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

The more and more I hear this guy open his about the Redskins the more I dislike him. He seems to hate the Redskins, he gives us no credit. But he gives Dallas credit after a poor showing in Buffalo; at least the Giants are a far better team then the Bills. Maybe I just dont like him, did anybody else got the same vibe?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01985.html

As far as I can tell, the Washington Post requires that all of their sports writers hat on all the local sports teams, particularly the Redskins. I don't think it is limited to Wilboner.

Eh, I only watched a few minutes but he didn't say anything I disagree with

I feel much the same way about Washington at this point. We've beaten the teams we should beat and gave one away against a division rival that was struggling badly at the time we played them.

We're in the mix at 3-1 and what we do over the next three weeks should give us a good idea about whether we're a contender or just a playoff hopeful.

I like what I see, don't get me wrong, but we've played 4 games and it doesn't really mean much.

It's fashionable to Hat on us, haven't you heard?

DaRealistJoka wrote:The more and more I hear this guy open his about the Redskins the more I dislike him. He seems to hate the Redskins, he gives us no credit. But he gives Dallas credit after a poor showing in Buffalo; at least the Giants are a far better team then the Bills. Maybe I just dont like him, did anybody else got the same vibe?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01985.html

He's a Chicago Bears fan.

Fios wrote:Eh, I only watched a few minutes but he didn't say anything I disagree with

Other than that both he and Kornheiser seem to think that "best record", and "best team" are synonymous, I can't argue with what they say either. Maybe at the end of the season, that's true, but at the quarter pole, I just can't agree.

Yeah, He seemed like he didn't even want to mention the Redskins.

Sounds like hate to me.

Then, he came around and gave his thoughts.

Yes, I agree with the points he made, but he still didn't even want to say the name Redskins.

That tells me he thinks the Redskins suck, and it don't matter who they beat. Almost sounded like a Cowboys fan after we we beat them.

"Yeah, the Redskins won the game, but you got lucky, and the Cows are better"

I have to agree, he is not yet convinced that the "skins" are for real this year. But with that said I find that Michael Wilbon is a very good sports writer and knowledgeable about the NFL. He is "not" a homer, and we havn't done anything yet, we are 3 and 1 but against non playoff contenders. Lets face it, we havn't earned any respect yet, but we are gaining momentum. This week could go a long way with a quality win on the road. Give Wilbon a pass on this one, "we are not there yet", and when we do turn the corner I feel he will report us appropriately....

Wilbon said the Redskins aren't better than the Giants. I would call that hatting on the Redskins.

GSPODS wrote:Wilbon said the Redskins aren't better than the Giants. I would call that hatting on the Redskins.

That statement is somewhat warranted since we did lose to the gints, we shouldn't have, but we did. He can hat all he wants, it's early, we are still in growing pains. Even if it looks like the pains are gone and it's the "W" that's growing

GSPODS wrote:Wilbon said the Redskins aren't better than the Giants. I would call that hatting on the Redskins.

Question....
Does he actually watch the games he comments on, or does he only see the highlights and final scores?

BnGhog wrote:

GSPODS wrote:Wilbon said the Redskins aren't better than the Giants. I would call that hatting on the Redskins.

Question....
Does he actually watch the games he comments on, or does he only see the highlights and final scores?

I'm certain Wilbon does what every other reporter does. He gleans only the information necessary to support his pre-existing opinion.

I have a question. What does being "hatted on", "hatting", or he "hat" the team mean?

skinsfan#33 wrote:I have a question. What does being "hatted on", "hatting", or he "hat" the team mean?

It is a joke in this forum. To be hatted on is to be hated. I'm sure someone can locate the avatars for you but I cannot seem to find them.

DaRealistJoka wrote:The more and more I hear this guy open his about the Redskins the more I dislike him. He seems to hate the Redskins, he gives us no credit. But he gives Dallas credit after a poor showing in Buffalo; at least the Giants are a far better team then the Bills. Maybe I just dont like him, did anybody else got the same vibe?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01985.html

What is this? Is this how they practice for PTI?

skinsfan#33 wrote:I have a question. What does being "hatted on", "hatting", or he "hat" the team mean?

A well known mis-speller used hatting when he meant hating... so we ran with it

One cup really got hatted on

That is a Photoshop fabrication, obviously, look to the left of these words

Fios wrote:That is a Photoshop fabrication, obviously, look to the left of these words

That's you getting ready to go out on the town

SKINFAN wrote:

GSPODS wrote:Wilbon said the Redskins aren't better than the Giants. I would call that hatting on the Redskins.

That statement is somewhat warranted since we did lose to the gints, we shouldn't have, but we did. He can hat all he wants, it's early, we are still in growing pains. Even if it looks like the pains are gone and it's the "W" that's growing

I didn't get that impression. Most of the stuff that he said made sense. Wilbon is a very good reporter and in reading his columns and watching him on tv for years he usually gives the Skins a fair shake. He doesn't hate on them and gives them plenty of love on Redskins Report. He is a Bears fan but that doesn't ever seem to cloud his judgment when reporting on the Skins.

Wilbon's a Chicago fan, his hometown.

Even so, I think he's a great writer and one of my favorite sports opinion people.

C'mon! Don't you ever watch him on George Michael's Redskins show? How can you dislike Mike Wilbon??

1niksder wrote:

skinsfan#33 wrote:I have a question. What does being "hatted on", "hatting", or he "hat" the team mean?

A well known mis-speller used hatting when he meant hating... so we ran with it

One cup really got hatted on

I remember that. I caught that it was a joke based on mispelling at the time, but then I started seein it more and more and thought that I was missing some sort of slang.

I got it now. Thanks!

GSPODS wrote:

BnGhog wrote:

GSPODS wrote:Wilbon said the Redskins aren't better than the Giants. I would call that hatting on the Redskins.

Question....
Does he actually watch the games he comments on, or does he only see the highlights and final scores?

I'm certain Wilbon does what every other reporter does. He gleans only the information necessary to support his pre-existing opinion.

He watches the Skins each and every week. It is a requirement of his job as a WP reporter.

GSPODS wrote:

BnGhog wrote:

GSPODS wrote:Wilbon said the Redskins aren't better than the Giants. I would call that hatting on the Redskins.

Question....
Does he actually watch the games he comments on, or does he only see the highlights and final scores?

I'm certain Wilbon does what every other reporter does. He gleans only the information necessary to support his pre-existing opinion.

A pretty ridiculous statement without having any first hand knowledge of how Wilbon does his job. There are plenty of bad sports writers out there but Wilbon isn't one of them. He is very informed and his columns are well researched and well written. I've had the opportunity to meet him and listen to him talk about sports and he is very knowledgeable about sports, including sports like golf and tennis that many reports don't know squat about. Wilbon may have biases but he does a very good job of making sure that they don't cloub his reporting.

Fios wrote:That is a Photoshop fabrication, obviously, look to the left of these words

I am wounded that you would suggest I could stoop so low.

It's not easy being cup pipperazzi. We get no respect, but our job is both necessary and dangerous. Just last month, I had a very serious paper cut.