Redskins most balanced team in NFC East?

[MTK]

Sure it's an old cliche but it does have some truth to it.

Playoff football usually boils down to who can run it, and who can play defense. That has always typically been the formula for postseason success.

If you take it for face value, of course it doesn't mean much. A #1 ranked D does not = a ring, but I'll take my chances in the playoffs everytime with a team that can run the ball and plays hard-nosed D.

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Sure it's an old cliche but it does have some truth to it.

Playoff football usually boils down to who can run it, and who can play defense. That has always typically been the formula for postseason success.

If you take it for face value, of course it doesn't mean much. A #1 ranked D does not = a ring, but I'll take my chances in the playoffs everytime with a team that can run the ball and plays hard-nosed D.

totally agree, see my previous post.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by hooskins

totally agree, see my previous post.

lol yeah I think we were posting at the same time

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Sure it's an old cliche but it does have some truth to it.

Playoff football usually boils down to who can run it, and who can play defense. That has always typically been the formula for postseason success.

If you take it for face value, of course it doesn't mean much. A #1 ranked D does not = a ring, but I'll take my chances in the playoffs everytime with a team that can run the ball and plays hard-nosed D.

So then, to be accurate, the saying should be: "defense, plus a strong running game wins championships."

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

So then, to be accurate, the saying should be: "defense, plus a strong running game wins championships."

Actually, to be really accurate the saying should be "Defense is an important part of a larger scheme to win a championship."

Defense winning championships is not some magic formula. The only thing we can say for sure is that to win a championship you must have the necessary win-loss record to advance to the playoffs. During the playoffs you must win every game you play in order to advance to the Super Bowl. If you win in the Super Bowl, you are the NFL Championship team.

Sure, maybe Super Bowl Champion teams have typically had strong defenses. That doesn't mean that "Defense wins championships."

Damn sports cliches...

I sound like such an uptight prick - this must have been a much worse morning than I thought...

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Sure it's an old cliche but it does have some truth to it.

Playoff football usually boils down to who can run it, and who can play defense. That has always typically been the formula for postseason success.

If you take it for face value, of course it doesn't mean much. A #1 ranked D does not = a ring, but I'll take my chances in the playoffs everytime with a team that can run the ball and plays hard-nosed D.

I'd like a team with the number 1 D, and a great passing game myself. Those games wouldn't even be close.

[Hog1]

I sound like such an uptight prick

Noooo, not at all.......................Jeez, what an uptight prick

[skindogger47]

Ohter than Eli and Hasselback, our QB situation is just as stable if not moreso than most teams in the NFC.

Coaching and personnel changes--the Cowboys lost their OC without replacing him, the Giants are starting practically a whole new secondary and Lavar (who just might take some time to fit), and the Eagles lost their premier receiving threat. Greg Lewis and Reggie Brown just aren't going to be able to take the load off Westbrook.

That said, I think the Skins have a great chance this year of vaulting themselves into the league's elite.

[RiggoRules]

The Skins have balance everywhere except QB.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by RiggoRules

The Skins have balance everywhere except QB.

They have balance there too. Brunell can attack you in multiple ways. Short, deep, with his legs, conservatively letting the D do the work. He's got accuracy problems, but they pay the WR's to help him out. He does a great job putting them in ideal situations. I can understand the opinions of those who think that Brunell is a liability at QB, but I would ask someone of that mindset to tell me how good of a QB they would need to have behind C for us to feel secure at the position. C'mon guys, give me a name!

Our weakness is either our kicking game or our age at key positions like TE (Fauria comes in as a FA at age 35) and DE (Can Daniels play at a high level for another year?). We have some depth problems, but so does every team in the league. It's why the NFL is such a crapshoot.

Lemar needs to stay healthy because no one else can play the middle. Sean Taylor needs to stay healthy because he's a once in a lifetime talent. The DTs need to be healthy because of a lack of depth. Brunell, Portis, and Thomas are absolutely vital on offense. Cooley would be difficult to replace, but back to the point of this thread, we have the offensive balance to cover for his absence. Goalline and 3rd and short would get real interesting personelwise.

So as long as all of those guys stay relatively healthy, we'll see you in Miami.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I can understand the opinions of those who think that Brunell is a liability at QB, but I would ask someone of that mindset to tell me how good of a QB they would need to have behind C for us to feel secure at the position. C'mon guys, give me a name!


Lemar needs to stay healthy because no one else can play the middle. The DTs need to be healthy because of a lack of depth.

Tom brady, peyton manning, carson palmer, ben roth, mcnabb, etc

marcus washington can play the middle well. In 1 LB situations he's the guy that should always be on the field.

wynn and daniels (when evan subs at DE) are depth at DT, so we're okay there, though griffin, taylor, and washington are the 3 Defensive players we need to stay healthy because the talent level is so high.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by That Guy

Tom brady, peyton manning, carson palmer, ben roth, mcnabb, etc

marcus washington can play the middle well. In 1 LB situations he's the guy that should always be on the field.

wynn and daniels (when evan subs at DE) are depth at DT, so we're okay there, though griffin, taylor, and washington are the 3 Defensive players we need to stay healthy because the talent level is so high.

I think a lot of people agree with you when you list those names for QBs you'd be comfortable with. Since we aren't going to get those guys anytime soon, I'm very happy with Brunell.

With Wynn and Daniels, you certainly could line them up at DT due to an injury to one of the starters, but is there any evidence to believe they would be more productive than a replacement player such as Killings? I would like to see Wynn in the middle with Griffin on a 3rd and long situation for added pass rush, but anchoring the end of the line vs. a TE is much different than holding your ground in the middle vs. Cs and Gs.

Originally Posted by number21isabadman

assuming that any other is up in the air i would take breeze,hasselback,rothlisburger,delome and green

Yeah, I'd take Roethlisberger and Hasselbeck to Brunell (although Hasselbeck may be a system guy). Trent Green gives you a right handed Brunell. Brees is coming off injury and Delhomme doesn't impress me.

There are guys out there to take over Brunell, but let's face it we have a good QB situation compared to many other teams.

[number21isabadman]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

They have balance there too. Brunell can attack you in multiple ways. Short, deep, with his legs, conservatively letting the D do the work. He's got accuracy problems, but they pay the WR's to help him out. He does a great job putting them in ideal situations. I can understand the opinions of those who think that Brunell is a liability at QB, but I would ask someone of that mindset to tell me how good of a QB they would need to have behind C for us to feel secure at the position. C'mon guys, give me a name!

Our weakness is either our kicking game or our age at key positions like TE (Fauria comes in as a FA at age 35) and DE (Can Daniels play at a high level for another year?). We have some depth problems, but so does every team in the league. It's why the NFL is such a crapshoot.

Lemar needs to stay healthy because no one else can play the middle. Sean Taylor needs to stay healthy because he's a once in a lifetime talent. The DTs need to be healthy because of a lack of depth. Brunell, Portis, and Thomas are absolutely vital on offense. Cooley would be difficult to replace, but back to the point of this thread, we have the offensive balance to cover for his absence. Goalline and 3rd and short would get real interesting personelwise.

So as long as all of those guys stay relatively healthy, we'll see you in Miami.

I'll take a stab at it, you say brunell is not a libability? He's 35 years old, not to mention if you happen to look on this website, you will see alot of forums stating brunell just broke a finger(not a significant injury) but its only the start of training camp. You say he can beat offensese with his arm and his legs well i disagree with that, again he's 35, so hes really not going to do much of that, not unless we want him to get injured faster. But he will kill offenses with his talent around him, his knowledgefor the game and experience at the position.with that said im comfortable with him back there because i really dont have any of choice at this point, but if it were my choice he wouldnt be, now im not going to sit here and tell you that I would rather like tom brady,payton manning or even carson palmers not everyone has the luxury of that but assuming that any other is up in the air i would take breeze,hasselback,rothlisburger,delome and green but thats not gonna happen either but i dont think teams fear us because of what we have at quarterback rather than what we have on the rest of the team.

[That Guy]

you still haven't even attempted to prove how your coaching staff is in any way better. Unless you're blind, you've seen the success of williams (many top 5 defenses), saunders (#1 in offense for years), and gibbs (rings and then some)... yet somehow coughlin is better? please.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by That Guy

you still haven't even attempted to prove how your coaching staff is in any way better. Unless you're blind, you've seen the success of williams (many top 5 defenses), saunders (#1 in offense for years), and gibbs (rings and then some)... yet somehow coughlin is better? please.

ok Rocky ...,no were in any post did I say they were better .Prove me wrong.