Who is "weakest" team with winning record?

[paulskinsfan]

Originally Posted by GiantsSuck703

Why didnt you put up defensive rankings, is offense the only side of the ball? So there mediocre because the Skins barely defeated the Cardinals, you do realize the Cardinals beat the Steelers, the third best team in the AFC. You give me no reasons at all, your using victories as the reason for the skins being mediocre. This is the NFL, were not going to blow out opponents week after week, it just doesnt happen like that. We didnt blitz Kurt Warner at all and guess what? he threw two picks, one of which went for a touchdown, not to mention Andre Carter sacked him and forced a fumble, so we were able to get three turnovers without blitzing, but obviously you know more about coaching defense than Gregg Williams. A win is a win, do you think Dallas is complaining about barely beating Buffalo?
If your going to use stats instead of wins to consider a team mediocre than your going about it all wrong, we set a league record for the least amount of offensive yards in the playoff game against Tampa Bay, and we still won, was anyone complaining and calling us mediocre then? Stats are for fantasy football

OK, have it your way. The Skins are, on defense:

18th in passing defense
23 in total yards allowed
15th in total scoring allowed
9th against the run

Im a fan, and Im a realist. If you cannot see that this team is a very mediocre team, then fine no one can convince you otherwise. There are several mediocre teams in the NFC. If you want to go strictly by wins then so be it.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by paulskinsfan

OK, have it your way. The Skins are, on defense:

18th in passing defense
23 in total yards allowed
15th in total scoring allowed
9th against the run

Im a fan, and Im a realist. If you cannot see that this team is a very mediocre team, then fine no one can convince you otherwise. There are several mediocre teams in the NFC. If you want to go strictly by wins then so be it.

They're 10th in yards, not 23rd. The 15th in scoring is a very skewed stat; they've allowed an opposing offense to score 20 points just twice this season and, if you look at each game, they've held opposing offenses to about 8 points under their average score. Aside from the Patriots game, the Redskins defense has been allowing opposing offenses to score just 13 points per game. If you're not satisfied with a defense allowing 13 points per game, you're never going to be satisfied with a defense.

I'll freely admit that the offense leaves a lot to be desired, but the defense is pretty damn stout. Why is it that many "Kool-Aid drinkers" are willing to concede that the offense has serious problems, but many of the team's critics won't admit that the defense is good.

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

They're 10th in yards, not 23rd. The 15th in scoring is a very skewed stat; they've allowed an opposing offense to score 20 points just twice this season and, if you look at each game, they've held opposing offenses to about 8 points under their average score. Aside from the Patriots game, the Redskins defense has been allowing opposing offenses to score just 13 points per game. If you're not satisfied with a defense allowing 13 points per game, you're never going to be satisfied with a defense.

I'll freely admit that the offense leaves a lot to be desired, but the defense is pretty damn stout. Why is it that many "Kool-Aid drinkers" are willing to concede that the offense has serious problems, but many of the team's critics won't admit that the defense is good.

The Patriots game skews the defensive stats like crazy. Obviously the stats are going to count every game and the Patriots were on our schedule, like it or not.

I think, however, that we can all agree that the Patriots are a rare exception in the league, not just this year either. Take out the Pats game and the defense is way up there.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

They're 10th in yards, not 23rd. The 15th in scoring is a very skewed stat; they've allowed an opposing offense to score 20 points just twice this season and, if you look at each game, they've held opposing offenses to about 8 points under their average score. Aside from the Patriots game, the Redskins defense has been allowing opposing offenses to score just 13 points per game. If you're not satisfied with a defense allowing 13 points per game, you're never going to be satisfied with a defense.

I'll freely admit that the offense leaves a lot to be desired, but the defense is pretty damn stout. Why is it that many "Kool-Aid drinkers" are willing to concede that the offense has serious problems, but many of the team's critics won't admit that the defense is good.

I think if we are going to use scoring defense, we can't just throw the Pats game out. It did happen, and we didn't stop them.

I think we should treat that game as a 35 spot. After all, anytime a defense gives up more than 35 points, it's not really a game anymore.

[GiantsSuck703]

Originally Posted by paulskinsfan

OK, have it your way. The Skins are, on defense:

18th in passing defense
23 in total yards allowed
15th in total scoring allowed
9th against the run

Im a fan, and Im a realist. If you cannot see that this team is a very mediocre team, then fine no one can convince you otherwise. There are several mediocre teams in the NFC. If you want to go strictly by wins then so be it.

If you were a realist you would understand that were a mediocre offense with really good special teams and a very stout defense. The offenses inability to put teams away does not take away from the defense pretty much winning all our games for us. If Santana Moss doesnt fumble in the Packers game, and Joe Gibbs quits coaching like hes scared to run up the score than we crush the Giants, that would mean we would have 1 loss on our record, its amazing how two simple mistakes can make a good team look mediocre.

[paulskinsfan]

Originally Posted by GiantsSuck703

If you were a realist you would understand that were a mediocre offense with really good special teams and a very stout defense. The offenses inability to put teams away does not take away from the defense pretty much winning all our games for us. If Santana Moss doesnt fumble in the Packers game, and Joe Gibbs quits coaching like hes scared to run up the score than we crush the Giants, that would mean we would have 1 loss on our record, its amazing how two simple mistakes can make a good team look mediocre.

You cannot factor "ifs" into the analysis. "If" Carlos Rogers made an interception 2 years ago against the Seahawks we might have gone to the Super Bowl. "Ifs" are part of the game.

Im not saying the Skins defense isn't solid, Im saying that as a whole its a bad offense with a slightly better then average defense, leaving us with a medicore team. The defense is now going to be worse since Rogers is out. The defense is the reason we are 5-3, but they are going to struggle more now that a dinged up Smoot is covering the No. 2 and Torrence is covering the ever dangerous slot receiver.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by GiantsSuck703

If you were a realist you would understand that were a mediocre offense with really good special teams and a very stout defense. The offenses inability to put teams away does not take away from the defense pretty much winning all our games for us. If Santana Moss doesnt fumble in the Packers game, and Joe Gibbs quits coaching like hes scared to run up the score than we crush the Giants, that would mean we would have 1 loss on our record, its amazing how two simple mistakes can make a good team look mediocre.

GiantsSuck,

Just because you can make quick excuses for our shortcomings doesn't make them go away. If you going to blame a HOF coach for costing his team the Giants game for "being scared," then it's pretty likely you have no idea why we lost that game, and are just throwing something out there.

I have no issue with that, so long as you don't confuse that with things that are actually happening.

I think you can describe our defense as very stout, although we are giving up plenty of yards against the run. Overall, we are a top 1/4 defense in this league thus far.

But to describe our special teams as really good without acknowledging incredibly short kickoffs, and not so great kickoff coverage, and a punt return game of which it's single best achievement this year is not turning the ball over...that's just not a good job of evaluation.

There are things to like about our special teams unit, namely Rock Cartwright, and a punt coverage team who smothers everything, but you described our special teams unit as "very good", which is simply overlooking the major issues with it.

As far as the offenses ability to put teams away, how is that not a symptom of a bigger problem that his just inconsistency all around?

I appreciate your optimism, but being optimistic is one thing, but telling someone else they aren't being realistic because they aren't optimistic is another.

[GiantsSuck703]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

GiantsSuck,

Just because you can make quick excuses for our shortcomings doesn't make them go away. If you going to blame a HOF coach for costing his team the Giants game for "being scared," then it's pretty likely you have no idea why we lost that game, and are just throwing something out there.

I have no issue with that, so long as you don't confuse that with things that are actually happening.

I think you can describe our defense as very stout, although we are giving up plenty of yards against the run. Overall, we are a top 1/4 defense in this league thus far.

But to describe our special teams as really good without acknowledging incredibly short kickoffs, and not so great kickoff coverage, and a punt return game of which it's single best achievement this year is not turning the ball over...that's just not a good job of evaluation.

There are things to like about our special teams unit, namely Rock Cartwright, and a punt coverage team who smothers everything, but you described our special teams unit as "very good", which is simply overlooking the major issues with it.

As far as the offenses ability to put teams away, how is that not a symptom of a bigger problem that his just inconsistency all around?

I appreciate your optimism, but being optimistic is one thing, but telling someone else they aren't being realistic because they aren't optimistic is another.

I really have no problem with the fact that hes not optimistic, really. I love to debate and it just wouldnt be that fun if everyone agreed all the time. Im just voicing my opinion, does that make me right? No, its just my opinion. I think its great that Paul sticks to his guns and doesnt drink the Kool-aid, but I choose to see it from another angle, but I really dont want that to come off as me attacking other posters, if it came off that way I apologize.