Skip to content

Poll: How many wins will the Redskins have at the bye?

Oct 4, 2016, 9:29 AM EDT


Answer the poll and then either reply on Twitter or comment here to let us know which ones they’ll win and which they’ll lose.

  1. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© - Oct 4, 2016 at 9:45 AM

    I’m hoping we get to five. Some how.

    It’s go to start in Baltimore.

  2. redskins12thman - Oct 4, 2016 at 9:56 AM

    Ideally the Redskins have five wins by the Bye Week to have a shot at the playoffs. If they are 4-4, it will be very tough to make the playoffs, especially if they lose to the Eagles. But if the Redskins lose to the Ravens and Bengals, they’re 4-4 with games against the Vikings and Packers next, followed by four days later at the Cowboys (i.e., the schedule gets even harder).

    The Redskins defense has achieved critical turnovers late in the last two games but how much longer can that continue? The defense needs to play better for the entire game; it’s putting an unfair burden on the offense and special teams to play near perfect …

    • Trey Gregory - Oct 4, 2016 at 12:54 PM

      Well we might want to call in some reinforcements then. Having Whitner in for a workout was a good start. Now sign him. Sign Pot Roast. And go see who else is out there in the way of pass rushers. I don’t care if they’re 40. Just have them in to work out.

      • redskins12thman - Oct 4, 2016 at 1:53 PM

        Mike Jones of WaPo on umpteen question on Redskins difficulty in stopping the run (in addition to tackling issues): The problem is the linemen struggle to get off blocks and clog running lanes no matter where they’re lined up. I’ve seen tweets on this too.

      • smotion55 - Oct 4, 2016 at 4:55 PM

        You are exactly right, don’t care how old get a couple of bodies in here. Why can’t they pay a little bit of money or trade a late round pick for a backup D-lineman from a good defense. A good backup would be better then at least 4 of our guys. Pot Roast will not cost much. The Head ache issue was one of the issues with him also.

        • chimps000 - Oct 5, 2016 at 9:19 AM

          Completely agree with you guys- they better bring in some more bodies, be it Pot Roast or some other guys off the street, because looking at their schedule they are not going to be favored to win a single game for a looong time, and if they fall to 2-8 the wheels are falling off this thing in a hurry… most of the goodwill from last year will be flushed down the toilet.

          BTW Joe Barry started Perry Riley most every game last year, he looked bad to my eyes, Cooley said he was terrible, but he kept getting the starts however until later in the season, and he is just now getting picked up by a team in week 5 off the street. He couldn’t even make a roster as a backup to open the season. Knighton, our starter from last year, still can’t make a roster in week 5, and here we are calling for him to play because he would not be one of our worst linemen and could most likely help our defense. Wow.

      • COSSkinsFan - Oct 4, 2016 at 10:23 PM

        I thought we’d sign pot roast quickly after he was cut, after Kendric got hurt I thought signing him would definitely happen. I don’t understand what’s to lose. It would put Iodonnis back on the practice squad and would be cheap. Hood, Baker and Knighton on the line wouldnt be horrible. I know that the argument used against investing in a nt has been that they arent on the field a lot and that we run with two dline men and then linebackers a lot. This seems like an easy explaination to why we have difficulty with stopping the run. We cant play nickel all the time and expect to stop the run consistently. I would like to see us sign Whitner as well although he may not be better than what we have at this point in his career.

        • Trey Gregory - Oct 5, 2016 at 2:01 AM

          Well a couple weeks ago “Redskinsnameisheretostay” made the point that we would probably use 3-man fronts more often if we had a true nose. And we run the 4-man fronts so often because we don’t. I tend to agree. Having Knighton would allow us more options and versitility. It could also freebuo Hood to be a 3-technique and suddenly our DE depth looks a little better. I’m with you, I don’t think it hurts anything to bring him in. He’s not going to be a stud or cure-all but he can help.

          That conversation a couple weeks ago started when I said we don’t actually run a 3-4. And we don’t. Barry’s scheme is not a 3-4 even with a true NT. It’s a hybrid scheme that allows multiple fronts. I actually love Barry’s scheme. But it’s missing talent and some key pieces. Part of the strength of this scheme is the versatility. But we have less versatility without a true 0 technique. You’re correct, our 4 man fronts are undersized even if they keep the LB in and don’t play true nickel with an extra DB. It’s a good tool to have but only when it matches up well. The point of this scheme is that you’re supposed to adjust it to the team you’re playing. So, vs. Dallas for example: We’re better off having Kerrigan/Smith at OLB, Baker/Hood at DE, and Knighton at NT than we are with Kerrigan/Smith as DEs and Baker/Hood as DTs.

    • bangkokben - Oct 4, 2016 at 5:40 PM

      “The Redskins defense has achieved critical turnovers late in the last two games but how much longer can that continue?” The takeaway well occasionally runs dry. There are teams that do a good job at protecting the ball and teams that don’t but even then no team is flawless. No surprise that both the Giants and the Browns are in the top ten in turnovers but right up there is the Ravens so it’s reasonable to think the Redskins will takeaway the ball. At the same time Baltimore knows it is their weakness and the Redskins strength and will no doubt emphasize this. The Eagles by the way have not yet turned the ball over, That reminds me of Jim Zorn’s first year and the Redskins torrid start. Like that, I expect the Eagles will fall back to expectations as soon as the law of averages catches up.

      • redskins12thman - Oct 4, 2016 at 7:50 PM

        I see your point, but I also saw the Eagles not just beat the Steelers but smack them down; it was a real drubbing.

        • bangkokben - Oct 4, 2016 at 8:56 PM

          It was. It could be the real thing or it might be one of those games that happen every year that makes no sense with the rest of season. Sure looks like the real thing but I’m not convinced. Let’s revisit this after eight games when injuries start to mount up. Do they have the depth to sustain a high level? Maybe.

      • Trey Gregory - Oct 5, 2016 at 2:22 AM

        The problem is expectations were too low for the Eagles even before Wentz come out looking good. I’m almost positive this hot streak will end and they’ll come down to earth a bit but all the way to the basement of the NFC East? No way. All the way to a losing record? No way.

        I spent a lot of time this summer trying to convince people the team is Philly was better than they were getting credit for. Couldn’t figure out why most people couldn’t see that. They have a very good defense with a DC who has a history of coaching g very good defenses. They had 3 serviceable QBs and some decent offensive weapons. Not anything great but decent. They basically have a bunch of #2 WRs to spread the ball around to. And the O-line isn’t terrible.

        I think they’re for real. Pittsburgh might be the best team in the league. Even if not, they’re one of the best. So it’s not like they haven’t faced a tough test. They will hit some bumps. Someone will get hurt, Wentz will throw a pick, and they will lose a game. The real test will be how they respond to that adversity. But I don’t see them being a bad team or finishing with a losing record. I could see them winning the division though.

  3. redskins12thman - Oct 4, 2016 at 12:54 PM

    Ravens have released Forsett (obviously happy with West and Dixon)

    Redskins tryout out Donte Whitner at safety (Giants looking at too). It’s worth a shot… couldn’t get worse…

    Keim: The Redskins’ defense allowed 102 yards after first contact Sunday. According to ESPN Stats & Information, they have allowed a combined 248 yards after contact the past two games; only Oakland has allowed more in this time (and Raiders looked much better at QB pressures and were twice as good at 3rd down conversion prevention)

    • Trey Gregory - Oct 4, 2016 at 1:36 PM

      I think I’m going to start a petition to get Pot Roast signed on a 1-year deal. I’m just about positive Baker and some other players would tweet it out and get it a lot of signatures. What’s the number where McCloughan caves or Snyder just orders him to do it to sell tickets? 100,000? 200,000? 1,000,000? :(

      • redskins12thman - Oct 4, 2016 at 1:57 PM

        Is it just about money or feeling that either 1. Redskins saw everything he offered last year and it won’t be better with him than what we have now or 2. Redskins don’t want to admit letting him go when we didn’t have a better option was the wrong move for the organization to make?

        • Trey Gregory - Oct 4, 2016 at 2:35 PM

          I don’t think it’s about money. I mean, maybe a little bit. I think McCloughan wants to roll as much cap space into the future as possible.

          But it could also be that other stuff. Or maybe he had some words with a coach or McCloughan on his way out. Maybe they feel like it would be moving backward. Maybe they don’t trust him to keep the weight off and work hard after last season. Maybe they genuinely don’t think he fits the scheme.

          But he appeared to be a good team leader and he would absolutely help us add some size up front. I’m starting to think it’s undeniable that Baker plays better with him around too. If it is anything to do with pride or appearances then they need to swallow it. He wasn’t great for us but he can only help in my opinion. Baker and Hood are better 3 techniques than 0. Having Knighton would allow us to do that. And use Murphy as more of a 3-5 technique in nickel.

      • metalman5150 - Oct 4, 2016 at 2:51 PM

        Even when Pot Roast was here, last year, our defense was bottom six in rush defense. With Pot Roast, making substitutions was almost impossible.

        • Trey Gregory - Oct 4, 2016 at 3:12 PM

          Yeah. Let me be clear. My argument is not that Terrance Knighton is a great nose tackle who will save this defense. He has his faults and had up and down play last year. But our “starting” nose tackle is on IR and Hood, who is really better as a 3 technique, is filling in. So we lose a 3 technique and we have a guy who isn’t a very good nose playing nose. Our depth is also atrocious. One of the many problems on this line is a lack of size. We’re in 4 man fronts a lot but have undersized guys playing those roles. All Knighton has to do is absorb a double team and take up space and he will help.

          So the argument isn’t that he’s a great player. It’s that he would help. Plus the intangible things like leadership and Baker getting all giddy because his bff is playing next to him.

          I think the substitution thing is a little overblown. There was one game where it really reared its head. And that was just like 3 plays in one game. It just happened to be in the playoffs. But substitutions are possible with Knighton. And they should also just work on a package where him and Baker both play the DT role and whoever is out there at OLB plays the DE role. Knighton can try to take a double team while Baker, and the OLBs pass rush. No big deal.

          He knows the system, the players like him, and he’s available for a deal that wouldn’t be guaranteed. We could cut him in 2 weeks if we wanted. What’s the problem? He was not the only reason our run-D was bad last year. The guys around him have to play better too. A nose tackle’s contributions don’t necessarily show up in the stats but I can look at last year’s run D and this year’s run D and say I think we were better last year. That’s not all because of Knighton, we lost a lot of players, but I don’t think he would hurt anything.

  4. bangkokben - Oct 4, 2016 at 4:28 PM

    As for Pot Roast, he was a liability in the outside zone running game. Atlanta exposed us and every team got a piece from that point on. On the other hand, the Redskins last year, despite their well documented rushing woes, were one of the best in short yardage and goal line rushing defense. Pot Roast had to be a key to that. In addition, it is clear that there is no reason for teams to run outside on us now. If the pass defense wasn’t so bad, I’d have no problem with it but they’re just as bad — as if they are expecting run on 3rd and long and not covering.

    • Trey Gregory - Oct 4, 2016 at 4:54 PM

      But would it hurt anything to add him? Even if he just sat on the bench and was available in case someone gets injured? We don’t exactly have defensive tackle depth. I don’t know that we even have a true DT on the team.

      Does he hurt the pass D? And I would like to see them bring in some safety help too.

      • bangkokben - Oct 4, 2016 at 4:59 PM

        No. I’m fine with them bringing him back now because how poor-ous it is. I realize my first comment was ambiguous. If anything it may help on the short yardage stuff. The team is loaded with DTs — just not 3/4 NTs.

        • Trey Gregory - Oct 4, 2016 at 7:06 PM

          Yeah that’s a fair point. Baker and Hood as 3 techniques/DTs in a 4 man front isn’t too shabby for not breaking the bank or spending high round draft picks. Seriously, you could do a lot worse. Then if you put Knighton at nose, Baker/Hood at DE, Smith/Kerrigan at OLB it would allow us the personnel to run more 3-man fronts and be more effective.

          Let’s hypothetically say Breeland comes back and plays at least as well as he has in the past. Kerrigan and Smith also play at least as well. Baker plays similar to last year. Compton and Foster get back to last year’s form, Fuller is an improvement over Phillips in the slot, and Cravens keeps playing nickel LB. Then we add Knighton so Hood can play more 3. That defense SHOULD be able to survive the below average D-line play and be a middle of the road type defense. An average D should be enough to let that offense win. I just think Knighton gives us more options. And yes, helps in short yardage situations. Because we will give up a bunch of yards between the 20s. But we can win if we prevent TDs in the Redzone. Taking away the inside run is a great step toward that.

          That’s the whole bend but don’t break thing. Maybe we should just let them race down to the Redzone in 3 plays to keep our D fresh then make a living forcing field goals ;)

  5. kenlinkins - Oct 4, 2016 at 4:29 PM

    Which Redskins are we talking about for total wins before the Bye, the Redskins that jumped out to a 14 point lead, the Redskins that threw a INT allowing the Browns to fight back and have a 3 point lead with only 4:30 left in the 4th quarter, or maybe the Redskins who took the ball away from the Browns 3 times in 16 minutes and scored 14 points in the last 4:30 minutes? Any answer would just be a guess with very little to back it up as the Redskins continue to Yo Yo from pretty bad to pretty good on both sides of the ball. So I will split it down the middle at 4-4 and hope that the Redskins are not once again sitting at 3-5 for the 3rd year in a row (which would mean the Redskins could end up 4-12 like 2014 or 9-7 like in 2015). IMO anyone who claims they know for sure just where the Redskins are headed this year is just taking a WAG (wild a$$ guess).

    • redskins12thman - Oct 4, 2016 at 5:26 PM

      Well said. I do have much more confidence in Redskins offense rather than Redskins defense. Plus the way the defense plays not only puts pressure on the defense for turnovers, as you note, but on the offense and special teams to play near perfect; that’s an unrealistic expectation for most teams.

  6. bangkokben - Oct 4, 2016 at 5:20 PM

    Put me down for an inexplicable five (for fighting). #notonthetwittersphere #hatehashtags

    • Trey Gregory - Oct 4, 2016 at 7:08 PM

      You gotta get on Twitter Ben. It’s the best way to get your sporting news. Rich is real good about answering questions too.

      • ajbus1 - Oct 4, 2016 at 10:14 PM

        Ya. Great place for news and sports.

  7. hrrcyberdemon - Oct 4, 2016 at 5:34 PM

    2 wins – 14 losses

  8. lezziemcdykerson - Oct 4, 2016 at 7:08 PM

    Need to win the next three and steal one in London. The Ravens are beatable. With our offense if Kirk makes good decisions and we commit to the run again we can beat the Ravens. The Lions are obviously beatable but their offense scares me more than Bal’s so I would not fall into the trap here. The Bengals face Cowboys Pats and Browns. Our best bet (and this is a reach, I know) is if Cin beats Dal then loses to the Pats and Browns in physical games. I think if we can catch them on a slide maybe if a few of their players get hurt we can beat Cincy easily. They put up the same amount of points VS Pitt as we did. Their D is markedly better than ours but if the injury bug bites on the right week… then the trip across the pond is a decent equalizer. I say 4 maybe 5 wins. I’m cool with 4 if we lose to Cincy as long as they beat the Cowboys on Sun. Need another division win and we need to continue to beat weaker teams. Yet to see Kirk have a statement game and he’s had sure opportunities to make one. Week 5 would be the perfect week to make that statement. I’ll have Kirk’s salary figured out by Sunday evening.

    • Trey Gregory - Oct 4, 2016 at 7:38 PM

      I might honestly rather catch Cincy after a couple wins. Teams have a way of digging deep and rebounding after multiple losses.

      It really all depends on how Cousins plays. I could argue that it depends on how well our O-line run blocks too. But really, it comes down to Cousins making big throws, not turning it over, and walking with 7 in the Redzone. This defense will be lucky to get a couple stops a game. So we have to score with the best of them. And we probably can if Cousins is playing well.

      • lezziemcdykerson - Oct 4, 2016 at 7:59 PM

        It could go either way, continue winning and we could be a trap game. To me it doesn’t whether they’re losing or winning but it would just go with theme of this year’s “contenders” looking average as ARI and CAR are both sliding. If we were facing one of them week 8 instead of Cincy we’d be a little more optimistic. If Cincy beats Dal but falls to the Pats and the Browns (they could get lucky) digging deep might not be as easy a task since they’re having their routine interrupted.

        • Trey Gregory - Oct 4, 2016 at 10:14 PM

          If the Browns are going to win any game this season it would be in the division. Add to it an in-state rivalry, a couple extra weeks for the Browns to get better, maybe get McCown back, and I believe the Browns could beat Cincy. Especially if Carl Nassib will be back. That kid is a stud.

          I don’t mean to doubt your greatness but Sunday will still be too early to gauge Cousins’ value. I think we’re going to need most of the season for that. Just imagine telling someone that Cousins would turn down a $16 mil a year long-term contract at this point last year. I wouldn’t believe it.

        • lezziemcdykerson - Oct 4, 2016 at 10:53 PM

          By this Sunday I’ll know whether he’s worth the risk in paying him amongst the elite or if he belongs with the mid range Fitzes of the world. I’ve proposed weekly how the team, or our fan base rather, would respond if Kirk pulls another late season push? What if that’s his hallmark? The two seasons Eli won SBs they started out looking terrible. Now we clearly don’t have a SB defense, barely even a wild card defense but this is the only out I’m leaving for him.

          A quarter into the season he’s been average, actually slightly less than average the D has bailed him out a few times. I’m not waiting til the Vikings game. A year in the system, same receivers, same personnel all around, little bit more responsibility, and he’s not progressing. We have yet to see polished Kirk. He’s actually regressed some, I don’t know how bad it is yet so I’m not sounding the alarm. Maybe it’s something he can fix or maybe he just isn’t as good as we thought, we don’t know. The less you know about something the more weary you are in investing in it. Keep in mind I measure regression by actual decline in production. I’m not just saying “because he hasn’t taken the next step..” he’s yet to even get to where he was week 16 of last year. The inconsistency alone is regression. The clutch picks, taking sacks (especially when our pass pro is actually a strength that’s inexcusable), missing reads, not making plays with his legs or improvising well enough on broken plays. You know as well as anybody on here that I’ve reserved my criticism for Kirk because I would hate to be loud and wrong. I’d hate to be waving the “CUT HIM” sign at FedEx only for him to come out after the bye and go 8-0. But to me even if he went 8-0 I would still have to drop his pay because of the inconsistencies. If we were losing these games because our D sucks that’s one thing. Kirk has handed both of our losses away, maybe to a lesser extent week one but that Shazier pick was a back breaker. It’s shades of Tony Romo where he’s a prolific passer that can win games… but he can also give just as many away. Now while Romo has thrown for 9M yds and 400K TDs he’s a shade over 500 in w-l which doesn’t surprise me because other than the gaudy stats what has he done? Really what’s the difference beteen Stafford and Romo other than one is in a much larger football market and has had the benefit of slightly better supporting cast? I don’t want Kirk to be like these guys with a ton of yardage and nothing to show for it other than INTs and fumbles and sacks.

          If he can’t put together more consistent performances he’s looking at the tag again next year or a new team. Now a 4 game stretch where he looks below average isn’t a CLEAR indication but, he comes out against Bal and lays an egg. I feel that that’ll remove a lot of wind from his sails. It’ll be in the back of everyone’s mind, can he do this every year? Is he first season Kirk or late season Kirk? Basically the same questions we were asking last year so how can we call it progress?

        • Trey Gregory - Oct 5, 2016 at 2:14 AM

          Yeah I agree with all of that about the regression. Although I might argue that he’s not the only one to blame for those losses. Minnesota wouldn’t be 4-0 right now if they had to put up 30 points every game to win. Cousins was asked to throw WAY too many times in those games and that leads to things like sacks and picks. Yes, he made the mistakes. But he was also being set up to fail. He has undoubtedly looked worse though and has to play better. He has to get it going. I assumed he would come down to earth a bit from last year but it’s been too much so far. He did look better vs. the Browns, but it’s the Browns so…. we’ll see.

          My only point is that 5 games isn’t enough to know. It’s not even half a season. If he goes in and plays great in Baltimore and we win are you going to give him $20 mil on the spot? No way. That’s crazy with how he started the season. What if he plays a pretty good game but we lose? Or do Gruden calls 2 runs and asks Cousins to throw 60 times? What if he’s just average? Or what if he sucks? Is just terrible? He could still come out week 6, light it up the next 10 games, and earn a big deal. He’s still 2-2 with one of the worst defense and run game in the league.

          We’re going to lose games even if Cousins plays well because the roster isn’t that good. The team isn’t ready. And when everything around a QB starts falling apart, the QB can fall apart too. His linemen still have to block, receivers still have to catch/run the correct routes, and the coach still has to call good plays. No game is ever just on one person.

          That’s a pretty long reply to a post I mostly agreed with. Sorry bout that.

        • lezziemcdykerson - Oct 5, 2016 at 4:04 PM

          We asked him to throw too much? He’s asking us to pay too much if that’s your position. I understand that balance is important but for the type of money he’s holding out for he needs to show that he can put the team on his back and be “that guy.” What you’re saying only reinforces my point. If he comes out week 6 and lights it up we’d still have a ton of questions because we’ve seen him play so poorly in the beginning. It’s just like last year and while he could come out and shock the world next week, I’m not sure it’d do much to sway Scot. I think that if he came out and looked like Kirk last year maybe he’d be able to ask for more than 16-18M. Last year’s Kirk looked more decisive, not throwing away as many games. This year’s Kirk has raised more doubt than he’s resolved. It’s almost like coming out and lighting it up would raise more doubt because.. who is he? This years Kirk, 2015 Kirk through first 8 games or Kirk ’15 last 8 games? That’s three different Kirk’s he has to set himself apart from and I’m not sure 11 games is enough to quell the front office’s reluctance.

        • chimps000 - Oct 5, 2016 at 8:57 AM

          lezzie i mostly agree, except that if cousins keeps up a below average to average level of play no way will he get tagged again next year, thats a 24 million dollar salary. Fitz signed for something like 11 or 12 million i believe. I would slot cousins in a little below andy dalton, a little above Fitz.

          Cousins biggest strength as a QB is his quick release. He also has decent accuracy in the short to mid game when he is in rhythm. His long ball is not great.

          At times he doesn’t see the field well, or feel the pocket very well in terms of when to move his feet, where to move his feet, and he makes boneheaded plays every other game it seems. He also has had very good pass blocking, and yet he gets panicked. Some of the anxiety issues could calm down with more success.

          When the coaches call a balanced run game plan, and a lot of quick 3 step drops first read quick release dink and dunk (like against Cleveland), thats when Cousins is at his best. The key is that the Steelers and others have played more drop 8 in short zones and sat on the dink and dunk throws, and Kirk struggled to stay alive and wait for his receivers to come open- he would just dump it off in an panic mode. The Skins need a decent run game to punish teams for the rush 3 drop 8 defense, and Kirk needs to develop more patience when he sees that defense. He has potential to be 15-20th best QB in the game, and you can win the SB with that level of QB if you have a great team around him. But you can’t give the guy too much cap space, I would rather roll the dice with a cheap young QB than pay cousins 18-20 million. Is he worth 15 million versus going with a young cheap QB and building a strong team around him? Going to be a tough decision for Mcloughan.

        • lezziemcdykerson - Oct 5, 2016 at 4:29 PM

          Yeah it’ll definitely be tricky with the number going up even higher next year but, better to be safe than sorry. I’m not condemning Kirk I’m just saying we still don’t know who he is. I would’ve rather him come out and just stunk it up so we know we suck rather than all of this wondering when he’s going to put it all together. That said, I don’t know if the MADTV guy’s patience is as sound as mine. I’m fine with Kirk as a stop gap, if inconsistent mediocrity is all he is. Problem is Kirk thinks he’s much better than what he’s shown and, while he’s not the QB we were hoping to run our offense, definitely an upgrade from what we’ve had and what other teams have. So even though we’re up in arms, Kirk can sleep peacefully knowing next year’s market is going to be just as fruitful as this past off-season. The franchise tag is really all we have if we’re not going to pay him.

          But consider this, you figure if we gave him a 3 year 16-18M deal with an exit ramp for the third year and he only ended up playing two. That’s 32-36M not to mention his guaranteed money up front. So 19M this year and 24M next year sure feels like we’re over paying but we aren’t, we’re just forcing our hand. The mistake would be paying him what he’s making on the tag for a 3-5 year contract just because he’s better than what we’ve had. Patience, I’d rather pay for the one season evaluation than let Trent’s, Ryan’s, Jordan’s, Jamison’s, Breeland and Schreff’s contracts go to waste trying to get Kirk to come around. These players are at or heading into their prime the time is now.

          Probably the best fix for now is definitely developing D line. I know Scot isn’t a need guy but I’ll bet a lot of the BPA’s this year will be on the D side of the ball. I could go on forever about how this could’ve been our draft (miffed the 4th rd could’ve got a legit NT or RB hell probably upgrades at S or a better quality backup than Sudfield.. what rd was Dak taken in?) but that wasn’t the case. I’m watching plenty of college football this year and I hope Scot is too. We have a ton of picks next year if a few of them are Cravens-like, and ready to go, Kirk will benefit the most from it. I preached this offseason that we could do either or, address D line or the secondary thinking that if one unit could carry the other. We aren’t there yet, Breeland is still coming along. Maybe AB shook some of his confidence up but he’ll come around. Once Fuller starts contributing(hopefully) and Cravens sees time at SS our secondary should improve. They’re already opportunistic imagine how we’d look with actual talent. For now I’d leave the O-line alone unless there is a sure thing in the draft. We made the playoffs with this line, our offense can keep up with anybody if Kirk puts it together, we won’t do anything with this defense though. At all.

        • lezziemcdykerson - Oct 5, 2016 at 4:51 PM

          “Probably the best fix for now is definitely developing D line.” This joke of a sentence can pretty much sum up our past off season, 1st quarter of this season, remainder of this season and upcoming off season. I promise I have a firm grasp on the English language. That was not my best work.

      • bangkokben - Oct 5, 2016 at 8:59 AM

        Agreed. I would’ve preferred playing a 4-0 B’more than one fresh off a loss.

  9. JOHN BALASCIO - Oct 4, 2016 at 7:51 PM

    If we don’t get some real coaching with properly planing for the next team. Heck we played better defencively with pot roast on the team last year with the front 5. Get it together or we will see 1 more win by the bye .

  10. chimps000 - Oct 5, 2016 at 9:04 AM

    I was happy with the win, with the offensive game plan, and with the defense forcing turnovers.

    However, we barely beat the browns at home, possibly the worst team in the league, who were using their 3rd string QB, and it took a huge referee botched call to win. It was the best game our QB and RB have played all year.

    Um, we might win zero more games for awhile, folks. I can easily see this team at 2-8 or 3-7. If I was betting, I would bet on 3-7. Just being realistic folks.

    • chimps000 - Oct 5, 2016 at 9:06 AM

      how many times can i say folks in one post…folks Archives

Follow Us On Twitter