The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Posted: **Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:42 pm**

We are the better team, we just need to play well together and we should win - we should have beaten the Giants in that first game and we should have beaten the Packers - no big deal - this is a big deal because this game is the next game Laughing

I'm curious why you think that we are a better team? I would like to know what makes a 7-7 team better than an 8-6 team.

Posted: **Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:10 pm**

For those that were able to see the Vikings vs. Bears game last week on the NFL Network know the Vikings were not very impressive in that game. Even though they won, their offense struggled quite a bit. I believe Williams will draw up some different packages to confuse Jackson. He also said he was going to use a lot of rotation to keep guys fresh.

Posted: **Sat Dec 22, 2007 9:16 pm**

SkinsFreak wrote::roll:

For those that were able to see the Vikings vs. Bears game last week on the NFL Network know the Vikings were not very impressive in that game. Even though they won, their offense struggled quite a bit. I believe Williams will draw up some different packages to confuse Jackson. He also said he was going to use a lot of rotation to keep guys fresh.

That's true. But the same could be said for our wins against the Jets and the Cardinals. Like I said above, I think that we'll win but I think it's a mistake to underestimate the Vikings. No doubt Jackson is garbage, but the Vikings are playing at home and they do a great job running the ball and stopping the run, and a team that does that usually can hang around in a game. If we can find a way to slow down Peterson and Taylor and make the Vikings one dimensional we should win. Imo the keys to this game are going to be stopping the Vikings' running game and our ability to successfully throw the football against their league worst passing defense.

Posted: **Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:49 am**

Fios wrote:
Smithian wrote:If you all think this is bad playing him once this year, imagine if the Browns sucked and we had to play Darren McFadden twice a year.

I assume the Redskins become an AFC North team or the Browns become an NFC East team in that scenario

I think he's referring to Dallas getting the Browns number one next year. If not, I'm really confused.

Posted: **Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:55 am**

CanesSkins26 wrote:
We are the better team, we just need to play well together and we should win - we should have beaten the Giants in that first game and we should have beaten the Packers - no big deal - this is a big deal because this game is the next game Laughing

I'm curious why you think that we are a better team? I would like to know what makes a 7-7 team better than an 8-6 team.

7-7 team could have a tougher schedule. Could have blown a game. Record isn't the end all of determining how good a team is.

LOSTHOG wrote:
Fios wrote:
Smithian wrote:If you all think this is bad playing him once this year, imagine if the Browns sucked and we had to play Darren McFadden twice a year.

I assume the Redskins become an AFC North team or the Browns become an NFC East team in that scenario

I think he's referring to Dallas getting the Browns number one next year. If not, I'm really confused.

Cowboys traded for the Browns #1 under assumption Browns would suck and therefore give them the #1 pick so Jerry Jones could pick...

Posted: **Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:40 am**

SkinsJock wrote:I did not compare anyone - maybe someone else did? - I was referring to the fact that a single talent on a team will not make up for any lack of talent on that team - it takes 11 on offense and 11 on defense - a great QB like Brady has a lot more success with less talent playing together very well than a Dan Marino with better talented teams but not quite playing in sync. Similarly a great defensive player is only as good as how much better he makes the other players around him.

The Vikings are riding a nice wave of momentum but they are not as good a team as we are - we will win this game if we want it more and play better together - they have some great talent mixed in with some not so great pieces. We also have better coaching and if both our players and coaches can get it together this week. it's really simple - we win!

Most here are a little to enamored with the talent than with the team - the Redskins' hogs were a great case of a bunch of guys who together made each other better and just excelled - a lot of players are great for fantasy football but really by not making others better their team does not benefit from their stats.

let's not get started on stats ... that is a whole new quagmire

Oh thats cool I just like talking about Barry Sanders.

However you had to go to Marino.

Marino played on lack luster teams as well bro. Marino is one of the all time greats. He played against better 49er teams. He never had a true hall of fame receiver or running back.

I just think if you were to switch Marino and Brady. Marino would win the Superbowl as well.

Posted: **Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:54 am**

CanesSkins26 wrote:
We are the better team, we just need to play well together and we should win - we should have beaten the Giants in that first game and we should have beaten the Packers - no big deal - this is a big deal because this game is the next game Laughing

I'm curious why you think that we are a better team? I would like to know what makes a 7-7 team better than an 8-6 team.

Redskins - 32
Vikings - 21

um, you want to argue about who's the better team now? :roll:

Adrian Peterson had 27 yards rushing... 27! A great defensive game plan and great execution... that's how you stop Peterson!

Posted: **Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:56 am**

How do we stop Adrian Peterson?

Hmmmmmm, lemme thing here for a second! Oh, I know what I'll do....I'll go watch video of last nights Redskins/Vikings game and find out just how to stop him. I think I'll hold him to 27 yards on nine carries.

:-)

Posted: **Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:56 am**

how do you stop adrian peterson??? you make sure that mr. fletcher, mr. landry, mr. carter, mr. montgomery, etc... all have their tickets and boarding passes, and have they seats and tray tables in a secured and upright position during their flight to Minneapolis.

Posted: **Mon Dec 24, 2007 11:04 am**

CanesSkins26 wrote:..I'm curious why you think that we are a better team? I would like to know what makes a 7-7 team better than an 8-6 team.

It's just me - I do not judge teams based on their record but how they look to me at the time - I think it is a mistake to consider how a team played at the begining of the season or how the teams have matched up in the past 10 years :shock:

I think a matchup should be looked at more closely than that - it really comes down to who wants it more on the day and what sort of effort the team will put out to achieve that.

Right now the Giants are 10-5 - but if we were to play them this week in NY we would win - their record does not change the fact that they have a loser coach and a QB that is a disaster we are not just a better team than them we are a much better team

I think that AP or AD or whatever they call him might turn out to be the best back ever and the Viking rush defense might be the best defense against the run - they still have to try and beat us when we want it more - not going to happen.

PLUS - as some here have pointed out, we have the best coach in the NFL right now - despite all the ignorant Redskins' fans who think he has "lost a step" and that we might be better off without him. :wink:

Posted: **Mon Dec 24, 2007 11:16 am**

HEROHAMO wrote:.. Marino played on lack luster teams as well bro. Marino is one of the all time greats. He played against better 49er teams. He never had a true hall of fame receiver or running back.

I just think if you were to switch Marino and Brady. Marino would win the Superbowl as well.

No worries - I agree - actually in my opinion Marino would have been even better that Brady if he had been their QB this year :lol:

I think Marino and Montana were the best QBs at taking what the other team gave you - while Marino had a great arm and a good head Montana had a great head for the game and a good arm

a great player can help his team win games but a better player is one that would win on either team - Brady suits this team but I'm not sure I'd take him over some of the great QBs I've seen.

I think that this Viking RB could be one of the best ever in a few years but at this time and with that passing game and that QB they are not as good a team as we are :lol:

Posted: **Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:11 pm**

SkinsJock wrote:

PLUS - as some here have pointed out, we have the best coach in the NFL right now - despite all the ignorant Redskins' fans who think he has "lost a step" and that we might be better off without him.

Hmm, and WHAT, pray tell, makes YOU any more intelligent than anyone else here? There were deficiencies in that game on the burgandy and gold side, contrary to what people have said.

We're elated about the roll we're on, but NEVER, NEVER say we're perfect, and there are MANY things that could be worked on. It could be a lot better and we SHOULD be a lot better off than we are. With that said, we're still in the running and we are doing what needs to be done down the home stretch.

Posted: **Mon Dec 24, 2007 4:39 pm**

Who says the Redskins are perfect?

On the other hand, why contend that the Vikings are better? They have a weak passing game, and Williams and the defense can shut Peterson.

By the way, the Vikings were piffle compared to the 82/83 Redskins running game. No team...none...has crushed all playoff opponents, as the Redskins did to win SB 17, by just handing the ball to the FB up the middle. It was "Riggins on Bostic's left heel", followed by ""Riggins on Bostic's right".

When the Redskins got the ball with at least a 10 point lead and 10 minutes to go, the game was over. No 50 yard runs...just 5, 6, 8 yards at at time.

The Vikings do NOT have anything approaching the old Redskins'running attack.

Oh, and all-team All-Pro????

Maybe they should wait until the end of the season?

Posted: **Mon Dec 24, 2007 5:25 pm**

I answered the question back on page 1, in the 2nd post to this thread.

Posted: **Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:35 pm**

HEROHAMO wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:I did not compare anyone - maybe someone else did? - I was referring to the fact that a single talent on a team will not make up for any lack of talent on that team - it takes 11 on offense and 11 on defense - a great QB like Brady has a lot more success with less talent playing together very well than a Dan Marino with better talented teams but not quite playing in sync. Similarly a great defensive player is only as good as how much better he makes the other players around him.

The Vikings are riding a nice wave of momentum but they are not as good a team as we are - we will win this game if we want it more and play better together - they have some great talent mixed in with some not so great pieces. We also have better coaching and if both our players and coaches can get it together this week. it's really simple - we win!

Most here are a little to enamored with the talent than with the team - the Redskins' hogs were a great case of a bunch of guys who together made each other better and just excelled - a lot of players are great for fantasy football but really by not making others better their team does not benefit from their stats.

let's not get started on stats ... that is a whole new quagmire

Oh thats cool I just like talking about Barry Sanders.

However you had to go to Marino.

Marino played on lack luster teams as well bro. Marino is one of the all time greats. He played against better 49er teams. He never had a true hall of fame receiver or running back.

I just think if you were to switch Marino and Brady. Marino would win the Superbowl as well.

Mark Clayton and Mark Duper are lackluster receivers? They are no Clark nor Monk but they were far from slouches. I agree about RB...but their biggest flaw was not having a defense none of the years he played.

Posted: **Mon Dec 24, 2007 9:42 pm**

Mark Clayton and Mark Duper are lackluster receivers? They are no Clark nor Monk but they were far from slouches. I agree about RB...but their biggest flaw was not having a defense none of the years he played.

I'd say, also a little small. No Monk or Didier. Although no one thought that was a problem at the time.

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

How do we stop Adrian Petterson?