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

So should we kick Gibbs off the bandwagon, too? On TV Gibbs called the game "awful", so I'm inclined to go with what he says.

Here's the problem with your little "theory".

Joe Gibbs' preseason record sucks. Always has. Always will. Why, you ask? Because he is one of few coaches who actually uses if for what it was intended... to test untested talent. He doesn't give a darn about winning in preseason. The game was "awful" because a bunch of his talent got messed up. You, and the freefalling fairweather bandwagoners, OTOH, seem to think the game portends disaster.

Ouch. I think a chunk of sky just hit me.

The biggest sandbagger on the planet is ALWAYS going to say we were 'awful' or need to 'work on a lot of things'... that's just Joe.

Nobody even figured out what a great coach he was until he'd won 3 Super Bowls because they'd been listening to Joe tell them how the Redskins were 'lucky', or 'fortunate'... it's just part of his schtick.

If you watch the starting defense against the Bengals... they certainly weren't anything close to 'awful'... they were splendid actually holding the Bengals to -20 yards. Did Joe point that out? No, he doesn't need to.

Unlike some people... Joe realizes that the preseason is about preparation... preseason is about evaluation... preseason is about setting tones... it's not about winning games and it's not about looking good either. These guys would rather put 'fringe' players in a position to show what they can or can't do and know that the experience they gain from it is invaluable.

I personally thought it was great that regardless of what the scoreboard said, the Redskins coaching staff stuck to their approach, stuck to their gameplan, stuck to their time schedules and just went about conducting on-field interviews for many of the Redskin players.

Countertrey wrote: You, and the freefalling fairweather bandwagoners, OTOH, seem to think the game portends disaster.

Perhaps you'd like to point out where I said that?

Perhaps you'd like to point out where I said that?

I've looked at a few threads... turns out you didn't actually say it anywhere... in fact, other than some criticism of Collins, you seem pretty optimistic, so an appology is in order...

In my defense, when I said:

OK, OK... nice thread... Great post... but, I'm telling you, dude... you're going to need a whole forum for the bodies falling from the bus

you responded:

So should we kick Gibbs off the bandwagon, too? On TV Gibbs called the game "awful", so I'm inclined to go with what he says. Yes, it's preseason, and no, it doesn't count for jack, but it could've been better; that's all anyone is saying.

That certainly looks like a defense of the Chicken Little faction, to me. The fact is, your assertion that "it could've been better" is all anyone is saying is just not true. A quick scan of the posts on Monday reveals no shortage of "OMG THE WORLD IS ENDING" posts.

The truth is that this is just another preseason game that we "lost", as happens far more often than not under JG. He's going to play "vanilla", knowing that most other coaches will actually try to win. If he can win playing "vanilla", then great... if not... oh well.

Gibbs was surely disappointed that none of the backup O-linemen stepped up to the plate. It is surely disappointed that K Carter was lost, and C Clemmons will be out for a while. He is surely worried that he really won't know how Portis is until he sees him stuff a blitzing backer (where his shoulder injury would most affect his play...) like he did on the same play where he was injured (that was an awesome block)

OTOH, I suspect he is equally pleased that Brandon Lloyd does, indeed, have hands coated with glue, that Jason Campbell is coming along nicely, that Mike Espy appears to be a real receiver, that the investment in Robert "the body" McCune appears to be paying off, and that Rocky McIntosh was the right call in the second round.

But, Gibbs is a paranoid poker player. You will never see his hand until the games count. BH correcly notes that JG can accurately be called "the biggest sandbagger on the planet". That's why there is a thread on this board questioning the legitimacy of Portis' injury.

Ouch. I think a chunk of sky just hit me.

Wanna borrow my armored umbrella?

Nahhhh... Dodging the falling sky (and, the bodies falling from the bus, as well) is good training for facing my wife after a late night at the bar.

Countertrey wrote:Nahhhh... Dodging the falling sky (and, the bodies falling from the bus, as well) is good training for facing my wife after a late night at the bar.

Can't help but laugh at that. A bit of sandbanging yourself???

Can't help but laugh at that. A bit of sandbanging yourself???

Every word I utter is the absolute truth!

Countertrey wrote:Nahhhh... Dodging the falling sky (and, the bodies falling from the bus, as well) is good training for facing my wife after a late night at the bar.

How late does your wife stay at the bar?

Mursilis wrote:

Countertrey wrote:Nahhhh... Dodging the falling sky (and, the bodies falling from the bus, as well) is good training for facing my wife after a late night at the bar.

How late does your wife stay at the bar?

Countertrey wrote:

Can't help but laugh at that. A bit of sandbanging yourself???

Every word I utter is the absolute truth!

Yes, but these words were typed not uttered.

Yes, but these words were typed not uttered. Confused

Great... another forum lawyer.

Countertrey wrote:

Yes, but these words were typed not uttered. Confused

Great... another forum lawyer.

DO NOT CALL ME A LAWYER

I'm speechless.


I thought yupchagee was Yidish for "an engineer who secretly wants to be a lawyer". Maybe I was wrong.

Countertrey wrote:I'm speechless.


I thought yupchagee was Yidish for "an engineer who secretly wants to be a lawyer". Maybe I was wrong.

1) It's not Yiddish.
2) It has nothing to do with engineering.
3) It has nothing to do with lawyers.

Other than that......

aswas71788 wrote:crazyhorse, I don't think we are going to miss Ramsey. If what I read is right, he has not been very impressive in NY. I think Campbell will be able to handle it. That is I hope Campbell will be able to handle it if Brunell gets hurt, which I sincerely hope doesn't happen. Brunell may have an age issue and sometimes a performance issue but he is still the quarterback and as he goes, so will the Redskins. If he stays healthy, the Redskins may even have a shot at the Super Bowl this year.

We won't miss Ramsey if Brunell holds up and Campbell is ready. You're right. The fear is that Brunell will run down and Campbell won't be ready.

The good news there is that with the talent we have on offense, if Campbell is called on, he'll have plenty of support, and won't be thrown into a situation where it's all on him.

Other than that......

At least I was close.

joebagadonuts wrote:The good news there is that with the talent we have on offense, if Campbell is called on, he'll have plenty of support, and won't be thrown into a situation where it's all on him.

That's why I'm not worried about Brunell going down (at least as much as I am about Portis going down). I think JC looked decent in the preseason game, and he has had experience in big-time games; after all, he QB'ed Auburn to a national title. If Big Ben in Pittsburgh can throw for a 98 QB rating as a rookie, JC can do as well with after a year on the bench, learning the pro game.

How naive we all were back then.

So who's on the bandwagon now?

joebagadonuts wrote:The good news there is that with the talent we have on offense, if Campbell is called on, he'll have plenty of support, and won't be thrown into a situation where it's all on him.

Who wrote this drivel?!? We should ban him!

joebagadonuts wrote:

joebagadonuts wrote:The good news there is that with the talent we have on offense, if Campbell is called on, he'll have plenty of support, and won't be thrown into a situation where it's all on him.

Who wrote this drivel?!? We should ban him!

It's not drivel - I still think our skill players (RBs/TEs/WRs) on offense are solid. The O-line play has been inconsistent, but other than that, I think this could be a top-10, maybe even top-5 offense easily enough . . . if only we changed the QB.

Mursilis wrote:How naive we all were back then.

So who's on the bandwagon now?

I'm still on the bandwagon.

Mursilis wrote:

joebagadonuts wrote:

joebagadonuts wrote:The good news there is that with the talent we have on offense, if Campbell is called on, he'll have plenty of support, and won't be thrown into a situation where it's all on him.

Who wrote this drivel?!? We should ban him!

It's not drivel - I still think our skill players (RBs/TEs/WRs) on offense are solid. The O-line play has been inconsistent, but other than that, I think this could be a top-10, maybe even top-5 offense easily enough . . . if only we changed the QB.

Well, I was referring to posts I've made in other threads that point to the fact that the defense, O-line, and running game are not being consistant, and when that happens, the QB needs to step up and win the game. That's asking a lot of JC to come in and win games for us, as opposed to not lose them. Not that I'm saying that Grandma should continue to start, but if JC did get the nod, I wouldn't expect him to run the table or anything.

Irn-Bru wrote:

Mursilis wrote:How naive we all were back then.

So who's on the bandwagon now?

I'm still on the bandwagon.

I'm right there with 'ya. Ride's getting bumpy, though...what with folk dropping off left and right.

Seriously, I'm digusted with game performance, lack of coaching decisions, etc...but I am holding onto hope for the late fall turn-around magic that Gibbs & Co. always seem to weave. Little do we know that a kick in the face like the Titans game isn't enough to embarrass the team into a 5+ win streak. Can't say it hasn't happened before. I honestly don't blame our flock for being angry and venting. I just hope that those of you who can go to the games in person throw everything but the kitchen sink into it to give our boys some life.

$.02