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

Did anyone read Sally Jenkins's editorial in the Post today? It's garbage (so I refuse to link to it), but this really annoyed me:

"It's not just the big trends, the 5-6 mark against the fifth-weakest schedule in the league, and the fourth-quarter collapses that provoke skepticism" (italics mine).

What statistics are being used to come up with the fifth-weakest schedule? Sagarin has the Skins with the third toughest schedule (only behind Philly and New England). Anyone that knows anything about football knows how tough the Skins' schedule has been up to now. Maybe her eyes slipped down a row to the Atlanta Falcons (29th toughest schedule) and she subtracted incorrectly.

Just because you can write, doesn't mean you understand football. If Sally Jenkins is more interested in cleaning her oven than watching the Redskins, then that's exactly what she should stick to doing.

What? weakest? I totally agree with you, that's not true at all. First of all if your in the NFC east, your schedule cannot be weak... second, top it off by playing the AFC west and your a lock for at least the 5th hardest. Tack on chicago and tampa your officially at team with the hardest schedule...well at least one of them. But are you sure she's not referring to the rest of the season rather than the entire season?

Ok ill make this brief for this horrible washington post writer.

Our opponents have a combined record of 72-49 to this point. That is nearly a .600 winning percentage. Look I want to make no excuses for where we are as a team but that is a tough road for any team to have to play. Even if you add in our opponents left to be played the combined record for our opponents is 99-77 a horrible .562 winning percentage. Now how would one come to the conclusion that that is the fifth easiest schedule? We have beat two out of three division leaders one that is 9-2 and the other at 8-3. We barely lost to the Broncos who are surely the second best team in the AFC. We have played only three games against teams with losing records and won two, with the third as a fluke game. We have played against five teams that are either tied for second or hold second place in their divisions at 7-4. The only other team that has had a harder combined schedule to this point I believe are the Chargers. To continue on the numbers parade our remaining opponents have a combined 27-28 record, this fares well for us but only if we capitalize on it.

Fact of the matter is Sally Jenkins is a moron and before she writes an stupid article that is based on garbage numbers she should do a little more research, and probably just quit her job as a sports columnist.

I will now return to doing my homework for class tonite after having done 10 minutes of research for the numbers i just provided.

Hail to the Redskins! Win or lose baby this is always the team for me!!!!!

She's an idiot.dude....she doesn't watch football and when she does she seems like a Cowboys fan.

wbbradb wrote:Did anyone read Sally Jenkins's editorial in the Post today? It's garbage (so I refuse to link to it), but this really annoyed me:

"It's not just the big trends, the 5-6 mark against the fifth-weakest schedule in the league, and the fourth-quarter collapses that provoke skepticism" (italics mine).

What statistics are being used to come up with the fifth-weakest schedule? Sagarin has the Skins with the third toughest schedule (only behind Philly and New England). Anyone that knows anything about football knows how tough the Skins' schedule has been up to now. Maybe her eyes slipped down a row to the Atlanta Falcons (29th toughest schedule) and she subtracted incorrectly.

Just because you can write, doesn't mean you understand football. If Sally Jenkins is more interested in cleaning her oven than watching the Redskins, then that's exactly what she should stick to doing.

I dont know how Phillys is more difficult...the only difference in our schedule and theirs is we played chicago and tb while they played GB and Atlanta. I guess they must have factored travel into the mix but if you strictly look at the teams our schedule is more difficult.

Sally Jenkins once, seriously, wrote a column in which she attempted to dismiss evolution as a crackpot theory, this despite her own rather obvious physical connection to the orangutan.
Point being, that woman has no use for facts. She is a one-trick monkey who writes unbelievably stupid things which generate letters which act as proof that people read her drivel.
Fortunately there is a cure for the disease that is Sally Jenkins: ignore her and she will go away. Don't read her columns, don't click on any link with her name, don't buy the Post when she publishes a column.
If we shun her often enough and en-masse the Post will too.

statistics about NFL schedule strength are absurd... every team in the NFL plays the same schedule as the rest of the teams in their division with exception of two conference games... This year those two games for us were against Chicago and Tampa (15 wins), you couldn't have made it much tougher than that... compared to the Giants whose two games are against New Orleans and Minnesota (9 wins), or Dallas whose two games are against Detroit and Carolina (12 wins), or Philly whose two games are against Atlanta and Green Bay (9 wins)...

as it turns out the Skins have the toughest schedule in the NFC East so far... you can't compare much more than that...

it's silly to even look at opponents winning percentage... take the Colts and Texans for instance, they play the same exact schedule except for two games, Indy's two are New England and San Diego (13 wins) and Houston's two are against Miami and Oakland (8 wins)... follow me... so other than the common games they play, Indy has the tougher schedule, but if you look at the opponent's winning percentage, Houston has the tougher schedule... THAT'S BECAUSE INDY DOESN'T PLAY THEMSELVES... OPPONENT'S WINNING PERCENTAGE IS A STUPID STATISTIC, LET'S COMPARE APPLES TO APPLES...

kkryan wrote:

wbbradb wrote:Did anyone read Sally Jenkins's editorial in the Post today? It's garbage (so I refuse to link to it), but this really annoyed me:

"It's not just the big trends, the 5-6 mark against the fifth-weakest schedule in the league, and the fourth-quarter collapses that provoke skepticism" (italics mine).

What statistics are being used to come up with the fifth-weakest schedule? Sagarin has the Skins with the third toughest schedule (only behind Philly and New England). Anyone that knows anything about football knows how tough the Skins' schedule has been up to now. Maybe her eyes slipped down a row to the Atlanta Falcons (29th toughest schedule) and she subtracted incorrectly.

Just because you can write, doesn't mean you understand football. If Sally Jenkins is more interested in cleaning her oven than watching the Redskins, then that's exactly what she should stick to doing.

I dont know how Phillys is more difficult...the only difference in our schedule and theirs is we played chicago and tb while they played GB and Atlanta. I guess they must have factored travel into the mix but if you strictly look at the teams our schedule is more difficult.

There is one other difference: They have to play us, but we get to play their sorry team!

I had a look at here rag in the Post and then ...

... decided not to waste my time anymore there and came here.

Fios wrote:

Sally Jenkins once, seriously, wrote a column in which she attempted to dismiss evolution as a crackpot theory, this despite her own rather obvious physical connection to the orangutan.

Tony K was talking about this today, and how she was totally off. Before the season started, we were supposed to play the 5th easiest schedule, but as it stands now, we have played the 6th hardest schedule.

Donkey McDonkerton wrote:Tony K was talking about this today, and how she was totally off. Before the season started, we were supposed to play the 5th easiest schedule, but as it stands now, we have played the 6th hardest schedule.

Hah! So that explains it.

I guess there's one thing more useless than strength-of-schedule stats: strength-of-schedule stats based on last year.

I still think that the schedule has a lot to do with teams' records. Just because everyone in the NFC East has essentially the same schedule does NOT mean that NFC East schedules are as easy as, say, NFC South schedules. Yes, Tampa Bay, Atlanta, and Carolina are good, but they also get to play the entire AFC East, while we get stuck with the AFC West! If we had lost to Miami, Buffalo, the Jets, etc., then we really would be awful. But there's no shame in playing close games to the wire against the Broncos, Chargers, Chiefs, and yes, even Oakland is better than the pitiful Jets.

wbbradb wrote:

Donkey McDonkerton wrote:Tony K was talking about this today, and how she was totally off. Before the season started, we were supposed to play the 5th easiest schedule, but as it stands now, we have played the 6th hardest schedule.

Hah! So that explains it.

I guess there's one thing more useless than strength-of-schedule stats: strength-of-schedule stats based on last year.

I still think that the schedule has a lot to do with teams' records. Just because everyone in the NFC East has essentially the same schedule does NOT mean that NFC East schedules are as easy as, say, NFC South schedules. Yes, Tampa Bay, Atlanta, and Carolina are good, but they also get to play the entire AFC East, while we get stuck with the AFC West! If we had lost to Miami, Buffalo, the Jets, etc., then we really would be awful. But there's no shame in playing close games to the wire against the Broncos, Chargers, Chiefs, and yes, even Oakland is better than the pitiful Jets.

Agreed

Of course, we all know that every one in the NFC East plays the same opponents for 14 of 16 games. So, we all have the same schedule for much of the year. But, did you know that the other two games are detemined by your prior year finish?

For example, the Eagles drew the number one teams from last years finish in the NFC North and South--Green Bay and Atlanta. The Giants drew the number two teams from those Divisions--Minnesota and New Orleans.

Perhaps, some very little known news. Officially, you guys finsihed last in the NFC East last year. Official finish was Eagles, Giants, Cowboys, and SKINZ, based on tie breakers.

Accordingly, you drew Tampa and Chicago, the worst teams in the NFC North and South last year. So, your schedule for 2005, was in theory the easiest for all NFC East teams as you played the last place teams from 2004 in those respective Divisions.

I quickly just saw the Thread Name and laughed. There is no way we have the weakest schedule. No evidence needs to be brought to the table...and I agree completely on the Orangtun/Sally Jenkins comparison Fios, even beyond a physical level.

I heard early in the year that San Diego had the most difficult schedule...Not a lot of doubt in my mind:

Dallas
Denver 2 times
N.Y. Giants
@New England
Pittsburgh
Oakland 2 times
@Philadelphia
Kansas City 2 times
@N.Y. Jets
Buffalo
@Washington
Miami
@Indianapolis

The Skins have a very difficult schedule this year...

Want to see a difficult college schedule, check out UNC's this year... http://www.sportsline.com/collegefootball/teams/page/NC

Boy, Jenkins is a sight for sore eyes! Check her picture out, it's Kornheiser with a wig and shaven.

elchalje wrote:Of course, we all know that every one in the NFC East plays the same opponents for 14 of 16 games. So, we all have the same schedule for much of the year. But, did you know that the other two games are detemined by your prior year finish?

For example, the Eagles drew the number one teams from last years finish in the NFC North and South--Green Bay and Atlanta. The Giants drew the number two teams from those Divisions--Minnesota and New Orleans.

Perhaps, some very little known news. Officially, you guys finsihed last in the NFC East last year. Official finish was Eagles, Giants, Cowboys, and SKINZ, based on tie breakers.

Accordingly, you drew Tampa and Chicago, the worst teams in the NFC North and South last year. So, your schedule for 2005, was in theory the easiest for all NFC East teams as you played the last place teams from 2004 in those respective Divisions.

hey troll, we all know that, you aren't contributing anything. but guess what? tampa and chicago might have been the worst teams in their divisions LAST year, but they are exactly 397 times better than Green Bay, Minnesota, New Orleans, and Detroit (who the cowboys played) this year (Atlanta is still pretty good, admittedly).

right now we are two games out of 1st... oh, maybe that has something to do with having two extra games against really good teams, while the rest of the division got to beat up on cupcakes.

Sally Jenkins once, seriously, wrote a column in which she attempted to dismiss evolution as a crackpot theory, this despite her own rather obvious physical connection to the orangutan.

wow

Hey now, orangutans are considered to be an endangered species. No need to further impact them by comparing then negatively to Sally Jenkins. I mean come on, there's likely to be a spate of accidental orangutan killings, done by nearsighted people trying to rid the world of Sally!

And please don't think that I condone any activity of that sort. Understand, possibly, but condone, never! After all, who would want to hurt those apes?

Sally Jenkins has no idea what she's talking about.

She's just a token female sports writer.

Pay her no mind.