This Skins Stat Says A Lot About Us

Meks · 11-12-2012, 11:20 AM

[quote=mredskins;963271]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meks

Really? Thanks.

lol, i meant to finish that with 'that's why u see alot more blowouts... cuz theres a ton more games'

30gut · 11-12-2012, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

This tells me that we are a great team that can't seem to finish games. We know how to be competitive, but we just don't have that extra push from either our players or our coaches or both.

it tells me the opposite. Great teams finish games, great team don't lose close games they win by blowout.

Monkeydad · 11-12-2012, 11:46 AM

Makes it sound like we're a lot better than our bad record indicates!

mredskins · 11-12-2012, 12:03 PM

Basically when the day is done the Skins over the past decade have been a bad franchise. If you helps you sleep better at night that a lot of games were close so be it, but we are still a bad franchise.

"Ask any racer. Any real racer. It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning's winning."- Dom

CultBrennan59 · 11-12-2012, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 53Fan

So we're the worse at finishing or completing games? It's pretty hard for me to find a positive in that. I guess it's better than getting blown out all the time but as mredskin just wrote...there aren't that many blowouts anyway. Good teams find ways to win...bad teams don't. It's as simple as that. We get a lead but know in our hearts it's not over because we have a history of allowing teams to come back and beat us. I appreciate your optimism and I would honestly be the last person to ask about my sister. Personally I would rather kiss my Jack Russell.

See this is the thing about this thread; I said see how you interpret this stat. It can be interpreted in more than one way. (You and most people here see it as a negative; I and a couple others see some positives out of it)

CRedskinsRule · 11-12-2012, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

See this is the thing about this thread; I said see how you interpret this stat. It can be interpreted in more than one way. (You and most people here see it as a negative; I and a couple others see some positives out of it)

I'm not much for the phrase garbage time, but the stat you made doesn't really reflect at all whether the game was close the whole way, or we just got garbage scores against prevent style defenses. I don't see a lot of use from just a blind number, good or bad.

Ruhskins · 11-12-2012, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

See this is the thing about this thread; I said see how you interpret this stat. It can be interpreted in more than one way. (You and most people here see it as a negative; I and a couple others see some positives out of it)

Funny that you see it as a positive, since you were the same guy that wanted the team to tank for a better draft position in the past two seasons.

InsaneBoost · 11-12-2012, 01:46 PM

Think this can be a bit deceiving. A lot of games we only were close in (besides really last year) because defenses go to prevent which allows us to drive easier. The other ones, that we were in, of course, are because the team STILL doesn't play for four full quarters.

CultBrennan59 · 11-12-2012, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Funny that you see it as a positive, since you were the same guy that wanted the team to tank for a better draft position in the past two seasons.

I wouldn't say I think this stat is a complete positive, but there are some positives to it. It's a two sided stat.

Your not gonna let that go are you? We would have been a better team for the future if we MS plan had worked. It back fired a couple times to get us out of the first overall pick range. Oh we'll it's in the past and I'm happy with griffin.

53Fan · 11-12-2012, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

See this is the thing about this thread; I said see how you interpret this stat. It can be interpreted in more than one way. (You and most people here see it as a negative; I and a couple others see some positives out of it)

I'm not coming down on you CB...
You obviously put some time and effort into this. It's really a shame to go through all that to try and find a positive. Sounds like something Lions fans probably did through the Millen years. Any way you look at it we're not very good and coming close through the last few years doesn't change that. A good coach would.

Ruhskins · 11-12-2012, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CultBrennan59

I wouldn't say I think this stat is a complete positive, but there are some positives to it. It's a two sided stat.

Your not gonna let that go are you? We would have been a better team for the future if we MS plan had worked. It back fired a couple times to get us out of the first overall pick range. Oh we'll it's in the past and I'm happy with griffin.

Given your own negativity over the past two seasons, it surprised me that you seemed surprised at the negativity of others.

Anyway, it is hard for me to see this stat as a positive, when a lot of these close games have been against teams that are not good. I do want to say that now more than ever I think we have a future and better days are (hopefully) ahead. But I think at least this year we are going to continue with the same mantra of keeping games close against good and bad teams alike.

Mattyk · 11-12-2012, 04:04 PM

Losing is losing anyway you look at it.

There's no style points for coming close.

REDSKINS4ever · 11-12-2012, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mredskins

Basically when the day is done the Skins over the past decade have been a bad franchise. If you helps you sleep better at night that a lot of games were close so be it, but we are still a bad franchise.

"Ask any racer. Any real racer. It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning's winning."- Dom

The Redskins have been a bad team because under Snyder's ownership the team has mostly been a damn circus. 7 head coaches in 12 years. Firing Norv Turner when the Redskins were still in playoff contention, firing Marty Schottenheimer after a dramatic turnaround, hiring Steve Spurrier who was not qualified to be a head coach in the NFL, and hiring Zorn as an offensive coordinator with no head coach and then giving him head coaching duties that he wasn't qualified for. It's all decisions like these that have held this franchise back.

Thanks a lot, Mr. Snyder. While the Steelers, Giants, and Patriots play in Super Bowls year after year we Redskins fans are buried deep in our own crap because of the decisions of Daniel Snyder.

SmootSmack · 11-12-2012, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by REDSKINS4ever

The Redskins have been a bad team because under Snyder's ownership the team has mostly been a damn circus. 7 head coaches in 12 years. Firing Norv Turner when the Redskins were still in playoff contention, firing Marty Schottenheimer after a dramatic turnaround, hiring Steve Spurrier who was not qualified to be a head coach in the NFL, and hiring Zorn as an offensive coordinator with no head coach and then giving him head coaching duties that he wasn't qualified for. It's all decisions like these that have held this franchise back.

Thanks a lot, Mr. Snyder. While the Steelers, Giants, and Patriots play in Super Bowls year after year we Redskins fans are buried deep in our own crap because of the decisions of Daniel Snyder.

Always the easy thing to do, just blame Snyder

REDSKINS4ever · 11-12-2012, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Always the easy thing to do, just blame Snyder

You played for this team once. A lot of this franchise's mediocrity can be traced to Daniel Snyder. The decisions he's made has had a bad impact on what's happened on the field. The only thing he did right was beg Joe Gibbs to come out of retirement and with that, the Redskins went to the playoffs 2 out of the 4 years Gibbs with coaching the Redskins again.

But even when Gibbs stepped down the head coaching vacancy should have gone to Greg Williams but Snyder even fouled that up too. Of course Vinny Cerrato has played a hand by making stupid trades, being incompetent by selecting bad draft choices, and allowing top notch safeties such as Ryan Clark to hit the open market.

But who's the moron who fired Charley Casserly in favor of Cerrato in the first place? That's whose fault it is then.

11-12-2012, 11:46 AM	#48
Monkeydad Gamebreaker Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: PA Age: 34 Posts: 14,885	Re: This Skins Stat Says A Lot About Us Makes it sound like we're a lot better than our bad record indicates! __________________ Not sent from a Droid, iPhone, Blackberry or toaster

11-12-2012, 12:03 PM	#49
mredskins Franchise Player Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 8,073	Re: This Skins Stat Says A Lot About Us Basically when the day is done the Skins over the past decade have been a bad franchise. If you helps you sleep better at night that a lot of games were close so be it, but we are still a bad franchise. *"Ask any racer. Any real racer. It don't matter if you win by an inch or a mile. Winning's winning."- Dom __________________ When life gives you paper jams, turn them into paper footballs!*

11-12-2012, 01:46 PM	#53
InsaneBoost The Starter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: DC Age: 25 Posts: 1,292	Re: This Skins Stat Says A Lot About Us Think this can be a bit deceiving. A lot of games we only were close in (besides really last year) because defenses go to prevent which allows us to drive easier. The other ones, that we were in, of course, are because the team STILL doesn't play for four full quarters. __________________ Twitter @ArenaDriveTimes

11-12-2012, 04:04 PM	#57
Mattyk ‎\m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 73,184	Re: This Skins Stat Says A Lot About Us Losing is losing anyway you look at it. There's no style points for coming close. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

This Skins Stat Says A Lot About Us

Redskins Locker Room