Re: ESPN: Are the Washington Redskins For Real?

If I can touch them...

Re: ESPN: Are the Washington Redskins For Real?

Didn't the Skins start quite strong last season? I am sure I remember being rather suprised to see them win a couple of good games early in the season and then tank after opponents had enough game tape to seperate the smoke and mirrors from the dodgy QBs.

Re: ESPN: Are the Washington Redskins For Real?

The question in the title above is ambiguous, and what are likely the most common interpretations are the wrong questions. Will the Skins continue to be undefeated for the entire season? No. Will they wind up with the best record in the NFL? No. Will they win their division? Maybe, but probably not. Will they make the playoffs? Maybe. Too early to tell.

Are the Washington Redskins better than they were last year, and a franchise headed in the right direction? Sure the heck looks like it.

Re: ESPN: Are the Washington Redskins For Real?

I don't think that this is the kind of article that would appeal to ESPN readers... heck I've been reading FO for years and even I skimmed half of it. The point of the article was drowned out by the table and all of the different stats being thrown around - stats that, at this point in the season, are largely meaningless.

I think if I were writing the article I would focused more on the stories to describe how the Redskins have been winning games, then dropped a teaspoon of stats to explain how those things aren't necessarily predictive. The track record angle was good but it was drowned out by the dozens of instances of DVOA that were mentioned in the article.

Hopefully this is constructive feedback.

Re: ESPN: Are the Washington Redskins For Real?

It looks like comparing the 2010 Saints and the 93 Panthers would be a good story.