Do you want the Redskins to lose to Vikings???

[elkabong82]

First: Glad to see you on here more!

The pick matters next April. A win against the Vikings doesn't.

First, thank you. Semester of grad school is over, so I have more time. ES beware, hahaha.

Steelers you are correct, I forgot they slid a year. However, they were still able to get their franchise guy going 6-10. The team was still a good team overall but had a slide IIRC due to Maddox either regressing or being figured out. But, had they been lower in the draft, trading up to get Ben wouldn't have cost that much, and some would argue that their team was already good, so giving up picks to get essentially that final piece would have been worth it.

My point is that the culture of winning is vitally important, and giving up picks to get the QB isn't terrible when you're bringing him to a good team. The more we win now, the more it means the young guys are excelling in the system and solidifying their spots. Carolina is 5-9, I was looking at a site which hadn't updated the results unfortunately. Still, they have a ways to go, and their main weapon, Steve Smith, is no spring chicken. There's also the concern of the team being abysmal should Cam get injured or have a sophomore slump next season. Instead of the Panthers, how about the rams? Bradford can't even stay healthy because he lacks support and spends most of the game on his back. Do we want a Ramsey repeat? Teams like the Pats and Steelers win games even when their starting QB goes out because the team overall is good, which is why I used the Colts as a contrast to them.

For the occasional Colts that get the very rare elite QB, there are teams like the Pats, Steelers, Packers, and Saints who get their franchise QB outside of the top 5, or even through free agency.

I agree that win or lose this team believes in itself, but I will never agree that losing out is the best route. If we have to rely on losing for draft position to get better, than our GM, coaches, and scouting department aren't very good.

Roethlisberger wasn't the top QB prospect of his class, nor was Brees, nor Rodgers. You have to have faith that this team can be good regardless of draft position. The Pats and Steelers find a way eventhough they pick later in most drafts. If we want a good team then our personnel has to be equally capable.

Not giving up, having the young guys win, is more important and beneficial to development then playing well and still losing. If you're losing, then problems persist, and it's no guarantee simply adding a QB will fix all that. But if you're winning, then you bring the QB into a good position.

The pick next April matters for one position, which does have a significant effect on the team. But, a win against the Vikings matters for the remaining 52 players on the active roster, and they typically collectively outweigh the QB position. You want a QB so badly that you're neglecting the intangible values of winning, which are much more significant than playing well and losing. Teams that do the same, that get desperate for a QB so much that they devalue all else, end up like the Chargers with Leaf and seemingly now the Jags with Gabbert. That's why I asked if you had played sports, because if you did then you should have first hand knowledge of the effect winning has on a team.

[MartinC]

Since when has a positive atmosphere with the current players, with many who won't be coming back, had an effect on the following year with players who have never been here?

We had a big clear out of dead wood and ageing players last year and a big infusion of youth many of whom are now making big constitutions - add in Hamk, Williams, Jenkins and Davis to those still out there contributing. Many of the players who are contributing are going to be the nucleus around which we build - them getting the habit and taste of winning is a good thing period IMO.

Without trading with Jacksonville, we don't have: Hankerson, Helu, Gomes, Paul, or Hurt. That's assuming that everything else was picked the same way. Oh, and we traded three picks to move up to grab

Right. These are the young guys who we want to build our future aound along with guys like Davis, Orakpo, Williams, Kerrigan etc. We have a good young nucleus (drug suspension aside for the moment).

How could we pull off such an amazing draft? We traded a high pick to Jacksonville so that they could get Gabbert. If we're sitting at 16 to begin with, then we're not getting that phone call, and we're not getting those players.

Nope. Different year, different situation and different stage of our teams development. This year we are the team making that call not taking it.

Anyway, I digress. Just answer this: What would you rather have? The above mentioned players or a "gee gosh darn dolly things are looking up" feeling after the Jacksonville game last year? I'll go with those players.

I'll take a win every time. Play the games, play to win and then when the dust settles you map our offseason strategy. Winning beats losing in just about any circumstance in my world.

[NewCliche21]

First, thank you. Semester of grad school is over, so I have more time. ES beware, hahaha.

Steelers you are correct, I forgot they slid a year. However, they were still able to get their franchise guy going 6-10. The team was still a good team overall but had a slide IIRC due to Maddox either regressing or being figured out. But, had they been lower in the draft, trading up to get Ben wouldn't have cost that much, and some would argue that their team was already good, so giving up picks to get essentially that final piece would have been worth it.

My point is that the culture of winning is vitally important, and giving up picks to get the QB isn't terrible when you're bringing him to a good team. The more we win now, the more it means the young guys are excelling in the system and solidifying their spots. Carolina is 5-9, I was looking at a site which hadn't updated the results unfortunately. Still, they have a ways to go, and their main weapon, Steve Smith, is no spring chicken. There's also the concern of the team being abysmal should Cam get injured or have a sophomore slump next season. Instead of the Panthers, how about the rams? Bradford can't even stay healthy because he lacks support and spends most of the game on his back. Do we want a Ramsey repeat? Teams like the Pats and Steelers win games even when their starting QB goes out because the team overall is good, which is why I used the Colts as a contrast to them.

For the occasional Colts that get the very rare elite QB, there are teams like the Pats, Steelers, Packers, and Saints who get their franchise QB outside of the top 5, or even through free agency.

I agree that win or lose this team believes in itself, but I will never agree that losing out is the best route. If we have to rely on losing for draft position to get better, than our GM, coaches, and scouting department aren't very good.

Roethlisberger wasn't the top QB prospect of his class, nor was Brees, nor Rodgers. You have to have faith that this team can be good regardless of draft position. The Pats and Steelers find a way eventhough they pick later in most drafts. If we want a good team then our personnel has to be equally capable.

Not giving up, having the young guys win, is more important and beneficial to development then playing well and still losing. If you're losing, then problems persist, and it's no guarantee simply adding a QB will fix all that. But if you're winning, then you bring the QB into a good position.

The pick next April matters for one position, which does have a significant effect on the team. But, a win against the Vikings matters for the remaining 52 players on the active roster, and they typically collectively outweigh the QB position. You want a QB so badly that you're neglecting the intangible values of winning, which are much more significant than playing well and losing. Teams that do the same, that get desperate for a QB so much that they devalue all else, end up like the Chargers with Leaf and seemingly now the Jags with Gabbert. That's why I asked if you had played sports, because if you did then you should have first hand knowledge of the effect winning has on a team.

Grad school is the worst. Have to give up everything for that!

The 2004 draft was very unique. Eight out of the first eleven picks were Pro Bowlers. There was so much talent up top that a SAFETY was taken that high. A friggin' SAFETY. Followed by a tight end! Sure, you can find safeties taken high now, but that was unheard of until Sean Taylor. Tight ends weren't taken with the sixth pick, either. In a 2012 draft, he doesn't last until the eleventh pick. As for being the top prospect, his trajectory was straight up from February through April, but everyone was just focused on Manning.

You can have a team that is really good that doesn't win. Look at the 49ers of 2011. That team seemed like crap, but with nearly the same team as 2010, they have the second seed pretty much locked up.

I think that you're reaching when you bring up "What if Newton has a sophomore slump", because that's not a real argument. Bradford doesn't have any weapons or a line in St. Louis, so him being flat on his back there has nothing to do with how he would perform here. In fact, if we hadn't done the McNabb trade, then we could've taken Bradford. Shanahan wanted him, but the price was too high when he only had four picks that year. Ramsey is irrelevant as well, as Shanahan is not Spurrier and has done a pretty fantastic job with quarterbacks.

More than a quarter of all Super Bowls were won by quarterbacks taken in the top five. That may not sound like much, but when there are 23-31 other teams who didn't get that top spot, your odds are much lower with a quarterback taken out of the top five. No player is ever a guarantee, but you go ahead and pick 199th overall and I'll pick first overall for the next ten drafts, and I'll be sure to tell your grandkids about the good guy you were while you're busy waiting and waiting for Tom Brady.

Having a real quarterback will be more beneficial to their development than winning some meaningless games. Real quarterbacks make their teams better.

You keep bringing up Ryan Leaf, and I'm not sure why. The Chargers didn't tank to get him and the Jaguars didn't do that for Gabbert. You're crossing argument streams here. Haven't you seen "Ghostbusters"? You can't cross streams!

However, if you talk to Bradshaw's Steelers, Unitas's Colts, Griese's Dolphins, Plunkett's Raiders, McMahon's Bears, Aikman's Cowboys, Elway's Broncos, Manning's Colts, or Manning's Giants, I'm sure that they'll tell you a hell of a lot more about their quarterbacks leading them to victory than trying so desperately to get out of the top five. A bunch of those first-overalls, by the way. I also left out any other Super Bowl-winning quarterbacks taken in the first round as well as any Super Bowl-winning teams that had an impact top-five pick at another position.

I'll take the championship brought to me by our star quarterback as opposed to the continuation of mediocrity and pointless wins that only prevent us from getting that quarterback.

Quarterbacks win Super Bowls. Week 16 of the year preceding those mentioned above does not.

---------- Post added December-20th-2011 at 05:42 PM ----------

We had a big clear out of dead wood and ageing players last year and a big infusion of youth many of whom are now making big constitutions - add in Hamk, Williams, Jenkins and Davis to those still out there contributing. Many of the players who are contributing are going to be the nucleus around which we build - them getting the habit and taste of winning is a good thing period IMO.

Yes, it's a fantastic thing. And many of those players aren't here if we don't get that trade with Jacksonville, which we don't get without earning the tenth-overall pick. Your future isn't there if you don't have a crap 2010.

Right. These are the young guys who we want to build our future aound along with guys like Davis, Orakpo, Williams, Kerrigan etc. We have a good young nucleus (drug suspension aside for the moment).

See above.

Nope. Different year, different situation and different stage of our teams development. This year we are the team making that call not taking it.

That's not what I was talking about. I'm saying that if we had won some more meaningless games last year, like I and many others were so excited to have won, then we're not able to trade to get ANY of the above-mentioned. All because we sure showed them Giants in 17 in that scenario. Woohoo!

Also, if we're picking at 4, then making that call for 2 or even 1 isn't going to cost nearly as much as it would even at 7. To get to 2 from 4 would probably be a first and a fourth at the most. To get to 2 from 7 is a couple of firsts or a first and most of the rest of this draft. Then you're sacrificing our next Hankerson, Helu, Jenkins, etc. just to beat the Vikings in a game that will not matter this time next year.

I'll take a win every time. Play the games, play to win and then when the dust settles you map our offseason strategy. Winning beats losing in just about any circumstance in my world.

You'll take a win over the players that you have said are contributing and getting better that are only on the squad because we did NOT win more meaningless games last year? Winning a single game, unless it's the Super Bowl or the NFC Championship against Dallas, means absolutely nothing in the long run. Nothing. Having a top quarterback means EVERYTHING.

[MartinC]

I'll take the championship brought to me by our star quarterback as opposed to the continuation of mediocrity and pointless wins that only prevent us from getting that quarterback.

Quarterbacks win Super Bowls. Week 16 of the year preceding those mentioned above does not.

I think just about all of us agree we need a QB and that getting one at the top of this years draft is almost certainly something we will be doing. If we win a couple more games and pick say 10 as opposed to 5 that increases the cost of us trading up but t also signals that QB is coming to a team with a foundation in place which is heading in the right direction.

I think we have to trade up this year regardless - we need a top 3 pick and maybe top 2.

I understand our argument about what havng last years record allowed us to do in terms of moving around and picking up more players. What I'm saying is we HAVE thoselayers now and seeing them develop and contribute to wins is a good thing. It shows this team is heading in the right direction - we lack a QB as you say. Adding a good young QB this year is key - this year it's quality over quantity.

[NewCliche21]

I think just about all of us agree we need a QB and that getting one at the top of this years draft is almost certainly something we will be doing. If we win a couple more games and pick say 10 as opposed to 5 that increases the cost of us trading up but t also signals that QB is coming to a team with a foundation in place which is heading in the right direction.

I think we have to trade up this year regardless - we need a top 3 pick and maybe top 2.

Nah, it signals that the quarterback is coming to a place that got a ball bouncing the right way or a penalty not being called. We're five points away from literally leading the NFC East right now. Literally FIVE points against the Cowboys in both games combined puts us at 7-7 and likely division champions. The Colts can't say that. The Vikings can't say that. The Rams can't say that. However, we can say that, and the players, coaches, and agents know it.

A loss to the Vikings makes the net cost lower and doesn't change the course of Redskins history in a negative way. Those are the only reasons that I want us to solidify our draft position.

[ArmchairRedskin]

We win out it's a three game win streak. Hardly anything to build on. Lets keep it in perspective. Rodgers took over a 13-3 team and went 6-10 his first year starting. Peyton was 3-13 his first year. Aikman was on a 1-15 team. Point is all those guys are great QB's and all went on to Super Bowl success despite a losing start.

It's not like all 22 of next year's starters are on the field. 9 significant guys are not playing. Some of the guys playing right now won't be starting next year. Its a lot more important that we get exceptional talent at the single most important position on the team that to try and build moementum off of 3 games.

You guys have all seen Grossman try and fail because he can't make all the throws. You've seen how wide open our offense gets the receivers. You've seen glimpses of what could be. Now imagine Luck or Griff in there. Both of those guys hit the deep pass on a regular basis. Luck this year less so due to the guys he has to throw to but he has in the past. Imagine how explosive we can be. You can't settle for a guy. Not in this league and not in the third year of Mike's 5 year deal. We absolutely have to hit on the guy and there is no draft better than this year where the top 2 are very special talents and the third could very well be elite as well.

Now we all know we are gonna have to trade up no matter what. However, if we drop too far the cost could be outrageous for us. Trading into the top 5 from the teens is gonna hurt. Trading up from 7 to the top 5 is not near as bad. I'd rather be able to use future picks than have to sink them into this trade up deal. Thats me rooting for the team, not against it. I want this team to have longterm success. A couple of losses is not gonna set this team back longterm. Having to give up a bevy of picks to move up very well could make us miss out on some very good talent. I can just see all the threads and posts now about how we gave up too much. Judging from the percentage of people that want to win, I'm pretty certain a lot of the same people will be the ones griping.

I'm certainly not advocating the team to mail it in. I don't want them to throw the game. I would just prefer a loss. I want our position to be as much in our favor as possible when it comes time to select our Franchise Quarterback. I prefer the cost to move up to be managable. You don't like that mindset, that's fine. It doesn't make me any less of a fan than you. I want to go back to the Super Bowl as much as the next person. I'm just being rational and pragmatic about it. I think the momentum angle is way overblown.

[Koala]

I'm not going to be very happy if we win this pointless contest.

Goooooo Vikes!!!!

Every football game is an oppurtunity to learn the game, to learn how to win, to build confidence, to build team unity, to build player's belief in the coach and the vice versa. There is no such thing as a pointless contest, except maybe game 4 of the pre-season and games played under a lame-duck coach.

Well, you're not going to build confidence and team unity by losing. Its really not a difficult concept, Im just shocked that the 25% of people who dont get this simple concept manage to dress themselves in the morning.

[Commander PK]

As the losses mounted this year, I tried to take things in stride and find the silver lining.

For me, there is no way this team and organization will not be in better shape going into next season with a 7-9 record as opposed to a 5-11 record. The draft will take care of itself. I have no doubt in my mind whatsoever, that whatever it takes to get the right QB of the future on this team, THIS front office will accomplish that. Where we end up in the 1st round after the season is over is only the starting point for them to get to work figuring out the strategy, and deciding what they want to do. I am confident that no matter what direction they go, they will be making a decision that they feel will best benefit this team.

Seriously, it's time to come down out of the clouds for some of you about this mythical messiah at QB riding in on his white horse and saving the day. Ultimately, we will probably get that guy, and hopefully he pans out, but the damn draft is in April.

I'm not asking anybody to be happy about the team's overall record. I'm not asking anybody to be happy about the team's deficiencies. Why not, just for once...savor the moment, and remember why you became a fan in the first place.

[NewCliche21]

As the losses mounted this year, I tried to take things in stride and find the silver lining.

For me, there is no way this team and organization will not be in better shape going into next season with a 7-9 record as opposed to a 5-11 record. The draft will take care of itself. I have no doubt in my mind whatsoever, that whatever it takes to get the right QB of the future on this team, THIS front office will accomplish that. Where we end up in the 1st round after the season is over is only the starting point for them to get to work figuring out the strategy, and deciding what they want to do. I am confident that no matter what direction they go, they will be making a decision that they feel will best benefit this team.

Seriously, it's time to come down out of the clouds for some of you about this mythical messiah at QB riding in on his white horse and saving the day. Ultimately, we will probably get that guy, and hopefully he pans out, but the damn draft is in April.

I'm not asking anybody to be happy about the team's overall record. I'm not asking anybody to be happy about the team's deficiencies. Why not, just for once...savor the moment, and remember why you became a fan in the first place.

You never explained why being 7-9 going into next season, which gives us a crap draft pick, is better than going 5-11 with a better one. You literally gave no explanation at all, and I'd be interested to read it.

I don't know why you think that the draft will take care of itself. If you're the Rams, then you want Khalil. Moving down two spots will probably let you still have him. Moving down ten spots? He's gone, and now you're still without your tackle. To convince the Rams to do that would take a LOT more than it would if they were just dropping two or three spots.

Will we get a quarterback? I hope so. I also don't want to pay out the nose to get that quarterback and then miss out on this year's Helu, Hankerson, Jenkins, Hurt, Paul, and Neild because we had to trade the rest of the draft away to move up.

Win meaningless games and that happens, don't and it doesn't.

[Commander PK]

You never explained why being 7-9 going into next season, which gives us a crap draft pick, is better than going 5-11 with a better one. You literally gave no explanation at all, and I'd be interested to read it.

because it has everything to do with momentum, confidence, and team-building. All items that cannot be measured, but items that are equally important to a team, just as are QB statistics and your percentage on 3rd down.

I don't know why you think that the draft will take care of itself. If you're the Rams, then you want Khalil. Moving down two spots will probably let you still have him. Moving down ten spots? He's gone, and now you're still without your tackle. To convince the Rams to do that would take a LOT more than it would if they were just dropping two or three spots.

because if the Skins want to trade up to get a guy, we have the ammo and a front office savvy enough to pull it off. If it costs us draft picks, so be it. The problem with this whole lose for a draft pick idea, is that it has absolutely zero basis in reality. There is no way the team actively tries to lose a game to improve or maintain a draft position. The whole idea is the very worst kind of defeatism.

Will we get a quarterback? I hope so. I also don't want to pay out the nose to get that quarterback and then miss out on this year's Helu, Hankerson, Jenkins, Hurt, Paul, and Neild because we had to trade the rest of the draft away to move up. Win meaningless games and that happens, don't and it doesn't.

This right here is the problem. We are fans, you can think what you want to. For the team there are NO meaningless games! Every single game the team plays means something. Every single down means something.

Honestly, straight up...do you think the Coaching staff should try to lose these next two games? and how would you implement a plan that would guarantee a loss, without proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that you were throwing the game?

I'd love to hear your answer.

[NewCliche21]

because it has everything to do with momentum, confidence, and team-building. All items that cannot be measured, but items that are equally important to a team, just as are QB statistics and your percentage on 3rd down.

That's just not true. If that were true, then teams would never get worse, or at least would get worse more often because of a bad preceding season than they would with a Ryan Leaf-type choice. You're saying that it has as much, if not more, impact than the quarterback, or at least that's what I'm getting from it. I could be wrong, so I apologize if I am.

However, if "momentum" mattered, then why are we 5-9 again? We ended on an upswing of sorts. Why didn't the 1991 Redskins go to 18-1 in 1992? 19 - 0 in 1993? And forever stay at the top? I mean, they have momentum, don't they? Momentum would carry over if there wasn't a nine-month break before the next season and all of the players and coaches stayed. With the momentum theory, good teams should always be good and bad teams should always be bad.

because if the Skins want to trade up to get a guy, we have the ammo and a front office savvy enough to pull it off. If it costs us draft picks, so be it. The problem with this whole lose for a draft pick idea, is that it has absolutely zero basis in reality. There is no way the team actively tries to lose a game to improve or maintain a draft position. The whole idea is the very worst kind of defeatism.

We have the ammo to pull it off? And the Colts, Rams, Vikings, and Browns don't have us by the balls because they know that we'll overpay? That's just silly. Having a higher draft pick enables the traded draft picks to be in a lower quantity, and that gives our savvy front office the ability to find a Helu or Royster or White.

And no, no way that a team intentionally tanks. Nobody ever argued that a team would do that. It's what the fans are hoping for that is under discussion.

This right here is the problem. We are fans, you can think what you want to. For the team there are NO meaningless games! Every single game the team plays means something. Every single down means something.

Cool? Like you said, we're fans, so I don't care what it means to them if it makes us win more next year and the years after that. That is all that matters as a fan.

Honestly, straight up...do you think the Coaching staff should try to lose these next two games? and how would you implement a plan that would guarantee a loss, without proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that you were throwing the game?

I'd love to hear your answer.

For the record, when I said that I wanted to read your explanation, there was no sarcasm there at all. I'm glad that you provided it in this post.

Again, no coach is going to try to lose games, and I'm not suggesting that they do.

The roulette wheel is spinning. You're pulling for black, and I'm pulling for red. Our rooting interests, however, have no effect on where the ball lands. This is just a big version of "we should have ran on that play vs. the pass was the right call" or "Campbell vs. Collins" or any other situation. Thank the Lord in Heaven that none of us have any impact on their decisions!

. . . except for not hiring Fassel. That would have just been stupid.

[Skinsfan1311]

**** No!!!!!!!!

[8181]

I'd like them to lose, but not tank on purpose.

[Renegade7]

Worst-case scenario for you Spock-its-only-logical fans out there:

what if we finish 7-9? Where's the lowest we could land in the draft? I saw somewhere that our easy strength of schedule will cause us at this rate to draft no lower then #10 even if we win out. Can you prove this is not true? Is it really impossible for us to even trade up and get our guy from the 10th overall pick? Do we really need the 2nd overall pick to get our guy???

Edit: seen a couple posters I've known in here for a while now vote, but less then I expected. Where you at?

site shows us with a .469 opponent winning %, surrounded by teams with over .500...

http://www.redskinsgab.com/2011/12/20/as-of-today-the-redskins-would-have-the-7th-selection-in-the-2012-nfl-draft/

[allannis]

I don't want them to win until the game starts, then I can't help myself, I start rooting for them to win.

[Commander PK]

That's just not true. If that were true, then teams would never get worse, or at least would get worse more often because of a bad preceding season than they would with a Ryan Leaf-type choice. You're saying that it has as much, if not more, impact than the quarterback, or at least that's what I'm getting from it. I could be wrong, so I apologize if I am.

it's not an either or though. One doesn't guarantee the other. You don't have to sacrifice one thing or the other. The best teams have always had good combinations of skill, chemistry, and leadership. From your point of view, why don't all these teams that have supposedly "bought" a championship over the years, (and not just in Football) seem like they never pan out? Take the Eagles for example. The "Dream Team" who signed Jenkins and Asomugha (sp?) and expected that simply bringing in these talented players would be enough to put them over the top. We all see how that has panned out, and I think a lot of it has to do with team chemistry. This is where all those intangibles come into play.

it's all good man. I do get really fired up about this topic though, because I really think the most cynical and pessimistic attitude a person could have with regards to their team is hoping they lose games for a draft pick.

[hail2skins]

I think its funny how many folks defended the Skins not drafting a QB last year because the 2012 draft was going to be super deep at the position.

And now that the Skins are winning a few games late in the season, panic is setting in because of falling out of position to draft the top 3 guys.

[Koala]

When will we learn that football messiahs dont exist? How many times have we convinced ourselves that this one player can save our franchise? And how many times have we ended up instead with players who cant carry the team alone because it has too many holes, and whose expensive acquisition ironically hindered our abilities to take care of those very holes that prevented the acquistion from living up to expectations in the 1st place?

Enough pursuing players. Why dont we focus on buidling talent pools through the draft and allowing good players to emerge, rather than searching for them? You win when you get players that exceed expectations (not just meet them), and since the draft is a crapshoot, the key to success is to give yourself as many chances as possible.

I say all this, because no matter what we do for the rest of the season, we're gonna have to trade up to ensure getting RGIII or Barkley. In other words, we're gonna have to pursue. Bill Bellichik wouldnt sacrifice his toe cheese in pursuit of any one player, that has never stepped on the field, much less a win. This "acquire RGIII/Luck at all costs" is loser talk, the same pathetic belief in football saviors that we've been trapped in for over a decade.

Win now. Reap the known benefits of winning. Then see who falls to us in draft, if we dont like it, trade down and expand that talent pool. Whatever you do, dont overpursue for FGII, and sacrificng wins now would be a clear signal that we are willing to overpur

[Boss_Hogg]

This thread is an abomination. It's no wonder our fan base is eroding.

Yuck.

[Jumbo]

It was said in a phone conversation earlier between a couple of mods that if we were really mean we would just take the list of those who voted for "lose" and B2A them.

Here's the thing. Think whatever you want, have your reasons, and if they involve why you want the team to lose, discuss them. But the burden of doing it in a manner without risking problems is on you, not us.

And fortunately for all concerned, there are a number of folks who know how to do that, but still sometimes precariously.

But the key matter here is this is EXTREMESKINS.

This is not the site to post on hoping the Redskins lose a game (any game) no matter why, or pissing and moaning if they win (no matter why) or getting on the case of someone happy for a win (no matter why).

It doesn't matter if you disagree, it doesn't matter if you don't like it or think it's any form of "unfair", but doing such can easily get you banned (as many have found out). There's no challenge to be made on that, and no debate. Been there, done that. In short, on this angle, "IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU THINK!"

[mojo]

It was said in a phone conversation earlier between a couple of mods that if we were really mean we would just take the list of those who voted for "lose" and B2A them.

Here's the thing. Think whatever you want, have your reasons, and if they involve why you want the team to lose, discuss them. But the burden of doing it in a manner without risking problems is on you, not us.

And fortunately for all concerned, there are a number of folks who know how to do that, but still sometimes precariously.

But the key matter here is this is EXTREMESKINS.

This is not the site to post on hoping the Redskins lose a game (any game) no matter why, or pissing and moaning if they win (no matter why) or getting on the case of someone happy for a win (no matter why).

It doesn't matter if you disagree, it doesn't matter if you don't like it or think it's any form of "unfair", but doing such can easily get you banned (as many have found out). There's no challenge to be made on that, and no debate. Been there, done that. In short, on this angle, "IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT YOU THINK!"

THANK YOU! I don't post a lot on the site but I enjoy the commentary and the camaraderie but seeing countless posts hoping the Skins lose is ridiculous. It's the equivalent to saying I'm going to quit my job because it gives me more time to play the lottery.

[Jumbo]

THANK YOU! I don't post a lot on the site but I enjoy the commentary and the camaraderie but seeing countless posts hoping the Skins lose is ridiculous. It's the equivalent to saying I'm going to quit my job because it gives me more time to play the lottery.

Well hell, you've been a member since 2002---post more!

[ClarkeKent91]

Yes I want them to lose, simply to have a higher chance at drafting a Franchise QB, without giving up a boatload of draft picks (which is most likely what we'll have to do if we end up drafting outside of the top 10). Im sick of this team being a cellar dweller, and the 2012 draft has 3 prospects that would be first overall picks if they came out in different years. It is CRUCIAL we end up with one of them!!!

[Conn]

Yes I want them to lose, simply to have a higher chance at drafting a Franchise QB, without giving up a boatload of draft picks (which is most likely what we'll have to do if we end up drafting outside of the top 10). Im sick of this team being a cellar dweller, and the 2012 draft has 3 prospects that would be first overall picks if they came out in different years. It is CRUCIAL we end up with one of them!!!

I don't COMPLETELY disagree with your post.

But I have a feeling that signing up here just to post that might not go over well after the first post on this page. Poor timing, possibly.

[elkabong82]

It's a good thing Joe Gibbs tanked games early on in order to get that franchise QB high in the draft that led him to all 3 Superbowl victories.

---------- Post added December-21st-2011 at 01:30 AM ----------

Yes I want them to lose, simply to have a higher chance at drafting a Franchise QB, without giving up a boatload of draft picks (which is most likely what we'll have to do if we end up drafting outside of the top 10). Im sick of this team being a cellar dweller, and the 2012 draft has 3 prospects that would be first overall picks if they came out in different years. It is CRUCIAL we end up with one of them!!!

No, it really isn't crucial we lose out to end up with Luck, RG3, or (I assume) Barkeley. We could finish 7-9, pick 12th, and only the Colts and Miami in front of us would be real threats to take a QB.

It is crucial that the team overall is good. For all any of us know, Luck is the next Leaf, RG3 the next Couch, and our Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, Jay Cutler, Matt Schaub is sitting there lower in the draft in the form of Barkely, Jones, or Tannehill.

Wishing for your team to lose for a higher draft spot when the prospects are uncertain (no matter how good they look in college), rather than rooting for them to win and improve the current, known prospects on the team, is not fan-like, but is detrimental wishful thinking. If we lose out, have even more holes to fill, and then our QB is the next Jamarcus Russell, will you feel good that you rooted for them to lose? I certainly wouldn't. The focus is better placed on right now and what we have, than focusing on the unknown at the expense of the current.