Defensive Struggles

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

People.... 

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

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

@"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.

@"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. 

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.

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. 

@"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. 

@"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. 

@"Mike Olson" said:

@"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. 

Other than the Skins and the Steelers... that's a pretty long list of bad teams.   (The Saints are good now... but we played them before they got their act together)

@"pumpf" said: Other than the Skins and the Steelers... that's a pretty long list of bad teams.   (The Saints are good now... but we played them before they got their act together)

The Rams are coming of playing the Watson-less Texans, the hapless Giants and the Warner-less Cardinals.  There signature win was week 4 at Dallas where the beat the Cowboys 35-30.  Other then that they have had a cake schedule wutg games against some of the worst teams in the NFL - Colts, Giants, Cardinals, 49ers.  

Between the two teams I think it is the Rams that are being over-hyped but we will find out shortly.  I think we win at home.   

I see a couple factors:

1. Our defense has been so good this year, that our standards for a bad game are much lower.
2. Washington does have a good offense.
3. Washington established enough a running game to keep the defense honest and even when we built up a big lead, turnovers and short fields quickly erased that advantage.
4. The defense clearly missed Everson Griffen.
5. Washington has one of the worst fields in the NFL, so it can lead to some uncharacteristic mistakes like Kendricks falling down in coverage.
6. We have a tendency to play soft shell coverage when up by 2+ scores at the end of the game to keep the clock running, but it does lead to opposing teams picking up some garbage points.
7. With Rhodes on the fields, teams are always going to pick on Waynes. He can make some good plays, but struggles to get his head around enough on deep passes and has some stiffness in his hips. He's improved in some ways, but I think there are certain aspects of Waynes game that we need to live with.

@"minny65" said:

@"pumpf" said: Other than the Skins and the Steelers... that's a pretty long list of bad teams.   (The Saints are good now... but we played them before they got their act together)

The Rams are coming of playing the Watson-less Texans, the hapless Giants and the Warner-less Cardinals.  There signature win was week 4 at Dallas where the beat the Cowboys 35-30.  Other then that they have had a cake schedule wutg games against some of the worst teams in the NFL - Colts, Giants, Cardinals, 49ers.  

Between the two teams I think it is the Rams that are being over-hyped but we will find out shortly.  I think we win at home.   

I thought the defense played decent, it was 35-20 when case gave away the near pick 6 to make it 35-27, then the FG drive they had late was a 13 play 41 yard drive which is the epitome of a keep it in front of you drive(13 plays to move 41 yards?)They gave up the early TD then played pretty stout, got a little lax(Rhodes dinged?) late but it was never really in doubt.  I remember when a road game was either a sure loss OR a fluke win.  I'll take ugly road wins most anytime.

@"pumpf" said: Other than the Skins and the Steelers... that's a pretty long list of bad teams.   (The Saints are good now... but we played them before they got their act together)

Funny how they got their act together after playing two division-leading teams. 

@"Mike Olson" said: People.... 

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

I laughed. Its true, though.....this fanbase has just been burned too many times unfortunately.

@"StickyBun" said:

@"Mike Olson" said: People.... 

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

I laughed. Its true, though.....this fanbase has just been burned too many times unfortunately.

@"Tyr" said: I see a couple factors:

2. Washington has one of the worst fields in the NFL, so it can lead to some uncharacteristic mistakes like Kendricks falling down in coverage.

I have some pictures of the field that will show you how bad it was. If anyone thought Chicago had a bad field..... It is like lush carpet in comparison. 

@"Mike Olson" said:

@"Tyr" said: I see a couple factors:

2. Washington has one of the worst fields in the NFL, so it can lead to some uncharacteristic mistakes like Kendricks falling down in coverage.

I have some pictures of the field that will show you how bad it was. If anyone thought Chicago had a bad field..... It is like lush carpet in comparison.