Redskins to set records/turnover futility [MERGED]

[greatest2]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/26/AR2006122600799.html

the redskins are about to set records the are not good. some being interceptions, take-aways, sacks, etc.

on a side note, under the section REdskin NOtes, it says that we will lose our 3rd rounder probably. which i think most of us thought. but depending on the draft value chart we could loose are 2008 fourth rounder. this trade just gets worse and worse (first a 3rd, then TJ isn't even a short yard back, and now maybe a 4th!)

[Smiley]

Honestly I think TJ was brought here as insurance for a Super Bowl run. It just didn't work out that way. uggg...

[shally]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/26/AR2006122600799.html

the redskins are about to set records the are not good. some being interceptions, take-aways, sacks, etc.

on a side note, under the section REdskin NOtes, it says that we will lose our 3rd rounder probably. which i think most of us thought. but depending on the draft value chart we could loose are 2008 fourth rounder. this trade just gets worse and worse (first a 3rd, then TJ isn't even a short yard back, and now maybe a 4th!)

that is the GW defense...emphasis on the run, so there is little pressure on the qb without a blitz.. and then we become vulnerable to the big play..

[shally]

Honestly I think TJ was brought here as insurance for a Super Bowl run. It just didn't work out that way. uggg...

insurance for a long term portis injury.. and they didn't trust either betts or rock to get it done..

[greatest2]

do you guys think that the FO put enough scouting and research into the TJ trade.

i mean, he hasn't changed his running style, you think that JG or who ever is scouting would see that and say it doesn't fit our style?

[LATrueRedskin]

This is almost the sole reason why we are 5-10. All great teams generate turnovers, and have their offenses play on a short field. Heck, one of our Super Bowl teams is tied with the record for most turnovers in a season, and had something like a +41 differential. We're usually not in the position to grab an INT, and when we are, we drop it. Time and time again.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

insurance for a long term portis injury.. and they didn't trust either betts or rock to get it done..
Which makes it pretty strange that Portis had both a long term injury and a short term one, and during neither was TJ used. This was just an unbelievably bad trade.

[CarMike]

This is almost the sole reason why we are 5-10. All great teams generate turnovers, and have their offenses play on a short field. Heck, one of our Super Bowl teams is tied with the record for most turnovers in a season, and had something like a +41 differential. We're usually not in the position to grab an INT, and when we are, we drop it. Time and time again.
Baldinger made a point after the blocked punt that it was the first the entire season that we started a drive inside the opponents 20 yard line.

Our defense hasn't done squat to help out of offense this season. Field position or turnovers.

Which is the most frustrating part of being a Redskins fan for the past 10+ years. We can't get all three phrases of our team to be good at the same time. One year our defense will good while our ST and offense is terrible. Then we get our our offense and ST up to par and then our defense tanks it.

[StogieHog]

insurance for a long term portis injury.. and they didn't trust either betts or rock to get it done..

I did not trust Betts or Rock either. I remember a time when they loved to fumble the ball a lot. Now it looks like Betts has come a long way. Hopefully, it will carry over to next year.

[Skinz4lyfe]

do you guys think that the FO put enough scouting and research into the TJ trade.

i mean, he hasn't changed his running style, you think that JG or who ever is scouting would see that and say it doesn't fit our style?

Honestly no! However, I don't think that is the issue. We paniced and made a stupid trade. I didn't like it at the time and I hate it even worse now. Boy that 3rd round pick could have turned into a DB or LB we so badly need right now. They better pray Duckett doesn't void the end of this deal but at this point does it matter anyway? I don't think we'll get much value out of the trade at this point. It's just time to move on.

[skins74]

Our team is a complete mess.

[Redskin4Life]

This was reported by PFW. Pretty telling of GW's "greatness" when it comes to takeaways and that it may have nothing to do with the players on the team:

Has there been a less opportunistic “D” than the 2006 Redskins? Through 14 games, they have created 11 turnovers; the NFL mark for inadequacy over 16 games is 15 — by the Rams and Packers in 2004. (The all-time low is 11 takeaways by the Baltimore Colts in the strike-shortened ’82 season.) Factor sacks into the equation, and the Redskins won’t set records — they have 17, four more than the ’81 Colts tallied — but the lack of pressure has been a major problem. CB Shawn Springs has been affected by injuries, and FS Sean Taylor has tried to do too much and been out of position to make plays. LB Marcus Washington and DT Cornelius Griffin are disrupters but not big-play guys. A look at Gregg Williams’ defenses going back to Buffalo, including the past two years in Washington, reveals that they have ranked 31st, 32nd, 32nd, 22nd and tied for 15th in takeaways. In 46 games with the Redskins, 21 of their takeaways have come in five games; the other 41 games have netted only 44 takeaways.

Maybe GW needs to get off his laurels and find a way to get some takeaways in his new defensive scheme...

http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL/NFC/NFC+East/Washington/WWHI/default.htm

[StogieHog]

The D is definetly a huge problem these days. If we could only get back the D that GW had in his first season as a Skins coach.

[redskin_rich]

Merged.

[Slobberknocker]

I think a LOT of it has to do with two factors: corners and pressure. With Springs hurt, everything changes and that should never be. Having to blitz to create pressure is also a scenario of doom.

Teams like the Eagles and Steelers use the blitz best IMHO. When you can create consistent pressure with your front 4, you can send anybody from anywhere at anytime and throw a monkey wrench into offensive gameplans.

No pressure and no coverage will equal a disaster. Takeaways, to answer the question, come with DISRUPTION.

[Redskin4Life]

The D is definetly a huge problem these days. If we could only get back the D that GW had in his first season as a Skins coach.
If you read the part I highlited, we pretty much are that same team turnovers-wise. 22nd in TOs when we were the #4 D in all the land?!?!?

As good as our D was in ypg, they really didn't help the O that much by not getting the ball from the opponent. Makes you wonder if the D contributed to part of the offensive problem in 04? If the D got the ball back in obvious scoring positions (inside the opponent's 30) or scoring themselves, we might have won more than 6 games in Gibbs' first year back.

[Redskin4Life]

I think a LOT of it has to do with two factors: corners and pressure. With Springs hurt, everything changes and that should never be. Having to blitz to create pressure is also a scenario of doom.

Teams like the Eagles and Steelers use the blitz best IMHO. When you can create consistent pressure with your front 4, you can send anybody from anywhere at anytime and throw a monkey wrench into offensive gameplans.

No pressure and no coverage will equal a disaster. Takeaways, to answer the question, come with DISRUPTION.
And HANDS... I don't remember the last time I saw so many dropped balls.

[StogieHog]

If you read the part I highlited, we pretty much are that same team turnovers-wise. 22nd in TOs when we were the #4 D in all the land?!?!?

As good as our D was in ypg, they really didn't help the O that much by not getting the ball from the opponent. Makes you wonder if the D contributed to part of the offensive problem in 04? If the D got the ball back in obvious scoring positions (inside the opponent's 30) or scoring themselves, we might have won more than 6 games in Gibbs' first year back.

Your right about the turnovers, but wasn't the D keeping the yards gained down and scoring total low? If I recall that year the O had a hard time scoring more than 17 points a game. If the D keeps the other team below 20 points per game then our O needed to get in the end zone more.

[Redskin4Life]

Your right about the turnovers, but wasn't the D keeping the yards gained down and scoring total low? If I recall that year the O had a hard time scoring more than 17 points a game. If the D keeps the other team below 20 points per game then our O needed to get in the end zone more.
True about the yards gained and scoring but I was thinking that instead of "only" giving up a FG, we got a TO which got converted into at least a FG... well, that's a 6 point swing in our direction. Even if we didn't score, that would still be a positive 3 pts for us...

I'm definitely not saying that the O wasn't atrocious that year but I remember a few times that the D did well by stopping the opponent from scoring but put our O in a hole with bad field position. Our D that year pretty much did nothing to help the offense "flip the field position battle".

[StogieHog]

True about the yards gained and scoring but I was thinking that instead of "only" giving up a FG, we got a TO which got converted into at least a FG... well, that's a 6 point swing in our direction. Even if we didn't score, that would still be a positive 3 pts for us...

I'm definitely not saying that the O wasn't atrocious that year but I remember a few times that the D did well by stopping the opponent from scoring but put our O in a hole with bad field position. Our D that year pretty much did nothing to help the offense "flip the field position battle".


That is a good point as well. I guess they lacked the karma, chemistry or something to Get R Done!

I know more O time or possesion would have helped. Seems like our Defense was on the field all the time back then.