Dr. Z explains why Skins will go 4-12 (sort of)

RedskinRat · 09-01-2005, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

This may infuriate a lot of us, but then, the truth usually does.

Truth? In that article? YOU obviously didn't read it. There IS NO MERRY-GO-ROUND at QB. Top 3 D and that's BAD?

I can take constructive criticism, but he's just written a lazy piece.

Don't defend the indefensible, it makes you as guilty.

Beemnseven · 09-01-2005, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Truth? In that article? YOU obviously didn't read it. There IS NO MERRY-GO-ROUND at QB. Top 3 D and that's BAD?

I can take constructive criticism, but he's just written a lazy piece.

Don't defend the indefensible, it makes you as guilty.

While I agree that it's not a QB merry-go-round YET, the addition of Jason Campbell only serves to indicate that the ride could at least be warming up. Add this to the fact that Joe Gibbs himself said that Mark Brunell's final history with this team hasn't been written yet. It's up to Ramsey to make sure none of this happens, but so far, #11 hasn't exactly put these notions to rest.

The truth I was referring to was that we've gone 7-9, 5-11, and 6-10 over the last three seasons. That's the mark of a bad football team no matter how you look at it. And until we start winning games and proving people like Dr. Z wrong, there will be much more pieces like his to come.

BleedBurgundy · 09-01-2005, 05:43 PM

Sometimes, I feel like the Randy Quaid (sp?) character in Major League I and II... I convince myself we're going all the way, and then after week 3, I start drinking heavily and cursing at Ramsey...

BigSKINBauer · 09-01-2005, 05:53 PM

Not that i like defending cowroids but..
we might have been allittle to harsh on the dalASS fan, (d'boyz). My grammer on this sight is pretty darn bad too. But all he said is that we were happy last week and not to get let down by this stupid article and he believes that we may 9-7.

We shouldn't care about the stupid article, it means nothing, that old fart doesn't know what he is talking about. 4 wins is just plain old bad. Most of us are not caring about this article at all. I surprisingly am not even the slighest bit ticked(usually i am). Lets take it for what it is........ and that is a stupid article by an even stupider man

Sociofan · 09-01-2005, 06:09 PM

Call me optimistic, but I'm looking at the schedule and I easily see 4-0 to start the season. Is he saying that the Skins will then drop 12 in a row?

Again, Zzzzzzzzz is an idiot.

That Guy · 09-01-2005, 06:22 PM

wow, this is what, the 500th bad article on the skins? I ran out of pissed off at number 4.

Quote:

and the sign of a deeper problem -- namely that this team doesn't quite know what it's doing.

Well, I know exactly what they're doing, its called the clinton portis offense.

D'BOYZ · 09-01-2005, 06:24 PM

ok Socio Fan lets see

W1 Chicago thats a W no argue there
W2 Dallas Thats most likely a L when was the last time you've won in Dallas?
W3 BYE
W4 Seatle This is a maybe going more to L
W5 Denver in denver this is an L
W6 KC To much offense and better D than last year L
W7 SF that's a W
W8 NYG that's a W
W9 PHI ok sorry L
W10 TB I put this in the maybe i really can't figure Tampa out just yet
w11 OAK L that Offense is scarry
W12 SD thats a L they liked last year and brees is still on contract year
W13 STL home game a L
W14 ARZ I don't believe in all the Hipe W
W15 DAL thats a maybe even is you don't like but history speek for it self
W16 NYG thats another W
W17 PHI this could be a W just because PHI could had the playoff clinched by then

so at the end we have 5 W with 4 maybes and 7 L as you see this canend up between a 5-11 season to a 9-7 one

Beemnseven · 09-01-2005, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by D'BOYZ

ok Socio Fan lets see

W1 Chicago thats a W no argue there
W2 Dallas Thats most likely a L when was the last time you've won in Dallas?
W3 BYE
W4 Seatle This is a maybe going more to L
W5 Denver in denver this is an L
W6 KC To much offense and better D than last year L
W7 SF that's a W
W8 NYG that's a W
W9 PHI ok sorry L
W10 TB I put this in the maybe i really can't figure Tampa out just yet
w11 OAK L that Offense is scarry
W12 SD thats a L they liked last year and brees is still on contract year
W13 STL home game a L
W14 ARZ I don't believe in all the Hipe W
W15 DAL thats a maybe even is you don't like but history speek for it self
W16 NYG thats another W
W17 PHI this could be a W just because PHI could had the playoff clinched by then

so at the end we have 5 W with 4 maybes and 7 L as you see this canend up between a 5-11 season to a 9-7 one

The only disagreements I have with you are the games against Oakland and San Diego. The Chargers were a mirage last year, and got knocked out of the playoffs in the first round. Granted, they MADE it to the playoffs, which is more than we've been able to sniff at recently, but they remind me of the 2001 Chicago Bears -- things just seemed to go their way, and reality caught up with them.

Oakland's offense doesn't scare me at all. We've handled Randy Moss in the past, Collins is a statue in the pocket and will get toppled quicker than Saddam Hussein's did against those Iraqi nationalists. Plus, they've got no running game and no defense. Trust me, this ain't 1983, and the Raiders haven't scared anyone since then.

wolfeskins · 09-02-2005, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

The only disagreements I have with you are the games against Oakland and San Diego. The Chargers were a mirage last year, and got knocked out of the playoffs in the first round. Granted, they MADE it to the playoffs, which is more than we've been able to sniff at recently, but they remind me of the 2001 Chicago Bears -- things just seemed to go their way, and reality caught up with them.

Oakland's offense doesn't scare me at all. We've handled Randy Moss in the past, Collins is a statue in the pocket and will get toppled quicker than Saddam Hussein's did against those Iraqi nationalists. Plus, they've got no running game and no defense. Trust me, this ain't 1983, and the Raiders haven't scared anyone since then.

i totaly agree with you about the chargers and the raiders but i'd like to take it a step further and add the seahawks and the cheifs to the list. the seahawks have alexander and jackson on offense, thats it, their defense is good but not that good. the cheifs do have a good offense but the skins defense will match up fine with them, the cheifs defense will still suck.

Beemnseven · 09-02-2005, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolfeskins

i totaly agree with you about the chargers and the raiders but i'd like to take it a step further and add the seahawks and the cheifs to the list. the seahawks have alexander and jackson on offense, thats it, their defense is good but not that good. the cheifs do have a good offense but the skins defense will match up fine with them, the cheifs defense will still suck.

Good points. I hadn't given the Seahawks or Chiefs much thought. So yes, those are games we SHOULD win. But then, I said the same thing about Cleveland last year.

Daseal · 09-01-2005, 07:37 PM

Lets just remember how many times, as a franchise, the Redskins have burned reporters in the last 10 years. Until we prove otherwise they're going to say we're awful. Just read it, think about it, then see what happens. I'm sure he got blasted for his predictions last year that weren't that far off.

DirtBagZ · 09-01-2005, 10:10 PM

First off, "Hail to the Redskins!"

Second guys I would not take this stuff to seriously, most of this stuff is just because of Snyder who is a popular whipping boy for the media. Something to keep in mind regarding the current World Champion Patriots is the following:

With no running game and tough competition in the division the 1999 season was tough for the Patriots. The team started 6-2 but finished 8-8, and Carroll was fired. Luckily for the Patriots, Bill Belichick, hand-picked to be Parcells' successor with the Jets, quit after one day to join New England. After a tough season with lots of close losses, the Patriots finished 5-11.

Found the above on the following website,

http://www.canbet.com/whatsnew/new-e...s-history.aspx

Our season last year is much like the Pat's 5-11 2000 season....not predicting a Superbowl win here, but I have good feeling about this team, that's all.

DirtBagZ

Skins fan 44 · 09-01-2005, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daseal

Lets just remember how many times, as a franchise, the Redskins have burned reporters in the last 10 years. Until we prove otherwise they're going to say we're awful. Just read it, think about it, then see what happens. I'm sure he got blasted for his predictions last year that weren't that far off.

Could not agree more. How long have all us of been saying this is our year, the reporters are full of it or whatever else. Believe you me no one wants to see us win more than me but until we see other wise I am not for sure. I heard it on ESPN Radio today that we wont be very good, along with every where else. Well it appears that we are bad until we prove everyone wrong. I mean I think that we could do some great things but will not know what this team is capable of doing untill about week 7 or 9. One thing that I could almost bet on is I just cant see Gibbs going through 2 losing seasons in a row.
How bout them Cocks?

skinsguy · 09-02-2005, 08:27 AM

I agree...we haven't given the reporters anything to change their predictions on. I think 8-8 is a safe, fair assumption....but 10-6 isn't at all out of the question. I think the Dallas game in the second week is going to set the stage for the season...either way.

MTK · 09-02-2005, 08:50 AM

I have no problem with predictions of a losing record, I just have a problem with these predictions being tossed out there without a solid rationale behind them.

The majority of the media doesn't cover the Skins as extensively as the local media, and hell I'd say we the fans are more in touch with the Redskins than guys like Dr. Zzzzz. So I guess that's what makes it all the more frustrating when you read lame excuses as to why someone thinks the Skins are only going to win 4 games. Are we biased? Of course. But I think in our heart of hearts nobody is expecting 4 wins this year. 10 wins is perhaps shooting on the high end, but 8 or 9 wins is fairly realistic. 4 wins? C'mon, that's just Dr. Z being a jerk.

09-01-2005, 05:43 PM	#3
BleedBurgundy Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 4,471	Re: Dr. Z explains why Skins will go 4-12 (sort of) Sometimes, I feel like the Randy Quaid (sp?) character in Major League I and II... I convince myself we're going all the way, and then after week 3, I start drinking heavily and cursing at Ramsey...

09-01-2005, 05:53 PM	#4
BigSKINBauer Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Washington, DC Age: 38 Posts: 5,688	Re: Dr. Z explains why Skins will go 4-12 (sort of) Not that i like defending cowroids but.. we might have been allittle to harsh on the dalASS fan, (d'boyz). My grammer on this sight is pretty darn bad too. But all he said is that we were happy last week and not to get let down by this stupid article and he believes that we may 9-7. We shouldn't care about the stupid article, it means nothing, that old fart doesn't know what he is talking about. 4 wins is just plain old bad. Most of us are not caring about this article at all. I surprisingly am not even the slighest bit ticked(usually i am). Lets take it for what it is........ and that is a stupid article by an even stupider man

09-01-2005, 06:09 PM	#5
Sociofan Special Teams Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Gainesville, VA Age: 61 Posts: 380	Re: Dr. Z explains why Skins will go 4-12 (sort of) Call me optimistic, but I'm looking at the schedule and I easily see 4-0 to start the season. Is he saying that the Skins will then drop 12 in a row? Again, Zzzzzzzzz is an idiot.

09-01-2005, 06:24 PM	#7
D'BOYZ The Starter Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,363	Re: Dr. Z explains why Skins will go 4-12 (sort of) ok Socio Fan lets see W1 Chicago thats a W no argue there W2 Dallas Thats most likely a L when was the last time you've won in Dallas? W3 BYE W4 Seatle This is a maybe going more to L W5 Denver in denver this is an L W6 KC To much offense and better D than last year L W7 SF that's a W W8 NYG that's a W W9 PHI ok sorry L W10 TB I put this in the maybe i really can't figure Tampa out just yet w11 OAK L that Offense is scarry W12 SD thats a L they liked last year and brees is still on contract year W13 STL home game a L W14 ARZ I don't believe in all the Hipe W W15 DAL thats a maybe even is you don't like but history speek for it self W16 NYG thats another W W17 PHI this could be a W just because PHI could had the playoff clinched by then so at the end we have 5 W with 4 maybes and 7 L as you see this canend up between a 5-11 season to a 9-7 one

09-01-2005, 10:10 PM	#12
DirtBagZ Special Teams Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 481	Re: Dr. Z explains why Skins will go 4-12 (sort of) First off, "Hail to the Redskins!" Second guys I would not take this stuff to seriously, most of this stuff is just because of Snyder who is a popular whipping boy for the media. Something to keep in mind regarding the current World Champion Patriots is the following: With no running game and tough competition in the division the 1999 season was tough for the Patriots. The team started 6-2 but finished 8-8, and Carroll was fired. Luckily for the Patriots, Bill Belichick, hand-picked to be Parcells' successor with the Jets, quit after one day to join New England. After a tough season with lots of close losses, the Patriots finished 5-11. Found the above on the following website, http://www.canbet.com/whatsnew/new-e...s-history.aspx Our season last year is much like the Pat's 5-11 2000 season....not predicting a Superbowl win here, but I have good feeling about this team, that's all. DirtBagZ

09-01-2005, 07:37 PM	#11
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 43 Posts: 8,341	Re: Dr. Z explains why Skins will go 4-12 (sort of) Lets just remember how many times, as a franchise, the Redskins have burned reporters in the last 10 years. Until we prove otherwise they're going to say we're awful. Just read it, think about it, then see what happens. I'm sure he got blasted for his predictions last year that weren't that far off. __________________ Best. Player. Available.

09-02-2005, 08:27 AM	#14
skinsguy Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Greensboro, North Carolina Posts: 6,766	Re: Dr. Z explains why Skins will go 4-12 (sort of) I agree...we haven't given the reporters anything to change their predictions on. I think 8-8 is a safe, fair assumption....but 10-6 isn't at all out of the question. I think the Dallas game in the second week is going to set the stage for the season...either way. __________________ "Fire Up That Diesel!"

09-02-2005, 08:50 AM	#15
MTK Hail Raiser Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 53 Posts: 100,115	Re: Dr. Z explains why Skins will go 4-12 (sort of) I have no problem with predictions of a losing record, I just have a problem with these predictions being tossed out there without a solid rationale behind them. The majority of the media doesn't cover the Skins as extensively as the local media, and hell I'd say we the fans are more in touch with the Redskins than guys like Dr. Zzzzz. So I guess that's what makes it all the more frustrating when you read lame excuses as to why someone thinks the Skins are only going to win 4 games. Are we biased? Of course. But I think in our heart of hearts nobody is expecting 4 wins this year. 10 wins is perhaps shooting on the high end, but 8 or 9 wins is fairly realistic. 4 wins? C'mon, that's just Dr. Z being a jerk.

Dr. Z explains why Skins will go 4-12 (sort of)

Locker Room Main Forum