Connect with us

Infinite Sadness

’10 Skins: Pretty Similar to ’09 Skins

Disclaimers first:

1. What follows is not an apples-to-apples comparison, obviously. Although ’09 Giants/’10 Cowboys are kind of a wash, as are ’09 Rams/’10 Rams. So this sorta comes down to ’09 Lions in Detroit vs. ’10 Texans in Washington. Pretty clear that the latter is the better team.

2. Yes, we are Jason Campbell sympathizers; No, we are not trying to suggest the team was necessarily better last season under him (or Zorn).

3. This is a small sample size. OR IS IT? It’s 1/5 of the season, so it’s not THAT small.


Here are the team stats through the first three games of this season vs. the first three games of last season:

2010 vs 2009
Pts scored: 56 vs 40
Pts allowed: 67 vs 49
Pt Diff: -11 vs -9
Yards gained: 1000 vs 1024
Yards allowed: 1271 vs 977
Yard diff: -271 vs +47
Pass yards: 797 vs 749
Rush yards: 223 vs 275
Turnovers: 2 vs 4
Takeaways: 4 vs 3
TO diff: +2 vs -1
Record: 1-2 vs 1-2

The good news: The Skins are positive on takeaways, and … um … their record isn’t worse than last season.

The bad news: They’re scoring more, but they’re also giving up more (again, we have to take into account the Texans, but still they’re -11 vs -9 in differential). They’re negative on yard differential in a HUGE way. The 2010 team has actually gained less total yards than last year’s team, which is kind of amazing. The Skins mortgaged the future for this year after hitting what we’d all probably agree was complete rock-bottom last season. Yet through three games, the Redskins are marginally better than ’09 … maybe.

The horrible news: The next four games are against the Eagles, Packers, Colts and Bears. It’s hard to be optimistic about that stretch right now.

Former Managing Editor at UPROXX; former Senior Editor at @SBNation; former ska-zine editor, fan of bad sports teams and good beer.



  1. Kip

    September 28, 2010 at 10:31 AM

    I wonder if Zornstar is laughing at this mess

  2. Kid Bro Sweets

    September 28, 2010 at 11:22 AM

    Umm, everyone is laughing at this mess.

  3. Kev29

    September 28, 2010 at 11:36 AM

    Not good enough on the lines of scrimmage = not good enough period.

    Also, Stephon Heyer vs Stephon Heyer

  4. Trousers

    September 28, 2010 at 11:41 AM

    The redskins almost always play to the level of their competition. Look at the Detroit, St Louis, and New Orleans games last year, we were SO close to being the first team to give the saints a loss.

    I wouldnt be suprised if they won 2-3 of their next 4 games, and then loose to the lions and jags

  5. Jamie Mottram

    September 28, 2010 at 11:42 AM

    The Shanahan-Allen administration’s “Future Is Now” approach kills me, especially if now means another 4-12 season.

  6. Trousers

    September 28, 2010 at 11:43 AM

    lose, even.

  7. Kid Bro Sweets

    September 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

    Seriously, how hard is it to just rebuild in earnest and not pull this win-now garbage. This is exactly why I hated the McNabb trade on principle (don’t get me wrong, I love the fact that we have a viable starting caliber NFL QB), but that was basically a complete sign that things – fundamentally – are not changing.

    On the plus side, Mark Ingram’s going to be sick next year running behind Silverback!

  8. SuperSkin

    September 29, 2010 at 12:35 AM

    You know what else hasn’t changed from 2009? The crying and moaning from hypersensitive Skins fans only three weeks into the season – only this year its far from warranted. To ignore Shanny’s track record and an offense with alot of upside, and write this season off as a “mess” – three games into the season, after a win over Dallas and only a week after running up 500 yards against the Texans – is absurd.

    This blog, and occasionally the Post’s Sports Bog, are what Doctors prescribe to elderly Redskin fans who have one of those Viagra-induced four hour erections. Works everytime.

  9. Chris Mottram

    September 29, 2010 at 8:56 AM

    Holy shit. Our offense has “alot [sic] of upside”!? Well in that case, we’re just fine! Especially if we keep racking up 500 offensive yards in games we lose! Phew. Thanks, SuperSkin. I feel so much better now. And my erection is BACK!

  10. KB

    September 29, 2010 at 9:29 AM

    We are 11th against the rush allowing 98 ypg. It is our third down defense that is getting beat because our nickel/dime packages are not stopping the pass with weak zone coverage.

    3-7-STL 26 (13:50) (Shotgun) 8-S.Bradford pass short left to 16-D.Amendola pushed ob at SL 34 for 8 yards (22-C.Rogers).
    3-6-WAS 40 (3:49) 8-S.Bradford pass short middle to 16-D.Amendola to WAS 32 for 8 yards (30-L.Landry).
    3-2-WAS 13 (1:12) (Shotgun) 8-S.Bradford pass short right to 89-M.Clayton pushed ob at WAS 1 for 12 yards (23-D.Hall).
    3-10-WAS 34 (9:38) (Shotgun) 8-S.Bradford pass short middle to 46-D.Fells to WAS 22 for 12 yards (41-K.Moore).
    3-7-WAS 19 (8:08) (Shotgun) 8-S.Bradford pass short right to 81-M.Gilyard to WAS 12 for 7 yards (23-D.Hall).
    3-20-STL 49 (2:52) 8-S.Bradford pass short right to 89-M.Clayton to WAS 26 for 25 yards (41-K.Moore).

    Almost every 3rd down completed by the Rams was on a passing play. They rushed for a first down while on 3rd down once and once more on 4th down. Both plays were for less than 2 yards.

    The Redskins run D allowed 107 total yards of rushing. Jackson had a 5.8 yard average but the chunk of his yards were on the one run. Darby came in and averaged 3.5 yards per rush which is mediocre.

    Our D would be so much better if our nickel/dime packages could get teams off the field on 3rd down. We are allowing 42% of 3rd downs to be converted. Having said that we are rated better than the Jets who are allowing a 50% conversion rate and the Saints who are allowing 48% of 3rd downs to be converted. Our defense has the 7th most penalty yards at 225 and we are allowing 25 first downs PER GAME which is #1 in the league. The Packers for example are allowing only 16 per game.

    The D will click and once Haslette realizes his soft zones on 3rd down and obvious passing situations are not working we will look a lot better.

    You also have to realize that allowing 497 yards of passing to Schaub really skewed our defensive stats. Otherwise we would be a midrange team.

    We gave up only 282 yards passing to Romo and a total of 77 yards rushing to 2 Cowboys backs.

    We gave up 235 yards to Bradford and a total of 107 yards rushing to 2 Rams backs.

    We gave up 497 yards passing to Schaub, who in his other 2 games has been held to under 400 yards combined. They held Arian Foster, who in his previous game went well over 200 yards rushing, to only 69 yards and a sub-4.0 yards per attempt. He followed that performance up with a 100+ yard game against the Cowboys.

    Our D needs to learn how to lockdown on 3rd down and it will all be good again.

  11. KB

    September 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM

    All stats from

  12. Chris Mottram

    September 29, 2010 at 10:01 AM

    Excellent comment, KB. Third downs absolutely killed the Skins against the Rams … not to mention a certain fourth down against the Texans which we shall never mention again.

  13. DocJay

    September 29, 2010 at 12:23 PM

    Dont forget, that was year 2 under Zorn and Blache,this is year 1 under Shanahan and Haslett. They are trying to do things with players they inherited, at least they did get rid of a bunch of players who didnt do much, I think you may see the same thing at the end of this year too. And of course they are touting the future as now, when a team admits rebuilding there attendance drops and you make less money. They do need some serious help at WR and at DB.

  14. pearlbullets

    September 29, 2010 at 1:26 PM

    Also need serious help at running back, offensive line, defensive line, linebacker, and if McNabb doesn’t resign the quarterback position.

  15. Walter Johnson

    September 29, 2010 at 1:58 PM

    I still want to punch Jim Zorn in the face.

  16. SuperSkin

    September 29, 2010 at 7:39 PM

    Chris – I certainly don’t believe we are “fine.” Never said we were. By “upside,” I mean we generally haven’t had any issue moving the ball, albeit through the air. With an identifiable and correctable offensive issue such as Red Zone efficiency, we have – in fact – upside. This offense is 1000 miles away from anything we have had in place since 1999. Defense? Well, I am much more discouraged on that side of the ball, but KB’s post is on point in that it may not yet be a total mess. I’m not blind to the work ahead of this organization, but the “Holy Shit!” Is best applied to those who reach for the razor blade and declare this a 4-12 season after three games with a new Coach, new QB, and new scheme. By the way, proofread this bitch for me again if you don’t mind, so I don’t expose my complete and utter lack of football knowledge with another accidental typo.

  17. Kid Bro Sweets

    September 30, 2010 at 1:19 PM

    Damn. That’s some serious extremeskins caliber posting, imo.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More in Infinite Sadness