Can we make up the difference?

[fanforlife]

OK, so last year we had 377 points scored against us . We scored 302 . That's a difference of 75 points Divide that by a 16 game season, that's only 5 points/game.

From the roof tops I've been shouting that we should address the "O" side of the ball. So if we trade down, get some more picks, draft a WR, "O"linemen, & possibly a QB, would...or could...that translate into a TD/game more

Really, we only got smoked 3 times, in week #3 against the Rams 30-16, in week #10 (black Monday) against the Pigeons 59-28 & in week #13 against the midgets 31-7.

The rest of our losses weren't that bad. In week #2 we lost by 3 against the Texans. In week #6 we lost by 3 to the Colts. In week #8 we lost by 12 (OK maybe that is bad) to the Lions. Week #12 we lost to the Vikings by 4. Week #14 to the Bucs by 1 & in weeks #15 & #17 by a combined total of 6 to the cow$hits & the midgets. & all of that with the 31st ranked "D".

I know that there are many of us who would like to spend our picks on the "D" side of the ball, but if we can address the issues on "O" & make up the 5 point difference, who knows , maybe we can be a play-off team sooner rather than later .

[DarthMonk]

OK, so last year we had 377 points scored against us . We scored 302 . That's a difference of 75 points Divide that by a 16 game season, that's only 5 points/game.

Pretty miserable to be outscored, huh?

From the roof tops I've been shouting that we should address the "O" side of the ball. So if we trade down, get some more picks, draft a WR, "O"linemen, & possibly a QB, would...or could...that translate into a TD/game more

All we really have to do is turn a missed FG into a TD! That's +10!!!

Really, we only got smoked 3 times, in week #3 against the Rams 30-16, in week #10 (black Monday) against the Pigeons 59-28 & in week #13 against the midgets 31-7.

Yes. We soptted the Rams 14 and later led 16-14 with blown chances "to boot." Even in the Eagle debacle we got it from 35-0 to 35-14 and then got turnovers on the next 2 posessions. The O hurt us as much as the D that night ... well ... almost.

The rest of our losses weren't that bad. In week #2 we lost by 3 against the Texans. In week #6 we lost by 3 to the Colts. In week #8 we lost by 12 (OK maybe that is bad) to the Lions. Week #12 we lost to the Vikings by 4. Week #14 to the Bucs by 1 & in weeks #15 & #17 by a combined total of 6 to the cow$hits & the midgets. & all of that with the 31st ranked "D".

... and we lit up the Texans with out offense and led by 17 twice ... I think. AND "won" it with a kick which we had to kick again and missed!

... and we scored against the Colts and played good D against them. Actually dropped some picks and got a lot of important stops late. Went to that one.

... and had a 5 point lead on the Lions and had the ball late. Threw a pick and pulled McNabb.

... and "robbed Banks" of a game changing punt return.

I know that there are many of us who would like to spend our picks on the "D" side of the ball, but if we can address the issues on "O" & make up the 5 point difference, who knows , maybe we can be a play-off team sooner rather than later .

I continue to say that in light of the fact that we have so many holes we should go BPA more than ever since he will certainly fill one. Trading down is preferred in this deep draft. With the luxury of many picks and choices I would lean toward O-line first then D-line then WR. Of course, this draft seems to be a better one for top notch defenders but about equally spread as you descend more deeply.

DarthMonk

[fanforlife]

DARTHMONK: Good afternoon

All we really have to do is turn a missed FG into a TD! That's +10!!!

That brings me back to my "competition for Gano?" post

I would lean toward O-line first then D-line then WR.

Me too!

[fanforlife]

We averaged 18.9 points/game last season. The top 20 teams averaged AT LEAST 21.3 points/game. That includes teams like Tennessee, Jacksonville, Oakland & even the friggin Lions for goodness sake. If we can get JUST 1 MORE TD/GAME that would give us an average of 25.9 points/game. That would put us in the top 5 along side teams like the Falcons, Colts, Eagles, Chargers & of course the Pats who average an astonishing 32.4 points/game.

Why is it so hard to imagine us getting 1 more TD/game if we focus on the "O" side of the ball? I think it can be done. If the friggin Raiders can do it with the likes of Campbell & Cartwright...why can't we?

[VetSkinsFan]

We averaged 18.9 points/game last season. The top 20 teams averaged AT LEAST 21.3 points/game. That includes teams like Tennessee, Jacksonville, Oakland & even the friggin Lions for goodness sake. If we can get JUST 1 MORE TD/GAME that would give us an average of 25.9 points/game. That would put us in the top 5 along side teams like the Falcons, Colts, Eagles, Chargers & of course the Pats who average an astonishing 32.4 points/game.

Why is it so hard to imagine us getting 1 more TD/game if we focus on the "O" side of the ball? I think it can be done. If the friggin Raiders can do it with the likes of Campbell & Cartwright...why can't we?

16 more TDs (for the season) is a HUGE feat... it's not like you're going for 1 more first down, TDs are prime...

[SkinsJock]

Oh for the simple life - the logic is amazing to me

We need to address the offensive line, the defensive line, the QB and the defensive secondary - then we have to look at the linebackers and the RBs and not forget that we need a big WR and a true FS ...

we made some mistakes along the rebuilding and reworking road last season and we still have some more work to do - these guys will get there but we are not going to miraculously develop into a playoff contender by just a few tweaks here and there


this is nowhere near as simple as adding a few points per game - we had a defensive scheme and players that really did not perform very well at all - who knows how many points we might have needed if the other teams had wanted to score more than they already did


this game is not simply a matter of "finding a little more offense" - we need to get a lot younger and have a lot more players playing well together for this franchise to consider itself a contender again



we can hope (and I will be too) that things go well this year but we really need a lot more time than that

[DarthMonk]

DARTHMONK: Good afternoon

Yo! 'Sup?

All we really have to do is turn a missed FG into a TD! That's +10!!!

That brings me back to my "competition for Gano?" post

... and though I really like Gano there is nothing wrong with competition. It's good for everybody.

DarthMonk

[crazyhorse1]

DARTHMONK: Good afternoon

Yo! 'Sup?

All we really have to do is turn a missed FG into a TD! That's +10!!!

That brings me back to my "competition for Gano?" post

... and though I really like Gano there is nothing wrong with competition. It's good for everybody.

DarthMonk

The points scored and points given up stats are almost worthless because of variables. In high school I played for a team that scored as many points as it gave up and lost nine of ten games. We won our first game fifty one to nothing and then lost the next nine. After that, most teams beat us by a touchdown or so only because they didn't get up for the games or didn't bother running up the score. Here's the outlook for the coming season: bleak. There are numerous holes on offense and on defense and we don't have a legit first string quarterback. Worse, the coaching staff makes crazy, hair-tearing decisions. In many ways, we took backsteps last season and I expect us to continue to do so.

[SkinsJock]

There is no doubt that this franchise was not helped as much as some of us hoped with the addition of the coaching staff, the FO decisions and by some players' attitudes - however there is no doubt in my mind that this group does not have much leeway and I think that they all know this - I look for these guys to make up for a lot of mistakes by showing that we are heading in the right direction

I do not expect very much I just want to see better management decisions and better coaching - I think the players will respond - I look for an 8-8 season but more importantly than that I look for a lot of progress in that, this time next season, we do not have as many position issues as we currently are experiencing - there are tons of holes and we are way too old

[DarthMonk]

The points scored and points given up stats are almost worthless because of variables. In high school I played for a team that scored as many points as it gave up and lost nine of ten games. We won our first game fifty one to nothing and then lost the next nine. After that, most teams beat us by a touchdown or so only because they didn't get up for the games or didn't bother running up the score.

Though there is some truth here there is a huge correlation among PF, PA, and winning. Here's what happened last year:

16 teams outscored their opponents. Only one had a losing record - the Titans at 6-10. The Raiders went 8-8.

Here are the rankings among the 16:

Patriots +205
Packers +148
Steelers +143
Falcons +126
Chargers +119
Ravens +87
Saints +77
Jets +63
Eagles +62
Bears +48
Colts +47
Giants +47
Chiefs +40
Raiders +39
Bucs +23
Titans +17

Of the 4 best teams on this list 2 had the best record in the league (Pats and Falcons) and the other 2 were in the Super Bowl. The worst team on this list was the 1 outlier with a losing record.

No team in the league got outscored and managed a winning record though the Jags went 8-8.

We all know why Seattle made the playoffs. Forgetting them, out of the top 13 teams on this list, 11 made the playoffs. The Giants missed out on a tie-breaker and the Chargers started out 2-5.

Conclusion: Points for and against matter a lot!

Here's the outlook for the coming season: bleak. There are numerous holes on offense and on defense and we don't have a legit first string quarterback. Worse, the coaching staff makes crazy, hair-tearing decisions. In many ways, we took backsteps last season and I expect us to continue to do so.

I tend to agree. I can only hope there are more steps forward than back. Having as many or more draft picks on draft day than we do now would be a good sign. So would getting younger and more talented.

DarthMonk

[SkinsJock]

We need to replace a lot of players & we do not need to worry about the win loss record this coming year
it will take more than one draft AND a litlle more time to get this franchise back to a position of seeing a decent product on the field each week




HOPEFULLY this is the group that will learn from the mistakes they have made since they took over OR they will be gone

[yupchagee]

OK, so last year we had 377 points scored against us . We scored 302 . That's a difference of 75 points Divide that by a 16 game season, that's only 5 points/game.

Pretty miserable to be outscored, huh?

From the roof tops I've been shouting that we should address the "O" side of the ball. So if we trade down, get some more picks, draft a WR, "O"linemen, & possibly a QB, would...or could...that translate into a TD/game more

All we really have to do is turn a missed FG into a TD! That's +10!!!

Really, we only got smoked 3 times, in week #3 against the Rams 30-16, in week #10 (black Monday) against the Pigeons 59-28 & in week #13 against the midgets 31-7.

Yes. We soptted the Rams 14 and later led 16-14 with blown chances "to boot." Even in the Eagle debacle we got it from 35-0 to 35-14 and then got turnovers on the next 2 posessions. The O hurt us as much as the D that night ... well ... almost.

The rest of our losses weren't that bad. In week #2 we lost by 3 against the Texans. In week #6 we lost by 3 to the Colts. In week #8 we lost by 12 (OK maybe that is bad) to the Lions. Week #12 we lost to the Vikings by 4. Week #14 to the Bucs by 1 & in weeks #15 & #17 by a combined total of 6 to the cow$hits & the midgets. & all of that with the 31st ranked "D".

... and we lit up the Texans with out offense and led by 17 twice ... I think. AND "won" it with a kick which we had to kick again and missed!

... and we scored against the Colts and played good D against them. Actually dropped some picks and got a lot of important stops late. Went to that one.

... and had a 5 point lead on the Lions and had the ball late. Threw a pick and pulled McNabb.

... and "robbed Banks" of a game changing punt return.

I know that there are many of us who would like to spend our picks on the "D" side of the ball, but if we can address the issues on "O" & make up the 5 point difference, who knows , maybe we can be a play-off team sooner rather than later .

I continue to say that in light of the fact that we have so many holes we should go BPA more than ever since he will certainly fill one. Trading down is preferred in this deep draft. With the luxury of many picks and choices I would lean toward O-line first then D-line then WR. Of course, this draft seems to be a better one for top notch defenders but about equally spread as you descend more deeply.

DarthMonk

No, it's only 7 points.

[DarthMonk]

All we really have to do is turn a missed FG into a TD! That's +10!!!

No, it's only 7 points.

That's too funny man! I actually have an advanced math degree! I keep trying to make it +10 ... and I can't.

It reminds me of a riddle I just heard: If you're in a race and you pass the guy in 2nd, what place are you in?

...oh wait ... now if we replace our opponent's made FG with our TD and PAT ... oh yaeh!

DarthMonk

[SkinsJock]

but wait it gets better - adding all these extra points by helping the offense do not take into account the 'added' points the opponents will score against us to get the W


the best thing we can do is to replace everyone on the O line (except for Williams obviously) and a number of the front 7 on defense plus bolster the secondary and .....

we need to get much younger and we have many issues - because of how things were mis-managed and mis-judged last year, we have a lot more to do here

PATIENCE is required

[DarthMonk]

PATIENCE is required

This has been our biggest failing. We have been so worried about sucking while thinking "we're close" and then making short-term moves. The irony is we've sucked anyway.

BTW - all those other things will raise our point production and lower that of our opponents leading to more victories.

DarthMonk

[SkinsJock]

This franchise has been mis-managed for so long that it will take time to get both younger AND have the guys playing together as they need to - this coupled with the blunders made in bringing in McNabb, installing a new defensive scheme without the players to suit and thinking that we could play in the NFC East with a bunch of has-been offensive linemen and no real weapons to speak of in both the run or the passing game was just not helpful

it is going to take a little longer and we are not just a few players away -
even if the FO gets really lucky with both the draft picks and a few free agents this season anyone that thinks this franchise is going to suddenly be a playoff franchise in 2011 is delusional

I predict that we are 2 drafts and 15 months away from looking forward to possibly getting some consistency here and that ONLY if the FO and the co-ordinators can get their acts together

we should see close to 30 new faces playing here this season


I'll say it again - PATIENCE is a pre-requisite here because so much damage has to be overcome

[DarthMonk]

Yo, SkinsJock. 'Sup?

Reminds me of my take in an old thread called "Are We Looking at 6 to 10 Years?"

Because we have switched to the 34 and had many holes to fill on offense alone, are we looking at many years to repair the damage that was done done to OUR team? The way I see it; we have put ourselves in a position. We have to spend draft picks on veterans to plug holes on both sides. I am not trying to be doom and gloom but let us think about it. How soon can things be done? You guys know where I stand. I think we made a mistake, and the 34 that we aren't suited for has made a bigger problem than was necessary. So, honestly, when do you really think we can have the type of team to contend for a championship? The way I see it we will have to mortgage our future for some time. Can someone explain how we can get this done in just a few years?

I believe next year the Redskins have a 1, 2, 5, 6, & 7. I could be wrong. After that I don't know but let's say we have all 7. So maybe in 4 years we have 25 picks or so. If half of them make the team we have 12 new guys in 4 years. Let's add another 12 through FA. In 4 years we can realistically turn over half the roster with young keepers. If we shed some older talent along the way we can acquire a few more picks. Best case we can hopefully find a dozen current guys worth keeping (who are they???), replace the rest, and in 5 years be very good, young, and be stocked for the future with many picks. This is very rough but is the way I see it. If we are fortunate along the way we can get early help on both lines, land an inspirational and resourceful QB, and be really good in 2 years. But we should not think that way. We should look ahead 4 to 5 years and consider earlier success to be gravy.

We would have been there 5 years ago if we'd kept Marty.

DarthMonk

This franchise has been mis-managed for so long that it will take time to get both younger AND have the guys playing together as they need to - this coupled with the blunders made in bringing in McNabb, installing a new defensive scheme without the players to suit and thinking that we could play in the NFC East with a bunch of has-been offensive linemen and no real weapons to speak of in both the run or the passing game was just not helpful

it is going to take a little longer and we are not just a few players away -
even if the FO gets really lucky with both the draft picks and a few free agents this season anyone that thinks this franchise is going to suddenly be a playoff franchise in 2011 is delusional

I predict that we are 2 drafts and 15 months away from looking forward to possibly getting some consistency here and that ONLY if the FO and the co-ordinators can get their acts together

we should see close to 30 new faces playing here this season


I'll say it again - PATIENCE is a pre-requisite here because so much damage has to be overcome

[HEROHAMO]

There is an old saying. Defense wins Championships.

I believe this to be true as long as football exists this will hold true.

Only teams with Great QBs can get by without a good defense. Lets take a quick look.

Phillip Rivers, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning etc..


These top three mentioned dont particularly have a great defense behind them but still managed to make the Playoffs. The only time they won the Championship when they had a good defense to go along with there great offense. (except Rivers)

To me I rather have a great defense, great running game and a game manager QB. That would topple any great offensive team any day.
There are old tried and true recipes for Football success that still hold true. As time goes on it does not matter Football is football.

Aaron Rodgers just won the SuperBowl. He was fantastic and may have taken over the best QB in football crown. However his defense was not too shabby either.


Give me a team with Massive Offensive lineman, 50 sacks on defense, a beast of a running back, a journeyman QB and a trio of great WRs and you have a Championship. That is the Redskins way. It will be again.

[DarthMonk]

+!

Even the Greatest Show on Turf led the league in rushing defense and sacks!

DarthMonk

There is an old saying. Defense wins Championships.

I believe this to be true as long as football exists this will hold true.

Only teams with Great QBs can get by without a good defense. Lets take a quick look.

Phillip Rivers, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning etc..


These top three mentioned dont particularly have a great defense behind them but still managed to make the Playoffs. The only time they won the Championship when they had a good defense to go along with there great offense. (except Rivers)

To me I rather have a great defense, great running game and a game manager QB. That would topple any great offensive team any day.
There are old tried and true recipes for Football success that still hold true. As time goes on it does not matter Football is football.

Aaron Rodgers just won the SuperBowl. He was fantastic and may have taken over the best QB in football crown. However his defense was not too shabby either.


Give me a team with Massive Offensive lineman, 50 sacks on defense, a beast of a running back, a journeyman QB and a trio of great WRs and you have a Championship. That is the Redskins way. It will be again.

[CanesSkins26]

There is an old saying. Defense wins Championships.

This is one of the most overused and useless sayings in all of sports. What wins championships is having a balanced and deep football team that is solid in all aspects of the game. Sure there are exceptions (namely the Ravens), but if you look at the teams that have won the SB over the past 10-15 years, all have generally been good in all facets of the game. Goods TEAMS win championships, not good offenses or good defenses.

To me I rather have a great defense, great running game and a game manager QB.

When is recent history has a "game manager qb" won a Super Bowl? The only example that I can think of is Trent Dilfer with the Ravens. Even Brad Johnson with the Bucs was more than just a "game manager" when they won the SB.

The winning qb's of the last 19 SB's...Rogers, Brees, Big Ben, Eli Manning, Peyton Manning, Big Ben, Tom Brady, Tom Brady, Brad Johnson, Tom Brady, Trent Dilfer, Kurt Warner, Elway, Elway, Favre, Aikman, Steve Young, Aikman, Aikman.

Dilfer and maybe Johnson, both with historic defenses, are the only two "game managers" in the group. It's a passing leagues and having a game manager isn't going to win in today's NFL.

[chiefhog44]

There is an old saying. Defense wins Championships.

This is one of the most overused and useless sayings in all of sports. What wins championships is having a balanced and deep football team that is solid in all aspects of the game. Sure there are exceptions (namely the Ravens), but if you look at the teams that have won the SB over the past 10-15 years, all have generally been good in all facets of the game. Goods TEAMS win championships, not good offenses or good defenses.

To me I rather have a great defense, great running game and a game manager QB.

When is recent history has a "game manager qb" won a Super Bowl? The only example that I can think of is Trent Dilfer with the Ravens. Even Brad Johnson with the Bucs was more than just a "game manager" when they won the SB.

The winning qb's of the last 19 SB's...Rogers, Brees, Big Ben, Eli Manning, Peyton Manning, Big Ben, Tom Brady, Tom Brady, Brad Johnson, Tom Brady, Trent Dilfer, Kurt Warner, Elway, Elway, Favre, Aikman, Steve Young, Aikman, Aikman.

Dilfer and maybe Johnson, both with historic defenses, are the only two "game managers" in the group. It's a passing leagues and having a game manager isn't going to win in today's NFL.

Exactly right canes. That's why we just have to kepp picking QB's until we get it right. Sorry, but that's the way it's gotta be

[HEROHAMO]

There is an old saying. Defense wins Championships.

This is one of the most overused and useless sayings in all of sports. What wins championships is having a balanced and deep football team that is solid in all aspects of the game. Sure there are exceptions (namely the Ravens), but if you look at the teams that have won the SB over the past 10-15 years, all have generally been good in all facets of the game. Goods TEAMS win championships, not good offenses or good defenses.

To me I rather have a great defense, great running game and a game manager QB.

When is recent history has a "game manager qb" won a Super Bowl? The only example that I can think of is Trent Dilfer with the Ravens. Even Brad Johnson with the Bucs was more than just a "game manager" when they won the SB.

The winning qb's of the last 19 SB's...Rogers, Brees, Big Ben, Eli Manning, Peyton Manning, Big Ben, Tom Brady, Tom Brady, Brad Johnson, Tom Brady, Trent Dilfer, Kurt Warner, Elway, Elway, Favre, Aikman, Steve Young, Aikman, Aikman.

Dilfer and maybe Johnson, both with historic defenses, are the only two "game managers" in the group. It's a passing leagues and having a game manager isn't going to win in today's NFL.

3/4s of those teams and QBs mentioned had top defenses in there respective years. Along with rushing leaders. Aikman and the Pukes had top defenses, Elway had the top rusher with a stout defense, Farve had the a top defense, Young had a top defense, Big Ben had a top defense and also had a horrible showing in his first SB, Eli manning had a very hot defense behind him and that defense can be credited for much of that win, Tom Brady when he won those SuperBowls was anything but prolific. It wasnt until after he won those SuperBowls that he started shattering records.

Bla, Bla and Bla.

In those Big games each and everyone of them I remember. Maybe ten percent of them the QB lit up the score board. Elway basically managed his first SuperBowl and rode the wave of Terrel Davis who set a new record for rushing yards in a SuperBowl that day.

Rogers, Farve, Peyton Manning and Steve Young were the only Qbs I can remember tearing it up in the SuperBowl. From the ones you mentioned.
Basically the rest of them just managed the game. Oh and 99 percent of them had a great defense.

[SkinsJock]

The NFL is full of cliches that are used by fans when it suits to 'support' their thinking - most of the time without any thought to the relevance

Success in the NFL in recent times has depended primarily on having a group of players on both offense and defense that are playing better together - this is primarily a team game - having a good special teams is normally a by product of those 2 also - it's really not a coincidence that teams that do well have good special teams play


everything really begins with the QB and sooner or later you have to find a way to add a future great QB - not having a decent offensive line is not a reason to not acquire a QB for the future - by the time the future great QB becomes a really good QB, the offensive line will 'suddenly' look a lot better than it did when the process began

we need to both build around the young players we have and trade the players that both are older or do not suit what we need - we need to find a way to re-build this franchise into having a bunch of young players with a lot of depth along both lines - I think that Mike made a mistake in trying to be competitive while re-building and revamping - that did not work

we need to face the fact it is going to take years and work towards that - I do not know that Snyder will allow that to happen but I hope that Bruce & Mike get rid of all the old players (trade anyone that you can) and begin the process of building through the draft and acquiring young free agents

[DarthMonk]

this is nowhere near as simple as adding a few points per game - we had a defensive scheme and players that really did not perform very well at all - who knows how many points we might have needed if the other teams had wanted to score more than they already did

I've been thinking about this a bit. Before I proceed I'll say that anyone who's read my posts knows that I do not think we "are close" or "just a few players away."

Having said that, how many of our games last year actually fall under the "who knows how many points we might have needed if the other teams had wanted to score more than they already did" situation quoted above? (Not picking on you, other people said it too)

I think we can only focus on our losses since we outsocred people in our wins:

Houston loss doesn't fit. Any 4th quarter score pretty much seals it and the OT kick wins it outright.

At Rams we spotted them 14, dominated for awhile, settle for 2 FG inside their 5 and still took a 16-14 lead in the 3rd qtr. Rams eventually win 30-16. If we get TDs instead and lead 24-14 do they just score the same or more? Maybe. I'll give you this one.

Loss to Indy? I was there. Late score wins. Our D played quite well. Never felt like Indy shut it down because they thought they didn't need more points. You can have this game or the Ram game but not both.

The loss at Detroit does not fit. We had a late lead with the ball and gave the game away.

Philly loss fits. A few more scores here mean nothing.

Viking loss might fit. Hard to say. I'll give it to you.

Giant loss fits. Killed us.

Tampa loss? Maybe. I'm convinced more points is simply a victory here. We let them off the hook.

Cowboy fits as does the Giant loss.

We can never know but it seems to me that a little more scoring and nothing else easily gives us 3 more wins and maybe 4. It's the difference between being a good mediocre team and a bad one. I guess I like our draft position better at 6-10 than 9-7 or 10-6. Plus, we (read FO) might be tempted to think we're close with that kind of record.

As many have said, let's be patient and build the right way.

DarthMonk

[El Mexican]

this is nowhere near as simple as adding a few points per game - we had a defensive scheme and players that really did not perform very well at all - who knows how many points we might have needed if the other teams had wanted to score more than they already did

I've been thinking about this a bit. Before I proceed I'll say that anyone who's read my posts knows that I do not think we "are close" or "just a few players away."

Having said that, how many of our games last year actually fall under the "who knows how many points we might have needed if the other teams had wanted to score more than they already did" situation quoted above? (Not picking on you, other people said it too)

I think we can only focus on our losses since we outsocred people in our wins:

Houston loss doesn't fit. Any 4th quarter score pretty much seals it and the OT kick wins it outright.

At Rams we spotted them 14, dominated for awhile, settle for 2 FG inside their 5 and still took a 16-14 lead in the 3rd qtr. Rams eventually win 30-16. If we get TDs instead and lead 24-14 do they just score the same or more? Maybe. I'll give you this one.

Loss to Indy? I was there. Late score wins. Our D played quite well. Never felt like Indy shut it down because they thought they didn't need more points. You can have this game or the Ram game but not both.

The loss at Detroit does not fit. We had a late lead with the ball and gave the game away.

Philly loss fits. A few more scores here mean nothing.

Viking loss might fit. Hard to say. I'll give it to you.

Giant loss fits. Killed us.

Tampa loss? Maybe. I'm convinced more points is simply a victory here. We let them off the hook.

Cowboy fits as does the Giant loss.

We can never know but it seems to me that a little more scoring and nothing else easily gives us 3 more wins and maybe 4. It's the difference between being a good mediocre team and a bad one. I guess I like our draft position better at 6-10 than 9-7 or 10-6. Plus, we (read FO) might be tempted to think we're close with that kind of record.

As many have said, let's be patient and build the right way.

DarthMonk

"Patience" is sort of a censored with Snyder.

History has pretty much explained that clearly over the past 10 plus years. It simply won't happen.

If life is full of change, then we should all just embrace with our favorite team.