Last year's team

There's a better argument to be made that last year's team won more games than it should have. Look, if you go 4-12, you should lose three times as many close games as you win. The Skins went 3-3 in close games, 1-9 in games that weren't close. Skins won one game by two points, one game by three points, and another game in overtime. All of those games could have easily been lost, more so than the three close games they lost could have been won. In other words, the Skins were closer to a 1-15 team than a 7-9 team, that's for sure. I'd say 4-12 is a pretty good indication of the team we were last year; but perhaps 3-13 would have been a bit more illustrative of who we were.

I think last year the internal bickering, the drama, and the general ineptitude at all levels (but particularly in the FO), left me feeling that there really was no plan, Bruce Allen had less than zero football acumen, and that there was just no end to the losing. By the end of the season, and for the first time EVER, I just didn't care if they won our lost. The long hard road of losing wore me out.

Scotty McC has given me hope that there is an actual plan in place and that it was put there by someone who actually knows how to build a winner.

...Looking at last year's games, were there any games that the Redskins lost that they should have won?Were they truly a 4-12 team or a potentially 8-8 team that concluded the season at 4-12? Nah, I believe your previous Parcell's quote...~"you are what you record says you are". I think any team can play the coulda/woulda/shoulda game. But the reality is the end result either by fault of players, coaching or front office.

Last year was the epitome of the quote "I drink to forget....I just can't remember what." I'm cautiously optimistic about this season, but am done with my kool aid, and have taken off my rose colored glasses. Just hoping for the best.

I had a discussion with a fellow Redskin fan about the 3-13 and 4-12 records in consecutive seasons. The fellow Redskin fan said that woulda coulda shoulda stuff. 3-13 could have easily been 9-7 or 8-8 in 2013 and 4-12 could have been 5-11 or 7-9 in 2014. HOF head coach Bill Parcells once said that a team is what it's record indicates but a lot of people don't necessarily agree with that. Looking at last year's games, were there any games that the Redskins lost that they should have won? Were they truly a 4-12 team or a potentially 8-8 team that concluded the season at 4-12? Outside of the first Philly game and maybe the second NYG game, were there any other games that the team was in a strong position to win that they ended up losing?

Our team was so lacking in areas that are so basic and critically important like defense and offensive line that leads me to answer your question with another question: what does it matter how many more wins we could of won?
Our needs were so glaring in the important areas that it would have been a disservice to IMO win more games and lose position in the draft. We were not going anywhere. If we had gone 8-8 and not been able to draft Schreff I would be pissed. Is 8-8 really such a great thing? No.
Now if you want talk about our record and how we had more talent than our record indicates, then yes, that is true. We were so weak in important basic areas that made our record skewed when looking at it. We are way better then most of the weaklings we were drafting near that had comparable records. We are closer to a winning team then a Jacksonville or tampa.

Looked like a cat turd rolled in crackers.

Nah, I believe your previous Parcell's quote...~"you are what you record says you are". I think any team can play the coulda/woulda/shoulda game. But the reality is the end result either by fault of players, coaching or front office.


I agree. I mean we've been on the wrong side of .500 pretty consistently for a long time. What else is there to say?

Our team was so lacking in areas that are so basic and critically important like defense and offensive line that leads me to answer your question with another question: what does it matter how many more wins we could of won?
Our needs were so glaring in the important areas that it would have been a disservice to IMO win more games and lose position in the draft. We were not going anywhere. If we had gone 8-8 and not been able to draft Schreff I would be pissed. Is 8-8 really such a great thing? No.
Now if you want talk about our record and how we had more talent than our record indicates, then yes, that is true. We were so weak in important basic areas that made our record skewed when looking at it. We are way better then most of the weaklings we were drafting near that had comparable records. We are closer to a winning team then a Jacksonville or tampa.

That Tampa team actually beat us last year. Last year was so bizarre. We beat Dallas and Philly (Philly nearly twice) and then lose to Tampa and nearly lose to the lowly Titans (I can't even remember who their QB was last year -- did they have one?).

It tells me that we have some talent but no depth and (unfortunately) suspect coaching. I think the talent level this year will be better -- we had some good addition by subtraction (talking to you Porter, Chester, Clark, Merriweather, Polumbus), and I think we have picked up some solid players. The coaching is still a work in progress -- real question marks there for me. But I like what Scot seems to be trying to do so far.