Re: On Blache
 

Bill Cowher will change our defense next year

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=eddie lewis;514080]Bill Cowher will change our defense next year[/quote]


changing the head coach ruins the point of changing the defensive coach.

Damnit, I think Snyder learned a lot from Gibbs. He hasn't acted like the owner he was before Gibbs in years.

Re: On Blache
 

I'm sorry but...

GTripp, Matty...

[U]Game, Set, and Match[/U] for everyone who already knew that it is absolutely ludicrous to say our defense is even REMOTELY equally responsible for our season being a disappointment.

Today was a PERFECT example of all of the stats I've have shared for the past week... [U]horrible[/U] offense (and yes, GTripp, I'd put our offense on in the same league as the Lions - I'll say it), above average/good defense (I never said ELITE defense, I said NOT equal to blame and NOT a below average pass defense!)

Re: On Blache
 

I never said the D was equally responsible. At least get your facts straight if you're going to call someone out.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;514497]I'm sorry but...

GTripp, Matty...

[U]Game, Set, and Match[/U] for everyone who already knew that it is absolutely ludicrous to say our defense is even REMOTELY equally responsible for our season being a disappointment.

Today was a PERFECT example of all of the stats I've have shared for the past week... [U]horrible[/U] offense (and yes, GTripp, I'd put our offense on in the same league as the Lions - I'll say it), above average/good defense (I never said ELITE defense, I said NOT equal to blame and NOT a below average pass defense!)[/quote]

Amen to that. Yes we need to change things in the defense, but to talk like they are the main problem is ridiculous.

Re: On Blache
 

we NEED an elite defense, though.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=MrJL;514510]we NEED an elite defense, though.[/quote]

If our offense was average, our defense would be good enough. Our defense is not elite, since we expect our offense to be able to keep us in the game, but they don't. Our defense, although not elite, has kept this team from having a losing record I would say 2 out of the 3 past years (and possible 3 out of the 4 years if we finish 9-7). Our defense is really good, but not Titans/Ravens good. And if our offense would be average, we'd be going to the playoffs.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;514497]I'm sorry but...

GTripp, Matty...

[U]Game, Set, and Match[/U] for everyone who already knew that it is absolutely ludicrous to say our defense is even REMOTELY equally responsible for our season being a disappointment.

Today was a PERFECT example of all of the stats I've have shared for the past week... [U]horrible[/U] offense (and yes, GTripp, I'd put our offense on in the same league as the Lions - I'll say it), above average/good defense (I never said ELITE defense, I said NOT equal to blame and NOT a below average pass defense!)[/quote]

Could not have said it any better.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Mattyk72;514504]I never said the D was equally responsible. At least get your facts straight if you're going to call someone out.[/quote]

When GTripp goes on and on to try and prove this, then you respond, (out of nowhere) "Game, set, and match, GTripp" ... then, yeah, you are supporting his argument right??

... let me just say... and if that pisses you off, well you know how I felt when threw your two cents in, (trying to make it seem like I'm somehow inferior to the guy) when you weren't even in the debate... your comment put you in, supporting him

Our defense is good enough to take an above average offense DEEP into the playoffs, at a minimum. An AVERAGE offense (you know, one that can score over 20 per game) would be a playoff team with this defense.... period.

I really don't mean to sound like a prick, but the whole argument just pissed me off all week. That a guy that's supposed to be the "guru" on this site gets supported by you and others when he says that our D is equally responsible as our O and make comments suggesting he was putting my clear arguments/statistics to shame... I just have had a chip on my shoulder...

BUT... chip is gone... My apologies for venting here like so..

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;514497]I'm sorry but...

GTripp, Matty...

[U]Game, Set, and Match[/U] for everyone who already knew that it is absolutely ludicrous to say our defense is even REMOTELY equally responsible for our season being a disappointment.

Today was a PERFECT example of all of the stats I've have shared for the past week... [U]horrible[/U] offense (and yes, GTripp, I'd put our offense on in the same league as the Lions - I'll say it), above average/good defense (I never said ELITE defense, I said NOT equal to blame and NOT a below average pass defense!)[/quote]

Wrong. The defense played great, but they only blitzed once (that I saw). That was the point. Blache had been calling bad games, using ineffectual blitzes and unnecessarily putting pressure on the back end. Today he played coverage and, well you saw the results. You have to understand the argument to have a decent rebuttal. This game actually proved Tripp's point. Great defensive effort, great play calling by Blache.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;514518]When GTripp goes on and on to try and prove this, then you respond, (out of nowhere) "Game, set, and match, GTripp" ... then, yeah, you are supporting his argument right??

... let me just say... and if that pisses you off, well you know how I felt when threw your two cents in, (trying to make it seem like I'm somehow inferior to the guy) when you weren't even in the debate... your comment put you in, supporting him

Our defense is good enough to take an above average offense DEEP into the playoffs, at a minimum. An AVERAGE offense (you know, one that can score over 20 per game) would be a playoff team with this defense.... period.[/quote]

I just thought he had the stronger argument, it didn't mean I supported 100% of what he said.

I agree the O is more to blame overall, but it's naive to think the D hasn't had a role at times this year as well. Especially during the 4th quarter as of late, not including today of course.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=SC Skins Fan;514522]Wrong. The defense played great, but they only blitzed once (that I saw). That was the point. Blache had been calling bad games, using ineffectual blitzes and unnecessarily putting pressure on the back end. Today he played coverage and, well you saw the results. You have to understand the argument to have a decent rebuttal. This game actually proved Tripp's point. Great defensive effort, great play calling by Blache.[/quote]

1) You HONESTLY want to say we just blitzed once today?

2) So when we don't play run first, great play calling, but if we play run first, and don't get any pressure, terrible play calling & our pass defense is below average. (??)

you are right, it is hard to understand your argument.

Clear as day we are top 10 in run defense and pass defense...
ANY kind of "blitz percentage" or "yards per completion" argument is definitely not understood by me... I clearly am an idiot.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Mattyk72;514523]I just thought he had the stronger argument, it didn't mean I supported 100% of what he said.

I agree the O is more to blame overall, but it's naive to think the D hasn't had a role at times this year as well. Especially during the 4th quarter as of late, not including today of course.[/quote]

Fair enough, but once again, everyone focuses on our D in the 4th quarter because our offense can't score 20 points in a game (hell, make that 17), so no matter WHO we play, they are in it late and our D has been on the field all day and the pressure is ALL ON THEM.

I'm still trying to figure how this is somehow an inferior argument... but ok.

I'm also still trying to figure out my true feelings on the whole "4th quarter is more important than the other 3" thing.

and let me finish with this... one guy just posted what it seems a lot of you think... "We NEED an elite defense, though"

It's CRAZY to me for people to demand we be the '85 Bears, '70s Steelers or early '90s Ravens. We have a GOOD defense. Let's talk about how our offense, out of all of the teams with new offenses and new QBs is FAAARRRR behind the rest, and drop the blaming the D.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Mattyk72;514523]I just thought he had the stronger argument, it didn't mean I supported 100% of what he said.

I agree the O is more to blame overall, but it's naive to think the D hasn't had a role at times this year as well. Especially during the 4th quarter as of late, not including today of course.[/quote]

There were times that the defense got too much into a prevent defense, for example our win against the Cowboys. I was listening to the game on the radio and Sonny Jurgensen was complaining that the team was not blitzing and allowed the Cowboys to score on a late TD. And that was a good game played by the offense. However, I think the offense's slow start in a lot of the games and the missed opportunities to score points, especially those off turnovers, had a big impact in the defense's woes in the 4th quarter.

I do agree that there are a lot of things that need to change on the defensive side of the ball. We need to see more play out of Jason Taylor like we saw today, we need to figure out what's going to happen with our aging LB group, and we need some type of stability/consistency with our defensive backs. But to imply that the defense is the major problem in our loses, overlooking the huge deficiencies (sp?) in the offense is just being too narrow minded. This team's priority should be the offensive line, getting more production of out the offensive side of the ball, and then the defense.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=SC Skins Fan;514522]Wrong. The defense played great, but they only blitzed once (that I saw). That was the point. Blache had been calling bad games, using ineffectual blitzes and unnecessarily putting pressure on the back end. Today he played coverage and, well you saw the results. You have to understand the argument to have a decent rebuttal. This game actually proved Tripp's point. Great defensive effort, great play calling by Blache.[/quote]

They blitzed a few times. Overall, I'd say the individual effort was great, the playing calling decent. But they still went into the damn Prevent Winning D at the end of the game.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;514531]1) You HONESTLY want to say we just blitzed once today?

2) So when we don't play run first, great play calling, but if we play run first, and don't get any pressure, terrible play calling & our pass defense is below average. (??)

you are right, it is hard to understand your argument.

Clear as day we are top 10 in run defense and pass defense...
ANY kind of "blitz percentage" or "yards per completion" argument is definitely not understood by me... I clearly am an idiot.[/quote]

Yes, I saw one blitz. Might have missed one or two, but they were not bringing all those blitzes that they used in previous weeks. Tripp might have been a larger argument (after reading back over the thread), he can speak for himself. My argument was more simple; Blache used too many blitzes that weren't working and putting unnecessary pressure on the DBs and giving the QBs easy reads. The numbers are there, 2nd (or so) in the league in blitz percentage going into this week. Today they brought four most of the time and only rushed three a bunch of the time. Good play calling since they have proven that they can't get pressure even by blitzing. McNabb struggled to find open receivers (and made some bad throws and had some key drops).

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=SC Skins Fan;514543]Yes, I saw one blitz. Might have missed one or two, but they were not bringing all those blitzes that they used in previous weeks. Tripp might have been a larger argument (after reading back over the thread), he can speak for himself. My argument was more simple; Blache used too many blitzes that weren't working and putting unnecessary pressure on the DBs and giving the QBs easy reads. The numbers are there, 2nd (or so) in the league in blitz percentage going into this week. Today they brought four most of the time and only rushed three a bunch of the time. Good play calling since they have proven that they can't get pressure even by blitzing. McNabb struggled to find open receivers (and made some bad throws and had some key drops).[/quote]

The funny thing about you and discussing this is that I agree, I hate our blitz packages. We hardly ever are successful on blitzes. So we agree in your argument.

But... all I have been saying all along is that:
1) our offense is AWFUL
2) our defense is certainly not equally accountable for us not making the playoffs
3) Points allowed is more important than "blitz" stats or "yards per completion", etc.
4) our pass defense is NOT below average

That's all... those 4 things. Now, I used alot of statistics, etc. to try and show this, but obviously, I'm trippin on acid and seeing things that no one else sees when they watch the Redskins play or look at the stats I provide, cause my argument is inferior... I'll have to accept that to some of you feel that way.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;514533]Fair enough, but once again, everyone focuses on our D in the 4th quarter because our offense can't score 20 points in a game (hell, make that 17), so no matter WHO we play, they are in it late and our D has been on the field all day and the pressure is ALL ON THEM.

I'm still trying to figure how this is somehow an inferior argument... but ok.

I'm also still trying to figure out my true feelings on the whole "4th quarter is more important than the other 3" thing.

and let me finish with this... one guy just posted what it seems a lot of you think... "We NEED an elite defense, though"

[B]It's CRAZY to me for people to demand we be the '85 Bears, '70s Steelers or early '90s Ravens. We have a GOOD defense. Let's talk about how our offense, out of all of the teams with new offenses and new QBs is FAAARRRR behind the rest, and drop the blaming the D.[/quote[/B]]

Could you have imagined what people on here would've said if Philly scores on that last play and then we lose in OT? You know people would've been bitching about the defense. But from what I saw out there today was an offense that was simply unwatchable. Time and time again getting the ball around the 50 and not able to do a damn thing.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;514550]The funny thing about you and discussing this is that I agree, I hate our blitz packages. We hardly ever are successful on blitzes. So we agree in your argument.

But... all I have been saying all along is that:
1) our offense is AWFUL
2) our defense is certainly not equally accountable for us not making the playoffs
3) Points allowed is more important than "blitz" stats or "yards per completion", etc.
4) our pass defense is NOT below average

That's all... those 4 things. Now, I used alot of statistics, etc. to try and show this, but obviously, I'm trippin on acid and seeing things that no one else sees when they watch the Redskins play or look at the stats I provide, cause my argument is inferior... I'll have to accept that to some of you feel that way.[/quote]

The Redskins actually blitzed 7 times (out of 50 pass attempts). They got pressure on one (but McNabb hit Smith for a first down). This is every Eagles pass play with the number of Redskins rushers. I think I probably agree with your point. I just thought Blache had done a poor job calling games and used too many blitzes in previous weeks.

1-10-PHI 35 (12:03) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short left to 82-L.Smith to PHI 40 for 5 yards (22-C.Rogers). 3
3-2-PHI 43 (10:44) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 10-D.Jackson pushed ob at WAS 49 for 8 yards (23-D.Hall) [99-A.Carter]. 4
1-10-WAS 49 (9:59) (Shotgun) PENALTY on PHI-83-G.Lewis, False Start, 5 yards, enforced at WAS 49 - No Play. 4
2-16-PHI 45 (8:52) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short middle to 10-D.Jackson (59-L.Fletcher). 3
3-16-PHI 45 (8:47) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete deep middle to 81-J.Avant. 3

2-8-PHI 18 (5:02) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 87-B.Celek pushed ob at PHI 26 for 8 yards (52-R.McIntosh). 3
1-10-PHI 26 (4:28) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short left to 49-D.Klecko. 4
3-8-PHI 28 (3:38) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb sacked at PHI 18 for -10 yards (55-J.Taylor). 4

1-10-PHI 47 (14:05) 5-D.McNabb pass short middle to 28-C.Buckhalter to WAS 42 for 11 yards (30-L.Landry, 54-H.Blades). 4
[B]1-10-WAS 42 (13:30) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short middle to 82-L.Smith. 5 Blitz (McIntosh)[/B]
3-6-WAS 38 (12:48) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 49-D.Klecko to WAS 36 for 2 yards (54-H.Blades, 27-F.Smoot). 3

2-8-PHI 22 (2:46) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short middle to 82-L.Smith. 3
Timeout #1 by PHI at 02:41.
3-8-PHI 22 (2:41) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 82-L.Smith to PHI 30 for 8 yards (27-F.Smoot, 92-D.Evans). Washington challenged the first down ruling, and the play was REVERSED. (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 82-L.Smith to PHI 29 for 7 yards (27-F.Smoot, 92-D.Evans). 3

2-7-PHI 20 (14:14) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete deep middle to 10-D.Jackson (30-L.Landry, 53-M.Washington). 3
Timeout #1 by PHI at 14:05.
3-7-PHI 20 (14:05) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 86-R.Brown to PHI 30 for 10 yards (27-F.Smoot). 3
1-13-PHI 27 (12:52) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb scrambles left end pushed ob at PHI 30 for 3 yards (24-S.Springs). 4
3-3-PHI 37 (11:37) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb sacked at PHI 30 for -7 yards (55-J.Taylor). FUMBLES (55-J.Taylor), RECOVERED by WAS-59-L.Fletcher at PHI 30. 59-L.Fletcher to PHI 18 for 12 yards (69-J.Runyan). 4

1-10-PHI 20 (8:43) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 83-G.Lewis to PHI 25 for 5 yards (24-S.Springs). 4
2-5-PHI 25 (8:07) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short middle to 36-B.Westbrook. 3
3-5-PHI 25 (8:02) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short middle to 82-L.Smith to PHI 42 for 17 yards (48-C.Horton). 3
2-11-PHI 41 (6:45) 5-D.McNabb pass deep left to 36-B.Westbrook to WAS 12 for 47 yards (23-D.Hall). WAS-79-L.Alexander was injured during the play. He is Out. 3
1-10-WAS 12 (5:50) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short middle to 82-L.Smith (30-L.Landry) [99-A.Carter]. 3
[B]2-10-WAS 12 (5:44) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short middle to 81-J.Avant to WAS 5 for 7 yards (24-S.Springs). 5 (Blades)[/B]
3-3-WAS 5 (5:03) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short left to 36-B.Westbrook to WAS 4 for 1 yard (48-C.Horton). 4

[B]1-10-PHI 9 (15:00) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short left to 86-R.Brown. 5 (Washington)[/B]
2-10-PHI 9 (14:56) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short middle to 36-B.Westbrook to PHI 15 for 6 yards (59-L.Fletcher). 4
3-4-PHI 15 (14:13) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short middle to 81-J.Avant. 4

1-10-PHI 3 (11:18) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 10-D.Jackson to PHI 9 for 6 yards (23-D.Hall). 4
[B]2-4-PHI 9 (10:35) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short middle to 87-B.Celek (23-D.Hall). 5 (Washington)[/B]
3-4-PHI 9 (10:30) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 82-L.Smith to PHI 11 for 2 yards (23-D.Hall). 3
[B]
1-10-PHI 10 (8:15) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short middle to 86-R.Brown (23-D.Hall). 6 (McIntosh and Fletcher)[/B]
2-10-PHI 10 (8:09) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short middle to 10-D.Jackson (24-S.Springs). 4
3-10-PHI 10 (8:03) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short right to 10-D.Jackson. 4

1-10-PHI 20 (6:09) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete deep left to 10-D.Jackson. 4
2-10-PHI 20 (6:03) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 82-L.Smith to PHI 21 for 1 yard (24-S.Springs, 48-C.Horton). 4
3-9-PHI 21 (5:24) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb left end pushed ob at PHI 26 for 5 yards (95-C.Wilson). 4

2-7-PHI 12 (3:11) 5-D.McNabb pass short middle to 86-R.Brown to PHI 22 for 10 yards (23-D.Hall). 4 (Springs and Rogers came, Monty and Taylor dropped)
1-10-PHI 22 (2:47) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short middle to 36-B.Westbrook to PHI 28 for 6 yards (59-L.Fletcher). 4
2-4-PHI 28 (2:15) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short right to 28-C.Buckhalter to PHI 35 for 7 yards (22-C.Rogers). 3
Two-Minute Warning
1-10-PHI 35 (2:00) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short middle to 82-L.Smith to PHI 41 for 6 yards (59-L.Fletcher). 3
2-4-PHI 41 (1:38) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short middle to 81-J.Avant to 50 for 9 yards (24-S.Springs). 3
1-10- (1:14) (No Huddle, Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete short middle to 81-J.Avant. 3
2-10- (1:10) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short left to 86-R.Brown pushed ob at WAS 40 for 10 yards (27-F.Smoot). 4
1-10-WAS 40 (1:05) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete deep right to 10-D.Jackson (23-D.Hall). 3
[B]2-10-WAS 40 (:57) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short middle to 82-L.Smith to WAS 29 for 11 yards (23-D.Hall). 5 (Springs)[/B]
1-10-WAS 29 (:39) (No Huddle) 5-D.McNabb spiked the ball to stop the clock.
2-10-WAS 29 (:39) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass incomplete deep middle to 81-J.Avant (22-C.Rogers). 4
[B]3-10-WAS 29 (:34) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short middle to 36-B.Westbrook to WAS 23 for 6 yards (59-L.Fletcher). 5 (Horton)[/B]
Timeout #3 by PHI at 00:27.
4-4-WAS 23 (:27) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass short left to 36-B.Westbrook to WAS 18 for 5 yards (55-J.Taylor). 3
1-10-WAS 18 (:27) (No Huddle) 5-D.McNabb spiked the ball to stop the clock.
2-10-WAS 18 (:12) (Shotgun) 5-D.McNabb pass deep middle to 86-R.Brown to WAS 1 for 17 yards (27-F.Smoot, 30-L.Landry). The Replay Assistant challenged the runner broke the plane ruling, and the play was Upheld. 3

Re: On Blache
 

Wow. Kudos for the effort. But yeah we did blitz more in other games... but again, we agree on this point and I feel like it's something that DEFINITELY needs to be addressed. But... the overall point of mine is to not point the finger at the D for our woes this year because these bad blitzes have not KILLED our defense this year as we are still are top 10 in my mind and in the important stats (yards allowed/points allowed)... regardless of blitz percentages... if you disagree, then so be it.

Re: On Blache
 

The defense has carried this team and Blache is the mastermind behind it all this....why are we complaining about him again?!! This thread is just as pathetic as the portis one.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=thomasfan31;514594]The defense has carried this team and Blache is the mastermind behind it all this....why are we complaining about him again?!! This thread is just as pathetic as the portis one.[/quote]

Hey, even the Washington Post and commentators were talking about the D being unable to get off the field in the fourth and suffering breakdown in the fourth in the past week.

Re: On Blache
 

I just re-read the whole Gtripp vs. Hail debate and have to say that I find it ludacris that a guy who puts so much effort into analyzing the Skins could ever say they have a "below" average pass defense and that they "give up too many points".

You could make an arguement that they don't have a "great" pass defense, but to say they are below averagae is beyond hysterical. (And I read all your super in-depth stats)

I looked at this arguement from an objective view and honestly I couldn't sum up your arguement in a couple sentences if I had to... You try to use "context neutral stats" to support your arguement but then "discount" Romo's performance because he had a cast on his hand. You lose all credibility with me right there, thats just intellectually dishonest.

Stats are good and all, but they are just tools. Usually they can't show you the whole picture with out context. You have obviously picked the stats that support your arguement while chosing to ignore the once Hail throws out.

Bottom line is this: Anyone who has watched every Skin's game this year will tell you their pass defense is no where close to "below" average.

And where are all these points that the Skins are so bad at "not preventing"? Cause they sure don't show up on the score board.

Your arguement, while eloquent, just doesn't make sense.

The fact that they are 5th in overall defense and 6th in points allowed proves in itself that they are at absolute minimum "average" (most would argue above average). You have yet to address why you consider those stats to be meaningless.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=maroonandblack30;514706]I just re-read the whole Gtripp vs. Hail debate and have to say that I find it ludacris that a guy who puts so much effort into analyzing the Skins could ever say they have a "below" average pass defense and that they "give up too many points".

You could make an arguement that they don't have a "great" pass defense, but to say they are below averagae is beyond hysterical. (And I read all your super in-depth stats)

I looked at this arguement from an objective view and honestly I couldn't sum up your arguement in a couple sentences if I had to... You try to use "context neutral stats" to support your arguement but then "discount" Romo's performance because he had a cast on his hand. You lose all credibility with me right there, thats just intellectually dishonest.

Stats are good and all, but they are just tools. Usually they can't show you the whole picture with out context. You have obviously picked the stats that support your arguement while chosing to ignore the once Hail throws out.

Bottom line is this: Anyone who has watched every Skin's game this year will tell you their pass defense is no where close to "below" average.

And where are all these points that the Skins are so bad at "not preventing"? Cause they sure don't show up on the score board.

Your arguement, while eloquent, just doesn't make sense.

The fact that they are 5th in overall defense and 6th in points allowed proves in itself that they are at absolute minimum "average" (most would argue above average). You have yet to address why you consider those stats to be meaningless.[/quote]

For me it's because at times late in the game when the Skins were only a touchdown or a field goal down, as hard as it would be to get that for their O to get that, they've given up a touchdown or a field goal to make it a two score game.

And also because I've actually seen the DB's blanket recievers for an insanely long period and the line not get anywhere near the QB

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=maroonandblack30;514706]The fact that they are 5th in overall defense and 6th in points allowed proves in itself that they are at absolute minimum "average" (most would argue above average). You have yet to address why you consider those stats to be meaningless.[/quote]Well, I mean, I addressed this very clearly. PPG simply ignores the amount of drives in a game. Period. If you have an offense that sustains drives, and a defense that allows sustained drives (which I proved that the Redskins do), theres going to be a relatively small amount of points scored in a game. I showed very clearly that the Redskins ACTUALLY prevent points at a league average rate.

That alone doesn't prove that the whole defense is below average (which actually was never, ever my argument). If you had read my arguments throughoughly, as you claim to have, you'll know that I went beyond what the stats say to show the downward trend in production.

But give Hail the credit for predicting the performance by the pass D against the Eagles (sort of), because I thought our downward trend would continue under Blache. I was wrong on that much.

It will be interesting to see how we finish the season, as Blache's major problems this year have come against below average offenses (and divisional opponents). But if you read and understood what I wrote, you'll agree that the defense isn't elite, at least not like the type of elite they showed they could be against Philly.

The "below average" pass defense, was an opinion, nothing more. The defense proved on Sunday that they can still have great games, something they hadn't done in over two months.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;514497]Today was a PERFECT example of all of the stats I've have shared for the past week... [U]horrible[/U] offense (and yes, GTripp, I'd put our offense on in the same league as the Lions - I'll say it), above average/good defense (I never said ELITE defense, I said NOT equal to blame and NOT a below average pass defense!)[/quote]Well, I'd say your assessment of the offense is pretty far out there as well, but necessary to support your assessment of the defense.

But I'm not going to bring up what you are wrong about this week. [B]Because the defense was great this week.[/B] And while you've missed the point on the offense, in the 4th quarter they were every bit as bad as you claim they've been all year. So, while I'd like you to see the contrast between that ineffective 4th quarter offense, and the offense in the rest of the game/season I'll settle for the hard work that SC Skins Fan put into this thread to show exactly what I meant.

[quote=SC Skins Fan;514522]Wrong. The defense played great, but they only blitzed once (that I saw). That was the point. Blache had been calling bad games, using ineffectual blitzes and unnecessarily putting pressure on the back end. Today he played coverage and, well you saw the results. You have to understand the argument to have a decent rebuttal. This game actually proved Tripp's point. Great defensive effort, great play calling by Blache.[/quote]

Remember Hail, the only thing I ever said you were flat out wrong on was when you said PPG is the only stat that matters. I proved this pretty convincingly. And you never really disputed that. Skinsfan69 tried to, but that ended kind of ugly. This is the part that Matty was referring to.

Anyway, in the spirit of the holidays, let's both be right this week. I was right on Blache. You were right on the quality of the Blache-neutral defense. We beat the Eagles behind an outstanding performance from our defense. Seriously. This is a great week to be a Redskins fan.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=skinsfan69;514057]I don't think you're a prick. I just thing you act like you a Mr. Know It All just cause you spend countless hours breaking down film and studying stats. Just cause you take the time to do this, you think your opinion is what matters. Then you get defensive when someone challenges you on it. You get defensive if I say other people who have played in the NFL and know more about football than you (or I) say the defense is not the main problem.[/quote]Well, either way, no hard feelings.

If I put multiple hours into an argument that I'm pretty darn sure/am sure I'm right on, you can't really expect me to give it up when a few people who don't necessarily understand where I'm coming from try to shoot me down. That's what this big thing boils down do. It probably won't be the last time I get defensive on this board when someone tries to (poorly) shoot me down.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=SmootSmack;514040]You said there is absolutely no evidence that the offense has gone three and out on multiple occassions and failed to advance field position. [B]I'm just trying to figure out why you would say that.[/B] Or maybe now the debate is over what you mean by "too infrequently"[/quote]You can't measure Zorn's ball control offense without noting the astounding effects on time of possession. Too many people ignore this, by claiming it goes three and out all the time.

If we assume a league average offense is the baseline for how many three and outs are acceptable (and don't we have to?), then it's factually incorrect to claim that they go three and out "too much". Our offense is one of the very best in the NFL on our side of the 50. Our problems come when the field shrinks and all of a sudden we get hit by negative plays.

Then there are some people who argue that we just as well might be going three and out. These people are wrong.

Some people confuse going three and out sometimes for going three and out always. I think these fans are vastly misinformed, and maybe it has something to do with where they are getting their information. So there you have it.

(Bonus points if you got the reference in that last sentence).

Re: On Blache
 

Hey look GTripp, it's the holiday season and even if it weren't, I want you to know I never meant to personally attack you throughout our debate (I may have sounded harsh at times, but I felt like I was defending my own level of intelligence and analysis).

Personally, I think one thing that is great about this site is that it's a place to come and vent as Redskins fans and also delve into intellecual banter about the current events revolving around the team. But when you make comments like people "poorly" try to dispute you... I get irritated all over again.

You say, "Remember Hail, the only thing I ever said you were flat out wrong on was when you said PPG is the only stat that matters. I proved this pretty convincingly. And you never really disputed that."

[I]REALLY[/I]???? [I]HUH[/I]????

Let me just remind you of a point I made that showed you didn't make such a CLEAR argument that PPG don't matter as much as points per drive and that we are average at best in this regard...

You said...
"But you'll also notice that we rank 10th in points per drive, and 12th in TDs per drive. Now look at the numbers. We are closer to #25 (Jacksonville) in points per drive than we are to #1 (Baltimore), and we are closer to # 26 (Oakland) in TDs per drive than we are to #1 (Pittsburgh)."

I said...
* How exactly is 10th in the league closer to 25th than 1st? How is being in the top 10 bad? or top 12 even? out of 32 teams, that's CERTAINLY not "middle of the pack" and DEFINITELY not close to 25th.

Also, you know we are DEFINITELY higher in the top 10 after this passed week in "your" category. So this argument solidfies the fact that we have a good defense.

You DEFIN ITELY haven't even come CLOSE to definitely proving me wrong on even ONE point... ESPECIALLY points per game allowed.


[U]I'll finish with this nugget:[/U]

[B]ONLY ONE, count that ONE, team in the top 17 in PPG allowed is out of the playoff hunt[/B] besides us... the Cleveland Browns (Their offense hasn't scored a TD in 5 games).

Is that not significant????

Re: On Blache
 

I'm sorry, but I have to address this.

GTripp, you come off as so smug and pompous in one breath and then COMPLETELY discredit yourself in the next with the insane amount of contridictions you spew.

Perfect example:

You say this... "I suggest you look at these drive stats before you post anymore. It takes the TOP argument off the table (but not the field position argument). You'll notice the Redskins defense ranks first in punts per drive. Obviously, that's good, and it's a big component of why we give up so few points per game: no team forces more punts than the Redskins. But [U]you'll also notice that we rank 10th in points per drive, and 12th in TDs per drive. Now look at the numbers. We are closer to #25 (Jacksonville) in points per drive than we are to #1 (Baltimore), and we are closer to # 26 (Oakland) in TDs per drive than we are to #1 (Pittsburgh).[/U]
This isn't even including the fact that we are in the top seven in Ave. Starting field position.
Here's the point: when you break the points per game stat down, you realize that we're really not that good at preventing points."



Then you spew on about our offense being "one of the best in the league" at ball control??

Using those SAME EXACT STATS from YOUR SOURCE you will see that our offense was ranked 16th in yards per drive, 27th in points per drive, and 28th in TDs per drive. (and these were the rankings BEFORE that incredible offensive output Sunday)

Basically, being 10th in points allowed per drive is terrible, comparable to Jax and Oakland, but our offense being ranked 16th in yards per drive is pretty damned awesome....

EH??

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;515209]Let me just remind you of a point I made that showed you didn't make such a CLEAR argument that PPG don't matter as much as points per drive and that we are average at best in this regard...

You said...
"But you'll also notice that we rank 10th in points per drive, and 12th in TDs per drive. Now look at the numbers. We are closer to #25 (Jacksonville) in points per drive than we are to #1 (Baltimore), and we are closer to # 26 (Oakland) in TDs per drive than we are to #1 (Pittsburgh)."

I said...
* How exactly is 10th in the league closer to 25th than 1st? How is being in the top 10 bad? or top 12 even? out of 32 teams, that's CERTAINLY not "middle of the pack" and DEFINITELY not close to 25th.[/quote]I did say "Now look at the numbers." Which is something you did not do: actually click the link and look at the numbers. That's pretty critical for understanding why the quantity of TD/Pts per drive allowed by our defense was closer to the quantity of Oakland than Pittsburgh. It's right there, you just had to look. And you've proven conclusively that this concept wouldn't be lost on you had you actually looked at the numbers...so HA, got you red handed! ;)

Being in the top 12 in TDs allowed per drive is NOT bad. Not at all. You can win 7-10 games a year with that sort of effort. Maybe more if you force more than 5 fumbles a year. But it's certainly not great, or even good. It's just meh.

[quote]Also, you know we are DEFINITELY higher in the top 10 after this passed week in "your" category. So this argument solidfies the fact that we have a good defense.

You DEFIN ITELY haven't even come CLOSE to definitely proving me wrong on even ONE point... ESPECIALLY points per game allowed.


[U]I'll finish with this nugget:[/U]

[B]ONLY ONE, count that ONE, team in the top 17 in PPG allowed is out of the playoff hunt[/B] besides us... the Cleveland Browns (Their offense hasn't scored a TD in 5 games).

Is that not significant????[/quote]One of the biggest problem's with your argument is that you were trying to prove that we were a top ten pass defense as if that was proof enough to dispute my argument. Note, I never tried to say we weren't a top ten pass defense. I said, that we weren't great. Both those things can be true. There are 8 pass defenses clear cut better than we are. As in, you can't make an argument that that's not true. So, sure, you can make a good argument that we're no. 9 or no. 10. But who cares? It's still pretty average, even if it's "top ten".

One of the biggest problems this whole time is you never really bothered disputing my point. Top ten does not necessarily equal good or great. It IMPLYS that, but then it's misleading. If you really disagreed with anything I was saying, you should have disputed that directly, instead of producing strong evidence that we were "top ten" without showing that we were actually good.

It may seem like I'm nitpicking here, but it's the difference between misleading people like maroonandblack, and coming to common ground. The logic that you were using that "look how high we rank, don't we have to be good?" wasn't correct. And I'm not sure how well I conveyed that point. We may both be right. We could be an average-below average pass defense, and top ten in total defense.

When I said that you weren't directly arguing a concise point, that's what I was trying to say.

And Cleveland giving up less PPG than 15 teams is a great point: that PPG is an overrated stat. Because that defense is garbage (and their offense is garbage, compared to ours. ;) )

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;515211]Then you spew on about our offense being "one of the best in the league" at ball control??

Using those SAME EXACT STATS from YOUR SOURCE you will see that our offense was ranked 16th in yards per drive, 27th in points per drive, and 28th in TDs per drive. (and these were the rankings BEFORE that incredible offensive output Sunday)

Basically, being 10th in points allowed per drive is terrible, comparable to Jax and Oakland, but our offense being ranked 16th in yards per drive is pretty damned awesome....

EH??[/quote]Hey you clicked the link!! Yay! I thought I'd never see this day!

I don't know what you're saying here. By the same measures that says our defense isn't that good at preventing touchdowns, we're terrible at actually scoring touchdowns. AND THAT's ALL VERY TRUE.

But the offense does a lot of things well that isn't scoring touchdowns/points. It moves the ball out of it's own end, chewing up yards AND time, and it doesn't really ever turn the ball over (only Miami gives it up less).

All of those are very, very good things. Now, I don't think our offense is very good, simply because we have such problems getting into the end zone. It's a legitimate problem: that we take too many negative plays in opponents territory. And it's something that needs to be fixed.

But an offense that chews up time, yardage, and doesn't commit the big mistake is valuable even when it's not scoring points (which obviously, ours has not been). Isn't that the big picture here?

Re: On Blache
 

LOL

OK, so I think you have missed your calling. Psychologist or Lawyer would be perfect for you (if you aren't one indeed, that's be funny if you were, i'd understand you a lot more).

Talk about a conveluded point. You take facts that I point out that are clear EVIDENCE of a TOP defense in the NFL, and using only your words, no clear evidence to dispute, you twist things like this...

* "[B]So, sure, you can make a good argument that we're no. 9 or no. 10. But who cares? It's still pretty average, even if it's "top ten[/B]"."

How in the heck does that last sentence make sense? Oh, I forgot, I am so simple-minded I just can't think on that profound level. Because to me it sounds like you are saying being in the top 10 is "pretty average". lol

or

* "[B]Being in the top 12 in TDs allowed per drive is NOT bad. Not at all. You can win 7-10 games a year with that sort of effort[/B]."

OK, first of all YOU said it was bad! You are the one that used the stat in your argument. And also, the top 12 teams make the playoffs right?? So if you are a top 12 team, wouldn't being 9th or 10th best be the equivilent to a 10-11 win season?? VERY crafty at slyly placing a lower value to the top 10 again... with just your words.

or

* "[B]If you really disagreed with anything I was saying, you should have disputed that directly, instead of producing strong evidence that we were "top ten" without showing that we were actually good[/B]."

I love this one. From a guy you digs so deep into stats he uses "yards per completion" and "points per drive" essentially comes the statement that stats so not matter at all. They are not direct evidence. They shouldn't be used to evaluate or show progress. I'll tell that to my students and they'll be ecstatic!

or

* "[B]And Cleveland giving up less PPG than 15 teams is a great point: that PPG is an overrated stat[/B]."

Wow. So simply ignore the clear, undisutable evidence that PPG allowed has a HUGE impact on their success, you STILL try and find a way to weasel out of it by bringing up the ONE TEAM in the TOP 17 (ONE!) with a sub-.500 season and using THAT to say it's overrated?? HOLY CRAP!? LOL

and finally... my favorite...

* "[B]misleading people like maroonandblack[/B]"

Misleading people?? By using easy to understand, widely recognized, FACTS... let me repeat FACTS... that I didn't twist, turn, or contradict, I mislead people??

When all you do in turn is use your verbose to embellish every argument, allowing all of the "pions" to ooh and ahh over your magnificence in being the authority on professional football.

Adolph Hitler. Jim Jones. These were people who used WORDS to mislead people into agreeing with them. I am just displaying stats/numbers/facts to support an argument of success. People do what they want with this information. I haven't persuaded anyone to "drink the kool-aid".


Also... on a side note...

I CLEARLY was pointing out how you contridicted yourself by USING YOUR STAT SITE. I went there. I went there before. And that site's stats only show the amazing contradiction in your agruments.... very weird statements at the beginning of your post made no sense and did NOT dispute your contradictions.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;515218]LOL

OK, so I think you have missed your calling. Psychologist or Lawyer would be perfect for you (if you aren't one indeed, that's be funny if you were, i'd understand you a lot more).

Talk about a conveluded point. You take facts that I point out that are clear EVIDENCE of a TOP defense in the NFL, and using only your words, no clear evidence to dispute, you twist things like this...

* "[B]So, sure, you can make a good argument that we're no. 9 or no. 10. But who cares? It's still pretty average, even if it's "top ten[/B]"."

How in the heck does that last sentence make sense? Oh, I forgot, I am so simple-minded I just can't think on that profound level.

or

* "[B]Being in the top 12 in TDs allowed per drive is NOT bad. Not at all. You can win 7-10 games a year with that sort of effort[/B]."

OK, first of all YOU said it was bad! You are the one that used the stat in your argument. And also, the top 12 teams make the playoffs right?? So if you are a top 12 team, wouldn't being 9th or 10th best be the equivilent to a 10-11 win season?? VERY crafty at slyly placing a lower value to the top 10 again... with just your words.

or

* "[B]If you really disagreed with anything I was saying, you should have disputed that directly, instead of producing strong evidence that we were "top ten" without showing that we were actually good[/B]."

I love this one. From a guy you digs so deep into stats he uses "yards per completion" and "points per drive" essentially comes the statement that stats so not matter at all. They are not direct evidence. They shouldn't be used to evaluate or show progress. I'll tell that to my students and they'll be ecstatic!

or

* "[B]And Cleveland giving up less PPG than 15 teams is a great point: that PPG is an overrated stat[/B]."

Wow. So simply ignore the clear, undisutable evidence that PPG allowed has a HUGE impact on their success, you STILL try and find a way to weasel out of it by bringing up the ONE TEAM in the TOP 17 (ONE!) with a sub-.500 season and using THAT to say it's overrated?? HOLY CRAP!? LOL

and finally... my favorite...

* "[B]misleading people like maroonandblack[/B]"

Misleading people?? By using easy to understand, widely recognized, FACTS... let me repeat FACTS... that I didn't twist, turn, or contradict, I mislead people??

When all you do in turn is use your verbose to embellish every argument, allowing all of the "pions" to ooh and ahh over your magnificence in being the authority on professional football.

Adolph Hitler. Jim Jones. These were people who used WORDS to mislead people into agreeing with them.[/quote]Now you're just being obtuse. It's like you're trying to miss the point on purpose.

You've totally wasted this post. There's not one part of this where you make any sense. Why did you even bother responding?

But thanks for comparing me to Hitler and Jim Jones. I pray that you're slightly more open minded when it comes to your students, and don't go and play dumbass quite as easily. America's youth is in your hands, you know.

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=GTripp0012;515222]Now you're just being obtuse. It's like you're trying to miss the point on purpose.

You've totally wasted this post. There's not one part of this where you make any sense. Why did you even bother responding?

But thanks for comparing me to Hitler and Jim Jones. I pray that you're slightly more open minded when it comes to your students, and don't go and play dumbass quite as easily. America's youth is in your hands, you know.[/quote]


What part of the post didn't make sense??

I was pointing out (with examples) that you talk your way around every clear point I make. Dumbass? How does that make me a dumbass again?

Maybe YOU need to REALLY, ACTUALLY READ the posts. You have yet to respond to all of these points... just called me a dumbass.

(And by the way, no one compared you to Hitler/Jones. I was defending that fact that I am not "misleading" people into agreeing with my point of view like YOU asserted)

Re: On Blache
 

[quote=Hail to the Redskins;515218]Also... on a side note...

I CLEARLY was pointing out how you contridicted yourself by USING YOUR STAT SITE. I went there. I went there before. And that site's stats only show the amazing contradiction in your agruments.... very weird statements at the beginning of your post made no sense and did NOT dispute your contradictions.[/quote]There was not a single contradiction involved. Taking a non-contradiction, that anyone can see is a non-contradiction, and calling it a contradiction does not make it one.

You're a teacher. You have no excuse to try to take this conversation and try to kill all logical balance within it. You've made a bunch of good points, and have arrived at a faulty conclusion. Now, you're trying to throw all class to the wind, and it's getting pretty sad IMO.

Re: On Blache
 

Alright guys let's agree to disagree and move on.

thanks