turtle28 Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 14 hours ago, Thaiphoon said: vs SF Week 7 I’m marking that one down as an L there butch! Lol 😂 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 1 hour ago, RSkinGM said: Not one 4 o'clock game --incredible . Maybe we get flexed ! They don't usually flex to 4. That's usually reserved for SNF games. And to be fair, why should Washington get a nationally televised game? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostnote Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 7 minutes ago, turtle28 said: Ehhh... that’s what they call NOT good! Philadelphia opens as 8-point favorite over Washington, Week 1's biggest spread https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/04/18/philadelphia-opens-as-8-point-favorite-over-washington-week-1s-biggest-spread/ via @ProFootballTalk Um, that is a small favorite. I expected at least double digits. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, mike23md said: Who in the blue hell are our playmakers? And dont feed me predictions or prior year stats of 1 year wonderkins. We don't have any playmakers on offense that can stay consistent or stay on the field. NONE. Well there’s a distinction to be made between having playmakers and not. We have playmakers, they just haven’t been able to stay healthy, that being said we do have them. And for the love of god I know that they haven’t stayed healthy I’m conceding that fac, obviously! Still to just blanketly say the Redskins don’t have playmakers isn’t true either: 1. Peterson 2. Reed 3. CT 4. Davis 5. Guice 6. PRich and; 7. Doctson who flashed as playmaker in 2017 when Kirk was here. So we have guys with potential here as playmakers. We just need them to either stay healthy or to finally step up and be consistent. We also haven’t had the draft yet. We could draft a WR who comes in as a rookie and impresses or Quinn could actually be what some think he can he and be a good to great slot WR for us this year. Now will they? That’s anyone’s guess. My guess is that they won’t step up and our offense will only be average or perhaps worse but there is always a possibility that they do. Like 1 in a million??? .... so you’re telling me there’s a chance! Yeah!! Edited April 18, 2019 by turtle28 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 29 minutes ago, turtle28 said: But it’s the 32nd ranked schedule in the NFL! That’s all I’ve heard from beat reporters and talking heads on the radio for the last two days! It was the 32nd ranked schedule back at the end of December. We knew who Washington was going to be playing and where as soon as the season ended. The question was when. On that front, that's how the schedulers screwed the team. 31 minutes ago, turtle28 said: Do they not understand that last years records don’t mean diddly poo! Disagree here. Last year's record isn't a surefire guarantor of this year's performance, but it is a good general marker. Yes, there are teams like the Jaguars who win seven more games the following season (2017), but they usually lapse (like they did in 2018). There's a reason why teams like New England and New Orleans are projected for division championships this coming season. The talent and coaching (which don't generally change on most teams over a four month period, even with free agency) showed what teams did last year. Projecting from that (and accounting for injuries) gives a sense of the strength of the schedules. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 Just now, mike23md said: 8 minutes ago, turtle28 said: Ehhh... that’s what they call NOT good! Philadelphia opens as 8-point favorite over Washington, Week 1's biggest spread https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/04/18/philadelphia-opens-as-8-point-favorite-over-washington-week-1s-biggest-spread/ via @ProFootballTalk Um, that is a small favorite. I expected at least double digits. Especially in Philly. A standard line is -3 for the home team. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 8 minutes ago, turtle28 said: Still to just blankety say the Redskins don’t have playmakers isn’t true either: Peterson CT Guice Reed Davis PRich and; Doctson who flashed as playmaker in 2017 when Kirk was here. As much as I like Guice as a person, we have no idea what he is as a professional football player. Also, the concept of a "playmaker" requires the player to ... well, make plays. That requires a high level of consistency and reliability. Flashes don't count. If you are not on the field, you cannot by definition make plays. Most of the guys you listed there have talent, but if they cannot stay on the field or cannot do more than flash, they aren't playmakers. They're just players. You remember the glory days, turtle. You know who are playmakers in the past were. Why are guys like Monk venerated? Because when the chips were down, he was going to catch that ball and get you that necessary yardage. It wasn't a question of if, but when. When the team was a bit listless, who was on the sidelines getting them fired up and then would go blow the top off the coverage? Gary Clark. The Hogs were so sure of their abilities (not just talent but execution) that they'd tell defensive linemen the counter trey was coming right at them ... and still blow through them. Those are playmakers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 2 minutes ago, Woz said: It was the 32nd ranked schedule back at the end of December. We knew who Washington was going to be playing and where as soon as the season ended. The question was when. On that front, that's how the schedulers screwed the team. Disagree here. Last year's record isn't a surefire guarantor of this year's performance, but it is a good general marker. Yes, there are teams like the Jaguars who win seven more games the following season (2017), but they usually lapse (like they did in 2018). There's a reason why teams like New England and New Orleans are projected for division championships this coming season. The talent and coaching (which don't generally change on most teams over a four month period, even with free agency) showed what teams did last year. Projecting from that (and accounting for injuries) gives a sense of the strength of the schedules. True, but just take the Jets for example. I heard EB on the Junkies this morning list teams like the Jets as teams we will beat bc they were and last year, or the Bills, 49ers, Dolphins and Lions. I sit and look at our roster and then thing about what those teams did in free agency or how our team - at least on paper - looks worse than last year and think that we aren’t beating these teams. Heck, we beat Green Bay last year with Alex Smith! I don’t see us beating Green Bay in Green Bay in December this year, I just don’t. I think this is going to be a rough year and we are going to be lucky to get to 7 wins. Then, Gruden will get fired so a good portion of the team will be changed around along with the offensive and defensive schemes so in 2020 and 2021 we’re likely looking and double digit loss seasons too as the entire coaching staff, philosophies, roster etc is retooled and rebuilt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 Just now, Woz said: As much as I like Guice as a person, we have no idea what he is as a professional football player. Also, the concept of a "playmaker" requires the player to ... well, make plays. That requires a high level of consistency and reliability. Flashes don't count. If you are not on the field, you cannot by definition make plays. Most of the guys you listed there have talent, but if they cannot stay on the field or cannot do more than flash, they aren't playmakers. They're just players. You remember the glory days, turtle. You know who are playmakers in the past were. Why are guys like Monk venerated? Because when the chips were down, he was going to catch that ball and get you that necessary yardage. It wasn't a question of if, but when. When the team was a bit listless, who was on the sidelines getting them fired up and then would go blow the top off the coverage? Gary Clark. The Hogs were so sure of their abilities (not just talent but execution) that they'd tell defensive linemen the counter trey was coming right at them ... and still blow through them. Those are playmakers. Again, not disagreeing but also saying that it’s not true to say that we don’t have them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 8 minutes ago, turtle28 said: So we have guys with potential here as playmakers. We just need them to either stay healthy or to finally step up and be consistent. We also haven’t had the draft yet. We could draft a WR who comes in as a rookie and impresses or Quinn could actually be what some think he can he and be a good to great slot WR for us this year. Now will they? That’s anyone’s guess. My guess is that they won’t step up and our offense will only be average or perhaps worse but there is always a possibility that they do. Like 1 in a million??? .... so you’re telling me there’s a chance! Yeah!! This is more honest. Could they become playmakers? Some of them, sure (Davis and Peterson were playmakers and are at the end of their respective careers). But the smart money (and hence the assertion that we have none) says that they are who they are. Just now, turtle28 said: Again, not disagreeing but also saying that it’s not true to say that we don’t have them. And you flipped back to saying they exist. There is just potential right now. Potential =/= actually existing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 1 minute ago, Woz said: This is more honest. Could they become playmakers? Some of them, sure (Davis and Peterson were playmakers and are at the end of their respective careers). But the smart money (and hence the assertion that we have none) says that they are who they are. And you flipped back to saying they exist. There is just potential right now. Potential =/= actually existing They exist bc they’re on the roster and they do have talent, ugh! That doesn’t mean I actually believe they’re going to all stay healthy all year and have break out seasons or career years. Sometimes I hate this place bc it’s too hard to explain in written words what I’m actually trying to say. It’d be much easier if we were talking in person and of course, most assume I’m trying to say something totally different than what I’m actually trying to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 2 minutes ago, turtle28 said: True, but just take the Jets for example. I heard EB on the Junkies this morning list teams like the Jets as teams we will beat bc they were and last year, or the Bills, 49ers, Dolphins and Lions. Because EB is a fan who has a radio show. At the same time, those are teams who were not good last year and in theory are at about the same tier of overall talent as Washington. 3 minutes ago, turtle28 said: I sit and look at our roster and then thing about what those teams did in free agency or how our team - at least on paper - looks worse than last year and think that we aren’t beating these teams. Heck, we beat Green Bay last year with Alex Smith! I don’t see us beating Green Bay in Green Bay in December this year, I just don’t. *scratches head* Who did the Bills, 49ers, Dolphins, Jets, and Lions add that make you think they jumped way higher than they were? Big signings are (more than $5M AAV): Bills = Mitch Morse, Cole Beasley, John Brown, Tyler Kroft, Ty Nsekhe Detroit = Trey Flowers, Justin Coleman, Jesse James Miami = Ryan Fitzpatrick NY Jets = C.J. Mosley, Le'Veon Bell, Jamison Crowder San Francisco = Kwon Alexander (Tevin Coleman AAV at $4.25M) So, I can understand the Jets, but the others? I suspect a lot of teams didn't expect to beat the Packers last year ... then Aaron Rodgers got hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e16bball Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 I don’t think it’s that tough a schedule. New England is the only true elite team we’ll play — managed to avoid the likes of NO, LAR, KC, etc. We get the AFC East, which aside from NE is very weak. We’ll at least be a toss up in each of the other 3 out-of-conference games. We get the NFC North, which doesn’t have any weak teams but also doesn’t have any great teams. Chicago is tough, but the rest seem likely to be pretty much middle-tier teams. They’ll have a fair chance in all 3 of those games. They got SF and Carolina as their “wild card” games. Both are potential wins. They get SF at home, so they’ll have to travel cross-country and play at 10am their time. They get Carolina as the road game, which is a short trip and one of the league’s weaker home field advantages. Both winnable games. Most importantly, the NFC East isn’t great. NYG are kind of a mess right now, and they’re apparently going all in on their plan to fashion themselves a running team in a passing league. Will Dallas’s defense come back to earth after a great season that exceeded all expectations? If so, they’re pretty mediocre. Will the Eagles bounce back with Wentz likely healthier? Probably, but it won’t be Napoleon Dynamite coming off the bench if he gets hurt again. I think they’ll win a couple games in the division. It’s not a cupcake schedule. But they drew the weakest division in the AFC and (arguably at least) the two weakest divisions in the NFC. It looks like a lot of toss-up games to me — very few obvious advantages for us, but also not many teams who will just outclass us. Schedule evaluation at this stage means only just a hair more than nothing, but I’d say it looks like 6.5 wins or so. I actually wish it was more difficult 🤷🏻♂️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 1 minute ago, turtle28 said: They exist bc they’re on the roster and they do have talent, ugh! They exist and have talent as players. That is not in question. But if they're not reliable and consistent, they cannot be playmakers. Those three extra letters are what we are talking about. 3 minutes ago, turtle28 said: That doesn’t mean I actually believe they’re going to all stay healthy all year and have break out seasons or career years. And that's fine. With the exception of Guice (and even there I'm hesitant due to recovering from the knee injury), I'm doubting any of them do more than what they've done in the past couple of seasons. That means Peterson and Davis will be good pieces, and Reed will have some great performances. But by and large, the team won't be able to count on them. 4 minutes ago, turtle28 said: Sometimes I hate this place bc it’s too hard to explain in written words what I’m actually trying to say. It’d be much easier if we were talking in person and of course, most assume I’m trying to say something totally different than what I’m actually trying to say. You are the one conflating "guys on the roster with talent" with "playmakers." We both agree that guys in the first column could make it to the second column. Speaking only for myself, I don't think any of them do, whereas you tend to be more optimistic. Nothing wrong with that, but it is where the difference of opinion comes from. I hope this explains where I think the difference between you and others on the board is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woz Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 1 minute ago, e16bball said: It’s not a cupcake schedule. But they drew the weakest division in the AFC and (arguably at least) the two weakest divisions in the NFC. It looks like a lot of toss-up games to me — very few obvious advantages for us, but also not many teams who will just outclass us. Schedule evaluation at this stage means only just a hair more than nothing, but I’d say it looks like 6.5 wins or so. I actually wish it was more difficult 🤷🏻♂️ If the team didn't have substantial holes/questions at multiple positions, they could take advantage of the schedule. Unfortunately, that isn't the case, and I'm dubious of the front office being able to fill those holes (or if they even think they are holes). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.