SI Ranks Offensive Backfields

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

The Skins defense ranked 4th last year giving up 288.8 ypg and 6th in ppg giving up 18.5. Which is shocking for the amount of 3 and outs the Skins had in 2008.

The Skins had problems on defense forcing sacks and turnovers and hopefully that problem has been fixed for 2009 with the additions they have made. At the sametime sacks and turnovers arent key to being a good defense. The key to being a good defense is to shut down the opposing team. If the Skins ranked in the bottom half of the league in defense then id say they needed more sacks or turnovers last year.

Out of the top 7 defenses last year the Skins were the only team that didnt make the playoffs. The reason why we didnt make the playoffs was because the offense didnt carry their weight. Hopefully in 2009 the offense can pick it up and the defense can help them out by forcing more sacks and turnovers. I know one thing if the Skins finish in the top 5 on defense again and miss the playoffs im going to be pissed.

We had the third least 3 and outs of any team in the NFL. Does this change your opinion of the offense at all?

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

We had the third least 3 and outs of any team in the NFL. Does this change your opinion of the offense at all?

Actually no. We were 26th in 3rd down converisons in 2008 with 35% so I just assumed we had alot of 3 and outs. At least it felt that way to me watching the offense last year.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

Actually no. We were 26th in 3rd down converisons in 2008 with 35% so I just assumed we had alot of 3 and outs. At least it felt that way to me watching the offense last year.

Well, we converted 67% of our first and tens for first downs, and that figure was above the league average. It just so happened that we were WELL above the league average at the start of drives.

That would seem to either be a credit to the playcalling, or just statistical noise. But converting 67% of our first and tens into another first and tens is a real trend. Of course, that also means that 33% of our drives failed, and that we weren't a great third down team, and while 33% is a good drive failure rate, it's not nearly good enough for an offense with zero big play ability, and a declining success rate as it gets closer to the opponents goal line.

We were a well above average between our own 20 and our own 40. But on the other side of the 50, we were a far below average offense. It's interesting how our field position seemed to determine our success rate, but when your greatest offensive weapon brings only the threat of a deep pass, and hardly any actual production, it's easy to justify what happened.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, we converted 67% of our first and tens for first downs, and that figure was above the league average. It just so happened that we were WELL above the league average at the start of drives.

That would seem to either be a credit to the playcalling, or just statistical noise. But converting 67% of our first and tens into another first and tens is a real trend. Of course, that also means that 33% of our drives failed, and that we weren't a great third down team, and while 33% is a good drive failure rate, it's not nearly good enough for an offense with zero big play ability, and a declining success rate as it gets closer to the opponents goal line.

We were a well above average between our own 20 and our own 40. But on the other side of the 50, we were a far below average offense. It's interesting how our field position seemed to determine our success rate, but when your greatest offensive weapon brings only the threat of a deep pass, and hardly any actual production, it's easy to justify what happened.

Nice post. I actually didnt know that stat about the 1st and 10s. Thats actually pretty impressive. Watching the Skins last year it really didnt feel like we were that successful starting drives. I guess the offenses failure to score on a regular basis made me feel that way. It just seemed like we punted so much last year. I guess the offense stalled after we picked up a little steam on drives. You would think the way the offense slowed down we would of had more 3 and outs. Thats pretty interesting.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Brian Orakpo

Nice post. I actually didnt know that stat about the 1st and 10s. Thats actually pretty impressive. Watching the Skins last year it really didnt feel like we were that successful starting drives. I guess the offenses failure to score on a regular basis made me feel that way. It just seemed like we punted so much last year. I guess the offense stalled after we picked up a little steam on drives. You would think the way the offense slowed down we would of had more 3 and outs. Thats pretty interesting.

I guess I could sum up last season like this: The offense was more frustrating than bad, the defense was more mediocre than frustrating, and Suisham was just incredibly frustrating.

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I guess I could sum up last season like this: The offense was more frustrating than bad, the defense was more mediocre than frustrating, and Suisham was just incredibly frustrating.

Id agree with that 100%.

[redskins1974]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I guess I could sum up last season like this: The offense was more frustrating than bad, the defense was more mediocre than frustrating, and Suisham was just incredibly frustrating.

In other words, the defense was better then the offense, which was my arguement the entire time with you.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by redskins1974

In other words, the defense was better then the offense, which was my arguement the entire time with you.

Well, no, I'm not saying that. Nor am I saying the opposite.

I'll say this: the offense declined more over the course of the four month season than the defense did. It also had further to go from the first five games. By the end of the season, the offense was less frustrating, and more undermanned. It featured names like Heyer and Fabini. There was really no upside there.

The defense was consistently underachieving what it could have been. For the final three games, when they were below average, their best defensive player was coming off the bench, and they were blitzing into teams who were plenty prepared to protect the QB. And they were performing at a level that undermined their talent.

Our horses were on the defensive side last year, but I'm not willing to say that they were more responsible for our wins than the offense. I'm not sure if I believe that or not.