NewCliche21 Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 And let's add that they are just looking at those things and aren't looking at minicamp or anything like that. Let's wait until pre-season and stuff. Eh. I'll wait until XLII is over to judge. Remember our preseason last year? 0-4, but it was preseason, so it didn't indicate anything, right? Wrong. But the Raiders were 4-0, so that DID indicate what their season would be like, right? Wrong. Let's just wait until the games are played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneBoost Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Media sucks, always have always will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1 Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Enjoy the underdog status...we're gonna make a great Cinderella story! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 The media (mostly) is lazy, many base their predictions on the previous year's standings and splashy free agent signings (to be fair think skins in 2000). We finished last, last year so most pick us to finish last this year, and we were without some key draft picks so no big suprise. Who knows how things will pan out, but I put my money on us in Vegas to make the SB and appreciate the odds the "experts" gave us. Exactly. Didn't they pick 6 out of 8 division winners in 05 to repeat in 06 and only 2 of 8 did? And now they're doing the same thing this year. Picking most of the 06 division winners to repeat in 07. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 The team is thin, however, on the lines (Off. and Def.), WR and TE.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++============ Ross Tucker, Todd Wade and Wil Wittaker are more than exceptable back-ups on OL compared to just about any other team. With Griff, Daniels healthy, a continued improvement from Carter, Wynn contributing and the development of Monty/Golston the DL is more than fine. And remember the quotes about Washington, he will be rushing the edge most likely this year. I really don't think any of us knows for sure what the team will look like, and obviously neither does the media. But stop bashing your own team until you see them on the field. With improved play at the QB position alone the team will be so much better off. Considering MB could not throw past 15 yards with accuracy, Campbell or even Bramlet could do that. If I'm reading your post correctly, you're saying we have no depth at OL, Dl, WR and TE? We also have Pucillo returning who can play Guard, Fabini who can play Guard and don't forget about Kili Lefotu in NFL Europa who played RG on the best rushing team in NFLE, Cologne. On the DL- Most of the problem last year was injury and lack of experience. I can see us having OK depth there. Not great, but OK WR- You only keep 5 on the roster, so Moss, BL, ARE, Thrash and Espy are fine. We brought in Mcaddley and we have 6'3" Ryan Hoag from NFLE. TE- You keep 3 to 4. In Gibbs offense 4. In Saunders offense 3. Cooley, Yoder, Ecker and Eric Edwards are enough. If I didn't read it right and you are saying we do have depth, I apoligize in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skindogger47 Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 We sucked last seasonA QB who started 7 games in his whole career No change on the d-line Returning a RB who was injured last year Is Clinton Portis returning really considered a negative factor when predicting wins? How about the fact that we have a quarterback that has had a full offseason to work with his first team and an offense in its second year with a much better understanding of their playbook, not to mention a much deeper LB core and secondary. I mean all we did was replace Brunell, Holdman, Archuleta, Wright, and Marshall with Campbell, McIntosh, Landry, Smoot/Macklin, and London Fletcher. I feel we have upgraded our defense more than we have since Joe's first year, and our record will show that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackdaddydean Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 the atmosphere trapping more of the reflection of the suns rays off the surface on the earth that are in the section of the ultraviolet spectrum with shorter wave lengths leaving a bluish hue. Incorrect. Close though. Molocules in the atmosphere scatter blue light from the sun more than they scatter red light. When we look towards the sun at sunset, we see red and orange colors because the blue light has been scattered out and away from the line of sight. Reflection off the earth is not needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz13 Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 What do you expect from national writers who don't cover the team on an everyday basis? They see a 5-11 team that didn't improve a mediocre D-line and a team that had only 19 sacks and set a record for fewest turnovers. And we have a starting QB that has only played in 7 career games. We see the day to day things that are going on and most of us saw every play last year and realize why we were so bad. I think most on this board believe we are a much improved team. One of the responses in the ESPN chat talked about the basic principles in the cover 2. We will barely be running that this year, and ran a lot last year out of necessity. National writers can't follow 32 teams as closely as us rabid fans follow one. I've seen in a few places some mediots predicting we will have the 1st pick in the draft next year. And let's be honest many here wear burgundy colored glasses as I have seen many people stating that we will be no worse than 10-6 and that we should win 12-13 games. Sorry but I don't see this team easily winning 12 or 13 games. I think 11-5 is about the best we can hope for. I would not be surprised by 8-8 at all. I think after a full draft next year and JC having a full year of starting, 2008 can be our year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BthatRAD09 Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 ']The Giants have been .500 or better the past two years and they are predicting them to finish 6-10 or 5-11. Why listen to these idiots? cuz the giants r the most overrated team in fball. yea, they won games, but they still rnt good man. u have eli at QB. thats why the giants r expected to be sub .500. THEY RNT THAT GOOD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylorcoreskin Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Because we made a record for the fewest sacks in a 16 game season, and we have yet to even change any of our defensive lineman ? :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taylorcoreskin Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 ']The Giants have been .500 or better the past two years and they are predicting them to finish 6-10 or 5-11. Why listen to these idiots? Well, actually, the Giants will have a worse record than the 'Skins. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Area51 Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Why does the media think we're going to be 6-10? Maybe its because we were pretty bad last year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 If I'm reading your post correctly, you're saying we have no depth at OL, Dl, WR and TE?We also have Pucillo returning who can play Guard, Fabini who can play Guard and don't forget about Kili Lefotu in NFL Europa who played RG on the best rushing team in NFLE, Cologne. On the DL- Most of the problem last year was injury and lack of experience. I can see us having OK depth there. Not great, but OK WR- You only keep 5 on the roster, so Moss, BL, ARE, Thrash and Espy are fine. We brought in Mcaddley and we have 6'3" Ryan Hoag from NFLE. TE- You keep 3 to 4. In Gibbs offense 4. In Saunders offense 3. Cooley, Yoder, Ecker and Eric Edwards are enough. If I didn't read it right and you are saying we do have depth, I apoligize in advance. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Actually I was responding to 102+++ with that same thought. Thanks for the additional names, I almost forgot about some of them. I think the depth is good not great but as good or better than most teams. ---Sorry as I was trying not to copy large blocks of text and get yelled at, hehe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Yeah Todd Wade is you starter not backup which means he better be more then an acceptable backup.Carter is 28 I think the improvement is over you know what you are going to get from that guy and its 2-8 sacks a year and mayeb 40-50 tackles. Also Brunell had a better winning percentage then Campbell last year so lets wait to see how he does before you say the QB position has improved +++++++++++++++ PJFootballer, this was the original 102blahblahblah that I was responding to. As you can read he basically has no knowledge of the depth on the Redskins at this time. And the Brunell/Campbell comparison is naive at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Why does the media think we're going to be 6-10? Maybe its because we were pretty bad last year The media is simply taking last years record plus the players we added and making a guess. That's all it really is. Heck, I wouldn't even call it an educated guess because none of them has bothered to educate themselves on THIS YEAR'S team. Making a prediction now is just plain silly when none of these prognosticators have been to training camp yet or even seen a preseason game. They're entitled to their silly guesses because it's what they get paid for....one would ASSume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsOrlando Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Let em say we're going 2-14, who cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 +++++++++++++++PJFootballer, this was the original 102blahblahblah that I was responding to. As you can read he basically has no knowledge of the depth on the Redskins at this time. And the Brunell/Campbell comparison is naive at best. No problem. I guess I may have read it wrong. Now I know what you're saying. Yeah, if anything WR, OL and TE we're pretty set. D-line will be OK if everyone stays healthy. I mean, we have no Reggie White's, but if they all do their job, it can be successful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowplay Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 I don't care about what the media says, I learned my lesson after last year. My problem lies with the defense and the overall crispness of the team. The defense wilted last year, mostly in run defense and QB pressure and there's no clear indication that it won't be more of the same this year. The lack of crispness last year was just as bad. The poor clock management and the penalties were a disgrace. Hopefully another year with Saunders and hopefully this is a dead issue. Have I mentioned that Sean Salisbury sucks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBass1724 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 The only difference between 6-10 and 10-6 is 4 single plays. You could name a play in each of our losses last year that caused us to lose the game. Fix some of those and we would have been 11-5 easily. It's like in baseball with 1 run games. If you win the close ones then your record will improve greatly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 The only difference between 6-10 and 10-6 is 4 single plays. You could name a play in each of our losses last year that caused us to lose the game. Fix some of those and we would have been 11-5 easily.It's like in baseball with 1 run games. If you win the close ones then your record will improve greatly. Using your same argument, we could've been 1-15. Wins are wins and losses are losses. Except for Tampa Bay during the regular season last year. That was crap.:mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tthorsen5 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 They are the same goofs that had us in the NFC Championship game or the SB last year after the pick upe we made then so they are as clueless as ever. It is just something they can put in print and get a rise out of someone. All we need to do is score 3 more points per game adn if the D can slide back into the top 15 we will win 5 more games than we did last year. That part is my expectation for this team. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmorina69 Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 We have an unproven QB, our star RB is comming off a season he sat out (due to him being hurt).O ur WR core has gotten no better, as well as our d line. And our secondary is unproven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 We were 5-11 last year. If anything, they're predicting we're improving. Thats more than I expected from the Media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomE Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Call me crazy, but it wasn't Saunders system in St. Louis, it was Martz's, which was actually a variation on Vermeil's. Guess who was the head coach in KC? You got it, Vermeil. Saunders has yet to do it without Vermeil. Well, let's hope we get lucky and Saunders can do "it" with Gibbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyvern Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Yep, you're sipping the Kool-Aid. This is a sub-.500 team. The defense is simply not ready.Come late into the 2007 season, you may be asking for seconds of that Kool-Aid. For some odd reason, I think this team is going to pleasantly surprise a bunch of Redskins fans. We've been stockpiling some decent talent these last couple of years, and building team chemistry. If things jell, this could be a decent offense, and that makes defense a lot easier. (And we've got better personnel than the Chiefs did.) I like that prediction of 9-7 with +/-3 depending on how seriously we get hit by the injury bug, and bad referee calls. If we stay healthy, and the offense jells under Campbell -- I could see the Redskins wining 'ugly' into a 12-4 record. My personal prediction (barring injuries): 10-6, and a force to be reckoned with in the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.