Thoughts of a Negative Poster

When Vinny Cerrato traded draft picks for Jason Taylor, a poll showed that 89% of this membership favored the trade. That kind of fan support has been typical for the major moves made during the Snyder era -- the hiring of coaches, the major trades, trading draft picks for veterans, and the big name free agent acquisitions. I think the solid support for the organization can be attributed to the Homer Phenomenon. The homer sees everything Redskins through a burgundy lens. It's an ego-based bias, in my opinion.

Why do I think it's ego-based? I think we know intuitively that the man excessively proud of being Irish, Catholic and a Cork City Rebels fan would be equally proud if, by some twist of fate, he had been raised as a German, Lutheran, Bayern Munchen fanatic. You see -- it isn't his groups that are wonderful. It's that his groups are wonderful because they're HIS groups.

So, what about the 11% who didn't favor the Jason Taylor trade? Were there some whose inflamed ego would rather have been right than wrong about that? Absolutely. I can't say how many. What I can tell you is that I have taken a negative position on most of the major moves in the Snyder era and my thought pattern is always the same:

I hope I'm wrong, but...

this sounds like a bad idea.

If I'm right, I hope the harm will be minimal.

Here's an example: After the run to the playoffs in 2005, giddy optimism swept this forum. I was the lone pessimistic voice because I was 99% sure that the Gibbs approach, building a roster by trading up in the draft, trading draft picks for veterans, and being very aggressive in free agency would fail. My best hope for the team was that the Gibbs plan would fail quickly and it did. The 2006 season was an eye-opener for Joe Gibbs and the organization.

Watching the 2006 collapse was difficult for me, as it was for all Skins fans, but I believed it was the best outcome possible for bad roster management.

I write this to encourage more negative voices in this forum. I'm not referring to those who enjoy second guessing every coach's decision that fails or those who trash players beyond reason. I'm encouraging those who try very hard to be realistic and fair to speak up and be heard when you don't agree with the decisions of Redskins management. Don't worry that your opinions won't be popular with the homer crowd. Take solace in the fact that, so far in the Snyder era, the homers have been consistently wrong.

I haven't always been happy with the way things are done, but I figure they are professionals at what they do, just like I am with my job. I'll always take the glass half full... Even if it means stressing and throwing stuff at the tv on Sundays.

Well, I do think you're right about the "My Groups" part. I certainly feel that way. Cork City sucks though.

Just what this forum needs, more negativity. :doh:

And seriously, If you want to talk about ego based posting, LOOK IN THE MIRROR.

The big problem with this post unfortunately is this should have been posted like 2 to 3 years ago. I feel now we don't go after high prized free agents example Stephen Bowen and Barry cofield great contributors but not superstars. As well as the Pierre garçon, in my opinion a steal we got in free agency. At the time sports analyst said skins made by choice with giving garçon #1 receiver money. Well the coaching staff was spot on with getting garçon and he is a true #1 receiver. So in the end the I feel by getting shanahan and Allen in here it has changed the whole culture of the front office and player selection in draft and free agency. Snyder is no longer involved in player selection. Song personally feel there really isn't any sentiment to talk about with your post at the current time. Times have changed from the old Snyder and cerrato era. Things are looking up. HTTR

I wish the Ben's Chili Bowl was on the first level.

fan would be equally proud if, by some twist of fate, he had been raised as a German,

Steady on - there are limits you know :evilg:

The Optimist in me says that things will turnaround in time, and look I was right.

Just what this forum needs, more negativity. :doh:

And seriously, If you want to talk about ego based posting, LOOK IN THE MIRROR.

I agree %100.

Just really weird timing Oldfan. Almost as if you are purposely trying to rain on the parade. I don't understand your angle here.

More negativity? You see this place after the Panthers game?

I think perhaps what you either don't understand or at least fail to acknowledge is that most fans do not take as analytical an approach to the game as you do. Your mindset and theories (some of which I agree with, almost all of which I enjoy) are more suited for baseball... The Moneyball approach almost. Large sample sizes, where emotion and intangibles mean little. Baseball is that way (I am a huge Reds fan and am a frequent poster at the top Reds message board) and the sport attracts those types of thinkers/people. Honestly, the Reds forum I belong to is calmer and much more analytical than ES. The posters are generally older, more well versed in history, and the posts are normally longer and more thought-out. Not a slam on ES at all, just a fact.

In football it doesn't work that way. Football is a "lose your mind" sport prone to wild swings of emotion from week to week or even play to play. It is high octane, intense, and full throttle. Fans react to it as such.

Most people are just fans that deperately want the skins to do well. So they generally grant them the benefit of the doubt. The Jason Taylor trade was awful; we all should have known it... And yes, the 11% were right and they are likely more analytical and less emotional. The 89% chose to hope that it would work out and that hope colored their actual opinion of the deal.

I'll be honest, I consider myself a pretty intellectual fan. Someone who knows the game and the team history. But very rarely have I been against a move... It's just the fan nature in me. My gut told me the McNabb deal was terrible, but I spun it in a way so that I could be happy about it. My gut was right, as were all of the people that spoke out about it when it went down.

But this is an uphill battle... You are asking people to take off the B & G lenses, but most people don't care to be as analytic about it... Takes the fun away from being a fan for many.

The team is in the midst of their most thrilling string of games in years and years and you start a thread calling more negativity? Just seems odd man.

I think I understand the thought behind your thread Oldfan but I guess I quibble with the line that encourages more "NEGATIVE" voices in the forum. Shouldn't it be more "realistic" voices? Shouldn't it be more "grounded" voices? Maybe that's what you meant. I don't think we need more "negative" voices.

Your argument about homerism is well taken but blind homerism (ie Larry Michaels) is as annoying as pure unadulterated haterism (ie Chad Dukes).

If your point is the forum could benefit from more grounded or realistic fans - I will concur. More negativity? I don't think so.

Oldfan,

What's your take on Robert starting against the Browns?

I guess hindsight forgets that in that Jason taylor trade example we had lost two defensive ends on the first day of camp. . It wasn't like the FO just went shopping for the hell of it.

A second was too high, but we had definite need.

What about the times the negative poster is wrong?

negativity is easy. In sports, the ultimate measure of success is a championship, and they are very rare.

In such, the negative take is always the easiest because it comes true more often.

Some folks think about it and give good reason for the negatives they are on about.

Most don't.

So i'd hope you'll encourage thoughtful negativity, not just ****ing for the sake of it.

~Bang

I applaud you Mr. Original Poster. I really do. I think a lot of people that are fans of a certain team tend to get to positive and put the blinders on. Ive always been the pessimist. Ive always been the guy who goes "Even though were up 28-3 at halftime, we'll somehow blow the lead!" Then when it comes to fruition I start freaking out, and I always felt this team was cursed. Regardless, I think there are some who are being way to optimistic about a few things. I created a post 4 weeks ago about how I thought the offense was gimmicky. I still think its gimmicky, and I still think we should just run a traditional Shanahan offense and that RG3 would still run it extremely well. But, whatever, let them run this as long as it works thats all I care about. Secondly, people are talking about going to cleveland and just smoking the Browns, but these are the games we always lose. We play down to competition. We always have.

So while everyone else is on cloud 9 this week, I cant stop worrying about this freaking Cleveland game.

And man, I hope RG3 plays.

Anyways, my point is, I think optimism is a great thing, and I think the Redskins as a whole deserve some optimism. They beat 3 divisional rivals in a row and beat one of the best teams in the league in Baltimore. So I think it is deserved, but I also think people need to realize we are FAR from where we need to be.

I'll be honest, I consider myself a pretty intellectual fan. Someone who knows the game and the team history. But very rarely have I been against a move... It's just the fan nature in me. My gut told me the McNabb deal was terrible, but I spun it in a way so that I could be happy about it. My gut was right, as were all of the people that spoke out about it when it went down.

But this is an uphill battle... You are asking people to take off the B & G lenses, but most people don't care to be as analytic about it... Takes the fun away from being a fan for many.

The team is in the midst of their most thrilling string of games in years and years and you start a thread calling more negativity? Just seems odd man.

Good post and I feel like I'm where you are. Even if I think the deal is bad (I didn't like the Jason Taylor trade) I'm always trying to put a positive spin on it because I want to see my team do well.

I don't mind negative voice in the forum as long as you have good reasons to back it up and not just spewing, "god this team sucks, they'll never get it, Danny sucks, etc., etc.," just as I don't like the uber homers who say, "Super Bowl baby, we'll be unstoppable now that we got player x, suck it NFC East." Both sides can be too extreme.

So, we're in the mist of a 4 game winning streak and are in playoff contention, and this is posted? OF, i respect you as a poster, but i'm struggling as to understanding what purpose this OP is serving.

Taking a negative position on another person's decision is a huge ego play. The ONLY reason to ever be negative about another person's is that you actually think you can influence a decision AFTER it is made.

Hahaha... This is hilarious. Here's my question...

Is the 2008 (0-16) Detroit Lions the worst team in NFL history? Or is the 2009 "Swinging Gate" Redskins (that lost to DET) the worst?

Hahaha... This is hilarious. Here's my question...

Is the 2008 (0-16) Detroit Lions the worst team in NFL history? Or is the 2009 "Swinging Gate" Redskins (that lost to DET) the worst?

I disagree with the wording in the OP strongly. I think it's appropriate to have a real voice, not necessarily a negative one.

That said:

Isn't your question completely subjective? How does one define "the worst team in NFL history"? I'd argue that neither one of them are.

Here's an example: After the run to the playoffs in 2005, giddy optimism swept this forum. I was the lone pessimistic voice because I was 99% sure that the Gibbs approach, building a roster by trading up in the draft, trading draft picks for veterans, and being very aggressive in free agency would fail. My best hope for the team was that the Gibbs plan would fail quickly and it did. The 2006 season was an eye-opener for Joe Gibbs and the organization.

Watching the 2006 collapse was difficult for me, as it was for all Skins fans, but I believed it was the best outcome possible for bad roster management.

.

Fans like me believe the only mistake Gibbs made was hiring Al Saunders and turning an offense that closed the season on a 5 game winning streak and averaged 30 points a game against the NFC east back to back to back to make the playoffs.

Gibbs offense was much better then Saunders, thats why we went deeper into the playoffs and if it wasn't for us running out of gas with injuries to Portis and Brunell, this team might have beat Seattle and went to the Super Bowl. Gibbs 91 team, the best to ever take the field was made up of few drafts and many FA.

He inherited a true turd from Spurrier and in 2 years had them into the playoffs, so for some to call that a failure is ridiculous. Gibbs turned a loser into a legit contender and even with Saunders made it back to the playoffs the next year, minus JC. He brought confidence and heart to his team and it showed especially in December when needed most. 9-0 in 05 and 07 in the Month of December. That's when heart takes over, just like it is today on this team.

They are beating the best in the league back to back and winning games that nobody gave them a chance. That's the heart of a Champion and this team has it! Plus luck always falls on that team, the ball and everything starts bouncing their way, and that's going on in Washington as well. I have a very strong feeling this team is winning the NFC East by 3 more weeks.

Taking a negative position on another person's decision is a huge ego play. The ONLY reason to ever be negative about another person's is that you actually think you can influence a decision AFTER it is made.

Well not quite. You can also hope to influence future decisions or the thought process which goes into making those decisions.

Taking a negative position on another person's decision is a huge ego play. The ONLY reason to ever be negative about another person's is that you actually think you can influence a decision AFTER it is made.

I don't know, is it?

Let's use the Jason Taylor fiasco:

He wasn't a scheme fit. We traded a second rounder for an aging player who didn't fit.

We (including me for a little while) were all excited about it. Yahoo!

Then it dawned on me, not too long into his tenure, "aww ****. He doesn't fit!"

Vinny Cerrato made a decision like a fan would. He didn't think about it like a football person should. A fan would agree that it was a good trade, primarily because Jason Taylor was a former defensive MVP and a well known football player. How could it be a bad trade? System fit. It wasn't looked at.

I'm not sure that has much to do with ego. I think it has more to do with football intelligence.

I'm not trading for Peyton Manning and expecting him to run the same offense as RG3. Are you? Could the trade be beneficial if there are changes made? Yes, in the short term. But imagine Peyton running options and zone reads.Not a great fit right? Now we also gave up a 1st rounder for it.

Is that an ego thing? Or a football intelligence thing. You tell me

Just what this forum needs, more negativity. :doh:

And seriously, If you want to talk about ego based posting, LOOK IN THE MIRROR.

I completely agree. I think there's enough negativity on ES to go around (even when we're doing well) to last a few lifetimes. And btw, how often does "realistic or rational" negativity ever actually happen here, and when does it EVER lead to anything positive? It's most often impulsive, irrational negativity (of which at times we're all guilty of IMPO). Either way, to encourage more of this behavior is pretty ludicrous imo.

I don't know, is it?

Let's use the Jason Taylor fiasco:

He wasn't a scheme fit. We traded a second rounder for an aging player who didn't fit.

We (including me for a little while) were all excited about it. Yahoo!

Then it dawned on me, not too long into his tenure, "aww ****. He doesn't fit!"

Vinny Cerrato made a decision like a fan would. He didn't think about it like a football person should. A fan would agree that it was a good trade, primarily because Jason Taylor was a former defensive MVP and a well known football player. How could it be a bad trade? System fit. It wasn't looked at.

I'm not sure that has much to do with ego. I think it has more to do with football intelligence.

I'm not trading for Peyton Manning and expecting him to run the same offense as RG3. Are you? Could the trade be beneficial if there are changes made? Yes, in the short term. But imagine Peyton running options and zone reads.Not a great fit right? Now we also gave up a 1st rounder for it.

Is that an ego thing? Or a football intelligence thing. You tell me

"Then it dawned on me"? That is a huge part of the very definition of an ego play.

---------- Post added December-12th-2012 at 11:31 AM ----------

Well not quite. You can also hope to influence future decisions or the thought process which goes into making those decisions.

Big difference and that is even more of an ego play.