QB or defense: what's the bigger problem?

I don't know how anyone can say that BOTH units aren't at fault.

5 Yard passes on 3rd and long(9 yds. or more), are you kidding me? Maybe if the offense ,which is lead by the play of the quarterback, could actually sustain drives, the defense wouldn't get exposed the way it has been. WTTF?! Why have the weapons, when he won't use them? If we had a QB change, maybe it would provide the spark the entire team needs. Cause it's gonna take a hell of a lot more than CP's characters to pull us out of this hole! HAIL from MCUSA!

check CP's interview on Redskins.com. he is PISSED. he kinda mumbles it, but he says it. "everyone isn't getting the ball". he's not talking about himself, CP got plenty of touches last game.... as a dump off.

This is a no brainer. We limped into the playoffs with a killer D and no QB last year. However, I'd like to see both get fixed.

Yeah, it is a no-brainer question... the D is the biggest problem. Trent dilfer got to and won a superbowl, and Mark Brunell COULD do it as well. I know he could and everyone else calling for CAmpbell probably knows he could, too, but he wont. He's not doing what we need him to do right now and its time for him to go.

The biggest reason (other than the fact that he's not winning, or putting us in a position late in games to be competitive) is that we're going to have to move on and we gave up 2 fucking first round picks for a QB that we're going to take a step back when we put him in... do it now, when he can get into a rythm of the offense with the rest of the offense. Maybe he'll provide a spark?

Maybe some of the younger guys will step up and play better to support him. Maybe he'll sustain drives by not checking down to the backfield as quickly, or getting out of trouble in the backfield by running and keeping a spy from blitzing...

The D definately needs to be fixed and should be TOP priority, but I do think its time to go to campbell.

Couldn't find a bigger or darker font? ;-)
Without absolving the defense of responsibility, there is a big difference in defending 80 yards than 45 yards. Drives don't have to start at our 40 but if you get the ball at the 20, gain 7 yards, punt and they start their possession at the 35-40 yard line that's a huge advantage vs. if you have to punt, punting from midfield or a little beyond, worse case they'll start at the 20.. Plus 3 and outs don't build any offensive rhythm and let their defense remain fresh while ours tires from being on the field all day.

Causing 3 and outs is huge! If you stop an offense anywhere on a 3 and out you will and should control the games tempo.

I don't care if the 3 and out happens at your 20. It should equate to a low scoring game. In low scoring games, typically the better defense wins.

Your logic makes no sense. 3 and out is a defensive victory. 3 tries for 1st down, you don't make it and you're kicking the ball!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable http://www.thewarpath.net/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/15165-qb-defense-whats-bigger-problem-post233291.html#post233291)
ANYONE WHO SAYS DEFENSE IS WRONG.
DEAD WRONG!

Have you been paying any attention to the missed tackles? The blown coverages? The injuries?



Have you been paying attention to football teams with good QB´s?

Essentially because of Joe Gibbs and Trent Dilfer, some people actually try to win without a franchise QB. Let´s look back at the last 20 years or so, shall we? Who wins superbowls?

Ben Rothlisberger
Brady times three
Brad Johnson
Trent Dilfer
Kurt Warner
John Elway times two
Brett Favre
Troy Aikman times three
Steve Young
Mark Rypien
Jeff Hostetler
Joe Montana times two
Doug Williams
Phil Simms

Now, my point is, that out of the last twenty SB winners, 15 were won with franchise QB´s. That´s 75%. It´s no coincidence that the teams with franchise QB´s are consistantly in it, year after year. The Redskins QB´s, Rypien and Williams, had solid if not spectacular careers, but had incredible SB performances. Dilfer is another QB on the list who had done very little else in his career. Hostetler and Johnson had solid careers but weren´t franchise QB´s. Warner is the lowest rated in my opinion out of the Franchise group. But he went again two years later and lost in an upset to a young guy named Brady. He bloomed late, and luckily for the Rams they cut him as soon as his skills had diminished. To me, what most of you are trying to say is that you´d rather take the Gibbsian approach to winning. Build the team around the QB first thinking that we can win it with a servicable QB who gets hot as the team around him peaks. Obviously, as Gibbs is our coach again, it makes sense to me and has the ring of foolishness to suggest otherwise. However, just imagine if we had a franchise QB? Would you trade that player for all the players and the members of the coaching staff of the #1 defense in the league? Do you trade Peyton Manning or Tom Brady for the Bears D? Absolutely not.

Let me repeat that: ABSOLUTELY NOT!

So, my point is that it all starts with a QB. Perhaps in other places the need is not quite as dire as it is here for us here in Skinsland. We haven´t had a franchise QB for decades and it is time to make that priority number one.

Well, since you used italics...

It really doesn't matter what a franchise QB does in the playoffs if you can't get there. We can't expect to win games if our D doesn't show up. I'd like to see both addressed, but, if I had to pick one (realizing that only fixing one is insufficient to win the SB), I'll take the D.

I don't know how anyone can say that BOTH units aren't at fault.I guess anytime any team loses, both units are at fault. The offense isn't playing well enough to pick up our shitty defense, so they cannot be completely absolved of blame.

But if you were to assign blame, I'd put about 80% on the D, and about 15% on the O with the remaining 5% on the inconsistent kicking game. Out of the 15% assigned the offense, about 10% of that is inconsistent line play, and the remaining 5% is a combination of Brunell inaccuracies with questionable Saunders playcalling.

It bothers me that this question needs to be asked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TenandSix:Unacceptable http://www.thewarpath.net/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/15165-qb-defense-whats-bigger-problem-post233291.html#post233291)
ANYONE WHO SAYS DEFENSE IS WRONG.
DEAD WRONG!

Have you been paying any attention to the missed tackles? The blown coverages? The injuries?



Have you been paying attention to football teams with good QB´s?

Essentially because of Joe Gibbs and Trent Dilfer, some people actually try to win without a franchise QB. Let´s look back at the last 20 years or so, shall we? Who wins superbowls?

Ben Rothlisberger
Brady times three
Brad Johnson
Trent Dilfer
Kurt Warner
John Elway times two
Brett Favre
Troy Aikman times three
Steve Young
Mark Rypien
Jeff Hostetler
Joe Montana times two
Doug Williams
Phil Simms

Now, my point is, that out of the last twenty SB winners, 15 were won with franchise QB´s. That´s 75%. It´s no coincidence that the teams with franchise QB´s are consistantly in it, year after year. The Redskins QB´s, Rypien and Williams, had solid if not spectacular careers, but had incredible SB performances. Dilfer is another QB on the list who had done very little else in his career. Hostetler and Johnson had solid careers but weren´t franchise QB´s. Warner is the lowest rated in my opinion out of the Franchise group. But he went again two years later and lost in an upset to a young guy named Brady. He bloomed late, and luckily for the Rams they cut him as soon as his skills had diminished. To me, what most of you are trying to say is that you´d rather take the Gibbsian approach to winning. Build the team around the QB first thinking that we can win it with a servicable QB who gets hot as the team around him peaks. Obviously, as Gibbs is our coach again, it makes sense to me and has the ring of foolishness to suggest otherwise. However, just imagine if we had a franchise QB? Would you trade that player for all the players and the members of the coaching staff of the #1 defense in the league? Do you trade Peyton Manning or Tom Brady for the Bears D? Absolutely not.

Let me repeat that: ABSOLUTELY NOT!

So, my point is that it all starts with a QB. Perhaps in other places the need is not quite as dire as it is here for us here in Skinsland. We haven´t had a franchise QB for decades and it is time to make that priority number one.

Well said. I'd like to add, all of those QB's also had something else in common. They all Could and did throw the Deep ball for big plays. Our QB either can't make the throws down field, or won't make them. Regardless if he has no confidence or what ever the excuse is this week, he's not gettin' it done. Time for a change! HAIL from MCUSA!