[skinsnut]

And don't give me that...we needed more turnovers crap....
I would gladly deal with no turnovers if we could force teams to punt occasionally.

After all...it is statistically far easier to force a punt than to force a turnover.
Forcing turnovers usually means taking big risks. At some point you need to assess if those risks in big plays are paying off....they certainly are not.

If you get a couple turnovers, but yield 350-500 yards a game and 30 points...it doesn't mean jack.

What is the worst way to lose defensively?
- because you gave up 500 yards and 30+ points
- because you got zero sacks and gave up 300 yards and 20 points
- because you got zero turnovers and gave up 300 yards and 20 points

I'd rather consistantly stop someone, rather than hope for some occassional big play like a sack or turnover to stop them...because teams that don't make mistakes dont give up sacks or turnovers anyways....you need to BEAT them...not trick them.

I know...talent, talent...but c'mon...freaking Phillip Daniels can stop the damn run and he is benched, Haynesworth essentially makes our defense 11 vs 10 because they need 2 to block him....and he is benched...Orakpo?...Fletcher?...probowlers playing for Blache!
McIntosh aint half bad and Landry is a SS beast...I bet if we played straight up we'd do better.