A Confidence I Haven't Had in 25 Years

[Dark Acre]

To paraphrase Poindexter (RotN), would you rather live during the ascendancy of the Washington Redskins or during its decline?  Having turned 50 last week, I've had both (started following the team in '75 when I was 7-8).  I preferred the ascendancy -- all that optimism and faith in the future.  Decline is just like getting old.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

53 minutes ago, GothSkinsFan said:

To paraphrase Poindexter (RotN), would you rather live during the ascendancy of the Washington Redskins or during its decline?  Having turned 50 last week, I've had both (started following the team in '75 when I was 7-8).  I preferred the ascendancy -- all that optimism and faith in the future.  Decline is just like getting old.

 

I'm confused why this is even a question?

[NickyJ]

I'd rather live during the ascendancy of flying cars tbh

[Cliffmark1]

11 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

I'd rather live during the ascendancy of flying cars tbh

I think we are really close.  As soon as people abandon the idea of them having to be battery powered I think we will see time-share type arrangements on autonomous quad copter type cars. 

 

I think the issue with Kleese hypothesis is that

 

1) we have lost our GM and OC from the previous two years, it's not the same team on the field either losing garcon and djax. 

2) KC is on a one year deal

3) jury is out on Jay. 

4) WR corps and run game seems anemic

[skinfan2k]

15 hours ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

We were thoroughly outplayed at home in the second half by the 0-7 49ers and really had no business winning that game.

And we still won.  Does anyone care if you win by 3 or 30?

[NickyJ]

13 hours ago, skinfan2k said:

And we still won.  Does anyone care if you win by 3 or 30?

When it's a good barometer for whether we can beat easy teams without screwing up, yes. I doubt the Eagles looked at our win and said "man, those Redskins are a solid team for beating an 0-6 team by 2 points"

[kleese]

35 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

When it's a good barometer for whether we can beat easy teams without screwing up, yes. I doubt the Eagles looked at our win and said "man, those Redskins are a solid team for beating an 0-6 team by 2 points"

 

I think it's fine to look at a game like we played against SF and find reasons for concern/improvement, but I think we see things across the league that make the "team x best team y therefore team x should beat team z" stuff (that is a really clunky way of making my point BTW). 

 

Steelers got beat by the Bears and Jags (crushed by Jags actually). Titans destroyed Jags. Steelers beat Chiefs. So therefore Titans should mangle Chiefs? I just think it is very much a week to week league where results really don't carry over to the next week. 

[NickyJ]

16 minutes ago, kleese said:

 

I think it's fine to look at a game like we played against SF and find reasons for concern/improvement, but I think we see things across the league that make the "team x best team y therefore team x should beat team z" stuff (that is a really clunky way of making my point BTW). 

 

Steelers got beat by the Bears and Jags (crushed by Jags actually). Titans destroyed Jags. Steelers beat Chiefs. So therefore Titans should mangle Chiefs? I just think it is very much a week to week league where results really don't carry over to the next week. 

I understand your point about it being week to week for most teams, but the constant in all of it is that the 49ers and Browns still have no wins. There are anemic teams, and then there are simply bad teams. The Giants are one of those bad teams, and their win came from the supposedly decent Broncos. The Broncos fell flat against the Giants, and the Giants went back to losing the very next game. The Broncos are now widely considered a mediocre team, with their 0-21 game against the Chargers reinforcing it.

 

A close win or loss against an average or even a mediocre team is extremely disappointing, but in the end I can accept it since we are an average team with injuries thrusting us into the mediocre. But the 49ers aren't average or mediocre. They are bad, as shown in their game against the Cowboys. Our 2 point win was concerning, and I'd say the Eagles game justified it.

[kleese]

7 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

I understand your point about it being week to week for most teams, but the constant in all of it is that the 49ers and Browns still have no wins. There are anemic teams, and then there are simply bad teams. The Giants are one of those bad teams, and their win came from the supposedly decent Broncos. The Broncos fell flat against the Giants, and the Giants went back to losing the very next game. The Broncos are now widely considered a mediocre team, with their 0-21 game against the Chargers reinforcing it.

 

A close win or loss against an average or even a mediocre team is extremely disappointing, but in the end I can accept it since we are an average team with injuries thrusting us into the mediocre. But the 49ers aren't average or mediocre. They are bad, as shown in their game against the Cowboys. Our 2 point win was concerning, and I'd say the Eagles game justified it.

 

I understand your point. If you can't analyze what you see and make judgments based off of that then what is the point in analyzing? I get it. And I do think warning signs can present themselves win or lose. But to flip it, the 49ers also played a down to wire game with the Rams on a night where a missed PAT did them in. Rams bounced back OK from that. 

 

In Philly, I felt we got Wentz'ed. Hate that I'm using that term and looks like I'm going to be wrong about him (figured he'd be solid and nothing more). I felt like we played the Eagles about the same as we played Oakland and KC; just were up against a dude on another level. 

[LavarArringtonMachine]

4 minutes ago, kleese said:

 

  I felt like we played the Eagles about the same as we played Oakland and KC; just were up against a dude on another level. 

 

Why do people here bring up Oakland like they are good?  They aren't on the same level as the Eagles and Chiefs.  Yes they escaped out of the Chiefs game with a win, but if those two teams played against each other 9 more times, the Raiders would lose 8 of them.  The Chiefs played down to the Raiders and paid for it with a loss.  Let me remind you....  besides winning against KC in a letdown game, the Raiders only beat the Jets and the Titans.

 

But if building them up also to be a good team because we blew them out brings comfort to the masses, I certainly dont want to take that away from any individual.

[kleese]

1 minute ago, LavarArringtonMachine said:

 

Why do people here bring up Oakland like they are good?  They aren't on the same level as the Eagles and Chiefs.  Yes they escaped out of the Chiefs game with a win, but if those two teams played against each other 9 more times, the Raiders would lose 8 of them.  The Chiefs played down to the Raiders and paid for it with a loss.  Let me remind you....  besides winning against KC in a letdown game, the Raiders only beat the Jets and the Titans.

 

But if building them up also to be a good team because we blew them out brings comfort to the masses, I certainly dont want to take that away from any individual.

 

I said nothing about the Raiders. I said I felt we played the same against Oakland, KC, and Philly. Meaning we've played consistently pretty good football. It resulted in an easy win against Oakland and tougher losses on road against KC and Philly. 

[LavarArringtonMachine]

Just now, kleese said:

 

I said nothing about the Raiders. I said I felt we played the same against Oakland, KC, and Philly. Meaning we've played consistently pretty good football. It resulted in an easy win against Oakland and tougher losses on road against KC and Philly. 

 

My bad.  When I seen the comment about playing them all the same, I guess Ive read it incorrectly and yes I agree with you about the consistency.

[zoony]

Skins dont need better players, better coaches, and better management.  Just need more fans who are thrilled with being a completely irrelevant franchise

[CousinsCowgirl84]

If the browns are the factory of sadness the redskins are the factory of agony. At least the browns fans know they are gonna loose, redskins fans still manage to have some sort of delusional hope.

[Warhead36]

I don't really feel any emotion watching anymore. When we score, I'm quiet. When they blocked the FG, I just sat there in silence. The Redskins are just...there. They've essentially devolved into a way to kill 3 hours on a Sunday.

 

I'm probably not going to watch next week's game.

[skins4eva]

45 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I don't really feel any emotion watching anymore. When we score, I'm quiet. When they blocked the FG, I just sat there in silence. The Redskins are just...there. They've essentially devolved into a way to kill 3 hours on a Sunday.

 

I'm probably not going to watch next week's game.

 

Exactly how I feel. They are just a miserable product. 

[SkinsGuy]

1 hour ago, zoony said:

Skins dont need better players, better coaches, and better management.  Just need more fans who are thrilled with being a completely irrelevant franchise

 

12. No trolling. Beware of making baiting posts.
Do not post comments that are fundamentally inflammatory, or of little substantive content, or of some broadly insulting nature that serve primarily to incite your fellow members. ExtremeSkins has always prided itself on its zero tolerance policy for the common internet troublemaker. Trolls come in many forms and will be identified and censured at the discretion of the ES Staff. We are seeking a better level of conversation than just habitual drive-bys, being simplistically insulting, or gratuitously flaming various well-established points of view regardless of how strongly they may differ from yours. 

 

As a mod, you should know better.

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

**** ain’t fun. Hasn’t been for years 

[NickyJ]

1 hour ago, zoony said:

Skins dont need better players, better coaches, and better management.  Just need more fans who are thrilled with being a completely irrelevant franchise

In before the "would you rather be relevantly bad like the Cleveland Browns" posts arrive.

[skinsfan1523]

Yeah I barely even get excited when we score, cause I know the next **** up is only a few plays away, so it doesn't really matter

[NoCalMike]

On 10/28/2017 at 8:40 AM, kleese said:

 

I think it's fine to look at a game like we played against SF and find reasons for concern/improvement, but I think we see things across the league that make the "team x best team y therefore team x should beat team z" stuff (that is a really clunky way of making my point BTW). 

 

Steelers got beat by the Bears and Jags (crushed by Jags actually). Titans destroyed Jags. Steelers beat Chiefs. So therefore Titans should mangle Chiefs? I just think it is very much a week to week league where results really don't carry over to the next week. 

 

Every team in the NFL will put up some stinkers during the course of the season, however certain franchises have almost earned the right, if you will, to have it looked at as an aberration by the fan base. The 'Skins as a franchise have not.  When they barely beat a bad team, it has usually said more about them not being as good as we think they are.  

 

Until the 'Skins become a consistent winner that is in the playoffs more than not, there is no such thing as "mental wins" during the season.  

[hail2skins]

Sitting in the parking lot at AT&T Stadium East now. If this is the way our STH fanbase supports the team then we deserve no better. Wouldn't surprise me if there were more Cowboys fans than Skins fans here. Pathetic.

[TradeTheBeal!]

3 minutes ago, hail2skins said:

Sitting in the parking lot at AT&T Stadium East now. If this is the way our STH fanbase supports the team then we deserve no better. Wouldn't surprise me if there were more Cowboys fans than Skins fans here. Pathetic.

 

Kirk is now 0 & 4 at home against the Cowboys.  What the hell did you expect?

[jskins11]

Wow. This season is spiraling out of control quickly. From that Doctson drop in KC to now - my confidence is rattled. 

 

Tons of injuries. Unreal how we've been hit. Definitely ok to use as an excuse given that we're pretty much fielding a JV squad. 

 

Big picture though, this team has issues that the defense helped mask early in the season. 

 

We don't have a 1 or 2 receiver, we don't have a running back, we really don't have a TE since Reed can't be counted on, and we botched our qb situation so badly that we'll likely lose him after 9 more games. 

 

Sadly, we're looking like 6 win team at this point. Which means a 10-12 draft pick. We don't have ammo to trade up to get top qb or Saquan (penn st rb) without giving up future picks, and we already went down that road with RG3. 

 

Complain about Kirk all you want, but he's working with a 35 year old TE and a 3rd down rb as his only weapons. Crowder finally had a game today. 

 

After GB win last year and Oakland win this year, this team gave me so much hope. Our offense will need to be completely rebuilt after Kirk walks this offseason. Every skill position will need major upgrades. 

 

I'm a Kirk guy. Want him to stay. Pay him whatever. The truth is, we're in every game that he plays. Compare him to Alex Smith and Andy Dalton all you like. When we are in the playoffs hosting playoff games for multiple years and failing, then we can talk about needing a different qb to get us to the SB. I'm fine with being competitive and winning more than losing at this point given the last 25 years. Kirk gives us that for now. Skill position players can only be better moving forward. 

 

Wouldnt at all all be surprised if we lose Kirk if we end up with Dalton or Smith next year. Would be fitting. 

[Mr. Sinister]

 

1 minute ago, hail2skins said:

Sitting in the parking lot at AT&T Stadium East now. If this is the way our STH fanbase supports the team then we deserve no better. Wouldn't surprise me if there were more Cowboys fans than Skins fans here. Pathetic.

Why, as a consumer, should one continuously support a routinely subpar and inept product?