Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=onlydarksets;220673]You're seriously surprised that calling someone a "so called fan" because they took a realistic view of our chances of winning "pushed a button"?

[COLOR=black]You just gotta know Southpaw. He is always pessimistic, and more often that not he picks the Skins to lose... and he knows I rib him for it regularly![/COLOR]

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

aw man, even when we are playing lousy, i'm always hoping the next game is where everything magically gets fixed.

i'm one of the most critical cats on this board, but i can honestly say i've never missed a play hoping for that improbable comeback. i mean Dallas happened last year you know?

being a Skins fan is hard, because it always feels like we're so CLOSE. but you gotta be there when it does, finally, happen.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=Mattyk72;220678]Being a fan and getting your heart broke, or sometimes ripped out, is part of the game. [/quote]

Why would you say that realizing your team is overmatched and is more likely to lose than to win means that it doesn't hurt when they do lose? That doesn't make any sense.

Maybe we're talking about two different things - faith versus expected outcomes. My faith in the Skins (as an organization) is unwavering - I want the Skins to win every game and to do everything they need to in order to win every game. However, I don't always expect that they will win.

[quote=Mattyk72;220678]But nothing beats the ultimate payoff. And we've been waiting too long for it.[/quote]
Amen to that!

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=onlydarksets;220687]Why would you say that realizing your team is overmatched and is more likely to lose than to win means that it doesn't hurt when they do lose? That doesn't make any sense.

Maybe we're talking about two different things - faith versus expected outcomes. My faith in the Skins (as an organization) is unwavering - I want the Skins to win every game and to do everything they need to in order to win every game. However, I don't always expect that they will win.[/quote]

We all have doubts, we just don't voice them. We need postive vibes on game day!!! :)

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=hesscl34;220688]We all have doubts, we just don't voice them. We need postive vibes on game day!!! :)[/quote]

lol - I'm not sure I can respond to that with anything other than

[SIZE=7][COLOR=darkred][B]Go Skins![/B][/COLOR][/SIZE]

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=TAFKAS;220674]I hear what you're saying. The problem is when someone says I'm as fanatical as the next fan when they win, yet I can't risk getting my heart broken by picking them to beat a better team then it's hard not to think "well how convenient for this bandwagoner"

Understand that I'm not saying you are jumping off and on a bandwagon, I'm just saying it can give that impression[/quote]

For the record. I am NOT anything close to a bandwagon fan. I was positive they could beat the Seahawks last year in the playoffs, and I was crushed when they lost. Just like I was sure they were going to beat the Vikings in the opener, and I was just as crushed when they lost that game. I'm loyal to the point that it confuses me when other fans are like "the NFC East is back!!!". Why would any Redskins fan be happy about that? I hate the rest of the NFC East, and I wish they all played like the Texans.

Anyway, It's not at all that I'm scared to pick Washington, for fear of being heartbroken. I just try to look at the game realistically, and realistically, they're overmatched. It'll take near perfect execution and a good amount of luck for Washington to beat Jacksonville. I don't think having that frame of mind makes me a bandwagoner.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=hesscl34;220682][COLOR=black]You just gotta know Southpaw. He is always pessimistic, and more often that not he picks the Skins to lose... and he knows I rib him for it regularly![/COLOR][/quote]

I play a few football pools, and I'm actually 2-1 in picking Skins games. The only time I was wrong was when I picked them to beat the Vikings...

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=Southpaw;220698]I play a few football pools, and I'm actually 2-1 in picking Skins games. The only time I was wrong was when I picked them to beat the Vikings...[/quote]

UM, AND when you picked them to lost to the Texans 17-10!!!

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[QUOTE=hesscl34;220702]UM, AND when you picked them to lost to the Texans 17-10!!![/QUOTE]


ouch is that true? :nono:

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=hesscl34;220702]UM, AND when you picked them to lost to the Texans 17-10!!![/quote]


I picked them to beat the Texans, 17-10. I was wrong about the score, but I was right about the victory. I admit they played better, than I expected in that game.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=Southpaw;220705]I picked them to beat the Texans, 17-10. I was wrong about the score, but I was right about the victory. I admit they played better, than I expected in that game.[/quote]

Southpaw you'll come around when we put a few Ws on the board in a row!! I look foward to it!!

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

For the record, I predicted a sqeaker of a win against the Vikings, a loss to the Cowboys, and another squeaker of a win in Houston.

My best week so far in picking the games straight up was Week 2 ... I was 11-4. I sucked with my picks in Weeks 1 and 3.

Yeah, I'm pessimistic this week. I look at what the Jags did to Pittsburgh's "Fast" Willie Parker and that vaunted Steeler O-line -- held them to 26 yards rushing. Then, take a look at what they did to Peyton Manning and the Colts in Indy: 48 yards rushing, and limited Manning's production to a very un-Peyton like 14 for 31 and 219 yards passing.

Now tell me, what in anyone's right mind could convince me that our offense -- which struggled against the Vikings, was stopped cold in Dallas, with all the penalties they've racked up -- can run the ball, and pass it effectively against Stroud, Henderson and the other guys that make up one of the top defenses in the league?

I've seen nothing to make me believe otherwise. The only thing I can hope for is for the Jags to have an "off" day.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;220715]I've seen nothing to make me believe otherwise. The only thing I can hope for is for the Jags to have a "off" day.[/QUOTE]

thats why the NFL is great. any given sunday. the belief that any team on an "on" day is better than any team on an "off" day.

while you're right Jax looks super tough, i would honestly just be happy to see this team play to their potential even if its during a squeaker loss.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=D'BOYZ;220279]Man the 74yds play Portis run/ catch because in reality that was a run even thought technically is a pass I was screaming in the end for him to cut to the middle he had the hole field open but he wanted to go close to the sideline and got tackle.

Great play tough it really shows how different this team it's with him on the field[/quote]
I was also screaming for him to cut up the middle...why the hell were you?

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=illdefined;220721]thats why the NFL is great. any given sunday. the belief that any team on an "on" day is better than any team on an "off" day.

while you're right Jax looks super tough, i would honestly just be happy to see this team play to their potential even if its during a squeaker loss.[/quote]

Where is Coach Janky Spanky when you need him???

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=illdefined;220721]while you're right Jax looks super tough, i would honestly just be happy to see this team play to their potential even if its during a squeaker loss.[/quote]

OK, you lost me there. You can rationalize a loss as a "step forward" because of good play, but for a team that's not the 49ers, Texans, or Raiders, you shouldn't be content with a loss.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[QUOTE=Meast;220725]I was also screaming for him to cut up the middle...why the hell were you?[/QUOTE]

one thing warpath does is slowly convert dallas fans.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[QUOTE=onlydarksets;220727]OK, you lost me there. You can rationalize a loss as a "step forward" because of good play, but for a team that's not the 49ers, Texans, or Raiders, you shouldn't be content with a loss.[/QUOTE]

in the grand scheme of a season, they're have been plenty of times when a loss has meant more to a team than a win etc. don't get me wrong, i'm never 'content' with a loss, but seeing this year's team click on all cylinders and find its identity means everything to the season, and it can happen in a win or a loss.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[QUOTE=Beemnseven;220715]Now tell me, what in anyone's right mind could convince me that our offense -- which struggled against the Vikings, was stopped cold in Dallas, with all the penalties they've racked up -- can run the ball, and pass it effectively against Stroud, Henderson and the other guys that make up one of the top defenses in the league?[/QUOTE]

True, but then again I'm probably not the only one who thought Oakland had no shot at all against the Skins last year.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS;220749]True, but then again I'm probably not the only one who thought Oakland had no shot at all against the Skins last year.[/QUOTE]

Yep, that could have been one of the top ten upsets of the 2005 season.

But if that's what we're reduced to, hoping for a miracle, the improbable victory against a team that just happened to have an "off day", what does that tell us about this season already?

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

I don't see the Jags being that much better than the Skins where we would need a miracle to win.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

the jags defense has played well so far this season, but they got lucky to beat dallas. and with the jags coming here, i fully expect the redskins to win. i say this without being a homer. i just think we are better

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=dmek25;221026]the jags defense has played well so far this season, but they got lucky to beat dallas. and with the jags coming here, i fully expect the redskins to win. i say this without being a homer. i just think we are better[/quote]

not a homer? LOL j/k I expect a victory as well. Yes they have a good front seven but that secondary really on has one good and proven player. Funny part is that the jags best db is a safety...sound familiar doesnt it? The key is to establish the run early and often. Then throw it deep.

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=Mattyk72;220220]The latest from Trevor Walters:


[CENTER][CENTER][B][U][FONT=Verdana]Reason for (Cautious) Optimism[/FONT][/U][/B][/CENTER]
[/CENTER]
[FONT=Verdana]For the first time since their playoff victory in [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Tampa[/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Bay[/FONT][FONT=Verdana] during the playoffs following the 2005 season, the Washington Redskins walked off of the field Sunday with a victory in their pockets. With a 31-15 triumph over the woeful Houston Texans, the Redskins made their first tangible step towards fulfilling the massive expectations that have been set forth for them both internally and by their fans. While [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Houston[/FONT][FONT=Verdana] is a team that the Redskins should beat, there is something to be said for winning the games that you’re supposed to win. Good teams do that, and they also win on the road. [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Washington[/FONT][FONT=Verdana] did both of those things this past Sunday, and they did so in rather impressive fashion.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana]In truth, the Redskins provided more competition for themselves than the Texans ever could have. As has become custom, the Redskins were whistled for 12 penalties, not counting another handful that were declined because there were multiple infractions on the same play. In terms of yardage, the distance the Redskins amassed in penalties was slightly more than the career high tally reserve tailback Ladell Betts registered on his 16 carries. It goes without saying that this is an area that [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Washington[/FONT][FONT=Verdana] must correct if they are to duplicate Sunday’s result against the tougher teams that lie ahead on the schedule, but what isn’t as obvious is whether or not such issues can be resolved. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana]The big question coming from the 31 point outburst Sunday afternoon is how much of the scoring can be attributed to the opponent, and how much is reflective of an increased comfort level with the offense? The opposition notwithstanding, the offense was splendidly balanced, at least until the game neared an end and more run plays were called to help bleed the clock dry. Of course, the efficiency of the offense can’t be praised without giving all due credit to quarterback Mark Brunell, who responded to numerous calls for his job with a record setting performance. Brunell seemed to flawlessly execute Al Saunders’ offense, seeming more like the “savvy veteran” of 2005 than the “washed up senior citizen” that he resembled only days earlier. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana]But just as the offensive explosion must also have an asterisk given the opposition, so too must Brunell’s day be analyzed with a grain of salt. Brunell made precious few throws that traveled over 10 yards in the air, with most of his 261 yards coming after the catch on screens and check-downs. His jersey can also skip the washing machine, thanks to a superlative effort in pass protection from the offensive line. So pessimistically, if you give him plenty of time, Brunell can accurately hit the receiver less than 30 feet away. Optimistically, he takes what the defense gives him and gets the ball into the hands of his playmakers. You can chose which description best suits your personal opinion, but as always, the truth most likely lies somewhere in between.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana]The best news to come out of [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Houston[/FONT][FONT=Verdana] – other than the victory of course – is that star halfback Clinton Portis returned, and did so with an emphatic bang. There appeared to be no new setbacks with regard to his injury status, and the outstanding performance of his backup Ladell Betts enabled him to take a large chunk of the second half off. His shoulder is going to be a source of constant concern as the season progresses, so each week that passes without a setback is critical for his long-term availability.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana]The game was not without its low points, though. Each team’s opening drive looked eerily similar to those from [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Washington[/FONT][FONT=Verdana]’s two prior contests. While the offense would eventually take command of the game, the defense continues to be as enigmatic as it has previously been dominant. Still without top cornerback [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Shawn[/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Springs[/FONT][FONT=Verdana], the secondary continued to struggle in pass coverage. Adam Archuleta, never known for his cover skills, has done little to alter his reputation in the first three games. The corners that have seen the brunt of the action – Carlos Rogers, Mike Rumph, and Kenny Wright – have been inconsistent at best. In Eric Moulds and Andre Johnson, the secondary faced a challenge that was much more difficult than did the team as a whole. Moulds and Johnson are an outstanding pair of receivers, and their success (combined 15 catches for nearly 180 yards) demonstrates the strides that the secondary must make down the stretch.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana]The amount of pressure [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Washington[/FONT][FONT=Verdana] placed on the quarterback was as negligible against the Texans as it had been in weeks past. Andre Carter, rescued from [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]San Francisco[/FONT][FONT=Verdana] to liven up a dull pass rush from the front four, has done little to merit his billing as a disruptive force. The one lineman who has spent time in the opposition’s backfield is rookie Kedrick Golston, who transformed himself from possible training camp casualty to consistent contributor in his short time in D.C. Golston and Lemar Marshall shared credit for the Redskins’ lone sack, and Golston also recovered his first career fumble when Texans quarterback David Carr put it on the ground after being flushed from the pocket.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana]The game ball this week goes to Clinton Portis, whose performance, and mere presence, fueled the 31 point offensive outburst. Portis lead the team with 78 yards receiving, most of which came on a Mark Brunell shovel pass, and chipped in with another 86 on the ground. The latter is a figure which would have been much higher had he not been rested in favor of Ladell Betts late in the game to rest his shaky shoulders. His two touchdowns raises his total for the young season to three, which is an impressive number given Portis only has 30 total touches thus far. His quickness and vision makes the draw play a vital weapon, not only for the yardage it accumulates, but for the pressure it takes off of Mark Brunell by reducing the defense’s appetite for the blitz.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana]Winning is a lot like pizza; it doesn’t matter where it comes from, it always hits the spot. While it can’t be forgotten that the Texans were lining up on the other side, it is still noteworthy for any team to put up 30+ points and win on the road. The gameplan set forth by Al Saunders had the Texans defense confused all afternoon long, and I would be remiss if I didn’t mention again that Mark Brunell’s execution of it was very nearly flawless. The healthy return of Clinton Portis was, and will be, key as the season progresses.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana]Washington[/FONT][FONT=Verdana] will visit the other end of the defensive spectrum Sunday as the third-ranked [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Jacksonville[/FONT][FONT=Verdana] defense comes to FedEx. The execution will need to be on a par with this past Sunday’s game if a similar result is to come from the Redskins’ tilt with the Jaguars. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana]
Check back in next week for your weekly Redskins football fix. Hail to the Redskins!


[/FONT]
[/quote] Wow! There are so mny reasons thay I categorically disagree with your summary. If you want to talk penalties than that is a different topic. Numero uno your grievances against our team. Wins are wins and losses are losses. Do we get a half win for beating Houston?
Now, down to my nitty gritty. You give your game ball to Portis....Jansen could have ran the holes he made. Did you miss El's blocks too? Absolute, there is a need for maniacal play out of our D that we have not seen.
Hail

Re: Reason for (Cautious) Optimism
 

[quote=Beemnseven;220715]For the record, I predicted a sqeaker of a win against the Vikings, a loss to the Cowboys, and another squeaker of a win in Houston.

My best week so far in picking the games straight up was Week 2 ... I was 11-4. I sucked with my picks in Weeks 1 and 3.

Yeah, I'm pessimistic this week. I look at what the Jags did to Pittsburgh's "Fast" Willie Parker and that vaunted Steeler O-line -- held them to 26 yards rushing. Then, take a look at what they did to Peyton Manning and the Colts in Indy: 48 yards rushing, and limited Manning's production to a very un-Peyton like 14 for 31 and 219 yards passing.

Now tell me, what in anyone's right mind could convince me that our offense -- which struggled against the Vikings, was stopped cold in Dallas, with all the penalties they've racked up -- can run the ball, and pass it effectively against Stroud, Henderson and the other guys that make up one of the top defenses in the league?

I've seen nothing to make me believe otherwise. The only thing I can hope for is for the Jags to have an "off" day.[/quote]


Huh? WTF? Your post pancakes me. You have never thought about coaching I would bet. If you were the OC would you be thinking about what the D is going to call or do? Thank the Almighty that we have Saunders and not you, the O calls, runs, and executes the play. The D reacts.
"have an off day" I hope our offense does not have to worry about them having an "off day" and if that happens, holy shinoly the D does not either.
Damn it is like magic

Hail
44