WP: The heat seems to be getting to the Washington Wishful Thinkers

[bubba9497]

Yes it is better to stay low key, and not tempt the football gods. But their is a difference in confidence, and arrogance... and Mr. Wise had taken this article to the "extreme" ... if you pardon the pun

[dreamingwolf]

the washington p paper is garbage, I used to buy it purely for their sports section but in the last few years that section has been terrible. If they would hire a few reporters who didnt hate football to write in that section it might get a little better.

[SkinsFTW]

What should the goals be for a team that finished the season by beating all 3 divisional opponents and also beat all 3 other NFC divisional winners during the season and only only lost in the playoffs because of a very poorly played game that they should have actually won?

Oh, yeah. Portis, Brunell, Moss and Washington should all be happy if they go 10-6 again and get knocked out of the playoffs because apparently it was pure luck that they were there last year anyway. Did this guy ever watch Redskins games in the 80's? Year after year the Redskins played strong at the end of the season and that is probably the most important thing about those teams. They beat the crap out of teams physically at the end of the year and playoffs.

[ouvan59]

Hm...when asked for their goals, do any players say, "Oh, yeah. I'd like to reach the Divisional Playoffs. Yeah, that's good enough for me."

LOL, ain't that the truth. I can see the story already if they had said that.

"Redskins fans talking Super Bowl, players not so sure. When your players aren't even confident enough about their abilities to set lofty goals it is extremely telling. So while the fans do their annual Super Bowl Shuffle, the players know they are in big trouble with key weaknesses at the 5th QB, the 12th TE and 3rd long-snapper. This is going to be a fun season for a New York guy. The team will crumble before my eyes and I'm going to enjoy every single minute of it.........."

[BKSkinsFan]

It's almost as if Wise is writing this article for fans of other football teams who do not have a clue what is going on with any details of the Redskins. This is the kind of down talk you hear from other football fans talking smack about your team. Maybe this is due to the fact that the Post realizes that most Skin fans ignore them now, who knows. All I know is, if you're having trouble selling your paper, maybe you should cater more towards the interests of your potential readers. Nah, hell with it, lets just keep this grudge towards Danny and run this paper into the ground, brilliant.

[tuna_h8r]

Correct me if I am wrong, but there isnt really a first place or last place schedule anymore. If I am right, what is wise talking about? I dont like his work. The fact that he called for the Redskins to change their name and he doesnt use the name in his articles is one of the MAIN reason I no longer get the post or even look at it online.

2 of each teams' 16 games are based on their place in the division the previous season.

each team plays:

division opponents twice (6 games)

one AFC division (4 games)

one NFC division (4 games)

and the last 2 are the teams from the other 2 in-conference divisions that placed the same the previous year.

by example, this year we play the nfc and afc south, plus the rams (second in the west at 6-10) from the nfc west and the vikings (second in the north at 9-7) from the nfc north.

[JimmiJo]

I didn't see anything wrong with it. I think, as Redskins fans, we may tend to have a knee-jerk reaction to any Washington Post article that isn't gushing.

All he is saying is, "It isn't a good idea to talk about the Super Bowl too terribly much in August". And I'd have to agree.

If you saw Gibbs' PC after practice the other day, you know that he agrees, too.

I have to agree with E-Dog agreeing with Gibbs agreeing with Wise.

[cakmoney61]

This guy is a tosser. No ones guaranteeing anything. If anything it's refreshing to see the leaders and go-to guys on this team with a single mindset. Portis could rush for 500 yards for the entire year and be happy if we won a Super Bowl.

...and he kept his starting job!

Sorry! ...Now back to our regularly scheduled program.

[Smoot Point Really]

He seems to be deperate for something to write... There is nothing in his article to back up what he is presuming, and he isn't really saying anything other than "this could be a mistake"... Not his best piece of work.

[ChiefPowhatan17]

I am not worried, I think that once the season starts, it will become the philosophy of one game at a time, which they will adapt. They will not look beyond any game. I just think that they know where they want to be and it's good. We need to know where we need to get to to be successful. :helmet:

[Jonathan]

I thought this was a good article. It helped bring some realism to my own views. I was starting to think that we were more likely than not going to win the Super Bowl. We may just do that. However, we do have a lot to integrate on offense - a new playbook, new players - and we do have very unproven backups along the offensive line.

I'm a big Mark Brunell believer, but if he is injured, we have uncertainty at that position. We have experience in Collins, but he hasn't played as a starter in so long that you don't know what he will look like. And Campbell has great talent, and a great future, but my hope is that he gets a chance to work gradually into the starting role over the next few years.

No, I privately may think we have a real shot at the Super Bowl, but I personally think teams that have had more success than us lately, and who also have improved, like Seattle and Carolina, are the favorites. And I know I won't be bragging about our chances at the local sports bar.

[Skin Patrol]

Tuna h8r-

"by example, this year we play the nfc and afc south, plus the rams (second in the west at 6-10) from the nfc west and the vikings (second in the north at 9-7) from the nfc north."

But Wise implied from the article that the Redskins won 10 games last year because they had a 6-10 schedule. But, as you've pointed out, only two games in a 16 game schedule are dependent on record at all. And besides, the two teams we earned the right to play with our 6-10 schedule won a combined 22 football games and both won their divisions (and both played in the postseason).

Even if the rest of Wise's article is completely well intentioned (which I'm not going to assume) his claiming a weakness in the Redskins season last year is a total joke and reflects an utter lack of research on his part. In fact, it makes me wonder if he watched football last year because our tough schedule was so apparent to everyone else who did.

It just doesn't make any sense.

[ouvan59]

I thought this was a good article. It helped bring some realism to my own views. I was starting to think that we were more likely than not going to win the Super Bowl. We may just do that. However, we do have a lot to integrate on offense - a new playbook, new players - and we do have very unproven backups along the offensive line.

I'm a big Mark Brunell believer, but if he is injured, we have uncertainty at that position. We have experience in Collins, but he hasn't played as a starter in so long that you don't know what he will look like. And Campbell has great talent, and a great future, but my hope is that he gets a chance to work gradually into the starting role over the next few years.

No, I privately may think we have a real shot at the Super Bowl, but I personally think teams that have had more success than us lately, and who also have improved, like Seattle and Carolina, are the favorites. And I know I won't be bragging about our chances at the local sports bar.

But the point of the article wasn't that they have a hard road. It was that they shouldn't even think about it. And take a look at this excerpt from the article:

"Gibbs doesn't want to hear how loaded he is at wide receiver, how good his defense is, how this club might just have the makings of a champion. He'd rather deal in reality, like his .500 record since he returned in 2004. That's right, after a nice little run at the end of last season, Gibbs is 17-17."

Why is the fact that they are loaded at WR, have a good defense and might have the makings of a champion not reality?

As I have said several times in this thread, Wise is correct that there is a lot of work to do and that could have been the tone of the article. Instead he says the Skins have no business setting goals that high and even if they do how dare they voice it.

[grego]

"And let's not forget that part of the reason Gibbs went 10-6 last year was a schedule based on 6-10 the year before."

Yeah, that was the most ridiculous part of his argument. I think we played almost every team that went to the playoffs in both the NFC and AFC. Hardly a cake schedule.

exactly. what kind of writer puts this in an article when the schedule was actually ...what was it? 2nd toughest in the entire league?

do some research next time, mike.........

[GrimReefa]

I usually think that a lot of the Post-bashing that goes on here is excessive, but this article was, at best, poorly written.

I mean, first of all, the quotes he uses, for the most part, aren't saying what he is interpreting them as. CP and Cooley each said that they don't care about individual achievements, that their goal was for the team to reach the top of the mountain. To twist that into the wrong answer is excessive spin. That is EXACTLY what you want your players saying. Brunell's quote, which has been twisted every way possible, was just him saying that the team would be dissapointed if they didn't win the Super Bowl. Ya, them and every other team in the NFL.

No predictions. No guarantees. Just a couple of quotes suggesting that winning the Super Bowl is the team's Ultimate Goal.

The David Patten quote that he alludes to, but doesn't reprint, sounds like it might fit the context of the column. But the fact that he doesn't actually use the quote - he just interprets it for us - makes me think it's probably more innocuous than the quotes he DID use. We saw how he misinterpreted them, why should we trust him to interpret Patten's quote (whatever it was) any better?

But the parts of the article that really got to me were:

- "After a nicle little run at the end of last season, Gibbs is 17-17." A nice little run? The team didn't lose for a month! They plowed through each of their divisional rivals in three consecutive weeks! And they won a playoff game, on the road! Downplaying the Redskins winning streak is absolutely absurd.

- "Al Saunders is going to earn his $2 million to pretty up the offense, but he assumes a huge professional risk. If Brunell's old bones betray him and Jason Campbell isn't ready yet, this becomes an in-between year at the quarterback position, and Saunders doesn't come across as a genius anymore." That's right...if Al Saunders offense has difficulties in its first year because his starting QB goes down, then everyone will just forget how he had the #1 offense in the League the last two seasons and the #3 offense the season before that... :jerk:

- "And let's not forget that part of the reason Gibbs went 10-6 last year was a schedule based on 6-10 the year before." This has been so thoroughly discredited it would be redundant to say anything more.

This is just a bad column. More Wilbon, Boswell, and Kornheiser please...

[Jumbo]

Look at it this way. At least he didn't run a name change piece during Dallas Week. Oh wait.......:doh:

Our name has been bothering me again, though. And sorry, but this is a good time to bring it up. Now more than ever, part of our name is synonymous with divisiveness and separation of one group from the other. Part of our name is associated with negative connotations like corruption, injustice, and ineptitude, and with a group of people often stereotyped as everything from warlike and violent to lazy, substance-abusing slackers who exist on the taxpayer dole and are prone to widespread ethical and moral judgments of highly questionable nature.

So maybe it is time to change. How long should our team carry the ugly weight that the behavior of our political professionals has attached to the name “Washington, D.C.”? Maybe this is the time we become simply The Redskins, America’s real team!

[Monkart]

I came to the conclusion awhile back that Mike is WISE by name ONLY!!

wise

adj. wis·er, wis·est

Having the ability to discern or judge what is true, right, or lasting; sagacious: a wise leader.

Exhibiting common sense; prudent: a wise decision.

Shrewd; crafty.

Having great learning; erudite.

Provided with information; informed. Used with to: was wise to the politics of the department.

[BleedBNG]

Our name has been bothering me again, though. And sorry, but this is a good time to bring it up. Now more than ever, part of our name is synonymous with divisiveness and separation of one group from the other. Part of our name is associated with negative connotations like corruption, injustice, and ineptitude, and with a group of people often stereotyped as everything from warlike and violent to lazy, substance-abusing slackers who exist on the taxpayer dole and are prone to widespread ethical and moral judgments of highly questionable nature.

So maybe it is time to change. How long should our team carry the ugly weight that the behavior of our political professionals has attached to the name “Washington, D.C.”? Maybe this is the time we become simply The Redskins, America’s real team!

:rotflmao: I concede!

[Kindred]

I usually think that a lot of the Post-bashing that goes on here is excessive, but this article was, at best, poorly written.

I mean, first of all, the quotes he uses, for the most part, aren't saying what he is interpreting them as. CP and Cooley each said that they don't care about individual achievements, that their goal was for the team to reach the top of the mountain. To twist that into the wrong answer is excessive spin. That is EXACTLY what you want your players saying. Brunell's quote, which has been twisted every way possible, was just him saying that the team would be dissapointed if they didn't win the Super Bowl. Ya, them and every other team in the NFL.

No predictions. No guarantees. Just a couple of quotes suggesting that winning the Super Bowl is the team's Ultimate Goal.

The David Patten quote that he alludes to, but doesn't reprint, sounds like it might fit the context of the column. But the fact that he doesn't actually use the quote - he just interprets it for us - makes me think it's probably more innocuous than the quotes he DID use. We saw how he misinterpreted them, why should we trust him to interpret Patten's quote (whatever it was) any better?

But the parts of the article that really got to me were:

- "After a nicle little run at the end of last season, Gibbs is 17-17." A nice little run? The team didn't lose for a month! They plowed through each of their divisional rivals in three consecutive weeks! And they won a playoff game, on the road! Downplaying the Redskins winning streak is absolutely absurd.

- "Al Saunders is going to earn his $2 million to pretty up the offense, but he assumes a huge professional risk. If Brunell's old bones betray him and Jason Campbell isn't ready yet, this becomes an in-between year at the quarterback position, and Saunders doesn't come across as a genius anymore." That's right...if Al Saunders offense has difficulties in its first year because his starting QB goes down, then everyone will just forget how he had the #1 offense in the League the last two seasons and the #3 offense the season before that... :jerk:

- "And let's not forget that part of the reason Gibbs went 10-6 last year was a schedule based on 6-10 the year before." This has been so thoroughly discredited it would be redundant to say anything more.

This is just a bad column. More Wilbon, Boswell, and Kornheiser please...

This sums it up nicely.

[isle-hawg]

Ummm.... Did Al Saunders not quote JG as telling the team something to the effect of "winning is nice, but we're here to win it all"? What a shocker than that the players would pick up on this and state the awful truth that winning the SB is more important than padding their personal stats :laugh:

:notworthy

HTTR

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Maybe this is the time we become simply The Redskins, America’s real team!

Exactly...afterall, they WERE here first...lol :cool:

[Chachie]

If a team isn't aspiring to go to a Super Bowl, then they are simply aspiring to NOT go to a Super Bowl. The Redskins and every other team that either cake-walked or barely squeaked into the post season were all talking Super Bowl because what the dickens else was there to concentrate on? Losing and going home? And here's the kicker: if everyone knows that's exactly what 32 NFL teams are trying to do, then why shouldn't those teams just come out and say it?

"We want to win the Super Bowl." DUUUUHHH, UnWise Mike! He even negated the point of his article by admitting that nobody actually "predicted" a Super Bowl appearance... and then finished and posted the the article. Mike- Once you typed that sentence you should have torn it up and tossed it in the can. It's a non-issue after you explain that the trash was never really talked.