Dear Santa....

Redskin_fan · Post by **Redskin_fan** » Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:44 am

USA Today's Jeff Zillgitt wrote ( http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football ... k-14_x.htm ), " Philadelphia (-9) at Washington. This is how delusional they are in Washington. On the radio and even in print, word is the Redskins can make the playoffs if they win out and go 8-8. For starters, that means the Redskins must beat the Eagles. That will happen the day Terrell Owens doesn't celebrate after scoring a touchdown. Eagles 24, Redskins 14"
===========

Dear Santa,
All I want for Christmas is to beat the Eagles (and the 49ers, the Cowboys, and the Vikes).

Sincerely,

A "Delusional" Redskin_Fan

box8276 · Post by **box8276** » Sat Dec 11, 2004 6:10 pm

If our offense shows up we can beat ANYBODY! but thats the problem

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 1:09 am

Is "that the problem" ?
Remember the only loss Philly has suffered thus far this year. A 1-2 punch at RB from Pittsburgh, and a systematic passing game.
I think that the combination of Portis/Betts will be enough to keep us in the game, which means we don't have to abandon the running game in favor of the more frenetic passing game you see from a Redskin offense that is getting buried by the other team.

Scottskins · Post by **Scottskins** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 6:13 am

If you run good against Philly, you can beat them handily. Joe knows this, so look for us to establish the run early...

McMVP · Post by **McMVP** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:13 am

Scottskins wrote:If you run good against Philly, you can beat them handily. Joe knows this, so look for us to establish the run early...

This just in...11 other teams tried to beat the Eagles other than Pitt. In those other games, the Eagles have outscored their opponents 337 to 154. That's and average victory of about 17 points per game.

Now I ask you, is Gibbs the only one that thinks if you can run well against Philly you can win?

The Giants have rushed for 331 yards against Philly in 2 games....165 per game....huge numbers. How did they lose by a combined score of 58-23?

Every team has bad games....Pitt let Baltimore score 30 points agianst them....Baltimore! The Eagles had a bad game in Pitt. The fact that they have gone 4-0 and outscored teams 151-50 since should tell you that...

Scottskins · Post by **Scottskins** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:14 am

It's called defense philadelphian. You know, the one that Pitt is #1 in, and the one we are #2 in ;-)

Had a bad game against Pitt eh? Well, I suppose if you call 420 yards to 113 yards a bad game, then yeah, you guys had a bad game. Probably didn't have anything to do with 252 yards rushing and a dominate defense eh?

I'll say it again, we get Portis going, we win. Simple as that...

McMVP · Post by **McMVP** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 6:48 pm

Scottskins wrote:It's called defense philadelphian. You know, the one that Pitt is #1 in, and the one we are #2 in

Had a bad game against Pitt eh? Well, I suppose if you call 420 yards to 113 yards a bad game, then yeah, you guys had a bad game. Probably didn't have anything to do with 252 yards rushing and a dominate defense eh?

I'll say it again, we get Portis going, we win. Simple as that...

Hillarious....

The sad thing is I think you truly believe this.

But as for your defense...here is your true ranking (#5):

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7973998

Nobody just looks at yards anymore....get with the present. You will also see the Eagles are #4. But if that doesn't convince you....play back the tape from 3 weeks ago when McNabb threw 4 TDs against your almighty D...

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 7:06 pm

McMVP wrote:But as for your defense...here is your true ranking (#5):

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7973998

Nobody just looks at yards anymore....get with the present. You will also see the Eagles are #4. But if that doesn't convince you....play back the tape from 3 weeks ago when McNabb threw 4 TDs against your almighty D...

That's Troy Aikman's Efficiency Rating Not the NFL Team Rankings

http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/D ... rt_col_1=4

Rating / Ranking ....2 totally different things
Troy Aikman / The NFL ...One maters one doesn't

Smithian · Post by **Smithian** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:08 pm

Redskins have field position, then.

Scottskins · Post by **Scottskins** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:00 pm

lmao, why don't you go back in your hole. Defenses are ranked according to things such as yards allowed, points allowed, turnovers, sacks, etc...

Not some media guys perspective. I mean, I respect Aikman in most things, but he's got New England ranked ahead of Pittsburgh?! Now if that doesn't just scream, I rank with my heart and not my head, I don't know what does...

I'm sure if I set it up right, the friggin Cardinals could be ranked 1st in offense.

McMVP · Post by **McMVP** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:29 pm

1niksder wrote:
McMVP wrote:But as for your defense...here is your true ranking (#5):

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/7973998

Nobody just looks at yards anymore....get with the present. You will also see the Eagles are #4. But if that doesn't convince you....play back the tape from 3 weeks ago when McNabb threw 4 TDs against your almighty D...

That's Troy Aikman's Efficiency Rating Not the NFL Team Rankings

http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/D ... rt_col_1=4

Rating / Ranking ....2 totally different things
Troy Aikman / The NFL ...One maters one doesn't

Get with 2004....

You are right about one thing...one of them matters....Aikman's

Why do you think they post it on NFL.com.

Are you saying it is all about yards? Wake up...

McMVP · Post by **McMVP** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:30 pm

double post...

McMVP · Post by **McMVP** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:35 pm

Scottskins wrote:lmao, why don't you go back in your hole. Defenses are ranked according to things such as yards allowed, points allowed, turnovers, sacks, etc...

Not some media guys perspective. I mean, I respect Aikman in most things, but he's got New England ranked ahead of Pittsburgh?! Now if that doesn't just scream, I rank with my heart and not my head, I don't know what does...

I'm sure if I set it up right, the friggin Cardinals could be ranked 1st in offense.

Ok...than lets forget about Aikman and concentrate on what no one can argue as the only defensive stat that matters....Points Allowed....

Eagles rnak #2 in the NFL.....Washington is 6th...

If youg guys have noticed...I'm not exactly slamming your D. I know it's good. I'm only pointing out that it takes more than running Portis 17 times for 37 yards to beat the Eagles.

Some guy agreed and said "it's called defense"...well this just in...the Eagles have that too...

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 9:48 pm

Get with 2004....

You are right about one thing...one of them matters....Aikman's

Why do you think they post it on NFL.com.

Are you saying it is all about yards? Wake up

They're both posted on NFL.COM
One is produced by NFL.COM on is posted by NFL.COM even you can figure that out

McMVP · Post by **McMVP** » Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:21 pm

1niksder wrote:
Get with 2004....

You are right about one thing...one of them matters....Aikman's

Why do you think they post it on NFL.com.

Are you saying it is all about yards? Wake up

They're both posted on NFL.COM
One is produced by NFL.COM on is posted by NFL.COM even you can figure that out

Who cares anyway...this game is proof that both team have great defenses...