Stop The Negative

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

This thread really encapsulates the main disagreement which has sort of been the theme of this website since I joined - whether fans should be openly critical of their team or should try to be more supportive, even when things aren't gong so well. I think it's great that we have both kind of people here. Often, when I think things can't get any worse, I'll hop on hear and read a post from one of the optimists and think, well, our backs are against the walls but maybe we do have a shot still.

The problem I have is with pompous fans on this board and elsewhere who act like, because they refuse to brook any negative thoughts concerning the team, they are somehow superior fans. That's garbage. I've flip flopped on my opinion of this team about four times this season already, but that doesn't make me a fairweather fan. A fairweather fan is one of these so called Eagles fans, who when Mcnabb goes down and needs surgery decides they will go play golf on sundays for the rest of the season. Now the team is winning they are hooting and hollering again. A fairweather fan is someone who, when things get bad, stops watching. That's not me, and I don't think that's most people here. When people say some of our fans are too negative, well, that's what happens when you suck for over a decade. But you know what? During that team we didn't have one game that wasn't a sellout, and I know I didn't miss a game. Not many other teams can say that.

Also, there has repeatedly been a suggestion on this site that somehow people want the Skins to fail, and I am directing this at whoever wrote that ridiculous post claiming that even if Brunell played great people would still attack him (an argument which has been made in some form for over 2 years now). People criticize Brunell because he frequently plays terrible. I actually think Skins nation is relatively easy on him, when you consider the rest of the country thinks he can't even play NFL football anymore. So look, when the Skins play like crap and get dominated in a game they are supposed to be equipeed to win, or at lests COMPETE in, don't expect everyone to act like everything is okay. But we sign on here, we share ideas, and no matter what, we are closer as fans. That's how it should work.

I don't how thinking positive makes me pompous. The fact that I don't get a heart attack after every loss doesn't mean I don't have concerns about the team or care any less than those on this board that act like the world has ended after a missed field goal. As for the Brunell argument, it's legit. For the most part whatever praise he has gotten has been reluctant at best.

Fairweather to me are those who say they're done with the team, never to watch them again...only to come back the next week. Or those that say things like "we can never win as long as Snyder is the owner." Well if you think that way (and I'm not talking about you here nemo) then why even bother?

That all being sad I, and I think a lot of other people here, know that for up to 72 hours after a loss 95% of what is written on this board is not worth putting any stock in because everyone writes out of frustration.

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

I don't how thinking positive makes me pompous. The fact that I don't get a heart attack after every loss doesn't mean I don't have concerns about the team or care any less than those on this board that act like the world has ended after a missed field goal. As for the Brunell argument, it's legit. For the most part whatever praise he has gotten has been reluctant at best.

Fairweather to me are those who say they're done with the team, never to watch them again...only to come back the next week. Or those that say things like "we can never win as long as Snyder is the owner." Well if you think that way (and I'm not talking about you here nemo) then why even bother?

That all being sad I, and I think a lot of other people here, know that for up to 72 hours after a loss 95% of what is written on this board is not worth putting any stock in because everyone writes out of frustration.

I dont think you are pompous Tafkas, you are actually a very gracious moderator who I have always found to be extremely respectful of differing viewpoints. My point was that its pompous to presume that optimism makes one a better fan than someone who is more critical. I can be very critical - I am probably the only person in my family who isn't prescribed anti-depressants, and it shows. I criticize all sorts of things. My friends call me the movie-Nazi. I frequently say very mean things about the Redskins and their players. My whole family does. If you heard us talking at dinner you might wonder if we even like the Redskins. But we are a family of true fans. I have a problem with anyone who questions my fandom because of that.

I wasn't trying to be divisive in anyway. Let me try and restate my point, hopefully more clearly. We all as different people bring different perspectives to the table, and some are just more critical people in general. But we are equal fans (in theory at least). It's not this thread that bugged me so much, its just that there's this whole tradition of argument going back to my first time visiting this board that says, or at least implies, that one who is critical is not as strong a fan as one who "trusts in Gibbs."

The point I was trying to make about Brunell is this: just because someone is reluctant to heap praise on a guy whose tenure here has been so hugely mediocre doesn't mean they have something against him or are rooting for him to lose. For the record, I have eaten crow on Brunell on this board at least 3 times in the past calender year (and then flipflopped back to saying, ha, I was right the first time!) It's not just me, btw, its also the entire national sports media.

Finally, if you come back the next week, you are not a fairweather fan! That's ridiculous. A fairweather fan is, by definition, one who waits until, ya know, the weather gets fairer to come back, not immediately proceeding an obviously demoralizing loss.

[railcon56]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

They have Donovan McNabb -- we have Mark Brunell, until both of his legs get broken, then Gibbs MIGHT pull him in favor of Todd Collins. Campbell could be better than McNabb in the year 2009, but that's just speculation.

I agree ...Not until Both legs are broken and maybe an arm....

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

Finally, if you come back the next week, you are not a fairweather fan! That's ridiculous. A fairweather fan is, by definition, one who waits until, ya know, the weather gets fairer to come back, not immediately proceeding an obviously demoralizing loss.

Sorry. I meant to write it to say "comes back the next week after a win"

[VTSkins897]

we need steve perry

[hesscl34]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

This thread really encapsulates the main disagreement which has sort of been the theme of this website since I joined - whether fans should be openly critical of their team or should try to be more supportive, even when things aren't gong so well. I think it's great that we have both kind of people here. Often, when I think things can't get any worse, I'll hop on hear and read a post from one of the optimists and think, well, our backs are against the walls but maybe we do have a shot still.

The problem I have is with pompous fans on this board and elsewhere who act like, because they refuse to brook any negative thoughts concerning the team, they are somehow superior fans. That's garbage. I've flip flopped on my opinion of this team about four times this season already, but that doesn't make me a fairweather fan. A fairweather fan is one of these so called Eagles fans, who when Mcnabb goes down and needs surgery decides they will go play golf on sundays for the rest of the season. Now the team is winning they are hooting and hollering again. A fairweather fan is someone who, when things get bad, stops watching. That's not me, and I don't think that's most people here. When people say some of our fans are too negative, well, that's what happens when you suck for over a decade. But you know what? During that team we didn't have one game that wasn't a sellout, and I know I didn't miss a game. Not many other teams can say that.

Also, there has repeatedly been a suggestion on this site that somehow people want the Skins to fail, and I am directing this at whoever wrote that ridiculous post claiming that even if Brunell played great people would still attack him (an argument which has been made in some form for over 2 years now). People criticize Brunell because he frequently plays terrible. I actually think Skins nation is relatively easy on him, when you consider the rest of the country thinks he can't even play NFL football anymore. So look, when the Skins play like crap and get dominated in a game they are supposed to be equipeed to win, or at lests COMPETE in, don't expect everyone to act like everything is okay. But we sign on here, we share ideas, and no matter what, we are closer as fans. That's how it should work.

My point with trying to be POSTIVE is that when we win everyone is happy and all they can talk about is how great we are, but when we lose a lot of you guys throw in the towel and start beating up the coaches and the QB. It's silly. I mean, there will be ups and downs along the way and I'm just one of those people that likes to think we'll pull it out in the end. As for suggesting you are "bad fans" if you are negative ... that is just my way of lighting fire under you guys and making you check yourself so you don't get too negative. It's all in good fun, and at the end of the day I only want to support the Skins that I love so much!! J

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

And the schedule gets much easier from there on out.

13-3 is still the target. 12-4 is more realistic.

10/22@ Colts 5-0
11/5vs. Cowboys 2-2
11/12@ Eagles 4-1
11/19@ Buccaneers 0-5
11/26vs. Panthers 3-2
12/3vs. Falcons 3-1
12/10vs. Eagles 4-1
12/17@ Saints 4-1
12/24@ Rams 4-1
12/30vs. Giants 2-2

Yeah... cakewalk. Come on you negative ninnys. 11-0 or 10-1 at the worst, is entirely possible.

[hesscl34]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

10/22@ Colts 5-0
11/5vs. Cowboys 2-2
11/12@ Eagles 4-1
11/19@ Buccaneers 0-5
11/26vs. Panthers 3-2
12/3vs. Falcons 3-1
12/10vs. Eagles 4-1
12/17@ Saints 4-1
12/24@ Rams 4-1
12/30vs. Giants 2-2

Yeah... cakewalk. Come on you negative ninnys. 11-0 or 10-1 at the worst, is entirely possible.

Sarcasm does not become you, Southpaw!

[TheMalcolmConnection]

The good news about those teams is that there are a few of them who have misleading records. Buccaneers will be bad without Simms. Falcons are as inconsistent as we are. Saints and Rams aren't what their records say they are. If we can beat the remaining teams in our division at home, steal one at Philly, we should be able to handle the rest of the NFC.

[hesscl34]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

The good news about those teams is that there are a few of them who have misleading records. Buccaneers will be bad without Simms. Falcons are as inconsistent as we are. Saints and Rams aren't what their records say they are. If we can beat the remaining teams in our division at home, steal one at Philly, we should be able to handle the rest of the NFC.

Thanks Malcolm... you made me smile!

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Anytime, and seriously, if we can take care of our business at home, I feel totally confident in us being able to HOPEFULLY steal one in Philly, and hopefully pull off wins against NO, St. Louis and Tampa Bay away. If the conditions are right for us to upset them, they most definitely are now barring injury to our guys.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Our toughest game this year is going to be away against Philly. We win that one, we're going to take HUGE momentum going down the stretch. Remember, Philly always has people injured and McNabb seems to be the only constant for them right now. If we can get totally healthy on both sides of the ball, they're prime for the plucking up in Philly.

[Hog1]

Parity is Here! The only team I look at and think we are POSSIBLY outmatched is Indy, and they are not the same with the exodus of EJ to AZ. Our secondary, at the moment may be our achilles with them. To a man, we hang our heads to NO ONE on that list. To date, however, we have obviously not played like it consistently. We'll see how much heart the team has. They did last year

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Anytime, and seriously, if we can take care of our business at home, I feel totally confident in us being able to HOPEFULLY steal one in Philly, and hopefully pull off wins against NO, St. Louis and Tampa Bay away. If the conditions are right for us to upset them, they most definitely are now barring injury to our guys.

***Bad Fan Alert*** Do Not Read if You Have Unrelenting Optimism

I agree that Washington is superior to some of the 4-1 teams on paper, but the problem is Washington played far better football last season, and only managed to go 10-6. They even lost to the hapless Raiders and tried to give another one away to the Cardinals. There has not been one season since 1992, where Washington has beaten every team they should beat. They've already lost one of the games they should've won this year. So while they should be able to beat Tampa Bay, St. Louis, New Orleans, Atlanta, and the Giants and Cowboys at home, at least a couple of those games will result in a loss.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Oh, I don't deny that at all. I'm just saying that if both teams play up to their potential in each one of those games, there's only a couple of those that might result in a loss. If I'm looking at losses realistically, I'm thinking we lose to the Colts, Eagles away and Rams away for the rest of the year.