• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About kleese

  • Rank
    The Free Agent
  • Birthday 09/13/1977

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • Website URL
  • Location
    Oklahoma City, OK
  1. I am a member of message boards for all the teams I follow... Redskins, Thunder, Reds, and University of Oklahoma. I think message board popularity in general spiked around 2002-2008 something like that. Partly because at that time everyone was internet connected, but no one was really doing social media or even texting. Message boards were a means to communicate that we hadn't seen before. Over the years, a few things have happened: 1. More message boards popped up. This obviously dilutes the pool a little. 2. Social media. For those that came to the boards more for news and takes rather than discussion, mediums like twitter have taken that over. 3. Novelty wears off and people get a little bored/complacent with it. I can can tell you this, all of the boards I belong to seem to have followed the same pattern of a peak then a decline. ES is still the busiest of the boards I frequent though. I think specific to ES beyond the general things I outlined would be the overall disappointing team performance. Some people just tune out. ES also had that direct connection to the team and no doubt typhus caused some silly drama/friction within the community. Perhaps some jealously. It started getting a little melodramatic and off topic at times and that likely turned some people away. Its not as popular as it once was but I'd say it's at least 75% just general stuff and 25% specific to ES.
  2. I always think it is realistic/reasonable to expect at least one contributing player per team to go down for an extended period in camp/pre-season. At this juncture, I think we seem to be a relatively "healthy" team. Through one pre-season game, Murphy is the only guy that we would count on to do anything that projects to not be there week 1. And in his case the blow is slightly lessened by the fact that he wasn't going to be there weeks 1-4 anyway. To me, now we've had our "big" pre-season injury and fingers crossed that we don't see any additional the next 3 weeks.
  3. I know we all become doctors and body language experts around here, but I'll agree with others that judging by Murphy's reaction and the post game crutches, it doesn't look/sound good at all. Hopefully Cravens is of the far less serious variety. I figure just just about every team in the league will lose at least one regular player to a serious ailment before the season starts-- that's about par for the course.
  4. Not entirely true. Gibbs team were bad in preseason and also had a bit of a trend of slow starts. Not necessarily always week one, but over the first quarter or so of the season. His teams generally gained steam and finished strong.
  5. Define early in the season... in 2015 we were meh against the Dolphins week 1 but had a strong showing in week 2. Last year, we started 0-2 but it was against two of the top teams in the league and the Cowboys game was nip and tuck--we didn't look "bad" that day at all. We then won 4 in a row.
  6. I don't think in the 2015 and 2016 pre season that the offensive starters looked "bad" for the most part. Maybe a little bland, but nothing overly concerning. Tonight, they looked bad. But it was six plays. And one drive started at the two yard line. Far too small of a sample for me to draw any conclusions. My other part of the response was to the "our coaches never have us prepared" in pre season. That is where the 6-2 record comes into play. It means nothing but if your contention is that the skins are always unprepared to compete in preseason at all coaching levels-- well, that simply is false.
  7. Guess you have to decide what you are complaining about then? Is it performance of the starters or overall team preparation? Above it sounded like people were saying we are consistently under prepared in preseason. But obviously our prep for the depth was OK.
  8. Eh, I never want them to look bad, and I'll be concerned if this is how the offense looks for four straight pre season games. But to be honest, more or less punting the first pre season game to just get out of town is fine with me.
  9. What are you all talking about? We went 6-2 combined the last two pre seasons.
  10. That's the thing about pre season along with the obvious... the motivation and effort isn't equal. One staff might be in "get this over with" mode and the other might be "we need to really work on xyz mode." It's hard to tell.
  11. No. Teams take different approaches to these games. Reading Grudens quotes it sounds as if there is literally zero gameplanning specific to this game.
  12. This is your annual friendly reminder that the 0-16 Lions went 4-0 in the preseason.
  13. It's sort of a flawed poll... you are asking the question on a Redskins specific message board. It's early August. That means that if you are here, reading this thread, that you are making the conscious decision to spend your time discussing or reading about the Redskins 6 weeks prior to the start of the regular season. Chances are that makes you a die hard. And I'd say chances are if you are reading this and answer something OTHER than being a die hard that you are lying-- at least to yourself. To me it's like walking into the waiting room of the ER and taking a poll... "everyone who isn't feeling well, please raise your hand." Come to think of it, that analogy actually probably marries pretty well with the Redskins fan question...
  14. They never really did dude. Not hard to go bonkers for a team like the one we had from the early 70s until the early 90s. Redskins fans are just like other fan bases; maybe a little more spirited when things are good; maybe stick it out a tad longer when things are bad. But in general, they are the same. I keep telling the story of my one trip to RFK. It wasn't good. Disappointed in almost every aspect. Stadium emptied out late third/early fourth. Very little energy. It was 1994 and we were bad. Got smoked that day. People had already stopped caring-- and that was only three years removed from a SB.
  15. But it has nothing to do with RFK-- the memories are of the great teams that happened to play there. RFK was a dump. When I was thirteen I didn't find it particularly well maintained. Of course because the teams of the 80s/early 90s were great and there were so many good moments, that RFK took on sort of a mythical reputation. But as soon as Gibbs left, any "magic" the stadium held magically disappeared with him. I have no desire as a "older" fan to go back to RFK. That ship has sailed. Now, if any when they build a new stadium, I do think the design should mirror places like Seattle, etc with fewer seats, cozier sightlines, etc and get far away from the concrete bowl design of FedEx. I guess it's all what floats your boat. The NBA right now is similar to that of the NFL in the 1980s-- very little parity, some truly dominant teams. Some people prefer it one way, some people like it the other. I see pros and cons on both sides, but I guess I'm old school enough to where I ultimately prefer greatness. Even if it means less than compelling individual games in the post season ala the NBA this year or the NFL in the 80s. The NFC playoffs and Super Bowls throughout the 80s were generally domination-fests.