Box Seats: Rooting for the Redskins to Lose is a Terrible Idea

  • Thread starter Lanky Livingston
  • Start date
I don't care who you are, it makes no sense to look at every individual game through the eye of an individual draft pick, 6 months away.

Whatever happened to the idea of "we'll cross that bridge when we get there" ???
 
I don't care who you are, it makes no sense to look at every individual game through the eye of an individual draft pick, 6 months away.

Whatever happened to the idea of "we'll cross that bridge when we get there" ???


yes...I'm sure the violin players on the Titanic thought they were loyal to the end as well.\

and...if one has a roadmap that depicts where various bridges lead....

"it's unpredictable so just sit back and live in the moment"......is not a good life philosophy for some. we all look at the future in different ways...nothing wrong with that. nothing wrong with seeing different bridges to the same goals.

as a post-script....I have dwelled in the space you advocate for the last 18 years....ready to try something new! if that doesn't work.....I'll look for the next best idea!
 
The thing is, rooting for, or against your team, on a message board, has zero effect on the game. All it does is show that you are willing to root against your team. You think doing so, will help the team more than winning will. Even though there is no proof that it will. It's hope, for hope's sake.

As long as 9-7 is a possibility, no matter how slim the possibility is, that's what I'm currently hoping for. And yes, this too, is hope, for hope's sake.

We choose what we hope for.

I choose to win, always. Plain and simple.

Others choose to win, most times, but not all the time. And, convince themselves that not is it only ok to lose, sometimes, but in this instance, desirable.
 
Seattle did win...they beat a bad team (who previously beat the Skins).....and your expectations for Seattle to win it all with their current QB would be?

My point is that after we beat Seattle everyone was bemoaning the fact that we won a meaningless game and our chances for getting a good pick went down and we moved from 4th to 7th in the draft order and yada yada yada. Of course a week later, Seattle wins and The Cardinals win and the Dolphins win and the Chiefs win and we move back to 5th, possibly 4th position. My point is one week doesn't freaking matter, because there's still a month of football to play. Saying one win loses us draft picks is like saying one win gets us into the playoffs.

Some of you want to complain about a winning STREAK, fine :)) though there are other arguments against that) but complaining after our first win in six weeks ... I don't see the point, and it's demoralizing as hell. But that's just me I guess.

Boone said:
Again, not rooting for losses, don't want my team not to try and win. But winning is not best for the team this year. I won't be convinced it serves any purpose.

It serves a purpose. A win makes us 552-522-27 as a team instead of 551-523-27. A win makes us 9-1 against the Jets lifetime instead of 8-2. I know these things because it's been written down. If it didn't matter we wouldn't be keeping track.
 
Last edited:
I'll confess...the more I see of RGIII, the more excited I am at the prospect of him under center. Guy is accurate, can make all the necessary NFL throws, can hurt you with his feet, and has quality material between the ears.

I like him :)

Agreed...he was surgical against Texas this weekend. Dude is gonna be a player! Let's just hope he comes out.

I don't care who you are, it makes no sense to look at every individual game through the eye of an individual draft pick, 6 months away.

Whatever happened to the idea of "we'll cross that bridge when we get there" ???

Exactly...so much can happen in these last 4 games. Four games! A full quarter of the season! A win or two is not going to drastically change the landscape of the draft, IMO.
 
There are so many bad clubs in the NFL this year that finishing 6-10 or 7-9 would put you out of the top 10.

The Redskins picked a bad couple of years under Shanahan to be bad and in need of draft talent.

Indy is 0-12. Minnesota and the Rams are 2-10.

At least Denver and Carolina seem to be moving forward and climbing out of the mix for a top pick.

Wouldn't it be ironic if the Eagles picked before us?
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 
Minny and the Rams won't draft a QB. Neither will Denver or Carolina.

We picked a GREAT year to win 6 or fewer games. Very deep QB class and most crappy teams don't need a QB.
 
The problem is no the qbs but the Shanahans. Remember they are looking for a system qb not a qb to build a system around.

Always a potentially risky endeavor
When talking about 22 year old talents.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 
Minny and the Rams won't draft a QB. Neither will Denver or Carolina.

We picked a GREAT year to win 6 or fewer games. Very deep QB class and most crappy teams don't need a QB.

My thoughts exactly. The way things are shaking out, its likely the Skins will pick 4th overall, behind Indy, St. Louis and Cleveland.

I know the conventional wisdom is that Indy will take Andrew Luck, but what if Manning has a miraculous recovery? They may opt to draft a Tannehill or Foles in the 2nd round to develop behind Peyton for a few more years. Drafting Luck would tie up a lot of cap space in the QB position for them. And they have holes in a lot of other places that need that cap money.

St. Louis will stick with Bradford - they should, anyway. Cleveland and Colt McCoy is another story altogether, but I think they'll stick with him for one more year at least.

Bottom line, I think the maximum number of QBs chosen will be 2, leaving two of RG3, Barkley, Jones to choose from. The best case scenario is no QBs are taken before us (although, I find this unlikely - if the Colts were to stand pat, they would likely trade down, or select Luck and trade him).
 
The problem is no the qbs but the Shanahans. Remember they are looking for a system qb not a qb to build a system around.

Always a potentially risky endeavor
When talking about 22 year old talents.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

Well that's another matter, and has nothing to do with draft position, or hoping to lose.
 
Yep, but important when you look at Matt Barkley's height and the fact Landry Jones' game doesn't fit what Kyle wants to run.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 
My thoughts exactly. The way things are shaking out, its likely the Skins will pick 4th overall, behind Indy, St. Louis and Cleveland.

I know the conventional wisdom is that Indy will take Andrew Luck, but what if Manning has a miraculous recovery? They may opt to draft a Tannehill or Foles in the 2nd round to develop behind Peyton for a few more years. Drafting Luck would tie up a lot of cap space in the QB position for them. And they have holes in a lot of other places that need that cap money.

St. Louis will stick with Bradford - they should, anyway. Cleveland and Colt McCoy is another story altogether, but I think they'll stick with him for one more year at least.

Bottom line, I think the maximum number of QBs chosen will be 2, leaving two of RG3, Barkley, Jones to choose from. The best case scenario is no QBs are taken before us (although, I find this unlikely - if the Colts were to stand pat, they would likely trade down, or select Luck and trade him).

Disagree. I suspect Barkley will fade a little with no Bowl Game, and assuming RGIII does not crap the bed in their Bowl Game, Luck and Griffin will go 1-2 in the draft, because someone will trade up to make it happen. Griffin is getting a lot of hype right now, and as long as he doesn't eff himself, some team will make an offer to the Rams (in your scenario) to move up.

That leaves us with a decision. Either we get in on the trade action, which shouldn't be too prohibitive, moving from the 4-6 range up to number 2, or we stand pat if it gets too expensive and pick Barkley.

St Louis has lots of holes and would be smart to trade down and get more picks, which I think they will do.
 
Disagree. I suspect Barkley will fade a little with no Bowl Game, and assuming RGIII does not crap the bed in their Bowl Game, Luck and Griffin will go 1-2 in the draft, because someone will trade up to make it happen. Griffin is getting a lot of hype right now, and as long as he doesn't eff himself, some team will make an offer to the Rams (in your scenario) to move up.

That leaves us with a decision. Either we get in on the trade action, which shouldn't be too prohibitive, moving from the 4-6 range up to number 2, or we stand pat if it gets too expensive and pick Barkley.

St Louis has lots of holes and would be smart to trade down and get more picks, which I think they will do.


Good points, and really its all moot until after the Combine. Griffin or Luck could go to Indianapolis and lay an egg, you never know. Or Foles and Tannehill could go to Indy and light the building on fire. All of this is why its too early to predict anything!
 
I'm going to throw this out there, and it's my main gripe with this piece...

I don't know of a single Redskin fan that actively roots against this team. I can't do it. I'm sure no one here, or on the other site, can do it either. Hell, I'd love to win with all of our players looking like all pros. Or just win in a positive fashion. Backing into wins does a ton of damage to our team, though. It keeps us in the never ending cycle of mediocrity.

Now, that said, a high draft pick doesn't guarantee you get out of that cycle, either (See: Shuler, Heath). But it certainly gives you a better opportunity than a lower pick.

I won't cheer for the team to lose. Never have, never will. But there is a silver lining to the losses. But, I disagree with the saying "a win is a win". To me it's quite inaccurate when looking at the large picture. A win, and missing on Griffin/Barkley/whoever could very well be a loss in the long run.

A win is instant gratification.

Which is why my stance is simple: You go into the game wanting to see the team play well and take the W home. That's something to build off of. Limited mistakes, solid play. What isn't something to build off of is a pedestrian offense, a decent to good defense and horrendous special teams. In my opinion, that was the Seattle game in a nut shell. People will disagree with me on that assessment, and I really do respect and appreciate your stance. But our team did not play well, Seattle just managed to play worse.

That's not how you want to win for the future. For a team in the playoff hunt, you want those wins. You need those wins. They're important. For a team that's been out of the race essentially for a few weeks now, those wins do nothing. A win where the team puts together a total effort would mean something, however. It means the team faced adversity, slapped that bitch in the ****ing mouth and won one.

We didn't do that. I had a lot of hope at the beginning of the Jet game too, but as the game went on it started to get away from us and you could feel the inevitable Jet onslaught coming.

There are positives on this team. Hurt looks better each week. Riley has been an absolute monster for us (and he's a great guy to interview). Roy Helu has been nothing short of spectacular. London Fletcher, even in the twilight of his career is a stud. So on and so forth (I didn't mention a lot of guys who have done great things. Please don't nitpick here, just trying to show some positive examples).

But our team as a whole needs to improve. And if we're going to win at this point in the season... like we all would like to see... Then it has to be after a great effort. Not a stinker.

Just my opinion. :)
 
KD, I don't have a problem with anything you wrote. It's all very reasonable and I agree with 99% of it.

The only, small disagreement I have is with the idea that the Seattle game was pointless. I think despite the fact that we didn't play great (Helu getting 100 yards in his first start is worth something though) there is value in avoiding a 12 game losing streak. Having a bad record is one thing. Losing twelve in a row is something else. I don't generally subscribe to the notion that a winning streak to close out the season automatically translates to the next season, but losing streaks ... they tend to be a little more contagious. Six in a row was bad enough. Talking heads were already keeping count. We already broke a few records ... I'm happy to have that issue behind us.
 
Cool, Henry. I respect your opinion more than most other people's... even when we find ourselves on opposite sides of the fence.

I'm not sure, though that avoiding a 12 game losing streak and losing 11 of your last 12 are all that much different :)
 
Jaws and Gruden both were commenting about this topic last night, and said the best way to develop young talent is through success. Winning breeds confidence; its better for our young players to do well AND succeed as a team. I suppose this will be more important once RG3 is in the B&G though...
 
The year after the Cowturds went 1-15...what did they do??? 13-3 and a SB. just like the draft...no magic formulas here.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top