Darth Tater Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 Do you all know how many times we lost to the Cowboys by one score over the past decade? We weren't within a 'hair's breadth' of being as good as them. We were just flat out bad. Scores rise and fall and we bite our nails and think the worst and cheer when we win, but when the smoke clears and we are two games better and sweep a team it's ok to say we are the substantially better team. Because we are. Except that, with the arguable exception of 2010, the Cowboys haven't been bad since before Parcells first took over there. Hell, even when they were bad from 1999 - 2002, they still beat us in all but one game, yet they really weren't the "substantially better team." If I'm not mistaken, we finished with a better record than they did during EVERY YEAR of that stretch, yet we kept losing to them. The fact is that, although we're currently the better team, they are still a potentially dangerous team who has a good shot at beating us. Bottom line: there was nothing wrong with Burgold's description. But they also have not been good since the late 90s. They had one good year and a couple of good years record-wise because most of their competion was down. Further, they have a QB that is worth 2-3 wins per year in Romo sits to pee. In 2011, had they had they not had Romo sits to pee, they would have lost to us both times and probably SFO. Last year, they'd have lost 3-4 more without him. Its pretty much as Romo sits to pee goes, so goes the season. I hear people ****ing about Tony all the time (or vice-versa in our case) but they'll probably be a middle of the pack team that would have lost another game or three had they not had Romo sits to pee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheItalianStallion Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 But they also have not been good since the late 90s. They had one good year and a couple of good years record-wise because most of their competion was down. Further, they have a QB that is worth 2-3 wins per year in Romo sits to pee. In 2011, had they had they not had Romo sits to pee, they would have lost to us both times and probably SFO. Last year, they'd have lost 3-4 more without him. Its pretty much as Romo sits to pee goes, so goes the season. I hear people ****ing about Tony all the time (or vice-versa in our case) but they'll probably be a middle of the pack team that would have lost another game or three had they not had Romo sits to pee. Sure they have. Not great, but since 2003 they've been in the top half of the league. With the exceptions of 2004 and 2010, they either made the playoffs or were still in the hunt going into week 17. Aside from our 3 playoff appearances since then, the only year we even came close to making the playoffs was 2008, and even then we were eliminated prior to week 17. I'm not sure what your point is regarding Romo sits to pee. Yes, he's a good QB who masks deficiencies on his team, but the same applies to RG3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallsux Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 Honestly, I was a little surprised by the trend in the mags, but at the same time, not. Either way tho, their opinions aren't going to change the end results. Let them sleep on us. Again. When we are back to back Division champs & going deep into the paloffs while Dallas is slumming up the rear of the Division, they'll all be saying "We saw this coming" Yeah right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 I think these writers who are predicting the Skins won't win the NFC-East, are basing it on the Skins defensive woes, and the fact that the Skins didn't upgrade their offensive line. I believe they feel that the defensive secondary will be vulnerable, and that will force the Skins offense to put up big numbers, just to keep up with what the defense is giving up. Frankly, I think the pundits will be surprised by the Skins pass-rush this season, which will help the defensive secondary to look better. The problem with that line of thinking, though, is Dallas' OL is no great shakes. DeMarco Murray has not shown himself to be reliable, and Romo sits to pee is still just an Autumn QB. Not to mention their defensive secondary doesn't scare anyone, and they have an owner who is more ringmaster than GM. Yet they are going to pole vault over the Redskins and win the division. Doesn't make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinny21 Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 I liked this article (training camp preview). Guy really seemed to 'get' the team. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/22626760/nfl-training-camp-preview-washington-redskins And I understand the skeptics - we needed 7 straight to win the division and our QB had 'major' surgery. What they're missing is a. health - 2nd most games lost by starters in 2012 b. the depth we saw as a result c. the fact that the team improved because we came together as a team (not just a lucky win streak) d. continuity e. youth - this could be its own post - Griffin, Morris, the 2012 draftees etc. f. tied in with e., the blend of veterans and youth. g. Whatever else I failed to mention At a minimum I'd say we have just as good a chance to win the division crown this year as the other three teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rskin72 Posted July 4, 2013 Share Posted July 4, 2013 Look, for me preseason polls are pretty much buying a lottery ticket....one in a million chance that the correct guess will be made. While one can look at KNOWN talent on a team and think "wow, that is a stacked team".....but no one can predict injuries, no one can predict how the team will gel, no one can predict break out seasons, no one can really judge a players heart. For the most part, we have a young team that has played together, and proven that they can win big games when the spotlight is on. We are getting back players that are not merely role players on the team, but playmakers.....from injury. Regardless of varying opinions on our D Coord, we have a pretty good coaching staff and FO overall. The team we return is largely the same team that won it all last season. For me, the question marks in the division are the Cowboys and the Eagles. New coaches/staff for both, and new responsibilities for players. While every team in the NFL has talent, not many teams make the most of that talent. Dallas is one of those teams that does not make the most of that talent, and I don't think the addition of all of these new coaches will make transform them into a SB Champ. Sure they will contend in the NFCE, but don't think they will win. The Eagles have a whole new coaching staff, unproven, with the head coach from college. Maybe he will work out, maybe he will be like Petrino or Spurrier or Sabin. The team I see who is our main competition are the Giants. They have proven over the past few seasons that they CAN win it all, they have the skill players, coaching staff, and talent to win and win big. If I were to pick any team over ours to win the NFCE, it would be the Giants. So, my predicitions are: 1. Redskins (yes, I am a homer....but I do not think that this is unrealistic) 2. Giants 3. Cowgirls 4. Eagles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted July 5, 2013 Share Posted July 5, 2013 But they also have not been good since the late 90s. They had one good year and a couple of good years record-wise because most of their competion was down. Further, they have a QB that is worth 2-3 wins per year in Romo sits to pee. In 2011, had they had they not had Romo sits to pee, they would have lost to us both times and probably SFO. Last year, they'd have lost 3-4 more without him. Its pretty much as Romo sits to pee goes, so goes the season. I hear people ****ing about Tony all the time (or vice-versa in our case) but they'll probably be a middle of the pack team that would have lost another game or three had they not had Romo sits to pee. Sure they have. Not great, but since 2003 they've been in the top half of the league. With the exceptions of 2004 and 2010, they either made the playoffs or were still in the hunt going into week 17. Aside from our 3 playoff appearances since then, the only year we even came close to making the playoffs was 2008, and even then we were eliminated prior to week 17. I'm not sure what your point is regarding Romo sits to pee. Yes, he's a good QB who masks deficiencies on his team, but the same applies to RG3. I think the definition of "good" requires consistency and success. "Consistent success" does not describe the Cowboys over the last 15 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 Thinking about this, the Redskins do have a couple of mountains to climb. There is the RGIII issue. Can he come back and stay healthy? There's the sophmore slump for both Morris and RGIII that need to be fought off. Then, you know the D coordinators have been killing themselves and spending sleepless nights figuring out a way to attack what Washington, San Francisco, and Seatle are doing. Can they? Finally, we have a brutal, brutal schedule. If we can overcome all of these, we will be not a good, but great team. Mind you, at the moment, I still think even with all that in mind we should be considered superior to Dallas and the Eagles. I could see someone arguing that we are on par with the Giants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieskin Posted July 7, 2013 Share Posted July 7, 2013 As long as the boys have Romo sits to pee I dont think they will do all that good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWAI Posted July 8, 2013 Author Share Posted July 8, 2013 Thinking about this, the Redskins do have a couple of mountains to climb. There is the RGIII issue. Can he come back and stay healthy? There's the sophmore slump for both Morris and RGIII that need to be fought off. Then, you know the D coordinators have been killing themselves and spending sleepless nights figuring out a way to attack what Washington, San Francisco, and Seatle are doing. Can they? Finally, we have a brutal, brutal schedule. If we can overcome all of these, we will be not a good, but great team. Mind you, at the moment, I still think even with all that in mind we should be considered superior to Dallas and the Eagles. I could see someone arguing that we are on par with the Giants. You apparently believe that there is this "thing" out there called the sophamore slump. no such animal exists. There are just players who don't try as hard or had a number of lucky plays their first season. None of this applies to either RG3 or Morris. In fact these 2 are working EVEN HARDER. I think you have bought into the brainwashing that goes into that subject. Also..I think you are brainwashed about this schedule thing. The STRENGTH of schedule is all about...ALL ABOUT....teams won/loss record from last season and in reality have very little to do with the current season. I can easily make a case for the Skins schedule being ADVANTAGEOUS for us. We play the Eagles to kick everything off in a home game and we also get the LIONS at home. Lucky for us there...and of the 2 away games in those first 4 we go to Oakland and play a horrible Raider team. So we could finish 3-1 or even 4-0 to begin the season because the Redskins may beat up the Packers. It IS possible. We get 2 weeks off to get healthy again before kicking some more butt and I really like the fact that our THURSDAY night contest in the middle of the season gives us yet another 10 day break to get healthy. So there are positives all over the place about the schedule....you just need to look for them. P.S. Dallas will beat the snot out of the Giants and the Giants will not have a winning season. N.Y. is in 4 a troubled season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 Do you all know how many times we lost to the Cowboys by one score over the past decade? We weren't within a 'hair's breadth' of being as good as them. We were just flat out bad. Going back to 2003, nine times. But Dallas hasn't been good for almost as long as we haven't been good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 Why does the supposed sophomore slump only apply to our players not and Wilson, Luck or Tannehill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted July 8, 2013 Share Posted July 8, 2013 Went to Barnes and Noble. Looked at all the preview magazines. All I have to say is, I hope someone from the team put these rag mags up on the bulletin board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWAI Posted July 9, 2013 Author Share Posted July 9, 2013 Why does the supposed sophomore slump only apply to our players not and Wilson, Luck or Tannehill? Ya know what...I wondered the same thing and then I realized...."WE ARE THE REDSKINS. THE TEAM PEOPLE LOVE TO HATE." Let me explain it ANOTHER way. Washington is where they TAX your income.....Washington is where they WASTE your money to study the sex habits of earthworms.....Washington is where they waste time and irritate people by telling them we have a border problem...and then they debate the topic for months...and then they do NOTHING. Washington is where we send our money and planes to countries that are burning our flag and shouting slogans like "DEATH TO AMERICA". So...I could go on. But do you now understand why everybody pretty much everywhere in the country can hate a team with the name that begins with "WASHINGTON". Then there is the whole Redskins name thing. Let's just enjoy our team and forget about what other people think! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.