Robert Griffin III may want a new head coach and a new offensive coordinator in 2014. Being careful with my words here, I stress the MAY part.
I strongly believe he does, but that is just my opinion. As I've said many times, I also feel that Mike and Kyle Shanahan should be back for one more year, as they are part of the problem, but not THE problem in my eyes.
Griffin said all the right things on Wednesday but you have to wonder how sincere it really was considering all of the tension and friction that has been simmering, if not boiling behind the scenes here at Redskins Park.
“I think these guys (the coaches) have a great future. I love having them here and that’s all I can say. We’re focused on Kansas City, they’re focused on Kansas City and that’s all we can control.”
That all sounds great if you just read the quote, or hear him say it. However, does he tell Dan Snyder and Bruce Allen exactly that when they inevitably ask him for his opinion or thoughts?
Does he even get asked or do they already know that the relationship between this group is broken beyond true repair?
Griffin III could have easily said "I believe in Mike and Kyle Shanahan. I trust them," or something similar. He chose not to do that. That's his right, but it would have been a much needed dose of good public will to a franchise that was sitting on top of a big oak tree at the end of last season, fell off and got punched by every branch on the way down.
“I think everyone’s going to have an opinion and it’s an outside opinion. Only the people that are inside – us, coaches, anybody else in the organization – knows what goes on around here. Whenever you have a year like we’re having, sitting at 3-9 when we had higher hopes and higher expectations, people are going to try to sink the ship. Our job is not to focus on that stuff, so I personally just focus on Kansas City.”
Without trying to read between the lines, it would have been and will continue to be in Robert Griffin III's best interests to publicly, strongly support his two top coaches. Even if it is only for good public relations, you can always voice your thoughts and opinions privately.
Griffin will not come out of this looking awful, no matter what the situation really is. That's because the team has miserably underachieved and I would say roughly eight-out-of-ten Redskins fans that I see and have communication with, are fed up with the Shanahans and the entire coaching staff.
“I think whenever you have competitors like us, losing can be tough. But at the end of the day, just like when I came in here, me, Coach, Kyle, all the rest of the coaches and all the rest of the players, we all want to win. That’s a winning recipe whether you’re doing it on the field or not. So that’s the way I look at it. We’re all competitors. We all get heated at times, but at the end of the day, we all want to win," Griffin III said.
There's nobody that doubts just that, but only somebody that is totally naive would believe that the impending situation is just about wanting to win. Everybody wants to win. Griffin has to feel comfortable. He has to believe, he has to trust.
“As much as it can develop in a year-and-a-half, two-year span. I haven’t spent a lot of time here, obviously. I haven’t spent a lot of time in the league. It takes time to build that trust over time with a coach anytime,” Griffin said on Wednesday when asked about that trust level he's built.
Here is a more than fair and relevant question that I haven't heard anybody really address or talk about in this form. Mike and Kyle Shanahan have both stressed that the reason for Griffin's struggles this year is directly linked to his lack of an off-season while recovering from his multiple ligament knee surgeries.
Totally fair in my eyes. NO doubt, you grow significantly as a player during the off-season, especially as a quarterback that is in transition. Say Griffin III gets that opportunity this upcoming winter and is able to make it out of the next four games, with his health intact.
Would he truly be able to reap that benefit IF Griffin III has to learn a completely new system of offense and entirely new set of terminology? Think about that. Instead of only getting more comfortable and capitalizing on two years of experience, Griffin III would now be charged with learning a different 'language' with different instructors. He would also be facing changes at wide receiver and on the offensive line at the very minimum.
Griffin still might have to go through just that after 2014, but at least nobody can say that both sides did not try to make it work. He would then have to learn that different system. However, his growth curve would be much different. He would be able to go thru this winter refining what he already knows. Then, assuming there would be a change at the end of 2014, he can focus on a new language and system, instead of doing both with his head swimming.
It takes time to develop relationships. It takes time to build trust. Griffin can work on that, and improving his game starting this January IF he goes to Dan Snyder and Bruce Allen and says the relationship can work and work well for at least one more year.
The Baltimore Ravens fired Cam Cameron as their offensive coordinator last December 10th, a day after the Ravens lost to the Redskins. They replaced him with then quarterbacks coach and former Colts Head Coach, Jim Caldwell. The result? Somehow, Joe Flacco eventually got on an Eli Manning like late December tear and rode that wave to a Super Bowl and a monster contract.
It was known that Cameron and Flacco did not have a great relationship for several years, dating back (at least) to Flacco having a close working relationship with former Redskins Head Coach, Jim Zorn. The Ravens gambled and won. One thing that did not change for such success? Terminology. System. The backbone of the Ravens offensive foundation.
Things were tweaked no doubt. Some things and principles were altered. However, game plans were not drastically altered at that junction of the season. Which brings us to another point. In a recent Washington Post column by Mike Wise, sources apparently on Griffin's side ( his family) expressed frustration or anger over the play-calling of Kyle Shanahan after the initial injury in that Baltimore game.
In a accusation that must be taken seriously , Wise notes "The source of the Griffins’ discontent over the whole episode wasn’t that a gimpy Robert was allowed to continue playing, especially because he did everything but beg to be on the field; no, it was the play-calling of Kyle Shanahan, the team’s offensive coordinator and Mike’s son, after Griffin was first hurt that they felt put him at further risk."
If you go back to watch the coaches tape for those final three games of Griffin's rookie year, it is clear that a couple of instances could serve as the fuel to this fire. However, overall - and this is important in my eyes after going back and watching a lot of the game tape from those three contests this week - it is extremely hard for me to see where Kyle Shanahan or Mike, put Robert Griffin III in a bad situation.
Systems can NOT be altered significantly at that time of the year. You've been working it all year and practicing it all year. That affects everyone. Of course you tweak and manipulate, but you do not make a dramatic overhaul to a scheme that had put the Redskins at the top of the NFL in many statistical categories during a week leading up to a game. You just don't.
Kyle Shanahan's reaction when I asked him on Thursday? “I didn’t feel that at all,” Shanahan said. “We don’t just do stuff that you don’t think someone can do.”
One thing that did stick out, true or not, was Kyle's overall thought about moving forward with Robert Griffin III. "Robert is a franchise quarterback. He’s a great quarterback, and he’s going to have a hell of a career, and I love coaching him. It’s been fun.”
It would be wise for Robert Griffin III to buy into that for at least one more year. It would be a move in the best interests of the franchise, his career and Dan Snyder's bank account.
The Washington Redskins are beyond a struggling team right now. In a nutshell, they are bad team that tries really hard and comes up short in roughly eight-out-of-ten areas on a weekly basis.
Many fans and some media feel they are poorly coached. If your main definition of that is their (3-9) record, that's your choice. However, they were not poorly coached last year at (10-6) and winners of the NFC East - so somehow Mike Shanahan, Kyle Shanahan, Jim Haslett and the rest of the coaching staff became a bunch of dummies with the snap of a finger.
If your criticism revolves around the lack of progression by Robert Griffin III, and the usage or lack there of when it comes to Alfred Morris. You have a point. If you are going to sandblast a defense that is consistently asked to clean up the carnage, that's where we strongly disagree. If you are going to blame the coaching staff for players taking undisciplined penalties, again I would ask what coaching staff can MAKE players not lose their cool or control of THEIR emotions?
You can point to Bill Belichick all you want as an example of a coach who breeds discipline, but for every Belichick - I show you the Oakland Raiders who have historically taken dumb penalty after dumb penalty. No matter who the coach is.
Just to provide an example, the Tampa Bay Bucs with a hard nosed, disciplinarian in Greg Schiano lead the NFL with 98 penalties. They have a losing record, but that's not because of penalties. Guess who is # 2 and # 3?
The two best teams in the league. Seattle (11-1) has committed 95 penalties, while Denver (10-2) has been guilty of 90 according to NFL.com statistics. The Redskins have 75.
To illustrate the point further, the Super Bowl Champion Baltimore Ravens had the 2nd most penalties in 2012 on their way to the top of the mountain at 121. The Redskins had the fourth most in the league, and won the NFC East. I know, I know -- they didn't really win the division. It was just a figment of my imagination and they really were a two-win team but because I am a corporate shill - I want your mind to be poisoned.
Oh by the way, for those convinced numbers always fluctuate from year to year, the Seahawks were 6th in the NFL with 110 last year. As a matter of fact, in 2012 - five of the top ten teams in penalties committed made the playoffs.
There is a difference between a dumb penalty and a bad penalty of course, but the thing that is not different - is coaches can not prepare you during the week for the tempers and emotions a game will present. When you have no live tackling, and extremely limited contact and pad work - who would really lose control of their emotions? Don't blame this element on coaches. The NFLPA rules won't allow it.
It's the same reason why Robert Griffin III wasn't ready to play at the beginning of this year. Mike Shanahan knew he wasn't ready, but he really had no choice. At least in my eyes and many others that I talk with inside the walls at Redskins Park. You can't possibly practice and simulate everything that will happen on gameday. The only thing you can hope for is that repetition in a controlled environment gets you more on the right side than the wrong side.
You can't practice players not being hot-heads. Either you are, or you are not. That's personality. Not a coached tool. Mike Shanahan actually went out of his way to defend DeAngelo Hall, Santana Moss and Pierre Garcon on Monday. All three drew penalties for retaliation or acts of frustration in Sunday night's loss to the Giants. Garcon, appeared to have at the very least a mis-communication if not a mistake on his part, that almost cost the Redskins dearly. Clearly he was frustrated and Pierre is a very emotional player.
Shanahan said "he's one of the most fierce competitors I've been around. If I get everybody playing like him, you won't need coaches.” There you have it. A player has a silly reaction, and could have cost his team -- and it is swept under the rug as a tip of the cap. Proves the point. It's not coaching, it is players.
Here is one valid criticism of the coaching staff. Sometimes they fall in love with certain things, and stick with their principles no matter what.
Logan Paulsen is one of the smartest an thoughtful members of the offense. He summed up some of the issues to ESPN.com & ESPN 980's John Keim. "Last year we were able to keep it pretty simple and a lot of basic stuff was very effective for us. This year teams have had a year to look at us and look at that seven-game run and say, ‘This is what they're doing and this is what we need to do to stop them.' So the counter punches to their counter punches are things we have not been able to execute as well."
Paulsen continued "We sit in meetings and see it on tape and say these are the plays we need to get to and these are the plays we need to execute to counteract. We haven't been able to nail that home. It's hard to explain. We rep something all week and we expect a certain coverage and sometimes that look isn't there and we have to get to other things in the progression and other routes have to win that aren't the primary route."
For instance, Kyle Shanahan feels that a true running back screen works great against a pass rushing team that plays soft coverage behind the rush. I can't disagree with that at all, but I would argue that in a league where tackling is at an all-time low (once again you can't practice it) that coverage doesn't always have to be the look you need to run a successful play.
Tackling or the lack of it, is what you need and eventually if you have enough speed and get it right or they get it wrong - boom. It's a perfect way to keep your quarterback in a rhythm and get the ball out of his hands quickly, while also being able to then pick apart the vacancies in the defense in other areas.
As anybody knows, I defend coaches much more than about 98% of the public and media, simply because they do not play the game and they work 110 hours a week. Sure there are great defensive minded coaches who fall into great quarterbacks and have monstrous success (Bill Belichick, Tony Dungy) and then there are coaches that have great defenses and no quarterback (Rex Ryan) or head coaches like Sean Payton that gave Drew Brees a new lease on life and has built a powerhouse offense that is dominant at home, and good but far from great on the road. The Saints defense? Up and down, with a lot of the latter in Payton's tenure.
There are many different philosophies and many different styles. I still believe in the coaching philosophies of Mike Shanahan and this staff. I would make a change at special teams, not because I think Keith Burns is a bad coach - but almost because you are forced to do so. A few of the core players only bought in because they are professionals. Not because they wanted to or liked the philosophies.
I don't agree with a lot of things Mike Shanahan says or does, but I am still of the belief that you have much less risk if you stay the course, as opposed to blowing up the foundation at Redskins Park.
I believe you point the finger elsewhere. Not just in one spot. Sorry kids, but Jon Gruden or some hot shot coordinator might have temporary success, but long term success is really hard to achieve and Shanahan's experience and philosophy still gives this team their best chance to succeed.
Will there be a year number five? It is becoming harder and harder to justify it for many reasons. I would say my current position is that Bruce Allen and Dan Snyder pull the plug, BUT if I was making the decision, I would give Shanahan one final year (as he was promised) to fix the mess.
Chris Russell -- SFTheRooster@Yahoo.com -- www.twitter.com/russellmania980
The Washington Redskins are (3-8) and get a primetime showcase to either keep their extremely remote playoff chances alive against a team that is better than them in the standings, the New York Giants (4-7). It is the first time the teams have met this year and it has been almost a full calender year before the two squads shared the same gridiron. The two division rivals played two terrific games last year, and this year could be playing in two games that mean absolutely nothing.
I have a feeling it will be a very dis-interesting December 29th at MetLife Stadium as the clubs finish out the regular season.
Either way, we will have pre-game coverage for you that begins at 4:30 on ESPN 980 AM, 94.3/92.7 FM, ESPN980.com and Audio Now at (832) 999-1980. The game doesn't start until about 830 so make sure you bring some toothpicks to keep your eye-lids open. This will be the Redskins fifth regular season primetime game, and eighth game this season played under the lights including the preseason schedule. As you know, they are a robust (0-4) on the primetime stage.
With that as our scene-setter, let's go "Inside the Numbers" for this epic battle of two teams that have crapped their pants more than a six month old on stewed carrots overload.
I. The Mike Shanahan era in Washington has not produced enough wins. That is indisputable. What are the reasons for it? That's in every way debatable. As you know by now, the Redskins are (3-8) this year, and when you combine that with (6-10), (5-11) and (10-6) plus an NFC East Crown - you get a unsavory (24-35) with the one divisional crown and one playoff game.
Before we get to Shanahan's tenure here in Washington (which may be coming to an end), it is often said that Mike Shanahan was nothing without John Elway. He hasn't won a Super Bowl Championship without Elway, so that must mean his success is largely a byproduct of # 7 getting over the top and wanting to go out with the perfect Hollywood ending.
Let's take a closer look. Shanahan took over the Broncos as their Head Coach in 1995 after appearing in three Super Bowls as an assistant and several league championship games. He went (8-8) in his first year with Denver, after a previous top job stint with the Los Angeles Raiders that finished (8-12).
The next three years for Shanahan (with Elway) were (13-3), (12-4) and (14-2) with two Super Bowl titles and a (7-1) playoff record. Shanahan was (47-17) in the regular season, with one of the greatest quarterbacks in NFL history.
Shanahan as we speak going into Sunday Night Football is (170-133) in the regular season as an NFL Head Coach, for 56.1 winning percentage. This is just as a head coach, the numbers are more impressive if you combine his record as an assistant with the Broncos and 49'ers.
Focusing then on the success level of Shanahan without Elway is the purpose of this argument. If you take away his time with Elway, Shanahan is (123 - 116). He is (1-5) in the playoffs without Elway. Obviously not overly impressive on the surface, but I would counter by saying that the best coach of this era - Bill Belichick - is (41-55) in full seasons without Tom Brady as his starting quarterback.
Brady took over in the Patriots magical 2001 season in Week 3, after New England was (0-2) with Drew Bledsoe. The Patriots were (11-5) in 2008, while Brady was injured in the very first game (win vs. Kansas City). In essence, without Brady in games those two years, the Patriots were (10-7). Brady was (11-3) in 2001 and (1-0)in 2008 as the starter.
If you add the (10-7) record for Belichick without Brady in those games to the (41-55) in his stint with the Browns and his first year as head coach in New England, Belichick is (51-62) without Tom Brady as his starting quarterback. Belichick overall in regular season action is (195-104) as the top banana. With Brady, Belichick is (144 - 42) and three Super Bowl Championships.
Is Bill Belichick EVER going to be looked at in any other way other than a coaching genius? Before you scream, no - I am not saying that Shanahan is even on the same neighborhood block as Belichick - but the overall point is this, head coaches are only as good as their quarterbacks make them.
Shanahan's 123 wins without Elway are more than Mike Ditka, Dick Vermeil, George Seifert, John Madden, Tom Flores or the legendary Bill Walsh had in their careers. Of course, not everybody has been a head coach for the same amount of time, but the point still serves.
His winning percentage is 51.4% without Elway as his starting quarterback, which would rate him ahead of Marvin Lewis, Norv Turner, Buddy Ryan, Jim Mora, Jerry Glanville, Herm Edwards, Butch Davis and Jim Schwartz. Again, not elite company by any means but Belichik's winning percentage without Brady is 45.1% which would rank him 114th all time.
The point is for those that argue Shanahan has not been successful since John Elway retired, you have a point. Shanahan has been just above the average mark since that time. Not sure about you, but I'd rather be above average than well below.
The Rest of the Rest
***Speaking of Shanahan, according to Redskins public relations , in his time as an Offensive Coordinator with the San Francisco 49'ers (1992-1994), Head Coach of the Denver Broncos (1995-2008) and his nearly complete four years with the Redskins, Shanahan guided teams have scored 8,136 points in that time span. That's only 2nd to the Green Bay Packers at 8,180 after their loss in Detroit.
So if the Redskins score 44 points tonight, that would vault "Team Shanahan" as Redskins PR calls it into the lead during that 20-year span.
***During that span, "Team Shanahan" leads the NFL in rushing yards with 44,774 and net yards of offense at 124, 215. Shanahan's teams (including the SF stint) ranks fourth in regular season wins and postseason wins during that time as well.
**Per ESPN Stats & Info - 6.79 is the Yards per play-action pass for the Redskins, ranking them 23rd in the NFL. Last season, the Redskins averaged 10.35 yards on such plays, which was second best in the NFL.
***Eli Manning has not had a lot of statistical success against the Redskins in his career. He's 11-6 which is the ultimate goal, but that is about team as opposed to the individual. He's only had two 300-yard passing games with the second one coming last October 21st (337) thanks to that blown coverage and long Victor Cruz touchdown.
He's averaged 33 passing attempts per game in his 17 starts against Washington, with an average of 18.7 completions per game for an average completion percentage of 56.2 % (Career 58.5%). Manning averages 227.4 passing yards per contest against the Redskins and averages 0.82 touchdown passes per contest. He also has thrown 15 interceptions in the 17 games.
This year, Manning is targeting and completing 26.7% (60-851, 4) of his completions to Victor Cruz, 18.8% to impending free agent Hakeem Nicks (42-620, O) and 14.3% to the rising Rueben Randle (32-524, 6 TD). TE Brandon Myers (29-336, 2)had a touchdown last week and he counts for 12.9 %. The Redskins have struggled against tight ends as many defenses do and Myers is a guy who many around the league hold in good regard.
Chris Russell - SFTheRooster@Yahoo.com - www.twitter.com/russellmania980
The Washington Redskins season is officially on life support. Sure they return to a brand new playing surface at FedExField for three home games in a span of 13 days, and theoretically that could provide an injection of juice to a season that is wasting away.
Here's a problem, among many. The wrong team is coming to DC to try and feel good about their chances of winning. You can never rule anything out in this league, but the San Francisco 49'ers are a much better team on both sides of the football than the Redskins are.
Yes they are only (6-4) with tough back to back losses to Carolina and New Orleans, but who are we kidding? The Redskins would not and could not beat either one of those teams this year, either.
Certainly not at the maddening inconsistent level of play by all three phases and units. The offense is just that. Inconsistent and bordering on disaster when it comes to the passing game and the various sub-plots and headstrong individuals that are associated with that side of the ball.
Special teams has been....well to put it kind, anything but special. Essentially, they've been as bad of a unit as you can probably fathom. The image I have in my head is trying to make an over-sized pig after a mud bath look like Carrie Underwood. It's not working. It's not going to work. It's not good. It's a unmitigated disaster.
The defense continues to get hammered with criticism. They are not a good unit by any measure, but they are not an awful unit by any realistic observation - when you consider they have gone against Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning, Matthew Stafford, Phillip Rivers, and Tony Romo for half of their schedule.
When not going against some of the blue-chip gunslingers, they've had to face Adrian Peterson, Matt Forte, and the Eagles contingent of Nick Foles, Michael Vick and LeSean McCoy.
Sure they have caught some breaks (Oakland) and with Jay Cutler getting hurt before halftime, but seriously, while I might make way too many excuses for Jim Haslett and the defense, the notion that they should be anything more than a below average defense against the schedule they have faced is simply preposterous.
Especially when you consider that unit has not had a serious infusion of established talent since 2011. Brandon Meriweather is the only significant veteran addition to the starting core in that time. He's missed 17 of the Redskins 26 games in that time and played in parts of two others (Philadelphia 2012, Green Bay 2013).
Sure they added 2nd round pick David Amerson this year, and he has made some big plays, but the rookie has also given up some huge plays as well. So far, in some ways - he is living up to his boom or bust reputation at North Carolina State.
Phillip Thomas, the fourth round pick hybrid safety out of Fresno State, was lost before the first preseason game was even at halftime. He's done for the year. Bacarri Rambo was seriously over-matched in his first two games as a pro against two high octane attacks and was benched. He re-surfaced in Denver and played a very nice game but has not really been a factor since.
During this three year period, the defensive unit has lost Carlos Rogers, LaRon Landry, Adam Carriker (essentially two seasons lost due to injury), Brian Orakpo (almost a full year due to injury), Jarvis Jenkins for his rookie year and Keenan Robinson for a year-and-a-half.
Because of the cap penalty, the Redskins were unable/chose not to bring back Lorenzo Alexander who helped them in a variety of ways on defense and of course was a special teams monster.
If you factor in the lack of infusion (in talent) along with the injuries - you can see why there are so many issues. Mike Shanahan knows it, Jim Haslett knows it. The entire defense knows it. The only ones that don't understand it are the maniacally frustrated and angry fan base who quite honestly should stick to water on game-days.
Anyways, keep blaming it on some phantom theory that the 4-3 would be better or that Jim Haslett and his staff do not know what they are doing. You have to have horses, you have to have studs. You have to have weapons. You'll see them on the field Monday Night. They'll just be dressed in 49'ers uniforms.
I was curious to see how the Redskins defense matched up statistically in realistic terms to opposing offenses and the league wide average. As we wrote about last week, going into the Eagles loss - the Redskins defense was giving up less rushing yards per game and passing yards per game, as we wrote here; than their opponents were racking up against the rest of the league on average. The point is essentially the same. The defense is only "awful" because the league is a offense driven league, and you have had a regime that has invested heavily in the offensive side of the ball.
This week, we take a further look "Inside the Numbers" and walk away with this. The Redskins (as a team) are allowing 31.1 points per game (311/10 games). Of course, you can't count all of those points against the defense as the Redskins have allowed five return touchdowns in 2013, which included a blocked punt, two punt returns, and two interception returns for scores. That's 35 points allowed (including extra points) that are not on the defense. It's only fair to take that number away and charge Haslett's crew with 276 points.
That's 27.6 points per game in reality (276/10 games) and if you take away the extra points (special teams plays, caused by the touchdown allowed) that is another 34 points. If you really want, the net average is 24.2 points per game allowed (242/10 games). I'll go with 27.6 because that is more accurate.
The defense has also scored five touchdowns for the Redskins, which again totals up to 35 points or 16.1% of the Redskins total team points, which is 246.
Naturally, if you are looking at the Washington offense for comparison sake, you take away those 35 points because the offense did nothing to earn them, and you get 211 points scored by the offense (including extra points). That's an average of 21.1 points per game on offense (211/10 games). Works both ways, right?
So you have an offense that is earning a true 21.1 per game average with a defense that is yielding a true average of 27.6 points per game. You have those 35 points that the defense scored, which kind of just are out there somewhere in between both numbers.
According to Joseph White of the Associated Press and via STATS INC., NFL offensive units are scoring an average of 21.4 points per game purely on offense.
Just to do my own research before Sunday's games, I went to every teams' offensive production and charted their actual offensive production. The following is the cold hard numbers (entering Sunday)
Arizona (21 offensive touchdowns, 18 field goals, 20 extra points) = 180 pure offensive points, 200 including extra points - 10 GP (20.0).
Atlanta (23 offensive touchdowns, 17 field goals, 24 extra points) = 189 pure offensive points, 213 including extra points - 11 GP (19.36).
Baltimore (19 offensive touchdowns, 20 field goals, 20 extra points (1-2pt) = 174 pure offensive points, 195 including extra points - 10 GP (19.5).
Buffalo (21 offensive touchdowns, 22 field goals, 22 extra points (2-2 pt) = 192 pure offensive points, 215 including extra points - 11 GP (19.54).
Carolina (26 offensive touchdowns, 14 field goals, 28 extra points) = 198 pure offensive points, 224 including extra points - 10 GP (22.4).
Chicago (26 offensive touchdowns, 19 field goals, 27 extra points, 3-2pt) = 213 pure offensive points, 242 including extra points - 10 GP (24.2).
Cincinnati (28 offensive touchdowns, 15 field goals, 32 extra points) = 213 pure offensive points, 241 including extra points - 11 GP (21.9).
Cleveland (18 offensive touchdowns, 15 field goals, 20 extra points) = 153 pure offensive points, 171 including extra points - 10 GP (17.1).
Dallas (27 offensive touchdowns, 17 field goals, 29 extra points, 1-2pt) = 213 pure offensive points, 241 including extra points - 10 GP (24.1).
Denver (47 offensive touchdowns, 14 field goals, 50 extra points) = 324 pure offensive points, 371 including extra points - 10 GP (37.1).
Detroit (30 offensive touchdowns, 14 field goals, 31 extra points) = 222 pure offensive points, 252 including extra points - 10 GP (25.2).
Green Bay (25 offensive touchdowns, 23 field goals, 27 extra points) = 219 pure offensive points, 244 including extra points - 10 GP (24.4).
Houston (18 offensive touchdowns, 17 field goals, 18 extra points, 1-2pt) = 159 pure offensive points, 178 including extra points - 10 GP (17.8).
Indianapolis (25 offensive touchdowns, 20 field goals, 22 extra points, 3-2pt) = 210 pure offensive points, 238 including extra points - 10 GP (23.8).
Jacksonville (11 offensive touchdowns, 12 field goals, 11 extra points) = 102 pure offensive points, 113 including extra points - 10 GP (11.3).
Kansas City (18 offensive touchdowns, 19 field goals, 25 extra points) = 165 pure offensive points, 183 including extra points - 10 GP (18.3).
Miami (21 offensive touchdowns, 17 field goals, 22 extra points) = 177 pure offensive points, 198 including extra points - 10 GP (19.8).
Minnesota (24 offensive touchdowns, 15 field goals, 27 extra points) = 189 pure offensive points, 213 including extra points - 10 GP (21.3)
New England (25 offensive touchdowns, 24 field goals, 26 extra points) = 222 pure offensive points, 247 including extra points - 10 GP (24.7).
New Orleans (35 offensive touchdowns, 20 field goals, 35 extra points) = 270 pure offensive points, 305 including extra points - 11 GP (27.7)
New York Giants (19 offensive touchdowns, 15 field goals, 21 extra points) = 159 pure offensive points, 178 including extra points - 10 GP (17.8).
New York Jets (15 offensive touchdowns, 23 field goals, 16 extra points) = 159 pure offensive points, 174 including extra points - 10 GP (17.4).
Oakland (20 offensive touchdowns, 11 field goals, 23 extra points) = 153 pure offensive points, 173 including extra points - 10 GP. (17.3)
Philadelphia (31 offensive touchdowns, 17 field goals, 31 extra points) = 237 pure offensive points, 268 including extra points - 11 GP (24.4).
Pittsburgh (21 offensive touchdowns, 22 field goals, 20 extra points, 1-2pt) = 180 pure offensive points, 214 including extra points - 10 GP (21.4).
St. Louis (20 offensive touchdowns, 15 field goals, 23 extra points, 2 - 2 pt) = 165 pure offensive points, 187 including extra points - 10 GP (18.7).
San Diego (23 offensive touchdowns, 20 field goals, 24 extra points) = 198 pure offensive points, 221 including extra points - 10 GP (22.1).
San Francisco (26 offensive touchdowns, 14 field goals, 29 extra points) = 198 pure offensive points, 224 including extra points - 10 GP (22.4).
Seattle (31 offensive touchdowns, 24 field goals, 32 extra points) = 258 pure offensive points, 289 including extra points - 11 GP (26.3).
Tampa Bay (18 offensive touchdowns, 15 field goals, 20 extra points) = 153 pure offensive points, 171 including extra points - 10 GP (17.1).
Tennessee (23 offensive touchdowns, 15 field goals, 26 extra points) = 183 pure offensive points, 206 including extra points - 10 GP (20.6).
Washington (26 offensive touchdowns, 10 field goals, 26 extra points, 2-2 pt) = 186 pure offensive points, 214 including extra points - 10 GP (21.4).
I have a total of 7,003 points scored by the 32 teams on offense only (including offensive touchdowns, extra points on those scores, two-point conversions and field goals). I have the total amount of games played by these teams entering Sunday at 326, for an average of BAM, 21.4 points per game.
What that means is that the Redskins offense is just slightly below the league average (21.6 - 21.4) and the Redskins defense is giving up six more points per game than the league average scored (21.4 - 27.4).
The Redskins' ten opponents, with Philadelphia counting twice, have accumulated 2,493 points over 102 cumulative games. That's an average of 24.44 point per game. If you only count the Eagles once (some people are picky), you get 2,225 cumulative points divided by 91 games played, you still get an average of 24.45 offensive points scored per game.
All of a sudden, that true defensive average of 27.4 against their schedule and the offensive talent they have faced is not so bad. (27.4 - 24.45). We're talking about a freaking field goal.
As I have said all along, the Redskins defense is not great. Or good. It's a below average defense with below average talent. I believe that in my heart. The numbers prove my case. If you are willing to go "Inside the Numbers."
Chris Russell - SFTheRooster@Yahoo.com -- www.twitter.com/russellmania980