RenegadeTK Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Football is dynamic. The league changes every year. Just because you sucked last year doesn't mean you shouldn't be optimistic if your team starts this year off well.Now that we're 3-1 and look to be playing strong football I'd be a tad bit disappointed with 8-8 or less. plus we were injury-ridden and just underachieved much of last year. now we have fixed holes in our defense, we are healthy on defense, we are dealing with offensive injuries, and our team has chemistry and is playing more to their ability Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 As things on the field change, expectations change. For example the Rams in their superbowl year were 3-13 the year before, but when they were 10-2 or whatever do you think there fans were say "well whatever happens its cool cuz we sucked last year" or do you think they wanted that superbowl?We were 5-11 last year, yea we sucked. Now we are 3-1 so the 5-11 doesnt matter, the 11 losses dont count toward this years record. Geez...people around here need serious reading comprehension skills. The point, for you and for anyone else who needs it, is that getting bent out of shape because a team that was 5-11 last year had ONE FREAKING BAD HALF OF PLAY THIS YEAR is asinine. When I created this thread, people were calling for Gibbs' head, saying players should be cut, saying we have NOT improved one iota...and all because of those two quarters of play against the Giants. "We're still a bad team" I think was the conventional wisdom after that loss. Hell, I got ridiculed for saying the offense was indeed improving each week this season..."We still haven't scored more than 21 points"...HELLO!! It was only week 3 and--wait for it--we WERE 5-11 last year... NOW look at this place lol... Expecting a 5-11 team to be flawless from the start is unrealistic...basing emotional reactions on that expectation is insane. We needed to realize this and not overlook the very real improvements this team was displaying, which I mentioned in the opening post, and which too many decided was rubbish. The point of this thread was to say that improving to a team that plays consistently well is a progression, and we shouldn't lose sight of where we started (*ahem* 5-11 *ahem*), and to make sure we acknowledge the VERY real progress we've made. FAR too few people around here were doing either after the Giants game. Those of us who were, knew that a game like the Lions game was extremely realistic and possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsn24 Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Geez...people around here need serious reading comprehension skills.The point, for you and for anyone else who needs it, is that getting bent out of shape because a team that was 5-11 last year had ONE FREAKING BAD HALF OF PLAY THIS YEAR is asinine. When I created this thread, people were calling for Gibbs' head, saying players should be cut, saying we have NOT improved one iota...and all because of those two quarters of play against the Giants. "We're still a bad team" I think was the conventional wisdom after that loss. Hell, I got ridiculed for saying the offense was indeed improving each week this season..."We still haven't scored more than 21 points"...HELLO!! It was only week 3 and--wait for it--we WERE 5-11 last year... NOW look at this place lol... Expecting a 5-11 team to be flawless from the start is unrealistic...basing emotional reactions on that expectation is insane. We needed to realize this and not overlook the very real improvements this team was displaying, which I mentioned in the opening post, and which too many decided was rubbish. The point of this thread was to say that improving to a team that plays consistently well is a progression, and we shouldn't lose sight of where we started (*ahem* 5-11 *ahem*), and to make sure we acknowledge the VERY real progress we've made. FAR too few people around here were doing either after the Giants game. Those of us who were, knew that a game like the Lions game was extremely realistic and possible. I think it is not us that need the reading comprehension. Even in this last post you kept saying "5-11" the thread topic is "am i the only one who remembers we were 5-11 last year"..The post should follow the topic sentence if written correctly. But now onto you point. We didnt start at 5-11. We started at 0-0 just like everyone else. The fact we were 5-11 means nothing, just like the fact the bears went to the superbowl means nothing. The steelers were under 500, won the superbowl, under 500. We are not expecting a 5-11 to be perfect, we are expectecting a 2-0/3-1 team to be good. The 11 losses dont count this year. SO what point are you trying to make besides that the second half of the gaints game was horrible. But i do agree it is starting to look like an anomoly, which would be great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 What exactly is a game a team is "supposed" to lose. I dont think any football goes into a game saying "we are supposed to lose this game" Isnt the purpose to win the game, thus every game is supposed to be won?Maybe some "experts" expect certain teams to win or lose certain games, but each team is always supposed to win. It's a saying, and I'm praying you knew that and just decided to act contrary for the hell of it... It means that there ARE teams out there who will be playing better than the Skins may be playing, who have more talent, and who have had more success...and that we may be playing them under bad conditions (on the road, bad weather, injuries to our squad, off days for key players, etc, etc)...yet with all those things that USUALLY mean defeat, the Skins win anyway. Those are the games you're "supposed to lose"...when you turn the ball over six times and can't create momentum...or when the other team has the game all sealed up with 30 seconds left and all they have to do is take a knee--but decide to run a rushing play instead, and end up fumbling the ball which your team ends up running back for a game-winning TD. THOSE are the games you're "supposed to lose"...but don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsn24 Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 It's a saying, and I'm praying you knew that and just decided to act contrary for the hell of it...It means that there ARE teams out there who will be playing better than the Skins may be playing, who have more talent, and who have had more success...and that we may be playing them under bad conditions (on the road, bad weather, injuries to our squad, off days for key players, etc, etc)...yet with all those things that USUALLY mean defeat, the Skins win anyway. Those are the games you're "supposed to lose"...when you turn the ball over six times and can't create momentum...or when the other team has the game all sealed up with 30 seconds left and all they have to do is take a knee--but decide to run a rushing play instead, and end up fumbling the ball which your team ends up running back for a game-winning TD. THOSE are the games you're "supposed to lose"...but don't. Good post. The red part are the games i agree with except you still are not supposed to lose, you are expect to lose. However, you are not supposed to lose to a "better talented team." You may be expected to lose, but if you are supposed to lose, you are saying your goal is to lose, becasue that is what you are supposed to do. It doesnt make sense. When you are "supposed" to do something it means that is your goal and anything else happens by mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
U C S D SkinsFan Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 This thread is a major buzz kill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 The fact we were 5-11 means nothing, I soooooooo want to go back and find all the posts that made fun of fans who felt the media was "hating" on the Skins by predicting a 6-10 record...because you would see many people (and maybe even yourself) saying "What do you expect? We were 5-11 last year" as reason FOR that ridicule. Now, though, when someone with my viewpoint uses last season's record to prove a point, us being 5-11 "means nothing". Gotcha lol... We are not expecting a 5-11 to be perfect, we are expectecting a 2-0/3-1 team to be good. The 11 losses dont count this year. And the 2-0 team WAS good...the loss to the Giants didn't negate that fact. Yet you'd never know it by how many people were calling for everyone's head, insulting every coach, disgusted by nearly every player...and again, even pronouncing "We're still not a good team"..."we still suck"...etc, etc... SO what point are you trying to make besides that the second half of the gaints game was horrible. But i do agree it is starting to look like an anomoly, which would be great. That WAS the point...unfortunately we have too many people on this board who seem to constantly need that reminder. As well as this point: last season's record and performance DOES matter when evaluating how a team is doing THIS season. The proof: Imagine the Skins' last three seasons occurring in this order: 2004 2006 2005 That would show stead progress (even with going 5-11 after going 6-10) and would put this year's 2-1 start in a different light as well. Last year matters as it helps put this year in a proper context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 Good post.The red part are the games i agree with except you still are not supposed to lose, you are expect to lose. However, you are not supposed to lose to a "better talented team." You may be expected to lose, but if you are supposed to lose, you are saying your goal is to lose, becasue that is what you are supposed to do. It doesnt make sense. When you are "supposed" to do something it means that is your goal and anything else happens by mistake. Eh, semantics lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsn24 Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 1. I soooooooo want to go back and find all the posts that made fun of fans who felt the media was "hating" on the Skins by predicting a 6-10 record...because you would see many people (and maybe even yourself) saying "What do you expect? We were 5-11 last year" as reason FOR that ridicule. Now, though, when someone with my viewpoint uses last season's record to prove a point, us being 5-11 "means nothing". Gotcha lol...That would show stead progress (even with going 5-11 after going 6-10) and would put this year's 2-1 start in a different light as well. 2. Last year matters as it helps put this year in a proper context. 1. I think you dont understand. Last year record is fine for making preseason predictions before anything is shown on the field. However, once 3-5 games have been played last years record means alot less, and means almost nothing around week 8 and nothing at all in week 10. Basically as each week happens last year means less and less. 2. Two is an interesting point as it does but this year into context, kind of. Its hard though because this is the NFL. A failure is pretty much always a failure (a 5-11 record) regardless of the previous years record. I will agree the failure appears worse after a winning season. But i doubt many teams that go 5-11 one year and 5-11 the next dont view the second as a failure. Again i will say in the NFL teams turn it around very quickly. Patriots first superbowl? Steelers? Rams? ect ect. Last year is simply last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsn24 Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Eh, semantics lol... Fair enough. But sometimes semantics cause big mistakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 Football is dynamic. The league changes every year. Just because you sucked last year doesn't mean you shouldn't be optimistic if your team starts this year off well. I don't think anyone is saying that... Now that we're 3-1 and look to be playing strong football I'd be a tad bit disappointed with 8-8 or less. I would too...all of us would, I think. But if the Skins end up going 10-6 or better, we'll all be satisfied. But that still means we could lose as many as six games...so maybe we shouldn't have reached for the cyanide pills after we actually had one of those losses lol...or at the very least we shouldn't have lost site that this is a good, improved team that was still deserving of optimism. Which was, again, my point at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted October 13, 2007 Author Share Posted October 13, 2007 1. I think you dont understand. Last year record is fine for making preseason predictions before anything is shown on the field. However, once 3-5 games have been played last years record means alot less, and means almost nothing around week 8 and nothing at all in week 10. Basically as each week happens last year means less and less. I agree with this, to a point... A team that is consistently having double digit wins, if they have a lousy start to a season there's always that belief and conclusion that they could turn it around and turn it on at anytime. It's a valid assumption. I think the reverse can be true as well, a team that has sucked for awhile could revert to it again (ie: the Lions lol)...it doesn't mean they WILL, but I do think it shouldn't be surprising if they do. I mean, if the Chargers go on a six game winning streak, should we REALLY be saying "Wow, I never would have guessed the Chargers could be that good"? 2. Two is an interesting point as it does but this year into context, kind of. Its hard though because this is the NFL. A failure is pretty much always a failure (a 5-11 record) regardless of the previous years record. I will agree the failure appears worse after a winning season. But i doubt many teams that go 5-11 one year and 5-11 the next dont view the second as a failure. They would view that second 5-11 record as a failure, definitely...but they would also view the offensive production as an improvement. They'd view the defensive production as a HUGE failure. They'd have to see if they're at least moving in the right direction. Again i will say in the NFL teams turn it around very quickly. Patriots first superbowl? Steelers? Rams? ect ect.Last year is simply last year. Only when perceiving the overall success of the current season. When looking at the success of a scheme or of a coaching move or of a unit, last year effects how we perceive the success of this year. For example, we say ARE is playing extremely well not just because of his stats this year but also because we look at his production last year. It plays a role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins4ever Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Having won three games already this year, I think we're moving in the right direction. Last year there were issues with the offense learning Al Saunders's offense. Portis was injured last year. The defense collapsed. The QB play was shaky last year with Brunell struggling at times and then a young inexperienced Jason Campbell coming in to replace him. This year, the defense has gotten faster, stronger, and better through the draft and free agency. The offensive unit have learned Al Saunders's offense. Portis is healthy and is doing an excellent job of running the ball. Jason Campbell has stepped up so far and is played well. This is a different team than last year. The coaches are coaching and the players are executing and playing hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatmeworry Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Since last year we've added a kickass middle linebacker and a good nickel. What else? Hmmmmm - oh yes, this year we have a quarterback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.