![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 22,379
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
Good point. I think our top ranking on defense has hidden this particular deficiency (and the lack of turnover as well).
__________________
R.I.P. #21 |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,570
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
[QUOTE=DBUCHANON101;560153]we have lacked a good front 4 for yrs.now we have a strong dline. a passrush helps the entire defense.[/QUOTE]
I think what some people aren't understanding is, it also helps the offense. It helps create turnovers and getting the opposing offense off the field so we can get our offense on the field and score more points.
__________________
Defense wins championships. Bring it! |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 22,379
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
The thing that kills me is that some people here don't understand that it is a pretty normal reaction for the fans of a team to be a bit upset if their QB and RB are ranked at the bottom of the league, especially with some questionable backfield ranked ahead of them.
![]() To every person in here who spends 90% of their threads bashing a particular player (i.e. our QB) or are quickly to dismiss those of us who drink the kool aid a little bit and ask for a higher ranking I have a question? What are you hoping out of this team and what do you root for? I'm not saying that you'd be a delusional fan and think that we have a top 5 backfield, but don't f'ing shoot us down fiercely if we think the players of our team are a bit better than what the sports media says. Shoot, I think the Giants and Eagles fans on this board have a better opinion of our team than some of us fans.
__________________
R.I.P. #21 |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
Quote:
The comments posted on that article over at SI were hilarious. There were Vikings fans who were convinced that they were jipped of a top ten ranking. You know, that one team, that has one of the five best Ds in football every year, and wins 7-10 games a year. Yeah, jipped of a top ten offensive backfield. Irrationality is the standard.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 22,379
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
Quote:
__________________
R.I.P. #21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
Quote:
That's usually true, but out of the guys who are ranked behind you, chances are a few of them are actually going to be better than you this year as well.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | ||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,570
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
I thought you guys knew me by now.
__________________
Defense wins championships. Bring it! |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
I'm just a little perplexed that some people who do watch all the games truly feel like they were witnessing a great defense last year. I mean, this is a franchise that has produced three legit top five/six defenses in the last five seasons, and some people look at last year's sad impersonation of a strong defense and are okay saying that they were witnessing a great unit.
I mean, the perspective is there. We've had great defenses here under Grilliams. Not just good, but great. Three out of four years. Then Blache has a mediocre unit with a small bend-but-don't-break effect, and people are convinced that they are witnessing greatness. I'm just confused. Defense did a lot of things well last year. Being great was not one of those things. We had two and a half players play at a pro bowl level all year (Rogers, Fletcher, and arguably Griffin). In the past, we had 5 or 6 guys playing at a pro bowl level (Griffin, Washington, Arrington, Springs, Taylor, Pierce, Carter, etc). End rant.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 55
Posts: 5,006
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
I didn't read every page of the thread so I don't know if anyone repeated what Terl said on Redskins Blog. Basically he said you have to be REALLY down on Campbell for him to offset 2 Pro Bowlers in the backfield and drag them to #26.
__________________
Paintrain's Redskins Fandom 1981-2014 I'm not dead but this team is dead to me...but now that McCloughan is here they may have new life! Jay Gruden = Zorny McSpurrier Kirk Cousins = Next Grossman |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kill Devil Hills, N.C.
Posts: 7,570
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
Quote:
__________________
Defense wins championships. Bring it! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
Quote:
At the sametime SI is stupid for ranking backfields and not listing FBs. God I cant wait for the season to start. I wish I could hibernate like a bear.
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
Well, if we were to define an average performance for the Redskins defense last year, I'm pretty sure they would only have beaten it in the first Giants game, and the Baltimore game, out of all those losses. In 6 of our 8 losses, the defense did not perform like it would have needed to win. Paintrain brought up three games where, while the offense wasn't good, it was good enough.
Of course, in three of the losses neither unit performed well enough to make it a close game. All three of those games happened in November. And one of those games was close, because the Cowboys are awful.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: SI Ranks Offensive Backfields
The current logical structure among the fanbase is this:
C = The team was average A = The defense was fantastic B = The offense must have been horrible C = A - B But proposition A clearly is an overstatement. However, if A isn't an overstatement, and the team was not average, but quite good (C = The team is very good), then the same logical structure sees B as "The offense was respectable". So the conclusion is, the crap the offense takes is a factor of people being hesitant to say the defense was anything less than fantastic. But as pointed out, they were not fantastic. They were anywhere between average and good, depending on who you ask.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|