Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

You were Right All Along (Fan's Reaction)


ThatGuy

Recommended Posts

I posted this yesterday on my site:

Nothing like a Redskin tailspin to prove any point a fan has ever made. Obviously if the Skins lose 6 of 8 games, every decision made this season that a fan disagreed with was wrong. No team can lose so many games and be right about anything. Just check the fan message boards, they’ll tell you.

This morning while checking out Extremeskins, I was shown the light. I read about the terrible decision to start Mark Brunell over Patrick Ramsey, and how we wasted precious development time on Ramsey during this ‘rebuilding’ season. Never mind that Ramsey isn’t the quarterback of the future anymore, and that he’ll probably be gone this off-season, we need to play him. I also read about our awful draft, picking Carlos Rogers over Mike Williams. We need a 2nd wide receiver, and Williams was that guy. Don’t worry about the fact that he only has twenty-five catches this year, and that he’s been labeled as having a bad attitude. If we had drafted Williams we’d be 8-3 instead of 5-6.

Normally I’d disagree with the people saying this kind of stuff, but in this case I think they are on to something. They just haven’t pushed it far enough. This is just the tip of the iceberg. I mean do you really think Laveranues Coles would have stood for all this losing? Getting Santana Moss was a mistake, we need a real angry guy in the locker room to speak up and let the team have it.

But I don’t think we should forget past decisions either, this team hasn’t been good in a long time, certainly someone is to blame. Jeff George over Brad Johnson, the real reason we’ve sucked since 2000. Firing Schottenheimer for Spurrier? Tony Banks or Kent Graham? Stephen Davis or Skip Hicks? Heck, why stop there? This probably dates back to Billy Kilmer vs Sonny. Obviously the Redskins have screwed up every decision they’ve ever made, why else would they be in this position.

So fans, take this opportunity. Anything you’ve ever disagreed with? Now is the time to prove you knew what you were talking about. I mean why else would they be on the verge of missing the playoffs again. Joe Gibbs and crew obviously have no clue what they are doing, they don’t compare to your vast knowledge of football. So stand up and tell us how the Skins screwed all us fans over. Don’t let rational thinking or common sense stop you. You were right all along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't act like you were right all along - you're right, but it goes both ways. If everything is going well, you can't point to one thing that you supported as being the factor that led to success. Maybe that thing prevented even greater success, who knows?

This is why it is silly to condemn people who point out flaws in our team even when we are winning. When we were 3-0, people were worried about things like our pass rush and run defense, but they were often dismissed by responses such as "We're 3-0, shut up!", "Just enjoy the win, we're undefeated", etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I will bite

I blame to us being 5 and 6 down to 4 decisions.

First why take White when Chris Canty is right there in the 4th. He would have been better than Chris Clemons right now in the pass rush and he is a future star.

Second. why pass when you can run the ball against a team you run well up to this point (Raiders) and you still have the lead. Terrible decision.

3rd. why run when you can pass at second and 20 after a boneheaded penalty. After all you are running against the number one run D in the league and in the game you are averaging less than 3 yards a carry.

Why Frost and why stick with him> The guy has cost us at least the TB and SD games if not the Raiders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest dissapointment I've experienced as a fan was when the Skins finished 8-3 at the end of '01 and the following happened:

1) Fired Marty after he turned things around

2) Hired Spurrier

3) Got rid of Stephen Davis, who had just piled up 1400 yards with Marty

4) Wasted picks and got rid of players (like Davis) to form this run and gun offense that failed miserably... we are still suffering from the wasted picks from the Spurrier days....

I would say my second biggest dissapoinment was the huge contract given to Brunell. I'll be the first to admit he's turned it around this year, and it's not even the fact that we signed a veteran QB to come in here last year... but at the time I just didn't see why we felt it was necessary to sign a 35-year old QB to a 7-year, 43 million dollar contract, including an 8.3 million dollar signing bonus & on top of that, throw in a high draft pick. Brunell was going to be released anyway, why throw in a draft pick? It was like stealing. And why sign him to that amount of money when he wasn't going to see a 1/4 of that anywhere else.... look at the Garcia contract or the Bledsoe contract.....

But what's done is done. I just hope we can eventually get back to the days of not always making the splashy free agent moves, but making the smart ones... building through the draft instead of throwing them away like they are garbage... getting a GM who can identify talent and manage the cap... and of course, WINNING

HAIL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the biggest dissapointment I've experienced as a fan was when the Skins finished 8-3 at the end of '01 and the following happened:

I hate this 8-3 arguement. After we fought back from being 0-5 to move to 5-5, we lost 3 of our next 4 to fall right out of the race. The four most important games of the year, we lost 3 of them. We won the last two meanlingless games. The focus shouldn't be on the 8-3 finish, it should be on losing 3 of 4 while we actually had a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3) Got rid of Stephen Davis, who had just piled up 1400 yards with Marty

To be fair, that happened in the second season of the Spurrier reign. Course, Davis only really had one good year left in him, so getting rid of him looks good in hindsight.

Course, the Danny didn't think that Spurrier would just get up and quit. It is sad that he didn't really seem to take things seriously here.

Jason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate this 8-3 arguement. After we fought back from being 0-5 to move to 5-5, we lost 3 of our next 4 to fall right out of the race. The four most important games of the year, we lost 3 of them. We won the last two meanlingless games. The focus shouldn't be on the 8-3 finish, it should be on losing 3 of 4 while we actually had a chance.

Ironically, Joe Gibbs began his coaching career with an 8-8 season after an 0-5 start. At one point, the team was 5-6, and lost consecutive games to Buffalo and New York, and then went on to close the season with three wins to finish 8-8.

According to your logic, instead of focusing upon Gibbs' 8-3 finish, an emphasis should have been put on the two consecutive losses that took place after reaching the 5-6 mark, and that the three wins at the end of the year was "meaningless".

As we all know, the following year, Gibbs went on to win the Superbowl the next season. I am sure that the momentum associated with the three "meaningless" wins at the end of the year was carried over to the following season.

As for Marty's encore performance after the 8-8 finish, we will never know how that transpired.

Moral of the story: don't understimate the significance of momentum that can carry over to the following season. Thus, I agree with jewbst1's premise that firing Marty was a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ironically, Joe Gibbs began his coaching career with an 8-8 season after an 0-5 start. At one point, the team was 5-6, and lost consecutive games to Buffalo and New York, and then went on to close the season with three wins to finish 8-8.

According to your logic, instead of focusing upon Gibbs' 8-3 finish, an emphasis should have been put on the two consecutive losses that took place after reaching the 5-6 mark, and that the three wins at the end of the year was "meaningless".

As we all know, the following year, Gibbs went on to win the Superbowl the next season. I am sure that the momentum associated with the three "meaningless" wins at the end of the year was carried over to the following season.

As for Marty's encore performance after the 8-8 finish, we will never know how that transpired.

Moral of the story: don't understimate the significance of momentum that can carry over to the following season. Thus, I agree with jewbst1's premise that firing Marty was a mistake.

I'm not saying that it wasn't a mistake. I'm just saying lets not act like we were on a rampage and the best team going. We had freaking Tony Banks as our QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that it wasn't a mistake. I'm just saying lets not act like we were on a rampage and the best team going. We had freaking Tony Banks as our QB.

The fact that we were able to finish 8-3 in spite of the presence of Banks as our qb should speak volumes as well.

I am just saying that based on that 8-3 finish, its unfortunate that Marty didn't have the opportunity to coach the 2002 team, for one reason or another. A foundation was laid with the emphasis of a strong running attack and a solid defense. With Spurrier becoming the head coach, as a result of his offensive philosophy, we went into another direction with an emphasis bestowed upon an identity based on the passing game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moral of the story: don't understimate the significance of momentum that can carry over to the following season. Thus, I agree with jewbst1's premise that firing Marty was a mistake.

Sorry, Drex, I must disagree.

When Gibbs started 0-5 in '81, it was with the then-conventional two-back set. He switched to Coryell's brainchild, the H-Back scheme, and then went 8-3 the rest of the season while putting up big numers on the scoreboard.

It was a better plan and not the mystical "momentum" that carried over to the next several seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, Drex, I must disagree.

When Gibbs started 0-5 in '81, it was with the then-conventional two-back set. He switched to Coryell's brainchild, the H-Back scheme, and then went 8-3 the rest of the season while putting up big numers on the scoreboard.

It was a better plan and not the mystical "momentum" that carried over to the next several seasons.

Some other points: Gibbs took over a 6-10 team, and improved them by 2 games. Schottenheimer took over an 8-8 team and stayed 8-8.

One other thing, the 1981 Skins never had a chance to go above .500. We sat at 5-6, then lost to Dallas (12-4). In 2001, the Skins were 5-5, then lost to Dallas, but this Dallas team sucked (5-11).

In other words, Gibbs took over a bad team and improved them. Schottenheimer took over an average team (2000 was the 8-8 year where we lost a few due to not having a kicker), and kept them the same way.

You can't compare the situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...