Redskins start 0 and 3

DaSkinz Baby · Post by **DaSkinz Baby** » Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:48 am

gushogs wrote:Can anybody remember the coaching carrousel we had a couple of years back???
New coach, new system, learning curves..., I'm tired of "rebuilding years". Football is a game of inches, a couple of tweeks and we are back in business.
HaiL,

No one is saying to revert to the coaching carrousel but why keep a coach that sucks? and has consistently ranked 28th -31 for defense??

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Wed Sep 25, 2013 11:59 am

Deadskins wrote:Yards don't mean jack squat. Points are all that matter.

I don't think you believe this. What's more valuable, a play that generates 99 yards of offense but doesn't score, or the 1-yard run that gets you 6 points? It's simplistic and unrealistic to say the 99-yard play doesn't mean anything.

DaSkinz Baby · Post by **DaSkinz Baby** » Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:14 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
Deadskins wrote:Yards don't mean jack squat. Points are all that matter.

I don't think you believe this. What's more valuable, a play that generates 99 yards of offense but doesn't score, or the 1-yard run that gets you 6 points? It's simplistic and unrealistic to say the 99-yard play doesn't mean anything.

Irn-Bru I know I have been called stupid on here and been given the reason that Mike Shanahan and Jim Haslett know more about football than me. But to me common sense will always be right. This past Sunday's game is proof, you supposedly have a game plan to STOP THE RUN! You decide to have this game plan with a PASS FIRST OFFENSE!! That had to be the dumbest defensive setup in NFL history, the problem Sunday and every game is the corners are giving too much cushion and not pressing at the line of scrimmage, this allows time after time QB's to just throw quick slants to wide open receivers and when you have poor tackling this only makes it worse. On top of that the back is consistently coming uncovered out of the backfield wide open with not a defender within 5 yds of him???? I mean come on it's 11 on 11 and you know the 5 lineman aren't eligible receivers so there shouldn't be anyone running free/wide open... But hey what do I know Jim Haslett knows more than I do and that's why he is the DC, regardless if that is a GLARING MISTAKE or not!!! :moon:

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Wed Sep 25, 2013 12:24 pm

StorminMormon86 wrote:Can we at least wait until the bye week before we start the sky is falling BS? Yes our D sucks and our O hasn't been much better. But let's wait until the bye before we start wanting to fire people.

Based on what we have seen thus far, I don't think it's necessary to wait until the bye week.

We have the worst D in the league and perhaps in the history of the NFL. Not much more you need to say about that. It LITERALLY doesn't get any worse than what we have now.
http://www.nbcwashington.com/blogs/capi ... -Ever.html

Meanwhile our offense lacks big play ability, has tons of penalties, poorly executes, can't sustain drives, and rarely scores. The only bright spot is our running game --- that we can't use because we are always down due to our D and defenses aren't afraid of getting burned via downfield passes (since our all-pro QB doesn't appear able to complete passes over 15 yards --- and the one dropped bomb doesn't count). On top of this, RGIII has made clear he's still afraid and hasn't fully recovered from injury.

Honestly, it doesn't get much worse when you look at where we were last season.

Being the patient person I am, I wouldn't fire Haslett just yet ---- especially since there are personnel issues. Thankfully, the cap penalty has been lifted and our GM can get a couple guys via FA in the offseason. But the unfortunete fact is that we are VERY likely to be 1-6 by November --- and regardless of the fact we only have a total of 2 solid defensive players outside of the LB position, I think a change at DC is necessary.

StorminMormon86 · Post by **StorminMormon86** » Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:19 pm

If we beat the Raiders and then the Cowgirls, we'd be sitting at 2-3. Our schedule doesn't get any easier I know, but firing Haslett is not going to make any difference one way or the other.

riggofan · Post by **riggofan** » Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:25 pm

DaSkinz Baby wrote:^^Wow you make your feeling known on a message board and all of a sudden it's whining?

Whining is whining. Not sure why you think typing this stuff makes it sound any less whiny.

langleyparkjoe · Post by **langleyparkjoe** » Wed Sep 25, 2013 1:39 pm

DaSkinz Baby...

I respect your opinion on the matter but don't fret it just yet champ, we have a lot of football left and even if it was luck last year we did make a good run after starting off with a bad record. I myself won't say anything yet because it's only 3 games and yes I agree that we have regressed but as fans we can only hope things will turn around. I'm not gonna say fire Haslett just yet because last year's defense was horrible too but they did manage to play better down the stretch. My ONLY beef is that we had a top 5 defense with the 4-3 and then we switched to 3-4. We do need better talent on defense as a whole but given our salary cap restrictions it was probably easier to say it than to actually do it.

With all our past failures I can understand the feeling of gloom but let's just say we should be "stronger" for it and keep the hope alive. :lol:

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:22 pm

DaSkinz Baby wrote:Well for all that think that points only matter have a mouth full of this stat:

In the past decade Hasletts defense has been ranked:27th, 28th, 28th, 31st 31st 21st 21st 22nd and 28th in points allowed. I guess this is acceptable......

So, to show that points aren't what matters, you list stats about points?

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:25 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
Deadskins wrote:Yards don't mean jack squat. Points are all that matter.

I don't think you believe this. What's more valuable, a play that generates 99 yards of offense but doesn't score, or the 1-yard run that gets you 6 points? It's simplistic and unrealistic to say the 99-yard play doesn't mean anything.

But the 99 yard play doesn't mean anything without the play that scores. But we were talking defenses, and you know that. I don't care how many yards our D gives up, as long as the other team doesn't put points on the board.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:56 pm

we have players that can play better and coaches that can do their jobs better

the record is 0-3 and we DO look terrible ... but - THE FACT IS:

the players we have right now on both offense and defense

AND

the coaches we have right now

need to do their jobs better

not long ago there was no way we could have said that we have the players or that we have the coaches

this team is basically 'better' than last year - we need to see that on the field, each and every Sunday

nobody is doing their job as well or better than they did last year - NOBODY

This team is NOT playing to it's potential

despite the doomsayers - this is a good team that is NOT playing well or being coached/prepared to play better than we've seen

THAT is all that needs to change

HTTR

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 8:47 am

Deadskins wrote:
Irn-Bru wrote:
Deadskins wrote:Yards don't mean jack squat. Points are all that matter.

I don't think you believe this. What's more valuable, a play that generates 99 yards of offense but doesn't score, or the 1-yard run that gets you 6 points? It's simplistic and unrealistic to say the 99-yard play doesn't mean anything.

But the 99 yard play doesn't mean anything without the play that scores. But we were talking defenses, and you know that. I don't care how many yards our D gives up, as long as the other team doesn't put points on the board.

Again, that's unrealistic. You give the Jaguars the ball on the 1 and they are going to score against the Seahawks. So it doesn't make sense to say that the field position (and yards that get you there) don't mean anything.

Our defense isn't going to stop teams from scoring if they can't pin them in their own territory. When you stop the team within their own 20-30 yard line and force a three and out, you give your offense great field position. And then, even if your offense doesn't score, they can return the favor by pinning the other team inside their own 20 or 10. All of these things feed off one another and are significant.

StorminMormon86 · Post by **StorminMormon86** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 9:51 am

The only thing that needs to change that matters is winning. Period.

emoses14 · Post by **emoses14** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:13 am

StorminMormon86 wrote:The only thing that needs to change that matters is winning. Period.

Curious to see what happens around here when the redskins right this ship later this year. Very curious. Especially if the defensive play improves.

riggofan · Post by **riggofan** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:30 am

StorminMormon86 wrote:The only thing that needs to change that matters is winning. Period.

So true. Our defense was crap last year too. I didn't hear a word about Haslett through that entire winning streak.

StorminMormon86 · Post by **StorminMormon86** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 11:36 am

riggofan wrote:
StorminMormon86 wrote:The only thing that needs to change that matters is winning. Period.

So true. Our defense was crap last year too. I didn't hear a word about Haslett through that entire winning streak.

Exactly!

Although I do think Al Morris is a very underappreciated part of this team. Griffin got a bulk load of the credit for carrying this team, but Morris was every bit as responsible for our win streak, IMO. We have got to give him the rock more, especially if Griffin is still playing at 75%.

langleyparkjoe · Post by **langleyparkjoe** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:19 pm

emoses14 wrote:

Give me the kniiiiiiiife... pleaaaaassse

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:44 pm

StorminMormon86 wrote:If we beat the Raiders and then the Cowgirls, we'd be sitting at 2-3. Our schedule doesn't get any easier I know, but firing Haslett is not going to make any difference one way or the other.

So correct me if I'm wrong but you are saying that whether we have Haslett as DC or not will have no impact on our team's performance?

If that is the case, then we should unquestionably fire him. After all, if he "is not going to make any difference one way or the other" --- then he adds NO VALUE and is a waste of time and money to the organization.

As far as beating OAK and DAL --- sounds like a great scenario. You may as well have said if we win the rest of our games, we'll be 13-3. Right now, we are 0-3; not 2-3. That is the scenario.

Lets stick to what we are and not what we hope to be.

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:56 pm

StorminMormon86 wrote:The only thing that needs to change that matters is winning. Period.

Wow, now that's what I call "high-level" analysis.

I think the more pertinent issue is the "how"; not the what. I think everyone on the planet grasps the concept that winning is the goal.

As things currently stand, we are on path to become the worst defense in NFL history. We can't continue to maintain the status quo. "Winning" doesn't just magically happen. Success is built.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 4:05 pm

markshark84 wrote:
StorminMormon86 wrote:The only thing that needs to change that matters is winning. Period.

Wow, now that's what I call "high-level" analysis.

I think the more pertinent issue is the "how"; not the what. I think everyone on the planet grasps the concept that winning is the goal.

As things currently stand, we are on path to become the worst defense in NFL history. We can't continue to maintain the status quo. "Winning" doesn't just magically happen. Success is built.

he can't handle the truth ....

btw - an 0-3 start means that we just need to go 10-3 over the next 13 and hope the pukes go 7-6 :lol:

riggofan · Post by **riggofan** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 4:14 pm

markshark84 wrote:
StorminMormon86 wrote:The only thing that needs to change that matters is winning. Period.

Wow, now that's what I call "high-level" analysis.

I think the more pertinent issue is the "how"; not the what. I think everyone on the planet grasps the concept that winning is the goal.

As things currently stand, we are on path to become the worst defense in NFL history. We can't continue to maintain the status quo. "Winning" doesn't just magically happen. Success is built.

Built how? By firing the defensive coordinator three games into the season? Give me a freaking break.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 4:36 pm

riggofan wrote: .... firing the defensive coordinator three games into the season? Give me a freaking break.

I'm with you - we have good players and we have good coaches - we need them to do their jobs better ...

we are only 2 games behind the stupid pukes and we get to play them twice ...

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 5:26 pm

riggofan wrote:
StorminMormon86 wrote:The only thing that needs to change that matters is winning. Period.

So true. Our defense was crap last year too. I didn't hear a word about Haslett through that entire winning streak.

Our defense was a lot better during the win streak last year, and people around THN were talking about it plenty.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 7:05 pm

this group of players is actually better than what we had for the last 7 games

the fact is we should be seeing better play and I would expect that is being looked at closely by both coaches and players

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Thu Sep 26, 2013 9:48 pm

We faced high powered offenses in the first 3 games. Mike Vick with Chip Kelly have shown they can put up points. The Chiefs have one of the best defenses in the league. The Eagles managed to put up some good yardage and points against them.

Aaron Rodgers is one of the best QBs in the game with a core of solid weapons to throw to. He was a SuperBowl MVP. Very tough to stop them.

Lions with Stafford and Calvin Johnson are also amongst the best in the league. Calvin Johnson is probably the best receiver in the league. D. Hall covered him pretty good. Also Amerson looked really good in the LIons game. Showing a huge improvement from the first game.

Our team isnt as bad as we think. Its the second year for RG3 and coming back from an ACL injury. We have a couple rookies on defense. But one of those rookies is starting to look like very solid. This is good because moving forward we can trust him without giving him help.

Our scheduele may not look easier but it is going forward. We wont be facing prolific offenses like we just did in the first 3 games. Other then Peyton.

We now look to Oakland. I am not going to underestimate them but the game is winnable. However they are hardly the offensive juggernauts we faced in the first three games.

StorminMormon86 · Post by **StorminMormon86** » Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:27 am

markshark84 wrote:
StorminMormon86 wrote:The only thing that needs to change that matters is winning. Period.

Wow, now that's what I call "high-level" analysis.

I think the more pertinent issue is the "how"; not the what. I think everyone on the planet grasps the concept that winning is the goal.

As things currently stand, we are on path to become the worst defense in NFL history. We can't continue to maintain the status quo. "Winning" doesn't just magically happen. Success is built.

I'm really sorry. I just can't be as football savvy as you. :roll:

It pisses me off to no end to see these smug posts from fans who think they have all of the answers. Look, firing Haslett is NOT going to make any difference in wins or losses. The players executing is what needs to happen. "Fire Haslett" is such a cop out it's not even funny. We're not even into our bye week yet and people want coaches fired. And it's only week 4! You do not build success by firing Haslett. That's admitting defeat.