Preseason 1991: Team Turmoil

Life is too short to worry about preseason but I tell you what, I hope Williams is experimenting or some-such. I know he subscribes to the "Attack and Attack Some More" mentality but come on, compensate a little for some of our weakness. Try a little "Bend But Don't Break."

When the Pats audibled we did nothing to counter it. Pretty stupid thing to do if you ask me, especially since they were picking us apart. Lord help us if we pull the sort of thing we pulled today when we face the Colts. Payton's gonna murder us.

Life is too short to worry about preseason but I tell you what, I hope Williams is experimenting or some-such. I know he subscribes to the "Attack and Attack Some More" mentality but come on, compensate a little for some of our weakness. Try a little "Bend But Don't Break."

When the Pats audibled we did nothing to counter it. Pretty stupid thing to do if you ask me, especially since they were picking us apart. Lord help us if we pull the sort of thing we pulled today when we face the Colts. Payton's gonna murder us.
I think its a case of we couldent beat any afc team last year..........and the fact that the pats might just be that damn good like the colts...

if everyone here is in agreement that we have the best coaching staff of all time, then everyone needs to calm down. i remember 1991 and people were predicting doom for the skins because of the preseason. we are probably not as good as that team but we are definitely not as bad as last nights game, either

All I know is, its 2006. Not 1991, and we've looked terrible. I know were not doomed and I could see us, just out of pure belief that we go out and roll the Vikings....but we've shown absolutley nothing on the feild to back up any positive thoughts, and thats where it counts.

All I know is, its 2006. Not 1991, and we've looked terrible. I know were not doomed and I could see us, just out of pure belief that we go out and roll the Vikings....but we've shown absolutley nothing on the feild to back up any positive thoughts, and thats where it counts.

The point is though, it doesn't matter what year it is, historically speaking, preseason is not a good measure as to what team you have in the regular season, at least according to Joe Gibbs. This is why Matty and myself say not to get all up in arms over a losing preseason. It's just like what we've been saying ever since Gibbs arrived back in Washington. Gibbs pays attention to so many little details that we obviously don't pay attention to. We're looking at the overall amount of points scored, allowed, etc... Gibbs and company look at the very fine details in preseason, because it is those very fine details that decide whether if your team is going to come out ahead by season's end or not. We might be getting our tails kicked 41-0 in preseason, but I'd rather this team get a butt whoopin' like that and to give our second stringers and "others" playing time so we can have type of depth come week one, rather than to put our first stringers in and our game plan displayed for all other teams to see, so that we can risk having injuries to our starters, our offense exposed, and back-ups who have not been evaluated properly.

How many times have people on this board screamed the sky is falling, only to have egg on their face? Quite a bit in Gibbs II. Just relax and prepare for the season opener.

Going 0 for 4 is not a good predictor of how the team will perform in the regular season, in spite of what happened in '91. And yes, the whole preseason isn't a good predictor either. That cliche "It matters not if you win or lose, but how you play the game" was invented for preseason. How they are playing the game is the concern.

The coaches aren't game planning the opponents. They call plays to see how individuals cope in a game situation, situations they will never set up in a real game. They, and we, are looking for execution. I'm looking for blocking. Does the QB get 3 seconds to make a play? Do the running backs average 4+ yards per carry? Do the receivers hang on to the ball? Is the first team D near the same level as last season? Can the new guys in the secondary play? I'm not seeing a lot of that. I wouldn't care about 0-3 if I saw something. I don't see preseason play on a par with Dallas or Philadelphia. The Giants, playing poorly, did enough to win two games. McNabb, with no one to throw to, has a preseason 112 QB rating.

With this division this year, it helps to get off to a fast start. To get to the Super Bowl, you have to win the division and get at least one home playoff game. Yeah, I know, it didn't help the Giants last year; but they weren't the "real" division champs. So, that's my distress, that it looks like it might take some time to shake things out when I hoped for a fast start. Wide open offenses poorly executed won't get you points.

I like the encouraging talk, but it's cheap. What happened in '91 shows what can happen. That's no guarantee that it will. The best predictor is play in the field. The sky isn't falling, but the sun ain't shining either.

I probably sound like a P-O'd season ticket holder with 3 grand invested in this team.

"The past doesn't buy you much." -- Coach-in-chief Joe Gibbs

The point is though, it doesn't matter what year it is, historically speaking, preseason is not a good measure as to what team you have in the regular season, at least according to Joe Gibbs. This is why Matty and myself say not to get all up in arms over a losing preseason. It's just like what we've been saying ever since Gibbs arrived back in Washington. Gibbs pays attention to so many little details that we obviously don't pay attention to. We're looking at the overall amount of points scored, allowed, etc... Gibbs and company look at the very fine details in preseason, because it is those very fine details that decide whether if your team is going to come out ahead by season's end or not. We might be getting our tails kicked 41-0 in preseason, but I'd rather this team get a butt whoopin' like that and to give our second stringers and "others" playing time so we can have type of depth come week one, rather than to put our first stringers in and our game plan displayed for all other teams to see, so that we can risk having injuries to our starters, our offense exposed, and back-ups who have not been evaluated properly.

How many times have people on this board screamed the sky is falling, only to have egg on their face? Quite a bit in Gibbs II. Just relax and prepare for the season opener.

I know, I understand your position. A very very small part of me wants to think its ok because of the past preseason records, and i'll tell myself that somtimes, but I just dont see anything on the feild that is making me feel better. After Cinci I was just like whatever, I really dont care its just preaseason. After the Jets, I was concerned, not worried. Now I'm worried.

Bet this wouldn't have happened if we had "56" on the defense!

(Hey, at a time like this, we could use a joke!)

And historically, I've seen too many Joe Gibbs-coached teams look blah in the preseason and then light it up in the real season. In fact, during the Gibbs I era the Redskins went 0-4 in the 1982 preseason and 1-3 in the 1991 preseason. And guess what they did both years? Ah, they won the Super Bowl
Enough Alarm For a Wakeup Call (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/26/AR2006082601004_2.html)

the difference is that gibbs isn't calling the plays now, al saunders is

Let's hope history repeats itself. We all had such hope before preseason. Maybe preseason is merely a smokescreen, and the Skins will come out on fire in September.