A 2-3 record through five weeks of the NFL season isn't good, but it isn't necessarily bad: Plenty of teams have started 2-3 and gone to the playoffs. But the Washington Redskins' 2-3 record is really, really bad, because the Redskins have what might be the easiest schedule to open the season that any NFL team has ever had.
As Joe Posnanski documents on his blog, the Redskins have played nothing but winless teams this season: In each of their five games, their opponent has come into the game with a 0 in the W column, and that will continue in Week 6, when the Redskins play the winless Chiefs. The Redskins have played one good team -- the Giants in Week 1 -- but since then they've played the Rams, Lions, Buccaneers and Panthers. The Rams and Bucs still haven't won a game, while the Lions and Panthers each have just one win, against the Redskins.
The Redskins' schedule finally gets harder in Week 7, when they host the Eagles on Monday night, and after that there's really only one more bad team -- the Raiders, Week 14 -- remaining on the schedule. So yes, the Redskins can become a .500 team if they beat the Chiefs on Sunday, but that doesn't mean they're heading to an 8-8 finish. It probably means they're on their way to 4-12, and they just got three of the wins out of the way early.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-12-2009 @ 11:46AM
A.J. said...
Small caveats; the Redskins got opening day against the Giants, who haven't exactly been horrible the last two years. And the Panthers team wasn't losing so much because of lack of talent as because of inability to protect the football - something they (or, at least, Delhomme) did a slightly better job of doing in Sunday's game.
Reply
10-12-2009 @ 6:31PM
thompson said...
everyone thought the broncos were the most disfunctional team. i believe the skins are a horrible team & jason campbell is a 2 or third string player get rid of zorn the clip board coach
10-12-2009 @ 12:16PM
oldmarbs said...
In all fairness, the lions have played one of the hardest schedultes to date, and have remained competive with some of the best teams. New Orleans, Minnesota, Chicago, Pitssburgh, and Washington. Could it be that the Lions are actually a better team then you give them credit for? name another team with a tougher schedule to this point.
Reply
10-12-2009 @ 12:50PM
bill said...
can they trade the owner?
Reply
10-12-2009 @ 2:25PM
SwyFrd said...
Zorn is the biggest LOSER, He's has no clue what's is going on.....
Reply
10-12-2009 @ 2:58PM
kwatson272 said...
I STILL don't get the fair catch call (non-call). When someone signals a fair catch you can NOT block/push someone into the receiver making the fair catch. It wasn't even close to being a judgement call ....... everyone was scratching their head on that one. Granted, the Skins stunk it up except for a few nice plays - but that one call was the game changer.
Reply
10-12-2009 @ 3:14PM
rrtraindepot said...
I agree with you. That dam call would had been corrected if it was made on DALLAS OR THE GIANTS. THE NFL KNOWS THAT WAS A BAD CALL AND IT WAS DONE ON PURPOSE BECAUSE OF BETTING. THE NFL HAS SCREWED UP THE REDSKINS SEASON.
10-12-2009 @ 3:22PM
ampcores said...
I agree with both of you. What a funny called game. Everyone knows that you cannot do what carolina did on that punt. If you notice the refs had ample time to correct that call. Why they did not only the NFL & REFS KNOW. You are right, just let the REDSKINS DO THAT TO THE COWBOYS AND WOULD SEE THE CALL WOULD HAD NEVER BEEN CALLED THE WAY THEY DID IN THIS GAME. The X football player are the announcers because of only one reason they know what is going on. They are their to cover up bad calls
Reply
10-12-2009 @ 4:19PM
Steve said...
WHAT sort of a call was that..( STRANGE )Something wrong here..How can you possibly get pushed into the player that calls fair catch and then its called as a turnover..How many times have we seen this happen and they call a personal fowl penatly on the player who hit the player who called it..I dont care what sort of excuse they gave to Coach Zorn it was worth the challenge because i would have thought it would have been a Redskin ball BUT apparently if your a blocker for the recieving team you can get pushed into the punt returner that calls the fair catch and then the ball becomes live so its anybodies..Its getting worse everyday..Best Regards Steve Dublin Ireland
Reply
10-12-2009 @ 6:19PM
kathgbj said...
I miss Jack Kent Cooke. Snyder is about money and having celebrities in the press box. who needs it
Reply
10-12-2009 @ 6:34PM
marcusj29 said...
Just so you non-football guru's know you can push a blocker into the guy even if he calls a fair catch. It's a rule that should be gone but it's practiced all the time. That's why you normally don't see the same player next to the fair catch guy because if you do they will try and do it.
Reply
10-12-2009 @ 7:09PM
rrtraindepot said...
Marcusj29 You are going to have to find this in the rule book for me. I have seen the refs call teams down for this before and they did not in this game.
10-12-2009 @ 7:22PM
rrtraindepot said...
OK marcusi29, I just down loaded the NFL RULE Book. It states that when when a fair catch sign is made which was in yesterdays game that a member of the kicking team may not interfere in anyway with the receiver on the receiving team at anytime or form
10-12-2009 @ 11:00PM
glennrc said...
About that punt no call. To me, it's clearly evident that the Carolina player intentionally pushes the Redskins player into the guy who called for the fair catch. Clearly a flag for interference should have been thrown. One thing though, I don't think they throw that flag unless it's called live. They don't throw that flag because of replay.
Reply
10-13-2009 @ 6:52AM
Jeff Hoff said...
Dan Snyder please hire a general manager who knows something about football team play. You just can't buy high priced individuals and expect to win. All thats right, you got Tom Cruise to help with your decisions. Jack Kent Cook is rolling over in his grave.
Reply