SI Ranks Offensive Backfields

[redskins1974]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, you're the one assigning blame. I'm making observations. And the observation, before you cited PPG, was that the defense seems to have a lot of issues. I was also focusing on the wins this whole time, realizing that when we did win, Campbell and Portis were huge parts of the victory in all except the last win, when they were both non-factors.

Now, if we talk about the losses, you point out the offense was held under 10 points against some good defenses. First, I want to point out that there were many field goal situations that Zorn had to pass up because the team was trailing by too much. Sure, if the goal of football was to score as many points as possible, like you say, the Redskins could have scored 13 points, 12 points, and 16 points in those games against strong defenses. Would not have done a thing to help win those games.

The margin of defeat prevented us from maximizing our point total. And that's the fault of not one unit, but both of them. The point deficit didn't have us chasing because the defense was playing great, and the offense was sucking. No. We were chasing because the offense couldn't get touchdowns and the defense couldn't get off the field. There's your culprits.

So you're placing 100% of the blame on the offense for something that was an offensive, and a defensive problem: that we weren't good enough to be in those games. PPG is terrible at painting that picture.

The offense is not 100% of the blame, but most of it. Though points scored versus points given up does not factor in every scenario, it is a key indicator of how well the offense and defense are performing. Yards for versus yards against was just as lopsided, in terms of rank.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by redskins1974

The offense is not 100% of the blame, but most of it. Though points scored versus points given up does not factor in every scenario, it is a key indicator of how well the offense and defense are performing. Yards for versus yards against was just as lopsided, in terms of rank.

No, I get the fact that it's a key indicator, which is why I wondered if you were going to take it further, or just leave it as is and allow people to draw conclusions from it. That's why I asked if you had anything else that supported the position that you implied, but never stated.

I think it's implied that you feel Campbell is responsible for most of the 8 losses last year, and if not him, someone else on the offense. But I don't think that the reality of the situation suggests that. I'm not disputing that we didn't score enough points to win more than 8 games. But I think our offense was plenty good enough to support a 10 or 11 win team, and also that our PPG would have improved with a different coaching philosophy and a better year from Suisham.

At the end of the day, the team went out to fix the defense in free agency and in the draft, so either 1) we're stupid beyond all hell, 2) Springs and Taylor were irreplaceable parts in the defense last year, or 3) the team concluded that the defense, as was, wasn't good enough.

[redskins1974]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

No, I get the fact that it's a key indicator, which is why I wondered if you were going to take it further, or just leave it as is and allow people to draw conclusions from it. That's why I asked if you had anything else that supported the position that you implied, but never stated.

I think it's implied that you feel Campbell is responsible for most of the 8 losses last year, and if not him, someone else on the offense. But I don't think that the reality of the situation suggests that. I'm not disputing that we didn't score enough points to win more than 8 games. But I think our offense was plenty good enough to support a 10 or 11 win team, and also that our PPG would have improved with a different coaching philosophy and a better year from Suisham.

At the end of the day, the team went out to fix the defense in free agency and in the draft, so either 1) we're stupid beyond all hell, 2) Springs and Taylor were irreplaceable parts in the defense last year, or 3) the team concluded that the defense, as was, wasn't good enough.

Our offense was good enough to support 11 wins? in what, soccer?

The team tried hardest to find a new QB, in both free agency and the draft.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by redskins1974

Our offense was good enough to support 11 wins? in what, soccer?

The team tried hardest to find a new QB, in both free agency and the draft.

If "the team" (Snyder) was determined to get either Cutler or Sanchez, it would have happened. We could have easily offered our 1st and 3rd this year plus our 1st and 2nd next year for Cutler and that would have trumped any offer. We could have offered our #1 this year and next year to go get Sanchez. Don't be a media sheep and believe every exaggerated rumor.

The defense blew the St. Louis game, Cincy game and SF game. 8+3=11.

Originally Posted by Paintrain

The defense blew the St. Louis game, Cincy game and SF game. 8+3=11.

Id go out on a limb and say the offense blew both Giants games, the Rams game, the 2nd Cowboy game, the Steelers game, the Ravens game, and the Bengals game. 8+7=15.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

Id go out on a limb and say the offense blew both Giants games, the Rams game, the 2nd Cowboy game, the Steelers game, the Ravens game, and the Bengals game. 8+7=15.

I get the point that both units were responsible in pretty much all of our loses, Cincinnati, SF, and St. Louis included, but Paintrain simply named games where inexcusable defensive mistakes were the entire difference in the score. While the offense could have played better in every single one of our losses, the margin of defeat was so wide that it wouldn't have matted if the defense hadn't also improved. And I think the one exception to the rule might have been the first Giants game.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I get the point that both units were responsible in pretty much all of our loses, Cincinnati, SF, and St. Louis included, but Paintrain simply named games where inexcusable defensive mistakes were the entire difference in the score. While the offense could have played better in every single one of our losses, the margin of defeat was so wide that it wouldn't have matted if the defense hadn't also improved. And I think the one exception to the rule might have been the first Giants game.

You bring up some good points but in the 7 games I brought up the Skins lost 7-16, 17-19, 6-23, 10-14, 7-23, 10-24, and 13-20. While the defense could of played better in some of those games the offense could of played better in all of those games.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I get the point that both units were responsible in pretty much all of our loses, Cincinnati, SF, and St. Louis included, but Paintrain simply named games where inexcusable defensive mistakes were the entire difference in the score. While the offense could have played better in every single one of our losses, the margin of defeat was so wide that it wouldn't have matted if the defense hadn't also improved. And I think the one exception to the rule might have been the first Giants game.

Exactly, I can name 3 things off the top of my head that were season killers:
1. Leigh Torrence getting beat deep with less than 2:00 to go on a 3rd and long vs. the Rams to set up the game winning FG.

2. Giving up an 87 yard screen pass against the Bengals to Cedric Benson. Every defender should have been docked $25,000 for that play.

3. Blowing a 10 point halftime lead against SF and then after we tied it, allowing yet another long completion under 2 mins to set up the game winning FG.

As "bad" as people want to say the offense was (and they were maddening at times) and as much as people want to tout our 4th ranked (most fraudulent ranking metric in the NFL) defense, we were a few plays away from being a playoff team.

[redskins1974]

Originally Posted by brian orakpo

id go out on a limb and say the offense blew both giants games, the rams game, the 2nd cowboy game, the steelers game, the ravens game, and the bengals game. 8+7=15.

agreed

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by redskins1974

The team tried hardest to find a new QB, in both free agency and the draft.

Well, what that proves is that the team is quite convinced that neither of our two backups will ever be as good as Campbell.

I don't blame them for looking for ways to improve our passing game, but I question the wisdom of any trail of thought that ends up at Jay Cutler or Mark Sanchez. There's a few guys who could improve our QB situation in this league, but none of them would ever be "available."