The Argument Against Psychological Explanations for Losing

[Oldfan]

When the Skins lose football games, we often hear Stadium members cite psychological causes: "The players lack discipline; they need leadership!" "The coach has lost the locker room!" "Someone needs to establish a winning atmosphere!" I think these fans confuse effects for causes.

I think poor coaching (about a 20% factor) and lack of roster talent (about an 80% factor) are the causes of losing football games. It can be one or the other or both. This is how I see the cause-and-effect chain:

original cause> poor coaching

effect> more difficult for players to execute assignments

effect> more missed assignments

effect> players cheat to compensate

effect> players are penalized

effect> missed assignments and penalties cause losing

original cause> lack of roster talent

effect> more missed assignments

effect> players cheat to compensate

effect> players are penalized

effect> missed assignments and penalties cause losing

The effects of losing are often mistaken as its causes:

cause> losing

effect> players blame coaches or each other

effect> coaches blame players

effect> players and coaches lose respect for each other

effect> discouragement

effect> loss of confidence

effect> lack of discipline

One might argue soundly that these psychological effects cause even more damage. However, when we discuss what needs to be done to fix the problem, we have to go back to the original causes: poor coaching, lack of talent or both. Forget the psychological effects.

[terrifNick21]

[Rufus T Firefly]

Because you touch yourself at night.

[terrifNick21]

Because you touch yourself at night.

[Rufus T Firefly]

[ejay183]

Easily the biggest factor

[aREDSKIN]

without question the 2nd biggest factor & probably right there with Vinny.

[The Full Monty]

without question the 2nd biggest factor & probably right there with Vinny.

But, but he's "learning" (as quoted in 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2010).

[RFKFedEx]

'Don't worry, we know what we're doing, we have a plan.'

Vincent Cerrato on Sports Talk 980 circa 2003.

[Oldfan]

All we have so far in replies is Vinny and Dan hate.. and one failed attempt at humor. My argument must be sound.

I'm going to change the thread title.

[XEL]

^ The fact that everyone on the board knows you're too stubborn to argue against does not make your argument sound..

[Oldfan]

^ The fact that everyone on the board knows you're too stubborn to argue against does not make your argument sound..

Let's see. Your reply..

..makes it obvious that you regard your opinions as facts;

..that you are egotistical enough to presume to speak for everyone on the board;

..that you have no counter-argument to offer;

..that you, in the past, have disagreed with me, but not recognized the possibility that you are the stubborn one in the debate

I'm not at all familiar with your posting history, but that one sentence you wrote tells me a lot about you.

[Bang]

If the assertion is that we suffer from bad coaching now, i don't think there's any reason to even begin to argue.

If that's the assertion it's just more knee-jerk whiplash expectations of turning around a really bad football team in a single season.

I think it's more along the lines of

Original Cause> Coaching Carousel

effect> no continuity of philosophy

effect> mixed parts for three different offenses and two different defenses existing on one football team... AKA 'lack of roster talent'.

effect> mixed ability to play in new schemes

effect>Sloppy confused play by players who are ill fit for the system

effect> A poor record as the new staff attempts to evaluate which of these mix-match parts will fit into the future

effect> Ridiculous knee jerk reactions from fans who expected miracles because the marketing dept. told them they should.

effect> More from fans who recognize how deep of a pit we're in and how long it could take to dig out of it

potential effect> Moronic pinhead of an owner is one of the unrealistic fans, fires coach after 2 seasons, begins process again.

effect> more years as a laughing stock.

~Bang

[Oldfan]

If the assertion is that we suffer from bad coaching now, i don't think there's any reason to even begin to argue.

I don't think there's any reason at all for me to defend myself against assertions you dream up.

When I make an argument that our team is poorly coached, I'll PM you so that you can show up and debate it.

[Bang]

I don't think there's any reason at all for me to defend myself against assertions you dream up.

When I make an argument that our team is poorly coached, I'll PM you so that you can show up and debate it.

Such a cranky old man.

That is exactly why I began my "dream" with the word

IF.

Big big word, that one.

You know,, it means "is this what you're saying?"

So, is it?

is your contention that

Original Cause> This coaching staff?

Because that would create

effect>

I think of the three Causes you've laid out, all can be traced back to lack of philosophical continuity.

~Bang

[terpskins10]

Idk, I think the point is more than an overall lack of roster talent is the reason and I can't argue with that. We are easily one of the least talented teams in football.

As for coaching, I'm on the fence. Definitely don't think we suffer from "poor" coaching but I have other preferences when it comes to head coaches. Mike is what we got though and he has my full support.

[Mahons21]

OF, while I agree with you that losing is the cause, in my opinion losing overtime can create a cycle of losing that is hard for players/coaches to snap out of.

As I said in another thread, show me a team has under 6 wins for two years straight, and I'll show you a group of guys that have lost confidence in one another as well as the coaching staff. In my opinion it can be very hard to come out of this cycle.

Yes, winning is the easy answer. But it becomes that much more difficult to win a game of football (the ultimate team game), when you can't trust those around you. WR's cut off their routes because they don't think the QB will get them the ball, QB's bail out of the pocket too early sometimes because the o-line is in shambles, finger-pointing in the media, defenders try to play beyond their assignment and so on...

Winning can restore the confidence in a given players surroundings, but in my opinion winning becomes that much more difficult. If I were the coach GM I would take this approach.

Trim the fat, you don't want to be a Redskin, then the Redskins don't want you and we'll have a much better chance of winning without you. Then I would need the players left to understand this is the NFL, which stands for "any given sunday," they need to believe that if all 53 players come together and play in unison there isn't a team in the NFL that we can't beat, and they need to truly believe it.

This is the scenario I'd like to bring my young drafted talent into. Unfortunately, the window to turn the franchise into a winner is small, like I said show me a coach with two seasons under 6 wins and I'll show you a team that has lost confidence. So you need to do a great job evaluating talent in this time. Trades similar to the Carriker trade are ideal, players that don't shine on lesser teams in the NFL, but have physical potential and fit our scheme.

[Oldfan]

...You know,, it means "is this what you're saying?"

If you can quote a line from the OP that seems to imply anything of the sort, I'll respond.

I think of the three Causes you've laid out, all can be traced back to lack of philosophical continuity.

I wasn't arguing against "philosophical continuity." I'm not even sure what you mean by that.

My argument opposes the psychological explanations often given by our members for losing football games. If you have something to say on the topic, we can discuss it.

[RedBeast]

Lets be honest here. There has been too much coddling and BS on this team for 20 years. Short cuts, quick fixes, prima donnas etc...We need a holistic disciplined approach on how this team should be run. Once we get a "team first" mentality, from every level, then things will turn the corner. Until we get that, and stick with it, we will always be mediocre at best.

Great ownership + great management + great coaching + great scouting + great players (who are all committed to the same goal) = great team (theoretically). A little luck doesn't hurt either.

You can pull in all of the psychological babble that you want, but it wont fix the team. Ask a Psychologist that has evaluated other high achieving teams (Delta, SF, Rangers, Seals, etc.) and they will tell you that it is quality people that are committed to the mission, committed to training and have a team first mentality that causes a consistent high level of success.

We don't have all of the above (yet?).

[Bang]

If you can quote a line from the OP that seems to imply anything of the sort, I'll respond.

He says, sneering down his nose.

I never said you DID. I simply wondered if that was what you meant. You typically have not been kind to the current staff, so it stood to reason that you MIGHT be saying that. Jeez, internet warriors. Always ready for the fight.

I wasn't arguing against "philosophical continuity." I'm not even sure what you mean by that.

Allow me to explain, and how it fits into the psychology of winning. (Something I believe in a lot more than the psychology of losing.)

Witness the best teams in the league, the ones who are in the playoffs every year.

Philadelphia. Pittsburgh, New England, Indianapolis. Baltimore.

What they have in common more than ANYTHING is consistency of philosophy. They KNOW what they will be doing because it's what they've been doing consistently for the last ten years.

How is it they don't have bust free agents like we or others do/ How is it their draft picks work out way more often than not? How is it that they are contenders every season despite personel changes, sometimes in key positions?

because they know what they will do with their offense and defense now and into the future. From the moment they even begin to scout a player they have a good idea of what they'd like out of him. They know what they want that sophomore linebacker to do in four years when they get him there and in the lineup.

Conversely, we don't have any idea who our coach will be in four years, what our offense will be, what our defense will be. None of it. Hell, we don't even know if we'll have the draft pick we need to get him in four years.

No philosophical continuity means no base on which to build anything.

That is what I mean when I say that lack of philosophical continuity is the largest factor in keeping this team down. Because of it, we continually end up with mismatched players and coaches, and we continually try to compensate with new players thru free agency.

And because it hardly ever works, that leads to fans believing that there's some sort of psychological reason behind why this team is so bad and always seems so confused. It's because they are confused, not because they have some sort of group mental issue that leads to such defeatism that they actually lose.

Conversely, because those above mentioned teams DO have continuity of philosophy, and they do get the results they desire as a result of it, the players they bring in are filled with confidence from the get go. And so they maintain that psyche of winning. Those teams are built with generations of players who share that same confidence built on the same steady phiosophical base.

My argument opposes the psychological explanations often given by our members for losing football games. If you have something to say on the topic, we can discuss it.

I offered some concrete reasons why those psychological things appear to exist. I personally don't buy into the whole "psychology of losing" business. I don't think these things happen because it's all in their heads, or that they expect to make the critical error, so they do. (I believe that losing and confusion from above leads to apathy, and that can cause critical errors.)

I believe that good coaching can change that. And I believe that good coaching comes from hiring quality coaches, and then giving them time. (Unfortunately for us, because we've had such a rapidly spinning carousel it means they need more time, because there's a bigger mess to clean up. ) We haven't much done any of that, so we don't have any consistent philosophy, which leaves players with a new boss every other year, which leads to confusion and losing.

The psychology of losing is a fan's problem, because the fan is powerless to change even the slightest bit of it.

~Bang

[Oldfan]

..

Mahons21 -- OF, while I agree with you that losing is the cause, in my opinion losing overtime can create a cycle of losing that is hard for players/coaches to snap out of.

As I said in another thread, show me a team has under 6 wins for two years straight, and I'll show you a group of guys that have lost confidence in one another as well as the coaching staff. In my opinion it can be very hard to come out of this cycle.

As I said in the OP..

One might argue that these psychological effects cause even more damage. However, when we discuss what needs to be done to fix the problem, we have to go back to the original causes: poor coaching, lack of talent or both. Forget the psychological effects.

Yes, winning is the easy answer.

I think winning is the ONLY answer, but doing it isn't easy.

Mike Shanahan was able to change the psychological effects left by the previous regime just by walking in the door. His reputation preceded him. But, that's like a doctor treating the symptoms and not the disease. The disease in this case is losing. Treating the symptoms eases the pain temporarily, but it is not a solution to the problem.

[TomE]

Commitment, team first mentality, discipline.... are these not variants of psychology?

[Bang]

Commitment, team first mentality, discipline.... are these not variants of psychology?

Yes, but if you commit people who are incapable, or mismatched, or poorly led.. those are just lip service.

I have no doubt that most of our players are committed. We've got a few notables who look for all the world like they're out for themselves, but for the most part, I think the players recognize the importance of being a team. I think we've got good discipline and desire as well, other than AH, I think we had perfect attendance for all of last offseason's workouts.

One thing we do have from a psychological standpoint is some good player-leaders. Especially London Fletcher.. if a player can't respect and follow him, he needs to be on the next bus out. I think London is one of the best in the league at being an on-field and in the locker room leader.

~Bang

[Mahons21]

I think winning is the ONLY answer, but doing it isn't easy.

Mike Shanahan was able to change the psychological effects left by the previous regime just by walking in the door. His reputation preceded him. But, that's like a doctor treating the symptoms and not the disease. The disease in this case is losing. Treating the symptoms eases the pain temporarily, but it is not a solution to the problem.

I would argue that winning is the band-aid for the cut, while the total change in culture is the stitches.

Winning will take away some of the stress, but what happens when that team goes on a losing streak? The finger-point etc will ensue... Therefore in my opinion you need to totally change this culture, I want players who at the hardest of times stick together, who fight together as a team. Not the prima-donas who are dancing on the sidelines when times are good, and then running off a the mouth to the media when the times are bad.

[Rypien1191]

I'm not sure if the fact that the OP makes no sense me makes me an idiot or a genius.