Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Trying to make sense of teams 'Skins beat vs. lose to. Overlooked or "Any Given Sunday" ?


NoCalMike

Recommended Posts

Lets be honest, the 'Skins have been mediocre the majority of seasons over the past two decades. Take out the Superbowl win, and the three seasons of playoff appearances, and this franchise has mostly been a sub-.500 team.

With that said, I have noticed, especially over the past handful of seasons, this team regardless of coach, the system, the mix of players, seem to have always elevated their play against the better teams. I understand upsets happen, but the 'Skins seem to constantly come away with peculiar wins over teams that are seemingly a lot better not only on paper but every other week of the season, while at the same time they manage to lose to teams with rookie QBs, 0-16 teams, teams with all sorts of starters out etc etc etc......

I have always had trouble with the notion that on the professional level Coaches would allow their squad to overlook ANY team, especially in the NFL when there are only 16 games and every game is so important, because playoff implications can be decided over a single win/loss.

Is this just an example of the "Any Given Sunday" theory, or do you think Elite teams really do have tendencies to look over an opponent?

It'd be interesting to see our rate of upsetting teams compared to other franchises, as compared to teams like say the Cowboys who always seem to destroy the teams they are supposed to (for the most part of course) but lose to competition that is equal.

Just some food for though to discuss while we wait for the season!

Now when it comes to the 'Skins, besides their 6-2 start under Zorn (and most attribute it towards an early weak schedule, although that could be argued) They have never been a good enough team (even in the two playoff teams under Gibbs 2.0) to feel comfortable to overlook teams, IMO. They were never a Pats team ripping through the NFL, they were always close to .500....so what was the excuse for losing to bad teams?

:beavisnbutthead:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better teams often overlook teams that are not quite as good. It happens at all levels of sports, it doesn't even have to be professionals. I play in an adult kickball league and everyone knows we were a top 4 team despite our 6-8 record in the regular season, we figured we just turn it on and cruise thru teams because we are better talented and we would do our jobs once we are on the field but we didn't and lost

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets be honest, the 'Skins have been mediocre the majority of seasons over the past two decades. Take out the Superbowl win, and the three seasons of playoff appearances, and this franchise has mostly been a sub-.500 team.

With that said, I have noticed, especially over the past handful of seasons, this team regardless of coach, the system, the mix of players, seem to have always elevated their play against the better teams. I understand upsets happen, but the 'Skins seem to constantly come away with peculiar wins over teams that are seemingly a lot better not only on paper but every other week of the season, while at the same time they manage to lose to teams with rookie QBs, 0-16 teams, teams with all sorts of starters out etc etc etc......

I have always had trouble with the notion that on the professional level Coaches would allow their squad to overlook ANY team, especially in the NFL when there are only 16 games and every game is so important, because playoff implications can be decided over a single win/loss.

Is this just an example of the "Any Given Sunday" theory, or do you think Elite teams really do have tendencies to look over an opponent?

It'd be interesting to see our rate of upsetting teams compared to other franchises, as compared to teams like say the Cowboys who always seem to destroy the teams they are supposed to (for the most part of course) but lose to competition that is equal.

Just some food for though to discuss while we wait for the season!

Now when it comes to the 'Skins, besides their 6-2 start under Zorn (and most attribute it towards an early weak schedule, although that could be argued) They have never been a good enough team (even in the two playoff teams under Gibbs 2.0) to feel comfortable to overlook teams, IMO. They were never a Pats team ripping through the NFL, they were always close to .500....so what was the excuse for losing to bad teams?

:beavisnbutthead:

Sorry not going to take out a Superbowl and playoff appearances to agree with you, why'll were at it lets take out the other 3 superbowl appearances also????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would we want to do that?

OP is just saying that with the exception of those few seasons we haven't been very good for two decades, not that we should pretend like they didn' happen or they didn't count.

If OP hadn't mentioned the exceptions someone would have come in here disputing the fact that we've been bad for two decades by pointing out the 4 good to decent seasons we've had over the past 20 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed this for a while, actually.

Just looking at the last three years:

6-10 in 2010 - Beat both teams who met in NFC title game, and eventual Super Bowl Champion.

4-12 in 2009 (or 5-11? I forget) - But we had the Saints dead to rights, who won the Super Bowl. I know its not a W, but it was one of the best Skins games.

8-8 in 2008 - Beat Cardinals who went to Super Bowl, Swept Eagles who went to NFC title game.

2007 - Beat Super Bowl Champs

I think we certainly elevate our game against better team and dont show up against "bad" or "average" teams (which we have been too)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since 2000, our offense has basically sucked but with a couple of exceptions, we've had a solid defense and twice played near elite level. Many of our games were wins and close losses were simply because the defense played on par to expectations or better while the offense didn't suck that day. If you can keep the game close, you can beat anybody but that also means you can also lose to anybody. Further, the difference between winning and losing in the NFL has pretty much always been razor thin. Hell, even most blowouts have less than a 7 play difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the up and down performances are as much a result of the instability of the franchise as anything else. It's good when they get up for the good teams, but it's just as bad when the play down to the lesser teams. With all of the changes we've been thru almost annually with players/coaches/schemes, I'd almost have expected it had I been thinking of it in that context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said take out the Superbowl and playoff appearances, just to make a point that over the past twenty years , this team has been "winning" only a handful of times, however if you average the accumulative results, we have been a sub .500 team overall. Now if you go from 2000, back 20 years, different results because you have the entire 80's to factor in, but from 2011 and back (20 years) not so much!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said take out the Superbowl and playoff appearances, just to make a point that over the past twenty years , this team has been "winning" only a handful of times, however if you average the accumulative results, we have been a sub .500 team overall. Now if you go from 2000, back 20 years, different results because you have the entire 80's to factor in, but from 2011 and back (20 years) not so much!

I don't think anyone is shocked that if you take away an entire decade of success (except for the years we weren't good) then we're bad.

Anyway, what bothers me most is what you brought up in your OP, losing to teams we're expected to beat (or teams with losing records anyway). I noticed this last season. The only teams we beat were teams with .500 or better records, at the time we played them.

I have to say, at the time we played them because the Cowboys were 0-0 when we played them and beat them (but it's a division game and those are always crazy no matter the record).

Anyway, that really bothers me, since our schedule is full of teams that were sub .500 last season. However, I'm hoping the difference this season is that we have more guys on the team that want to win than we have in quite a while. Mike and Bruce did a good job of collecting guys who are hard workers and aren't here just to get paid, so hopefully that character flaw we've seen the last 3 seasons is gone.

I doubt the coaches are "allowing" their players to over-look opponents. I think it has to do with the players' attitudes more than anything, and a lot of ours weren't very good. Let's hope that's gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may not be a popular opinion on here, but I think it's the opposite.

I think teams like the Saints a couple of years ago and other teams that come through our schedule see Washington as an "easy victory" and then show up soft. They either recover from showing up soft or they don't. You have to look at it from both sides. We've been victimized for doing the same thing to teams like the Lions and the Rams, isn't it possible that other teams would do that to us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dread "trap" games.as said already,we always play to the competition.We play down to the weaker teams,ie,ending the Lions and Rams losing streaks.

If we wanna win more games and eventually playoffs/superbowls,we have to get over that tendency.Play our game no matter who the opponent is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This may not be a popular opinion on here, but I think it's the opposite.

I think teams like the Saints a couple of years ago and other teams that come through our schedule see Washington as an "easy victory" and then show up soft. They either recover from showing up soft or they don't. You have to look at it from both sides. We've been victimized for doing the same thing to teams like the Lions and the Rams, isn't it possible that other teams would do that to us?

Well great, then we should be undefeated this season, since EVERYONE KNOWS we're going to be the worst team in the league. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said take out the Superbowl and playoff appearances, just to make a point that over the past twenty years , this team has been "winning" only a handful of times, however if you average the accumulative results, we have been a sub .500 team overall. Now if you go from 2000, back 20 years, different results because you have the entire 80's to factor in, but from 2011 and back (20 years) not so much!

You do realize that in the NFL this is the norm. For instance, take away the Brady years from NE and they are a sub 500 team and you can pretty much do this with all but 2-3 teams in the NFL (ie, take away their great periods) as most teams either suck or are good to great, few teams have long periods of being just above mediocre. On the other hand, only two teams have never had at least one above average season (and those teams are less than 15 years old and play in divisions with very dominant teams). Only a couple of teams over 20 years old have never been great and no teams over 20 years old has not had an extended period of suck. As I said, the difference between winning and losing in the NFL is razor thin, good teams just find a way to stay on that positive side while bad teams continue to pretty much stay on the bad side. Further, great teams just don't lose the games they should win even though those games may be close. I don't think that, in general, teams play up or down to the level of competition, the teams are usually so close in talent that a small difference in talent, emotions and tactics can sometimes big difference in the results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed this for a while, actually.

Just looking at the last three years:

6-10 in 2010 - Beat both teams who met in NFC title game, and eventual Super Bowl Champion.

4-12 in 2009 (or 5-11? I forget) - But we had the Saints dead to rights, who won the Super Bowl. I know its not a W, but it was one of the best Skins games.

8-8 in 2008 - Beat Cardinals who went to Super Bowl, Swept Eagles who went to NFC title game.

2007 - Beat Super Bowl Champs

I think we certainly elevate our game against better team and dont show up against "bad" or "average" teams (which we have been too)...

this is what really gets me.. like last year, we beat the packers who end up winning the superbowl. that means that they're the best.. but we beat the best, so arent we the best? i know there were other teams who beat them in the regular season, but the fact that we do win games against good teams just shows that we are a good team also. i dont know why we keep losing to teams like the rams and lions but if we can work on that then we will be back in contention

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...