Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 I wasnt watching the skins closely in 2000, i know we started off 6-2 and it looked like we were walking into the playoffs, kinda like how this year has started. we ended up going 2-6 down the stretch, good ol norval was fired, and the ugly 01-03 years were ahead. im just wondering, guys that were following this team very closely, how does this season compare to that 00' season at the moment? the records are similiar but im assuming this team looks way better than the 00 did. thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 I wasnt watching the skins closely in 2000, i know we started off 6-2 and it looked like we were walking into the playoffs, kinda like how this year has started. we ended up going 2-6 down the stretch, good ol norval was fired, and the ugly 01-03 years were ahead. im just wondering, guys that were following this team very closely, how does this season compare to that 00' season at the moment? the records are similiar but im assuming this team looks way better than the 00 did. thoughts? I think the really really key difference is that in 2000 we had a squad and this year we have a team. The 2000 team was Dan Snyder in rookie form throwing his cheque book around and assembling his fantasy football dream team. A bit like the 2008 Dallas Cowboys - a collection of individuals who are all smiles and good quotes when the going is good but fall apart like a cheap suit at the first sign of showers. Players who are there for the 'me' not the team. This year we have a real team with a good blend of vets who have been through a lot together and who know they can trust each other and some younger guys (Horton is the obvious example but even Devin Thomas is making an impact on teams for example) who are adding to the mix. Jom Zorn is also a far, far, far (did I say far?) better man manager and motivator than Norv. Even with zero experience and a staff he largely had handed to him there is no doubt who is in control and that his players trust and respect him. Not the case with Norv. Finally we have a QB in Campbell who can do more than just manage games. Brad was a good QB but he was undermined and his confidence shot in 2000 by Snyder bringing Jeff George in - he was not sure it was HIS team and it showed. There is no doubt that this is Campbell team and that he is Zorns guy - thats shows as well. There will be some speed bumps ahead but this group is much stronger than the 2000 team. Even if we lose 2 or 3 games they will bounce back. We should win next week to be 6-2 at the bye. If we play .500 ball from there thats 10-6 which is the worst I expect from here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike42 Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Snyder was very involved with the team in 2000. Signing guys past their prime. It didn't work. I wasnt watching the skins closely in 2000, i know we started off 6-2 and it looked like we were walking into the playoffs, kinda like how this year has started. we ended up going 2-6 down the stretch, good ol norval was fired, and the ugly 01-03 years were ahead. I disagree that 2001 was a bad year. Only the first 5 games of that year was bad, but that Washington Redskin team at the end of the 2001 year was amazing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Potato Sack Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Great Post! btw - I believe we have Pittsburg before the bye. So we could potentially be 7-2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Great Post! btw - I believe we have Pittsburg before the bye. So we could potentially be 7-2. My bad your right. I was thinking we had our bye after the Lions game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 The 2000 was a more impressive 5-2 (soon to be 6-2) than this team is. In 2000, while the offense sputtered (thanks to Brad Johnson and a season ending injury to Michael Westbrook in week 2), the defense was playing great early in the season. Bruce Smith looked like the Bruce Smith of the early 90's. Biggest thing is that the 2000 team beat a string a really good teams. at Giants (eventual NFC Champs) vs. Bucs (the team that beat us in the playoffs the year before) at Eagles (Reid's team that would ultimately dominate the division for the decade was on the rise) vs. Ravens (#1 D and the eventual world champs) at Jaguars (team wasn't as good as it once was but the Skins spanked them) I am hoping/expecting though that this team won't run out of gas like that team did but we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Team chemistry for one This 2008 version is very together and is quite cohesive. Guys have been playing together for 4 years now There are no Dieon Sanders, Jeff George's, Mark Carrier type guys Our number 1 WR is not out for the season. Michael Westbrook tore his ACL in week 2 against Detroit. He was actually off to a promising start with 9 catches in the first 1.5 games Pre-season hype. The 2008 version does not have it compared to that 2000 team But really, I gotta go back to chemistry. This 2008 team seems to be one of the most "together" teams in Redskins history. A big part of that is going through the tragedy last year, another part of it is a good chunk of the team has been together for the past 4 years The 2000 team added key pieces that previous offseason in Dan Snyder's first spending spree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChampSkinsFanatic Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 A bit like the 2008 Dallas Cowboys - a collection of individuals who are all smiles and good quotes when the going is good but fall apart like a cheap suit at the first sign of showers. Players who are there for the 'me' not the team. He beat me to it. I was watching them lose yesterday and they reminded me of us in 2000. The announcers kept saying "They have the most talent", thats how the 2000 team was but we had no chemistry. We went out and lost to teams we were supposed to blow out. Norv getting fired during the season didn't help either. I really feel 1999-2000 is more similar to this year. I honestly felt that year, all the chips were in place for it to be "our year". There was no team that we didn't have a chance against. Stephen Davis was leading the league in rushing and TDs before his injury, similar to the season Portis is having. We got into the playoffs and the Turk bros. screwed us. But I believe if we would have beat the Bucs, we matched up perfectly to beat that Rams team that eventually won the Superbowl. Dan Snyder went out and got every "superstar" he could because he felt we were a couple players away from getting to that big game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spear Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Too much is made of the FA "busts" of 2000. That is NOT what sunk us that year. Bruce Smith was effective. Deion Sanders was effective (as a CB, not so much as a PR, outside of that one return that beat Tampa). Mark Carrier.... okay, 2/3 isn't bad. But if it makes you feel better, he was probably fined more that year than we payed him. Injuries just killed us on offense. Michael Westbrook went down early, leaving Albert Connell to collapse as the de facto #1. we were relying on ancients like Andre Reed and Irving Fryar to produce. Wasn't happening. By the end of the year, Champ Bailey was our best WR. Yeah. The interior of the O-line was ravaged. Cory Raymer went down for the year, Tre Johnson went down for the year, and Keith Sims didn't have much left in the tank. By the latter half of the season, teams had caught on and were just obliterating us up the middle, disrupting our, by then, dink and dunk passing offense. And while Stephen Davis managed to put up 1300 yards, the running game wasn't anywhere near as effective as the previous year. Also hurting us that year was that the woeful Cowboys were smack in the middle of their baffling string of dominance over us. Those were two losses that really hurt, when coupled with other "easy" games that we were Norv'd out of. Then there was the QB controversy. Snyder brought in Jeff George as "his guy", and when the offense was wrecked and the deep ball vanished, he blamed Brad Johnson and bullied Norv into playing George as a cure-all. That didn't work, but he was more mobile than Brad and better able to run for his life from all that interior pressure I talked about. Eventually, George got hurt and Brad finished the season. By that time, the rift between he and Snyder was so large that it was a foregone conclusion that he'd be gone after the season. Johnson went on to win a Super Bowl, while George's impressive displays of personal cowardice got him, for all intents and purposes, bounced out of the league just 2 games into the following season. Setting off a chain-reaction of instability at the position that we are only now emerging from. Thank your owner, children. And on top of all that, we had Eddie flipping Murray as our kicker, who was in serious danger of having his dried-up, brittle leg fly off during every kick. You can thank fragile Brett Conway for that one. The 2000 Redskins could have won it all. They beat the eventual champion Ravens. They very nearly beat the eventual NFC champion Giants twice. They just got hurt, became ineffective offensively, and were destroyed from within by the ensuing turmoil. If they had avoided those injuries and found some way to shed the Norv/Cowboy jinxes for just long enough, we could've had a 4th Lombardi by now. Damn it to Hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Too much is made of the FA "busts" of 2000. That is NOT what sunk us that year. Bruce Smith was effective. Deion Sanders was effective (as a CB, not so much as a PR, outside of that one return that beat Tampa). Mark Carrier.... okay, 2/3 isn't bad. But if it makes you feel better, he was probably fined more that year than we payed him. Its not so much that the free agents were busts as such - its more that they were individuals like Sanders and George who were all about themselves and not the team. That, the QB controversy, Dan snyder undermining Norv (who needed little help anyway in being underwhelming as a person anyone was going to rally around) meant we had a traveling circus not a football team. So when we did get the injuries and times got a bit tough there was no team ethic or sense of figting through things together. So we tanked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted October 20, 2008 Author Share Posted October 20, 2008 bump for others opinions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Not even close. We were considered by many the most stacked team in the entire NFL in 2000 and a SB favorite. This year we were considered by most the worst team in our division. We had just signed Deion, Bruce and Mark Carrier and just drafted Lavar and Chris Samuels with the #2 and #3 picks overall. It was also Norv's 7th season as our coach. So by those, there is absolutely no comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alleycat Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 11. Please do not use the “Quote” feature to quote huge blocks of text or pictures. If you would like to respond to the contents of a particular post, simply quote the sentence or idea that you're commenting upon, not necessarily the entire post. This is particularly retarded when someone responds to the long quoted post to simply make a one or two phrase reply, or a "me too" comment like below. This sums it up perfectly...End of thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spear Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Its not so much that the free agents were busts as such - its more that they were individuals like Sanders and George who were all about themselves and not the team. That, the QB controversy, Dan snyder undermining Norv (who needed little help anyway in being underwhelming as a person anyone was going to rally around) meant we had a traveling circus not a football team.So when we did get the injuries and times got a bit tough there was no team ethic or sense of figting through things together. So we tanked. As much as I don't like Sanders, I don't think you can find anyone with any first-hand knowledge that will say he was a bad teammate. It's a myth. As for George, he was saying the right things and supportive of Brad Johnson. He did want to play, but one can hardly fault him for that. In the end, he was merely a harbinger of our destruction, rather than the catalyst. I agree about Norv being incapable of righting the ship once adversity had set in. But with our physical shortcomings, we were simply not the same team and didn't have the same capability by the end of the season that we began it with. With a better coach, we might have managed to limp into the playoffs, but going deep in the playoffs and winning it all was probably out of reach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted November 17, 2008 Author Share Posted November 17, 2008 so when i made this thread 3 weeks ago we were 6-2 and everyone was excited. since then we have scored 16 points. could we potentially see a 200 all over again? because frankly i dont see anything about this team currently that makes me believe our offense is going to start putting up big points this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 8, 2008 Author Share Posted December 8, 2008 so i made this thread on october 20th worried about how we'd look down the stretch. looks like we are the 2000 team after all, cause i cant predict that we'll win a single game the rest of the season scoring 10 points a game. ugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCalSkins Posted December 8, 2008 Share Posted December 8, 2008 Feels more like the 1996 team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
33 Posted December 8, 2008 Share Posted December 8, 2008 Feels more like the 1996 team. I agree. In '96 we looked awesome and felt great going to 6-2 only to find out we weren't as talented or well coached as we thought we were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogs87 Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 Talk about jinx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
str8jacket Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 God, i hope and pray that the future looks nothing like the Norv years. Though it could if we don't address the age factor at key positions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted December 30, 2008 Author Share Posted December 30, 2008 lol, i was gonna bump this thread but i decided not to. looks like i called it long ago, sadly but truthfully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 so when i made this thread 3 weeks ago we were 6-2 and everyone was excited. since then we have scored 16 points. could we potentially see a 200 all over again? because frankly i dont see anything about this team currently that makes me believe our offense is going to start putting up big points this season. I'm a little curious why at the age of 17 you apparently weren't a serious enough Redskins fan to be "watching the team closely in 2000" (which was a very significant season) as you mentioned in your OP. When did you decide to become a fan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted December 30, 2008 Share Posted December 30, 2008 For me the main differece was that you knew Norv was only capable of mediocrity. You KNEW it. No matter what ,you knew that team would come back to earth. As I recall, he was fired when we were like 6-3 or something, and lots of folks cried it was premature. I'd seen every Norv team play, and they all had the same look of lackadaisical resignation in their eyes, that they knew that mediocrity was the best they could ever get under Norv. And they had that look in 2000. So far we don't know for certain that Zorn is the same level of mediocrity. But by 2000, we were certain beyond the shadow of a doubt what we had in Norv. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.