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

Just the facts mom ...



Total of 15 games to date

Total score: 241 points
Average score per game: 16 points

First 8 games

Score: 165 points
Average score pergame: 21 points

Last 7 games

Total score: 76 points
Average score: 11 points

Other issues to note:

Clinton Portis decline in total yards per game as the season advanced.

Pitt figured out that they could run through our defense outside and everybody did it afterwards.

The passing away of our QB half way through the season.

I am sure many others will add their

Also everyone talks about how great our D is...they aren't great...great D's create TO's

DEHog wrote:Also everyone talks about how great our D is...they aren't great...great D's create TO's

Okay, then, here's how I look at it. If you could only focus on the deficiencies of one (offense or defense) side of the ball, which would you work on? I'll go out on a limb and assume that 99% of the population would work on the offense, since the majority of the THN community feels that the DEFENSE has been able to operate more efficiently than the offense.

DEHog wrote:Also everyone talks about how great our D is...they aren't great...great D's create TO's

While I think that our defense is good.........

Defenses that pressure the QB create TOs. Our defensive line is incapable of pressuring the QB and therefore we don't create TOs. The two sacks against Philly were embarrasing --- typical coverage sacks.

I remember JT celebrating after his sack on McNabb. My reaction was "why are you celebrating? it took you 6 seconds to get there?".

VetSkinsFan wrote:

DEHog wrote:Also everyone talks about how great our D is...they aren't great...great D's create TO's

Okay, then, here's how I look at it. If you could only focus on the deficiencies of one (offense or defense) side of the ball, which would you work on? I'll go out on a limb and assume that 99% of the population would work on the offense, since the majority of the THN community feels that the DEFENSE has been able to more efficiently than the offense.

Of course I'd work on the O...We have a good not great D the difference is we don't get sacks and TO...if we did I'd bet my house that our O would be better. DId you notice we got a sack and a TO and the O turned it into 7 this week. I'm not blaming either side of the ball this is a team game and that how it work best.

markshark84 wrote:

DEHog wrote:Also everyone talks about how great our D is...they aren't great...great D's create TO's

While I think that our defense is good.........

Defenses that pressure the QB create TOs. Our defensive line is incapable of pressuring the QB and therefore we don't create TOs. The two sacks against Philly were embarrasing --- typical coverage sacks.

I remember JT celebrating after his sack on McNabb. My reaction was "why are you celebrating? it took you 6 seconds to get there?".

The strength of the defense is the secondary, not the front 4. I thought that was all understood. That covers the pressure and the lack of turnovers due to QBs making hurried mistakes. I thought that horse was dead and buried and not needed to be discussed anymore. Some people can't let go of the obvious...

This isn't a typical 8-8 or 9-7 finish...

What makes this record devastating is that we lost EVERYTHING at the end. The team was in a tailspin and Zorn couldn't even it out and at least coast to a crash landing. This team really nose dived into the earth...

Most of the team you look at a record such of this and think that it's not too bad but you gotta look at how we got to this record and that really is what sets the tone for the fans.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

markshark84 wrote:

DEHog wrote:Also everyone talks about how great our D is...they aren't great...great D's create TO's

While I think that our defense is good.........

Defenses that pressure the QB create TOs. Our defensive line is incapable of pressuring the QB and therefore we don't create TOs. The two sacks against Philly were embarrasing --- typical coverage sacks.

I remember JT celebrating after his sack on McNabb. My reaction was "why are you celebrating? it took you 6 seconds to get there?".

The strength of the defense is the secondary, not the front 4. I thought that was all understood. That covers the pressure and the lack of turnovers due to QBs making hurried mistakes. I thought that horse was dead and buried and not needed ot be discussed anymore. Some people can't let go of the obvious...

Ok...than how bout some picks??? Again my argument is that we are a good not great D. We has this this agrument about pass rush vs. coverage back when Bailey got traded...I argued to keep Bailey becuase of the lack of pass rush I got crucified on here...people said it didn't matter who was at corner when you have a pas rush?? Well I happen to think both are important you can no more have a one demensional D then you can an O

DEHog wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

markshark84 wrote:

DEHog wrote:Also everyone talks about how great our D is...they aren't great...great D's create TO's

While I think that our defense is good.........

Defenses that pressure the QB create TOs. Our defensive line is incapable of pressuring the QB and therefore we don't create TOs. The two sacks against Philly were embarrasing --- typical coverage sacks.

I remember JT celebrating after his sack on McNabb. My reaction was "why are you celebrating? it took you 6 seconds to get there?".

The strength of the defense is the secondary, not the front 4. I thought that was all understood. That covers the pressure and the lack of turnovers due to QBs making hurried mistakes. I thought that horse was dead and buried and not needed ot be discussed anymore. Some people can't let go of the obvious...

Ok...than how bout some picks??? Again my argument is that we are a good not great D. We has this this agrument about pass rush vs. coverage back when Bailey got traded...I argued to keep Bailey becuase of the lack of pass rush I got crucified on here...people said it didn't matter who was at corner when you have a pas rush?? Well I happen to think both are important you can no more have a one demensional D then you can an O

I think Rogers hands of stone has also contributed to the lack of INTs. This keeps him from being an intinidating threat to a QB. He has come around in all aspects of being a starting corner EXCEPT INTs.

Note, I'm not arguing that we're the best D. I'm arguing that putting as much blame on the defense as some people like to do when the offense moves like pond water is silly.

I also believe that the implosion has to do with Zorn not being as dynamic as people once believed. I pointed out numerous times in the beginning that with no game tape, Zorn may look better than he actually is. Couple that with CP getting driven in to the ground (he was on par for 380+ carries for the year. Not the Redskins, but PORTIS), is all intsrumental to the offensive implosion. THIS is Zorn's year to prove.

In summary, I acknowledge that the defense is not perfect. My point is when you have a "not great, but good" portion and "anemic" portion, why beat up the better of the two?

VetSkinsFan wrote:

DEHog wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

markshark84 wrote:

DEHog wrote:Also everyone talks about how great our D is...they aren't great...great D's create TO's

While I think that our defense is good.........

Defenses that pressure the QB create TOs. Our defensive line is incapable of pressuring the QB and therefore we don't create TOs. The two sacks against Philly were embarrasing --- typical coverage sacks.

I remember JT celebrating after his sack on McNabb. My reaction was "why are you celebrating? it took you 6 seconds to get there?".

The strength of the defense is the secondary, not the front 4. I thought that was all understood. That covers the pressure and the lack of turnovers due to QBs making hurried mistakes. I thought that horse was dead and buried and not needed ot be discussed anymore. Some people can't let go of the obvious...

Ok...than how bout some picks??? Again my argument is that we are a good not great D. We has this this agrument about pass rush vs. coverage back when Bailey got traded...I argued to keep Bailey becuase of the lack of pass rush I got crucified on here...people said it didn't matter who was at corner when you have a pas rush?? Well I happen to think both are important you can no more have a one demensional D then you can an O

I think Rogers hands of stone has also contributed to the lack of INTs. This keeps him from being an intinidating threat to a QB. He has come around in all aspects of being a starting corner EXCEPT INTs.

Note, I'm not arguing that we're the best D. I'm arguing that putting as much blame on the defense as some people like to do when the offense moves like pond water is silly.

I also believe that the implosion has to do with Zorn not being as dynamic as people once believed. I pointed out numerous times in the beginning that with no game tape, Zorn may look better than he actually is. Couple that with CP getting driven in to the ground (he was on par for 380+ carries for the year. Not the Redskins, but PORTIS), is all intsrumental to the offensive implosion. THIS is Zorn's year to prove.

In summary, I acknowledge that the defense is not perfect. My point is when you have a "not great, but good" portion and "anemic" portion, why beat up the better of the two?

All good points...My point is we are one demisional on O and D we could do some things better on both sides of the ball yes are D is our strong suit...I think we all agree that we need to get better on the lines of both sides of the ball. It's a team sport and all I'm saying is are D is good not great had they created more TO's I believe you would have seen a better offense. Please don't read into that that I'm blaming the D.

I argue that if we had any type of kicking game they would have scored 20-30 more points.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:The team was in a tailspin and Zorn couldn't even it out and at least coast to a crash landing. ...

I thought that this is EXACTLY what the win against Philthy did.

It saved his job. It put the media at rest. The players recovered some lost pride and played hard.

It is not an optimum situation. It is BARELY a winning record situation. But we are not the WORST team in the NFL, Chris.

Come on ... God knows and God willing we will have another mediocre season to cheer on next year.

All good points...My point is we are one demisional on O and D we could do some things better on both sides of the ball yes are D is our strong suit...I think we all agree that we need to get better on the lines of both sides of the ball. It's a team sport and all I'm saying is are D is good not great had they created more TO's I believe you would have seen a better offense. Please don't read into that that I'm blaming the D.

DE,

Every point isn't directed specifically to you, but you are one of the few that can actually have a good discussion without losing it. I overemphasize my counterpoints b/c I honestly believe, by what some of these people post, that they believe that the D's not pulling their weight.

To counter one point highlighted above, is that I don't believe that the D should be leaned on when the offense can't get out of its own way. I do understand that there's always something someone could have done better, but I honestly think if you piled up all of the problems and prioritized them, the D would hardly rank.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

All good points...My point is we are one demisional on O and D we could do some things better on both sides of the ball yes are D is our strong suit...I think we all agree that we need to get better on the lines of both sides of the ball. It's a team sport and all I'm saying is are D is good not great had they created more TO's I believe you would have seen a better offense. Please don't read into that that I'm blaming the D.

DE,

Every point isn't directed specifically to you, but you are one of the few that can actually have a good discussion without losing it. I overemphasize my counterpoints b/c I honestly believe, by what some of these people post, that they believe that the D's not pulling their weight.

To counter one point highlighted above, is that I don't believe that the D should be leaned on when the offense can't get out of its own way. I do understand that there's always something someone could have done better, but I honestly think if you piled up all of the problems and prioritized them, the D would hardly rank.

Got ya...Put me in the group that does feel the D has play well...

Yeah, it's evident that our offense is putrid. The entire offense.

Our defense is good, but I also agree with DEHog's point that it's not great. We've seen 2 great defenses; the Steelers and the Ravens, and you honestly cannot say our defense is as good as either of those defenses.

However, our defense is good enough to win with, certainly.

PulpExposure wrote:Yeah, it's evident that our offense is putrid. The entire offense.

Our defense is good, but I also agree with DEHog's point that it's not great. We've seen 2 great defenses; the Steelers and the Ravens, and you honestly cannot say our defense is as good as either of those defenses.

However, our defense is good enough to win with, certainly.

We're 1 great DT away from there, IMO.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:Yeah, it's evident that our offense is putrid. The entire offense.

Our defense is good, but I also agree with DEHog's point that it's not great. We've seen 2 great defenses; the Steelers and the Ravens, and you honestly cannot say our defense is as good as either of those defenses.

However, our defense is good enough to win with, certainly.

We're 1 great DT away from there, IMO.

Yeah...but that's the kicker. It's one of the hardest positions to get.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:Yeah, it's evident that our offense is putrid. The entire offense.

Our defense is good, but I also agree with DEHog's point that it's not great. We've seen 2 great defenses; the Steelers and the Ravens, and you honestly cannot say our defense is as good as either of those defenses.

However, our defense is good enough to win with, certainly.

We're 1 great DT away from there, IMO.

Now we agree!!! I believe if we got a DT who commanded a double team and got a push that it would elavate the play of Corny, Montgomery, Golston and our DE. This is the only place I;d spend BIG money on in FA

DEHog wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:Yeah, it's evident that our offense is putrid. The entire offense.

Our defense is good, but I also agree with DEHog's point that it's not great. We've seen 2 great defenses; the Steelers and the Ravens, and you honestly cannot say our defense is as good as either of those defenses.

However, our defense is good enough to win with, certainly.

We're 1 great DT away from there, IMO.

Now we agree!!! I believe if we got a DT who commanded a double team and got a push that it would elavate the play of Corny, Montgomery, Golston and our DE. This is the only place I;d spend BIG money on in FA

I agree 100%. I hate to say anthing about signing Vet FA because that is the reason why we are in the position we are in now but because we have limit draft picks this year like always, Albert and Tommy are FA's.

PulpExposure wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:Yeah, it's evident that our offense is putrid. The entire offense.

Our defense is good, but I also agree with DEHog's point that it's not great. We've seen 2 great defenses; the Steelers and the Ravens, and you honestly cannot say our defense is as good as either of those defenses.

However, our defense is good enough to win with, certainly.

We're 1 great DT away from there, IMO.

Yeah...but that's the kicker. It's one of the hardest positions to get.

Well, we're in the bidding for the Haynesworth sweepstakes.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:Yeah, it's evident that our offense is putrid. The entire offense.

Our defense is good, but I also agree with DEHog's point that it's not great. We've seen 2 great defenses; the Steelers and the Ravens, and you honestly cannot say our defense is as good as either of those defenses.

However, our defense is good enough to win with, certainly.

We're 1 great DT away from there, IMO.

Yeah...but that's the kicker. It's one of the hardest positions to get.

Well, we're in the bidding for the Haynesworth sweepstakes.

No one's brought him up, but I like that NT from Cleveland. He gets penetration with a double team...Shaun Rogers. I know he's not out there, but man, this guy's a beast.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:Yeah, it's evident that our offense is putrid. The entire offense.

Our defense is good, but I also agree with DEHog's point that it's not great. We've seen 2 great defenses; the Steelers and the Ravens, and you honestly cannot say our defense is as good as either of those defenses.

However, our defense is good enough to win with, certainly.

We're 1 great DT away from there, IMO.

Yeah...but that's the kicker. It's one of the hardest positions to get.

Well, we're in the bidding for the Haynesworth sweepstakes.

No one's brought him up, but I like that NT from Cleveland. He gets penetration with a double team...Shaun Rogers. I know he's not out there, but man, this guy's a beast.

Isn't Tommie Harris availible??

I dunno but he did create some havoc last night with the Bears...

What if we get them both like good ol'times?

Isn't Tommie Harris availible??

Not accordig to RotoWorld

6/19/2008: Signed a four-year, $40 million contract extension through 2012. The deal contains $18 million guaranteed, including a $6.5 million signing bonus. Another $2 million is available through incentives. If Harris makes the Pro Bowl in 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011, he will receive an $8 million bonus in 2012. 2008: $605,000 (+ $3.5 million roster bonus - $35,588 for one-game suspension), 2009-2012: Under Contract, 2013: Free Agent. Cap charge: $6.07 million (2008).

VetSkinsFan wrote:

Isn't Tommie Harris availible??

Not accordig to RotoWorld

6/19/2008: Signed a four-year, $40 million contract extension through 2012. The deal contains $18 million guaranteed, including a $6.5 million signing bonus. Another $2 million is available through incentives. If Harris makes the Pro Bowl in 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011, he will receive an $8 million bonus in 2012. 2008: $605,000 (+ $3.5 million roster bonus - $35,588 for one-game suspension), 2009-2012: Under Contract, 2013: Free Agent. Cap charge: $6.07 million (2008).

Ok I knew this was his year..did know he signed already