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

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

absinthe1023 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

absinthe1023 wrote:You would really like to see the community respond with rational discourse rather than blind homerism

What a stupid post

That was a very efficient way to prove my point.

OK, how's this then. The majority are arguing we might make 8 wins, maybe. We're optimistic. Which you call "blind homerism" in your support of the point we completely suck and will maybe win 2 games. This is an endless ridiculous point brought up by the bashers. No one but Langley is a "blind homer" and not only doesn't he deny it, he's proud of it. Which means really he's a homer and not blind. More power to him. You want to bash the team, fine. But that while you're extreme and the general community isn't, that you call us "blind homers" is...a stupid post... You're a blind hater.

That clear it up for ya?

I think that your comprehension of my posts has been quite poor. I have not bashed the team in any way. I also don't think that this year's team will win only 2 games; for the record I think they will probably win between 4 and 6.

These are the only 3 points I have tried to convey in this thread:

1. I feel like it is a personal attack to immediately dismiss the fanhood of the OP for suggesting that the Redskins would be better off in the long run by having a horrible season and getting the chance to draft Luck. I agree with the OP that Luck is an incredible pro prospect, probably the best since Peyton Manning. In fact, I would like to hear more debate on that topic (i.e. is there someone you like better?) than see more baseless boasts on who has the biggest fanhood.

2. I do not believe it is rational or realistic to expect a professional football team to willfully tank and throw a season, and have never advocated this.

3. I believe that the Redskins would be hurt in the long run by winning 4 or more games this season and losing the opportunity draft Luck first overall. I think this is a clear case where a small, incremental improvement would serve to prevent a huge leap forward. It evokes the old adage "It is better to lose the battle in order to win the war". I understand that Luck could still be obtained by packaging multiple first rounders and probably players, but this is obviously not the most efficient way to secure his rights. This is also an area for fruitful exploration and discussion, as there are very few certainties in place.

Lastly, I have no quarrel with LPJ's homerism (I'm using him as an example since he was mentioned in the post above). I actually find it refreshing. He expresses his view without prejudice, and by his posts seems to give others with opposing viewpoints the same level of respect while still retaining the ability to carry on a reasonable discussion...which is the overall purpose of this board. He lacks the tendency to lash out reflexively with baseless and senseless personal attacks when an opposing viewpoint is presented.

I have no problem with adding a great QB

The differences IMO is that some here think:

we should try NOT to win games to put the franchise in better position to draft Andrew Luck AND ONLY Andrew Luck

the FO and coaching staff will actually try not to do well this season for the same reason

the FO have not done well since they took over running things here = 1 season & 2 drafts

the basis for this franchise not being able to become a regular playoff contender lies in what has happened here BEFORE this FO took over

this franchise should not try and become more competitive now AND build for the future with an eye to being better when we get a great QB

I'm not bashing posters for thinking like that - I just think it's STUPID


I do not think that REAL fans of this franchise are blind to what is so OBVIOUSLY happening

I'm not saying we are going to be great in a couple of years - I just think that we have to continue to do the best we can NOW (INCLUDING adding a great QB ASAP)

NOBODY can convince me that this franchise will be better off by ensuring we are in a better position next draft - that's IDIOTIC

That's not 'bashing' ... that's just stating the obvious

absinthe1023 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

absinthe1023 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

absinthe1023 wrote:You would really like to see the community respond with rational discourse rather than blind homerism

What a stupid post

That was a very efficient way to prove my point.

OK, how's this then. The majority are arguing we might make 8 wins, maybe. We're optimistic. Which you call "blind homerism" in your support of the point we completely suck and will maybe win 2 games. This is an endless ridiculous point brought up by the bashers. No one but Langley is a "blind homer" and not only doesn't he deny it, he's proud of it. Which means really he's a homer and not blind. More power to him. You want to bash the team, fine. But that while you're extreme and the general community isn't, that you call us "blind homers" is...a stupid post... You're a blind hater.

That clear it up for ya?

I think that your comprehension of my posts has been quite poor. I have not bashed the team in any way. I also don't think that this year's team will win only 2 games; for the record I think they will probably win between 4 and 6.

These are the only 3 points I have tried to convey in this thread:

1. I feel like it is a personal attack to immediately dismiss the fanhood of the OP for suggesting that the Redskins would be better off in the long run by having a horrible season and getting the chance to draft Luck. I agree with the OP that Luck is an incredible pro prospect, probably the best since Peyton Manning. In fact, I would like to hear more debate on that topic (i.e. is there someone you like better?) than see more baseless boasts on who has the biggest fanhood.

2. I do not believe it is rational or realistic to expect a professional football team to willfully tank and throw a season, and have never advocated this.

3. I believe that the Redskins would be hurt in the long run by winning 4 or more games this season and losing the opportunity draft Luck first overall. I think this is a clear case where a small, incremental improvement would serve to prevent a huge leap forward. It evokes the old adage "It is better to lose the battle in order to win the war". I understand that Luck could still be obtained by packaging multiple first rounders and probably players, but this is obviously not the most efficient way to secure his rights. This is also an area for fruitful exploration and discussion, as there are very few certainties in place.

Lastly, I have no quarrel with LPJ's homerism (I'm using him as an example since he was mentioned in the post above). I actually find it refreshing. He expresses his view without prejudice, and by his posts seems to give others with opposing viewpoints the same level of respect while still retaining the ability to carry on a reasonable discussion...which is the overall purpose of this board. He lacks the tendency to lash out reflexively with baseless and senseless personal attacks when an opposing viewpoint is presented.

You chastise me and then completely and utterly miss the discussion!!!!

Re-read the thread and come back, none of the discussion is about his saying we'd be "better off." The discussion was about his rooting for it. And that after you chastised me for reading skills. Again...



And despite your spin, you called the community predicting 8-8 blind homers. To say you're defending his stating his view, you're mistating and mischaracterizing ours. Then say you just want honest discussion. Surrreeee you do....

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

absinthe1023 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

absinthe1023 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

absinthe1023 wrote:You would really like to see the community respond with rational discourse rather than blind homerism

What a stupid post

That was a very efficient way to prove my point.

OK, how's this then. The majority are arguing we might make 8 wins, maybe. We're optimistic. Which you call "blind homerism" in your support of the point we completely suck and will maybe win 2 games. This is an endless ridiculous point brought up by the bashers. No one but Langley is a "blind homer" and not only doesn't he deny it, he's proud of it. Which means really he's a homer and not blind. More power to him. You want to bash the team, fine. But that while you're extreme and the general community isn't, that you call us "blind homers" is...a stupid post... You're a blind hater.

That clear it up for ya?

I think that your comprehension of my posts has been quite poor. I have not bashed the team in any way. I also don't think that this year's team will win only 2 games; for the record I think they will probably win between 4 and 6.

These are the only 3 points I have tried to convey in this thread:

1. I feel like it is a personal attack to immediately dismiss the fanhood of the OP for suggesting that the Redskins would be better off in the long run by having a horrible season and getting the chance to draft Luck. I agree with the OP that Luck is an incredible pro prospect, probably the best since Peyton Manning. In fact, I would like to hear more debate on that topic (i.e. is there someone you like better?) than see more baseless boasts on who has the biggest fanhood.

2. I do not believe it is rational or realistic to expect a professional football team to willfully tank and throw a season, and have never advocated this.

3. I believe that the Redskins would be hurt in the long run by winning 4 or more games this season and losing the opportunity draft Luck first overall. I think this is a clear case where a small, incremental improvement would serve to prevent a huge leap forward. It evokes the old adage "It is better to lose the battle in order to win the war". I understand that Luck could still be obtained by packaging multiple first rounders and probably players, but this is obviously not the most efficient way to secure his rights. This is also an area for fruitful exploration and discussion, as there are very few certainties in place.

Lastly, I have no quarrel with LPJ's homerism (I'm using him as an example since he was mentioned in the post above). I actually find it refreshing. He expresses his view without prejudice, and by his posts seems to give others with opposing viewpoints the same level of respect while still retaining the ability to carry on a reasonable discussion...which is the overall purpose of this board. He lacks the tendency to lash out reflexively with baseless and senseless personal attacks when an opposing viewpoint is presented.

You chastise me and then completely and utterly miss the discussion!!!!

Re-read the thread and come back, none of the discussion is about his saying we'd be "better off." The discussion was about his rooting for it. And that after you chastised me for reading skills. Again...



And despite your spin, you called the community predicting 8-8 blind homers. To say you're defending his stating his view, you're mistating and mischaracterizing ours. Then say you just want honest discussion. Surrreeee you do....

I don't see where I need to say much else here. I made my point clearly. Your response offers nothing of substance, and consists merely of imparting spin onto another poster's prose, thinly-veiled insults, and straw-man construction. I'm not surprised, as I've seen you do it in multiple other threads over the years. I'm not going to be drawn into that. If anything, I'm thankful to you for reminding me why I always read but rarely post to these forums.

My points are what they are. I'm not the official spokesman of any other poster, and therefore their exact intentions/thoughts behind their posts are unknown to me and I cannot speak as to why they thought/wrote as they did, nor am I responsible for defending each and every sentence of other poster's remarks. Find someone else to play the game that you clearly love so much. I have a life to get back to.

Don't worry man, nobody likes Kazzo @ first but he's a good guy.. except for that one time @ band-camp.. but that's a different story.

langleyparkjoe wrote:Don't worry man, nobody likes Kazzo @ first but he's a good guy.. except for that one time @ band-camp.. but that's a different story.

Thanks for the optimism, but no worries as I obviously haven't attached a life-or-death level of intensity/emotion to my posting here.
On a side note, a long time ago I noticed you mentioned you were a Trini, but I never made a comment about it. My father is from Diego Martin....

Go Soca Warriors!

Red_One43 wrote:

jeremyroyce wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

jeremyroyce wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

jeremyroyce wrote:That is one reason why this team is dysfunctional.

Last year's team can easily be labeled as dysfunctional. What are you basing dysfunctinalism on this year?

That Beck or Grossman is the QB. Who would you rather have then as QB. McNabb who won't run the offense as it was meant to be? He was part of the dysfunction. Regardless of whose fault, you say it was for McNabb's failure - McNabb who is an improvisor can not function well in this offense. Do you Ponder, Dalton, Gabbert? A long term rookie QBs. Dalton looks horrible so far and fortunately for Ponder and Gabbert they do not have to start. Do you know better than Shanny as to whether these guys are the right QB for this Offense? Do you Orton with his 9 million dollar contract? What are we suposed to do with him if Shanny has his eyes on a college QB for next year's draft. Trade him like Denver did. Who should we have gotten after the lock out? Vince Young? He is tearing it up on the bench in Philly being out played by the 3rd teamer. Marc Bulger? - Retired. Hasselbeck? Stinking it up in Tenessee right now - having trouble learning to the O. Guess whose Offense is also similar to ours besides Houston.

The Shanny's are going to rid out the season with Beck or Grossman. Based on what we got out of the QB position last year, it won't take much to improve on that. Grossman in his three starts matched McNabb', the pro bowler's 13 starts in average per game stats.

Harping over not having a QB makes no sense when the coach has not settled on Beck or Grossman a THE QB - You and a couple of other say he will falter - that's the way YOU CHOOSE to see it - it doesn't make you right. I bet you were one of those guys that said that Grossman would implode in is three starts last year - did for a half in Dallas but get this - he hadn't started a game in how long?

I like how you only post part of my post.

I post only the part that I want you to answer. I am glad that you understand.

Seriously, what has this team done since winning the last super bowl in January of 1992. Nothing. We have been a laughing stock team. Sure we have made the playoffs 3 times and that's it.

This has nothing to do with the team right now.

I'm not going to explain every reason as to why this team is dysfunctional other wise I would be here all night, however ONE REASON, Once again if John Beck starts which I believe he will, Beck will be the 21st different starting QB for this team since 1993. That right there is a problem. We have a revolving door at the QB situation. Look at the Dolphins since Dan Marino retired, look how many years the Falcons were set back after they traded Brett Favre, how about the Bills since Jim Kelly retired, how about the 49ers since Joe Montana and Steve Young retired, I could go on forever, but I'm giving you ONE REASON why this team is and has been dysfunctiona.l

Fair enough, I asked a question and I got an answer. Redskins are dysfunctional in your eyes because if John Beck starts he will be the 21st starting QB since 1993 and that constitutes a revolving door.

Beck has made one start and looked good, so what I am hearing is, if Beck looks good, then it is because it is pre-season and it means nothing. What I suspect I will hear from you if Beck does bad in a preseson game is, I told you so.

I'm not the type of a guy that comes out and says "I told you so" If, I'm right then I keep my mouth shut, and if I'm dead wrong then I will admit that I'm wrong.

Then I misjudged you. My sincere apologies.

Once again I'm not saying the QB situation is the only reason I feel the way I do about this team. No, I'm not sold on John Beck or Rex Grossman for that fact. We have a collection of 2nd and third string QB'S on this roster in my opinion.

I heard loud and clear the first time. You did say that that was one reason. I did remember your 2nd and 3rd stringer post as I read your one reason and it actually stopped me from asking a follow up.

I also believe that out of all the 32 NFL teams, we are one of the weakest teams at the QB situation.

I can see where you get that, but can you see where I get my position - we don't know yet, what Beck can do with this offense. Even you have only seen one game situation with Beck in this offense and 14 of 17 aint' bad against a cover 2 Defense doesn't doesn't allow the deep ball. More important than yardage and winning a preseason game is the fact that Beck managed the game and made no glaring errors.

How can you justify that these 2 clowns are better then McNabb?

Beck or Grossman don't have to have better talent than McNabb. They just have to be better in this offense. Grossman was just as good in stats as McNabb but even better at the tempo of the team. Grossman against a Giant team trying to make the play-offs (14-17) vs McNabb vs the Giants (7-31) early in the season. Head to head. Same team - Grossman out plays McNabb. They both had their turnovers and bone headed decisions in that game, but at least Grossman can say he was blind sided on his two fumbles. McNabb just stood at the line of scrimmage on a roll out with the first down right in front of him and then fumbled when he could find a receiver.

McNabb's resume speaks for itself. Ok, yes McNabb had a bad year, however it wasn't entirely all his fault either, others had also help contribute to his poor season.

You are failing to remember that Andy Reid traded the guy to keep who? Who? Kevin Kolb. And what team is he on? The Cardinals. So, why isn't McNabb still in Philly? I am sure that Reid knows his resume much better than you or me, but yet, he sent McNabb packing.

I mean seriously we gave how many dreadful years to Jason Campbell and yet we give McNabb only one year? If you even call it that. I guess you and I can agree to disagree

McNabb didn't fit this offense. He said so himself. It ws too robotic. Seriously, you did read that article on the thread you had been posting on in Around the League. That article clearly says that the Shannys and McNabb couldn not coexist together. One more year? C'mon Jeremey. It would not have worked any better than last. If you know about McNabb, then you know that he is an improvisor - you do know this right? Kyles' O leaves little room for improv.

I'm only going to address one more issue and then I'm done discussing this. I have mentioned this before and I will say this one last time. Shanahan did not fit his system around the strengths of his players (McNabb) and not only McNabb. Shanahan knew what he was getting in McNabb when he traded for him yet he forced his system on McNabb expecting him to just succeed in one season. That's pure stupidity. Part of a good head coach is to get the best out of the players rather then force a system on your players, when you don't have the players to run that system. The reason this wasn't going to work out or didn't work out was because of MIKE AND KYLE SHANAHAN. I think when you throw your players under the bus, and for a week, everyday Shanahan came out with a different excuse as to why he benched McNabb, insulting the intelligence of not only McNabb but the fans and the public and to think that the fans and the public is stupid enough to believe all of his excuses? That's why it didn't work out.

langleyparkjoe wrote:Don't worry man, nobody likes Kazzo @ first but he's a good guy.. except for that one time @ band-camp.. but that's a different story.

Dude, you promised not to bring that up again...

absinthe1023 wrote:I don't see where I need to say much else here. I made my point clearly. Your response offers nothing of substance, and consists merely of imparting spin onto another poster's prose, thinly-veiled insults, and straw-man construction. I'm not surprised, as I've seen you do it in multiple other threads over the years. I'm not going to be drawn into that. If anything, I'm thankful to you for reminding me why I always read but rarely post to these forums.

My points are what they are. I'm not the official spokesman of any other poster, and therefore their exact intentions/thoughts behind their posts are unknown to me and I cannot speak as to why they thought/wrote as they did, nor am I responsible for defending each and every sentence of other poster's remarks. Find someone else to play the game that you clearly love so much. I have a life to get back to.

jeremyroyce wrote:I'm only going to address one more issue and then I'm done discussing this. I have mentioned this before and I will say this one last time. Shanahan did not fit his system around the strengths of his players (McNabb) and not only McNabb.

This is true. Shanahan didn't fit his system around McNabb, but Shanahan is not Joe Gibbs whose style is to do that. Some coaches do and some coaches don't. Shanahan is a my way or the highway guy. Just because I like Joe Gibbs' method better doesn't mean that Shanahan's way is stupid. Here we go again - Afterall the guy has three Super Bowl Rings. Coached up Elway as his QB coach and then won two Supwer Bowls with a coached up Elway with a running game ta boot, but you think Shanahan should do things YOUR way.

Shanahan knew what he was getting in McNabb when he traded for him yet he forced his system on McNabb expecting him to just succeed in one season. That's pure stupidity. Part of a good head coach is to get the best out of the players rather then force a system on your players, when you don't have the players to run that system. The reason this wasn't going to work out or didn't work out was because of MIKE AND KYLE SHANAHAN.

It is a strange thing why he traded for McNabb in the first place. It has been said that Kyle never wanted the guy. Looks stupid on the surface. We don't know the underlying reasons behind such a strange acquisition. But I won't get into my theories because I did that on another thread a long time ago and they don't fit the point - which is why do you see the Redskins as dysfunctional. That being said. A head coach should reasonably expect a veteran who wants to win to do as his coach says to do. That's what he is paid to do. A coach has an expectation that when he shows a player the flaws in his mecahhics, that he shuld want to fix them - that wasn't the case here. Do you want to win a Super Bowl, Donovan? Apparently not. TO threw his under the Bus and his own coach Andy Reid got rid of him and kept a guy who is not on the team anymore. So it didn't work out in Philly because of the Shanahans as well.

I did not quote the rest of what you said because I didn't see where it was a separate argument and it had no support for your argument , in my opinion; however, it is still in your original post if folks want to see it so I don't understand the concern over partial posts. If I misquote or take you out of context let me know.

As far as I am concerned, you answered the question.

absinthe1023 wrote:

1. I feel like it is a personal attack to immediately dismiss the fanhood of the OP for suggesting that the Redskins would be better off in the long run by having a horrible season and getting the chance to draft Luck. I agree with the OP that Luck is an incredible pro prospect, probably the best since Peyton Manning. In fact, I would like to hear more debate on that topic (i.e. is there someone you like better?) than see more baseless boasts on who has the biggest fanhood.

That is not why his fanhood was questioned and you know it. The RR56 quote below was pointed out directly to you by Irn-Bru and it has been posted all over this thread. Of course if you were to acknowledge it, then it would give us blind homers reason to question his fanhood. By not acknowledging it, that is what you seem to be saying.

That is why I am rooting against my favorite sports team this year. My number one team, I love all my DC teams but the Redskins are what I live and die for more so then then Caps, Wizards, Nationals, Terps and MSU (alum)

Like I said, if you want to be a peacmaker, then be one and look at both sides.

NEVERTHELESS - RR56 is having a discussion on this board as I write and I don't believe anyone lately, I could be wrong, has questioned his fanhood - they may have questioned his sanity - but everybody's sanity has been questioned on these boards at one time or another.

2. I do not believe it is rational or realistic to expect a professional football team to willfully tank and throw a season, and have never advocated this.

I think the problem was you got lumped in with RR56 because you defened him and a defense of him was taken that you defended his rooting against the team of subject on this site. THE SKINS! !

3. I believe that the Redskins would be hurt in the long run by winning 4 or more games this season and losing the opportunity draft Luck first overall. I think this is a clear case where a small, incremental improvement would serve to prevent a huge leap forward. It evokes the old adage "It is better to lose the battle in order to win the war". I understand that Luck could still be obtained by packaging multiple first rounders and probably players, but this is obviously not the most efficient way to secure his rights. This is also an area for fruitful exploration and discussion, as there are very few certainties in place.

I hear what you are sayng but it makes no sense to me. Sounds like you saying, If it were reasonable and rational to tank a season, you would. Hey! That's whatt it sounds like when you make the analogy, "It's better to lose ...." or the Skins would be hurt in the long run.

To most fans, you try to win every game in every season - that is what it is about right. When you don't win the Super Bowl, you evaluate each game and learn from them, win or lose. Though your draft position sucks with a 10-6 non play-off season like TB, you accept your position because that is the rules of the game. You want to win with integrity, right?

Lastly, I have no quarrel with LPJ's homerism (I'm using him as an example since he was mentioned in the post above). I actually find it refreshing. He expresses his view without prejudice, and by his posts seems to give others with opposing viewpoints the same level of respect while still retaining the ability to carry on a reasonable discussion...which is the overall purpose of this board. He lacks the tendency to lash out reflexively with baseless and senseless personal attacks when an opposing viewpoint is presented.

You're not helping your case that you have no quarrel with "homerism," LPJ's or others', when you describe your position as "realism" (in an earlier post). You say "reasonable?" It is not reasonable to claim that your positon is one of realism wile incinuating that the "homers" positon is not. Homers' positions are just as real as yours.

What is it that makes your position so realistic? The Vegas odds are 6.5 wins for the Redskins with an over and an under of plus or minus 1. That doesn't take into account that an average of 6 new teams make the play-off each year since 1993. Vegas had the KC Chiefs at 6 last year. Not sure where they had the Bucs. On the radio today, Ron Jaworski siad that he believes that the Skins can make the play-offs. Marshall Faulk was singing praises to the Skins - why is your position so real and who determined was real besides you? These former players see something in the Skins, so why can't the so called "blind homers" see something?

A fanatic by definition of the word, IMO, believes that his team can be one of those 6 or this year's KC or TB until it is PROVEN otherwise. !

Red_One43 wrote:

jeremyroyce wrote:I'm only going to address one more issue and then I'm done discussing this. I have mentioned this before and I will say this one last time. Shanahan did not fit his system around the strengths of his players (McNabb) and not only McNabb.

This is true. Shanahan didn't fit his system around McNabb, but Shanahan is not Joe Gibbs whose style is to do that. Some coaches do and some coaches don't. Shanahan is a my way or the highway guy. Just because I like Joe Gibbs' method better doesn't mean that Shanahan's way is stupid. Here we go again - Afterall the guy has three Super Bowl Rings. Coached up Elway as his QB coach and then won two Supwer Bowls with a coached up Elway with a running game ta boot, but you think Shanahan should do things YOUR way.

Shanahan knew what he was getting in McNabb when he traded for him yet he forced his system on McNabb expecting him to just succeed in one season. That's pure stupidity. Part of a good head coach is to get the best out of the players rather then force a system on your players, when you don't have the players to run that system. The reason this wasn't going to work out or didn't work out was because of MIKE AND KYLE SHANAHAN.

It is a strange thing why he traded for McNabb in the first place. It has been said that Kyle never wanted the guy. Looks stupid on the surface. We don't know the underlying reasons behind such a strange acquisition. But I won't get into my theories because I did that on another thread a long time ago and they don't fit the point - which is why do you see the Redskins as dysfunctional. That being said. A head coach should reasonably expect a veteran who wants to win to do as his coach says to do. That's what he is paid to do. A coach has an expectation that when he shows a player the flaws in his mecahhics, that he shuld want to fix them - that wasn't the case here. Do you want to win a Super Bowl, Donovan? Apparently not. TO threw his under the Bus and his own coach Andy Reid got rid of him and kept a guy who is not on the team anymore. So it didn't work out in Philly because of the Shanahans as well.

I did not quote the rest of what you said because I didn't see where it was a separate argument and it had no support for your argument , in my opinion; however, it is still in your original post if folks want to see it so I don't understand the concern over partial posts. If I misquote or take you out of context let me know.

As far as I am concerned, you answered the question.

Hey, man I know I said that I was done with this and I am done talking about this issue. I know I beat this issue to death, but I wanted to say that I appreciate your response regarding my last post and I may not agree with you I can see and understand from your point of view. Thank you. Also, I just wanted you to know that you did not take anything I said out of context. Enjoy the game tonight.

Suck for RR56

jeremyroyce wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

jeremyroyce wrote:I'm only going to address one more issue and then I'm done discussing this. I have mentioned this before and I will say this one last time. Shanahan did not fit his system around the strengths of his players (McNabb) and not only McNabb.

This is true. Shanahan didn't fit his system around McNabb, but Shanahan is not Joe Gibbs whose style is to do that. Some coaches do and some coaches don't. Shanahan is a my way or the highway guy. Just because I like Joe Gibbs' method better doesn't mean that Shanahan's way is stupid. Here we go again - Afterall the guy has three Super Bowl Rings. Coached up Elway as his QB coach and then won two Supwer Bowls with a coached up Elway with a running game ta boot, but you think Shanahan should do things YOUR way.

Shanahan knew what he was getting in McNabb when he traded for him yet he forced his system on McNabb expecting him to just succeed in one season. That's pure stupidity. Part of a good head coach is to get the best out of the players rather then force a system on your players, when you don't have the players to run that system. The reason this wasn't going to work out or didn't work out was because of MIKE AND KYLE SHANAHAN.

It is a strange thing why he traded for McNabb in the first place. It has been said that Kyle never wanted the guy. Looks stupid on the surface. We don't know the underlying reasons behind such a strange acquisition. But I won't get into my theories because I did that on another thread a long time ago and they don't fit the point - which is why do you see the Redskins as dysfunctional. That being said. A head coach should reasonably expect a veteran who wants to win to do as his coach says to do. That's what he is paid to do. A coach has an expectation that when he shows a player the flaws in his mecahhics, that he shuld want to fix them - that wasn't the case here. Do you want to win a Super Bowl, Donovan? Apparently not. TO threw his under the Bus and his own coach Andy Reid got rid of him and kept a guy who is not on the team anymore. So it didn't work out in Philly because of the Shanahans as well.

I did not quote the rest of what you said because I didn't see where it was a separate argument and it had no support for your argument , in my opinion; however, it is still in your original post if folks want to see it so I don't understand the concern over partial posts. If I misquote or take you out of context let me know.

As far as I am concerned, you answered the question.

Hey, man I know I said that I was done with this and I am done talking about this issue. I know I beat this issue to death, but I wanted to say that I appreciate your response regarding my last post and I may not agree with you I can see and understand from your point of view. Thank you. Also, I just wanted you to know that you did not take anything I said out of context. Enjoy the game tonight.

Thanks for hanging in there with me. I enjoyed the conversation. Here's to a good game tonight.

This is a shout out to Jeremy and others that don't like what Mike & Bruce have done so far

I'm going to enjoy watching this franchise improve and I am going to thoroughly enjoy reminding you guys:

you have no idea of what it takes to do what these guys have done

you have no clue about what it takes to bring in players and then find out that they are not going to make the effort to be the player you had hoped they would be when you brought them in here

you have no idea of how supportive this HC and this staff have been of players that were no longer 'wanted' by their last team





I'm NOT going to let you guys forget that you thought we would be better off making sure that we could be in a better position if we did not do well this season JUST so we could draft Andrew Luck

YOU'RE a BUNCH OF LOSERS = AND I'm going to be here ALL SEASON LONG

SkinsJock wrote:This is a shout out to Jeremy and others that don't like what Mike & Bruce have done so far

I'm going to enjoy watching this franchise improve and I am going to thoroughly enjoy reminding you guys:

you have no idea of what it takes to do what these guys have done

you have no clue about what it takes to bring in players and then find out that they are not going to make the effort to be the player you had hoped they would be when you brought them in here

you have no idea of how supportive this HC and this staff have been of players that were no longer 'wanted' by their last team





I'm NOT going to let you guys forget that you thought we would be better off making sure that we could be in a better position if we did not do well this season JUST so we could draft Andrew Luck

YOU'RE a BUNCH OF LOSERS = AND I'm going to be here ALL SEASON LONG

Listen, I have said this twice and I will say this one last time. If I am wrong, I will be the first to admit that I was wrong, and I even said that if I was wrong that I will create a new thread saying that I was wrong and apologize for not having faith in Mike. However DON'T EVER CALL ME OR ANYBODY ELSE A LOSER.

You're right - I'm not going to call anyone anything - I'm just going to keep you apprised of how WRONG your posts and thinking is (and a couple of others here) about how this franchise is improving this season and next

I have a lot more faith in this FO, these coaches and these players than you guys do

Don't worry about 'responding' - we all know you're here and hoping things fall apart

btw - IF I'm wrong about these guys, I, like you, will be the first to admit it too

enjoy

All your opinions SUCK!

16-0 baby!

SkinsJock wrote:You're right - I'm not going to call anyone anything - I'm just going to keep you apprised of how WRONG your posts and thinking is (and a couple of others here) about how this franchise is improving this season and next

I have a lot more faith in this FO, these coaches and these players than you guys do

Don't worry about 'responding' - we all know you're here and hoping things fall apart

btw - IF I'm wrong about these guys, I, like you, will be the first to admit it too

enjoy

How can you have faith in this front office?

Look at the mess they've created...

1. No one has a guaranteed roster spot, other than the guys that worked their way to the front of the depth chart by working hard... that's not fair to the big name players. Wait a minute, they didn't even bring in any big names

2. There is no drama in a Redskins locker room.... this is unheard of

3. Who the hell goes out and draft a dozen rookies? That's normally a three year (4 picks per year) process in Washington.

4. What about those stupid trades of picks... McNabb was a bad one but lets not for get about swapping a 3rd round pick for a 5th to get a starting RT, or basically doing the same thing to get a starting DE

5. Even worst they traded players too, like a up and coming young DB for a guy that's going to more than likely be the starting QB, a young DE that didn't fit the system for a starting WR plus a aging DL for a young one cut RB that has claimed the starting role.

That's just a handful of the things these front office guys have done.

How can you have faith in that?

1niksder wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:You're right - I'm not going to call anyone anything - I'm just going to keep you apprised of how WRONG your posts and thinking is (and a couple of others here) about how this franchise is improving this season and next

I have a lot more faith in this FO, these coaches and these players than you guys do

Don't worry about 'responding' - we all know you're here and hoping things fall apart

btw - IF I'm wrong about these guys, I, like you, will be the first to admit it too

enjoy

How can you have faith in this front office?

Look at the mess they've created...

1. No one has a guaranteed roster spot, other than the guys that worked their way to the front of the depth chart by working hard... that's not fair to the big name players. Wait a minute, they didn't even bring in any big names

2. There is no drama in a Redskins locker room.... this is unheard of

3. Who the hell goes out and draft a dozen rookies? That's normally a three year (4 picks per year) process in Washington.

4. What about those stupid trades of picks... McNabb was a bad one but lets not for get about swapping a 3rd round pick for a 5th to get a starting RT, or basically doing the same thing to get a starting DE

5. Even worst they traded players too, like a up and coming young DB for a guy that's going to more than likely be the starting QB, a young DE that didn't fit the system for a starting WR plus a aging DL for a young one cut RB that has claimed the starting role.

That's just a handful of the things these front office guys have done.

How can you have faith in that?

We're doomed obviously, but why do I feel so happy?

1niksder wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:You're right - I'm not going to call anyone anything - I'm just going to keep you apprised of how WRONG your posts and thinking is (and a couple of others here) about how this franchise is improving this season and next

I have a lot more faith in this FO, these coaches and these players than you guys do

Don't worry about 'responding' - we all know you're here and hoping things fall apart

btw - IF I'm wrong about these guys, I, like you, will be the first to admit it too

enjoy

How can you have faith in this front office?

Look at the mess they've created...

1. No one has a guaranteed roster spot, other than the guys that worked their way to the front of the depth chart by working hard... that's not fair to the big name players. Wait a minute, they didn't even bring in any big names

2. There is no drama in a Redskins locker room.... this is unheard of

3. Who the hell goes out and draft a dozen rookies? That's normally a three year (4 picks per year) process in Washington.

4. What about those stupid trades of picks... McNabb was a bad one but lets not for get about swapping a 3rd round pick for a 5th to get a starting RT, or basically doing the same thing to get a starting DE

5. Even worst they traded players too, like a up and coming young DB for a guy that's going to more than likely be the starting QB, a young DE that didn't fit the system for a starting WR plus a aging DL for a young one cut RB that has claimed the starting role.

That's just a handful of the things these front office guys have done.

How can you have faith in that?

#5 is where they blew it for me. The other trades I can accept (even the McNabb one), but giving up that up and coming young DB (nevermind he is out of football - that's the Shanny's fault - both of them) for a QB that might start the season for us, that will go down as a trade that will be talked about for decades. We will never get over it. Both Parcells and Ozzie Newsome, two of the best in the business of talent, discarded that QB. What a horrible, horrible trade!

And bring back the drama. Except for the preseason games - training camp is boring. I pick up the national newspaper and the Skins aren't there - I miss those days.

This team cares deeply about winning football games, and has developed a nasty streak that is one of the most refreshing things I have ever seen. We have heard about the little fights during camp, and now twice seen them scuffle with the apposing team during the preseason.

For the last ten years or so, every time the Redskins have been matched up against teams like the Colts, Steelers or Ravens you could tell they didn’t belong on the same field. They looked scared, played scared, and got pushed around.

The game consistently looked bigger than they were able to handle, and usually the Result was a bloodied beaten and embarrassed team marching toward another losing season.

As of last night, it looks like those days are ending… soon. Finally the Redskins are a franchise that seems to have a clear direction, and that direction is up.

This team finally has fight in them. They don’t care who you are, or what you have done they are going to hit you in the mouth and beg for your best shot.

It is pretty hard to call a preseason game against a team that is not even in your conference a “statement” game, but last night under the big lights the Redskins made a statement.

As usual during the pre game the Redskins were once again the brunt of ESPN’s jokes. Mike Tirico and Ron Jawarski took a few backhanded shots at the team, and let’s be honest the Redskins have earned the criticism. But as the game went on the MNF guys began to sing a different tune.

My favorite quote came from John Gruden when he said “No one has run on the Ravens for the last ten years. This Redskins team is very impressive”.

Link

Red_One43 wrote:Before George Allen, we went 25 years without a play-off berth - not championship but play-off berth! Along comes man named George Allen in 1971 and puts together a team of old guys and an old half back that he wanted to make his QB.

All props to George, but it was really Lombardi who began to right the ship before he died.

RedskinsRule56 wrote:Didn't many posters on this board project 9-10 wins last year and we ended up with 6.

And the difference between those predictions and the eventual outcome was a few unlucky breaks.

SkinsJock wrote:NOBODY can say "I am a fan of the REDSKINS" and then say that they ENDORSE LOSING

Apparently, you're wrong.