We could be 7-6 ...

[Henry]

I’ve heard this one a lot lately from those more optimistic than I about the state of this team. Citing close losses as proof that a team isn’t really all that bad is a tried and true practice of sports fans everywhere. I know I’ve done it, so this is not to attack anyone for saying such things, but merely to put things into perspective:

If we apply the method of counting close losses (losses by 7 points or less) as wins to the Redskins over the past 15 years this is what our team’s records could have been:

1995: Actual record 6-10, but we could have been 11-5
1996: 9-7 but we could have been 13-3
1997: 8-7-1, could have been 13-3
1998: 6-10, could have been 10-6
1999: 10-6, could have been 13-3
2000: 8-8, could have been 13-3
2001: 8-8, could have been 11-5
2002: 7-9, could have been 10-6
2003: 5-11, could have been 12-4
2004: 6-10, could have been 13-3
2005: 10-6, could have been 15-1
2006: 5-11, could have been 11-5
2007: 9-7, could have been 14-2
2008: 8-8, could have been 12-4

Now obviously, not all losses by one score are close games. Using my method we could change our 4-9 record to 10-3. But I think you get the point. Close losses happen every year. That doesn’t make a team secretly good. Norv Turner was notorious for losing close games. In fact, that’s what got him fired.

The Redskins have not secretly been a 10+ win team every year, and we are not a 7-6 team this year. We are 4-9. It’s a record we absolutely, positively deserve.

 

[MisterPinstripe]

I like the records on the right better.

 

[CHUBAKAH]

..and there is our problem since Gibbs I. Can't win a close game to save our life. Appreciate the hard work you put in to create the thread. The only thing I think it proves it what a lot of people have said for years. We play down to lesser teams, and play up to better teams. Fact is the Redskins just don't get it done.

 

[MisterPinstripe]

..and there is our problem since Gibbs I. Can't win a close game to save our life. Appreciate the hard work you put in to create the thread. The only thing I think it proves it what a lot of people have said for years. We play down to lesser teams, and play up to better teams. Fact is the Redskins just don't get it done.

They have no clue how to close out a game. When the offense is playing well, the defense tanks, when the defense plays well the offense tanks.

Why is that? Its the coaching not the players. We have had the players to win games, but the coaching is very lacking. Well coached teams win close games.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

I think the only season this really can be applied to is 2004, our first year with Gibbs. Defense was stellar, but the O just couldn't move the ball to save their lives. 2005 came around, and the O improved and whaddya know? We're 10-6. Still lost a few close ones, but that happens. Then Snyder or Cerrato or Gibbs or whoever went and effed with the chemistry, and brought in Saunders and his 8000 page playbook, and we sucked again.

This team just continues to find ways to screw up a good thing, and this offseason will be no different. Not saying this year is a "good thing," however the performances the past few weeks definitely show we have *SOME* pieces in place, and with smart drafting/teambuilding we could be competitive in the next 2 or 3 years. Instead, we'll blow it up, start all over, and suck again. Sigh.

 

[MisterPinstripe]

I think the only season this really can be applied to is 2004, our first year with Gibbs. Defense was stellar, but the O just couldn't move the ball to save their lives. 2005 came around, and the O improved and whaddya know? We're 10-6. Still lost a few close ones, but that happens. Then Snyder or Cerrato or Gibbs or whoever went and effed with the chemistry, and brought in Saunders and his 8000 page playbook, and we sucked again.

This team just continues to find ways to screw up a good thing, and this offseason will be no different. Not saying this year is a "good thing," however the performances the past few weeks definitely show we have *SOME* pieces in place, and with smart drafting/teambuilding we could be competitive in the next 2 or 3 years. Instead, we'll blow it up, start all over, and suck again. Sigh.

I agree. Everyone talks about how Snyder has no patience, that we have to give a new coach 3 years to see how he does, blah blah blah.

Then they go ahead and start calling for a blow up.

I am in no way saying that this is an acceptable season, but you can not ignore that the team has shown a lot of improvement these past few games that are encouraging. This will mean squat if they dont play the next 3 games the same way.

But if they play well through these last 3 games I think we need to consider keeping things together and see what happens. I guarantee you if you blow up a team and change the coaching staff every two years you will never see success.

I am not a fan of Zorn, but I think that if this team comes together and proves in the next 3 games against top competition that they can play I think you have to see what the 3rd year will be like.

But maybe I just dont want to be depressed anymore so I am fooling myself.

 

[Elephant]

I often find myself thinking the very same thing. If only we had made that field goal? If only the refs could have ignored the potential of a perfect season and actually called Kareem Moore down by contact?

The great or even good teams win the close ones. As much as I'd like to think we could be 7-6, the reality is we are not!

 

[hail2skins]

Another problem with the methodology is that it doesn't factor in the actual games we won by 7 or less that we could've lost. The Rams and Bucs games this year come to mind.

Edit: Just for grins, decided to look at our record in games decided by 7 points or less since the 1983 season:

1983: 3-2 (14-2)
1984: 2-3 (11-5)
1985: 6-1 (10-6)
1986: 7-2 (12-4)
1987: 7-4 (11-4)
1988: 5-5 (7-9)
1989: 6-4 (10-6)
1990: 4-2 (10-6)
1991: 5-2 (14-2)
1992: 5-2 (9-7)
1993: 2-6 (4-12)
1994: 1-8 (3-13)
1995: 4-6 (6-10)
1996: 4-4 (9-7)
1997: 2-4-1 (8-7-1)
1998: 4-4 (6-10)
1999: 4-3 (10-6)
2000: 4-6 (8-8)
2001: 3-3 (8-8)
2002: 3-3 (7-9)
2003: 4-7 (5-11)
2004: 4-7 (6-10)
2005: 5-5 (10-6)
2006: 4-6 (5-11)
2007: 3-5 (9-7)
2008: 7-4 (8-8)
2009: 2-6 (4-9)

The year-to-year comparison that jumps out at me is 2003 and 2004. We had basically the same number of close games in Spurrier's last year, which was the one in which the team had supposedly quit, as we did in Gibbs' first year, where people say we were playing with such heart. We did have a couple of home clunkers at the end of 2003 against Dallas and Philly, but also remember that we were featuring Tim Hasselbeck at QB by then.

 

[Henry]

That is great work. The thing that jumps out at me is our record in close games pre-Gibbs vs. post-Gibbs (Gibbs I, that is.) It's startling how immediate the drop-off is, and how we never got back to winning the close ones more often than we lost them.