Rooting Against the Redskins How Dare you?

[The Consigliere]

I'm a lot less invested in the outcome of football games now than I used to be.  I'm busier now and have more serious worries/responsibilities.  And I watch a greater variety of sports than I used to.  Truth be told, the Redskins failure to develop RGIII was also a turning point for me.  It proved definitively that you can't help some organizations.  We squandered the most talented QB prospect I've ever seen.  Not only that, he came in and delivered the greatest rookie season a QB has ever had.  When I've watched the QB prospects since 2012, it's been such a downer seeing none of them really even come that close to RGIII's level.  All we had to do was get out of our own way and the kid was eventually going to be the best player in the NFL.  But alas, bad franchises don't get franchise QBs.  And it will probably be decades before we get another prospect as talented as him.  So I've been in the realm of massively diminished expectations the past two years.

 

I too love watching games with people.  I like talking about the sport.  And I'll often root for the teams of the people I'm watching games with too.  Kind of as a fan tourist.

 

Though it's different with the Wizards.  I am 100% invested in them.  That team has become shockingly good to its fans the last two seasons, and amazing though it may sound, I don't root scared with them any more.

 

This definitely helps, being a Nats/Caps/Wiz/USMNT fan keeps me busy all year long, as does teaching, snowboarding, backpacking and building a life in the Tahoe area in general, makes it easier to throw away seasons when I can never attend games unless the Redskins come out west for me to watch them lose as per usual (shockingly, they won at Arizona back in '01 when I went to that game, and in '99 at Candlestick (took a pic pointing at the scoreboard after the game) much more fun than seeing their season opener at San Diego two months earlier). But yeah, I'm just not interested in the perennial short cuts that I know ahead of time have no chance whatsoever at succeeding.

 

Look, back in '10 the Vikes took Ponder, I laughed heartily, just like I would the following year when the Bills took Manuel, as a passive FSU fan, I was literally 100% sure both of those guys had zero chance whatsoever of ever being anything save for a backup or below league average hack, not often I'm 100% sure of anything with prospects, but I'd seen enough w/both of them to be absolutely positive there was zero chance whatsoever theyd ever be franchise guys. Well, five years later the Vikes took another shot when Bridgewater had a middling combine and bad workout and dropped like a rock from #1 overall in the '14 draft during the summer and fall of '13 to the bottom of round 1. Now, going into the '15 season most experts believe they stole a legit franchise QB, basically viewing Bridgewater as the third best QB prospect to be drafted in the past six years after Luck and Wilson (he's viewed as a better throwing QB prospect than Newton at this point, who simply isn't a very accurate passer period, which is something that was clear in his Auburn days, good #'s, but the tape revealed a passer who wouldn't be able to consistently hit spots in the tighter coverage of the NFL).

 

I want to be the vikes, and take another swing and get a hit. I actually think in Mettenberger, we could actually trade for our own Bridgewater, but I don't think McC likes his mental make up, and I think the Titans view him as an undervalued legit starting QB that they want to keep around until his valuation makes trading him, worth the asset loss.

[The Consigliere]

This article makes me want to vomit.

Like I said, more negativity. Just what we need.

Redskin fans are the worst anymore.

We don't need you. I have never rooted for any of my teams to lose.

 

Doesn't make you any better of a fan. I'm a redskins fan for life, that means I'm rooting for whatever is in the long term interest of the franchise, not just what happens sunday, if losing sunday, or losing 12 Sunday's, means having 10 wonderful seasons, I'll gladly take the losses, even if its just for a chance at it, rather than a guarantee (which is of course, the reality).

 

I don't take issue with fans that simply can't get themselves to stomach losing for the greater long time good, I understand winning feels better, but I don't care at all about the short term pay off of a feel good win. Does anyone actually remember, or even feel warmth in their heart thinking about those handful of flukey victories over the Giants and Cardinals in 2011. Does it really mean more too you, than losing those games and getting Luck would have? It sure as hell doesn't to me.

 

That was a virtual guarantee season unlikely to happen for a long time considering Luck was the highest rated QB to come out since Elway (yes, even greater evals than Manning). That still doesn't matter to me, if we can position ourselves for a shot at a guy with a 50/50 shot at being a franchise QB, the decision is easy to me, take the loss. Don't want the players to quit obviously, or the coaches, but pulling a Colts '11 is fine with me, playing the kids and scrubs at QB, I'd totally sign off. I'm interested in '17, '18, '19, and '20 and beyond far more than just a couple of Sunday's this fall. The long term is what matters. For me. anyway. Get why losing is just too painful for some. I used to feel that way. But changed my mind after the short cuts of '99 and beyond.

[Renegade7]

Rodgers was rated #1, and #1A going into that draft up until the last moment the Niners went back and forth on it, finally settling on Smith in part because they liked his humility and were bothered by Rodgers ****iness in interviews. The argument that you can get a franchise QB at 24 because the Packers did is a fallacious one, Rodgers fell because SF and Miami, the only two teams apparently considering QB's in that '05 draft wanted the same guy. Once Rodgers fell past them, nobody considered them. Even the Packers were going to pass and it took ownership support and fierce determination by the GM and his scouts to push aside counterarguments from that dolt Mike Sherman. It was a close call because Sherman wanted immediate help and felt Rodgers was a luxury they couldn't afford. Luckily for the Packers, Thomas had enough juice that he was able to push aside his coaches desires and act in the long term interests of the club, which is a GM's job.

Rodgers was ranked #1 or #2 from everybody that entire winter and spring, not #24, it was a weird fluke that he fell that far, I argued at the time that the redskins should take him, but gave up once it was obvious we were dead set on idiotically taking Campbell, I also suggested the crazy idea that if the Niners loved him so much, when he fell that far, they should simply trade up from their pick near the top of round 2, and get him to ensure a better chance of landing their franchise guy. Instead they went with David Bass instead. Alas, the Niners are still looking for their franchise QB.

Best chance at a franchise QB is at the top of the draft, and sometimes a bit further down, look around the league and there's an exception that pops up about every 8 years or so, and a clump in 2000 ('00-Brady and romoSUCKS, '01 Brees at end of round 1, '12 Wilson in round 3, considered a reach by many at the time), but the franchise QB's of the past fifteen years other than them have been McNabb top of '99, Eli top of '04, Rodgers rated #1 in '05 slipped to bottom of round 1, Cutler whose become a joke but was considered one for about five years, mid-1st in '07, Bridgewater was ranked #1 in fall of '13, Stafford top of the '08 draft, Ryan, top of the '07 draft, Winston top of the '15 draft, Newton top of the '11 draft, Palmer top of the '03 draft, Tannehill top of the '12 draft, Ben Roth, near top of '04, Flacco mid-1st in '08, Luck, top of '12, Mariota top of '15, Bortles top of '14, Manning top of '98, Smith (laughing heartily) top of '05, and Rivers top of '04. Some of these guys obviously aren't some straddle franchise QB and basically league average, and some are unproven and still young but you can see that for the 3 guys we have that slipped through the cracks, we have 19 who were either drafted as a franchise guy high in round 1, or were rated that high at some point in their draft year and slipped a bit (Bridgewater, Rodgers). You can try and hope you get one of the 2% chance guys that are discovered after the first 75-100 picks, or you can take a swing with a 35-65 to 50/50 shot of landing that guy in round 1. I prefer the latter approach, eventually we'll hit, hell we might have in 2012 if the F.O. hadn't allowed Shanny to ruin RG3 by playing him when he had no business doing so late in '12 and in the second quarter and after of that playoff game. I like the potential of Hackenberg, Cook, Jones, and Goff, and am interested in some of the other guys, I have little doubt we'll take a swing next spring unless Cousins miraculously does what he has never done, and puts together a largely consistent, excellent season w/an turnover per play ratio that is league average or better (something he's nowhere remotely close too right now in his career, or in his time at Michigan State).

Best chance at a top "prospect" is a high first rounder, but you should just scratch out the guys from your post concerning your point who are not elite and think about what I just said. For whatever reason Rodgers fell, he was there. And if we did our homework, he'd be on our team right now(sure 23 other teams feel the same way). Ben was #11 pick, Flacco was #18 in their respective drafts.

In fact, in the last 15 years there has not been a single super bowl winning team with a starting QB drafted in the top ten who's last name wasn't Manning (shoot, most of them weren't even drafted in the first round). And you would be hard pressed to find even a giants fan willing to call Eli elite right now.

[The Consigliere]

Ah, baloney.

 

There are fans on this board who want Gruden gone NOW, and he has had only one season.

 

And they aren't a small minority, either.

 

They want him gone at the end of this season (just two seasons) if everything isn't exactly perfect for them.

 

When it comes to patience, Redskin fans are the biggest hypocrites there are. Ready to rush players and coaches out of town if they aren't 4-0 at the start of their first season, and the project their impatience onto the front office, and then complain about it.

 

They make Snyder look like the definition of patience in comparison.

I fit that ridicule/condemnation to a T. But it's because he never had any business being hired in the first place. He's a hack, a guy who got hired because of familial connections rather than talent, he had an inside connect to Allen, and so was in. They never bothered to look to see how little was accomplished with that offense, and how god awful they played in pressure situations. Now we see the same issues here, and incompetent player management to boot. I have no trouble with the idea of moving on from a bad decision quickly. If we had this offseason we might have gotten Bowles, one of the best young coaching prospects around and one with ties to the organization (though that doesn't matter to me), instead, we'll be looking for a coach again in a year or two barring a miracle, and will have to pray it's a good offseason for coach hunting, and our reputation isn't even more poisonous than it is already. Hopefully McC can help camouflage the stink of the organization a bit for candidates but with this summer, the rep the team has gotten is literally as bad as it's ever been, even with the McC hiring.

[SkinsGuy]

I fit that ridicule/condemnation to a T. But it's because he never had any business being hired in the first place. He's a hack, a guy who got hired because of familial connections rather than talent, he had an inside connect to Allen, and so was in. They never bothered to look to see how little was accomplished with that offense, and how god awful they played in pressure situations. Now we see the same issues here, and incompetent player management to boot. I have no trouble with the idea of moving on from a bad decision quickly. If we had this offseason we might have gotten Bowles, one of the best young coaching prospects around and one with ties to the organization (though that doesn't matter to me), instead, we'll be looking for a coach again in a year or two barring a miracle, and will have to pray it's a good offseason for coach hunting, and our reputation isn't even more poisonous than it is already. Hopefully McC can help camouflage the stink of the organization a bit for candidates but with this summer, the rep the team has gotten is literally as bad as it's ever been, even with the McC hiring.

 

 

Everything you wrote is just your personal opinion.

 

Doesn't alter what I wrote in my previous post.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

The problem with our franchise is NOT that we didn't get a talented enough QB in the 2012 draft class.

Franchise QBs are made, not found. And bad franchises don't make franchise QBs.

I think it's unrealistically optimistic to think we can solve our fundamental issues as a franchise by bottoming out and getting a high draft pick and spending it on the QB prospect du jour. I think all that actually ensures is we'll have **** records and ruin a new QB prospect and further marginalize the franchise.

No draft pick can save us. There is no way out. Not until this organization finds the right leadership and establishes the right culture.

 

 

This is precisely why I was so optimistic--and then so disappointed--after the whole "Griffin is starter once cleared/This is Kirk's team now/Griffin needs to be cut" 5-day episode that went on.

[chipwhich]

Quite the opposite.  Instead of this fan base looking for a savior, they should be cheering on what is happening.  Draft players, build depth, and look to contend year over year.  This is year one of a LONG overdue rebuild.

[The Consigliere]

Best chance at a top "prospect" is a high first rounder, but you should just scratch out the guys from your post concerning your point who are not elite and think about what I just said. For whatever reason Rodgers fell, he was there. And if we did our homework, he'd be on our team right now(sure 23 other teams feel the same way). Ben was #11 pick, Flacco was #18 in their respective drafts.

In fact, in the last 15 years there has not been a single super bowl winning team with a starting QB drafted in the top ten who's last name wasn't Manning (shoot, most of them weren't even drafted in the first round). And you would be hard pressed to find even a giants fan willing to call Eli elite right now.

 

Best chance at a top "prospect" is a high first rounder, but you should just scratch out the guys from your post concerning your point who are not elite and think about what I just said. For whatever reason Rodgers fell, he was there. And if we did our homework, he'd be on our team right now(sure 23 other teams feel the same way). Ben was #11 pick, Flacco was #18 in their respective drafts.

In fact, in the last 15 years there has not been a single super bowl winning team with a starting QB drafted in the top ten who's last name wasn't Manning (shoot, most of them weren't even drafted in the first round). And you would be hard pressed to find even a giants fan willing to call Eli elite right now.

 

What's the point you're trying to make here though? That you can get that franchise QB outside the top 10?

 

Sure. I'd agree, the Steelers got their's because of the Miami of Ohio pedigree, Ravens got Flacco (whose only a franchise QB when the playoffs come, he's the AFC's Eli Manning) the same way, he transferred to a smaller school from a big school to get a starting role, then pushed his way back into round 1 with his arm talent (just about best in the league for deep passing). But I actually think the more relevant means to measure this is with percentages of teams in the playoffs with franchise QB's because it's a larger sample size, and it definitely comes into play there.

 

I don't have a problem, btw, with us taking a QB in mid round 1 either, this year we'll probably get that shot if we trade down as all of these QB's have pocks, and most of the god awful teams have drafted franchise guys recently, the only horrible teams that may go after QB next spring are us, the Browns, the Jets, and the Bears and the Jets will likely play their way to a mid round slot due to their defensive and offensive talent just being too good, to force a total collapse, especially w/the coaching of Bowles. Indeed, if I were GM I would have taken day 3 swings at guys like Landry Jones, Tyler Wilson, and Tyler Bray recently, as well as a trade up for Teddy Bridgewater with our '14 2nd rounder packaged, and this year at Hundley or Mannion. I'm not averse for swing after post-round 1 QB's even though their success rate is miniscule, especially when it comes to guys with high grades pre-final year only to disappoint in their final year, guys like Marino, Wilfork, and even Bridgewater were mega-steals because teams paid too much attention to only one season.

Everything you wrote is just your personal opinion.

 

Doesn't alter what I wrote in my previous post.

Well of course, you have yours, and I have mine, and we both think we're right. I do reserve the right to admit I'm totally wrong if I find a counter-argument more convincing than my own, and certainly have done so in the past and will do so again. I'm wrong plenty of the time, I loved Amobi Okoye and Kenechi Udeze after all and that's only the beginning of a long trail of ignominy when it comes to hard and fast takes on internal decision making and personnel.

[Renegade7]

The point, as has been made by other people, is it takes more then a high first round draft pick QB to win championships. Other franchises have gone a step further and proven you can win championships without one (better culture, better coaching, and more efficient scouting departments). At the end of the day, I don't care about the playoffs, I care about the rings.

[Darrell Green Fan]

The point, as has been made by other people, is it takes more then a high first round draft pick QB to win championships. Other franchises have gone a step further and proven you can win championships without one (better culture, better coaching, and more efficient scouting departments). At the end of the day, I don't care about the playoffs, I care about the rings.

Of course drafting a QB high is a huge risk and most bust. But it's pretty clear that a top QB changes your future and high picks improve those odds. Teams like GB, Pittsburg, NE etc aren't in contention year after year because they drafted good linebackers and guards.

[Renegade7]

Of course drafting a QB high is a huge risk and most bust. But it's pretty clear that a top QB changes your future and high picks improve those odds. Teams like GB, Pittsburg, NE etc aren't in contention year after year because they drafted good linebackers and guards.

I understand your second sentence (tho stated my points about that), but completely disagree with your last one. Just look at how many of those teams starters are drafted vs picked up via free agency.

[chipwhich]

Drafting QB's is all luck, no skill.  The list of failures of high drafted QB's is long.

 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?type=position

[mbws]

The players and coaches don't give 2 cents toward losing for ANY REASON. The players want to audition for next year, so they want to win at all costs. The Head Coach wants to win to save his job. What good is it to him if the team gets the First pick, if he, and they players who tanked are not going to be around to reap the benefits?

[TSO]

Hey fellas, just a quick reminder since this thread is filled with long posts (my kind of thread, lol).

Don't forget rule 11. It's not just about pics and vids. Don't quote large blocks of text. Just use your common sense and think about someone scrolling. Edit it out a little, do what you can. I know it's annoying on your phones to do it, but just select what you can and delete a couple times.

Thanks

[Skinsfan1311]

snowboarding, backpacking and building a life in the Tahoe area

OT, but....there's actually still snowboarding Tahoe?

I thought that there wasn't enough snow there. We used to go every year,(stayed at a timeshare across from the California Lodge,at Heavenly).

We quit going, because of the depressing lack of snow.

Back OT, while I can understand your sentiment, I just can't wrap my head around rooting for losses. I just can't do it.

[Destino]

Back when we needed to tank, like the colts did, I agreed that it was in our best interests to lose. But I as a fan can only feel that way 6 days a week. Once the game starts I can't hope my team loses. Not possible. My heart wants what it wants.

So I will have my cake and eat it too on this issue. I can understand fans wanting to lose in hopes of gaining something greater. I cannot support fans rooting to lose during the actual game.

[TSO]

Back when we needed to tank, like the colts did, I agreed that it was in our best interests to lose. But I as a fan can only feel that way 6 days a week. Once the game starts I can't hope my team loses. Not possible. My heart wants what it wants.

So I will have my cake and eat it too on this issue. I can understand fans wanting to lose in hopes of gaining something greater. I cannot support fans rooting to lose during the actual game.

 

Fanhood should not be this complex. The Redskins have made us all nuts.  

[returnofthefunbunch]

I'm a simple man.  The definition of a fan (short for fanatic) is "a person filled with excessive and single-minded zeal".   Pretty simple I think. 

 

Fanhood should not be this complex. The Redskins have made us all nuts.

Well said.

[GoDeep81]

Don't have time to read all the posts, but it's probably been said a few times already.. If you're a true fan, it's impossible to "root against" them.. Period.. You may get really pissed and say it after a bad loss, or actually not think they'll win, but come the next game day you'll be hoping they find a way to win.. If you don't, I'd have to question your fandom to begin with.. (which is also a "no no" in most sporting forums) lol..

[JSSkinz]

The people who are so infatuated with Rg3 and hoping for loses because he was benched seem to be going through some sort of grieving and this is their way of dealing with it, I find it odd.

[The Consigliere]

OT, but....there's actually still snowboarding Tahoe?

I thought that there wasn't enough snow there. We used to go every year,(stayed at a timeshare across from the California Lodge,at Heavenly).

We quit going, because of the depressing lack of snow.

Back OT, while I can understand your sentiment, I just can't wrap my head around rooting for losses. I just can't do it.

Oh it's been god awful, I went once last Christmas, the other major storm happened on exactly the one weekend I couldn't go (had a training with the rest of my social studies department that Saturday), and '13-14, and '12-13 were awful too ('11-'12 was just not great, but not bad either). I was lucky in that I finally started learning during the '09-10 season, and had two straight wonderful seasons in a row to crash on my backside in powder instead of ice and dirt, just wish I was better at the time like I am now so I could have enjoyed it more.

[The Consigliere]

Don't have time to read all the posts, but it's probably been said a few times already.. If you're a true fan, it's impossible to "root against" them.. Period.. You may get really pissed and say it after a bad loss, or actually not think they'll win, but come the next game day you'll be hoping they find a way to win.. If you don't, I'd have to question your fandom to begin with.. (which is also a "no no" in most sporting forums) lol..

 

No offense, but this "true fan" --- is complete nonsense.

 

I've been reading everything, traveling around the country to see games, and posting on message boards to the tune of probably more than 100,000 posts since '96, and I'm not a true fan? Give me a break. Any poor **** that still is following this team after twenty plus years of this garbage is the definition of a fan.

 

The fact that we want different things for the sake of our team is how we express our fandom, I am willing to suffer in the short term for the long term payoff of building an eventual winner, even if the short term ends up being a long time, what I'm not willing to do is take short cuts, to have an extra win on a sunday just to feel good, to no purpose beyond that moment. I want to believe we're building towards something other than 1 9-7 or 10-6 season every fourth or fifth year. You just want to see your team win on sunday.

 

Both fandom's are legit, and real, and the fact that both of us continue to support a team that has been run by a megalomaniacal narcissistic scumbag, and his merry band of incompetent morons into the ground for 3 decades running tells you all you need to know about legitimacy. '81-'93 didn't test anybody, but '93-'15, anybody still holding onto any passion for this team and its fortunes at this point is unquestionably a true fan. Period.

The people who are so infatuated with Rg3 and hoping for loses because he was benched seem to be going through some sort of grieving and this is their way of dealing with it, I find it odd.

 

me too, and I started watching RG3 closely in the fall of 2010, two years before we drafted him, viewing him as the backup plan to Sucking for Luck. It's over. Maybe he makes it, but if he ever does, it won't be here, the well has been poisoned beyond repair by the stupidity and ignorance of both sides. Kirk Cousins being a sub-par QB and starting has nothing to do with it, and shouldn't. Gruden's trying to save his own rear by entrusting the offense to a poor man's Andy Dalton. Maybe it works out for him, at least he has a fighting chance with Cousins, he wouldn't have with RG3 and that's why he's made that choice.

 

I'm fine with the fans being so sick of things that they want the team to not be rewarded for its collective stupidity and mismanagement. I get that. Don't get the RG3 thing, but then again, I always cheered the players, and the sweater, not just the players. A lot of young fans today are a bit of the opposite due to free agency and changes in the marketing paradigms of different sports leagues.

[Bacon]

Hooper nailed this thread in the first response. It's foolish to think that the Redskins of all teams would capitalize on a tanked season even if they attempted such a thing. On top of that, who's worth tanking for anyway?

 

All that aside, I never root against my team regardless. That's just the way it is.

[bowhunter]

Rodgers was rated #1, and #1A going into that draft up until the last moment the Niners went back and forth on it, finally settling on Smith in part because they liked his humility and were bothered by Rodgers ****iness in interviews. The argument that you can get a franchise QB at 24 because the Packers did is a fallacious one, Rodgers fell because SF and Miami, the only two teams apparently considering QB's in that '05 draft wanted the same guy. Once Rodgers fell past them, nobody considered them.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

I just had a flashback. 

 

And a ghost from the past jumped out to warn me to warn the OP to drop this and get out of this thread NOW and pretend it never happened. 

 

Just walk away, and let it fade away. 

 

That ghost speaks from bitter experience. 

 

Hail.