Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

Offiss, from what I saw his speed was what opened him up more than jukes. He also was lucky to play when our special teams were starting to improve a bit. He actually got some blocks. I'm not taking anything away from Brown, I think he's better than Morton without a doubt, but I don't feel Morton was as bad as people want to say.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]2004 - 6-10
2003 - 5-11
2002 - 7-9
2001 - 8-8
2000 - 8-8
1999 - 10-6

5 seasons without going over 500 in a row. How exactly does that not make us a perenial loser? Phinehas - the records speak for themselves, the Redskins, for the past 5 years, have been losers.[/quote]

Actually you're incorrect - the past three seasons we have been losers, an 8-8 record isn't really considered a losing season.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

Chad Morton was not a bad return man. The problem is that a return man is all he is and all he is ever going to be.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

I have to go with Offiss on this one...I believe he had some nice moves along with some killer speed - impressed me far more than what Morton has done for us.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=skinsfanthru&thru]that's mainly cuz the two teams play painfully dull basketball. yeah they play basketball pretty much how it should be, except bowen grabbing people's arms ;) , but pro basketball is also about entertainment and neither team really offers much excitement to those watching except for actual fans of the 2 specific teams.
[/QUOTE]

You've never seen Manu Ginoboli..................

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=skinsguy]Actually you're incorrect - the past three seasons we have been losers, an 8-8 record isn't really considered a losing season.[/QUOTE]

skinsguy is right .500 is not a losing season, its not winning either. I think to more adequately describe what you are trying to talk about is 5 straight seasons without a playoff appearance.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=skinsfanthru&thru]that's mainly cuz the two teams play painfully dull basketball. yeah they play basketball pretty much how it should be, except bowen grabbing people's arms ;) , but pro basketball is also about entertainment and neither team really offers much excitement to those watching except for actual fans of the 2 specific teams.[/QUOTE]

Hmmmmmmmm let's see Redskins #3 in defense, and I bet you find that painfully dull too.................

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=angryssg]skinsguy is right .500 is not a losing season, its not winning either. I think to more adequately describe what you are trying to talk about is 5 straight seasons without a playoff appearance.[/QUOTE]

We haven't had a good record since the 1990s - that's a pretty solid basis for criticizing the Redskins. The constant coaching turnover, the free agency binges, Danny's arrogance, and the tiff with the Washington Post are pretty good reasons for the media to poke fun at our expense.

I love the Redskins, but we haven't given the media any reason to do anything but doubt us and sneer at our woes. Like Gibbs said last year - "[the Redskins] are not going to silence the critics until we start winning games."

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[quote]
5 seasons without going over 500 in a row. How exactly does that not make us a perenial loser? Phinehas - the records speak for themselves, the Redskins, for the past 5 years, have been losers.
[/quote]

You just don't get it, Daseal. I'm a fanatic. You can't reason with a fanatic. :D The Redskins are not losers no matter what your silly numbers say. What kind of fanatic would I be if I believed otherwise? A reasonable one? Who's ever heard of such a thing?

[quote]
I love the Redskins, but we haven't given the media any reason to do anything but doubt us and sneer at our woes. Like Gibbs said last year - "[the Redskins] are not going to silence the critics until we start winning games."
[/quote]

The sad part is that it appears winning games is required to silence more than just the media critics. It appears it is also required to silence pessimistic supporters masquerading as fans.

--Phin the Fanatic

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

Phineas -
As much as I applaud your enthusiam and optimism, vocally expecting more than 5-11 or 6-10 from a team you love doesn't make anyone a "pessimistic supporter masquerading as a fan". When such comments are directed at the members of this site - 99% of whom (sorry, ZackMills :Smoker: ) have shown the passion to argue with, for and about this team weeks before training camp even starts - it shows a lack of respect for your fellow members.

There aren't a whole lot of halfway fans or bandwagon jumpers here [u]ever[/u], especially this time of year. Try to remember that when you question the loyalties of your fellow forum members.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

So in other words he's saying check yourself before you wreck yourself...

Straight 80s style BEYOTCH. :)

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

BrudLee,

I didn't intend to question anyone's loyalty nor imply anyone was a bandwagon jumper. I don't doubt that Daseal is a consistent Redskins supporter. Everytime I read his/her tag line, however, I can't help but think once again that fanatics do indeed have unrelenting optimism. That is sort of what defines fanaticism. As I wrote elsewhere on the board:

[quote]
The word "fan" is short for "fanatic." It refers to an ardent devotee, and there is at least the implication that this devotion isn't particularly rational. For me, there is also the idea of "keeping the faith" tied into fanaticism. No matter how dark things look, WE BELIEVE! We believe irrationaly. We believe fanatically. And it is this belief that carries us through to eventual success. Our unfailing belief buoys the spirits of the players as we cheer them on at games. For if they don't themselves believe, how shall they ever be victorious? So, for me, unrelenting optimism and fanaticism do indeed go hand-in-hand. Realistic fanaticism just seems rather oxymoronic, doesn't it?

That why the Redskins WILL have a great season this year and WILL go to the playoffs. I BELIEVE!

Foolishness? Perhaps. Fanticism? You better believe it! After all, I AM A FAN!
[/quote]

From the perspective of true fanaticism, I do indeed believe that it stretches the meaning of such for someone to consistently take a pessimistic view. Such a person may still be a loyal supporter, but not all loyal supporters are fanatics. To me, fanatics leave it to media critics to talk about how the Redskins are losers, perrenial or otherwise. As long as Daseal keeps a sig line in place that pretends that fanaticism doesn't imply unrelenting optimism and belief, I hardly think its fair to moderate me for pointing out that, in fact, it does. By doing so, I don't intend to be disrespectful toward anyone, only to provide an alternative view that I believe passionately is more appropriate to the idea of fanaticism. I have nothing at all against Daseal as a person, I just think the sig line is incredibly misleading, and, quite frankly, wrong.

--Phin the Fanatic

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

Even with the idea that you can't have fanatic without fan, the two are most definitely not one in the same.

A fan is quite simply an ardent devotee. To put it simply, someone who supports a cause enthusiastically.

A fanatic is someone who does the same, but takes this a step further and also supports a cause enthusiastically but rationality goes out the window.

Daseal is a fan, as are most of the people on this site. And by supporting his cause enthusiastically, Daseal proves he is a fan. Even though there is a method to his madness, he often "keeps it real" but nonetheless qualifies for all definitions of a fan.

The people I find on here to be the fanatics are the ones who would still support the Redskins if Snyder himself shot your dog and burned your house to the ground. It's the idea of rationality that separates the two.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

P.S. I'll be happy to change my view on fans and fanaticism the day that Sonny Jurgensen predicts a Redskins' loss for the weekend. It ain't gonna happen, though, 'cause Sonny is a true fanatic.

--Phin the Fanatic

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

TMC,

What you call a fan, I call a supporter. They consistently support their team.

"Fan" is just a shortened form of the word "fanatic," so it is difficult for me to see how they can have different meanings. That's like "Fridge" meaning something different that "Refrigerator."

Perhaps it is just semantics, but I don't think it is unreasonable at all to expect a fan to possess unrelenting optimism, and I'll continue to express this perspective to balance against those who consistently promote the idea that such a view is unreasonable.

--Phin the Fanatic

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

Hey, I just go by what the majority view states is a fan and a fanatic (that being the dictionary meanings of the two) because that's the only true way you can really "define" one or the other. It's really not semantics when you look up the definitions. A lot of people can easily say, "Well that's just the dictionary." But you have to have some kind of standard and for me, as well as the majority of the country, that IS the standard, so that is what I base my arguments over definitions on.

You can call them supporters and I can call myself the President of the United States. :)

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=Phinehas] That's like "Fridge" meaning something different that "Refrigerator."[/QUOTE]



when i hear the word "fridge"
i always think of a 350 lb black man with a huge gap between his front teeth and wearing a bears jursey.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

And running for touchdowns? :)

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

Funny, I think of the exact same thing when I hear "Refrigerator." :D

--Phin the Fanatic

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]

The people I find on here to be the fanatics are the ones who would still support the Redskins if Snyder himself shot your dog and burned your house to the ground. It's the idea of rationality that separates the two.[/QUOTE]


Well, fan or fanatic...it really is all the same. Think about it...I doubt any of us here are just "fans" if we devote each and everyday to this forum posting messages about our beloved team and getting to know other Redskins fans. Your average casual fan probably won't devote that much time and energy. So, in a way, we're all actually fanatics.

Supporting the Redskins through thick and thin isn't irrational - just shows a sign of being devoted to the team.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

Right. Like I said before, I'm just going with true definitions. There ARE of course levels of fan-dom and the people like us who post on here day in and day out are "better" or more hardcore fans.

I wouldn't consider myself a fanatic because my love isn't irrational. Just like what you quoted above, that type of love for something would be irrational. I would consider myself a hardcore fan, about as hardcore as they get, but not a fanatic.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

I don't really care, sometimes I just like to put out a well-structured argument. :)

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]I don't really care, sometimes I just like to put out a well-structured argument. :)[/QUOTE]



:) At least you put out...LOL!! Just kidding.....

I don't believe we have anyone on here (that I know of) that would faint and cry if they were in the same room as one of the players or coaches...ya know the Michael Jackson syndrome?

Now talking about irrational...LOL MJ has to have the most irrational fans alive!

It's just the personalities on here. Some people are optimistic in nature, some are pessimistic. I think the ones who are pessimistic sounding don't mean to sound like gloom and doom all the time - I think they actually do love the Redskins and want to see our current team succeed. I believe when they try to "keep it real" they're trying their best to keep their hopes low so they don't get too dissappointed. I can understand that.

On the flipside, you have the optimistic people (sometimes I probably fall under this category) that wants to find the good in everything and believes that Gibbs and Co are in complete control and are never in a mode of "guessing." I'm sure this is completely false - considering how last season went. But - I think if one says Gibbs has no idea what he is doing is pretty much an idiot because his track record speaks for himself. But, to say that Gibbs can magically turn this franchise around within a year is probably just as idiotic...and unfortunately most of us fell under the hype last season. But...Gibbs will turn the team around - the old fashioned Gibbs way! Hard work and devotion. :biggthump

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

I completely agree. Like I said above, sometimes someone poses an argument and being the male dong-flopper-outter that I am, I felt compelled to present an alterior viewpoint.

I am of the optimistic group of fans as well, I just always hate it when people give Daseal (and others who keep it real) shit for their viewpoints. Sometimes I get irritated with SC (who sometimes is a Dave Chapelle example of 'When Keeping It Real Goes Wrong') who be negative because that's "who they are". My argument is mainly in defense of anyone who actually is willing to call into question Gibbs' judgement, because their opinion should be just as respected as ours.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

And I'm not THAT big of a whore. :biggthump Do you not see my advertisements on here about not giving up the WHOLE package on the first date? I'm like a walking public service annoucement.

G.I. Joooooooooooooooooooe.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]And I'm not THAT big of a whore. :biggthump Do you not see my advertisements on here about not giving up the WHOLE package on the first date? I'm like a walking public service annoucement.

G.I. Joooooooooooooooooooe.[/QUOTE]


LOL!!!! :lol:

You tease..... :)

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

I know, maybe some heavy petting but that's IT.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

I certainly have differing views from many people on this site in type, however, I bet if we got together that we would get along great. I often spend most of my time around other fans defending Gibbs and the Redskins. Thanks to this site I can put up solid arguments both ways, and understanding both sides is unbelievably important to winning an argument.

I just believe that being a fan has more responsibility than undying loyalty. Just like being a citizen of the United States requires more than sitting there and saying US RULES! USSR sucks (We're the Redskins, they're Dallas!) You have to question things, you have to look at things from many viewpoints. It's part of being a well-rounded citizen. If people took citizenship the same way they take being a football fan then our country would be in dire straights.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

Exactly. If people didn't question things we would still be ruled by those DAMN Brits. ;)

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]I certainly have differing views from many people on this site in type, however, I bet if we got together that we would get along great. I often spend most of my time around other fans defending Gibbs and the Redskins. Thanks to this site I can put up solid arguments both ways, and understanding both sides is unbelievably important to winning an argument.

I just believe that being a fan has more responsibility than undying loyalty. Just like being a citizen of the United States requires more than sitting there and saying US RULES! USSR sucks (We're the Redskins, they're Dallas!) You have to question things, you have to look at things from many viewpoints. It's part of being a well-rounded citizen. If people took citizenship the same way they take being a football fan then our country would be in dire straights.[/QUOTE]

I hear what you're saying and you have some good posts, some not so good posts (but we're pretty much all that way) but I think that a lot of people here get the impression that you're just consisently bitter and almost looking to get noticed by being negative. And it extends beyond Gibbs and the Redskins:

Star Wars-hated it
Phil Jackson-most overrated coach ever
Baseball-sucks
Baseball in DC-will never work

But I do agree with you that we might be reading too much into what King has written. I don't think it reflects any sort of bias and the best way to erase any doubt is to win

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]I hear what you're saying and you have some good posts, some not so good posts (but we're pretty much all that way) but I think that a lot of people here get the impression that you're just consisently bitter and almost looking to get noticed by being negative. And it extends beyond Gibbs and the Redskins[/QUOTE]

He gets that reputation because people will always remember the posts they disagree with more than the posts they agree with, ya know? I read 200 posts a day, and when I read them and agree with all 200, its pretty boring. ITs been happening alot latley, because theres nothing to really argue about. When someone brings a different angle, its fun to debate that with them, especially when its well presented.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=Gmanc711]He gets that reputation because people will always remember the posts they disagree with more than the posts they agree with, ya know? I read 200 posts a day, and when I read them and agree with all 200, its pretty boring. ITs been happening alot latley, because theres nothing to really argue about. When someone brings a different angle, its fun to debate that with them, especially when its well presented.[/QUOTE]

I agree that it's fun to debate but sometimes it's just as boring to debate just for the sake of debating...but most of the time Daseal's posts are well presented

Talking about Daseal sure seems to hijack a lot of threads

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

Heh, why should I put a positive spin on a movie I didn't like. The dialogue was poor and the only thing worth seeing were the special effects. Lucas is just milking Star Wars now for the money, it wasn't innovative like it was when the first three came out.

Phil Jackson - When he can turn a team that doesn't have star-studded talent on it into a contender, then he gets credit. He shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Pat Riley or Larry Brown.

I don't like baseball, you're right. Why shouldn't I tell you you're wrong for liking it? I don't like baseball because I feel as a sport it's over-rated. Does it take talent, yes. Does that make it fun or interesting to watch? no, not in my opinion. I like to play it, but normally that involves a bbq and a cooler full of beer.

I didn't say baseball would never work in DC. However, I could certainly see it fail. I didn't expect the Nationals to do so well (did anyone?) so that may have saved it and gotten the approval of a stadium, etc. However, I could still see it struggling some. I think MLB as a whole will begin to struggle more and more as the years go on. That's just my feeling.

All of the positive things I've posted in the off-topic forum you've ommited. Same with all the positive posts I put in the locker room. Those seem to be forgotten and it's always being pessimistic. I'm not looking to be noticed at all, I post my opinions how I see them, isn't that what discussion boards are for? I don't even feel it as a pesimistic outlook to try to see what can/might go wrong. I think we should be prepared to analyze the team and it's weaknesses. It has it's strong points defense, RB, coaching staff. It has it's weak points: WR's, Playcalling, and QB (kinda, love Ramsey but there's a lot depending on him this year). Granted all of that could change come the begininning of the year, but I prefer not to base my arguments on what if's, rather I prefer to base them on what I've seen.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]Heh, why should I put a positive spin on a movie I didn't like. The dialogue was poor and the only thing worth seeing were the special effects. Lucas is just milking Star Wars now for the money, it wasn't innovative like it was when the first three came out.

Phil Jackson - When he can turn a team that doesn't have star-studded talent on it into a contender, then he gets credit. He shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as Pat Riley or Larry Brown.

I don't like baseball, you're right. Why shouldn't I tell you you're wrong for liking it? I don't like baseball because I feel as a sport it's over-rated. Does it take talent, yes. Does that make it fun or interesting to watch? no, not in my opinion. I like to play it, but normally that involves a bbq and a cooler full of beer.

All of the positive things I've posted in the off-topic forum you've ommited. Same with all the positive posts I put in the locker room. Those seem to be forgotten and it's always being pessimistic. I'm not looking to be noticed at all, I post my opinions how I see them, isn't that what discussion boards are for? I don't even feel it as a pesimistic outlook to try to see what can/might go wrong. I think we should be prepared to analyze the team and it's weaknesses. It has it's strong points defense, RB, coaching staff. It has it's weak points: WR's, Playcalling, and QB (kinda, love Ramsey but there's a lot depending on him this year). Granted all of that could change come the begininning of the year, but I prefer not to base my arguments on what if's, rather I prefer to base them on what I've seen.[/QUOTE]

Hey Daseal..........we actually agreed on a lot in this post :headbange:

We both HATE baseball.......I call it a cure for insominia. And admit it all you baseball lovers have you ever stayed awake for an ENTIRE game!!!

Agree with you about Phil........he had all this talent, and seemed to take all the credit. And I agree about Larry Brown......best coach in the NBA.

I like to be a realist too, but sometimes I just yearn to hear something positive....14 years of pain may have had something to do with it. Anyway, it's nice to read things from a different perspective now and again, you learn
things................

KUDOS DASEAL!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

Monk - That's why I come here, to keep me balanced and to hear the good news. I promise you, I'm not nearly as pessimistic as I come off. I just write it that way because it takes too long to put a disclaimer on everything.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=monk81]

We both HATE baseball.......I call it a cure for insominia. And admit it all you baseball lovers have you ever stayed awake for an ENTIRE game!!!

KUDOS DASEAL!!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE]


Honestly. I'm a big baseball fan, I think its a great, fun sport. However, when you put the playoffs aside (Those are easy to watch), I probaboly only watch 5-6 full games of regular season baseball a year. I'll watch a few innings almost every night, but overall, I agree that its just pointless to sit there and watch an entire game, which is basically meaningless when it comes right down to it. Now I dont think baseball is a bad sport or anything, but I defintley see why people dont like it.

Re: Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

At the end of the day, players are just players - they can't take on the responsiblity of being coaches at the sametime, so any coach who can coach a team, regardless of how gifted the players are, to one or many championship victories deserves alot of credit. The protocol for a championship team involves balance and structure - poor coaching is going to be reflected on the players...I don't care how much of a star each and every player on the team may be, they cannot win championships and build dynastys without a good coach.

Sorry to get off topic...

I think for the most part the D.C. area is always going to be targeted for negative spin on news. If it isn't the President, it's the Wizards, Nationals (in due time my friends), and of course the Redskins. But, then again, like I said earlier, it could also be that since we're Redskins fans, we see it more or pay attention to it more than what anyone else does. A fan in Indy probably wouldn't know the difference.