Stat Prediction

SkinFan 0-16 or 16-0 · Sat May 22, 2004 11:47 am

OK. Lets predict the stats for the players on our offense. Then at the end we can all look back to see how close we were. OK here is mine.

QB: Il let you know when I find out who is starting.

Portis: 1600 yards, 300 recieving.

Trung,Betts,Chad, and Rock: 750 yards.

Coles: 80 catches 1200 yards.

Gardner: 75 receptions 1000 yards.

McCants: 50 catches 650 yards

Cool

ey: 30 catches 300 yards.

Jacobs: 20-25 catches

Thrash 15-20 catches.

taylormade234 · Post by **taylormade234** » Sat May 22, 2004 12:34 pm

That seems like an accurate prediction to me.

Redskins4Life · Post by **Redskins4Life** » Sat May 22, 2004 1:21 pm

QB- Ramsey- 88.8 QB Rating, 3,700 yards passing
RB- Portis- 1,800 yards, 20 TD's
WR- Coles- 92 catches, 1,700 yards
WR- Gardner- 79 catches, 1,100 yards
WR- Jacobs- 35 catches, 500 yards
WR- McCants- 22 catches, 300 yards, 5 TD's
TE- Cool

ey- 45 catches, 500 yards

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Sat May 22, 2004 1:24 pm

Wow, all of the sudden we're threatening our 1983 performance. . .

Warmother · Post by **Warmother** » Sat May 22, 2004 1:29 pm

Both QB's together- 3500 yds passing 26 TD's

Portis- 1535 yd's 15 TD's 250 Yds receiving.

All other backs- 300 yds rushing 2 TD's.

Coles- 85 receptions 1350 yds 6 TD's.

Gardner- 70 receptions 950 yds 8 TD's.

McCants- 60 receptions 800 yds 10 TD's.

Cool

ey- 25 receptions 300 yds 2 TD's.

All other receivers get the rest of the yd's.

iluvdaeagles · Post by **iluvdaeagles** » Sat May 22, 2004 4:35 pm

no way gardner gets 1000yards

SkinFan 0-16 or 16-0 · Sun May 23, 2004 5:52 pm

iluvdaeagles wrote:no way gardner gets 1000yards

Why not? He did it 2 years ago, and now he is in a system that fits him better.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Sun May 23, 2004 8:14 pm

Is it possible for a smaller RB to get 1600 yards when he plays so many games in the NFC East ? I can't wait to see.

hailskins666 · Post by **hailskins666** » Sun May 23, 2004 8:53 pm

clinton's weight does bother me. he hasn't played 16 games in a single season yet, despite the 2 1500 yd seasons.

iluvdaeagles · Post by **iluvdaeagles** » Mon May 31, 2004 4:51 pm

SkinFan 0-16 or 16-0 wrote:
iluvdaeagles wrote:no way gardner gets 1000yards

Why not? He did it 2 years ago, and now he is in a system that fits him better.

becuase he isnt a #1 anymore

Smithian · Post by **Smithian** » Mon May 31, 2004 4:53 pm

I predict like 1,200 yards for Portis... Denver didn't have a passing attack like ours.

SkinFan 0-16 or 16-0 · Mon May 31, 2004 6:57 pm

iluvdaeagles wrote:
SkinFan 0-16 or 16-0 wrote:
iluvdaeagles wrote:no way gardner gets 1000yards

Why not? He did it 2 years ago, and now he is in a system that fits him better.

becuase he isnt a #1 anymore

That does not matter in Gibbs' offese. In some offenses like spurrier's and your sorry one. Only the #1 receiver can get 1000 yards.

But in Gibbs' he usually has two 1000 yard receivers. One time he even had three 1000 yard receivers.

wandkwitham · Post by **wandkwitham** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 8:59 am

QB (either) 3300 yds 21 TDs.
Statistics usually don't lie. Brunell has NEVER thrown for more than 20 TDs in a year despite playing on offenses with some very explosive weapons. It is completely unrealistic to think he will do better now at the end of his career, even with Joe Gibbs et al coaching. Ramsey was on pace for 21 last year before he left because of his foot injury - and that was in a pass happy (albeit severely undisciplined) offense. I think the passing game will be average - but not above average, especially considering .

Portis 1550yds 13 TDs
Statistics usually don't lie and the statistics say that Portis is something special. Lets hope he can stay healthy.

Coles 90 Rec 1300 yds 7TD
Gardner 75 Rec 850 yds 5TD
McCants 28 Rec 400 yds 4TD
All others 750 yds 5TD

iluvdaeagles · Post by **iluvdaeagles** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 9:13 pm

SkinFan 0-16 or 16-0 wrote:
iluvdaeagles wrote:
SkinFan 0-16 or 16-0 wrote:
iluvdaeagles wrote:no way gardner gets 1000yards

Why not? He did it 2 years ago, and now he is in a system that fits him better.

becuase he isnt a #1 anymore

That does not matter in Gibbs' offese. In some offenses like spurrier's and your sorry one. Only the #1 receiver can get 1000 yards.

But in Gibbs' he usually has two 1000 yard receivers. One time he even had three 1000 yard receivers.

SO your saying that the skins will have 1000yard,6+td WR, one 1600yard 10+td back, and 1 3000+yards 25+td QB????????????????

REMEMBER THIS THERE IS ONLY ONE BALL ON THE FIELD AT A TIME

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 9:26 pm

iluvdaeagles wrote:SO your saying that the skins will have 1000yard,6+td WR, one 1600yard 10+td back, and 1 3000+yards 25+td QB????????????????

REMEMBER THIS THERE IS ONLY ONE BALL ON THE FIELD AT A TIME

hey guy.... It's not impossible... Hasselbeck, Alexander, and Jackson did it up there in seattle last year.... and Brunell/Ramsey, Portis, and Coles are atleast comparible if not some better than them...... so it's not like it couldn't happen...

iluvdaeagles · Post by **iluvdaeagles** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 9:36 pm

Alexander was no where near 1600, M. beck is better then brunell, and i think jackson and koren edge out coles gardner.

also why do skins fans always say brunell/ramsey when talking about ur qb system. Brunell is your starting QB and unless he sucks and the team is losing ramsey wont see the field this year. You dont pay a guy the type of money u paid brunell to not play.

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 9:59 pm

Same reason Eagles fans championed their depth at QB a few years back when Detmer and Feeley helped them to the NFC Championship game. Professional football is about depth. Don't be a hater because we have it at the most important position.

You are right about Brunell being our starting quarterback. I don't think anyone realizes just how good this guy is. Consider: Donovan McNabb's best single season QB rating is 86.0. Mark Brunell's WORST single season QB rating is 82.0. Mmmm-mmmm, finger-lickin' good...

iluvdaeagles · Post by **iluvdaeagles** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 10:04 pm

Steve Spurrier III wrote:Same reason Eagles fans championed their depth at QB a few years back when Detmer and Feeley helped them to the NFC Championship game. Professional football is about depth. Don't be a hater because we have it at the most important position.

You are right about Brunell being our starting quarterback. I don't think anyone realizes just how good this guy is. Consider: Donovan McNabb's best single season QB rating is 86.0. Mark Brunell's WORST single season QB rating is 82.0. Mmmm-mmmm, finger-lickin' good...

the guys prime was 4years ago!?! last year he was a 3rd string QB for a sucky team! Ramsey is so much better but thank you redskins for playing burnell

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 10:38 pm

iluvdaeagles wrote:Alexander was no where near 1600,

Your right.... Alexander had 1435 yards last year.... which is SO far away from 1600 yards.... :roll:

The point was you made it seem like it would be impossible for a team to get to those totals and I'm saying it ain't especially when those 3 guys got well over your "impossible to reach" totals in all the other categories except for Alexanders rushing yards.... excuse my ignorance

iluvdaeagles wrote: M. beck is better then brunell, and i think jackson and koren edge out coles gardner.

"My dads better than your dad".....ok.... let's not think and provide some substance behind your thoughts please....

iluvdaeagles wrote:also why do skins fans always say brunell/ramsey when talking about ur qb system. Brunell is your starting QB and unless he sucks and the team is losing ramsey wont see the field this year. You dont pay a guy the type of money u paid brunell to not play.

because Gibbs says it's an open compitetion and he's not one to lie...... Warner was making more money than Bulger the past 2 seasons but he couldn't perform.... so he's been kicked out..... it's about performance my friend... not the almighty dollar.... there not.... although I do think that Brunell will when out in the end because he has more experience..... but it's still an open compitetion.... which will be one of the best things to watch, come training camp

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Tue Jun 01, 2004 10:42 pm

Last year, Brunell posted an 89.7 rating in his limited action. The year before he posted an 85.7 in a full season. In his so called "prime", four years ago, he posted an 84.0 rating. Please don't show your ignorance by pretending Brunell is washed up. The guy can still play...

hailskins666 · Post by **hailskins666** » Wed Jun 02, 2004 4:43 pm

man, i don't want to ever get on ssIII's badside....

silent1903 · Post by **silent1903** » Wed Jun 02, 2004 6:47 pm

Redskins4Life wrote:QB- Ramsey- 88.8 QB Rating, 3,700 yards passing
RB- Portis- 1,800 yards, 20 TD's
WR- Coles- 92 catches, 1,700 yards
WR- Gardner- 79 catches, 1,100 yards
WR- Jacobs- 35 catches, 500 yards
WR- McCants- 22 catches, 300 yards, 5 TD's
TE- ey- 45 catches, 500 yards

And presumably Brunell passing for the extra 400+ yards all these receivers are going to catch for? Why can't we be quietly confident about this season and let the girls and the budgies spout off about how good they are going to be, and set themselves up for a big fall. Big predictions play into their hands and it is the same old thing year in, year out as they all say. Personally I sit here with a smug grin on my face, waiting for Gibbs' team to do the talking.

fleetus · Post by **fleetus** » Fri Jun 04, 2004 10:38 am

Brunell - 93.0 rating, 2400 yds. 16TD/5INT (12 games)
Ramsey - 85.0 rating, 1100 yds. 8TD/6INT (4 games)
Portis - 1200 yds. 14TD (11 games)
Betts - 700 yds. 4TD (5 starts)
Coles - 90/1200yds. 8TD's
Gardner - 60/700 yds. 3 TD's
Thrash - 45/400 yds. 2 TD's
McCants - 40/400yds. 6 TD's
Taylor - 25/375 yds. 2 TD's
Cool

ey - 55/425 yds. 4 TD's
Offensive Line - 18 sacks allowed

iluvdaeagles · Post by **iluvdaeagles** » Sat Jun 05, 2004 5:42 pm

Steve Spurrier III wrote:Last year, Brunell posted an 89.7 rating in his limited action. The year before he posted an 85.7 in a full season. In his so called "prime", four years ago, he posted an 84.0 rating. Please don't show your ignorance by pretending Brunell is washed up. The guy can still play...

You know why he was had "limited action" because he was benched and was out played by a rookie.

iluvdaeagles · Post by **iluvdaeagles** » Sat Jun 05, 2004 5:54 pm

2000 Jacksonville Jaguars 16 16 512 311 60.7 3640 7.11 67 20 14 54/289 39 9 84.0
2001 Jacksonville Jaguars 15 15 473 289 61.1 3309 7.00 44 19 13 57/387 37 2 84.1
2002 Jacksonville Jaguars 15 15 416 245 58.9 2788 6.70 79 17 7 34/210 28 6 85.7
2003 Jacksonville Jaguars 3 3 82 54 65.9 484 5.90 65 2 0 9/46 4 1 89.7

All of his numbers in the last 4 years have gone DOWN what makes you think that at the age of 34 in his 12th season that in a primarily run O that his numbers will go up.

Rod Gardner
2003 Washington Redskins 16 16 59 600 10.2 35 5 7 0 30

Todd Pink
2003 Philadelphia Eagles 16 15 36 575 16.0 59 2 8 5 22

So for all of you people saying that Gardner will have 1000 yards does this mean Todd will also have 1000yards. I mean Todd has a better QB throwing to him, and a better WR next to him. So will Todd have 1000 yards as well???????????