Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media
 

[QUOTE=Peter King's Monday Morning QB] I think whoever signs Chad Morton is going to get a player who helps that team win two extra games this year. Two! Stop arguing over a few signing-bonus bucks. Morton will be one of the five most electric return men in the game.[/QUOTE]
Now I'm pretty sure I read an article back in '03 where King said how bad of an idea it was for the Redskins to give up all that money and a 5th round pick for a special teams player and an occasional 3rd down back. Granted, Morton didn't do much as a Redskin, but all of the sudden, now that he's no longer a Redskin and coming off of a torn ACL, he's going to help a team win 2 extra games and be one of the five most electric return men in the game? C'mon, am I missing something here?

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

Special Teams returners are only as good as your blockers. Watching him come out of New York who didn't think he'd be an amazing player for us. I don't understand the Morton hate, he said a guy on him by the time he touched the ball.

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

Peter King is an absolute TOOL! A perfect example of a "journalist" who caters to what's politically correct. Exemplifies everything that is wrong with the media. What a monumental dickhead he is.

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

Even if he gets this one right by blind luck, I'm totally with you dblanch66. King is clearly making this claim based on his hating of the skins and nothing else. Not to mention that Morton is coming off a serious knee injury late in the season. He'll probably take a while just to get back to health.

Another reason to ignore everything the man writes.

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

[QUOTE=Daseal]Special Teams returners are only as good as your blockers. Watching him come out of New York who didn't think he'd be an amazing player for us. I don't understand the Morton hate, he said a guy on him by the time he touched the ball.[/QUOTE]


I have to disagree with you on this one Daseal, Morton went no where on punt returns unless there was a big time wedge, otherwise he couldn't create, and that's what great returners do create, they make the first guy mis he couldn't do that, our return game became a whole lot better when we put Brown back there late in the year, I believe we will be 1 of the best return team's in the NFL this year with the emergence of Brown along with Moss.

As for King saying Morton is going to be this big time impact player and actually win 2 games single handidly, I don't see it, where he get's that from I have no idea because in 2 year's he really didn't impact our games.

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

Antonio Brown (8.9 yds) and James Thrash (8.5 yds) did much better on punt returns than Morton (6.2 yds). Betts was better (23.0 yds) on Kickoffs than Morton (22.4) Morton only had one good kickoff return return during his tenure here. That one being the TD against the Saints in 2003. Antonio Brown also had a return for 66 yds and Ladell Betts had one for 70 yards. Morton's long? 49 yards. Cutting Morton was a great move.

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

What a putz!

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

[QUOTE=bjschmonsees]Antonio Brown (8.9 yds) and James Thrash (8.5 yds) did much better on punt returns than Morton (6.2 yds). Betts was better (23.0 yds) on Kickoffs than Morton (22.4) Morton only had one good kickoff return return during his tenure here. That one being the TD against the Saints in 2003. Antonio Brown also had a return for 66 yds and Ladell Betts had one for 70 yards. Morton's long? 49 yards. Cutting Morton was a great move.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. You can argue that we got better at blocking, but then our returns got better too. Morton is a fine return man, but he doesn't change a game by himself. Definatley not two wins by signing him.

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

[QUOTE=Paintrain]Now I'm pretty sure I read an article back in '03 where King said how bad of an idea it was for the Redskins to give up all that money and a 5th round pick for a special teams player and an occasional 3rd down back. Granted, Morton didn't do much as a Redskin, but all of the sudden, now that he's no longer a Redskin and coming off of a torn ACL, he's going to help a team win 2 extra games and be one of the five most electric return men in the game? C'mon, am I missing something here?[/QUOTE]

I'm not going to hate on Morton, but DAMN five most electric return men?!

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

Maybe instead of Cutting Morton, we should have cut King out of ESPN! Just don't talk about him anymore!

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

King is a joke, and he only proves it with a comment like this.

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

What's interesting is do you THINK he peers are like, "Wow, what hard-hitting and accurate news!" I don't see how he can be respected in the sports community with opinions like that.

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

:Smoker: Lay off the ganj Pete.

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

How many times could a guy like this completely contradict himself and still have a job?????

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

I find it hilarious. Just wait until we drop Gardner. He'll probably say he's one of the top WRs in the league!

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

haha. "The redskins released Rod Gardner today, one of the most consistant wide recievers in league. Gardner alone will win 5 games for any team willing to pick him up."

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

I agree with all of you.. AND... when the Redskins start playing well and winning, he'll jump on the bandwagon and start blowing Gibbs and saying he's the greatest coach..etc. What a tit.

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

[quote]Antonio Brown (8.9 yds) and James Thrash (8.5 yds) did much better on punt returns than Morton (6.2 yds). Betts was better (23.0 yds) on Kickoffs than Morton (22.4) Morton only had one good kickoff return return during his tenure here. That one being the TD against the Saints in 2003. Antonio Brown also had a return for 66 yds and Ladell Betts had one for 70 yards. Morton's long? 49 yards. Cutting Morton was a great move.[/quote]

Hard to compare two different special teams coaches like this. Is Morton a top 5? No. Could we do worse - yes. Antonio Brown doesn't have a whole lot in the way of moves, but when you have the speed he has it's not really that important!

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

Not sure the stats back this up but, I fell Morton was better as a KO return man than as a punt returner. Last year I recall more than one occasion when there were catchable punt in the air that he let hit the ground and bounce, costing us valuable yards. I always thought that if the punt is in the air and you have a chance to catch it you should, even if you have to fair-catch.

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

[QUOTE=Daseal]Hard to compare two different special teams coaches like this. Is Morton a top 5? No. Could we do worse - yes. Antonio Brown doesn't have a whole lot in the way of moves, but when you have the speed he has it's not really that important![/QUOTE]

Those were the stats from last year, so they are from the same system and the same coaching staff.

Morton was defintely a better kickoff returner than punt returner.

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

King quote..."Spurrier will win big"

King is not always anti Redskin but even when he's not he's usually wrong anyway...

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

He also predicted Wuerfell would have a 30 TD season under Spurrier!

How's that for smoking some serious crack! I guess he got caught up in that preseason 49er game.

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

LOL!!!!!! WOW! I never heard that. The man just is not educated in the ways of sports.

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

Classic case of not knowing a team and judging a team by maybe seeing one game - a preseason game at that.

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

Actually guys, Peter King doesn't have a beef with the Redskins; he loves Gibbs, thought the trade for Moss was good for us, and correctly thought that the hiring of Gregg Williams was a good move.

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

Out of all of the bad things he's said however, that gives him a broadcasting record comparable to our football record last year.

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

PETER KING IS A [email="!@#$%"]!@#$%[/email]^ WHO NOT ONLY HATES THE REDSKINGS BUT ALSO IS THE SOLE REASON THAT ART MONK IS NOT YET IN THE HALL OF FAME!! PETER KING CAN CONTRACT A HORRIBLE STD FOR ALL I CARE

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

FU-K Peter KING! The guy rights whatever he feels weather or not it's truth.

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

Let's go Peter King Let's go!
Let's go Peter King Let's go!
man i love that guy's articles, i mean that is sports journalism at it's best. haha sike that bitch should retire for all i care. Okay, so he likes some of the things we've done, but lets face it, wherever there is criticism about the redskins, peter king isn't far to be found.

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

I actually don't mind Peter King; he's not always right in his predictions (as noted above, but he's smart, articulate, and doesn't appear to have a real bias.

That's more than I can say for Len Pastabelly.

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

I'm not so fond of Peter King's take on the Redskins, and the whole Art Monk thing... but I know his brother Bob pretty well (married an ex-roommate), and Bob is a great guy. In fact I'm camping with the other Kings in a few weeks at Hammonasset beach.

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

Let's get off of Peter King for a second and look objectively at what we got from Morton. An average return man. He's slightly above average, but we signed him because he had one good game where he took back 2 kickoffs for TD's. Guess how many he got the rest of the year. 0. None. nada. Not so impressive is it?

I was never sold on him. King is a jackass. 2 games just by having Morton? Are you kidding me?

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

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I find it hilarious. Just wait until we drop Gardner. He'll probably say he's one of the top WRs in the league![/QUOTE]

Matty and dirtbag :laughing-

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

Matty can we have a poll for BIGGEST IDIOT IN THE MEDIA:

Nominees:
Pasta Belly
King
Stephen A. Smith

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

When you're a perenial loser you often think that the media has a bias against you.

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

[QUOTE=Daseal]When you're a perenial loser you often think that the media has a bias against you.[/QUOTE]

No Daseal it happens to winners too........case in point NBA Spurs and Pistons..........no respect for either team that's for sure. The media is still agonizing why the Suns and Miami aren't in the finals :rolleyes:

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

Who exactly are you calling perrenial losers? The Redskins aren't any kind of losers, bub, and no fan would say otherwise. If you disagree, feel free to go ahead and change your tag line to read:

"Apparently not having unrelenting optimism and calling the Redskins losers means you're not a fan."

:rolleyes:

Supporters cheer.

Fanatics believe.

--Phin the Fan

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

[QUOTE=monk81]No Daseal it happens to winners too........case in point NBA Spurs and Pistons..........no respect for either team that's for sure. The media is still agonizing why the Suns and Miami aren't in the finals :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

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=Phinehas]Who exactly are you calling perrenial losers? The Redskins aren't any kind of losers, bub, and no fan would say otherwise. If you disagree, feel free to go ahead and change your tag line to read:

"Apparently not having unrelenting optimism and calling the Redskins losers means you're not a fan."

:rolleyes:

Supporters cheer.

Fanatics believe.

--Phin the Fan[/QUOTE]

while the skins might not be exactly perrenial losers, they haven't exactly been on the winning side of too many games these past 10 years or so. Here's to hoping and praying this year is finally the year we can say the team starts to turn it around :cheers

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

[QUOTE=Daseal]Hard to compare two different special teams coaches like this. Is Morton a top 5? No. Could we do worse - yes. Antonio Brown doesn't have a whole lot in the way of moves, but when you have the speed he has it's not really that important![/QUOTE]


Daseal, did you take a close look at Brown the limited time he did play? The kid has some moves, he's not a stright line player, in all honesty the speed and excelleration that I saw from him was Daryl Green est, I couldn't believe my eye's the first time I saw him run, my thought was how on earth could a team just release a kid with that kind of speed? I expect very big thing's from Brown this season.

Clinton Portis upon seeing Brown run turned to Gibbs and said "that's the fastest human I have ever seen".

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

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. Some teams have to be losers, and those 5 years we were the losers. Does that mean we have tos tay losers? No.

How can you disagree with solid numbers. After loads of looking I estimate our all-time win %age to be just a bit over 500. Thanks mainly to Joe Gibbs. I can't find the exact number and my math, even for something so simple, isn't something I'd trust to base an argument on. It looked to be a bit over 500. If anyone can find the exact numbers I'd like to know.

The Redskins HAVE been losing, Phinehas. Why can't we as fans accept this. We act as if the media and fans of other teams should declare our dominance every year like we say we're going to have. I'm looking just as forward to that day as you are, but unfortunately, it hasn't quite come yet. Maybe this year.

Please, find anyone who's watched a game with me and haven't seen me cheer. Read all my posts and find me somewhere that I haven't believed Joe Gibbs will turn it around before he leaves DC. Your argument is based on false assumptions. In closing, maybe you should look at your team from another standpoint and not always the burgandy colored glasses. May help you get a more accurate picture of what tier the Redskins are currently grouped in todays NFL.

EDIT:505-462-27
thats from 1932-2004
I dont think that includes a 22-15 postseason record
so .5222222222 I didn't include ties because I wasn't sure how they were scored.

Also, here's a Peter King article - look at that bias go!
[url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/writers/peter_king/01/09/mmqb/[/url]