PotomacSkinsFan Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Portis had broken ONE more tackle. On a 4th quarter run. 1st and 15 from the 11, going out. Portis almost breaks a dexter jackson tackle, but barely steps out of bounds. We are a 9-point dog in this game. The reason cited for most media people picking against us this game is our anemic offensive output against the Bucs. But, if portis can keep just one more foot inbounds, he ends up with over a 100 yards and we win by two touchdowns. That score would have made our offensive output pretty respectable and really respectable in terms of rushing. I just really think a lot of people out there are putting too much emphasis on our offensive output against the bucs. skins win by a touchdown and a field goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Dude...not only that potential touchdown, but they barely missed on two trick plays at other points in the game. The fake-screen to Moss was wide open, but Brunell missed him by a foot or so (very close). The half-back pass was wide open, but Portis put a tiny bit too much air under the throw and it hung up...enough time for Jackson to break up the play. We potentially beat that team by 4 touchdowns...not just 2!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt [Redskins Fan] Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 But if we were ahead, we wouldn't have run some of those plays, or the Bucs would have been in a different formation.. you can second-guess it all day long. We won! Forget the haters, if you're not absolutely elated right now you have a serotonin imbalance or something. Plus, we set a record previously held by Super Bowl champions. Might even be a good omen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3 Rings Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I agree with both of these posts. Vegas will lose a lot of money on that -9 line though. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erigion Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 ...we went 14-2 and were playing the 3rd or 6th seed in the playoffs. There is no way the 6th seed would be the favorite against the 1st seed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Point spreads are based on the betting public and nothing more. Too much Seattle money that's why there is a 9 point spread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 We wouldn't be favored in Seattle no matter what the score was last week. But 9 points is a joke. Bet that all day long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish50 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 We could have won by 4 touchdowns and we would still be the underdogs. Back in the 80's when Gibbs was first here, we were hardly ever favored in any playoff games. Never favored in any of the 4 Superbowls. In order to be a favorite of the media, you have to have some superstars. Joe Gibbs teams have never had a bunch of star players (exception-John Riggins). Every tream we played back then had the star reciever, runningback, quarterback, etc. They were the media darlings and we were a bunch of no names that just won football games. So get used to it. I actually like it that way. Everybody always underestimated us and the Redskins would just go out and win football games. I see the same trend happening again. HAIL TO THE REDSKINS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 But in reality we should be favored: " Since all four games this weekend are rematches from the regular season, here's an interesting note: Since 2000, there have been eight instances when teams that faced each other once in the regular season played a rematch in the playoffs. In those games, the teams that won the regular-season meetings are a combined 8-0 in the playoff rematch." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotomacSkinsFan Posted January 12, 2006 Author Share Posted January 12, 2006 But in reality we should be favored:" Since all four games this weekend are rematches from the regular season, here's an interesting note: Since 2000, there have been eight instances when teams that faced each other once in the regular season played a rematch in the playoffs. In those games, the teams that won the regular-season meetings are a combined 8-0 in the playoff rematch." is that true? Because i thought pittsburgh beat new england last year in the regular season and then went on to lose to them in the AFC championship game. I'd like to find the stat here if anyone knows it (that is the record of teams in the playoff rematch when they won the first game). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mania Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Portis had broken ONE more tackle.On a 4th quarter run. 1st and 15 from the 11, going out. Portis almost breaks a dexter jackson tackle, but barely steps out of bounds. We are a 9-point dog in this game. The reason cited for most media people picking against us this game is our anemic offensive output against the Bucs. But, if portis can keep just one more foot inbounds, he ends up with over a 100 yards and we win by two touchdowns. That score would have made our offensive output pretty respectable and really respectable in terms of rushing. I just really think a lot of people out there are putting too much emphasis on our offensive output against the bucs. skins win by a touchdown and a field goal. Our total output would've been a little over 200 yards, which isn't that respectable at all, but I agree with you that the mediots are putting to much emphasis on our offensive output in the TB game. However, I disagree that we would've been the favorite, we just wouldn't be 9 pt dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frediemac Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 We could have won by 4 touchdowns and we would still be the underdogs. Back in the 80's when Gibbs was first here, we were hardly ever favored in any playoff games. Never favored in any of the 4 Superbowls.In order to be a favorite of the media, you have to have some superstars. Joe Gibbs teams have never had a bunch of star players (exception-John Riggins). Every tream we played back then had the star reciever, runningback, quarterback, etc. They were the media darlings and we were a bunch of no names that just won football games. So get used to it. I actually like it that way. Everybody always underestimated us and the Redskins would just go out and win football games. I see the same trend happening again. HAIL TO THE REDSKINS! Reminds me of another Dynasty that still has its wheels under it. THE NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjcdaman Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Why does it seem the under 25 crowd(mostly under 20 actually) are the ones saying, "The media hates us." "We get no respect." "We should be the favorite." Who gives a ****!!!! Look, these so-called experts don't determine who wins the ****ing game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csgunderson Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Vegas will lose a lot of money on that -9 line though. Doubtfull. Vegas isn't Vegas because it loses money. Vegas is vegas because they are experts at balancing the bets for both teams. If they get close to 50-50, they always win because you're betting at 11-10 odds (for example, in this week's game, most books require $110 to win $100). So, no matter which team covers, they pay out with the money put up by those betting on the losing team and keep the extra 10%. And in the meantime, they earn interest on the millions of dollars they hold until they pay out. In this game, they have a big spread primarily for two reasons (1) the general betting public sees a #1 seed vs. a #6 seed and expects an easy win for Seattle and (2) the general betting public has the 120 yard output versus Tampa as its most recent memory of the Skins' offense. That combines for a lot of people expecting Seattle to win. So, they need to make the spread large enough to entice bets on Washington. Even if the oddsmakers think that Washington has a chance to outright win the game, the safest way for the books to make money is to have 50-50 betting balance, so that's their only goal. And, by the way, from what I've seen, Vegas yet again got it right, because at most books the money is just about even on this game so far (53% in favor of Skins). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins11 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 is that true? Because i thought pittsburgh beat new england last year in the regular season and then went on to lose to them in the AFC championship game. I'd like to find the stat here if anyone knows it (that is the record of teams in the playoff rematch when they won the first game). Maybe the stat applies to Divisional playoff games, not Championship games? If so, it's kind of a stupid stat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotomacSkinsFan Posted January 12, 2006 Author Share Posted January 12, 2006 Why does it seem the under 25 crowd(mostly under 20 actually) are the ones saying, "The media hates us." "We get no respect." "We should be the favorite." Who gives a ****!!!! Look, these so-called experts don't determine who wins the ****ing game! you hit 26 recently? now you refer to others as the "under 25 crowd." You're on the young side here too. I was merely pointing out that a lot of people are putting too much emphasis on our offensive output from the bucs game: whether it be the media, vegas, nfl viewers, seahawks fans, etc. This has nothing to do with "no respect." I was pointing out that if one play turned out slightly differently then there would be a lot of different things being said about this game right now. The post is a lot more about how a little thing like that makes a maybe a 6 point difference in a spread than "lack of respect." looks like these over 25 guys do a lot of cussing and complaining, and im willing to bet that most of the complaining on this site about other skins fans comes from that age range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotomacSkinsFan Posted January 12, 2006 Author Share Posted January 12, 2006 The Redskins apparently now must call a press conference to apologize for even being in the league, much less the playoffs, much less the second round of the playoffs for generating just 120 yards of offense in a victory. You see, teams with such terrible offensive performances are not judged at all by being the No. 11 offense in football over the course of the season playing one of the most difficult schedules in football. Teams aren't judged by being the No. 13 scoring team. Teams are ONLY judged by one side of the team, on the road, in the playoffs, against the favorite, in a win when only 120 yards of offense is in the books. Art agrees with us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 I agree with both of these posts. Vegas will lose a lot of money on that -9 line though. :-) No they won't -- everyone in the known universe except Skins fans (okay, maybe that's an exaggeration) thinks the Skins are going to get blown out. I believe Vegas will make tons of money off the chumps who bet on the Seahawks. This line is fishing for suckers...of which my time on the bodog poker tables tells me there are PLENTY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan133 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 our odds would have been beter but i don't know about being a favorite... never i the history of the seeded playoff system has the lowest seed been the favorite over the highest seed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PotomacSkinsFan Posted January 12, 2006 Author Share Posted January 12, 2006 our odds would have been beter but i don't know about being a favorite... never i the history of the seeded playoff system has the lowest seed been the favorite over the highest seed yeah, i went a little overboard saying we'd be the favorite. But i think we'd be a 3 point dog if portis breaks that tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lefty420 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 The Stat Is Divisional Games. All The Divisional Games Last Year Were Rematches. Pats Played Indy And Beat They Handily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poteet Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Doubtfull. Vegas isn't Vegas because it loses money. Vegas is vegas because they are experts at balancing the bets for both teams. If they get close to 50-50, they always win because you're betting at 11-10 odds (for example, in this week's game, most books require $110 to win $100). So, no matter which team covers, they pay out with the money put up by those betting on the losing team and keep the extra 10%. And in the meantime, they earn interest on the millions of dollars they hold until they pay out. In this game, they have a big spread primarily for two reasons (1) the general betting public sees a #1 seed vs. a #6 seed and expects an easy win for Seattle and (2) the general betting public has the 120 yard output versus Tampa as its most recent memory of the Skins' offense. That combines for a lot of people expecting Seattle to win. So, they need to make the spread large enough to entice bets on Washington. Even if the oddsmakers think that Washington has a chance to outright win the game, the safest way for the books to make money is to have 50-50 betting balance, so that's their only goal. And, by the way, from what I've seen, Vegas yet again got it right, because at most books the money is just about even on this game so far (53% in favor of Skins). Well done.... very accurate analysis. And as long as Vegas doesn't get more than 55% of the money bet either way, they win.... regardless of the actual outcome. What a great way to make money!!! All of us that take the Skins will simply win the money from all of those that bet on Seattle. And Vegas keeps the juice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunarluau Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 We would be a favorite if.... We won 14 games and the game was at Fed Ex Field Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPM285181 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 We could have won by 4 touchdowns and we would still be the underdogs. Back in the 80's when Gibbs was first here, we were hardly ever favored in any playoff games. Never favored in any of the 4 Superbowls.In order to be a favorite of the media, you have to have some superstars. Joe Gibbs teams have never had a bunch of star players (exception-John Riggins). Every tream we played back then had the star reciever, runningback, quarterback, etc. They were the media darlings and we were a bunch of no names that just won football games. So get used to it. I actually like it that way. Everybody always underestimated us and the Redskins would just go out and win football games. I see the same trend happening again. HAIL TO THE REDSKINS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPM285181 Posted January 12, 2006 Share Posted January 12, 2006 Well put kingfish well put. I remember how the days leading up to the 92 Superbowl all you heard about was Buffalos "no huddle" offense. The skins come out of the gates running their version of the no huddle and run it up the Bills confused arses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.