Washington Redskins

[rockydennis]

I would like for anyone who has played as WAS for a season to list their accomplishments/failures here.

I went 14-2 with Rypien (and Humphries). Towards the end of the season their offense became about as anemic as NE. However, defensively I only allowed 135 pts and got 11 interceptions overall. Darrell Green was a real asset with his speed.

The offense is another story. Rypien can't throw (or run) for shit and his receivers have no speed.

I beat Minnesota in the playoffs 14-0 and lost to SF in the championship game. Let's just say that the comp was ready to **** with me. I have never allowed that many points (41 through 3 quarters) and was mounting a decent comeback. But when Rathman ran one 80 yards for TD, I decided it was a game.

How the Redskins went 10-6 that year is beyond me.

[fro30]

I found my text file of where I went 13-3 with the Redskins.

13-3 losing in the regular season in week 13 to the Cowboys by 3, week 15 the cardinals by 16, lol, dont remind me about that game and week 16 to the giants by 14.

Here is the playoffs.

2nd round: Redskins 34 49ers 31

NFC Championship: Redskins 24 Giants 6

Superbowl: Redskins 30 Oilers 14

Here's a few key guys.

Mark Rypien: 96-173, 3134 yds, 38 tds, 16 ints.

Earnest Byner: 87 rushes, 803 yards, 18 tds.

Art Monk: 32 catches, 1265 yards, 17 tds.

[rockydennis]

lol, Phoenix can be tough sometimes, that damn Johnny Johnson..lol..anyways, my two losses cam against the Giants and Eagles. I beat the Giants the first time (by 3). And the lost in overtime the 2nd time. I was deep in their own territory and lost a fumble. Of course they preceeded to march down the field and kick a FG. Lost to the Eagles the last game of the season. Lost a couple more fumbes and created one which kicked me in the ****. I sacked Cunningham deep in their territory and he fumbles. Of course Byars recovers and runs like 50 yards. Sets up one of their two FG. They won 6-0. I think that is the first time I have ever been shutout. The one fumble came when I was about 10 yards from a TD.

Oh well, there is always next year...

btw,

btw, don't remember Rypien's exact numbers, but he did throw for 40 TDs as well as 12 INTs, also had over 3000 yards. Byner didn't do shit...

[rockydennis]

lol, Phoenix can be tough sometimes, that damn Johnny Johnson..lol..anyways, my two losses cam against the Giants and Eagles. I beat the Giants the first time (by 3). And the lost in overtime the 2nd time. I was deep in their own territory and lost a fumble. Of course they preceeded to march down the field and kick a FG. Lost to the Eagles the last game of the season. Lost a couple more fumbes and created one which kicked me in the ****. I sacked Cunningham deep in their territory and he fumbles. Of course Byars recovers and runs like 50 yards. Sets up one of their two FG. They won 6-0. I think that is the first time I have ever been shutout. The one fumble came when I was about 10 yards from a TD.

Oh well, there is always next year...

btw,

btw, don't remember Rypien's exact numbers, but he did throw for 40 TDs as well as 12 INTs, also had over 3000 yards. Byner didn't do shit...

[Bad Moon Rison]

I found my text file of where I went 13-3 with the Redskins.

Did you export these stats from the season stats or did you just keep a record of the game on a .txt file? If the former, how come I never knew about this?

[fro30]

Nah, I played the game on the Nintendo then after every game I'd just write down a few stats and a little recap.

[artoose monk]

i wrote this when me and long dong chuck long had our first season done a while ago......

Washington was kicking ass and taking names all regular season going 14-2 led by earnest p. byner and gary “dark” clark. His dicovery of artoose “obtuse” monk in the playoffs made him a force to be reckoned with. he ran into the 49ers in the nfc championship game and had them by the balls up 6 with only seconds to go, and then tom “should have been a stain on the sheets” rathman fights off a tackle for a safety to ramble all the way home 97 yards and send the skins to an early vacation. Darrell Green savaged things along while D Grant led the league in sacks with 23.

byner had a good year, and after i discovered monk in the playoffs, i thought i had a chance....that rathman play still pisses me off to this day....but the thing i remember most was how bad don warren is....he is fucking terrible...

[t-bob]

I don't care for the Skins myself in Tecmo. I like their D: I prefer to use use a DB for my MAN player unless I'm using tactics (or LT, heh), and with two good CBs, Washington gives you great flexibility in adjusting for which way the run's going. But, for me, a Tecmo team has to have a quarterback that's more or less reliable, and Rypien/Humphries haven't done that for me yet. I know it's silly, the Skins O is wicked deep and damn good, but that one weak link really kills it for me. It's the same reason I don't like the Bears, the Chargers, the Lions, etc. I'm just more of a passer than a runner, and I need a solid QB to make things happen on offense. *Shrug*.

[kingsoby1]

because of their QBs, poor LBs, and poor safeties, the skins are a lower echelon team.

i always start humpher over rypien... 6 ms just feels like their's lead in my boots. of course, checking conditions helps too.

[artoose monk]

now that i think about it, rypiens huge gap in his teeth should have given him better speed because he would have less wind resistance.....but stan the man would be throwing to gary clack all day long...

[BO FB Offtackle Left]

I posted about this in another thread, but I used Washington one season because I wanted to try out their crazy pass plays. I changed the second run to FB Offtackle L and replaced that ridiculous reverse with something else, but I kept the rest of the playbook.

I didn't keep stats, but I know I managed to go undefeated and win the Superbowl. I actually liked playing with Washington. I don't have a problem leaning on the run if the passing game isn't there. Byner was a workhorse for me, and Sanders had the most passing yards. Clark and Monk did about the same, but I'm sure I had much more yards running than passing. I don't remember what I did on defense, but unless I'm doing a specific challenge that says not to lurch, I lurch. So I was probably the NT a lot.

[BO FB Offtackle Left]

I posted about this in another thread, but I used Washington one season because I wanted to try out their crazy pass plays. I changed the second run to FB Offtackle L and replaced that ridiculous reverse with something else, but I kept the rest of the playbook.

I didn't keep stats, but I know I managed to go undefeated and win the Superbowl. I actually liked playing with Washington. I don't have a problem leaning on the run if the passing game isn't there. Byner was a workhorse for me, and Sanders had the most passing yards. Clark and Monk did about the same, but I'm sure I had much more yards running than passing. I don't remember what I did on defense, but unless I'm doing a specific challenge that says not to lurch, I lurch. So I was probably the NT a lot.

[BO FB Offtackle Left]

I posted about this in another thread, but I used Washington one season because I wanted to try out their crazy pass plays. I changed the second run to FB Offtackle L and replaced that ridiculous reverse with something else, but I kept the rest of the playbook.

I didn't keep stats, but I know I managed to go undefeated and win the Superbowl. I actually liked playing with Washington. I don't have a problem leaning on the run if the passing game isn't there. Byner was a workhorse for me, and Sanders had the most passing yards. Clark and Monk did about the same, but I'm sure I had much more yards running than passing. I don't remember what I did on defense, but unless I'm doing a specific challenge that says not to lurch, I lurch. So I was probably the NT a lot.

[LouisOliver]

because of their QBs, poor LBs, and poor safeties, the skins are a lower echelon team.

I had some success with them in the vMAN seasons my friends and I played. Their greatest strength is that they'll almost never get blown away on either side of the ball and can often take control against mid-level teams.

I mean, on offense they have the run, the line and clark. the qs suck and this causes them to sputter sometimes but you should be getting in the endzone a few times a game. D they have the corners. Corners are not what I like to play with but they'll get some stops which is what you need to win. I just don't see many teams in the NFC that you can "easily" put above them. This is because the NFC sucks in tecmo though. In the stratified AFC the Skins would get hammered.

[mattrose]

My only season with Washington:

WASHINGTON REDSKINS 14-2 WON SUPER BOWL (Houston)

[BO FB Offtackle Left]

OK I did not purposely post the same thing three times. I clicked the submit button once, and I didn't get a session interrupt or anything. Everything looked normal when I posted this. Knobbe, do you know why this happens? Is there anything I can do to prevent this from happening in the future?

[t-bob]

I just don't see many teams in the NFC that you can "easily" put above them. This is because the NFC sucks in tecmo though. In the stratified AFC the Skins would get hammered.

Dude. The Giants and Niners are far better of course. But I think Philly, Chicago, Minnesota, and Detroit are clearly better than Washington as well. Maybe six teams isn't "many", but it's more than a couple.

[LouisOliver]

Dude. The Giants and Niners are far better of course. But I think Philly, Chicago, Minnesota, and Detroit are clearly better than Washington as well. Maybe six teams isn't "many", but it's more than a couple.

I'm in the minority, but I really think the Eagles and Bears are overrated. Chicago has to be the single most overrated team in tecmo. Their offense *is* a running back and the defense has no one faster than 56 MS. This equals lots of fumbles and the potential to get picked apart by a capable player.

The Eagles are solid; I just don't think the cube is a guaranteed TD every time he touches the ball like a lot of people seem to think- its a mindgame. And the secondary blows. It's a prob in tecmo when your dbs arnt jumping to knock down low throws on bombs to clark.

Detroit *might* be better than WAS but only marginally. Minnesota just isnt.

Don't get me wrong, PHI and CHI are better than thew skins, but not by a lot. I'm just saying that they're not the trash team kingsoby1 said they were. I think in a field of avg tecmo talent I could take them to the playoffs every season.

[Primis]

Detroit *might* be better than WAS but only marginally. Minnesota just isnt.

DET as a team is a lot better teamwise than people think. I say that because of their Defense. Yeah the offense isn't so hot with mediocre recievers, but then again if you get Rodney Peete hurt you don't lose a ton by bringing in Andre Ware at QB either.

And DET's defense is pretty darn good -- you have a playmaker at every area. Jerrry Ball at NT, Chris Spielman and Mike Cofer at LB, and Bennie Blades and William White at safety..

And don't forget Mel Gray returning kicks and punts.

So even though they have Barry and not a lot else on offense, their team as a whole is pretty well-balanced. I can and have regularly gone undefeated and won the Super Bowl as the Lions without using Barry all season, without much problem because even though Perriman and Clark aren't great, they're serviceable..

Then again, I'm currently trying to go undefeated as the Colts using Trudeau only so... it's all relative.

-- Primis.

[t-bob]

Hey, I don't think the Skins are trash either. In the right hands they can rip anybody apart. I just think the teams I listed are better.

I feel compelled to defend myself though. Two things to bear in mind in each case: the Redskins have shitty QBs (they do, admit it), and nothing by two very good CBs on the other side of the football. That's what it comes down to.

1. Philly - QB Eagles and Keith Jackson alone are almost as good as Washington's offense. Their secondary is lousy, but the front seven is pretty hot shit. Thus, they have stuff on D that Washington doesn't (like, oh I don't know, PASS RUSH) so it's a toss-up as to who's better. Conclusion: I think they're better than Washington 'cause their offense is more dangerous (if star-driven) and their defense is just has more impact players.

2. Chicago - 56 MS the highest on D? Doesn't matter. They've got tons o' talent there, not to mention what's arguably the best pass D in the game. I think their D is *unarguably* superior to Washington's in every way. Their offense is severely crippled by their passing game, yes, but the D makes up for it. Plus, it's not like the passing game isn't completely useless. Their ground game is dangerous enough that you can do something in the air from time to time since the other team will be going against the run all the time. Head-to-head, what Chicago can do is just keep running at whichever CB the MAN prefers. Washington doesn't have the same luxury, as the Bears have more weapons to get stops. On the flipside, Washington can't count on those wonderful wideouts because Chicago's pass D is so croosh, and Byner can't win the game for them. Conclusion: Only slightly better than Washington, but better nonetheless.

3. Minnesota - Versatile D with talent at all three levels: the opposite of Washington. Plus, the offense is in the same situation as Washington: plenty of talent, no QB. Conclusion: Better because of D, because offense is more or less comparable (and Minn.'s D is *clearly* better).

4. Detroit - Primis covered the bases pretty well here. More balanced D. Good offensive depth and versatility (almost as good as Washington there). No worse in the QB department. And Barry seals the deal. Conclusion: Better than Washington because they can match their stride on offense (plus Barry puts the running game a notch or three above the Skins'), and once again, better, more useful D.