Redskins 2010 Season Statistics: The Mother Lode

One of many experimental iterations ...

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,769
Reaction score
1,688
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia


For you number-crunching afficianado's, I present you with the good, the bad, and ugly from our abruptly final 2010 Redskins season. Click HERE to view:

• Final 2010 Overall Team Statistics
• Final 2010 Defensive and Special Teams Statistics
• 2010 Game-By-Game Participation
• 2010 Game-By-Game Starters
• Final 2010 Depth Chart
• Roster By How Built
• Final 2010 Alphabetic Roster
• Final 2010 Numerical Roster
• Roster By Position
• 2010 Transactions


2010 Washington Redskins Final Information provided courtesy of the Washington Redskins.
 

Henry

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,837
Reaction score
158
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


Wow. That's very cool.

Reminds me of some of the cool features we used to sport on that other site years ago. :)
 

fansince62

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
16,349
Reaction score
156
Points
343


clearly...all our games next season should be on the road!!! ... :) ......
 

Rymanofthenorth

BGObsessed
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
5,639
Reaction score
74
Points
128
Location
I live in the warmest city in the coldest provinc

UTEP

3 things jump out at me right away,

1- London Fletcher may not have played his best football this year in the 3-4 but the man is a player! even playing in a garbage scheme, he puts up very solid numbers and makes plays whenever he has a chance.

2- anyone who thinks Haynesworth is overrated either bought into the hype by the media or just doesnt watch football very much, despite being a backup/specialist he has 20 hurries 2.5 sacks and affected the game whenever he was in there, he had better numbers overall than any of our so called starters on the line despite not playing anything remotely close to them. He and AC both were among team leaders on Dline despite hardly playing in the second half of the season. oh well maybe they showed enough to be good trade bait.

3- On defence, this roster is what we call top heavy, in other words a few players at the top make the majority of plays, not only does this mean we lack depth but also that we have a few very talented guys and some with little talent, you can clearly see that when you break down the stats.

After seeing the coach stats on here , I am even less enthusiatic about this change if that was possible and I don't see how ANYONE could be enthusiastic about losing a quality redskin in AC and a very good player in AH for what will most likely be peanuts.
 

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

...

2- anyone who thinks Haynesworth is overrated either bought into the hype by the media or just doesnt watch football very much, despite being a backup/specialist he has 20 hurries 2.5 sacks and affected the game whenever he was in there, he had better numbers overall than any of our so called starters on the line despite not playing anything remotely close to them. He and AC both were among team leaders on Dline despite hardly playing in the second half of the season. oh well maybe they showed enough to be good trade bait...

Ryman, I agree with you that Albert Haynesworth has talent and can make a difference in the game, when he gives forth effort. We know he was used wrong, and we know the 3-4 was a miserable failure in the first year. I will not dispute that.

I will dispute your assertion that Albert Haynesworth "affected the game whenever he was in there". This is simply not true! You are wrong!

Look, by your own admission you were unable to watch every Redskins' game this year because of your location. You could not have watched him om every single play to make such a claim. I watched every single Redskins' game this year and I went to 6 games live and was unable to see him on every play. However, I did see Albert on entirely too many plays where he gave half of what he could have and was NOT affective whatsoever! i.e. lying on his belly in the Eagles game while Vick scrambled for 9 seconds until he finally found a receiver in the end zone. Oh wait, he did affect that play, his lack of play allowed Vick 9 seconds to find the open man.

Again, we agree the Haynesworth situation was a debacle. We agree he was not used in a manner that best suited his abilities. We agree the 3-4 in the first season with the lack of personnel suited to play this scheme was an abject failure. No argument there.

But when you are trying to make your argument for Big Al, don't throw in foolish assertions you cannot support to make your point. He did not influence every play. In fact there were several games that I attended where I saw one man blocking him with little to no effort. Al half-assed it on the field much more often than not.
 

Rymanofthenorth

BGObsessed
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
5,639
Reaction score
74
Points
128
Location
I live in the warmest city in the coldest provinc

UTEP

Sorry El but you in fact are the one who is wrong here. I watched almost every game on the internet although I am jealous you got to see them live lol.

Perhaps saying every play was hyperbole but looking at the stats bears me out far more than it does you,the percentage of plays that he was in actually playing, combined with the number of impact plays he made combined with the fact that despite not starting and not really playing much in the base package clearly show that he not only made a huge impact when he was in but that he must have been making plays most of the time he was in. it is an indictment of the staff that he wasnt used more and used correctly, it literally is cutting off the nose to spite the face. when you add in that AC actually played very well when used correctly and that we have at least 4 others who would benefit immediately from the switch back, its simply stupid to continue this. and the stats only bear witness to this.

The Vick thing we will have to agree to disagree on, I saw a guy go down and lay still while not stretched out, look at how he is holding his one leg,implying to me that he was cramping up and trying to move for a second, it was really played out by the media. but to be honest and candid, the way he was treated that game, was pretty much the end of AH in DC.

I also saw a guy in the Eagles game who was dominant the first few plays that he was in in the eagles game TOO BAD THEY DIDNT PUT HIM IN UNTIL WE WERE DOWN 14.

Please find me a game where one man was blocking him with little or no effort? that simply never happened, now if you argued that the few times he was in with the base defence that he was washed out of his gap, I wouldnt argue that, I did see him start upfield then remember to stay in the gap and stop, and once he stopped moving his feet was pushed out of the gap, but I also recall several plays where he literally blew up the man across from him.

The idea that he was halfassing it was made by the media, and we as redskins fans should know better than anyone what garbage that is, ffs ask yourself, would shannahan have remained silent on this if he had been "halfassing" the entire season?
 

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

Sorry El but you in fact are the one who is wrong here. I watched almost every game on the internet although I am jealous you got to see them live lol.
Again, you watched "almost" every game so admittedly, you cannot make the claim you did, "Affected the game whenever he was in there." You did not see him every time he was in the game.

Perhaps saying every play was hyperbole but looking at the stats bears me out far more than it does you,
Again, you can say it is hyperbole, but your claim was pretty clear, "Affected the game whenever he was in there."

the percentage of plays that he was in actually playing, combined with the number of impact plays he made combined with the fact that despite not starting and not really playing much in the base package clearly show that he not only made a huge impact when he was in but that he must have been making plays most of the time he was in.
I am not going to argue that he could be affective. We all know the man is an enormous talent. I ceded that point from the beginning. But which Albert is going to show up?


it is an indictment of the staff that he wasnt used more and used correctly, it literally is cutting off the nose to spite the face. when you add in that AC actually played very well when used correctly and that we have at least 4 others who would benefit immediately from the switch back, its simply stupid to continue this. and the stats only bear witness to this.
Again, we agree. But that is not what I was arguing against. My point was simple, you made a claim that was not true! "Affected the game whenever he was in there." You did not see him play every down so you cannot make that claim.

The Vick thing we will have to agree to disagree on, I saw a guy go down and lay still while not stretched out, look at how he is holding his one leg,implying to me that he was cramping up and trying to move for a second, it was really played out by the media. but to be honest and candid, the way he was treated that game, was pretty much the end of AH in DC.
OK, so even if he was holding his leg in pain, perhaps cramping as he suggested, he laid on the ground useless in that play again proving your claim, "Affective every time he was in there", wrong.

Please find me a game where one man was blocking him with little or no effort? that simply never happened, now if you argued that the few times he was in with the base defence that he was washed out of his gap, I wouldnt argue that, I did see him start upfield then remember to stay in the gap and stop, and once he stopped moving his feet was pushed out of the gap, but I also recall several plays where he literally blew up the man across from him.
Look, I am not going to go back through the season to prove you wrong on this. You will have to take the word of someone who attended 6 games this season who paid particular attention to Albert when he was on the field, as opposed to your limited view from an internet feed where you could not see his effort on every single play. Look, I saw him tangled up with single defenders, giving very little effort in the play. On the other hand, I saw him running down field to make plays. It all depended on which Albert wanted to show up.

The idea that he was halfassing it was made by the media, and we as redskins fans should know better than anyone what garbage that is, ffs ask yourself, would shannahan have remained silent on this if he had been "halfassing" the entire season?

No one said he was half-assing it the entire season. He did however half-ass it for a large portion of the season. To bad too, because if he had given 100% all season he would have made the Pro-Bowl, even if he was used the wrong way. He is that talented!
 

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,769
Reaction score
1,688
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

I think the salient point would be that Haynesworth was brought here, and paid a King's ransom to be an impact player. By definition, that guy is a player who has the potential to game-changing plays every week. He has been far from that guy. I can think of just a single goal line play he made that actually impacted a game's outcome. For a guy of his physical talents, that's absolutely pathetic.

You are correct Ryman, that even at 50% effort level (and I think that's seriously about what we've gotten from the guy), he's still better than most of the guys we'd plug in in his place. But that's hardly a resounding endorsement. You mentioned remembering 'several plays where he literally blew up the man across from him'? Seriously - at his talent level he should be blowing people up multiple times a game, not a handful of times in a season. On top of that, I don't know how you factor in the distraction he's represented for this team - but I believe that you have to factor that in.

I think you're wrong about him 'half-assing' it. He hasn't put in the effort to be the player he could be. If you want to blame the coaches for that, that's fine. But the bottom line is, he's no Pro Bowler and should be one perenially. That's on Haynesworth in my book. I think you will find very few Redskins fans who share your generous assessment.
 

Rymanofthenorth

BGObsessed
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
5,639
Reaction score
74
Points
128
Location
I live in the warmest city in the coldest provinc

UTEP

The problem Boone is very simple, he isnt going to be a very good player if hes not on the field. look at the percentage of impact plays he makes, the stats you posted clearly illustrate the abject failure of this defence to put its best player on the field enough to actually make a difference. his stats are those of a normal DT on a normal defence who plays a full season yet he barely played at all. you cant affect a games outcome from the bench, and thats on Shannahan. not putting him in until we were down and even thn not playing him much in a game where we were embarassed pretty much says it all.

The biggest issue I have with people saying he was half assing it is simple, you dont make that many plays halfassing it all the time no matter how good you are. as for distraction, I place that on Shannahan, if he handled this even somewhat professionally it wouldnt have been an issue, but when you spend a season scapegoating someone to make yourself feel bigger, you end up making things way worse than they need to be.

the worst part of all this is that we were so close to being able to actually have a great defence, and now we are farther than we have been in a decade.
 

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,769
Reaction score
1,688
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

He could have been 'on the field' from Day 1. All he had to do is do what every other Redskin did, which is show up and participate in all of the off-season training activities and show the coaching staff that he is a team player and will do whatever it takes to help the team. That is obviously NOT a priority for him. So instead, he did whatever the hell he wanted to do. The result of which was to create controversy and doubt about his commitment level.

Blame the coaching staff all you want, but I think you're off-base with that position. I fault Shanahan not for addressing Haynesworth. I actually think he wasted his time trying to address him. I'd have preferred the Redskins traded him immediately for whatever they could get for him. They will never get value for him, or production that comes close to justifying his acquisition and what they paid for him. They should have cut their losses when the cutting was good.

And I would contend that when you describe 'that many plays', you are overstating the impact Haynesworth had when he was in there. As one of the top defensive talents in the NFL, he shouldn't just be making plays, he should be a dominating force. That's what he was brought here to be. And dominating we have not seen. That's just a fact. And Shanahan wasn't holding him back when he was on the field. Haynesworth level of motivation, commitment, and desire is what held him back.

That being said, Haynesworth the human being isn't worth this much energy expenditure. He'll go down as an NFL 'could have been'. That will be his legacy. All the excuses and wishing in the world won't change that.
 

Goaldeje

The Legend
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
18,381
Reaction score
44
Points
328
Location
Waynesboro, VA

James Madison

Ry, when I think of "affecting the game", I think of someone who's presence is noticed by everyone seriously watching the game, and someone who has to be gameplanned against every single time they step on the field. I will readily cede that I do not have the defensive knowledge that you do, but it seems to me that Haynesworth fit neither of these qualifications. From the tenor of your posts now and in the past, there have been times one would infer Haynesworth is so talented that he affected the game every single time he was in. To me personally, that is indicative of someone like Reggie White, Ray Lewis, Deion Sanders (early Deion), etc.

Haynesworth in no way, shape or form belongs in the same ZIP code as that conversation taking place. Not even close.

I think a better argument is that Haynesworth is exceptionally talented, but was unable to live up to his talent due to a combination of poor scheme, coaching, and complete and utter lack of desire to make the most of himself. Is it more his fault than Shanny's? I don't know, and am not sure it really matters. Fat Al won't be around next year, and if Shanny can learn from the egregious way he handled this, I'm OK with it.

Considering that Fat Al wasn't Reggie White when Zorn was here either, and that the only time in his career he has remotely resembled an All Pro DT was his contract year, I'm inclined to give Shanny a little benefit of the doubt here.
 

servumtuum

The Owner's Favorite
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Messages
7,138
Reaction score
0
Points
116
Location
Raleigh, NC

Indiana

Several good points being made here. But I have one of my own.

It's not all Haynesworth's fault. At least this season it isn't. Shanahan botched the Haynesworth mess IMHO.


Having said that, however, I want to go back to last season-and further-for a minute. Last season, under Blache-not Shanahan and Haslett-not a brand new and "uncomfortable for Haynesworth" 3-4 but in a familiar 4-3 with him as DT.

As Boone said, he was brought in under those conditions to be that "impact" player. I remember being in game threads-every time he occupied a double-team and freed Orakpo up for a sack we all cheered-loudly. That was the impact player we wanted.

But then, Haynesworth would leave the game, hobbling or something as if injured only to return later-seemingly suddenly "cured" or perhaps having gotten his breath back from being "gassed". I remember the complaints in not only game threads but others about his habit of only being "there" for about 60% of the plays. Was this all we were going to get? A tease? A"blow-up the OL...sometimes...and rest on the bench when he felt like taking himself out of the game? I remember this from last season.

When this year's Haynesworth blow-up started rumors began circulating about the Titans possibly wanting him back-so, as I sometimes do, I checked out Titans forums to see what they thought of the idea. Some were all for it. Others were dead set against the idea. Why? The same thing that we fans were complaining about on our forums-his intermittent brilliance followed by just disappearing. The most common quote I saw referenced his best year being his last contract year. "Play at Pro-Bowl level and get a fat new contract" and then crank the intensity down to a...shall we say..."comfortable" level. This is what was being said by Titans fans who did not want Haynesworth back.

Has the move to a 3-4 been a mistake, maybe it has, but it is not, I don't think the root cause of Haynesworth's problems. Shanny made a mess of the approach to a solution but Haynesworth cannot be absolved from acting like a petulant spoiled child. He didn't like his new role in the 3-4 so he slacked off-maybe the role wasn't the right one but even commentators during the games noted how little effort he was making to blow up opposing OLs. He is an extraordinary physical talent, and as Boone has mentioned, even at less than full effort he can be intimidating-but if his history with the Titans and both last season and this season with the Redskins is any indicator-then in my opinion what we saw from him in his intermittent "impact player" mode last year is the best we will ever see from him regardless of who the HC or DC is or defensive scheme we run.
 

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,769
Reaction score
1,688
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

I think that's a great and entirely fair assessment serv - the kind of thing I've grown to expect from you :cheers:
 

Rymanofthenorth

BGObsessed
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
5,639
Reaction score
74
Points
128
Location
I live in the warmest city in the coldest provinc

UTEP

the way we used him for the majority of blaches tenure with him was dumb. he still played decently but Boone is right in that he never looked like a DMVP candidate with us. but also keep in mind blaches 4-3 is not standard by any means.

Boone and Goal, there are players that you build around, I am not going to argue that AH is a superior human being, he is petulant and childlike a lot and he obviously doesnt know how to manipulate the public like a Shannahan does. However, there are players you build around and he is one of them. based simply on his skillset and physicality you do what you have to in order to get your 100million back lol.

how do you deal with someone like AH without bending over everytime he gets mad? We have discussed this and its obvious that Shanny couldnt or wouldnt and it was due to his overriding ego.
You scheme around his strengths and you play on their pride and desire to maintain their own self image, you DONT confront them at every turn and try to use the my way or the highway that shanny obviously did.

You basically say to them " ok you publicly stated you want to be a hof player, go prove it. we will scheme around your strengths and if it fails its nobodies fault but your own." You hype the player like crazy and you build them up showing nothing but support and giving them nothing to egt angry about. You use positive reinforcement not negative and you basically get them to behave by making them a leader (which they generally are in their mind anyway lol). and more importantly you make them WANT to be the best they can be. I know this can be done, I have seen several players who were egotists subjugate that for the team but still remain proud, it just takes some actual ability.

I have said all along that we mishandled this from the get go and I stand by that.
 

Goaldeje

The Legend
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
18,381
Reaction score
44
Points
328
Location
Waynesboro, VA

James Madison

Ry, that is a nice thought, but it doesn't always work that way. Your expertise is in football, mine is in sales and management. Some people will respond the way you indicated, some won't. To think that Fat Al would have responded the way you think simply because others you have seen have responded that way shows an inexperience with human psychology and management. There is no sure fire way to manage and motivate people, which is a shame because it would make my job a helluva lot easier.

From the outside looking in, it sure looks to me like Fat Al is motivated by money only. His one truly great, consistent season, as Serv confirmed through the Titans message boards, was his contract year. Which means that, surprise, surprise, Danny and Vinny really screwed the pooch when they signed him and gave him so much money up front.

See, you really can blame Dan and Vinny for EVERYTHING.

Or Scott, take your pick.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

the worst part of all this is that we were so close to being able to actually have a great defence, and now we are farther than we have been in a decade.
And this is the point on which we agree! Great? Maybe, but a top ten for sure!
 

Boone

GM
Staff member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
40,769
Reaction score
1,688
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

I disagree on the 'prognosis'. The defense was a strength, not a liability during the last 4 games of the season. I expect better things next year.
 

Elephant

The Commissioner
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 1, 2009
Messages
24,810
Reaction score
453
Points
1,113

Florida State

I disagree on the 'prognosis'. The defense was a strength, not a liability during the last 4 games of the season. I expect better things next year.
We did some major improvement from players like Carriker and Bryant to name a few, but I think overall Ryman is correct about the switch to a 3-4. Instead of having a good/great defense this year and perhaps a great one next year, we are placed in the position of rebuild. I think you would agree with that. But yes, I am not so doom and gloom as Ryman, I do think we will see improvement on defense next year.

Now I see Rob Ryan is going to Dallas and we are stuck with Haslett running the 3-4? I see improvement going into next year, but I am still concerned.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Private conversations
Help Users
    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Chat 0
    Top