"Offensive" Analysis

[Paintrain]

2007-0 games

2006-3 games

2005-6 games

2004-2 games

This is is the number of times over the past 3+ seasons that we have scored 24 or more points in a game, the benchmark for a quality winning offensive team. 21.5% of the games we've played in the past 4 years we've accomplished that benchmark. Much of our consternation the past couple of days about the offense still being too conservative and not producing enough points is supported by the numbers.

Currently we're 21st in scoring (17.7 ppg), 17th in total offense.. Last year we were 20th in scoring (19.2 ppg), 13th in total offense.. 2005, 13th in scoring (22.4 ppg), 11th in offense and 2004 31st in scoring (15.0 ppg) and 30th in offense..

Everyone knows that we're working with a QB with 10 career starts and a retooled OL but something's not right when with the talent we have on offense we have consistently had trouble scoring 3 TD a game. Last year we got all excited about the return to 'Redskins Football' at the end of the year, yet we still put up a 2-5 record down the stretch..

I'm not climbing aboard the 'Fire Gibbs/Saunders' train, but I'm continuing to wonder if JG17 (as I've nicknamed him for his penchant to get to 17 pts and take the air out of the football regardless of when it is in the game) isn't stuck too much in his ways to embrace what needs to happen to be successful in today's NFL..

[MTK]

I think we're underestimating how much losing your starting right side of the line can hurt a team. Add in a young QB who's made 10 starts in this league and you're bound to have some growing pains. I'm not overly concerned yet.

[Chief X_Phackter]

I don't know if it is as much being conservative, as it is learning a new offense every year except this year, and injuries, and having a green quarterback. There are still only five teams in the NFL with a better record than the Redskins. I'm not worried.

[BrunellMVP?]

I'm not sure that we are underestimating the loss of the right side of the line...no DOUBT that is a tremendous blow- but i think the point of PainTrain's post was to establish a disturbing trend- where the skins fail to achieve the NFL benchmark for successful offenses (24 points scored). Since 2004, its been done an underwhelming 11 times...while I'm aware that Gibbs was fixing the mess left behind, and that past years don't represent a JC led team, the trend still stands, and it signals that something ain't working...
However, at 2-1...no complaints...

Record since 2004

24 wins - 29 losses (including post season)

2007 Washington Redskins 3 2 1 0 .667 -- --
2006 Washington Redskins 16 5 11 0 .313 -- --
2005 Washington Redskins 16 10 6 0 .625 1 1
2004 Washington Redskins 16 6 10 0 .375 -- --

[RMSkins]

Let's talk about this after the Lions game, if we can't score more than 24 points against the Lions then there should be a legitimate concern, but until then I wouldn't panic to much.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I think we're underestimating how much losing your starting right side of the line can hurt a team. Add in a young QB who's made 10 starts in this league and you're bound to have some growing pains. I'm not overly concerned yet.

Totally O-line.
No team can sustain the changes we have seen through injury and attrition to the line and not have trouble. the protection has not been bad, but we obviouisly could not run on a reasonably bad D. We must have the solid ground game to keep the heat off JC

[BrunellMVP?]

Originally Posted by RMSkins

Let's talk about this after the Lions game, if we can't score more than 24 points against the Lions then there should be a legitimate concern, but until then I wouldn't panic to much.

fair enough, but the giants did give up 80 points in the 2 weeks preceding us...

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by RMSkins

Let's talk about this after the Lions game, if we can't score more than 24 points against the Lions then there should be a legitimate concern, but until then I wouldn't panic to much.

Let's definitely talk about this after the next few games (Lions, Packers, Cardinals, Patriots) because the Lions, Cardinals and Pats are going to put 21-24 pts up, minimum so we're going to need 3-4 TD to beat each of them..

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I think we're underestimating how much losing your starting right side of the line can hurt a team. Add in a young QB who's made 10 starts in this league and you're bound to have some growing pains. I'm not overly concerned yet.

I acknowledged the O-line issues and Campbell's inexperience.. My point was more a trend supported by the numbers in JG17's current tenure as head coach.. If we didn't have talent that's one thing, but we shouldn't be scoring less, on average of the past 4 years than teams such as the Jets, Bills, Bears, Cards, Browns, Ravens, Raiders, Texans, Bucs, & Titans.

[EternalEnigma21]

It bothers me that all of our games come down to the wire... we should've blown out the giants the other day. We were dominating them, and then we quit executing. I don't know enough to say who's to blame, but we should've broken their backs... it seems like we're too nice a team and just want to keep the games too close... it doesn't matter who the opponent is either. RARELY does our margin of victory exceed one touchdown...

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

2007-0 games

2006-3 games

2005-6 games

2004-2 games

This is is the number of times over the past 3+ seasons that we have scored 24 or more points in a game, the benchmark for a quality winning offensive team. 21.5% of the games we've played in the past 4 years we've accomplished that benchmark. Much of our consternation the past couple of days about the offense still being too conservative and not producing enough points is supported by the numbers.

Currently we're 21st in scoring (17.7 ppg), 17th in total offense.. Last year we were 20th in scoring (19.2 ppg), 13th in total offense.. 2005, 13th in scoring (22.4 ppg), 11th in offense and 2004 31st in scoring (15.0 ppg) and 30th in offense..

Everyone knows that we're working with a QB with 10 career starts and a retooled OL but something's not right when with the talent we have on offense we have consistently had trouble scoring 3 TD a game. Last year we got all excited about the return to 'Redskins Football' at the end of the year, yet we still put up a 2-5 record down the stretch..

I'm not climbing aboard the 'Fire Gibbs/Saunders' train, but I'm continuing to wonder if JG17 (as I've nicknamed him for his penchant to get to 17 pts and take the air out of the football regardless of when it is in the game) isn't stuck too much in his ways to embrace what needs to happen to be successful in today's NFL..

24 points seems like a pretty high benchmark. An offense that can put up more than 24 on a consistent basis is a very, very good offensive football team.

Field position also has a lot to do with the number of points a team scored. We don't get turnovers, virtually ever. Sunday was the exception, not the rule with us. It's sad that we couldn't capitalize on a 3 turnover day from the defense, but if they are going to consistently get our offense backed up into their own end, then they have little to complain about on days like Sunday.

The 2005 figure shows the one year when our defense could force the turnover, and our offense was good enough to punch it in. The last three seasons, our offense, albeit inconsistently, has shown the ability to go up and down the field. The difference between 05 and 06 was almost exclusively defensive.

This year, we have a kicking game (finally). If the defense can force 2-3 turnovers week in and week out without letting the opposing offense chew up all the clock, the offense will have no issue putting up 24 points every week.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by canthetuna

It bothers me that all of our games come down to the wire... we should've blown out the giants the other day. We were dominating them, and then we quit executing. I don't know enough to say who's to blame, but we should've broken their backs... it seems like we're too nice a team and just want to keep the games too close... it doesn't matter who the opponent is either. RARELY does our margin of victory exceed one touchdown...

That just means we haven't played any teams than we are a lot better than.

I do, however, think we are a lot better than Miami. There is a lot of variance from how good a team really is in week one. I think if we played Miami at home in Week 8, we would smoke them by two touchdowns.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

I acknowledged the O-line issues and Campbell's inexperience.. My point was more a trend supported by the numbers in JG17's current tenure as head coach.. If we didn't have talent that's one thing, but we shouldn't be scoring less, on average of the past 4 years than teams such as the Jets, Bills, Bears, Cards, Browns, Ravens, Raiders, Texans, Bucs, & Titans.

Of course, if we threw the ball a lot more, we could make the game last longer and score a lot of points.

Would that give us a better chance to win? Absolutely not. Running the ball shortens the game, and by nature, leaves the outcome more up to chance. Less plays means that there is a greater chance that the fluky plays (Burress runs right through our secondary) in a game can influence the outcome. Thus against better teams, we should try to run the ball often to shorten the game.

Against worse teams, I would try to throw all over them until the lead got big enough, then run out the clock. This is what we tried to do against New York. The problem was that the passing efficency was awful in the second half, and the defense was awful, and it didn't take long for New York to get right back in.

Turns out that they probably weren't as bad as we thought. As my HS coach would always say, "we would have won the game, unfortunately we just ran out of time."

[hurrykaine]

Originally Posted by canthetuna

It bothers me that all of our games come down to the wire... we should've blown out the giants the other day. We were dominating them, and then we quit executing. I don't know enough to say who's to blame, but we should've broken their backs... it seems like we're too nice a team and just want to keep the games too close... it doesn't matter who the opponent is either. RARELY does our margin of victory exceed one touchdown...

You've hit the nail on the head. Gibbs v 2.0 conservative playcalling means we play down to the level of our opposition on offense - if we're up by even a FG or just 1TD, Gibbs is content to just run the ball and eat up clock rather than trying to extend the lead. If we're running extremely well, then its a successful strategy, but when the right side of the line is banged up and/or other teams are crowding the box, its not as effective.

We have rarely won by more than a TD in the last 4 years. There have been exceptions like the SF game and the last 3 games from '05 when the defense scored and created tons of turnovers, but outside of that, we have not been putting teams away.

[BrunellMVP?]

Not that I think this sheds much light, but since 2004, we've won 8 games by over 7 points (I only looked bc someone asked...)

once in 2006, 5 times in 2005, and 2 in 2004.