Underdogs?
 

We are currently underdogs to the Broncos by 7 points. do you agree with this shit?.I guess vegas does not beleive in us yet

Re: Underdogs?
 

yea I agree with it. The broncos offense is scoring on average as many points as we have had total all year. Until we start scoring more we are going to be the underdog. Its not like we are a td underdog to san fran (and we better not be when we play them). If we beat the broncos though, a lot of things change. A split between either denver or KC is huge. winning both is even better but ill take the split.

Re: Underdogs?
 

Denver has traditionally been a hard place to win, and especially with Denevr having a little momemtum behind them. Should be a good game and of course we shall win another close one



[QUOTE=gibbsisgod]We are currently underdogs to the Broncos by 7 points. do you agree with this shit?.I guess vegas does not beleive in us yet[/QUOTE]

Re: Underdogs?
 

if memory serves..we were 7 point dogs to dallas, perhaps we could have the same outcome:biggthump

Re: Underdogs?
 

if we can control the ball, limmit the sacks to brunnel we should win. This will be a huge test for our o-line

Re: Underdogs?
 

I'll take the seven points underdog.....fine with me.

The game is played on the field, not the papers.

Re: Underdogs?
 

Yes, i agree. Denver is a tough place to play for visiting teams. Right now, thats reasonable.

Re: Underdogs?
 

Absolutely. Denver has one ofthe best homefield advantages in football, and has beaten some good teams (San Diego, Kansas City and Jacksonville).

Don't get me wrong, I think that we can win this game, but any reasonable person (including Vegas) would favor Denver in this game.

Now let's prove them all wrong.

Re: Underdogs?
 

I think it will go down before the end of the week, but I'm not really shocked by that. I'd probaboly put it at around 5.

Re: Underdogs?
 

The underdog is the most dange4rous team, because they have nothing to lose, and WILL spoil games for teams. I have no problems being an underdog

Re: Underdogs?
 

I say the team is going to be so thirsty for more of the good feeling they are getting from winning games that they are going to somehow pull this one out! Just think how good MOST of us are feeling to be 3-0, I can only imagine how good it feels to be a player on the team knowing you're 3-0.

Re: Underdogs?
 

I'd put us at 10 point underdogs, it doesn't affect the outcome.

Re: Underdogs?
 

Playing in Denver alone gives them the edge. I have no confidence in their defense and their QB is nothing to talk about. Not much can be said about their running game either. We should win an ugly one I reckon.

Re: Underdogs?
 

Yea I agree that Denver has a pretty good home field advantage. But like in my other post on another thread as long as we limit our mistakes and turnovers we will be able to hang with any team in the NFL. Being a 7 point underdog means nothing to me other than some dude sitting in an office somewhere reading and trying to interpret statistics and personnel on paper. If the line was correct every week wouldnt alot of people make alot of money week in and week out? I think that the Redskins as underdogs win this game by ball control, clock running, and long third down conversions, Oh wait, thats how we beat the Seahawks. Anyways, skins win 21-14.

Re: Underdogs?
 

7 is a big spread, I would expect that to come down a bit as the week goes on.

Re: Underdogs?
 

Man, I just watched ESPN - Stuart Scott, Tom Jackson (whom I liked to watch when I was kid), Jaws, and Michael Irvin. Boy did they piss me off!!!!

Basically the segment started with are the Redskins for real? Then Stuart Scott starts the conversation off by saying, "well technically they are 3-0"....and the other three guys just about fell out of their chair laughing because he said "technically".

After they finally settled down, Tom Jackson went on to say how he thinks they are still a joke (paraphrase) and have been for some time. He went on to say that they've only beaten the Bears w/ a QB that has never played a professional game. How we played poorly against Dallas for 55 minutes and beat a mediocre Seattle team that no one respects.

Jaws, bless his ignorant heart, backed us up some - but the only thing he could come up with was some old ass Sean Taylor footage from last year and went on to say he's the tempo setter for the defense. I couldn't believe it!! I mean every highlight he showed Taylor was wearing #36 - what a joke!!

Irvin, yes Michael Irvin was the only one who said he felt we had a great Defense, and reiterated great twice because he drew groans from Jackson and Scott. He went on to say that we could only play who's on the schedule, and that 3-0 is 3-0!

Here's what get's my goat. When we beat Dallas it was we played poorly for 55 minutes. When we beat Seattle they gave us the game - when the reverse was actually true. We dominated Seattle damn near all of three quarters, let them back into it, and pulled out the win. It's amazing how the media twists the story to suit their view.

Re: Underdogs?
 

I agree we must split with Denver and KC. Once again, this game will be harder than KC. Denver has so far played better than the Chiefs, and I am not worried about Bailey telling any secrets to his teamates, mainly because there is nothing left(system or style of play) from his time here. That thin air could wear us out, hopefully the team can stay fresh, and keep their offense off of the field.

KC also has a good home field advantage, but their defense is weak, and their offense isn't the same as it was last year. Right now I am not afraid of anyone at runningback. After we played a hard nosed against two of the top runningbacks in our last two games.

Re: Underdogs?
 

Yeah, I'm watching the same shit. They then started another discussion. "Whose better, the Redskins, the Dolphins or the Bears?" No joke. I'm gonna go shoot myself now.

Re: Underdogs?
 

So basically Irvin comes up with the most logical statement "3-0 is 3-0 and all we can do is play who's on the schedule"

Re: Underdogs?
 

Yeah, Super Genius......like Wyle E. Coyote!!!

Re: Underdogs?
 

Forgive me if I'm wrong but the second post here said the Broncos are scoring as many points on average than we have scored all year. Maybe that was just an estimate but they have scored 80 points this year out of four games which brings the average to 20 points per game. These points were from at least three teams that dont have a threatening defense. We have scored 43 points, an average of 14.3 ppg. Im sure alot will tell me im wrong but I truly dont see how Denver is a threat. It will only be a hard fought game if the skins have to battle themsleves in addition to Denver. Denver is 3 and 1, but they played a jacksonville team that just self destructed and didnt really pose any problems for them, Kansas city as seen yesterday by philly, blasted off but once philly figured out there scheme was just whooped, they scraped by San Diego, and lost to Miami. It may be wierd but I really have a gut feeling that if the Redskins show up to play and have learned anything in the past four weeks, it will be a serious upset. I perdict 24-7 Redskins.

Please dont rip me a new one over my prediction.

Re: Underdogs?
 

[QUOTE=SARPUP]Forgive me if I'm wrong but the second post here said the Broncos are scoring as many points on average than we have scored all year. Maybe that was just an estimate but they have scored 80 points this year out of four games which brings the average to 20 points per game. These points were from at least three teams that dont have a threatening defense. We have scored 43 points, an average of 14.3 ppg. Im sure alot will tell me im wrong but I truly dont see how Denver is a threat. It will only be a hard fought game if the skins have to battle themsleves in addition to Denver. Denver is 3 and 1, but they played a jacksonville team that just self destructed and didnt really pose any problems for them, Kansas city as seen yesterday by philly, blasted off but once philly figured out there scheme was just whooped, they scraped by San Diego, and lost to Miami. It may be wierd but I really have a gut feeling that if the Redskins show up to play and have learned anything in the past four weeks, it will be a serious upset. I perdict 24-7 Redskins.

Please dont rip me a new one over my prediction.[/QUOTE]

I hope you're right!!! :headbange :food-smil

Re: Underdogs?
 

[QUOTE=Balmerskinsfan]Yeah, I'm watching the same shit. They then started another discussion. "Whose better, the Redskins, the Dolphins or the Bears?" No joke. I'm gonna go shoot myself now.[/QUOTE]I was so f'n pissed when i heard that, what the hell is that. WHO IS BETTER THE SKINS DOLPHINS OR BEARS!! What the hail kind of question is that. They took the illegitamite division leaders and compared them. Irvin said the fucking bears, we beat the bears. the bears have won 1 game!! what the hail. I HATE ESPN AND SI!!

Re: Underdogs?
 

[QUOTE=12thMan]Man, I just watched ESPN - Stuart Scott, Tom Jackson (whom I liked to watch when I was kid), Jaws, and Michael Irvin. Boy did they piss me off!!!!

Basically the segment started with are the Redskins for real? Then Stuart Scott starts the conversation off by saying, "well technically they are 3-0"....and the other three guys just about fell out of their chair laughing because he said "technically".

[/QUOTE]

That stupid technically shit. I was on the phone and watching it with someone, we missed exactly what they said so i rewinded it and heard that dumb shit. I paused it and at about that time irvin and jaws were seriously about to fall out of their chairs.

How are we only Technically 3-0, realistically we are not?? Stupid sons of bitches
I hate STuard Scott

Re: Underdogs?
 

[QUOTE=BigSKINBauer]That stupid technically shit. I was on the phone and watching it with someone, we missed exactly what they said so i rewinded it and heard that dumb shit. I paused it and at about that time irvin and jaws were seriously about to fall out of their chairs.

How are we only Technically 3-0, realistically we are not?? Stupid sons of bitches
I hate STuard Scott[/QUOTE]

if we're technically 3-0 than the giants are technically retarded, since all their wins came against bottom dwellers... they only have 1 really easy game left, we have 4.

Re: Underdogs?
 

[b]The point spread has nothing to do with who is more or less likey to win[/b].... or what the bookey thinks the score will be. The point spread is to make half the betting on each team. Then the bookey makes money on the margin. For example if the Skins were playing the Raiders, I(the bookey) personally think the Skins would win and most likely by at a TD. However I will make the line 4 1/2 because I check my charts on how the betting goes team by team and I see that people like to bet the Raiders. Perhaps it is because people in Cali have more money, like to bet more than most, or Raiders fans are all a little bit off their rockers. If after a couple of days I see alot of betting on one side or the other(say 55% vs 45%) I will adjust the spread to ecourage betting on the other team.

The point is that the line has little basis on the outcome.

Re: Underdogs?
 

Let's not get worked up over a washed up coke head, a no good clown in Tom Jackson who watched his dreams become a nightmare in the 42-10 Redskins Superbowl victory and I'm not going to waste time talking about the other idiot. The Redskins really haven't proven anything to the public and this wil continue until we put enough points on the board. If you don't like the criticisms, just turn off of the
radio.

Re: Underdogs?
 

Bottom line they are right, who have we played? I said it earlier today Denver is our first big test.

Perhaps they looked at the fact that we scored 14 points against dallas and needed two freak plays to do that, to beat a team that allowed the 49er's to score 34 points against them, who couldn't score a point offensivly against the Cardinals sunday night.

They are correct about everything they said about the teams we have played so far.

If we beat Denver then we will have something to hang our hats on, I just don't see it happening.

I disagree about us having a great defense, I believe we have a great defensive scheme, but we are short on the defensive line, we need guy's who can collapse the pocket, and a player who can be a legitamate pass rusher and then we will be great, right now we rely to much on the blitz for pressure, team's have already shown that they are making better adjustments against our D this year with pass protection, our secondary can't cover for ever, we need to generate some kind of pressure from our front four.

Re: Underdogs?
 

offiss, many were saying Seattle was our first big test, but I guess that's just been explained away since they missed a FG and Holmgren made some questionable calls down the stretch.

I'm not arguing that Denver is better than Seattle, but Seattle isn't exactly a slouch either. They have one of the top ranked offenses and their D was ranked 8th coming into our game.

It's funny how fickle the media is week to week. After week 1 the Bears were bums, after week 2 they were on the rise again. After week 1 Dallas was headed to the playoffs, now they're headed back to the basement.

All the Skins can do is go out and beat the next team on the schedule, which they've done so far. I'm just wondering what excuses will pop up when we go on the road and beat Denver. Should be interesting.

Re: Underdogs?
 

On another topic... Did they put those glasses on Stuart Scott to hide his eye? That things getting worse every time I watch...

Re: Underdogs?
 

[QUOTE=BleedBurgundy]On another topic... Did they put those glasses on Stuart Scott to hide his eye? That things getting worse every time I watch...[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I noticed that too...

Re: Underdogs?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]offiss, many were saying Seattle was our first big test, but I guess that's just been explained away since they missed a FG and Holmgren made some questionable calls down the stretch.

I'm not arguing that Denver is better than Seattle, but Seattle isn't exactly a slouch either. They have one of the top ranked offenses and their D was ranked 8th coming into our game.

It's funny how fickle the media is week to week. After week 1 the Bears were bums, after week 2 they were on the rise again. After week 1 Dallas was headed to the playoffs, now they're headed back to the basement.

All the Skins can do is go out and beat the next team on the schedule, which they've done so far. I'm just wondering what excuses will pop up when we go on the road and beat Denver. Should be interesting.[/QUOTE]


The media is one thing, how many of these writers really know the nuts and bolts of football?

What you really have to focus on are my post's Matty :) the ones where I said I wasen't impressed with Seattle regardless of their record and said we should beat them!

So far as much as I have been in opposition of our offensive scheme I have predicted all 3 victories, reason? I knew the Bears had no QB, and the Hawk's have no coaching, as for Dallas my thought was they would beat us except for the fact that all our termoil that week I could see us winning on something out of the ordinary, although I thought it would be a defensive score it still was out of the ordinary.

What will they say after we beat Denver? Let's not put the cart before the horse here, I think we will come out of this game with much more media respect win or lose, I feel we will give them a good game and in doing so we will start to gain respect, but I don't see us winning this one, it's not by any means impossible, but it will be a tough one to come away with a W in mile high.

I do hope you are right though, I can handle being 3-1! :biggthump

Re: Underdogs?
 

The home team automatically gets +3, so Denver would only be favored by 4 if the game were in DC.

Re: Underdogs?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]offiss, many were saying Seattle was our first big test, but I guess that's just been explained away since they missed a FG and Holmgren made some questionable calls down the stretch.

I'm not arguing that Denver is better than Seattle, but Seattle isn't exactly a slouch either. They have one of the top ranked offenses and their D was ranked 8th coming into our game.

It's funny how fickle the media is week to week. After week 1 the Bears were bums, after week 2 they were on the rise again. After week 1 Dallas was headed to the playoffs, now they're headed back to the basement.

All the Skins can do is go out and beat the next team on the schedule, which they've done so far. I'm just wondering what excuses will pop up when we go on the road and beat Denver. Should be interesting.[/QUOTE]

Seattle is something like 1-30 in the eastern time zone so while they are a tougher team than Chicago they are not exactly world beaters when they go east. The bottom line is the skins have beaten 3 weak team which is a good thing because in the past few years the skins found a way to lose games that went down like Sunday's did. I just dont see a way to argue that the skins are one of the stronger teams in the nfl because they have not had a tough test yet. That will happen this week.

Re: Underdogs?
 

There's room for more than one swami around here, offiss.

I'm putting the cart way before the horse and saying we'll steal this one on the road in Denver, and we still won't get much respect at 4-0. The majority of the media will still have plenty of excuses as to why we're now the worst 4-0 team in NFL history. If we lose and drop to 3-1, all the naysayers will pull out the "I told you so" takes as to why the Skins are beginning to slide back down to reality.

I really don't see the Skins gaining much respect until at least halfway through the season, if we're sitting there with at least 5 or 6 wins after 8 games, then I think some eyebrows will have been raised.

Re: Underdogs?
 

I still say we beat a good Seattle team - this is a team, until we beat them, many thought would make noise in the AFC West.

I say the Skins have nothing to prove but to play their hearts out like they have all year, so far. Whether they win or lose, they've proven that they can now close out nail-biters. Now I'm not satisfied with a "moral" victory Sunday, but this is a quality that will take them into the playoffs. The blowouts will come, IMO, we're just learning how to win right now.

BTW, I sent a semi-nasty email to Vic Carruci?? from NFLnetwork.com. Their website had some commentary about the 4 undefeated teams in the NFL, but they had yet to update it with our most recent win v. Seattle. I let him have it!! I hope he responds.....him and that fat Lincoln Kennedy!!!

Re: Underdogs?
 

I agree 12thMan.

I'm aware Seattle sucks on the road, but that doesn't discount they were still a quality opponent.

Seattle is a team that should win 8 or 9 games, possibly 10 if they play their cards right.

As for Dallas, I don't think they are a pushover either. I think they're also capable of winning 8 or 9 games.

I wouldn't say we've been truly tested yet, and I agree that Denver will be a great test, BUT I really wouldn't say we've played 3 weak teams either.

Re: Underdogs?
 

The problem with the "quality of opponents" is that it's so easily twisted to meet the needs of the arguer.

The Bears may end up OK, but they aren't the team we thought they were. Why? They lost to the Redskins.

The Cowboys clearly still have some kinks to work out. Why? They lost to the Redskins.

The Seahawks need to restore some focus and fix their playcalling. Why? They lost to the Redskins.

[i]IF[/i] the Redskins win in Denver, will the story be that they're 4-0, or that Denver had a breakdown of some sort. I mean, a Denver loss would have to be their own fault. They lost to the Redskins.

Re: Underdogs?
 

I don't care if we score 10 or 30 points as long as the other team has one less point. I do not think our O will but up alot of points in the first half of the season. With that said if we keep improving every week our O sould be a force in the second half of the season and with our D that could realy be a tough combination for teams to deal with. Gibbs knows how to build on what he starts and we are starting to see that.

Re: Underdogs?
 

[QUOTE=BrudLee][i]IF[/i] the Redskins win in Denver, will the story be that they're 4-0, or that Denver had a breakdown of some sort. I mean, a Denver loss would have to be their own fault. They lost to the Redskins.[/QUOTE]

I definitely agree with the latter. The story will focus on how Denver lost, not how the Redskins won.