrorized the QB and we don't.