Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2010/10/redskins-packers_best_and_wors.html]D.C. Sports Bog - Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst[/url]

Totally agree with this one:

[B]Worst TV Graphic:[/B] For the 703rd consecutive week, the crew broadcasting the Redskins' game -- in this case, on Fox -- used a nifty graphic to show all the coaches who have worked under Dan Snyder, and their personal win-loss records. I mean, I've beaten that drum as much as anyone, but at this point I'd rather see a graphic highlighting the career catches of Anthony Armstrong or something.


Seriously, must they roll that out every damn game??

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

It's kind of like talking about the 2000 FA spree STILL... :doh:

People still talking about that a decade later...

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

I was stunned they rolled out that stat with all the flash and dazzling effects. I was like WTF does this have to do with the Skins being 2-2, facing the Packers today.

They roll out that tired ass stat every chance they get. I'm like move on already.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

NBC is having a similar graphic being prepared as we speak.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=saden1;746331]NBC is having a similar graphic being prepared as we speak.[/quote]


NO NO NO remember the networks talk now so Fox will be loaning there graphic to NBC. LOL

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

I Brian Orakpo really 24? Even his voice is scary...all I hear when is speaks is "I'ma kill you!"

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

We are the media's whipping boy, plain and simple. They love to hate us, and the other teams in the division easily get more, and better, coverage.

Has anyone been hearing how the Giants are #1 in the division? I've heard it several times now. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they are 2nd (div record 0-0) and we are 1st (div record 2-0). If anything, they are merely tied for 1st.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;746349]We are the media's whipping boy, plain and simple. They love to hate us, and the other teams in the division easily get more, and better, coverage.

Has anyone been hearing how the Giants are #1 in the division? I've heard it several times now. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they are 2nd (div record 0-0) and we are 1st (div record 2-0). If anything, they are merely tied for 1st.[/quote]

I gotta' say though. Nicks has been scary for them. I HATED when they got him in the draft (later than I would have guessed too). That being said, we've proven we can play with ANYONE.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

Best: The Offense and Defense in the 4th Quarter and Overtime.

Worst: The Offense and Defense in the first half!

Stat that matters: Win. 3-2 1st in the East one game out of Homefield Advantage in the Playoffs! :) (had to add that one)

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;746351]I gotta' say though. Nicks has been scary for them. I HATED when they got him in the draft (later than I would have guessed too). That being said, we've proven we can play with ANYONE.[/quote]

Yeah, Nicks is totally legit, and the worst part is that he makes Eli look good. So now that makes us the only team in the division without a big play receiver, unless you consider Moss, but he doesn't really compare to Austin, Jackson and Nicks.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;746358]Yeah, Nicks is totally legit, and the worst part is that he makes Eli look good. So now that makes us the only team in the division without a big play receiver, unless you consider Moss, but he doesn't really compare to Austin, Jackson and Nicks.[/quote]

Yeah, but I thought Jennings and Driver were suppose to be "all that" ..... let's see Jennings 2-22 and Driver 4-58 and neither scored, so all I have to say is "whatever" to these great receivers. The Skins also shut down Jackson and Maclin the week before. Teams are obviously moving the ball on the skins, but they havn't scored much on them lately. I see the skins doing the same thing to Manning next week. The Colts seem to be stuggling lately to score as it is.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

The Giants and the Eagles both look good. Eagles look like the best team, but we usually match up with them a lot better than we do the Giants. We may have to beat the Eagles twice to finish ahead of them. The Giants, we can probably get away with a split because of our softer non-conference schedule.

Then again, we lost to the Rams who might be better than the Seahawks, and the Bucs are almost certainly a better opponent than the Panthers. So perhaps the Giants have the easiest schedule in the division, considering that Tampa Bay looks like a .500 or better team.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=scowan;746383]Yeah, but I thought Jennings and Driver were suppose to be "all that" ..... let's see Jennings 2-22 and Driver 4-58 and neither scored, so all I have to say is "whatever" to these great receivers. The Skins also shut down Jackson and Maclin the week before. Teams are obviously moving the ball on the skins, but they havn't scored much on them lately. I see the skins doing the same thing to Manning next week. The Colts seem to be stuggling lately to score as it is.[/quote]Rogers took Jennings out of the game -- they love to use him out of the slot and we just took him off the field essentially.

Driver had a number of plays where he beat our coverage downfield and then just dropped the pass.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;746324]It's kind of like talking about the 2000 FA spree STILL... :doh:

People still talking about that a decade later...[/quote]

Yes, I don't like it either, but it has been the Skins "way" for about a decade up until last year w/ the AH signing. Big FA signings, no draft.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[url=http://www.fredericksburg.com/video/2010/102010/20101010-skinspackersslides/index.html]Week 5: Redskins Defeat Packers In Overtime: 16-13[/url]

good pictures

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

Aikman loves Norv.

Actually, I found it rather enlightening that all of them came out with a record that showed mediocrity or suckitude, and yet we as fans still approach games against the Lions and Rams with an elitist attitude. We have an ok team, but it's not going to be a world beater by any stretch.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;746400]Aikman loves Norv.

Actually, I found it rather enlightening that all of them came out with a record that showed mediocrity or suckitude, and yet we as fans still approach games against the Lions and Rams with an elitist attitude. We have an ok team, but it's not going to be a world beater by any stretch.[/quote]

Fair enough. But we don't have to be world beaters the way most teams are playing this year. If we can make to the bye week one or two games above .500, I definitely see us making the playoffs. After that, it's a whole new ball game.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

Those are great pics.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=12thMan;746405]Fair enough. But we don't have to be world beaters the way most teams are playing this year. If we can make to the bye week one or two games above .500, I definitely see us making the playoffs. After that, it's a whole new ball game.[/quote]
Making the playoffs is not a great accomplishment. There are still chump teams in the wild card and divisional rounds who get pounded into oblivion.

We are not a Super Bowl team. There is no reason to be hyper-optimistic about a non-Super Bowl team. We were a Mason Crosby kick from whining and crying today. These gifts are not always going to come, especially as the season drags on.

I'm just happy that this coaching staff is not "deer-in-headlights" and is willing to adjust from week to week so that they have a chance to win. It means that there's hope that we'll be going to the big dance in the near future, provided that we get some good drafts and other acquisitions in. But the team is in a transition and still has kinks to work out, and it's blatantly apparent.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

Coming off a 4-12 disaster, making the playoffs would be a pretty nice start to the Shanahan era.

Besides, the NFC is wide open this year and our best ball is yet to be played. You never know.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

Worst - The officials ignoring obvious pass interference and holding by Green Bay's defense for the first 55 minutes, especially picking up the flag when Cooley was interfered with, killing a drive. "Honorable" mention - Carlos Rogers with yet another dropped INT in crunch time.

Best - The defense keeping the Skins within striking distance, then the offense making plays in the 4th quarter to complete the comeback. LaRon Landry playing at a Pro Bowl level - name another safety who has played as well this year? Polamalu's great, but does he strike fear of getting trucked the way Landry has all season?

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

We're winning because...
1)Playing smart (not committing stupid penalties like personal fouls,late hits out of bounds and stuff at critical moments of the game) which leads me to #2
2)Good coaching
3)We are playing inspired football,hitting people very hard and making big stops at critical moments of the game
4)Kicking game is much better....Yes,Gano has his misses,but he's hitting the key kicks with the exception of the Houston game,which he did MAKE...just missed it 2nd time around and it was 52 yards to boot...no gimme (I love Graham Gano!!)
5)Return game is SOOOO much better now. Nice seeing a guy break one long instead of moving side to side and fumbling like Randel el. Thus,this is absolutely huge for field position. It's also nice to think...Could he return this all the way? (everytime he touches the ball) Love Banks!
6)We have a QB that makes play,throws down the field and doesn't play scared and shows true leadership....Kinda nice,isn't it?

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;746410]Making the playoffs is not a great accomplishment. There are still chump teams in the wild card and divisional rounds who get pounded into oblivion.

We are not a Super Bowl team. There is no reason to be hyper-optimistic about a non-Super Bowl team. We were a Mason Crosby kick from whining and crying today. These gifts are not always going to come, especially as the season drags on.

I'm just happy that this coaching staff is not "deer-in-headlights" and is willing to adjust from week to week so that they have a chance to win. It means that there's hope that we'll be going to the big dance in the near future, provided that we get some good drafts and other acquisitions in. But the team is in a transition and still has kinks to work out, and it's blatantly apparent.[/quote]

Great post. Well put, sir!

Re: Redskins
 

[quote=GhettoDogAllStars;746349]We are the media's whipping boy, plain and simple. They love to hate us, and the other teams in the division easily get more, and better, coverage.

Has anyone been hearing how the Giants are #1 in the division? I've heard it several times now. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they are 2nd (div record 0-0) and we are 1st (div record 2-0). If anything, they are merely tied for 1st.[/quote]

IMO, there isn't a media bias against us. Some even think ESPN is our enemy in some small way. They don't hate us, we haven't done anything worth talking about for 20 years. Yes we are leading our division now, but it's a long season and we haven't exactly shown dominance. Trust me, that bias crap is our own little myth.

Re: Redskins
 

[quote=LavaRnChad;746443]IMO, there isn't a media bias against us. Some even think ESPN is our enemy in some small way. They don't hate us, we haven't done anything worth talking about for 20 years. Yes we are leading our division now, but it's a long season and we haven't exactly shown dominance. Trust me, that bias crap is our own little myth.[/quote]

I think a lot of people believe this partly because whenever we win it isn't reported that we won but that the other team lost. I would go as far as to say there is a bias against us but there certainly are certain columnists that aren't exactly Skins' fans.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;746410]Making the playoffs is not a great accomplishment. There are still chump teams in the wild card and divisional rounds who get pounded into oblivion.

We are not a Super Bowl team. There is no reason to be hyper-optimistic about a non-Super Bowl team. We were a Mason Crosby kick from whining and crying today. These gifts are not always going to come, especially as the season drags on.

I'm just happy that this coaching staff is not "deer-in-headlights" and is willing to adjust from week to week so that they have a chance to win. It means that there's hope that we'll be going to the big dance in the near future, provided that we get some good drafts and other acquisitions in. But the team is in a transition and still has kinks to work out, and it's blatantly apparent.[/quote]

I beg to differ. Particularly about losing if Mason Crosby hits the field goal, because the what if game goes both ways. If Santana grabs that catch in the end zone and another on 3rd & 8, we're not even discussing the Crosby field goal. Last year and the year before, those balls weren't bouncing our way, this year they are.

Another thing, the Packers converted only 2 of 13 3rd conversions. Two. That's not luck, and it's no small feat considering we were playing the Packers, a team no one gave us a fighting chance to win against; Yards surrendered be damned, that's great defense in my book. By your Super Bowl logic, well, how many teams are really playing Super Bowl football right now, whatever that is? And don't you have to reach the Super Bowl, or at least the playoffs, before you acually know it's Super Bowl football?

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

I'm not saying this is us, but three years ago there was a 3-2 team that went on to earn a wild card berth and a few weeks later went on to beat the league's first ever 18-0 team in the Super Bowl

Or in 2008, when another 3-2 team went on to earn a wild card berth, got on a hot run in the playoffs and came a Holmes' toe away from being the first ever 9-7 team to win the Super Bowl.

Once you're in the playoffs it's a whole different game. There's no shame in making the playoffs

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SmootSmack;746460]I'm not saying this is us, but three years ago there was a 3-2 team that went on to earn a wild card berth and a few weeks later went on to beat the league's first ever 18-0 team in the Super Bowl

Or in 2008, when another 3-2 team went on to earn a wild card berth, got on a hot run in the playoffs and came a Holmes' toe away from being the first ever 9-7 team to win the Super Bowl.

Once you're in the playoffs it's a whole different game. There's no shame in making the playoffs[/quote]

Elite D-line
Plaxico
Sheli waking up
Spags
Tyree lucksack
Do we have any of the above?

Elite QB
Defense suddenly tightened up
Fitz and Boldin
Do we have any of the above?

We have a bunch of guys who have already hit their ceilings, and their ceilings are not very high. Expecting guys like Rabach, Hicks, and Lichtensteiger to suddenly perform at a Pro Bowl level is beyond outlandish.
Aside from Armstrong and Moss, our WRs are just ok fillers.
Our D-line has no one worth holding penalties except for Haynesworth and Rak, and Haynesworth is inconsistent.
Dhall is not going to be a shutdown corner, ever.
Carlos Rogers will not catch many game ending ints, ever.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=12thMan;746452]I beg to differ. Particularly about losing if Mason Crosby hits the field goal, because the what if game goes both ways. If Santana grabs that catch in the end zone and another on 3rd & 8, we're not even discussing the Crosby field goal. Last year and the year before, those balls weren't bouncing our way, this year they are.

Another thing, the Packers converted only 2 of 13 3rd conversions. Two. That's not luck, and it's no small feat considering we were playing the Packers, a team no one gave us a fighting chance to win against; Yards surrendered be damned, that's great defense in my book. By your Super Bowl logic, well, how many teams are really playing Super Bowl football right now, whatever that is? And don't you have to reach the Super Bowl, or at least the playoffs, before you acually know it's Super Bowl football?[/quote]

Rabach and hicks are a Pro Bowl material. Golston is immovable. We've got two shutdown corners. Haynesworth is an EXCELLENT NT. Got ya. We're elite.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SmootSmack;746460]I'm not saying this is us, but three years ago there was a 3-2 team that went on to earn a wild card berth and a few weeks later went on to beat the league's first ever 18-0 team in the Super Bowl

Or in 2008, when another 3-2 team went on to earn a wild card berth, got on a hot run in the playoffs and came a Holmes' toe away from being the first ever 9-7 team to win the Super Bowl.

[B]Once you're in the playoffs it's a whole different game. There's no shame in making the playoffs[/B][/quote]
100% agreed. We get into the playoffs and anything can happen. Veteran players and SB winning coaching tends to help in the playoffs. Right I think we're still playing like an 7-9 team but we're winning games we shouldn't. As long as we continue to get better, and I think we have every week so far, we have a good shot. The key is that we can't look at 3-2 and think it is indicative of how we're playing as a whole. Right now we've played at best to 2-3 and probably more like 1-4.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;746481]Elite D-line
Plaxico
Sheli waking up
Spags
Tyree lucksack
Do we have any of the above?

Elite QB
Defense suddenly tightened up
Fitz and Boldin
Do we have any of the above?

We have a bunch of guys who have already hit their ceilings, and their ceilings are not very high. Expecting guys like Rabach, Hicks, and Lichtensteiger to suddenly perform at a Pro Bowl level is beyond outlandish.
Aside from Armstrong and Moss, our WRs are just ok fillers.
Our D-line has no one worth holding penalties except for Haynesworth and Rak, and Haynesworth is inconsistent.
Dhall is not going to be a shutdown corner, ever.
Carlos Rogers will not catch many game ending ints, ever.[/quote]

We have a lot more than you want to give us credit for, but what's the point? No one is saying we're a flawless team that's going to coast to the Super Bowl and be carrying the Lombardi Trophy. But we are 3-2, first in our division, and winning key games. But again, what's the point. You just piss on everything and ignore what people say anyway.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=FRPLG;746485]100% agreed. We get into the playoffs and anything can happen. Veteran players and SB winning coaching tends to help in the playoffs. Right I think we're still playing like an 7-9 team but we're winning games we shouldn't. As long as we continue to get better, and I think we have every week so far, we have a good shot. The key is that we can't look at 3-2 and think it is indicative of how we're playing as a whole. Right now we've played at best to 2-3 and probably more like 1-4.[/quote]

Certainly room for improvement, I would agree with that for sure

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SmootSmack;746489]We have a lot more than you want to give us credit for, but what's the point? No one is saying we're a flawless team that's going to coast to the Super Bowl and be carrying the Lombardi Trophy. But we are 3-2, first in our division, and winning key games. But again, what's the point. You just piss on everything and ignore what people say anyway.[/quote]

And recent Super Bowl teams usually dominate in at least one facet of the game, those facets being offense or defense, for the whole year. We're barely keeping afloat everywhere.

I'm not going to be swindled again with the yearly Super Bowl Kool-Aid until I see us stacked with talent like some of the other teams in the league.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=FRPLG;746485]100% agreed. We get into the playoffs and anything can happen. Veteran players and SB winning coaching tends to help in the playoffs. Right I think we're still [B]playing like an 7-9 team but we're winning games we shouldn't.[/B] [SIZE=4]As long as we continue to get better,[/SIZE] and I think we have every week so far, we have a good shot. The key is that we can't look at 3-2 and think it is indicative of how we're playing as a whole. Right now we've played at best to 2-3 and probably more like 1-4.[/quote]

We should continue to get better...exponentially as the season progress's, possibly more than any other team as we are incorporating new schemes, coaches, players, etc. All aspects should radically improve as the season goes on and familiarity improves.
We may not win the division or get in the playoffs, but we are turning some heads....AS WE SHOULD BE!
........HTTR

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;746496]And recent Super Bowl teams usually dominate in at least one facet of the game, those facets being offense or defense, for the whole year. We're barely keeping afloat everywhere.

I'm not going to be swindled again with the yearly Super Bowl Kool-Aid until I see us stacked with talent like some of the other teams in the league.[/quote]

Forget this imaginary Super Bowl Kool-Aid you speak of. Do you not appreciate at all that we have won back-to-back key games? That we are 2-0 in the division? That these are games that in the past the players, like the fans, would have given up on after the 1st quarter? Do you not see the positives of the season so far? Do you not realize that before you even play in the Super Bowl you have to make the playoffs and to make the playoffs you have to win games? Does none of that even remotely resonate with you?

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;746496]And recent Super Bowl teams usually dominate in at least one facet of the game, those facets being offense or defense, for the whole year. We're barely keeping afloat everywhere.

[B]I'm not going to be swindled again with the yearly Super Bowl Kool-Aid until I see us [SIZE=4]stacked with talent like some of the other teams in the league[/SIZE][/B][SIZE=4].[/SIZE][/quote]

You mean like Dallas??
How does "SirTonyRomo" sound to you?

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SmootSmack;746501]Forget this imaginary Super Bowl Kool-Aid you speak of. Do you not appreciate at all that we have won back-to-back key games? That we are 2-0 in the division? That these are games that in the past the players, like the fans, would have given up on after the 1st quarter? Do you not see the positives of the season so far? Do you not realize that before you even play in the Super Bowl you have to make the playoffs and to make the playoffs you have to win games? Does none of that even remotely resonate with you?[/quote]

It's obvious to me they're much better than their sorry ass chokes last season in which utter fail gems like ARE's muffed punt or Suish's chip shot choke left me fuming. That is slowly being snuffed out week to week.

They're still not good enough due to the utter neglect of the lines the past few years. Neither lines dominate the LOS, and can name at least a couple teams that do.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=Hog1;746502]You mean like Dallas??
How does "SirTonyRomo" sound to you?[/quote]

On offense, Broncos 2008.
On defense, Pittsburgh.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

A win is a win, and being 3-2 is a lot better than 2-3 (and we could easily have been 4-1). All of this is pretty positive, and this team does seem to have the will to win, which is unquestionably a change from recent years.

What's troubling me most is our O-line and our D (which are obviously related in that the failure to sustain drives puts our D on the field a lot). But we have shown flashes and shown improvement during games and over the course of the season.

Our team D is last -- dead last -- in the league in yards per game. But we're 9th in the league in points given up. At some point, those yards per game are going to translate into some real points (which hasn't been the case in a couple of games we've played -- yesterday's being a good example), and we don't have the offensive power to score tons of points. So unless we can get better at the O-line somehow (blocking schemes, getting the ball out faster, getting our running game going), if our D will continue to give up these kinds of yards, we're going to start coming up short more often than not.

I do trust, however, that we have good coaches who can figure this out within the limits of the talent we have on the team. And winning a game like this one should give us confidence that we really can play with anyone.

Re: Redskins-Packers, Best and Worst
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;746496]And recent Super Bowl teams usually dominate in at least one facet of the game, those facets being offense or defense, for the whole year. We're barely keeping afloat everywhere.

I'm not going to be swindled again with the yearly Super Bowl Kool-Aid until I see us stacked with talent like some of the other teams in the league.[/quote]

It seems like you are creating a straw dog argument. No one is seriously talking about the Super Bowl - except for you. I'm not sure I get the point of knocking down a non-argument.

So far this year we have been competitive. I personally am going to enjoy that fact for what it is.