III wrote:

Sarlacc83 wrote:

III wrote:Here are some facts:

Only one team has put more than 24 on you - DET in Detroit.

No one in his right mind can deny your D is a far different animal on the road (BUF game was in Canada and it was BUF). 5 teams ARZ, RAM, 49R, DET, MIA beat you in 8 tries on the road.

Opinion:

I'm gonna say we have a better offense than all those teams - even DET which has one WR, an immobile QB, and no ground game.

Trying to stay on topic, our offense has been responsible for almost all of our points. We are tough to deal with. We have hung 28+ on over half the teams we've played. You will have to stop us without the benefit of us running silent counts and a plethora of noise-induced false starts.

Both of us are hot. Your job of stopping us in our place will probably be your toughest yet. You will not be getting off the ball against a deafened offense. We will run a random mix and probably try to get your secondary involved in run support. I might be wrong but I think you are under-sized but over-quick on the D line. This plays for you at home but against you on the road - especially against a ground game like ours.

You are 3-point road favorites. I'm a little surprised. I see this more like pick 'em with a slight edge to us as the home team.

III

You shouldn't be. There's already been good conversation about the smoke and mirrors of the Redskins 28+ points. (All against bad defenses.) Seattle comes in with the #1 scoring defense and a top 10 offense. I expect the Redskins to give us a game, but if Seattle plays up to its normal strengths, you'll be lucky to break the 20 point barrier. And I highly doubt your defense is going to keep Wilson, Lynch, and crew under that.

Well I guess we disagree. You lost more than half your games on the road and we are better (offensively and overall) than all the guys who beat you. But I guess 1/2 the country thinks the spread is about right for what that's worth. Like I said, a little surprised, not shocked. The betting public is fairly ignorant. I like being a home dog.

This thread IS about your D against our O, right?

III

The offensive point is fair. However, with the exception of the Lions, the teams that beat us on the road have excellent defenses. The teams without excellent defenses were wins. The Redskins do not have an excellent defense.

And yes, it is about your Offense against our Defense, though there's some wiggle room. (My post was mostly about your O and our D, though.)

Navyhawkfan187 wrote:Hey Redskins fans, can you tell me how well your team did defending the read option in your only game against it? I can...you saw 10 read/option plays for 94yds vs Carolina and Cam Newton who we shut down hard. Have fun watching your team lose to the Seahawks again on Sunday.

lol thats because you defense is better than ours. Our defense sucked hard during the first half of the season. The defense in the second half, particularly during the last 5 games has been a different animal.

Remember, this is the new NFL. You dont need a great defense anymore. You just need to get timely stops and turnovers. Im not saying you can win with a bad defense, but if you get turnovers, you're good. If you are +2 in the turnover margin in any game, you chances of winning that game are something crazy like 80%.

Let us be honest. The Seahawks are going to have to play very poorly and the Redskins are going to have to play their best game of the year for this game to be close.

hawker84 wrote:well said, nice avatar too by the way..

problem is you're making the same mistake as every other team we've faced.. trying to judge us on teams we played in the first half of the season... anybody that's followed this team will know that the D started out hot, and the O was very vanilla for the first 6 games of the season give or take , during this time the D cooled down and the offense got hot, now over the last few games, the D is back close to where it was and the offensive has taken off...

so to compare the present team to the team that lost to Miami and Detroit and NFC west teams, is like comparing this team to last years Tavaris Jackson lead team .. completely different team now, operating on all cylinders in all 3 phases of the game...

stopping RG3 will be a tough assignment for sure, but your average D at best stopping our O will be an even tougher assignment, at home or not, you've got a tough day ahead of you come sunday. london fletcher will not be having a career day against RW, his age and deminished abilities will be exposed... as will josh wilson, who we let go because he can't cover his for sh*t...

there's a reason we're 3 point road favorites, we're the better more complete team.

Actually, I gave you credit for being hot right now - like us. The main reason you are favored is that Vegas is in the business of predicting and reflecting the opinion of the betting public.

I think your offense will not run as effectively as usual and that your QB will present problems for our secondary.

SoCalSeahawk wrote:

III wrote:I might be wrong but I think you are under-sized but over-quick on the D line.

III

You are incorrect:

DE Bryant 6'4" 323
DT Branch 6'6" 325
DT Mebane 6'1" 311
DE Clemons 6'3" 254

Yeah, I was definitely focused on the guy you just drafted - Bruce? Thanks for the enlightening info.

hawker84 wrote:well said, nice avatar too by the way..

Thanks.

hawker84 wrote:problem is you're making the same mistake as every other team we've faced.. trying to judge us on teams we played in the first half of the season...

Same. Our D has played way better since the bye.

Neither team will have to play over its head while the other has a bad day in order to win. It's the NFL. Both teams are good. As someone said but did not follow his own advice - let's be honest.

HansGruber wrote:

rdskns4eva wrote:Earlier in the year, most had the east as the second best division after the NFC north. 3 teams with 0.500+ records is pretty good. Are they second best good? Probably not, but it's not the AFC West either lol. It's a good division.

The East fielded 2 of the top 10 offenses n football this year.

They also had all four defenses finish no higher than 15th this year with two finishing in the bottom 3rd of the NFL.

This is funny.

NFC East is the biggest cupcake division in the NFC. Put any one of those teams in the NFC West or North and you're looking at 6-10 teams at best. Even in the NFC South, Skins would be lucky to go 8-8.

Of course, we're all going to see that first-hand on Sunday when the Seahawks destroy the Redskins in the playoffs yet again. It is cute to hear smack talk from the fans of a team who the Seahawks have completely dominated in the playoffs over the last decade.

This is funny considering that the Skins beat the Vikings and the Giants beat the bears.

Also, this cupcake schedule talk is nonses. Both the Hawks and the skins had a easy schedule difficuly. You guys had more impressive victories with wins agaisnt the 49ers and Patriots, but your team also lost 4 games agaisnt teams with records below .500. The Skins had two such losses, both agaisnt 7-9 teams (Rams were 7-8-1). You lost to a 5-11 team, and a 4-12 team. Those are facts.

You guys did play the AFC East which is the worst division in football with the powerhouse teams of the Jets, Dolphins and Bills.

Not saying we played powerhouses, but again, the teams you played agaisnt had a combined winning % of 50% whereas the Redskins had 49%. It wasnt far off at all.

Let's talk plainly, as a lot of this thread is subjective and dripping with fan bias.

The Redskins are pretty reliant on their running game, its the basis of the entire offense, just like the Hawks. If the Seahawks contain the running game, this game will not be close.

In regards to scheme, the offenses that have run the ball with success on us do not run the same type of run schemes as Washington. We struggled with San Francisco's power and trap game, we struggled with New England and Detroits shotgun belly plays. The Skins run a lot of read option and zone stretch plays and dives from the pistol, which haven't been successful against the Seahawks. You can throw out numbers and defame our road record, but I'll be stunned if the Skins tear us up on the ground.

Hog fans keep hanging their hat on our road record. And yet, they were only 5-3 at home. 2 of those three losses were to top ten defenses.

I love it when opposing fans pay close attention to the Seahawk losses from this year while at the same time dismissing the wins Seattle has. With 5 wins in 6 tries against teams with 10 or more wins this year, Seattle has shown it can beat ANYONE. The redskins have played three games against teams with at least 10 wins...they have lost two of those games. Their only quality win came against the Vikings. Seahawks should win this game. They are the better team.

rideaducati wrote:I love it when opposing fans pay close attention to the Seahawk losses from this year while at the same time dismissing the wins Seattle has. With 5 wins in 6 tries against teams with 10 or more wins this year, Seattle has shown it can beat ANYONE. The redskins have played three games against teams with at least 10 wins...they have lost two of those games. Their only quality win came against the Vikings. Seahawks should win this game. They are the better team.

You cant be talking about my post because my post specifically said your team had more impressive victories. But they had bad losses as well. Everything has bad losses though.

Looking at the Redskins schedule, I don't see a "different team" in the second half of the season. I see a team that was feeding off the bottom of the pool in the late half of the season. Cleveland, Philly, the Giants and Cowboys. Skins are a team with NO defense. Look at the points they give up to even remotely decent teams. They win by outscoring their opponent and when their opponent is any good at all, they lose. They started out 3-6 for a reason: that was the tough part of their schedule. Losses to the decent teams this year.

Looking over DVOA rankings for the year, the Giants were actually a decent team. Skins won at home by 1pt. But they won. They beat Baltimore, but Baltimore was slumping. they gave up 31 points to the LAMBS. They gave up 38 to Cincinatti. Those are two below average offenses.

Then you look at their offense and they racked up 28 on that Lambs 7th ranked defense. They racked up 31 against the Bengals 10th rated defense. Both those games came early in the season when their read option was new and there was no film on Griffin. Here's the defenses that Skins offense has faced according to DVOA:

Opponent Defensive rank result with score
@ NO...............32nd........ win 40-32
@ St. L.............7th..........loss 31-28
Cinci.................10th.......... loss 38-31
@ TB.................20th..........win 24-22
Atlanta..............12th..........loss 24-17
Minnesota.........21st ..........win 38-26
@ Giants...........16th..........loss 27-23
@ Pittsburgh.....13th.......... loss 27-12
Carolina............11th..........loss 21-13
Philly................26th..........win 31-6
@ Dallas...........23rd.......... win 38-31
Giants...............16th.......... win 17-16
Baltimore..........19th .......... win 31-28 OT
@ Cleveland......22nd ..........win 38-21
@ Philly............26th..........win 27-20
Dallas...............23rd.......... win 28-18

Once I color coded it (bottom 16 defenses/scored 27+ = green) the whole pattern became crystal clear. You throw out the first four weeks as an anamoly because of the newness of their offense. Thus the Rams and Cincy having top 16 defenses that the Skins racked up points on. Oddly, this also tosses out the TB game where a bottom defense kept the Skins under 27. I chose 27 as the cutoff point because that's what the Skins averaged per game.

It's pretty obvious that once the opposing defenses knew what they were up against, the Skins scoring went down when they were up against good defenses. Be they away or home games, the Skins offense will not blow out a good defense. The Skins winning streak is coterminous with the defensive crappyness of their late season scheduled opponents.

@ NO...............32nd........ win 40-32
@ St. L.............7th..........loss 31-28
Cinci.................10th.......... loss 38-31
@ TB.................20th..........win 24-22
Atlanta..............12th..........loss 24-17 <-RG3 missed a half
Minnesota.........21st ..........win 38-26
@ Giants...........16th..........loss 27-23
@ Pittsburgh.....13th.......... loss 27-12 <- WR's dropped two sure TD passes right in there hands and 10 dropps in total
Carolina............11th..........loss 21-13 <- Bad loss, everyteam has them
Philly................26th..........win 31-6 <-Good teams beat bad teams
@ Dallas...........23rd.......... win 38-31 <-Classic rivalry. Cowboys skins games are almost always down to the wire regardless of talent
Giants...............16th.......... win 17-16 <-Giants are a tough team. They beat 49ers and destroyed the Packers
Baltimore..........19th .......... win 31-28 OT
@ Cleveland......22nd ..........win 38-21 <-Good teams beat bad teams
@ Philly............26th..........win 27-20 <-Good teams beat bad teams - RG3 first game back from knee injury
Dallas...............23rd.......... win 28-18

rdskns4eva wrote:@ NO...............32nd........ win 40-32
@ St. L.............7th..........loss 31-28
Cinci.................10th.......... loss 38-31
@ TB.................20th..........win 24-22
Atlanta..............12th..........loss 24-17 <-RG3 missed a half
Minnesota.........21st ..........win 38-26
@ Giants...........16th..........loss 27-23
@ Pittsburgh.....13th.......... loss 27-12 <- WR's dropped two sure TD passes right in there hands and 10 dropps in total
Carolina............11th..........loss 21-13 <- Bad loss, everyteam has them
Philly................26th..........win 31-6 <-Good teams beat bad teams
@ Dallas...........23rd.......... win 38-31 <-Classic rivalry. Cowboys skins games are almost always down to the wire regardless of talent
Giants...............16th.......... win 17-16 <-Giants are a tough team. They beat 49ers and destroyed the Packers
Baltimore..........19th .......... win 31-28 OT
@ Cleveland......22nd ..........win 38-21 <-Good teams beat bad teams
@ Philly............26th..........win 27-20 <-Good teams beat bad teams - RG3 first game back from knee injury
Dallas...............23rd.......... win 28-18

I don't know how to say this any clearer...

You're wrong... and we're right.

And any attempt to convince us otherwise is futile.

Bottom line is, after week 4, the Skins have averaged only 16.5 pts per game vs defenses ranked in the top 16 DVOA. At home vs top ranked defenses, they have averaged only 15.7 pts per game.

The question of this thread is: How will this team fare against the Washington Offense? I think we won't let them break 20 points. Allowing 17 points would be above average. Holding them to 13-16 points is what we should expect.

onanygivensunday wrote:

rdskns4eva wrote:@ NO...............32nd........ win 40-32
@ St. L.............7th..........loss 31-28
Cinci.................10th.......... loss 38-31
@ TB.................20th..........win 24-22
Atlanta..............12th..........loss 24-17 <-RG3 missed a half
Minnesota.........21st ..........win 38-26
@ Giants...........16th..........loss 27-23
@ Pittsburgh.....13th.......... loss 27-12 <- WR's dropped two sure TD passes right in there hands and 10 dropps in total
Carolina............11th..........loss 21-13 <- Bad loss, everyteam has them
Philly................26th..........win 31-6 <-Good teams beat bad teams
@ Dallas...........23rd.......... win 38-31 <-Classic rivalry. Cowboys skins games are almost always down to the wire regardless of talent
Giants...............16th.......... win 17-16 <-Giants are a tough team. They beat 49ers and destroyed the Packers
Baltimore..........19th .......... win 31-28 OT
@ Cleveland......22nd ..........win 38-21 <-Good teams beat bad teams
@ Philly............26th..........win 27-20 <-Good teams beat bad teams - RG3 first game back from knee injury
Dallas...............23rd.......... win 28-18

I don't know how to say this any clearer...

You're wrong... and we're right.

And any attempt to convince us otherwise is futile.

LOL

SalishHawkFan wrote:Bottom line is, after week 4, the Skins have averaged only 16.5 pts per game vs defenses ranked in the top 16 DVOA. At home vs top ranked defenses, they have averaged only 15.7 pts per game.

The question of this thread is: How will this team fare against the Washington Offense? I think we won't let them break 20 points. Allowing 17 points would be above average. Holding them to 13-16 points is what we should expect.

Here we go with these "advanced metrics". The same "advanced metrics" that said that Alfred Morris, a 1600 yard back was overrated.

All I know is that the Redskins are top 5 is scoring and are averaging 25 points per game at home. Thats all that matters to me.

rdskns4eva wrote:Here we go with these "advanced metrics". The same "advanced metrics" that said that Alfred Morris, a 1600 yard back was overrated.

All I know is that the Redskins are top 5 is scoring and are averaging 25 points per game at home. Thats all that matters to me.

So...you bash metrics, then use them to defend your home performance? Ok, then...

Last year the Skins were able to bait Browner late in the game to give up the winning score. Helu ran over them with ease and Davis took advantage of our LBs. Browner may not start, depends on his conditioning, but he still can be baited. Morris should be able to provide more than Helu. I think Davis is hurt, not sure. I saw on the telecast that another TE was starting in his place.

So the question is whether Wagner's youth/speed is better than Heater and has the secondary's experience grown enough that Shanahan will not be able to bait Browner. RGIII obviously is a huge step up from Grossman and Garcon is a huge asset as well.

I think you have to consider the notion that the Seahawks will be giving up more than their season average. If teams were able to coax a Miami and Detroit performance out of the defense, they can do it again. But that was so far in the past, the team has moved beyond that. Right?

drdiags wrote:Last year the Skins were able to bait Browner late in the game to give up the winning score. Helu ran over them with ease and Davis took advantage of our LBs. Browner may not start, depends on his conditioning, but he still can be baited. Morris should be able to provide more than Helu. I think Davis is hurt, not sure. I saw on the telecast that another TE was starting in his place.

Yes Davis has been out on IR with a torn achilles since week 7.

RolandDeschain wrote:

rdskns4eva wrote:Here we go with these "advanced metrics". The same "advanced metrics" that said that Alfred Morris, a 1600 yard back was overrated.

All I know is that the Redskins are top 5 is scoring and are averaging 25 points per game at home. Thats all that matters to me.

So...you bash metrics, then use them to defend your home performance? Ok, then...

Negative. Advanced metrics are garbage. It's the whoe reason that sports writers are saying that Luck is rookie of the year because his "advanced metrics" are better than RG3 and RW.

Same thing is baseball. One dude is triple crown winner and people seriously were saying that Mike Trout was the best player in Baseball because of "advanced metrics". Get that crap out of here.

Uh, what? Show me advanced metrics that show Luck is better than RG3 and RW.

The best advanced metrics in the world (Football Outsiders) tell a different story: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Media pundits are still all over Luck's jock because they anointed him the savior of the NFL before he was even drafted, and "they can't be wrong, now". Idiots, by and large. Most metrics I've seen have Luck ranking poorly, as they are in this one. Passing yards is the only thing he has going for him this year.

RolandDeschain wrote:Uh, what? Show me advanced metrics that show Luck is better than RG3 and RW.

The best advanced metrics in the world (Football Outsiders) tell a different story: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Media pundits are still all over Luck's jock because they anointed him the savior of the NFL before he was even drafted, and "they can't be wrong, now". Idiots, by and large. Most metrics I've seen have Luck ranking poorly, as they are in this one. Passing yards is the only thing he has going for him this year.

[url]http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/luck-vs-griffin-a-statistical-comparison/
[/url]
This was when RG3 was clearly outperforming Luck, but advanced metrics said otherwise.

rdskns4eva wrote:

RolandDeschain wrote:Uh, what? Show me advanced metrics that show Luck is better than RG3 and RW.

The best advanced metrics in the world (Football Outsiders) tell a different story: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Media pundits are still all over Luck's jock because they anointed him the savior of the NFL before he was even drafted, and "they can't be wrong, now". Idiots, by and large. Most metrics I've seen have Luck ranking poorly, as they are in this one. Passing yards is the only thing he has going for him this year.

[url]http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/luck-vs-griffin-a-statistical-comparison/
[/url]
This was when RG3 was clearly outperforming Luck, but advanced metrics said otherwise.

That's why I like DVOA. Luck is playing against the weakest division in the league with the weakest strength of schedule (and one of the weakest strength of victory %).

RolandDeschain wrote:Uh, what? Show me advanced metrics that show Luck is better than RG3 and RW.

The best advanced metrics in the world (Football Outsiders) tell a different story: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Media pundits are still all over Luck's jock because they anointed him the savior of the NFL before he was even drafted, and "they can't be wrong, now". Idiots, by and large. Most metrics I've seen have Luck ranking poorly, as they are in this one. Passing yards is the only thing he has going for him this year.

lol these metrics are garbage as well. They have Staffard and Tony Oh-No as better than RG3 AND RW. Not worth reading.

Again, advanced Metrics are garbage. I go by eye test. Thats all I need to see.

All Stafford does it chuck the ball up to Megatron. Yards are meaniless in todays game. It used to be 4000 yards passing was a great season. Now every QB is throwing for 4k and some are pushing for 5k every year.
Romo, Brees, Stafford. All three top 3 in passing yards, all three not in the playoffs.

rdskns4eva wrote: Both the Hawks and the skins had a easy schedule difficuly. You guys had more impressive victories with wins agaisnt the 49ers and Patriots, but your team also lost 4 games agaisnt teams with records below .500. The Skins had two such losses, both agaisnt 7-9 teams (Rams were 7-8-1). You lost to a 5-11 team, and a 4-12 team. Those are facts.

Football Outsiders rank the Seahawks schedule as the 4th toughest in the NFL. The Redskins schedule was ranked 15th toughest. So neither one of the teams had an easy schedule, but the Seahawks definitely had a tougher road.

The Redskins winning streak included two wins over the Nick Foles Eagles, one over the Brandon Weeden Browns and two over the Tony Romo Cowboys. It leads to a bit of skepticism as to what level your team is truly at right now. Please do not count the Cowboys as a good team. There is a reason that every single Seahawk fan was rooting for the Cowboys to beat you guys in the finale. The 'Skins have game while the Cowboys have become akin to a boy band for Jerry Jones. All pizazz and marketing...no talent, no substance.

The Seahawks defense had 4th quarter lapses against the Dolphins and Lions as those were the only two teams to score at or above their season average against the Seahawks. A playoff lapse is very unlikely. For example, when the 49ers don't play the Seahawks they average what the Redskins average (27). Against the Seahawks they scored 13 points each time. Which is exactly what I predict for your Redskins.

Edited

SoCalSeahawk wrote:

rdskns4eva wrote: Both the Hawks and the skins had a easy schedule difficuly. You guys had more impressive victories with wins agaisnt the 49ers and Patriots, but your team also lost 4 games agaisnt teams with records below .500. The Skins had two such losses, both agaisnt 7-9 teams (Rams were 7-8-1). You lost to a 5-11 team, and a 4-12 team. Those are facts.

Football Outsiders rank the Seahawks schedule as the 4th toughest in the NFL. The Redskins schedule was ranked 15th toughest. So neither one of the teams had an easy schedule, but the Seahawks definitely had a tougher road.

The Redskins winning streak included two wins over the Nick Foles Eagles, one over the Brandon Weeden Browns and two over the Tony Romo Cowboys. It leads to a bit of skepticism as to what level your team is truly at right now. Please do not count the Cowboys as a good team. There is a reason that every single Seahawk fan was rooting for the Cowboys to beat you guys in the finale. The 'Skins have game while the Cowboys have really become akin to a boy band for Jerry Jones. All pizazz and marketing...no talent, no substance.

The Seahawks defense had 4th quarter lapses against the Dolphins and Lions as those were the only two teams to score above their season average against the Seahawks. A playoff lapse is very unlikely. When the 49ers don't play the Seahawks they average what the Redskins average. Against the Seahawks they scored 13 points each time. Which is exactly what I predict for your Redskins.

Going into the 05 playoffs the argument was reversed...Skins had by far the tougher schedule and the Seahawks had a number of less highly-ranked opponents. Hey, if that means the result of the playoff game between the Seahawks and Redskins will be reversed as well - I'm fine with that.

Edited

Edited

SoCal, Jesus Christ, when you get an error on the forum verify that the post didn't actually take before trying again, haha. You posted it 4 times.

Also, rdskns4eva, you obviously don't know anything about Football Outsiders. Look at their DVOA rankings. RG3 and RW are both above Romo and Stafford.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Seriously, please, stop embarrassing yourself. Most metrics are not "advanced metrics"; FO's are.

RolandDeschain wrote:Also, rdskns4eva, you obviously don't know anything about Football Outsiders. Look at their DVOA rankings. RG3 and RW are both above Romo and Stafford.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Seriously, please, stop embarrassing yourself. Most metrics are not "advanced metrics"; FO's are.

I'm not embarrasing myself. The NY Times had the same "Advanced Metrics" saying Luck was better than RG3. Another idiot reporter quoting advanced metrics said that Morris was the 13th best RB in the NFL....this year.

Advanced Metrics can say anything you want them to say. It's all garbage. Again, any list that has Romo as one of the best QB's in the NFL is garbage. Romo sucks. Everyone in the NFL knows it and most fans (even Dallas fans) know it. But these advanced Metrics have him listed as a top qb....just stop it, please.

rdskns4eva wrote:

RolandDeschain wrote:

rdskns4eva wrote:Here we go with these "advanced metrics". The same "advanced metrics" that said that Alfred Morris, a 1600 yard back was overrated.

All I know is that the Redskins are top 5 is scoring and are averaging 25 points per game at home. Thats all that matters to me.

So...you bash metrics, then use them to defend your home performance? Ok, then...

Negative. Advanced metrics are garbage. It's the whoe reason that sports writers are saying that Luck is rookie of the year because his "advanced metrics" are better than RG3 and RW.

Same thing is baseball. One dude is triple crown winner and people seriously were saying that Mike Trout was the best player in Baseball because of "advanced metrics". Get that crap out of here.

DVOA ranks Luck at 19th. RGIII at 8th and DangeRuss at 6th. Ohhhhh, I see why you don't like advanced metrics.

btw, DVOA ranks Romo and Stafford below both R's.

rdskns4eva wrote:I'm not embarrasing myself. The NY Times had the same "Advanced Metrics" saying Luck was better than RG3. Another idiot reporter quoting advanced metrics said that Morris was the 13th best RB in the NFL....this year.

Advanced Metrics can say anything you want them to say. It's all garbage. Again, any list that has Romo as one of the best QB's in the NFL is garbage. Romo sucks. Everyone in the NFL knows it and most fans (even Dallas fans) know it. But these advanced Metrics have him listed as a top qb....just stop it, please.

The same advanced metrics? You do not know what you're talking about. Nobody does stats like Football Outsiders. They are unique in the statistics world for NFL stats. Come on, dude. At least attempt to educate yourself. What a joke...

rdskns4eva wrote:

RolandDeschain wrote:Also, rdskns4eva, you obviously don't know anything about Football Outsiders. Look at their DVOA rankings. RG3 and RW are both above Romo and Stafford.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Seriously, please, stop embarrassing yourself. Most metrics are not "advanced metrics"; FO's are.

I'm not embarrasing myself. The NY Times had the same "Advanced Metrics" saying Luck was better than RG3. Another idiot reporter quoting advanced metrics said that Morris was the 13th best RB in the NFL....this year.

Advanced Metrics can say anything you want them to say. It's all garbage. Again, any list that has Romo as one of the best QB's in the NFL is garbage. Romo sucks. Everyone in the NFL knows it and most fans (even Dallas fans) know it. But these advanced Metrics have him listed as a top qb....just stop it, please.

rdskns4eva, you seem like a pretty decent fan. Not trolling us. Keeping it real. So I believe your enjoyment of the sport we all love would be enriched if you checked out these advanced metrics. This link explains what DVOA is all about. After you spend a season or two watching how their projections tend to work out correctly way more often than not (Any Given Sunday, afterall) I believe you'll come to realize that Football Outsiders knows what they're talking about. For example, they've said Luck was over hyped all along.

RolandDeschain wrote:

rdskns4eva wrote:I'm not embarrasing myself. The NY Times had the same "Advanced Metrics" saying Luck was better than RG3. Another idiot reporter quoting advanced metrics said that Morris was the 13th best RB in the NFL....this year.

Advanced Metrics can say anything you want them to say. It's all garbage. Again, any list that has Romo as one of the best QB's in the NFL is garbage. Romo sucks. Everyone in the NFL knows it and most fans (even Dallas fans) know it. But these advanced Metrics have him listed as a top qb....just stop it, please.

The same advanced metrics? You do not know what you're talking about. Nobody does stats like Football Outsiders. They are unique in the statistics world for NFL stats. Come on, dude. At least attempt to educate yourself. What a joke...

Damn man, you dont have to get all butt hurt...jeez.

SalishHawkFan wrote:

rdskns4eva wrote:

RolandDeschain wrote:Also, rdskns4eva, you obviously don't know anything about Football Outsiders. Look at their DVOA rankings. RG3 and RW are both above Romo and Stafford.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Seriously, please, stop embarrassing yourself. Most metrics are not "advanced metrics"; FO's are.

I'm not embarrasing myself. The NY Times had the same "Advanced Metrics" saying Luck was better than RG3. Another idiot reporter quoting advanced metrics said that Morris was the 13th best RB in the NFL....this year.

Advanced Metrics can say anything you want them to say. It's all garbage. Again, any list that has Romo as one of the best QB's in the NFL is garbage. Romo sucks. Everyone in the NFL knows it and most fans (even Dallas fans) know it. But these advanced Metrics have him listed as a top qb....just stop it, please.

rdskns4eva, you seem like a pretty decent fan. Not trolling us. Keeping it real. So I believe your enjoyment of the sport we all love would be enriched if you checked out these advanced metrics. This link explains what DVOA is all about. After you spend a season or two watching how their projections tend to work out correctly way more often than not (Any Given Sunday, afterall) I believe you'll come to realize that Football Outsiders knows what they're talking about. For example, they've said Luck was over hyped all along.

I'll check it out.

Thanks

Well my take on it... and Everyone knows mine is the only take THAT MATTERS on this board... is this..
Its going to be An AWESOME GAME..... win or lose.....both teams need to be happy about there seasons and future's

I"M excited...... and I don't think it will be easy.. for either team.. whichever team brings its a game will win.

I think this game comes down to Gus Bradley's play calling. If he is passive and gives III all day to throw the ball it's going to be a long day, if they over blitz (unlikely with Bradley) it's going to be a problem. QB pressure has to come from different angles, predictability = bad things!

Anyone who has been watching the Hawks closely know that their weak link on the road is their defense in the 4th quarter. For whatever reason we tend to crumble under pressure if the game is close and the opposing team is driving for a game winning FG or TD. Hopefully it does not come to this, but I for one think that if it does, we will lose. Another words, for us to win this game I think we have to blow them out. And even if we win in this manner, the same issue will come up again against Atlanta. I think the Hawks have progressed miles this season but I just don't think they have what it takes to shut down an opposing offense on the road when the game is on the line.

Damn! Sorry about the repeat posts. Error message threw me off.

Everything from the regular season doesn't matter anymore. Its the playoffs, and we're playing in D.C. Probably one of the hardest places to play. 100,000 Skins fans screaming down on you, on a cold, damp grass field (when our boys play at least half the season on turf). It will be a difficult win for the Seahawks. If this were in Seattle, I would favor the Hawks, by far.. But since that isn't the case, this game is close to a coin toss.

I hope i'm wrong.