Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

How our defense could flourish with a guy like Sean Lee in the middle. I really believe that. When was the last time Fletcher's name has been called in a game? Love the guy, but we need a playmaker in the most important position on defense.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

The special teams sucks because the Redskins don't value it when it comes time to evaluate players. Keith Burns isn't helping, but there's not enough that can be done in November to overcome the negligence this team shows towards special teams in March and April.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1040082]This team is an $110 million operation by cap dollars. If you truly believe an additional $18 million makes this a playoff team, you may be a sucker.[/quote]

In this division? it would depend on money spent, but i think in the end, its a blessing in disguise.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Also, those who want Kyles head for calling a fade on 4th down. It was a hot route that RG3 played. Not Kyle... Reed was open because his defender slipped. Would of been an easy TD if Griffin didn't lock in the hot read. Which is irony of course.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Chico23231;1040080]I thought Paul could ball? I thought we had the best depth in years? I see way too many peanalties on teams and I see our coverage teams amazingly poor. Crawford hurt, but we drafted guys with supposid skills like Thompson. I see a complete clusterfuck of a miscommunication last night, and another game where we had 2 blocked kicks. This drop off is unacceptable.[/quote]

Thompson wasn't drafted to play teams though.

Danny Smith had kicks blocked too.

The coverage is what's really killed us, that's where Zo comes in. Plus the guy was a leader on the field. Losing him definitely had an impact.

[QUOTE=Paintrain;1040027]Seriously?!?! The O-line, while not perfect was #5 in sacks allowed and the team is in the top 5 running the ball coming into last night.

So far the team has drafted almost an entire line (T. Williams, LeReibus, Gettis, Compton). Now development of those players can be discussed but using draft picks on O-linemen is about 15th on the list of what's wrong with this team.


As a poster before mentioned, these problems aren't new. These same problems have occurred since, honestly, Schottenheimer left. Those issues happened with Spurrier, Gibbs II, Zorn and Shanny. It's organizational. The issues stem from a cultural lack of accountability throughout the Redskins franchise.[/QUOTE]

Do they? Spurrier and Zorn couldnt coach for the most well oiled franchise. Gibbs 2 is not Gibbs 1, he had been really removed from football for a long time and absorbed with nascar. Which leaves Shanny. I do not want to get into that debate, but he was not setting the world on fire for several years in Denver and it is looking more and more like his best years are behind him. So I would argue that you could make the case that the "rite" guy could fix things. I mean Snyder has pretty much stopped his bologna and seems to be resided to the fact that he is the owner and football people should be in charge. He is not afraid to open the checkbook and the fanbase is loyal. Snyder is not Jerry Jones. We are not Jacksonville. The rite guy comes here and he could have the rest of the league by the balls.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040088]Thompson wasn't drafted to play teams though.

Danny Smith had kicks blocked too.

The coverage is what's really killed us, that's where Zo comes in. Plus the guy was a leader on the field. Losing him definitely had an impact.[/quote]

I just dont think the expectations should be multiple special teams breakdown each week. The penalty on teams have been turdble as well. I dont think Zo being here would solve much this year on teams.

Skins Viks Postgame
 

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1040094]I just dont think the expectations should be multiple special teams breakdown each week. The penalty on teams have been turdble as well. I dont think Zo being here would solve much this year on teams.[/QUOTE]

Is turdble like terrible and turd?
Edit: because that is a perfect word for it.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=punch it in;1040092]Do they? Spurrier and Zorn couldnt coach for the most well oiled franchise. Gibbs 2 is not Gibbs 1, he had been really removed from football for a long time and absorbed with nascar. Which leaves Shanny. I do not want to get into that debate, but he was not setting the world on fire for several years in Denver and it is looking more and more like his best years are behind him. So I would argue that you could make the case that the "rite" guy could fix things. I mean Snyder has pretty much stopped his bologna and [B]seems to be resided to the fact that he is the owner and football people should be in charge[/B]. He is not afraid to open the checkbook and the fanbase is loyal. Snyder is not Jerry Jones. We are not Jacksonville. The rite guy comes here and he could have the rest of the league by the balls.[/quote]

This is the key with the next coaching staff. I know the owner will always have input, but the next HC needs to come from the FO not the owner.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk;1040088]Thompson wasn't drafted to play teams though.

Danny Smith had kicks blocked too.

The coverage is what's really killed us, that's where Zo comes in. Plus the guy was a leader on the field. [B]Losing him definitely had an impact.[/[/B]QUOTE]

I don't disgaree. But the loss of one player on D (a non-starting LB) when we were gaining back to starters in Orakpo and Merriweather shouldn't have resulted in the putrid excuse for a defense we now have. Bowen, Golston, and Jenkins are largely non-factors, and Cofield is a decent run stopper -- none gets within the same area code of opposing QBs. Now I realize a 3-4 is designed to get LBs to the QB, but our front three cannot collapse a pocket or even really push it back. I was watching some of the "highlights" (glutton for punishment), and Ponder and Cassel had all freaking day to throw; the opposite of RGIII's experience in the second half, and most of that pressure was up the middle (Montgomery and Lichtgensteiger have become liabilities).

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=calia;1040098][QUOTE=Mattyk;1040088]Thompson wasn't drafted to play teams though.

Danny Smith had kicks blocked too.

The coverage is what's really killed us, that's where Zo comes in. Plus the guy was a leader on the field. [B]Losing him definitely had an impact.[/[/B]QUOTE]

I don't disgaree. But the loss of one player on D (a non-starting LB) when we were gaining back to starters in Orakpo and Merriweather shouldn't have resulted in the putrid excuse for a defense we now have. Bowen, Golston, and Jenkins are largely non-factors, and Cofield is a decent run stopper -- none gets within the same area code of opposing QBs. Now I realize a 3-4 is designed to get LBs to the QB, but our front three cannot collapse a pocket or even really push it back. I was watching some of the "highlights" (glutton for punishment), and Ponder and Cassel had all freaking day to throw; the opposite of RGIII's experience in the second half, and most of that pressure was up the middle (Montgomery and Lichtgensteiger have become liabilities).[/quote]

I was talking about losing Zo hurting us on teams, not on D.

The D has it's own problems.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1040082]This team is an $110 million operation by cap dollars. If you truly believe an additional $18 million makes this a playoff team, you may be a sucker.[/quote]

18Million in cap dollars is easily 2-3 valuable starters, plus 1-2 role players. I don't think it's unfair to say that defensively that could be the difference between a 3rd and 18 completion, and a 3rd and 18 throwaway/sack.

Does the cap space alone make the difference, no, but it's easy to see how 2 of the "right" guys could fit into that space and make a difference. Heck the average spending for Offensive line positions for all the teams was $19,095,093(compiled from Overthecap.com's positional spending chart) so clearly 18Mil is a substantial amount when it comes to salary cap. Like wise the average spending for safeties and cb's was 18.135Mil. We spent 12Mil on safeties/cb's I would think a few upgrades were available if we had even 9mil extra.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=punch it in;1040096]Is turdble like terrible and turd?[/quote]

exactly, i would like word to replace the word for "Redskins special teams"

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1040084]The special teams sucks because the Redskins don't value it when it comes time to evaluate players. Keith Burns isn't helping, but there's not enough that can be done in November to overcome the negligence this team shows towards special teams in March and April.[/quote]

I really don't believe this. I would be interested in your proof, because I tend to think Shanahan has generally regarded ST as a proving ground and held it in high regard. On the flipside, I can't offer any proof, because I don't really know how you prove it. I do think ST coaching has been lacking though.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1040100]18Million in cap dollars is easily 2-3 valuable starters, plus 1-2 role players. I don't think it's unfair to say that defensively that could be the difference between a 3rd and 18 completion, and a 3rd and 18 throwaway/sack.

Does the cap space alone make the difference, no, but it's easy to see how 2 of the "right" guys could fit into that space and make a difference. Heck the average spending for Offensive line positions for all the teams was $19,095,093(compiled from Overthecap.com's positional spending chart) so clearly 18Mil is a substantial amount when it comes to salary cap. Like wise the average spending for safeties and cb's was 18.135Mil. We spent 12Mil on safeties/cb's I would think a few upgrades were available if we had even 9mil extra.[/quote]

What starters would the Redskins been able to acquire that would have made one of the worst defenses in the NFL that much better?

I don't think the 18 million dollar hit would have bought us that many wins. Look at the Miami Dolphins for example, they got Ellerbe, Wheeler, and Grimes this past offseason.

They went from the 21st ranked defense by yardage... to the 20th. They actually got worst in Points Allowed.

I do not think the 18 million dollar excuse is valid. There are already enough free agents on the Redskins, signing more players that other teams thought were replaceable wouldn't help.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

We're not just talking $18M but $36M over 2 years. That's a pretty significant handcuff.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1040082]This team is an $110 million operation by cap dollars. If you truly believe an additional $18 million makes this a playoff team, you may be a sucker.[/quote]

I agree and I'm tired of everyone saying..."oh well if we had cap dollars we'd be better!" ...that's a cop out excuse. This team has free agents that stink. Come March, Snyder will gas on the plane and everyone will be along for the ride. I hope we go out and get a couple guys, but I don't want to see the 2000 Redskins. I'd prefer that we draft more guys like Morris, Amerson and Reed.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040116]We're not just talking $18M but $36M over 2 years. That's a pretty significant handcuff.[/quote]

Skins still made the playoffs last year even with the penalty.

I understand the impact of the penalty, I just do not think its an excuse for Skins not to be performing. Besides Alexander there was no significant player they could not resign, there was no combination of players in free agency that would have changed this 3-6 team into an actual respectable team.

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1040101]exactly, i would like word to replace the word for "Redskins special teams"[/QUOTE]

Consider it done.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=donofriose;1040121]Skins still made the playoffs last year even with the penalty.

I understand the impact of the penalty, [B]I just do not think its an excuse for Skins not to be performing[/B]. Besides Alexander there was no significant player they could not resign, there was no combination of players in free agency that would have changed this 3-6 team into an actual respectable team.[/quote]

I don't think it can be written off as a non-factor.

Take away $36M from any team and there's going to be ramifications.

No free agents could have helped this year? I really find that hard to believe.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

if we could have gotten just 1 more lineman (starter) and then a DB and LB in FA we would be better imo. O well is what it is, I just want to see Griff continue to get better and better

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040124]I don't think it can be written off as a non-factor.

Take away $36M from any team and there's going to be ramifications.

No free agents could have helped this year? I really find that hard to believe.[/quote]

Yeah, I don't see how that $36 million penalty is a non-factor. That's a bit of a stretch.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040124]I don't think it can be written off as a non-factor.

Take away $36M from any team and there's going to be ramifications.

No free agents could have helped this year? I really find that hard to believe.[/quote]

The Redskins already have a team pretty much built on free agency. I think not having two first round picks will have more of an impact than the cap penalty.

Free Agency to me will always be one of the most overrated aspects to building a successful NFL team. Teams tend to turn around quicker through the draft than free agency. Resigning players is by far the most important part of free agency.

Plus the concept of a Salary Cap is a joke but that is a topic for another day.

[QUOTE=donofriose;1040128]The Redskins already have a team pretty much built on free agency. I think not having two first round picks will have more of an impact than the cap penalty.

Free Agency to me will always be one of the most overrated aspects to building a successful NFL team. Teams tend to turn around quicker through the draft than free agency. Resigning players is by far the most important part of free agency.

Plus the concept of a Salary Cap is a joke but that is a topic for another day.[/QUOTE]

I think we have a pretty large core group of players that were drafted on this team. The current state of the league pretty much makes it impossible to keep all your draftpicks year after year.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=donofriose;1040128][B]The Redskins already have a team pretty much built on free agency[/B]. I think not having two first round picks will have more of an impact than the cap penalty.

Free Agency to me will always be one of the most overrated aspects to building a successful NFL team. Teams tend to turn around quicker through the draft than free agency. Resigning players is by far the most important part of free agency.

Plus the concept of a Salary Cap is a joke but that is a topic for another day.[/quote]

I don't see it that way -- important contributors from the draft (or undrafted free agents) include: RGIII, Morris, Amerson, Kerrigan, Orakpo, Reed, Doughty, Montgomery, Williams, Forbath, Golston, Hankerson, Robinson, and probably a bunch of other guys that don't immediately come to mind. And a number of our relatively recent FA signings have been good: D. Hall, Cofield, Garcon, Chester. But our current roster is nothing like the FA hot mess that was the 2000 team. But I wouldn't say our team was built on free agency, and we have recent signings that show that you don't need a lot of money to get value if you're smart. There will be busts from time to time -- true of the draft and true of FAs -- and we have them as all teams do. But with the $36MM in the last two years, had wwe acquired some O line and D line help, or LB help -- even just one impact player in each area -- I imagine that we'd be noticeably better off.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040099][quote=calia;1040098]

I was talking about losing Zo hurting us on teams, not on D.

The D has it's own problems.[/quote]

I was thinking about him in both roles -- he was better in coverage that Fletcher. Of course, he's on IR this year (feel for the guy), so that could have happened here too.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

You know you've got huge special teams problems, when you have to debate whether losing one player caused an entire ST collapse.

Yikes.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=DynamiteRave;1040133]You know you've got huge special teams problems, when you have to debate whether losing one player caused an entire ST collapse.

Yikes.[/quote]

We have more than just ST problems that's for sure

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=calia;1040131]I don't see it that way -- important contributors from the draft (or undrafted free agents) include: RGIII, Morris, Amerson, Kerrigan, Orakpo, Reed, Doughty, Montgomery, Williams, Forbath, Golston, Hankerson, Robinson, and probably a bunch of other guys that don't immediately come to mind. And a number of our relatively recent FA signings have been good: D. Hall, Cofield, Garcon, Chester. But our current roster is nothing like the FA hot mess that was the 2000 team. But I wouldn't say our team was built on free agency, and we have recent signings that show that you don't need a lot of money to get value if you're smart. There will be busts from time to time -- true of the draft and true of FAs -- and we have them as all teams do. But with the $36MM in the last two years, had wwe acquired some O line and D line help, or LB help -- even just one impact player in each area -- I imagine that we'd be noticeably better off.[/quote]

I never said there weren't contributors that were drafted by the Skins. Hell to me the best players on the Skins were all drafted by the Skins outside of one and that being DHall this year.

I am saying the majority of starters on the Skins are free agents. That is a problem in my opinion. I do not believe you can win in this league with free agents making up the majority of your starters. Which is why I do not see the cap penalty as an excuse for this team not to perform well.

The great teams in this league like the Patriots, Broncos, and Saints drafted the majority of their starters. Two of the most talented teams, the Bengals and Seahawks, also drafted the majority of their players. They use free agency sparingly and only to fill holes, not to build teams like the Skins have been doing and still are doing based on the roster makeup. I just see an example of how to build a contender and I am not seeing the Redskins replicating that example.

And obviously I have gotten off track since I am now referencing something that happened a couple of years ago.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[url=http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000278190/article/what-we-learned-defense-holding-redskins-back]What we learned: Defense holding Redskins back - NFL.com[/url]

At 24 - 14 at the half all the offense needed to do was match FG for whatever the Vikings scored and we'd have won. I blame everyone, Offense, D and ST.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=calia;1040131]I don't see it that way -- important contributors from the draft (or undrafted free agents) include: RGIII, Morris, Amerson, Kerrigan, Orakpo, Reed, Doughty, Montgomery, Williams, Forbath, Golston, Hankerson, Robinson, and probably a bunch of other guys that don't immediately come to mind. And a number of our relatively recent FA signings have been good: D. Hall, Cofield, Garcon, Chester. But our current roster is nothing like the FA hot mess that was the 2000 team. But I wouldn't say our team was built on free agency, and we have recent signings that show that you don't need a lot of money to get value if you're smart. There will be busts from time to time -- true of the draft and true of FAs -- and we have them as all teams do. But with the $36MM in the last two years, had wwe acquired some O line and D line help, or LB help -- even just one impact player in each area -- I imagine that we'd be noticeably better off.[/quote]

What about Morgan and Wilson?

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=donofriose;1040135]I never said there weren't contributors that were drafted by the Skins. Hell to me the best players on the Skins were all drafted by the Skins outside of one and that being DHall this year.

[B]I am saying the majority of starters on the Skins are free agents.[/B] That is a problem in my opinion. I do not believe you can win in this league with free agents making up the majority of your starters. Which is why I do not see the cap penalty as an excuse for this team not to perform well.

The great teams in this league like the Patriots, Broncos, and Saints drafted the majority of their starters. Two of the most talented teams, the Bengals and Seahawks, also drafted the majority of their players. They use free agency sparingly and only to fill holes, not to build teams like the Skins have been doing and still are doing based on the roster makeup. I just see an example of how to build a contender and I am not seeing the Redskins replicating that example.

And obviously I have gotten off track since I am now referencing something that happened a couple of years ago.[/quote]

It's actually 50/50 right now

Offense 5 of 11 starters drafted:
Griffin - draft
Morris - draft
Garcon - FA
Hankerson - draft
Moss - FA
Reed - draft
OL - all FA except Williams

Defense 6 of 11 drafted:
Jenkins - draft
Cofield - FA
Bowen - FA
Fletcher - FA
Riley - draft
Orakpo - draft
Kerrigan - draft
Hall - FA
Amerson - draft
Doughty - draft
Meriweather - FA

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040124]I don't think it can be written off as a non-factor.

Take away $36M from any team and there's going to be ramifications.

No free agents could have helped this year? I really find that hard to believe.[/quote]

especially special teams . . . the depth players are not making very much as we couldn't afford those guys . . .

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Why the F has Thompson been playing if he was injured? Maybe doing kickoffs with an injury doesn't really bode well for errrrrr, ya know, positive production?!

Oh well. See ya later, scrub.

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2013/11/08/chris-thompson-headed-for-ir-with-shoulder-surgery/]Chris Thompson headed for IR with shoulder surgery[/url]

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Patriots depth chart for shits and giggles

Offense 7 of 11 drafted
Brady - draft
Ridley - draft
Amendola - FA
Edelman - FA
Dobson - draft
Gronk - draft
OL - 3 of 5 drafted

Defense 5 of 11 drafted
Ninkovich - FA
Vellano - FA
Chris Jones - FA
Chandler Jones - draft
Collins - draft
Spikes - draft
Hightower - draft
Talib - FA
Dennard - draft
Gregory - FA
McCourty - draft

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040166]It's actually 50/50 right now

Offense 5 of 11 starters drafted:
Griffin - draft
Morris - draft
Garcon - FA
Hankerson - draft
Moss - FA
Reed - draft
OL - all FA except Williams

Defense 6 of 11 drafted:
Jenkins - draft
Cofield - FA
Bowen - FA
Fletcher - FA
Riley - draft
Orakpo - draft
Kerrigan - draft
Hall - FA
Amerson - draft
Doughty - draft
Meriweather - FA[/quote]The problem with the FAs isn't the quantity, but the relative lack of productivity. Particularly on the OL and in the secondary.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

Kind of off topic but what did people think about the refs? I swear I can not understand why the NFL keeps Ed Hochuli employed. All the missed holds and the roughing call on Baker was simply atrocious. That looked like replacement refs last night and everything seemed to go against us. I'm starting to think the NFL has it out to F us over.

Rak doesn't get held as much as we think, he just throws his arms up trying to.get calls. Every ref wouldn't miss the same calls.weekly

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040170]Patriots depth chart for shits and giggles

Offense 7 of 11 drafted
Brady - draft
Ridley - draft
Amendola - FA
Edelman - FA
Dobson - draft
Gronk - draft
OL - 3 of 5 drafted

Defense 5 of 11 drafted
Ninkovich - FA
Vellano - FA
Chris Jones - FA
Chandler Jones - draft
Collins - draft
Spikes - draft
Hightower - draft
Talib - FA
Dennard - draft
Gregory - FA
McCourty - draft[/quote]

Where are you getting your depth charts? I was on ESPN earlier and it looked different than this. Not saying you are wrong just curious. Also I am talking about 1st string players not who they have to start due to injury. I said earlier you use free agents to fill holes. The Pats situation right now with all their injuries is a perfect example of that.