ouvan59 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 For all intents and purposes, you're right...there's a maybe 1-2 game difference between a "first place" and "last place" schedule...and it's far more likely that the teams you expect to be bad will suddenly be good. The only teams who benefit from their schedules are teams like Seattle who play in a horrid division and have six guaranteed games against conference doormats...The Eagles had that advantage for a few years as well (unfortunately..lol). The difference between our schedule and everybody else in the division was that we got the NFC South Champion Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the NFC North Champion Chicago Bears. The Giants got the Saints and the Vikings. The Cowboys got the Panthers and the Lions. The Eagles got the Falcons and the Packers. Yeah, we really lucked out there. :doh: While I agree with the premise of the article that big talk can backfire, I guarantee that while Joe Gibbs is not happy his players are talking about the SB he is happy as hell they are thinking about it as a goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyburd Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 He's a Giants fan, what do you expect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 We're all gushing. As fans, this is what we do.But I didn't see this article as doom and gloom at all, and I certainly don't think that UnWise Mike set out to write this article just to put a damper in the day of Redskins fans. He makes the very cerdible point - indeed, a point made several times on this board - that the O-line is one major injury away from a reality that I'd rather not think about. But as a sports journalist, it's his job to point out these types of things. People make the mistake of thinking that the Washington Post, being a hometown newspaper, is in the business of painting a rosy picture at all times, and they are not. The never did that, not even before that spat with Snyder. And now, about Joe Gibbs. If you were watching FOX 5 the other day, they played a clip from perseason 1991 when Steve Buckhantz was interviewing Gibbs on the Super Bowl expectations of the Redskins that year. Buckhantz stated that several media publications has picked the Skins to win the SB. And I don't think I've ever seen Gibbs so livid. I think he actually said "bullcrap". :laugh: But anyway, he definitely downplayed it, said that people shouldn't say that kind of stuff. And if you noticed, his team followed suit. Joe Gibbs is a very humble man. He knows it's better to say nothing and perform, and that talking big can get you in trouble. Man plans, God laughs. Speak softly and carry a big stick. So you're ok with Wise purposefully diminishing the teams' accomplishments last season by (falsely) chalking it up to an "easier" schedule due to their last place finish the year before...and you're ok with him overlooking all the very real and valid reasons why the team should indeed be setting the Super Bowl as a realistic goal, the only one that will suffice....and you're ok with Wise conveying the idea that the 5-6 Redskins are very likely the "real" Skins and not the 10-6 Skins that made it to the second round of the playoffs... All that's cool with you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 my point, again, though is you could point to ANY of the 32 teams in the NFL and poke a hole in their collective optimism by saying an injury at position X or position Y would be a significant challenge to their ability to contend why not look at Dallas and their less than stellar starting 5? Seems to me that Drew Bledsoe may be the most endangered species in the NFC East right now. how about the lack of depth at wide receiver, running back, and qb in Philly? how about the transition at quarterback in Chicago? Every team has question marks. The key is to judge whether they are question marks that are there from Day 1 (ie no matter how lucky the team is with injuries or the bounce of the ball) or whether you are just manufacturing worst case scenarios? Yes, if you take the view that IF Mark Brunell suffered a major injury early on and the Redskins had to play 16 games without him then the team likely would not be a front rank contender. But how is that any more likely than Peyton Manning getting hit and being knocked out for the season? Or the same happening to Roethlisberger or Tom Brady? These severe injuries we have seen to quarterbacks aren't limited to the ones with some age on them. Carson Palmer and Donovan McNabb's injuries last year show that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jethrodsp Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 I think the players' focus right now should be on winning the division. Then we can talk about getting homefield. Then we can talk about the Big Dance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 The difference between our schedule and everybody else in the division was that we got the NFC South Champion Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the NFC North Champion Chicago Bears. The Giants got the Saints and the Vikings. The Cowboys got the Panthers and the Lions. The Eagles got the Falcons and the Packers. Yeah, we really lucked out there. :doh: Exactly...lol :laugh:...Why the HELL is it that fans see this logic so damn easily and Wise just stares at these same facts blankly as if in a daze... :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 ....and you're ok with Wise conveying the idea that the 5-6 Redskins are very likely the "real" Skins and not the 10-6 Skins that made it to the second round of the playoffs...All that's cool with you? And having to tear through all three division foes to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Exactly...lol :laugh:...Why the HELL is it that fans see this logic so damn easily and Wise just stares at these same facts blankly as if in a daze... :doh: Because he had a point to make. Screw the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNatsFan Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 If you can name a potential backup for Jon Jansen, Casey Rabach or Chris Samuels, you work for the team, run an NFL message board or your name is Kili Lefotu (rookie, Arizona.)" :laugh: Ok, which one of you guys working the camp this year surprised hiim and answered his question. He doesn't seem to understand Redskins fans very well. There are tons of Redskins fans who can name potential backups at tackle and guard. At this point, what we don't know unfortunately, is who the actual backups will be. Hopefully they'll have a few guy stand out this pre-season and make that less of a concern. The time and roster spot investment in Molinaro so far doesn't seem to be panning out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Wise sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Lefotu is not at the top of the depth chart on the OL, so the mention of a #7 pick unlikely to make the final roster by name was strictly gratuitous on the part of Wise. There are several players ahead of him on the depth chart, some including Pucillo and Walter have started games in the NFL and been effective in stretches. Any team that happens to have a spare John Hannah or Jim Lachey on the bench, please go ahead and let Joe Gibbs know, Mike, and he will be sure to make a trade form him :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 :laugh: Ok, which one of you guys working the camp this year surprised hiim and answered his question. He doesn't seem to understand Redskins fans very well. There are tons of Redskins fans who can name potential backups at tackle and guard. At this point, what we don't know unfortunately, is who the actual backups will be. Hopefully they'll have a few guy stand out this pre-season and make that less of a concern. The time and roster spot investment in Molinaro so far doesn't seem to be panning out. How has Molinaro performed?...How much playing time has he been given? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Lefotu is not at the top of the depth chart on the OL, so the mention of a #7 pick unlikely to make the final roster by name was strictly gratuitous on the part of Wise.There are several players ahead of him on the depth chart, some including Pucillo and Walter have started games in the NFL and been effective in stretches. Any team that happens to have a spare John Hannah or Jim Lachey on the bench, please go ahead and let Joe Gibbs know, Mike, and he will be sure to make a trade form him :laugh: :laugh: I would like to challenge UnWise Mike to name one single backup lineman in the entire NFL. . . . . . . <crickets> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No_Pressure Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Article Summary: Those pesky Redskins and their big goal setting and their optomism! How dare they say such things in AUGUST! I am sure that other NFL teams would be shocked to hear this because they sure as hell arent talking about their team and their hopes for a championship! Someone should put this Redskins team in its place, whats all this optomism about winning big about anyways? It isnt like the Redskins went to the playoffs last season and won on the road. Not like the team could have anything to build on and high hopes with new additions to the roster. Why do these kinds of people always end up writing for the post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 I would like to challenge UnWise Mike to name one single backup lineman in the entire NFL. . . . . . . <crickets> Yeah, who exactly is the backup left guard for the Kansas City Chiefs?... Who's the backup center for the Miami Dolphins?... Who's the backup left tackle for the Denver Broncos?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Isn't it great that we have Bears' fans like Wilbon and this other carpetbagger, Wise, to comment on the Redskins for the Post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yonisredskins Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 I just sent an e-mail to Mike Worthless. I gave him a peice of my mind. If he responds to my e-mail, I'll post it here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Why do these kinds of people always end up writing for the post? It's in the job description... "Wanted: marginally talented writers with surly attitudes to be official 'wet blankets' to the players and fans of local NFL sports team. Must be able to not see the forest for the trees. Blinders provided upon hiring. Employment dependent upon passing drug test first...if you pass it, you won't get hired." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 He makes the very cerdible point - indeed, a point made several times on this board - that the O-line is one major injury away from a reality that I'd rather not think about. But as a sports journalist, it's his job to point out these types of things. He could also make the point that if a piano fell out of a window and landed on your head, you would have a headache. As bulldog said, this is a reality that confronts every team. THAT's where he loses his credibility, along with other areas that others touched on. It didn't come across as a reality check. It came across as a guy looking for any negative slant and going all the way with it. It lacked balance. Granted, it's an opinion piece, but the lack of analysis and discrepancy in facts make it hard to find it credible. It's like he was asked to do a hatchet piece on the team. You'd say the same thing if he swept every piece of negativity under the rug. People want to see that these guys put THOUGHT into their writing. When that is so obviously lacking, you can't really accept their credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raperry2 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 I think Wise praises Gibbs in this article mainly. It's not a bad article. It's all about respecting your opponents and playing hard. Don't worry though. I still remember his article about our "bush league fans" after the Chicago game last year. Still hate him for it. We were great. 3 straight offsides calls. I couldn't hear myself yelling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Don't worry though. I still remember his article about our "bush league fans" after the Chicago game last year. Still hate him for it. We were great. 3 straight offsides calls. I couldn't hear myself yelling. I think that was George Solomon but I could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-Dog Night Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 So you're ok with Wise purposefully diminishing the teams' accomplishments last season by (falsely) chalking it up to an "easier" schedule due to their last place finish the year before...and you're ok with him overlooking all the very real and valid reasons why the team should indeed be setting the Super Bowl as a realistic goal, the only one that will suffice....and you're ok with Wise conveying the idea that the 5-6 Redskins are very likely the "real" Skins and not the 10-6 Skins that made it to the second round of the playoffs...All that's cool with you? Ah crap. I had a long drawn out response to this, and then my IE crashed. No way I'm writing all that out again. So quickly: 1) His statement wasn't false. While the schedule doesn't change as much as it used to since the re-alignment, it does change a bit. No matter that some of the lesser teams improved along with the Skins - that statement isn't patenly false, as you suggest. 2) Pointing out the positives is outside the scope of this article. The Post has pointed out the positives in many other pieces. This article was about the fallacy of boasting in August. 3) Did Wise say that the 5-6 Redskins were the real Redskins? No he did not. You chose to see it that way. He merely pointed out that the SKins are a .500 team since Gibbs came back, and that not too long ago, they had a losing record, so let's not hand over the Lombardi trophy just yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raperry2 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 I think that was George Solomon but I could be wrong. hmmm. well now im just confused. it came out so long ago that there's no way i can be sure either way. i want to say it was wise. let me know if you find out for sure who it was though. :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 1) His statement wasn't false. While the schedule doesn't change as much as it used to since the re-alignment, it does change a bit. No matter that some of the lesser teams improved along with the Skins - that statement isn't patenly false, as you suggest. No, it wasn't false. Actually, it was. They didn't have a 6-10 schedule. They had the schedule of the last-place team in the NFC East. Stating that would have been a fact. Now, if he wanted to be factual AND honest, he would have said that that last-place schedule turned out to be one of, if not the, most difficult schedule in the league. With a bye week in Week 3, to boot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Diggler Posted August 5, 2006 Author Share Posted August 5, 2006 Joe Gibbs is a very humble man. He knows it's better to say nothing and perform, and that talking big can get you in trouble. Man plans, God laughs. Speak softly and carry a big stick. That's not the reality that we live in. These players have mikes in the their faces after EVERY practice! They can't just say nothing. Would you prefer every player to boycott the media? Our players aren't shouting from the rooftops that they are going to kick ass and take names - though that's what this poor excuse for a writer would have you believe. They aren't shooting a Super Bowl Video without having even won the AFC Championship game (1994 Steelers). When someone asks you what your goals are for the year - what are you supposed to say? No comment? I even heard during one of the Gibbs interviews from Redskins.com some weasel writer say to Gibbs "Mark Brunell predicted a Super Bowl - how do you feel about that?" Gibbs had to correct the guy on what Brunell actually said. That guy was trying to stir up trouble and so is this jerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.