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

After watching the playoff games this weekend two things in particular struck me=

1. The 49ers went 4-12 last season and now they're one game away from the Superbowl. What can we learn from them to help us achieve the same kind of turn around next year..?

And 2. Didn't we beat the Giants?!? Like twice!!?!! WTF is that all about..? Maybe Rolle was right and we just happened to get 2 of our 5 wins in 100 games against them this year.


Or maybe we're a better team than our record suggests...

Eli doesn't really play well against the Redskins, so that helps a lot...

SouthLondonRedskin wrote:After watching the playoff games this weekend two things in particular struck me=
1. The 49ers went 4-12 last season and now they're one game away from the Superbowl. What can we learn from them to help us achieve the same kind of turn around next year..?
And 2. Didn't we beat the Giants?!? Like twice!!?!! WTF is that all about..? Maybe Rolle was right and we just happened to get 2 of our 5 wins in 100 games against them this year.
Or maybe we're a better team than our record suggests...

not sure what the issue is - are you trying to figure out how we beat the giants TWICE or why the 49ers are so good??

The 49ers answer is easy - they had a good team and added a coach that knew what to do to make them play together
this is a team game, first and foremost

The Redskins are better than we were - we're still trying to get some things established here - we're VERY, VERY close
we are a lot better than we were and we're almost as good as the other teams in the NFC East think we are

As a matter of interest - the Redskins have not been very good for a number of years
BUT ..... it's an interesting fact, recently we've beaten the eventual winner of the Super Bowl during the regular season

One thing that I took from this weekends games is that you need PLAYMAKERS on the offensive side of the ball....which is something we are lacking in. Lets address that in this draft.

PAPDOG67 wrote:One thing that I took from this weekends games is that you need PLAYMAKERS on the offensive side of the ball....which is something we are lacking in. Lets address that in this draft.

Actually I took a very different perspective on the weekend.

The Saints, who are essentially nothing but playmakers on offense, got beat by a QB nobody thinks is top tier (well maybe they are starting to after this season ), mostly because of a huge performance by their defense and special teams in securing turnovers.

The Texans had the big playmakers on offense in their game but still got beat. Flacco was his usual mediocre and Ray Rice didn't even have a good day. But that doesn't matter when you play solid fundamentals and your defense is elite.

I guess you could say the Giants have lots of playmakers, but that doesn't change the fact that Green Bay had the most playmakers on offense this year and still got beat, at home, once the heat was on.

Personally I don't think Tebow is very good, but what else is he known for in the media except the guy who can make plays when it counts? Once again, give me elite coaching and a well-rounded team with solid depth. It also helped the Pats that the Broncos had no business getting that far into the post season to begin with.

So, IMO, saying that this weekend proved the value of offensive playmakers is way overstating things. Three of the four games should have turned out differently if that was really true.

SkinsJock wrote:The 49ers answer is easy - they had a good team and added a coach that knew what to do to make them play together
this is a team game, first and foremost

Well said. I know a lot of people want to compare the 49ers to the Redskins like this, but Harbaugh took over a pretty good team. If you watched much ESPN or Fox pre-game yesterday you probably heard a lot of credit going to Mike Singletary all of a sudden.

What most Redskin fans fail to realize is that Harbaugh inherited an intact team.

What most Redskin fans fail to come to grips with, is that this team was complete and utter garbage. Mike inherited a team that lacked depth and playmakers. The players who started for us in his first year, are backups now and some aren't here. That's how talent starved this squad was/is.

Yes, Harbaugh did take over a much more talented team than Shanahan, but we also cannot overlook that Harbaugh has gotten things out of players that other teams couldn't.

Alex Smith - We all know his story
Carlos Rogers - We all knew that he was good, but Harbaugh's scheme (and an eye exam - how did Haraugh get hims to get it?) took him to the next level.

The Niners let Aubrayo Franklin go. Who is their nose tackle now? I don't know, but it sure is tough to run on the Niners.

Harbaugh did not have the benefit of an off-season, but yet he is going to the NFC championship. Most folks wrote them off before the beginning of the season. Afterall, how can a brand new coach, new to the NFL head coaching ranks, get his underachieving team with no QB, prepard for a play-off run with no off season? I would be included in the most folks.

There is no smoke and mirrors to what Harbaugh is doing. My guess is that Lombardi would be proud of him with his old school appoach football and Gibbs probably is proud of him for adjusting his scheme to fit his players abilitites.

Harbaugh put the fun back into football, you can see it in how his players are playing with the enthusiasm of college players. The complicated schemes of the Skins, have players constantly thinking instead of playing ball to their abilities.

Can the Redskins learn something from this? Not Shanny. He has his proven way and he is going to stick with it.

Can the NFL learn something from this? Yes, it is a copy cat league. If the Niners win the SB, a lot of teams will be following the Harbaugh example.

I know this is a well known saying but in the playoffs the team with the best defense usually wins. Last weekend, the 49er's, Patriots, Ravens and Giants all played better defense than their respective opponents.

The 49ers are more talented that the Redskins and a lot has gone their way this year. They are the #1 team in getting turnovers, and the #1 team in protecting the football.

They have a good running back, and their OLIne has several first rounders on it. They are beating people the old fashioned way--running the ball, controlling the clock, and not giving it away.

Red_One43 wrote: Alex Smith - We all know his story
Carlos Rogers - We all knew that he was good, but Harbaugh's scheme (and an eye exam - how did Haraugh get hims to get it?) took him to the next level.

I'm not sure Jim Harbaugh has "schemed" anything to make Carlos Rogers play better. For one thing, he's not the defensive coordinator. And for another, that entire defense is just good. Teams can't run the ball on them, so they have to throw. Not hard to see how that helps the secondary.

I was kind of laughing watching that game on Saturday btw when Rogers had a good chance at an interception and the ball bounced off his bricks/hands. He's definitely playing better in SF, but some things never change.

riggofan wrote:

Red_One43 wrote: Alex Smith - We all know his story
Carlos Rogers - We all knew that he was good, but Harbaugh's scheme (and an eye exam - how did Haraugh get hims to get it?) took him to the next level.

I'm not sure Jim Harbaugh has "schemed" anything to make Carlos Rogers play better. For one thing, he's not the defensive coordinator. And for another, that entire defense is just good. Teams can't run the ball on them, so they have to throw. Not hard to see how that helps the secondary.

I was kind of laughing watching that game on Saturday btw when Rogers had a good chance at an interception and the ball bounced off his bricks/hands. He's definitely playing better in SF, but some things never change.

When I referred to Harbaugh's scheme for Carlos - I was giving him credit as head coach for all aspects of the team. True, it is not Harbaugh's defense, but the DC does what Harbaugh does and listens to players and allows them to make suggestions about the scheme. Harbaugh sets the tone.

The 49ers had the basically the same players as last year. Why weren't they good last year? Harbaugh and his DC, Vic Fangio, have a lot to do with getting those same players to play their best at their postions. Again, they let NT Aubrayo Franklin walk for who? That "Who" must be playing good at NT. That was a coaching decision that paid off.

I saw the "drop" that Carlos had of that interception and thought yep there is a Carlos drop, but the replay showed that the receiver got his hand in there, so I didn't see it as a classic Carlos drop. Carlos had 6 INTS. I have to disagrees with you on that. That was a major change for Carlos who had 6 INTs in his career with the Skins.

Here's some examples of Harbausgh and Fangio's style. Does it sound like Shanny's style?:

"He wanted to be part of a team. He wanted to be where it was about football," Harbaugh said. "He wanted to compete, didn't want anything handed to him."

Unlike his Redskins days, Rogers finds pleasure in staying after practice to catch passes and work on his once-clumsy hands.

When Rogers suggested that a scout-team player get recognized among the 49ers' weekly award winners, Harbaugh agreed.

Carlos, you're not in Washington, anymore.

Fellow 49ers defenders have echoed those positive words about playing under Fangio. He teaches them. He listens to them. He lets them play without fear of repercussion or benching, contrary to what Rogers said he endured in D.C.

http://dcskins.net/ShowArticle.aspx?id=40118

SouthLondonRedskin wrote:After watching the playoff games this weekend two things in particular struck me=

1. The 49ers went 4-12 last season and now they're one game away from the Superbowl. What can we learn from them to help us achieve the same kind of turn around next year..?

Careful with that line of reasoning. There are several teams every year that suddenly turn things around. Sometimes it's legit; sometimes it's luck.

Last year everyone's favorite turnaround team seemed to be the Buccaneers. From 3-13 to 10-6, and if I heard one more time about how "young," "exciting," and "fun" either Morris or the whole of the team was, I'd have puked. Now, of course, the team is in total disarray. They won't get their crap together fast enough to make anything of that original young and exciting roster.

The Falcons of several years ago were another great example. The arrogant Jim Mora took a 5-11 team to 11-5 in his first year but then flopped after that.

The 49ers got some nice bounces this year. I think there's a very good chance they regress toward the mean in some very important categories next year and are not as dominant. (It also depends on what they are able to do in the offseason, of course.)

I guess I mentioned the 49ers because last year they looked to me like a team with some talented individuals but they made silly mistakes at crucial times in a few games and ended up lacking any sort of confidence.

That's a pretty good description of the season we just had, but I take the point that the management styles are worlds apart.

It's a good point about the importance of having a top defence. They say a good offense wins games, a good defence wins championships. So we can't concentrate solely on the offense this draft, we need some talent in the secondary that's for sure.

I'd also use a top half pick on a talented young inside linebacker. I would then have him move in with London Fletcher. I'd have him eat the same, talk the same, walk the same, everything. Really shadow him, do you know what I mean..?
What better education could you want for an LB..?? He could then share some of London's workload over the next couple of seasons. And then we can give London the LB's coaching job when he eventually retires.

I say all that, we'll probably fail to resign him for some stupid reason and have no leader for next season!!!

Irn-Bru wrote:

SouthLondonRedskin wrote:After watching the playoff games this weekend two things in particular struck me=

1. The 49ers went 4-12 last season and now they're one game away from the Superbowl. What can we learn from them to help us achieve the same kind of turn around next year..?

Careful with that line of reasoning. There are several teams every year that suddenly turn things around. Sometimes it's legit; sometimes it's luck.

Last year everyone's favorite turnaround team seemed to be the Buccaneers. From 3-13 to 10-6, and if I heard one more time about how "young," "exciting," and "fun" either Morris or the whole of the team was, I'd have puked. Now, of course, the team is in total disarray. They won't get their crap together fast enough to make anything of that original young and exciting roster.

The Falcons of several years ago were another great example. The arrogant Jim Mora took a 5-11 team to 11-5 in his first year but then flopped after that.

The 49ers got some nice bounces this year. I think there's a very good chance they regress toward the mean in some very important categories next year and are not as dominant. (It also depends on what they are able to do in the offseason, of course.)

Let's not forget the Chiefs in that roll call of one year wonders.

Irn, you provide some excellent points concerning whether or nor a franchise has legitmately turned things around for the long run; however two things come to mind when you compare Harbaugh to Mora and Morris.

1. Harbaugh's coaching resume was a lot stronger than Mora's and Morris. He coached San Deigo State to consecutive 11-1 seasons. In 2007, he took a Stanford team that was 16-40 in it's last five years and hadn't had a winning season since 2001 and turned them into winners in this third season and went 12-1 in 2010. Coaching at Stanford is no easy task.

2. This season ain't over yet. The 49ers could end up and in the Super Bowl and with their defense, have a good chance to win. A Super Bowl win will make it legit even if it is for one year.

Back to your points, only time will tell if they are here to stay as perennial winners.

Red_One43 wrote:I saw the "drop" that Carlos had of that interception and thought yep there is a Carlos drop, but the replay showed that the receiver got his hand in there, so I didn't see it as a classic Carlos drop. Carlos had 6 INTS. I have to disagrees with you on that. That was a major change for Carlos who had 6 INTs in his career with the Skins.

Oh, no question about it man. He's had a great year and played like we all wished he would have played here. I won't deny it! And you may be right about the drop in that game on Saturday. Just thought it was funny because we saw that so often in DC.

Rogers was here during some of the worst years in franchise history, plus he kind of got jacked losing his chance to be a free agent in 2010. Can't really blame him for being bitter about his time here.

I'm a regular person like the rest of you and guess what...I have to wear contacts to be able to do my job. Do U think that I told my boss that I refuse to excel at my job unless he buys me some contacts? Nope.

I took my <insert profanity here> to the eye doctor and got some contacts. That simple.

<----- See that avatar. I supported and think highly of Carlos during his stint here. But if he's the type of person who'd rather limit himself than help himself, then he doesn't need to be here.

IF Carlos had purchased $200 worth of contacts years ago, he'd have been PAID!!! PAID!! PAID!! But he wanted and now he's in his 30's? Trying to get a long-term contract... He cheated himself out of millions just to spite this team, what an idiot.

So please, don't give Jim the credit. He didn't do anything but give that chump some change to go get his eyes checked.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:I'm a regular person like the rest of you and guess what...I have to wear contacts to be able to do my job. Do U think that I told my boss that I refuse to excel at my job unless he buys me some contacts? Nope.

I took my <insert profanity here> to the eye doctor and got some contacts. That simple.

<----- See that avatar. I supported and think highly of Carlos during his stint here. But if he's the type of person who'd rather limit himself than help himself, then he doesn't need to be here.

IF Carlos had purchased $200 worth of contacts years ago, he'd have been PAID!!! PAID!! PAID!! But he wanted and now he's in his 30's? Trying to get a long-term contract... He cheated himself out of millions just to spite this team, what an idiot.

So please, don't give Jim the credit. He didn't do anything but give that chump some change to go get his eyes checked.

Chris, I make you right! Rogers should have got himself checked out years ago and he knows it. Its easier for him to blame us after he's gone then admit to a 'Contacts!?! Heck, I never thought of that!!!' moment which would show him up as being a little dumb looking...

riggofan wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:I saw the "drop" that Carlos had of that interception and thought yep there is a Carlos drop, but the replay showed that the receiver got his hand in there, so I didn't see it as a classic Carlos drop. Carlos had 6 INTS. I have to disagrees with you on that. That was a major change for Carlos who had 6 INTs in his career with the Skins.

Oh, no question about it man. He's had a great year and played like we all wished he would have played here. I won't deny it! And you may be right about the drop in that game on Saturday. Just thought it was funny because we saw that so often in DC.

I have to admit that I laughed too when I saw the ball hit his chest and bounced to the game. I believe my comment was - so much for contacts!

Clearly Rogers is the blame for him not getting his eyes checked and not staying after practice to work on catching the ball when he was here with the Skins. Carlos, in his contract year with the Skins, should have done all he could to have a big season, to get his pay day as a free agent - He didn't do it and thus he had to settle for a one year deal.

Rogers may have poor attitude, but Harbaugh got the most out of this poor attitude guy. Give Jimmy his due. He got somethgn out of Rogers, we couldn't. Jimmy is one win from the Super Bowl in a season in which he had no off season to work with.

Remember, this thread isn't about Rogers. It is about what we might learn from the 49ers. That is adjusting the scheme to the players. That aint' new. Didn't Gibbs do this?

The biggest story about Jimmy getting the most out of a player on the Niners that other coaches couldn't is Alex Smith.

No one is accsusing Jimmy of being a magician with Rogers and Alex. He simply put them in situations where they could succeed. Send Alex to another team and he probably busts. Send Carlos back to the Skins and we get a Carlos who can catch but one who also has a bad attitude and bites on double moves. I am not cheering Rogers. I am definitely cheering Harbaugh for what he has done this season. Fluke or not! The dude is one game from the Super Bowl.

Just a slight bit of a contrarian view of the Niners, and not a full throated one at that:
1. They play in the NFC West. That, and winning against us on the road, got them a bye last week and homefield this past weekend.
2. They beat a dome team, who played on the road, on turf with a pretty good homefield advantage. With that, the Saints still scored pretty well.
3. They have won exactly one playoff game so far. This week may very well be different. The Giants defense certainly is more stout than the Saints were.

The Niners have played good defense this year, along with a pretty balanced offensive attack. There's a lot to like. They seem to be trending in the right direction. However, if Sh-eli and the Giants D go out there and play like they can, the Niners will still have won only one playoff game this year.

Next season, teams will know what to expect of them. With that, it would be surprising if they slipped back a bit. Although, playing in their division will prop up their W-L record a bit.

I'm not trying to play all sides of the issue here. Just tossing some things out for discussion.

Burgundy&Wha? wrote:Just a slight bit of a contrarian view of the Niners, and not a full throated one at that:
1. They play in the NFC West. That, and winning against us on the road, got them a bye last week and homefield this past weekend.
2. They beat a dome team, who played on the road, on turf with a pretty good homefield advantage. With that, the Saints still scored pretty well.
3. They have won exactly one playoff game so far. This week may very well be different. The Giants defense certainly is more stout than the Saints were.

The Niners have played good defense this year, along with a pretty balanced offensive attack. There's a lot to like. They seem to be trending in the right direction. However, if Sh-eli and the Giants D go out there and play like they can, the Niners will still have won only one playoff game this year.

Next season, teams will know what to expect of them. With that, it would be surprising if they slipped back a bit. Although, playing in their division will prop up their W-L record a bit.

I'm not trying to play all sides of the issue here. Just tossing some things out for discussion.

Good points, but who expected the Niners with a first year NFL coach to do waht they did without an off-season?

The question asked on this thread was:

What can we learn from them to help us achieve the same kind of turn around next year..?

I feel that regardless of whether the Niners are a fluke this year or not. There is something to be said about adjuting what you do to the strengths of the players that you have. What if Kyle adjusted his play calling to the strengths we had? Should Kyle have been asking Rex to do the things that he knew Schaub could do? The Niners run the ball! Weak QB equals run the ball. We had Rex - run the ball!

What can we learn from them (Niners and Giants - the thread included the Giants)? From the Niners - Adjust to our players stengths and run the darn ball!
From the Giants - Get the best pass rushers out there in the FA market.

Is there anything you think that can be learned form the Niners or the Giants?

The Saints, who are essentially nothing but playmakers on offense, got beat by a QB nobody thinks is top tier (well maybe they are starting to after this season Laughing), mostly because of a huge performance by their defense and special teams in securing turnovers.

The 49ers D made some plays, but it was Alex Smith and Vernon Davis that matched the Saints offense drive for drive in the 4th. In crunch time the Saints got the best of the 49ers D, but the 49ers had the ball last and their offensive play makers got it done.

The Texans had the big playmakers on offense in their game but still got beat. Flacco was his usual mediocre and Ray Rice didn't even have a good day. But that doesn't matter when you play solid fundamentals and your defense is elite.

The Texans were also starting their 3rd string rookie quarterback. Andre Johnson (111 yards) and Foster (155 all purpose yards) kept the Texans in the game.

I guess you could say the Giants have lots of playmakers, but that doesn't change the fact that Green Bay had the most playmakers on offense this year and still got beat, at home, once the heat was on.

Manning, Cruz, and Nicks have carried the Giants all season long and did it again yesterday. Manning had 4933 yards and 29 tds this season, Cruz was third in the NFL with 1536 yards, and Nicks had 1192 yards. Their wide receivers are just as good as what the Packers put out there.

CanesSkins26 wrote:

The Saints, who are essentially nothing but playmakers on offense, got beat by a QB nobody thinks is top tier (well maybe they are starting to after this season Laughing), mostly because of a huge performance by their defense and special teams in securing turnovers.

The 49ers D made some plays, but it was Alex Smith and Vernon Davis that matched the Saints offense drive for drive in the 4th. In crunch time the Saints got the best of the 49ers D, but the 49ers had the ball last and their offensive play makers got it done.

The Texans had the big playmakers on offense in their game but still got beat. Flacco was his usual mediocre and Ray Rice didn't even have a good day. But that doesn't matter when you play solid fundamentals and your defense is elite.

The Texans were also starting their 3rd string rookie quarterback. Andre Johnson (111 yards) and Foster (155 all purpose yards) kept the Texans in the game.

I guess you could say the Giants have lots of playmakers, but that doesn't change the fact that Green Bay had the most playmakers on offense this year and still got beat, at home, once the heat was on.

Manning, Cruz, and Nicks have carried the Giants all season long and did it again yesterday. Manning had 4933 yards and 29 tds this season, Cruz was third in the NFL with 1536 yards, and Nicks had 1192 yards. Their wide receivers are just as good as what the Packers put out there.

I agree with all of this . . . I mean, you can't even get to the playoffs if you don't have at least some playmakers. (Except maybe if you are the 2000 Ravens.)

But look at the post I was responding to. If The Key to entry and success in the postseason is having offensive playmakers, then this past weekend's results are mixed at best. It's an unhelpful way to look at it because the person who counts as a playmaker on offense may or may not show up on a given day. Or they might show up, play very well, and still lose (e.g., Aaron Rodgers).

One team has to outperform the other, so statistically you will always have some players standing out. But does that make them a Playmaker? How many Sundays do they have to do something like that to count? And what about the ones who do it all year but still fall short in a playoff game?

This is like trying to nail jello to the wall. I just don't see the usefulness in the distinction, at best, and I think at worst it's probably the wrong thing to think.

Irn-Bru wrote:

PAPDOG67 wrote:One thing that I took from this weekends games is that you need PLAYMAKERS on the offensive side of the ball....which is something we are lacking in. Lets address that in this draft.

Actually I took a very different perspective on the weekend.

The Saints, who are essentially nothing but playmakers on offense, got beat by a QB nobody thinks is top tier (well maybe they are starting to after this season ), mostly because of a huge performance by their defense and special teams in securing turnovers.

The Texans had the big playmakers on offense in their game but still got beat. Flacco was his usual mediocre and Ray Rice didn't even have a good day. But that doesn't matter when you play solid fundamentals and your defense is elite.

I guess you could say the Giants have lots of playmakers, but that doesn't change the fact that Green Bay had the most playmakers on offense this year and still got beat, at home, once the heat was on.

Personally I don't think Tebow is very good, but what else is he known for in the media except the guy who can make plays when it counts? Once again, give me elite coaching and a well-rounded team with solid depth. It also helped the Pats that the Broncos had no business getting that far into the post season to begin with.

So, IMO, saying that this weekend proved the value of offensive playmakers is way overstating things. Three of the four games should have turned out differently if that was really true.

I read this one and didn't bother to read the rest. I agree with all of this.

Carry-on and good day my friends!