The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 1:00 am**

where'd he go?

just when the stuff had almost hit the fan too.......

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 1:04 am**

hailskins666 wrote:where'd he go?

just when the stuff had almost hit the fan too.......

He went for reinforcements...

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:09 am**

Why is the owner of the Redskins talking trash about his own team?

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:33 am**

Daniel Snyder wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:
Daniel Snyder wrote:
hailskins666 wrote:
Our defense got better after Bailey left. Can't you say the same thing about your running game sans Portis?
ROTFALMAO nail in coffin.

better yet, our TEAM is better without chump. not the same in denver. same struggle in the division, choke in the playoffs team they have been since elway left....

So Portis did carry you guys to the playoffs.

I'm confused. I'm pretty sure you won 6 games last year. Impressive, I know.

Yall choked before you had chump and you choked with chump. We hadn't gotten far enough without CP to choke so you can't really can't compare us. We improved and you didn't. Chokers...

You improved in record by one game and made your legend of a coach look like a total fool.

and your defensive improvement in the playoffs? you lost 49-24 instead of 41-10! among the astonishing feats of the bailey-led broncos defense was that they allowed the following:

27 attempts, 21 completions for 360 yards and 3 TDs for peyton manning, not to mention giving up 2 more TDs on the ground. wow!! what an amazing performance by the colts! what a colossal meltdown by the broncos defense!

but there is yet another bit of information that makes things much, much worse:

THAT WAS ONLY THE FIRST HALF!!!

your team did not improve with the addition of bailey. further evidence:

2003: 10 wins, 6 losses
2004: 10 wins, 6 losses (same)

2003 Points Allowed: 301
2004 Points Allowed: 304 (worse)

2003: 277.1 Yards Per Game Allowed
2004: 278.7 Yards Per Game Allowed (worse)

2003: 2828 Passing Yards Allowed
2004: 2947 Passing Yards Allowed (worse)

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:50 am**

So it would seem that you guys didn't improve one bit, you actually got worse.

Lol, our 1 game improvement looks a lot better now. :lol:

Anyway, that was last year. Compare this season thus far to last season and in no way has Gibbs image been tarnished. Its just that most of you werent alive when Gibbs was around (myself included) and you dont recognize him for what he was back in the day. You all think he's changed when he's really stayed the same. Of course you "fans" dont want to learn anything and just recite what you hear the retard analysts spout off. You fail to garner you OWN opinion and for that simple reason you fail at life in my book regardless if we win or lose.

k thanks goodbye.

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 12:25 pm**

die cowboys die wrote:
Daniel Snyder wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:
Daniel Snyder wrote:
hailskins666 wrote:
Our defense got better after Bailey left. Can't you say the same thing about your running game sans Portis?
ROTFALMAO nail in coffin.

better yet, our TEAM is better without chump. not the same in denver. same struggle in the division, choke in the playoffs team they have been since elway left....

So Portis did carry you guys to the playoffs.

I'm confused. I'm pretty sure you won 6 games last year. Impressive, I know.

Yall choked before you had chump and you choked with chump. We hadn't gotten far enough without CP to choke so you can't really can't compare us. We improved and you didn't. Chokers...

You improved in record by one game and made your legend of a coach look like a total fool.

and your defensive improvement in the playoffs? you lost 49-24 instead of 41-10! among the astonishing feats of the bailey-led broncos defense was that they allowed the following:

27 attempts, 21 completions for 360 yards and 3 TDs for peyton manning, not to mention giving up 2 more TDs on the ground. wow!! what an amazing performance by the colts! what a colossal meltdown by the broncos defense!

but there is yet another bit of information that makes things much, much worse:

THAT WAS ONLY THE FIRST HALF!!!

your team did not improve with the addition of bailey. further evidence:

2003: 10 wins, 6 losses
2004: 10 wins, 6 losses (same)

2003 Points Allowed: 301
2004 Points Allowed: 304 (worse)

2003: 277.1 Yards Per Game Allowed
2004: 278.7 Yards Per Game Allowed (worse)

2003: 2828 Passing Yards Allowed
2004: 2947 Passing Yards Allowed (worse)

May be worse but still had the #4 overall "D" in the league.

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 12:33 pm**

Correct me if im wrong but we got better and had the #3 overall D in the league right?

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 1:35 pm**

I guess we'll just have to see what happens on Sunday.

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 1:42 pm**

Here's a power-ranking website that takes statistical information based on teams performance, who they've played and other factors to come up with a ranking. Changes weekly and is perhaps a good reason why the experts are saying what they're saying about the Redskins:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl05.htm

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:22 pm**

Were #12... take a look at #13, they beat you 3 weeks ago.

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 3:03 pm**

They're probably the most improved team this year also. Who've you beaten? Oh yeah, teams #26, #19 and #14 compared to our #10 & #11. Unfortunately for you, these ranking don't lie and are not based (or biased) on opinion.

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 3:27 pm**

BroncoJoe wrote:They're probably the most improved team this year also. Who've you beaten? Oh yeah, teams #26, #19 and #14 compared to our #10 & #11. Unfortunately for you, these ranking don't lie and are not based (or biased) on opinion.

It's always biased when strenth of schedule comes into play.
The fact that a voilent game has to be played and anything could happen in those 60 minutes is not factored in

After you lose this week, you'll see the bias.
Every statistical category will drop. The Seahawks and that Team in Texas were ranked much higher prior to losing to us.
The srength of schedule will drop. The pure points in ELO'S thingy will be out of wack. This will cause adjustments to those that you have played win/lose.

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 3:53 pm**

1niksder wrote:
BroncoJoe wrote:They're probably the most improved team this year also. Who've you beaten? Oh yeah, teams #26, #19 and #14 compared to our #10 & #11. Unfortunately for you, these ranking don't lie and are not based (or biased) on opinion.

It's always biased when strenth of schedule comes into play.
The fact that a voilent game has to be played and anything could happen in those 60 minutes is not factored in

After you lose this week, you'll see the bias.
Every statistical category will drop. The Seahawks and that Team in Texas were ranked much higher prior to losing to us.
The srength of schedule will drop. The pure points in ELO'S thingy will be out of wack. This will cause adjustments to those that you have played win/lose.

exactly- part of the reason those teams are #26, #19, and #14 is because we gave each of them an extra loss. it makes no sense to drop us down along with the teams we defeated! if you subtract US from the equation, the teams we've played are 5-3 against the rest of the league.

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:04 pm**

I'm impressed you guys followed the link! Actually, after only 3-4 games, it is out of whack a bit. It gets better about 1/2 way through the season. It's one of the sites I look at on a consistant basis because it's not a sports-caster/writer's opinion.

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 5:29 pm**

BroncoJoe wrote:I'm impressed you guys followed the link! Actually, after only 3-4 games, it is out of whack a bit. It gets better about 1/2 way through the season. It's one of the sites I look at on a consistant basis because it's not a sports-caster/writer's opinion.

What makes you think we haven't been looking at those rankings all along? How 'bout you have a look in the rankings thread and see them all listed?

Posted: **Sat Oct 08, 2005 9:32 pm**

VRIEL1 wrote:lets look at stats. Brunell has a QB rating of 84.8. Plummer has a 77.9. Brunell has only 2 interceptions and Plummer has 3. running game is about equal with Portis having 263 yrds with an average of 4.2 yrds per carry. their anderson has 267 yrds with an average of 4.3 yrds per carry. receiving...Moss has 15 catches for 342 yrds for an average of 22.8 yrds per carry. smith has 26 catches for 286 yrds for an average of 11.o yrds per carry. The teams are about equal offensivly and it will boil down to the defenses again. of course Denver has the home stadium advantage and it being mile high. they think thier offense is all that well the Seahawks had one of the most explosive offenses in the league and we shut them down till the 4th quarter. We controlled the ball longer and should have beaten them by atleast 1 touchdown had it not been for the refs bad call and one field goal had it not been for our missed field goal. the game will be close but I think we can pull it off.

WOW.....I can't belive something I wrote actually made what 3-4 pages?lol. thanks to you all. including the Bronco fans.lol. Funny that they (Bronco fans) chose not to use this one. They didn't even post any real statistics to counter this one. I wonder why? maybe they can't. I'm not going to sit here and argue that our QB is better or smarter because they both are not at this point in time. They are only as good as the players around them...ie..Plummer in Arizona....and Brunell last year. however Brunell played hurt...Plummer just played.lol. Unfortunatly teams ride waves and the Bronco's are on the downside of the wave and the Skins are on the upside....ride the wave Bronco's ride the wave. enjoy it while you can.

Posted: **Sun Oct 09, 2005 12:34 am**

VRIEL1 wrote:
VRIEL1 wrote:lets look at stats. Brunell has a QB rating of 84.8. Plummer has a 77.9. Brunell has only 2 interceptions and Plummer has 3. running game is about equal with Portis having 263 yrds with an average of 4.2 yrds per carry. their anderson has 267 yrds with an average of 4.3 yrds per carry. receiving...Moss has 15 catches for 342 yrds for an average of 22.8 yrds per carry. smith has 26 catches for 286 yrds for an average of 11.o yrds per carry. The teams are about equal offensivly and it will boil down to the defenses again. of course Denver has the home stadium advantage and it being mile high. they think thier offense is all that well the Seahawks had one of the most explosive offenses in the league and we shut them down till the 4th quarter. We controlled the ball longer and should have beaten them by atleast 1 touchdown had it not been for the refs bad call and one field goal had it not been for our missed field goal. the game will be close but I think we can pull it off.

WOW.....I can't belive something I wrote actually made what 3-4 pages?lol. thanks to you all. including the Bronco fans.lol. Funny that they (Bronco fans) chose not to use this one. They didn't even post any real statistics to counter this one. I wonder why? maybe they can't. I'm not going to sit here and argue that our QB is better or smarter because they both are not at this point in time. They are only as good as the players around them...ie..Plummer in Arizona....and Brunell last year. however Brunell played hurt...Plummer just played.lol. Unfortunatly teams ride waves and the Bronco's are on the downside of the wave and the Skins are on the upside....ride the wave Bronco's ride the wave. enjoy it while you can.

You're right. The stats are similar. The difference is that we've actually played good teams - not losers. Since we have more than one good running back, compare our total rushing yards to your totals. You may find something interesting there...

See ya tomorrow,

Posted: **Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:05 am**

AND ANOTHER THING:

Now that I've had time to read some of the pages in this post, it astounding how many of you refer to the Superbowl our two teams played in. Do you guys realize that game took place almost a decade ago? Please. Let's focus on the current teams, not the past.

Posted: **Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:17 am**

BroncoJoe wrote:AND ANOTHER THING:

Now that I've had time to read some of the pages in this post, it astounding how many of you refer to the Superbowl our two teams played in. Do you guys realize that game took place almost a decade ago? Please. Let's focus on the current teams, not the past.

If you read closer, you'll notice it was your co-fan who brought up the past, not skins fans.

Posted: **Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:19 am**

BroncoJoe wrote:AND ANOTHER THING:

Now that I've had time to read some of the pages in this post, it astounding how many of you refer to the Superbowl our two teams played in. Do you guys realize that game took place almost a decade ago? Please. Let's focus on the current teams, not the past.

sure thing! We are undefeated, are you? WE will see you tomorrow! By the way, didnt you get your asses handed to you by the Dolphins? :lol:

Dont give me that you haven't played anyone crap.

Posted: **Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:31 am**

Since we have more than one good running back

Both of our RBs are better then Denver's. My 2 cents

Betts could be a starter for a lot of teams in this league, including yours.

Posted: **Sun Oct 09, 2005 12:33 pm**

I logged on there many days ago now and cannot get an email sent to validate my account and begin posting. Have they just decided to ban redskins fans from their board?

Posted: **Sun Oct 09, 2005 12:38 pm**

I had the same problem

Posted: **Sun Oct 09, 2005 12:41 pm**

sch1977 wrote:I had the same problem

Was there a post about this somewhere? Seems rather extreme if this was done on purpose.

Posted: **Sun Oct 09, 2005 12:44 pm**

No, they posted here that they were having problems with their server and activation emails weren't getting sent properly.

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

broncos fans are heated! it's funny.

Did the broncosfreak board ban redskin participation?