Why aren't the Redskins winning at home?

Just a question that needs answering. The better teams in the NFL win at home. The Redskins haven't won at home since week 2 of the 2011 season. Since then the Redskins are 0-8 at FED EX FIELD. What is it that is preventing them from winning at home. This is a far cry from the Redskins teams of the past who won 5/8 or half of their games on their own home turf. Even Norv Turner's Redskins could win at home.

Why the hell can't the Redskins win in front of their own fans?

Because we are a terrible team that is a good 2-3 years and a lot of good draft picks away from doing squat.

Flat out no excuse. terrible

But they are good enough to win some of those games. They should have beaten Dallas at FED EX last year. They should have beaten the Vikings at FED EX last year too. They let New England get out of there with a win. They play good enough to win but end up not winning.

Cause the franchise needs to rebuild a brand new RFK stadium in D.C. and move back. Maryland has not been kind to the Redskins.

Because we stay injured. 3 of the 11 projected Defense starters are not playing. Carriker, Orakpo, Merriweather. Kerrigan and Fletcher are the only pro bowl caliber players on Defense, the rest are backup quality. On offense, our biggest weapon Garcon has not lived up to expectations yet and Hankerson and Morgan are not making any plays. Thus the 1-9 on 3rd down or whatever the number is. Not enough playmakers across the board. Also last year we didn't have Trent williams and Fred Davis for the last 4 games = injury or basically not on the field.

Bottom line, can't stay healthy or otherwise keep good players on the field. Good chance we may have won last Sunday, BUT, RG3 hurt = can't stay on the field.

It is part of a bigger problem that Rich Tandler did a nice job of talking about earlier today. We can't seem to finish games. 0-8 is bad, that's for sure, but overall we are 5-14 since our last home win. Without getting into the coaching debate, we don't play consistently on either side of the ball for 4 quarters.

Much has been said about the lack of a home field advantage we have due to the size and design of Fed Ex Field. The stadium doesn't generate noise, doesn't have an intimidating presence and doesn't have anything that gives us a benefit of being the home team. It really is almost like playing 8 games a year at a neutral site.

It is part of a bigger problem that Rich Tandler did a nice job of talking about earlier today. We can't seem to finish games. 0-8 is bad, that's for sure, but overall we are 5-14 since our last home win. Without getting into the coaching debate, we don't play consistently on either side of the ball for 4 quarters.

Much has been said about the lack of a home field advantage we have due to the size and design of Fed Ex Field. The stadium doesn't generate noise, doesn't have an intimidating presence and doesn't have anything that gives us a benefit of being the home team. It really is almost like playing 8 games a year at a neutral site.

Which is why I say, ditch Fedup Ex and move back to Washington. Heck, build a smaller stadium if need be - make it more of an intimate stadium like RFK was!

But, yeah, you're right about not finishing games. Heck, if football was just three quarters instead of four, the Redskins would be playoff bound every year.

Cause the franchise needs to rebuild a brand new RFK stadium in D.C. and move back. Maryland has not been kind to the Redskins.

More and more I take exception (don't take it personally) to the idea that if the team played at RFK still, that many of the team's issues would suddenly be remedied. RFK was great because of the great teams that played there. It was a dump, otherwise. If the Skins of the late 1990s-2000s played there, many people would probably list it as one of the worst professional venues of all time. The atmosphere that existed within RFK during home Redskins games was a direct result of the quality of play on the field.

Building a new "RFK" and moving back into the city won't suddenly give the players talent, help the coaches call the right plays, or give the fans in the seats the vocal ability to deafen the opposing QB.

In response to the OP's question, the Redskins have been unable to win at home because they have been outmatched. Simple as that. Anything else is just a shallow excuse.

It is part of a bigger problem that Rich Tandler did a nice job of talking about earlier today. We can't seem to finish games. 0-8 is bad, that's for sure, but overall we are 5-14 since our last home win. Without getting into the coaching debate, we don't play consistently on either side of the ball for 4 quarters.

Much has been said about the lack of a home field advantage we have due to the size and design of Fed Ex Field. The stadium doesn't generate noise, doesn't have an intimidating presence and doesn't have anything that gives us a benefit of being the home team. It really is almost like playing 8 games a year at a neutral site.

Strong explanation that sounds about right. Losing like that at home is like allowing someone to beat you up and take your lunch money. It's a travesty for sure. I first watched Allen's and Pardee's Redskins in the 70s when I was a small child and viewed Joe Gibbs Redskins growing up when I was a teenager. In those days the Redskins were a winner at home. Even during the Norv Turner era as I stated, they won at home. Even Schottenheimer's and Spurrier's Redskins won at home. Gibbs II Redskins won at home also. But Zorn and Shanahan's Redskins consistently get beat at home. It's almost like getting robbed while armed with a gun. It's extremely pitiful!