Login

*JimmyinSD* · 11-15-2017, 08:25 PM

Somebody the other day was complaining about the defense surrendering points and their concerns about that being an issue worth discussing. I suggested starting a new thread but it didnt happen... but it does raise and interesting question considering the timing of the defensive downturn. last year it was about this time that the D started to struggle and it was blamed on the offensive woes and the cumulative effect of the D being left on the field to much ( which I disagreed with based on our offensive time of possession being respectable) now this year we are seeing even better offensive production on the score board, but once again we are seeing our D start slow, and in recent games give up more points than many fans think they should.

what say you.. is there a reason to be concerned?

11-15-2017, 08:39 PM

I think it's just fans trying to not start believing that we have a pretty good team. Ok we gave up a few to the Redskins who mind you aren't terrible. Oh and we gave up two back to back pics as people like to point out.

But here's our defensive allowances (we've only allowed a team to cross 20 point threshold twice):
Redskins 30Browns 16Ravens 16Packers 10Bears 17Lions 14Bucs 17Steelers 26Saints 19

11-15-2017, 08:45 PM

People....

The lyrics are "Don't STOP Believin".... Not "Don't Start Believin"

11-15-2017, 08:52 PM

i think the fact that our stout D gave up any points to the Browns is concerning.... B)

11-15-2017, 09:01 PM

Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
i think the fact that our stout D gave up any points to the Browns is concerning.... B)

Meh, funny game going overseas to play and while the Browns are a bad team they've put up some numbers/and or kept a few teams closer than you'd think they would.

18 against the steelers 2110 against ravens 2428 against the colts 317 against the Bengals 3114 against the Jets 1717 against the Texans 339 against the Titans 1216 against the Vikings 3324 against the Lions 28

11-15-2017, 09:28 PM

Quote: @Mike Olson said:
I think it's just fans trying to not start believing that we have a pretty good team. Ok we gave up a few to the Redskins who mind you aren't terrible. Oh and we gave up two back to back pics as people like to point out.

But here's our defensive allowances (we've only allowed a team to cross 20 point threshold twice):

Redskins 30Browns 16Ravens 16Packers 10Bears 17Lions 14Bucs 17Steelers 26Saints 19

And by no coincidence the only 2 over 20 were on the road to good teams. And the offense gave away points or field position.

11-15-2017, 10:38 PM

The thing that had me worried about the Skins is what I think will always bother this Defense.

Namely, a #2 WR that can go deep against Waynes and also outduel him for the ball on jump balls.

A shifty, savvy Slot WR that can put Mac Ax's head on a swivel.,

An even shiftier RB that can catch Kendricks flat-footed when in coverage.

An athletic TE running seem routes.

Washington had all of that and got enough out of their ground game to keep the Defense honest.

Unfortunately, the Rams have all that too, maybe minus the TE. Kupp will be a tough matchup for Alexander. Waynes will struggle with the Woods/Austin matchup. Gurley can manufacture yards even when there aren't any running lanes.

Going to be tough. The good news is that not that many teams have enough weapons that it makes them hard to defend. Eagles, Rams, Skins and Vikings are really the only ones in the NFC. Washington has just been too banged up on Offense and not good enough on Defense to contend like the other teams.

11-15-2017, 10:42 PM

Gurley and the play action are what concern me. I don't really think the deep pass is going to hurt this D to often. If we stop the run, we should be fine. If they get the run going, the play action will pull our LBs up and leave that middle zone open.

11-15-2017, 10:47 PM

Quote: @greediron said:

@Mike Olson said:
I think it's just fans trying to not start believing that we have a pretty good team. Ok we gave up a few to the Redskins who mind you aren't terrible. Oh and we gave up two back to back pics as people like to point out.

But here's our defensive allowances (we've only allowed a team to cross 20 point threshold twice):

Redskins 30Browns 16Ravens 16Packers 10Bears 17Lions 14Bucs 17Steelers 26Saints 19
And by no coincidence the only 2 over 20 were on the road to good teams. And the offense gave away points or field position.

ONe of which we won. The other was when we went with a gametime decision on QB.

11-15-2017, 10:49 PM

Quote: @FSUVike said:
The thing that had me worried about the Skins is what I think will always bother this Defense.

Namely, a #2 WR that can go deep against Waynes and also outduel him for the ball on jump balls.

A shifty, savvy Slot WR that can put Mac Ax's head on a swivel.,

An even shiftier RB that can catch Kendricks flat-footed when in coverage.

An athletic TE running seem routes.

Washington had all of that and got enough out of their ground game to keep the Defense honest.

Unfortunately, the Rams have all that too, maybe minus the TE. Kupp will be a tough matchup for Alexander. Waynes will struggle with the Woods/Austin matchup. Gurley can manufacture yards even when there aren't any running lanes.

Going to be tough. The good news is that not that many teams have enough weapons that it makes them hard to defend. Eagles, Rams, Skins and Vikings are really the only ones in the NFC. Washington has just been too banged up on Offense and not good enough on Defense to contend like the other teams.

They had all of that and we held a 90% chance of winning the game through the end of the 4th quarter. Yes if we play teams that are damn near stacked at every position it might be a tough game.