The Redskins in the playoffs

[SkinsHokieFan]

9-7 and a first round loss would only work for me if it is primarily on the backs of our young guys.

If Kerrigan, Orakpo, Landry, Hankerson, Helu, Trent Williams, Niles Paul are all key contributors to this, I could live with it.

If it is the result of a career year from Rex Grossman and Santana Moss, I would be livid

[scruffylookin]

I agree with SHF.

While I want the Redskins to be in a position to draft an elite prospect at QB next year because I feel that is what will ultimately be best for the long term health and success of this franchise, if the Redskins do somehow get to 10-6 with young players playing great ball then I guess this team is much closer than I thought and I'd have fun with it.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

If it is the result of a career year from Rex Grossman and Santana Moss, I would be livid

Livid?

I understand your point of view (and actually agree that I'd prefer younger players lead the charge this year). But could you really be livid if any Redskin team made the playoffs? Maybe it's not what you think will ultimately help them long-term and maybe you would prefer to take three steps backwards in order to move forward...but I think you're crossing into insanity if you'd actually root for a Redskin team to lose games once the season begins.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Livid?

I understand your point of view (and actually agree that I'd prefer younger players lead the charge this year). But could you really be livid if any Redskin team made the playoffs? Maybe it's not what you think will ultimately help them long-term and maybe you would prefer to take three steps backwards in order to move forward...but I think you're crossing into insanity if you'd actually root for a Redskin team to lose games once the season begins.

Under the second scenario I painted, a playoff run led by Moss, Grossman and lets say London Fletcher and OJ playing the big roles, yea I'd be pretty upset because I know it wouldn't be a foundation for better things. Instead we just went on a run with guys on their last legs and cost ourselves a high round draft pick, which would help us further down the line.

It would basically be the 2007 Redskins in the long run. A team on its last legs making one final push and maxing out at 9 wins.

This franchise needs to get back to the level of 11-12+ wins a season. I am done with maxing out at 9 or 10 wins every 5-6 years

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Under the second scenario I painted, a playoff run led by Moss, Grossman and lets say London Fletcher and OJ playing the big roles, yea I'd be pretty upset because I know it wouldn't be a foundation for better things. Instead we just went on a run with guys on their last legs and cost ourselves a high round draft pick, which would help us further down the line.

It would basically be the 2007 Redskins in the long run. A team on its last legs making one final push and maxing out at 9 wins.

This franchise needs to get back to the level of 11-12+ wins a season. I am done with maxing out at 9 or 10 wins every 5-6 years

Right...read my replies in here...I completely understand and would want success to be due to our youngsters. No problem with your outlook on that type of run. But, once the team is picked and the players are in their roles, don't you just default to rooting for the Redskins? And, let's say the skins are 9-6 with those older vets and playing in Philly to end this season. Win and they are in, lose and they go home. Are you hoping that group of veterans fail in that situation? I am mostly curious about your use of "livid" almost as though you'd root against a veteran Redskin team rather than just prefer they be younger.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Right...read my replies in here...I completely understand and would want success to be due to our youngsters. No problem with your outlook on that type of run. But, once the team is picked and the players are in their roles, don't you just default to rooting for the Redskins? And, let's say the skins are 9-6 with those older vets and playing in Philly to end this season. Win and they are in, lose and they go home. Are you hoping that group of veterans fail in that situation? I am mostly curious about your use of "livid" almost as though you'd root against a veteran Redskin team rather than just prefer they be younger.

I hate to use the term "root against the team" because overall I am not rooting against the team.

In my mind I have already punted the 2011 season. I expect it to be bad, very bad, which is ok by me. And in fact, I hope it is for the long term plan.

Your scenario of 9-6 against Philly, of course at that point I would want the win. But I am starting in the default position that we need to lose as much as possible this year

[Sticksboi05]

You do not lose on purpose. I'm sorry, that is detestable. Winning starts with a winning attitude.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I hate to use the term "root against the team" because overall I am not rooting against the team.

In my mind I have already punted the 2011 season. I expect it to be bad, very bad, which is ok by me. And in fact, I hope it is for the long term plan.

Your scenario of 9-6 against Philly, of course at that point I would want the win. But I am starting in the default position that we need to lose as much as possible this year

OK. Interesting, but I understand your point.

Do you actually want them to lose in 2011 because you think they need to in order to get better (draft Luck, etc.) or are you just saying that you are OK with them losing as long as they play young players? I think there is a distinction there...

For example, as you mentioned, a successful season on the backs of our rookies and younger vets (even with someone like Grossman or Beck at QB) is something we could build on and sustain for years.

---------- Post added July-12th-2011 at 11:07 AM ----------

You do not lose on purpose. I'm sorry, that is detestable. Winning starts with a winning attitude.

In fairness...the team certainly shouldn't ever lose on purpose. But a fan (SHF for example) thinking losses are better in the long run is different than a team employing that strategy.

[Mursilis]

This franchise needs to get back to the level of 11-12+ wins a season. I am done with maxing out at 9 or 10 wins every 5-6 years

You may want to re-evaluate your rooting interests then. The last 11+ win season was . . . I don't even remember.

[Burgold]

I chose Grossman in this scenario over Beck for exactly this reason. Although, I kind of see both as equals. Grossman has had more of a shot, but in many ways is still that young qb that flashes a lot and then makes you hit your head. If he could become a Kerry Colins or Rich Gannon who sudddenly rises into that upper tier of qbs, he could stay there for a while. He hasn't absorbed that many hits and still has tread on the tires. Same with Beck, if he somehow turned out to be Trent Green or the Cowboy Choker. A guy who never really got his chance for whatever reason and then took off once he did.

Still, I don't see playing Grossman as the same as playing McNabb or evenn luring Brett out of retirement for one more swing of the bat. Those are clearly homerun/strikeout swings.

Anyway, I understand both views and that's part of why this thread was started. My dream scenario is that all the pups or most of them just really start clicking and that second year 3-4 magic happens. The team starts getting good and believing in itself. If we got to the playoffs, even if we were trounced and sent back... I'd feel pretty good going forward. Mind you, I'd be happier if it were on the backs of Armstrong, Banks, Torrain, and some of the rooks, but I don't really mind if some reclamation projects like Grossman suddenly make good.

[S.T.real,lights,out]

IDK, I love watching the team win obviously buuuuttt idk if in the long run us going one and done will be good. If its all of our young guys doing it then hell yea...if its a bunch of older vets then no.

[The Tris]

You may want to re-evaluate your rooting interests then. The last 11+ win season was . . . I don't even remember.

So because we haven't done it in a while means we shouldn't set our goals and expectations to that level?

Sheesh, thats worse than wanting to tank the season.

The fact that the vast majority of fans think 10 wins is about as much as one can hope and the goal we should set speaks to an incredible lack of vision, one that is seemingly shared by the ownership of this team.

[Sticksboi05]

So because we haven't done it in a while means we shouldn't set our goals and expectations to that level?

Sheesh, thats worse than wanting to tank the season.

The fact that the vast majority of fans think 10 wins is about as much as one can hope and the goal we should set speaks to an incredible lack of vision, one that is seemingly shared by the ownership of this team.

Are you on crack? Get real, this team cannot win 12 games. They are a mess that is slowly becoming unraveled. It's called being realistic.

[The Tris]

Are you on crack? Get real, this team cannot win 12 games. They are a mess that is slowly becoming unraveled. It's called being realistic.

This team can not win 12 games, you are right.

However, the goal of this team should be to build a team that wins 12+ games every season.

You go about that goal by thinking long term and about the bigger picture.

Not by focusing on immediate gratification.

This team's and this fanbase's goals and expectations need to be elevated above the quick fix, microwaved roster success of the past decade.

[Mursilis]

So because we haven't done it in a while means we shouldn't set our goals and expectations to that level?

Sheesh, thats worse than wanting to tank the season.

The fact that the vast majority of fans think 10 wins is about as much as one can hope and the goal we should set speaks to an incredible lack of vision, one that is seemingly shared by the ownership of this team.

I set my goals and expectations at 19-0 every season, but the team never seems to cooperate. Sadly, I have no control over that fact, and none of us fans do. This may come as a shock to you.

Regardless, you're addressing the wrong person. I'm not the one who said I was "done" with this team peaking at 9-10 wins per season.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Are you on crack? Get real, this team cannot win 12 games. They are a mess that is slowly becoming unraveled. It's called being realistic.

This team cannot. This franchise should be striving to.

[The Tris]

I set my goals and expectations at 19-0 every season

Setting a goal of 19 wins per season is hardly a realistic goal.

I am taking about goals that are both realistic and attainable.

Winning 12+ games per season is a goal which is both.

[CrypticVillain]

:doh:

I am not talking about handicapping the future to do so, but if my team is not playing to win the game, I don't want them to be my team anymore.

[The Tris]

The twice fired Edwards, he of the career 56-77 record, is a really good motivational speaker.

[Burgold]

This team can't win 12 games next season? Can't? I think the percentage chance of us winning 12 games is far larger than zero. It might be as high as 4%. Maybe even 10%. Still, it ain't impossible. Just really, really, really unlikely.

Absolutists annoy me.

[CrypticVillain]

The twice fired Edwards, he of the career 56-77 record, is a really good motivational speaker.

Mock the man all you want, but you can't mock the message.

Try telling London Fletcher, Orakpo, Moss, Cooley, and other players on the team that we should lose games so we can get a better draft pick.

WE DON"T EVEN KNOW HOW THE TEAM WILL PERFORM!!!! And we are already talking about tanking the season. What happened to the fans of the Redskins?

[pjfootballer]

I want to see progress from the younger players on both sides of the ball. I always want to win every game, but I can honestly go through a poor season record wise as long as I see the team fighting every week and see the team get better in areas besides the scoreboard.

Lets face it, we have been needing a franchise QB for a loooooonnnnnggggg time. I don't want us to tank it, but I'd rather finish 5-11 and below and get a chance at one of the QBs, then to have another mediocre season and lose out on getting a future franchise QB.

---------- Post added July-12th-2011 at 12:11 PM ----------

You may want to re-evaluate your rooting interests then. The last 11+ win season was . . . I don't even remember.

1991-1992 when we won 14 games. Yes, it's been that frigging long. I believe we are the only team besides the expansion (can you even call them that anymore) Texans (never had 11 wins), Browns (1995 had 11 wins- who were reinvented as an expansion team) and Lions (I think they last had 11 wins the same year we did when we beat them for the NFCCG) that have failed to win 11 games or more over the last 15 years.

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

Hmm, I did Win, Baby, Win because that's what the team needs, the fan base needs, and the players need. I already feel like we're going with a youth movement. However, the "I just wanna see progress" thing also works, that implies that we're better than 6-10, and our youth is progressing. I feel like both categories feature youth progressing and more wins than last season. I went with the Win, Baby, Win, since building a winning culture in the lockerroom and fanbase is incredibly important. We can't let your youngsters get used to a losing season.

That said. I think our roster is much better than it was last season. MUCH better. Our schedule is easier. Our defense has far fewer holes.

The following guys started for us at the beginning of last season:

Derrick Dockery - 30 years old

Joey Galloway - 39 years old

Andre Carter - 31 years old

Maake Kemoeatu - 31 years old

Artis Hicks - 32 years old

Donovan McNabb - 34 years old

We'll have improved at every one of those positions (with either talent or how they fit in our scheme). So yes, we've gotten a lot younger, but in this case, the youth is better as well.

[KCClybun]

Cool. I just get the sense that there is this pervading sense of defeatism masquerading as realism that has swept our fan base.

Truer words have never been spoken, sir.

A lot of the negativity out there is, essentially, a defense mechanism for what could be a hard season, even though there's more than a few bright spots.

I just want my team to do well. And yes, I want them to win more than I want them to lose. If they lose, I want them to fight hard and be in the game most of the time. But I'm not sitting here saying "well at least if we lose we'll get a top pick." I want them to do well, because I think positive momentum is always better than sitting around halfway hoping they stagnate.

Also, this fanbase has single handily made me despise Andrew Luck.

[pjfootballer]

Setting a goal of 19 wins per season is hardly a realistic goal.

I am taking about goals that are both realistic and attainable.

Winning 12+ games per season is a goal which is both.

I have the same goal of 12 wins per year. Unfortunately most of this fanbase looks back at the last 20 years and wants to "hail" the 8-8, 9-7, 10-6 seasons as some sort of "great acheivement." I watched the team during the their four SB seasons. 10-6 and a wild card appearance was garbage during that time period and it should be the same now. I understand this team will have to grow and build towards those 12 win seasons. I'd like to see a progression with this team from 6-10, to 9-7 to 11-5 to 13-3 sort of scenerio. I also realize the team may have to go down from 6-10 this season in order build back up to 12+ wins. I can deal with that if I see progress. I hate being 5-11 to 9-7 and occasionally make a playoff appearance.