Comparing the 2009 Skins to the 2011 Skins

[Califan007]

Mike Wise said in his article that "Beyond an upgraded defensive line and Ryan Kerrigan becoming a breakout star, no solid evidence exists that Shanaplan is working. What other position group is significantly better than it was two years ago?"...

I thought it might be a good idea to not only help Wise out, but any other media members who might be having a hard time seeing any change in the Skins now compared to the Skins back then. So let's make a list of things that have changed for the better under Shanahan's watch, kind of a crib sheet for journalists to use for future articles. Since those like Wise apparently don't really follow the Redskins, I think we should help them out :thumbsup:...

I'll start:

Top two RBs (yards), 2009:
Portis: 494 yds, 4.0 ypc
Cartwright: 228 yds, 3.6 ypc

Combined receptions: 36 catches, 299 yds


Top two RBs (yards), 2011:
Helu: 640 yds, 4.2 ypc
Royster: 328 yds, 5.9 ypc

Combined receptions: 59 catches, 455 yds


Scoring offense, 2009:
16.6 ppg

Scoring offense, 2011:
18.0 ppg

---------- Post added January-4th-2012 at 09:44 AM ----------

Yards per game, 2009:
312.5 yards

Yards per game, 2011:
336.7 yards

[Redskins Ruckus]

I see an improvement as well. I also went into this season with no expectations of a payoff birth. I would have liked to have seen a better record, but considering the injuries we suffered and the lack of a quality QB, I am not surprised.

[KDawg]

Scoring offense, 2009:
16.6 ppg

Scoring offense, 2011:
18.0 ppg

That's actually not really proving a point. Our scoring offense is still horrendous.

2011: We scored 288 points.

6 were scored defensively (Kerrigan), 118 were scored by Gano.

288 - 124 = 164 points scored offensively

The 2009 Redskins scored 266 points.

No defensive or special teams touchdowns were scored.

Shaun Suisham scored 74 points, Graham Gano scored 18 points.

So 266 - 92 = 174 points scored offensively.

The 2009 team actually scored more offensive points.

Where the team has improved is in other ways, that aren't measured by statistics, which Wise seemed to have missed.

We have a much better core now.

Santana Moss, Devin Thomas, Malcolm Kelly, ARE, Marko Mitchell < Santana Moss, Leonard Hankerson, Jabar Gaffney, Donte Stallworth, David Anderson

Clinton Portis, Rock Cartwright, Quinton Ganther < Evan Royster, Roy Helu, Tim Hightower

Mike Sellers < Darrell Young

Levi Jones < Trent Williams (Chris Samuels only played 5 games before being injured)

Derrick Dockery > Maurice Hurt (for now, even in this system, though I think Hurt may be a pretty decent long term piece of the puzzle)

Casey Rabach < Will Montgomery

Big Mike Williams < Chris Chester

Stephon Heyer < Jamaal Brown

Our entire offense is virtually better, sans quarterback.

It's just not necessarily better production wise.

[Califan007]

Division record, 2009:
0-6

Division record, 2011:
2-4

[RFK Lives]

I went to check penalties per game to see if that was improved, it is but only marginal. Will look for something better but I always look for team discipline as a result of solid coaching and focus from the players.

2009 - 5.3 penalties per game (9th least penalized)
2011 - 5.0 penalties per game (5th least penalized)

[hail2skins]

2009: Vinny employed by the Skins
2011: Vinny not employed by the Skins

That is all.

[Califan007]

That's actually not really proving a point. Our scoring offense is still horrendous.

2011: We scored 288 points.

6 were scored defensively (Kerrigan), 118 were scored by Gano.

288 - 124 = 164 points scored offensively

The 2009 Redskins scored 266 points.

No defensive or special teams touchdowns were scored.

Shaun Suisham scored 74 points, Graham Gano scored 18 points.

So 266 - 92 = 174 points scored offensively.

The 2009 team actually scored more offensive points.

Unless your FG kicker is scoring field goals without the offense moving the ball even 1 yard, separating out the FGs made is an inaccurate way of measuring offensive scoring. 99% of the time those field goals are absolutely dependent upon offensive production and should absolutely be considered part included in offensive scoring.




Where the team has improved is in other ways, that aren't measured by statistics, which Wise seemed to have missed.

We have a much better core now.

Santana Moss, Devin Thomas, Malcolm Kelly, ARE, Marko Mitchell < Santana Moss, Leonard Hankerson, Jabar Gaffney, Donte Stallworth, David Anderson

Clinton Portis, Rock Cartwright, Quinton Ganther < Evan Royster, Roy Helu, Tim Hightower

Mike Sellers < Darrell Young

Levi Jones < Trent Williams (Chris Samuels only played 5 games before being injured)

Derrick Dockery > Maurice Hurt (for now, even in this system, though I think Hurt may be a pretty decent long term piece of the puzzle)

Casey Rabach < Will Montgomery

Big Mike Williams < Chris Chester

Stephon Heyer < Jamaal Brown

Our entire offense is virtually better, sans quarterback.

It's just not necessarily better production wise.
Agree with all of that :yes:...but there ARE many places where the Skins this season were indeed better production-wise than the Skins of 2009 as well.

[KDawg]

Unless your FG kicker is scoring field goals without the offense moving the ball even 1 yard, separating out the FGs made is an inaccurate way of measuring offensive scoring. 99% of the time those field goals are absolutely dependent upon offensive production and should absolutely be considered part included in offensive scoring.

I disagree. A missed field goal is on the special teams, not the offense in most people's minds. The logic is rarely (although it does happen, admittedly) "the offense should have gotten in a better position". It's "The kicker stinks, or the line can't block".

But even if you include it, the numbers are still stupid close. The 2009 team scored 266 points. The 2011 team scored 282 points. But, marginally better is better, so if you choose to include field goals, then yes, the 2011 team did score better.

I view kicking as an independent statistic. The offense shouldn't necessarily be punished for a missed field goal, and they shouldn't be rewarded for a made one. I also don't think a kicker should get full blame for missing a 52 yard + field goal attempt. That's a stab in the dark by the coaching staff.

But, that's just my two cents.

[elkabong82]

Our team overall is significantly younger now, even at depth, yet that fact seems to completely escape them. Odd, because they used to harp on the Skins all the time for being old, yet now don't give any credit for them being young.

We have the RBs, Young at FB, Hankerson, Austin, Paul at WR. We still have Davis at TE, Trent at LT, Hurt at LG, Monty starting C, Chester, Willie Smith. On defense the DL guys are under 30, and Jarvis Jenkins comes back, we have Neild also. We have Orakpo as in '09 also, but also Riley and Kerrigan. Wilson was a good addition, Gomes has come along, Westbrook looks better though Barnes has regressed. We have a young kicker and a young KR/PR as well.

2009 we had Collins backing up at QB, CP, Betts, Rock at RB, Mike Sellers was starting FB, we had ARE as a #2 WR and the Comb and DT behind him, TE spot was similar, xcept we had Yoder instead of Paulsen, our starting OL had Samuels, but also Dockery, Rabach, Randy Thomas who were all past productivity, and we had Heyer.The depth wasn't good outside of Monty. Defense we had big Phil and Carter, but also Fat Al, Griffin, Wynn, and Golston was a rotational starter, this year is about out. We had Anthony Montgomery, we still had injured Jarmon, we did have Zo though. LBer after 59 and 98 we had Rocky starting, we had henson, and Blades also. We had Rogers "I refuse to get eye surgery" starting and we had Smoot winding down and Tryon not fitting in, we did have Barnes and Westbrook, who rarely got PT. At safety after Landry we had Horton, Moore, and Doughty, and that was it, ugghh. We had Hunter Smith at punter. Suisham at K who has turned out well now, at LS we had Albright, now we have Sundberg.

The biggest difference between the two is age and potential, but those don't fit the narrative of people like Wise who post negative exaggerations just to rile people up to improve ratings. They use it as a crutch since their journalistic capabilities are lacking.

[hail2skins]

Speaking of the offense, not that it really matters in the grand scheme, but Steinberg has an entry today which says the Skins haven't scored 35 or more points in 92 games.....and that was in an OT game against Jacksonville in early '06 when we hit 36. We did it back-to-back with two 35s against Dallas and NY in that late '05 run. The next team on the list with the longest sub-35 point drought is Cincy with like 41 games. Ugh.

[Califan007]

Starting WRs, 2009:
Moss: 3 TDs
ARE: 0 TDs

Combined yards: 1,432


Starting WRs, 2011:
Moss: 4 TDs
Gaffney: 5 TDs

Combined yards: 1,531

[Califan007]

I disagree. A missed field goal is on the special teams, not the offense in most people's minds. The logic is rarely (although it does happen, admittedly) "the offense should have gotten in a better position". It's "The kicker stinks, or the line can't block".
How is that any different than the logic that says "The QB should have thrown the ball better" or "the RB shouldn't have stumbled/fumbled/whatever"?



But even if you include it, the numbers are still stupid close. The 2009 team scored 266 points. The 2011 team scored 282 points. But, marginally better is better, so if you choose to include field goals, then yes, the 2011 team did score better.
As a seasonal total, you're right. But within individual games, an extra point or two can be the difference between a win or a loss.


I view kicking as an independent statistic. The offense shouldn't necessarily be punished for a missed field goal, and they shouldn't be rewarded for a made one. I also don't think a kicker should get full blame for missing a 52 yard + field goal attempt. That's a stab in the dark by the coaching staff.
That's why yards per game for the offense is included lol...the offense still gets "rewarded" even if your idiot kicker shanks a 25 yard field goal. And if you put both the yards per game AND the points per game together, you get a noticeable improvement from 2009 to 2011.

[BillyKilmer]

When the new regime took control we were overrated, old, and miscast for the 3-4. Character flaws in more then just Fat Albert have been revealed and dealt with to some extent either by the staff or the NFL's policies. The Defense is in better shape now, we are younger at many key spots.
We lack depth on both sides of the ball but our G.M and staff seem to be rectifying this through both the draft and free agency. Last years draft and free agent class brought in a nice group of young and talented players who fit the schemes our staff has implemented. We need this new trend to continue hopefully bringing in play makers for the offensive side of the ball.and depth for the defense.

Notable players I think will not return for 2012

LaRon Landry
Phillip Buchanon
Donte Stallworth
Brandon Banks
Chris Cooley
Rocky Mcintosh
Mike Sellers
John Beck









Allen

[KDawg]

How is that any different than the logic that says "The QB should have thrown the ball better" or "the RB shouldn't have stumbled/fumbled/whatever"?

I'm not following your point, though even when I don't agree with you, you seem to have pretty sound logic for the most part, so I'm sure I'm just missing something.


As a seasonal total, you're right. But within individual games, an extra point or two can be the difference between a win or a loss.

That can't be debated. But points per game is a seasonal statistic as well. You could be shut out once, and score 36 points once and your average is still 18 points per game, and it may not have any bearing on the outcome.

[hail2skins]

That's why yards per game for the offense is included lol...the offense still gets "rewarded" even if your idiot kicker shanks a 25 yard field goal. And if you put both the yards per game AND the points per game together, you get a noticeable improvement from 2009 to 2011.

Even with the PPG improvement, we were still ranked 26th in the league in that department. YPG improvement gave us a nicer jump in the rankings, as we went from 22nd in 2009 to 16th this season.

Defensively, PPG allowed was 21 in 2009 (18th) and 22.9 in 2011 (21st). We were 10th in YPG allowed in 2009, and 13th in YPG allowed in 2011.

[elkabong82]

Speaking of the offense, not that it really matters in the grand scheme, but Steinberg has an entry today which says the Skins haven't scored 35 or more points in 92 games.....and that was in an OT game against Jacksonville in early '06 when we hit 36. We did it back-to-back with two 35s against Dallas and NY in that late '05 run. The next team on the list with the longest sub-35 point drought is Cincy with like 41 games. Ugh.

Why 35 points? Why not 32? Or 28? or how about 50?

It's an arbitrary number meant solely to push an agenda, which is why Steinberg put it out there. You think Cincy cares about not getting 35 points when they are in the playoffs?

Our team this season consistently scored 21+ more so than it has in a while, and with a good defense 21 points is about what you consistently need. Few teams score 35+ on a regular, or even semi-regular basis, and those teams have had stable systems that have been run, and a team that has been built, for more than just 2 seasons.

[scruffylookin]

That's actually not really proving a point. Our scoring offense is still horrendous.

2011: We scored 288 points.

6 were scored defensively (Kerrigan), 118 were scored by Gano.

288 - 124 = 164 points scored offensively

The 2009 Redskins scored 266 points.

No defensive or special teams touchdowns were scored.

Shaun Suisham scored 74 points, Graham Gano scored 18 points.

So 266 - 92 = 174 points scored offensively.

The 2009 team actually scored more offensive points.



The 09 team did have two special teams scores. The two Hunter Smith TDs. The run against the Giants in the opener and the pass to Sellers against the Broncos.

164-162 for 2011 :point2sky

Just kidding. You're overall point stands. Both offenses sucked at scoring points.

[KDawg]

The 09 team did have two special teams scores. The two Hunter Smith TDs. The run against the Giants in the opener and the pass to Sellers against the Broncos.

164-162 for 2011 :point2sky

Just kidding. You're overall point stands. Both offenses sucked at scoring points.

You're right! I missed that. I gazed over Hunter Smith. I must have completely tried to block the Swinging Gate out of my head. Good catch. Two point advantage for 2011. Hey, marginally better is still better. Although, 164-162 makes it interestingly similar :ols:

[WSHRedskins3ATLBraves3]

2009: Vinny employed by the Skins
2011: Vinny not employed by the Skins

That is all.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

2009: Vinny and Dan making the decisions
2011: Bruce and Shanny making the decisions

It's not even close.

[KDawg]

Our team this season consistently scored 21+ more so than it has in a while, and with a good defense 21 points is about what you consistently need. Few teams score 35+ on a regular, or even semi-regular basis, and those teams have had stable systems that have been run, and a team that has been built, for more than just 2 seasons.

The only counter I have here is that we still finished 5-11. We need to score points much more consistently, regardless.

[chipwhich]

2009 we had to bring in the bingo caller to get our points per game up.

It's sad how people forget how bad 2009 was. We are so far beyond the drama that was the Vinnie years, it's not even close.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Defensively, PPG allowed was 21 in 2009 (18th) and 22.9 in 2011 (21st). We were 10th in YPG allowed in 2009, and 13th in YPG allowed in 2011.

In other words, our "much improved defense" has actually gotten worse.

[Riggo#44]

Two words I can't believe no one has mentioned: Average Age.

2009: 28.0
2011: 26.7

[acuratl1984]

Here's what I look at in terms of improvement

Year 1:
Derailments: Or Events that did not help Shanny.
No Free Agency (Not really anyways)
Mistake in trading for McNabb (Lost 2nd rounder + 2011 4th)
Chris Samuel's retirement
Fat Albert debacle.

Draft Wise:
1) HAD to use 1st on OT - Trent Williams
2) Mistake in McNabb no 2nd rounder
3) Jarmon so no 3rd rounder (Thank you Cerrato)
4) Perry Riley - Our Starting ILB2
5) Traded for Adam Carriker
6) Dennis Morris sucked/gone
7) Terrance Austin - still here
7.2) Erik Cook - sucks will be gone next year.
7.3) S. Caper - he was too Selvish

UDFA:
KR: Brandon Banks
TE: Logan Paulsen

Year one summary, in a year with out free agency, and very limited draft picks.
We got:

Starting OT - Trent Williams
Starting ILB - Perry Riley
Starting DE - Adam Cariker
KR - Brandon Banks
Blocking TE - Logan Paulsen

Year 2:
Derailments?
Not Drafting a QB

Other notable moves
Traded Fat Albert for a 5th.
Traded McNabb for a 6th
Signed Cofield/Bowen/Atogwe
Traded or rather stole: Gaffney and Hightower

Draft: No need to recap the picks, we had a league high 12 draft picks.
11 of the 12 players made team at some point int he season, 12/12 if you count Jarvis Jenkins
9/12 players started or played extensively (Jarvis Jenkins IR, Brandyn Thompson, and Aldrick Robinson did not play)

Defense ranking:
09: 10th P 8th R 16th
10: 31st P 31st R 26th
11: 13th P 12th R 18th

The best thing about Shanny/Allen.

They fix their mistakes or Cerrato's mistakes also.

Trading away Fat Albert for a 5th.
Trading away McNabb for a 6th.

Remember Cerrato and Zorn let Jason Taylor walk after giving Miami a 2nd and 4th?. He went back to Miami the following year.

[Califan007]

I'm not following your point, though even when I don't agree with you, you seem to have pretty sound logic for the most part, so I'm sure I'm just missing something.
A kicker shanking a makable FG is no different than a WR dropping a catchable pass in the end zone, as both take points away from what would have been a successful offensive drive. In fact, the argument can be made that giving the FG points to the offense makes the most sense, as while the offense still gets "punished" for not getting the ball into the end zone, they also get "rewarded" for having a successful drive that put them in scoring range.




That can't be debated. But points per game is a seasonal statistic as well. You could be shut out once, and score 36 points once and your average is still 18 points per game, and it may not have any bearing on the outcome.
If the season was 2 games long, you'd be right lol...but over the length of an entire season those types of things end up evening out in the long run.

[Riggo#44]

The biggest difference between the two is age and potential, but those don't fit the narrative of people like Wise who post negative exaggerations just to rile people up to improve ratings. They use it as a crutch since their journalistic capabilities are lacking.

Thank you.

No one mentions that when they trot out the out-of-context "Shanahan has won one less game than Zorn!" crap...

[Califan007]

In other words, our "much improved defense" has actually gotten worse.

Some of that is offset by comparing the stats and rankings of the offenses each defense went up against. For example...

6 out of 16 games in 2009 were against offenses ranked in the bottom 11 in terms of scoring.

2011? Only 2 of the 16 games were against offenses ranked in the bottom 11 in terms of scoring.

[endzone_dave]

This team was 5-11 with NOTHING in place at QB. It's going to be a few more years of bad results before it can get better.

The Skins also put in a lot of new pieces in defense and it was only an average defense. I guess one strategy would be to keep the defense average and put in a high octane offense but that goes back to having nothing in place at the QB position.

Still hopeful but it's going to be a while.

[RFKFedEx]

In 2011 we didn't have any diva players who'd cry to the owner when they didn't get their way. In 2009 we had former star players who had the liberty to take themselves in and out of games as they saw fit, and practiced when they choose to do so. There was no correlation between the amount of practice and gametime each week. It's not like that anymore.

[Aghar]

2009 - Old and sucked
2011 - Young and has potential but still record sucked

Just to add something to the argument about the defense, anyone have a way to find out the average starting field position opposing offenses were working with? Seemed, more times than not, they were working a short field after a hideous turnover by us..

[DjTj]

Why 35 points? Why not 32? Or 28? or how about 50?

It's an arbitrary number meant solely to push an agenda, which is why Steinberg put it out there. You think Cincy cares about not getting 35 points when they are in the playoffs?

Our team this season consistently scored 21+ more so than it has in a while, and with a good defense 21 points is about what you consistently need. Few teams score 35+ on a regular, or even semi-regular basis, and those teams have had stable systems that have been run, and a team that has been built, for more than just 2 seasons.35 is 5 touchdowns in a game. It's not completely arbitrary. And if you put the number at 30, we are one of the few teams that failed to score 30 points in any game this year.

And we actually only scored more than 21 points in only seven games this year, so we're not that great by that metric either. We averaged 18.0 points per game this year, which was 26th in the league. That's a little worse than last year, but better than 2009, when we averaged 16.6 points per game. You don't need to have an agenda to realize that our offense is among the worst in the league, and it has been for the past five years.

There are maybe a few signs of hope, but we still have a ways to go.

[Califan007]

35 is 5 touchdowns in a game. It's not completely arbitrary. And if you put the number at 30, we are one of the few teams that failed to score 30 points in any game this year.

And we actually only scored more than 21 points in only seven games this year, so we're not that great by that metric either.

Games of 21+ points, 2009:
4

Games of 21+ points, 2011:
7

Thanks for that lol :thumbsup:

[KingGibbs]

With all of the talk that we've improved here and improved there the one and only important stat that matters is W-L record. We've regressed and I would like to believe we've improved, but there are areas on this team where we've taken a step backwards starting with the secondary and our receiving corp was pathetic in terms of YAC. How many playmakers do we have on offense? Maybe one. That being Fred Davis and who knows if he'll be back. Our offensive line is still a big question mark and QB? Self explanatory.

On defense there were upgrades with the DL and LB'ing corp, but I think some people are grading those two units a little too highly. Secondary needs to be revamped.

Sorry I'm not going into specifics, but most of you know what I'm referring to.

I won't consider this team "improved" until our record indicates we've imroved. Moral victories have gotten stale and to have to point out stats that show a VERY marginal improvement from previous years stats isn't exactly awe inspiring, but more like excuses. We still have a LONG way to go.

[chipwhich]

I won't consider this team "improved" until our record indicates we've imroved. Moral victories have gotten stale and to have to point out stats that show a VERY marginal improvement from previous years stats isn't exactly awe inspiring, but more like excuses. We still have a LONG way to go.

Moral victories have gotten stale??? :ols:

What moral victories have we had.

[Califan007]

With all of the talk that we've improved here and improved there the one and only important stat that matters is W-L record. We've regressed and....

If the "one and only important stat that matters" is the win/loss record, how is going from 4-12 to 6-10 and 5-11 a "regression"? lol...

[KingGibbs]

If the "one and only important stat that matters" is the win/loss record, how is going from 4-12 to 6-10 and 5-11 a "regression"? lol...

When comparing '11 to '10 I must have missed that part in math where 5 is greater then six. One more win in '11 then we had in '09. You call that a significant improvement?[COLOR="Gold"]

---------- Post added January-4th-2012 at 03:38 PM ----------


Moral victories have gotten stale??? :ols:

What moral victories have we had.

I'm referring to people claiming that we are better in areas stat wise that gives them cause to celebrate.

[KDawg]

A kicker shanking a makable FG is no different than a WR dropping a catchable pass in the end zone, as both take points away from what would have been a successful offensive drive. In fact, the argument can be made that giving the FG points to the offense makes the most sense, as while the offense still gets "punished" for not getting the ball into the end zone, they also get "rewarded" for having a successful drive that put them in scoring range.

Except the receiver that dropped the ball is actually a part of the offensive unit.


If the season was 2 games long, you'd be right lol...but over the length of an entire season those types of things end up evening out in the long run.

Eh, not really. Scoring 18 points per game isn't going to win you many games. And neither is 16.6 or whatever god awful number we've put up.

[chipwhich]

I'm referring to people claiming that we are better in areas stat wise that gives them cause to celebrate.


Gotcha.

About the only moral victory we have gotten is losing Vinny for good.

Other than that, we have the same questions today as we have under the Snyder era. I just have a little more optimism because we are using the draft it appears, and we are done signing the highest price free agent on the market...it appears...which is another 2009/2011 difference.

[Califan007]

When comparing '11 to '10 I must have missed that part in math where 5 is greater then six. One more win in '11 then we had in '09. You call that a significant improvement?
1) No, you must have missed the part in English that covers reading comprehension lol...because this thread is comparing the 2009 stats to the 2011 stats to see if we have improved. So since the only stat that matters is the number of wins that means the team HAS improved from 2009, no? lol ;)

2) If one less win between 2010 and 2011 can be described as "regression", then one MORE win between 2009 and 2011 should be described as "improvement", no? lol ;)

3) You first just said "improvement"...now it needs to be "significant improvement"? What would be significant improvement in terms of number of wins?

[Califan007]

Except the receiver that dropped the ball is actually a part of the offensive unit.
So, we don't include extra points either?

Besides, your earlier point I was addressing was that it was unfair for the offense to be penalized by a placekicker shanking a field goal. My point was to show that the offense is ALSO being penalized when a WR drops a sure TD pass or a QB overthrows an open player in the end zone.




Eh, not really. Scoring 18 points per game isn't going to win you many games. And neither is 16.6 or whatever god awful number we've put up.

I know...but even if it wins you one more game, that might make a significant difference. Hell, we had a massive thread about how winning the Seahawks game put the Skins back 5 years :ols: :silly:...

[DC9]

cough, cough... ahem....


Dear Mike Wise,

You need not look further than the previous years draft vs contribution to the team.

2008/2009

2008 Draft:
Devin Thomas (playing special teams for the Giants)
Fred Davis (contributing)
Malcolm Kelly (out of the league)
Chad Rhinehardt (playing for the Bills)
Justin Tryon (playing special teams for the Colts)
Durant Brooks (out of the league)
Kareem Moore (has contributed)
Colt Brennan (out of the league)
Rob Jackson (contributing)
Chris Horton (out of the league)

10 picks/ 3 still on the team / 4 out of the league

2009 Draft:
Brian Orakpo (contributing)
Kevin Barnes (contributing but won't likely be back)
Cody Glenn (out of the league)
Robert Henson (out of the league)
Eddie Williams (the Tight End) (out of the league)
Marko Mitchell (out of the league)

supplemental pick: Jeremy Jarmon (traded and then cut/I don't know if he was ever picked up)

7 picks / 2 still on the team / 5 out of the league

2010:
Trent Williams (contributing)
Perry Riley (contributing)
Dennis Moore (out of the league)
Terrance Austin (contributing)
Erik Cook (contributing)
Selvish Capers (out of the league)

6 picks / 4 still on the team / 2 out of the league

UDFA:
Brandon Banks (contributing)
Keiland Williams (cut, then picked up by a playoff team and is contributing)
Logan Paulsen (contributing)

3 signings / 2 starters / one started for a Lions team in the playoffs

2011:
Ryan Kerrigan (contributing)
Jarvis Jenkins (IR/but was contributing and will contribute)
Leonard Hankerson (IR/but was contributing and will contribute)
Niles Paul (contributing)
DJ Gomes (contributing)
Roy Helu (contributing)
Evan Royster (contributing)
Maurice Hurt (contributing)
Markice White (contributing)
Brandyn Thompson (practice squad/contributing)
Aldrick Robinson (practice squad)
Chris Neild (contributing)

12 picks / 11 on the team / 1 on the practice squad / 12 contributing

What you need to look at Mike, is how many players Cerrato picked or signed to be "core members" of this team, that weren't just old and big bad Shanny cut them, but after they were cut.... who signed them? NOBODY! The CORE of the Redskins in 2009, couldn't even be signed as backups by any other team.

Cornelius Griffin
Renaldo Wynn
Fred Smoot
HB Blades
Curtis Gatewood
Alvin Bowen
Marcus Mason
Quinton Ganther
PJ Hill
Malcolm Kelly
Randy Thomas
Clinton Portis
Eddie Williams

This was the core of a team... and there wasn't even a player on it that would rate a back up spot on another team in the league.

Now, this is what Shanny means when he says "we have no depth." Because other teams drafted their depth in 2008 and 2009.... we have five players on this team from those drafts.

And you can't say "Well Shanny cut all of the players for 'his' guys" and act like the players he cut were so much better. What are those players doing right now? Nothing.

He hasn't had enough time to fix the whole roster with "his" guys yet, but the guys that are here are workers and they are more Shanny's guys than not.

The 2009 squad was full of aging vets and young players (most of which) that weren't going anywhere.

The 2011 squad has exciting young players on both sides of the ball that have yet to reach their potential, but are definite building blocks for the future.


HAIL!

[KingGibbs]

1) No, you must have missed the part in English that covers reading comprehension lol...because this thread is comparing the 2009 stats to the 2011 stats to see if we have improved. So since the only stat that matters is the number of wins that means the team HAS improved from 2009, no? lol ;)

2) If one less win between 2010 and 2011 can be described as "regression", then one MORE win between 2009 and 2011 should be described as "improvement", no? lol ;)

3) You first just said "improvement"...now it needs to be "significant improvement"? What would be significant improvement in terms of number of wins?

Well if a Mike Shannhan coached team having ONE more victory than does a Jim freaking Zorn team is improvement then you really have lowered your standards.

When I bring up W-Lrecord being an indicator I mean at least .500 and better. You knew that, but I know how you like to debate.

[Califan007]

Well if a Mike Shannhan coached team having ONE more victory than does a Jim freaking Zorn team is improvement then you really have lowered your standards.
I haven't said anything about how I feel about W/L records or being satisfied with them. I'm just saying that by YOUR definition earlier--that the only stat that matters is number of wins and that winning one game less than the previous year should be seen as "regression"--then it means you should see the 2011 team as an improvement on the 2009 team.



When I bring up W-Lrecord being an indicator I mean at least .500 and better. You knew that, but I know how you like to debate.
No, I'm going on exactly what you said earlier without inserting my own biases. For all I know you would have seen a 7-9 record this year as "improvement", especially over the 4-12 record of 2009.

So then let me ask this: what should Shanahan have done to make the 4-12 team of 2009 become at LEAST an 8-8 or 9-7 team in 2011?

[KingGibbs]

I haven't said anything about how I feel about W/L records or being satisfied with them. I'm just saying that by YOUR definition earlier--that the only stat that matters is number of wins and that winning one game less than the previous year should be seen as "regression"--then it means you should see the 2011 team as an improvement on the 2009 team.


Here's the bottom-line Cali. Comparing '11 to '09 and Zorn nto Shanny is flat out assinine. Zorn had no control over the team even thogh he wore the title "head coach." Shanny has total control of the "football" operations and had a resume that included two Lombardi's. What was Zorn's coaching resume? "LOL."

If you are going to compare two seasons with a current coaching staff perhaps you should compare it with the preceeding year. No? So in reality, record wise, we've regressed. I know that's hard for you to "comprehend." "LOL."

Just for the record. I have stated many times I'm willing to give Shanny and Allen time to clean up the the mess that Vinny left behind, but I'm not gullible enough that Shanny is exempt (as I've also stated before) from criticism.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

On defense there were upgrades with the DL and LB'ing corp, but I think some people are grading those two units a little too highly. Secondary needs to be revamped.


I think the Snyder Era has killed our fanbase's football sense to some degree. We've watched so much bad football that we naturally assume that anything different is "good" football.

What we are seeing is definitely different. I'm not convinced that it's good though. Let's talk about the vaunted youth and 12 draft picks. The thing to remember is, you need to fill out a roster. You need 53 active players. You need 45 on game day. You need 22 starters. Those players must exist and they must come from somewhere. So, just saying that we have rookies playing doesn't necessarily mean that they are good. It just means that someone has to play and they are here. Yes we have a lot of contributers. They are contributing to a really bad football team at the moment.

(As I've said before, if we had a young receiver perform like Antonio Brown or Victor Cruz, the board would melt down).

I also get the sense that Shanahan - more or less - wants to wipe the slate clean completely and have 2010 be the starting point for this team. So, anyone here before he got here was highly at risk unless there were exceptional circumstances that necessitated keeping them.

[Califan007]

Here's the bottom-line Cali. Comparing '11 to '09 and Zorn nto Shanny is flat out assinine.
Wise wrote an entire column behind doing just that...so you might be right lol...



Zorn had no control over the team even thogh he wore the title "head coach." Shanny has total control of the "football" operations and had a resume that included two Lombardi's. What was Zorn's coaching resume? "LOL."

If you are going to compare two seasons with a current coaching staff perhaps you should compare it with the preceeding year. No? So in reality, record wise, we've regressed. I know that's hard for you to "comprehend." "LOL."
You may need to read the OP again, because clearly everything is sailing way over your head lol--and yes, I love inserting "lol" when responding to you ;)...I find it hysterical when people get their testicles knotted up because some anonymous poster on one of millions of message boards typed out three little letters in succession lol :cool:...but you're right, ridiculing the use of "lol" DEFINITELY makes your point stronger :yes:...so I can see why you do it.

Anyway, you've constructed and entirely new topic to debate, I'm guessing because you didn't like where the actual topic was going. I see that a lot around here :ols:...


Just for the record. I have stated many times I'm willing to give Shanny and Allen time to clean up the the mess that Vinny left behind, but I'm not gullible enough that Shanny is exempt (as I've also stated before) from criticism.

And I haven't seen anyone on this thread claim that Shanahan IS exempt from criticism. But the criticism has to be valid. You can't see anything beyond the number of wins, so I don't really expect you to be able to tell which criticisms hold merit and which criticisms are full of ****. But Wise I do expect that from...my mistake, I know.

---------- Post added January-4th-2012 at 01:46 PM ----------


I think the Snyder Era has killed our fanbase's football sense to some degree. We've watched so much bad football that we naturally assume that anything different is "good" football.

What we are seeing is definitely different.

So you wouldn't describe the play and production of the D-Line as "good"....just as "different". Interesting.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

So you wouldn't describe the play and production of the D-Line as "good"....just as "different". Interesting.

It's ok. The only real job that a 3-4 line has is occupy blockers so linebackers can make tackles in the run game. We had the 18th best run defense in the league. That's more or less the definition of "ok."

I'm just not that impressed with this defense. I see all this crazy praise here and I'm not sure why. If London Fletcher suddenly wakes up old, I fear for our run defense in a big way.

I don't particularly care for Haslett but he certainly knows how to draw up a blitz. And we have some guys in the front seven who can get home. So we get sacks. That's kind of our thing on defense. It doesn't overwhelm me but it's something.

[Califan007]

It's ok. The only real job that a 3-4 line has is occupy blockers so linebackers can make tackles in the run game. We had the 18th best run defense in the league. That's more or less the definition of "ok."
1) That's the only real job of defensive linemen in the 3-4? lol...Really?

2) If the linebackers aren't making the tackles even though the DLinemen are doing their "only" job of occupying blockers, then what? DLinemen don't cause LBs to take bad angles or misread plays.

3) Fletcher lead the league in tackles. Between McIntosh and Riley, they had 130 tackles combined playing next to Fletcher. That would have landed two LBs in the top 10 in the league in terms of tackles...so I'm guessing that making tackles wasn't the issue. Either that, or simply stating the run defense stat doesn't tell the whole story.



I'm just not that impressed with this defense. I see all this crazy praise here and I'm not sure why. If London Fletcher suddenly wakes up old, I fear for our run defense in a big way.

I don't particularly care for Haslett but he certainly knows how to draw up a blitz. And we have some guys in the front seven who can get home. So we get sacks. That's kind of our thing on defense. It doesn't overwhelm me but it's something.
There are more than a few ES members who need to see regular dominating performances before they will say improvement has been achieved by any unit or on either side of the ball. I'm definitely not one of them lol...I love marking the progress, seeing the changes from one year to the next start to pan out. What you may be mistaking as "crazy praise" is probably just fans happy to actually see moves starting to work the way it's intended. We find pleasure in seeing the team moving forwards towards its ultimate goal. And we really love seeing that it's being done with young drafted players and young, smart FA acquisitions.

I'm enjoying the journey towards the goal...Wise feels like we're just sitting in the driveway convincing ourselves that the car actually moved lol. Me? I'm reminding myself that in 2009 the tank was empty, we needed a new radiator, fuel pump, spark plugs, battery, oil change, transmission...yeah, we could have still driven the car but it never would have gotten us to where we wanted to be. So, Shanahan has only changed the oil, replaced the spark plugs and radiator, charged the battery for now and put 1/3rd a tank of gas in so far. At least I'm no longer thinking the thing's gonna break down a mile out of town :ols:...If he keeps making repairs, we'll be sailing with the top down soon enough.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

1) That's the only real job of defensive linemen in the 3-4? lol...Really?


That and occupying linemen on passing downs. Their job is basically to push two human beings two inches in the direction they do not wish to be pushed.

---------- Post added January-4th-2012 at 06:24 PM ----------


1 There are more than a few ES members who need to see regular dominating performances before they will say improvement has been achieved by any unit or on either side of the ball.

I would like to see the Skins not give up 30 points in four of the last five games. Our defense sucked for the last five weeks.

[ArtMonkwastheman]

2009: Vinny employed by the Skins
2011: Vinny not employed by the Skins

That is all.

I LOL'd and oh so true!

I wouldn't compare our O with '09 because I have a feeling changes are coming quickly this draft/ FA. This past season was just hopefully the "I need to see what I really need" season.

[Califan007]

That and occupying linemen on passing downs. Their job is basically to push two human beings two inches in the direction they do not wish to be pushed.
So then it's not the "only" thing DLinemen have to do lol...


I would like to see the Skins not give up 30 points in four of the last five games. Our defense sucked for the last five weeks.

I don't think any fans would disagree with that. But I do think there are a lot of fans who saw--before those last 5 games--some very real moments of what this defense is capable of becoming. Many of the people giving out "crazy praise" (as you put it) will also say without hesitation that the defense still needs help (NT, ILB, the entire secondary lol)...but they are loving some of the new parts that arrived over the last two offseasons and can see them improving the more time they spend together in the same scheme.

[PerryMason]

When the new regime took control we were overrated, old, and miscast for the 3-4. Character flaws in more then just Fat Albert have been revealed and dealt with to some extent either by the staff or the NFL's policies. The Defense is in better shape now, we are younger at many key spots.
We lack depth on both sides of the ball but our G.M and staff seem to be rectifying this through both the draft and free agency. Last years draft and free agent class brought in a nice group of young and talented players who fit the schemes our staff has implemented. We need this new trend to continue hopefully bringing in play makers for the offensive side of the ball.and depth for the defense.

Notable players I think will not return for 2012

LaRon Landry
Phillip Buchanon
Donte Stallworth
Brandon Banks
Chris Cooley
Rocky Mcintosh
Mike Sellers
John Beck









Allen

You have a chance on being right on all of those except Brandon Banks. Shannhan knows how dangerous he is as a returner, and while he may not have returned one for a TD this year, neither did any other NFC East return men and the returns he did have were pretty darn good. He's staying no doubt.

[KingGibbs]

Good morning Cali. I just checked my testicles as I was pissing this morning and they weren't "knotted up" as you suggested. As a matter of fact they seem to be losing the fight with gravity as I get older.:ols:

[Darrell Green Fan]

Good God is Mike Wise an idiot. The '09 team was the oldest in the league and had exactly one good young player, Rak. Now we've got a long list of young, productive players. Remember Jason Campbell's last few games? Playing behind an OL that had about the same number of injuries as this year's team the protection was a joke and the poor bastard had no chance. This year we lose 3 starters and the OL really didn't drop off too badly. And that is the one of the weaker units on the team.

[KDawg]

When using Football Outsiders advanced statistics for team efficiency, here is how the 2011 team stacks up with the 2009 team:

Here's their primer:


These are the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings for 2011, measured by our proprietary Defense-adjusted Value Over Average (DVOA) system that breaks down every single NFL play and compares a team's performance to a league baseline based on situation in order to determine value over average. (Explained further here.)

OFFENSE and DEFENSE DVOA are adjusted based on strength of opponent as well as to consider all fumbles, kept or lost, as equal value. SPECIAL TEAMS DVOA is adjusted for type of stadium (warm, cold, dome, Denver) and week of season. NON-ADJUSTED TOTAL VOA does not include these adjustments.

As always, positive numbers represent more points so DEFENSE is better when it is NEGATIVE. LAST YEAR represents 2010 rank.

And here's the numbers they come up with:

Total DVOA: -5.9% (2011), -5.9% (2009)
Result: Dead even

Non-Adj. Total VOA: -13.4% (2011), -6.2% (2009)
Result: 2009 was better

Offensive DVOA: -2.1% (2011), -4.7% (2009)
Result: 2011 was better

Defensive DVOA: (Remember, you WANT this number in the negatives) 2.8% (2011), -0.1% (2009)
Result: 2009 was better

Special Teams DVOA: -1.0% (2011), -1.3% (2009)
Result: 2011 was better


All these numbers can be found at http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff

So numbers wise, our offense and special teams were better in 2011. Our defense was better in 2009. And we were dead even in both years in total DVOA.

But again, where we saw improvement was in how the roster was built in 2011, not necessarily statistically.

[Mursilis]

Good God is Mike Wise an idiot. The '09 team was the oldest in the league and had exactly one good young player, Rak.

Fred Davis is not good? Or young? Rogers wasn't half-bad either.

[Darrell Green Fan]

Fred Davis is not good? Or young? Rogers wasn't half-bad either.

Fred Davis was off a lot of people's draft board at the time for the knucklehead factor. Now we see why. His future is very much in doubt. Rogers excelled in another city, that doesn't count. He was never even close to being as productive here as he should have given his draft position.

So even giving you those 2 that's exactly 3. Now look at this roster and compare.