Where are the Warpathers Who Predicted a 10-6 Record?
 

Each offseason, we Warpathers rave about our offseason additions (See Coles, Thomas, Griffin, Washington, Taylor, Springs, Portis, Brunell, etc). Our blood collectively boils when:

experts like Len Pastabelly say that we overpaid for this guy or that guy,
that our acquisitions are busts in the making,
that we don't have enough talent to be considered contenders,
that we are ranked around 24th in the preseason power rankings, etc.

We all predicted that the Redskins would make the playoffs and would end up with a 10-6 or even a 12-4 record. Fess up, last August how many of you knew what players we were going to field, said we we're going to make the playoffs, and predicted we'd end up with a record of at least 9-7? I seem to recall that the overwhelming majority of us Warpathers thought we'd be playing in January.

Yet by December, many of those very same Warpathers have abandoned ship and begun to say how many holes we have and how this player or that player needs to be replaced. So what happened? Did we not realize who was on our roster? Were those "experts" who we all criticized right all along?

While calling for basically an entirely new roster, people criticize Daniel Snyder for the constant turnover. I've heard calls for Coles to be replaced as our #1 wideout, Gardner to be cut, a new tight-end, a new center, a new left tackle, Brunell to be cut, PORTIS to be benched, Ramsey to be benched, a new quarterback, a new defensive tackle, a new defensive end, a new strong safety, etc. Thank God we Warpathers aren't running the Redskins - we'd make Daniel Snyder's management style look like the epitomy of continuity and patience.

I personally think we are 1-2 players away from having an excellent roster. Get a solid, new run-blocking center and tight end on offense and we could put up monster numbers with the right play-calling. I have no doubt that a guy like former-USC wideout Mike Williams could bring a lot to our offense, but we have Gibbs, not Spurrier at the helm. We need help with our run-blocking. Getting Williams when we have such poor run-blocking in a Gibbs-run offense is like buying $5,000 rims and sweet hydraulics for a car with no engine - it looks cool, but it doesn't make the car run.

As for our defense, we don't really need much help and with maybe one addition, it could be devastating and consistently put points on the board. Give our defense a pass-rush specialist at defensive end and they could look like the Ravens of 2000. Bringing a pass-rush with the front four allows guys like Arrington, Washington, Pierce, Springs, and Taylor to create turnovers by ballhawking instead of pass-rushing.

Ultimately, when you think about it, we're not far from playoff contention. So let's not dismantle the team, go on another free agency spending spree, and irrationally talk-down our current roster after talking them up so much this past offseason.

holla

I predicted 10-6 or possibly 11-5 before the season because I expected a much better level of play from the team in terms of eliminating the boneheadeed mistakes that had plagued the Redskins for about the past 4 years.

That didn't happen. AND, Mark Brunell was worse than anyone could have imagined.

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]I predicted 10-6 or possibly 11-5 before the season because I expected a much better level of play from the team in terms of eliminating the boneheadeed mistakes that had plagued the Redskins for about the past 4 years.

That didn't happen. AND, Mark Brunell was worse than anyone could have imagined.[/QUOTE]



His statement could match exactly waht I would tell you. I said that type of record before the season, and outside of the Brunell fiasco, I really dont know what happend. I never expected this level of play from our defense. And seirously, I thought we might have the best offense in the league this year. I was wrong, but I'm still here.

Deep down in my heart I was hoping for 8-8 realistically, and in the best case scenario with no injuries at our best 9-7.............Injuries to Arrington and Jansen hurt us who know what would happen if these guys had been healthy AND Ramsey started at QB.............

[QUOTE=Ramseyfan]I personally think we are 1-2 players away from having an excellent roster. Get a solid, new run-blocking center and tight end on offense and we could put up monster numbers with the right play-calling. I have no doubt that a guy like former-USC wideout Mike Williams could bring a lot to our offense, but we have Gibbs, not Spurrier at the helm. We need help with our run-blocking. Getting Williams when we have such poor run-blocking in a Gibbs-run offense is like buying $5,000 rims and sweet hydraulics for a car with no engine - it looks cool, but it doesn't make the car run.[QUOTE]

The reason Dan Snyder is criticized is because you could make the argument that we were 1-2 players short of an excellent roster in 1999 - and that team made the playoffs - what did Snyder do?...bring in Bruce, Deion and Jeff George? We would've made the playoffs under Marty if Snyder had given him a chance. Run blocking was superb under Marty with Samuels, Jansen and a couple of old vets on the O-line. We didn't even have Dockery or Thomas. What does Snyder do?..fire Marty after a year in which we went 8-3 in our last 11 games, and that too with a no name QB like Banks.

People have now backed off criticizing Snyder because he's ceded control over personnel decisions to Gibbs. Snyder/Cerrato are only responsible to the extent that they've handed out ridiculously generous contracts to Brunell and Portis.

Back to your argument: There's no reason why we can't get all three - Mike Williams, an excellent run blocking center, and a blocking TE. You're a salary cap doomsdayer - taking into consideration that there will be a 4 million increase in the cap next year, and a further increase after the new TV deal in 2006, we can easily afford a Mike Williams.

As for your "car with no engine analogy", the QB is the engine of the offense (playcalling acting as the fuel) - so saying that our offense is a car with no engine doesn't speak too well of your boy Ramsey. I for one think you're exactly right - our car doesn't have an engine - Ramsey is overrated - he lacks accuracy, anticipation, and doesn't see the field well. I'll happily eat those words if Ramsey dazzles us next year, but pardon me for being skeptical after seeing the 3rd year vet struggle.

I'm with you in that I don't see a need for a complete overhaul of the team, but we need better play at O-line, QB & WR.

How often does a head coach doubling as GM work out? Very rarely. That scares me.

It's also hard to judge Ramsey who's played through 25 games now? In two different systems? Give him some time.

I predicted either 10-6 or 9-7. Don't remember. I can't think of a single person on this board, except LAHOF73 who isn't disappointed with the skins season.

I definitely thought we would go at least 10-6.....I didn't expect us to have the season we have went through, but looking back on it, it probably was too much to expect a 10-6 record after installing a new system and a new coach that hasn't been in the league in about 12 years. I think Gibbs will fair much better next year.

Hurrykaine,

You want better play at WR, QB, and O-line. So basically you want a whole new offense? What exactly would you like to see? As has been pointed out, Ramsey ran for his life his first two years when he was in and has been mostly efficient this year. Under a new system he had a QB rating of 83 in his starts until this past weekend.

I don't think either INT in last Sunday's game showed a serious lapse in judgment. His first INT was all on Kozlowski. His second INT looked like it was either the result of Coles slipping or a miscommunication. I don't completely absolve Ramsey of either pick, but I don't think he's been piss poor.

Also, I stand by the observation I made in Week 3 that this offense is vanilla, predictable, doesn't work, and needs serious "fine-tuning." So I don't think Ramsey is the engine; Gibbs is.

I like your argument that I am a salary cap doomsdayer. So if we don't resign Smoot, does that mean that Gibbs is a friggin moron? I mean, we don't have any salary cap issues (according to you) and Smoot wants to be here. So, as long as Gibbs wants Smoot here, he'll be here right? If he's gone are you prepared to rail Gibbs?

Yes, I'm one of those fans who thought we would go 10-6. But I'm not criticizing now. I'm not nearly smart enough to say what should be done to fix things. I only know that I'm sick about how our season progressed (or rather DIDN'T progress) and, once again, I'm looking forward to next year. It seems like I've been doing that for a lot of years now. But in my humble opinion, I think Gibbs needed a year to get comfortable with all of the changes. I do think he will be able to learn and adapt and that we will be much improved next year. I've been a loyal Redskins fan for about 50 years, and I'll stick with them, win or lose.

I thought 10-6 was a possibility, but I also thought realistically 8-8 or 9-7 were more likely. I really wasn't expecting double digit losses, that's for sure. If you look back on the season we had a handful of games that really could have gone our way to get us to 8-8, but as they say, shoulda, coulda, woulda...

I am one! The offense didn't progress like I thought and the inconsistency of the coaching caused WAY more problems than anything I ever imagined. I am still loyal and will always be loyal win or lose.

Smoot will leave because the front office are a bunch of friggin idiots when it comes to keeping the best players on the team (Stephen Davis, Champ Bailey to name a few). Gibbs will need to fine tune (blow up) his offense and come up with some new ideas. If Smoot leaves that will change the draft dramatically from offense to defensive back so we will just have to wait and see what happens.

Should be an interesting off season.....aren't they all???????

I thought 9-7 but figured that 1 game plus or minus was a possibility. 5-11 never entered my mind. I think if we were all told in August that we would have the #2 defense in the league we would have spent the last few months trying to get our hands on Super Bowl tickets...

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]I predicted 10-6 or possibly 11-5 before the season because I expected a much better level of play from the team in terms of eliminating the boneheadeed mistakes that had plagued the Redskins for about the past 4 years.

That didn't happen. AND, Mark Brunell was worse than anyone could have imagined.[/QUOTE]

I thought the same thing-we wouldn't beat ourselves and Brunell would have a bit of a revival here.

To respond to the rest of your email, I do not want this team dismantled. The only rant I fess up to is that I do want Coles replaced as the #1 WR and if I end up wrong on that i will admit it. I want few additions elsewhere except in the offensive line and defensive line. I would like the Skins to have Mike Williams, but if they can get a dominating lineman instead I will be happy as a pig in sh*t with that...

IMO perhaps the biggest need on the team is a new starting center, but they are generally drafted much lower than the top 10 of round #1. And I agree that if you gave Greg Williams a dominant pass rushing end the results could be devastating for the rest of the NFC East...

Looking back I don't think that I would have changed my preseason prediction of 9-6 or better. We are 5-9 now and could win this game. Even with a lose, I thought that we would beat the Brown, Bengals, Cowboys (one time), and Giants (both times). Brunnel cost us a few, but I saw the preseason and I really don't think that Ramsey was ready for Gibbs system early in the year. Unfortunatley, Brunnel wasn't ready for any system. OK, with the games that we did win, and the games I expected to win, we would be 9-6. Any upsets (Packers, Viks, Ravens) would put us at 10 or more wins.

One thing that would have helped us would have been to play some of the really tough games early in the year (Pittsburg, Philly) to give Gibbs a little trial by fire.

We were in every game this year and except for a couple of games, a couple of penalties or plays would have changed the outcome of the game and we would be going to the playoffs. Even with the season going badly, I think that I feel better about the Skins than I have in a while.

I believe I had the skins having atleast a 10-6 record, if not better, but I never thought in a million years that any professional qb with the production Mark Brunnel has had could play so terribly. Injuries and blown calls were out of the hands of the team but the pathetic playcalling and clock management was a problem all season long. I don't think it's as ludicrious(Sp?) as some people are making it seem to try and upgrade at a couple positions on the offense if it's possible because the offense was our obvious achilles heel. Whether it be a more modern offensive cordinator or a playmaking wr or an upgrade or 2 on the o-line or not handing the starting qb job to a player that hasn't truly shown that he is deserving of a 100% gurantee of said job next season, something needs to be done to the offense and hoping that another year with the same players under the same system will make it all better is highly unlikely. I also remember I was one of the few people before the beginning of the season who said Greg Williams could take the players we have on defense and make it a pretty darn good one, and he did it without any super stud d-lineman(although if griffin plays like this next year, he'll move into that category) and 2 of our best linebackers. I love Smoot and hope that he stays, but from the rumors about what he's asking for, nobody can be making it seem like Gibbs and Snyder are the only ones who might be a little less than comprimising.
Sure some people are taking their fantasy fix up job of the team to a bit of an extreme but all of us just want the team to be better practically by any way possible.

I was one who thought we'd be better than 10-6. Why, are you handing out demerits?

[QUOTE=frogprincess]Yes, I'm one of those fans who thought we would go 10-6. But I'm not criticizing now. I'm not nearly smart enough to say what should be done to fix things. I only know that I'm sick about how our season progressed (or rather DIDN'T progress) and, once again, I'm looking forward to next year. It seems like I've been doing that for a lot of years now. But in my humble opinion, I think Gibbs needed a year to get comfortable with all of the changes. I do think he will be able to learn and adapt and that we will be much improved next year. I've been a loyal Redskins fan for about 50 years, and I'll stick with them, win or lose.[/QUOTE]

You and I are in complete agreement. That's exatly why I don't want wholesale changes to our roster.

[QUOTE=celts32]To respond to the rest of your email, I do not want this team dismantled. The only rant I fess up to is that I do want Coles replaced as the #1 WR and if I end up wrong on that i will admit it. I want few additions elsewhere except in the offensive line and defensive line. I would like the Skins to have Mike Williams, but if they can get a dominating lineman instead I will be happy as a pig in sh*t with that...

IMO perhaps the biggest need on the team is a new starting center, but they are generally drafted much lower than the top 10 of round #1. And I agree that if you gave Greg Williams a dominant pass rushing end the results could be devastating for the rest of the NFC East...[/QUOTE]

I definately agree with you about the new center. Fair enough re: Coles. I can understand why people want help at WR, I just strongly disagree with that.

[QUOTE=GoSkins!]
We were in every game this year and except for a couple of games, a couple of penalties or plays would have changed the outcome of the game and we would be going to the playoffs. Even with the season going badly, I think that I feel better about the Skins than I have in a while.[/QUOTE]

So if we were just a few plays away from a completely different record, is it wise to dismantle the offense?

"You want better play at WR, QB, and O-line. So basically you want a whole new offense? What exactly would you like to see?"

No, you misunderstand. The offensive playbook fundamentally stays the same (running to set up the pass), but with a lot more 3 receiver sets, downfield passing (instead of short screens). I'd use the analogy of switching from regular fuel to premium (instead of the engine analogy). If that means getting 3 new offensive players ( 2 linemen and a WR), then so be it. The core - Portis, Ramsey, Jansen, Thomas, Cooley, LC stay the same. But there better be improvement in offensive execution.

"I don't think either INT in last Sunday's game showed a serious lapse in judgment. His first INT was all on Kozlowski. His second INT looked like it was either the result of Coles slipping or a miscommunication. I don't completely absolve Ramsey of either pick, but I don't think he's been piss poor."

When was the last time you saw Ramsey hit a receiver in stride for a TD, or a big gain?
When was the last time you saw him throw a slant for a completion?
When was the last time you saw him throw a fade into the endzone?
Has Ramsey ever engineered a come from behind win?
Have you ever seen him win the game for us with 2 minutes remaining?

He's not piss poor, but he's not that great, either. This far he's been average in the NFL. People are rightly excited by his big arm, but this far he hasn't lived up to the upside everyone said he has. So pardon me for not being too high on him. The only reason I'd want Ramsey here next season is for the sake of continuity (and that's it). You can defend his INTs all you want, but Ramsey and Coles have played together the better part of 2 seasons and 2 training camps - and they hooked up a hell of a lot better last year than this year.

"I like your argument that I am a salary cap doomsdayer. So if we don't resign Smoot, does that mean that Gibbs is a friggin moron? I mean, we don't have any salary cap issues (according to you) and Smoot wants to be here. So, as long as Gibbs wants Smoot here, he'll be here right? If he's gone are you prepared to rail Gibbs?"

Wrong, and wrong. You jump to extremes like its all black and white. There's a big middle ground between cap hell and cap heaven. We're not in cap hell because of the increases in the cap forthcoming in the next 2 years. However, I do have complaints about how our cap is being used...like Brunell's expensive deal, dead money from former redskins, etc. Does this constrain us from pursuing a Dwight Freeney? - sure it does! But it DOES NOT, I repeat, DOES NOT prevent us from resigning Smootie, Pierce, a high draft pick, and a couple of Free agent O-linemen.

I don't talk about things in black and white like a moron hurrykaine. You are the one who said I was a salary cap doomsdayer (talk about black and white).

I don't understand how the salary cap affects our ability to sign free agents, but it doesn't affect our ability to re-sign players. You have some splaining to do hurrykaine.

yeah you kinda lost me on your cap math, hurrykaine.

We can't pursue Freeney, but we can sign a #1 pick, our own free agents, and a couple of FA lineman?

Ramseyfan:

Tony Kornheiser had it right when he wrote about how silly it was for Skins' fans to delude themselves into believing that the offense was just ever so short of being able to have this team in the playoffs. As he said, "if the Skins had scored 20 point per game..." is like saying " if my grandmother had wheels she'd be a bicycle". Then he said the simplest and most profound thing of all:

The Redskins did not score 20 points in any game - save one now - because they weren't able to do it. Not being able to do it means they are not good enough to do it. They were TRYING to score and the defenses they played were able to prevent them from doing it. That means:


The 2004 Washington Redskins' offense is not good enough to be carried forward into 2005. That will give you the same results.


The Ravens won a Super Bowl with a great defense. The Bucs won a Super Bowl with a great defense. The Panthers got to the Super Bowl with a great defense. But all of those teams had offenses that although they were below average, they were still good enough to score sufficient points to be able to utilize the defensive strengths of the team.

The 2004 Washington Redskins' offense played with a defense that was in the top 5 in the league all year long but the offense could not muster enough points to win all the games when the defense held the opponent under 14 points. The word you are looking for to describe such an offesne is:

a. substandard
b. unacceptable
c. insufficient
d. incapable

or my favorite:

e. all of the above

The offense certainly was awful SC. I don't differ with you on that point. I don't think the offense is as bad as people think. I think a few small roster changes and a few changes to the playbook (not philosophy) will result in dramatic improvements.

[QUOTE=Ramseyfan]The offense certainly was awful SC. I don't differ with you on that point. I don't think the offense is as bad as people think. I think a few small roster changes and a few changes to the playbook (not philosophy) will result in dramatic improvements.[/QUOTE]

I agree not a dismantling just a tweaking of personnel on offense and the return of a healthy Jansen will help tremendously......I think we need a new center.......and for how long can you rely on 42 year old lineman Ray Brown....I think we need to cut Gardner and draft a WR AFTER a DE and upgrading the line...........Gibbs opened it up against the Vikings and I think this is a taste of good things to come in 2005!

We're definitely not going to blow up the offensive personnel, we've made some gradual progress over the course of the season and we just need to add a few guys here and there, tweak the offensive schemes and continue to grow next year.