Where is the negativity???

I was fustraded after the game. we should've killed them. I was pissed that our passing game sucks...

I even created a long post about how angry i was and how sad it was that 3 runs bailed us out of the game. but i decided against it. i wanted to let everyone enjoy the victory.They were three runs that we made and not the oppisite. We have three games that we lost because the other team had a couple of long runs so as long as we are making the plays who cares. Our passing game is hurting because we only have one WR to worrie about. Even though Patten & Thrash did not have high receiving yards teams had to account for them and that helped Moss get open more.

Where is this "Brunell played poorly" sentiment coming from? Our game plan was to attack with the run and use the pass for third down. He seemed to play rather well within the scheme and minmized mistakes, which is his main job in that scheme, that could have derailed everything. The safety was a complete disaster but it is hard to place blame on him alone. Let's not forget that he is severly lacking in the WR dept right now. Moss is geting doubled and tripled since we have no one else capable of contributing. That makes attacking with the pass pretty hard.

I have had it with these Cowturd fans jawing with me on another forum board. They kept whinning about not getting to watch Cowboy games in this area (because they'd rather whine than to find some other means to get the game on tv.)

No kidding! My friend walks 16 NY blocks every Sunday to get to the closest bar with NFL Sunday Ticket. I literally ran my ass all over down downtown Orlando in the POURING rain to find a bar with the Ticket (for those of you who might ever be looking there on a Sunday, there is a place called Maui Jack's, soon to be renamed the Clubhouse, that has the Ticket and good wings).

So don't whine to me about what game is on TV, Cowgirls, GO FIND A SPORTS BAR.

You and everyone else out here can complain about the lack of aggresiveness on a Gibbs coached team. It isn't going to change one thing. This is the way he was, is , and more than likely always will be. If the running game is going crazy, like it was, its going to be more conservative. The fact the Defense was playing really good, was even more of a reason for him to be conservative. This is not college where we try and put up 40 points in the first half. A win is a win, fact is in the 2nd half we scored two TDs. thats when it really counts. We were up 10-3, the Rams couldn';t move the ball for crap. Why risk a turnover and give them a short field? Not going to happen. We had to crowd out of the game, the QB confused, its all about field position and we had it all day long.

I have to admit I'm guilty of mostly posting when the Skins lose. I think its because I use this forum to vent my frustration. I am optimistic. I do believe they can run the table. I find it easier to point out areas that require improvement. I was especially happy after this victory. I live in St. Louis and have to deal with these fair-weathered Rams fans. I always make it a point to go to the Skins game when they come in town. There were a lot of Skins fans in attendance, we were singing Hail to the Redskins in the end as always.

I agree that there is far more activity after a loss than a win, but there are several reasons for it other than misery loving company.

First of all, there are plenty of wins that have made the Warpath explode with activity. The win in Dallas on the Monday nighter is a perfect example. An unexpected victory over a hated opponent made us go crazy with joy. Why should anyone be overly excited about beating the hapless Rams? Yes, a win always feels good, but most of us expected them to beat a team who lost their head coach in the middle of the season, and is starting a third string quarterback, so there wasn't a whole lot to get excited about.

The losses over the last several weeks have been games we either should have won, or had a clear shot at winning. That's the main reason for all the activity after a loss. If Washington were to play the Colts, and played a good game with few mistakes, but just lost to the better team, there wouldn't be nearly the uproar as when they play the Raiders, and give the game away because of stupid mistakes.

And how is someone acting irrationally after a loss, with talk of dismantling the offense and firing all the coaches any different from people having us winning out, and going into the playoffs, when Washington just got their third win in 2+ months?

You and everyone else out here can complain about the lack of aggresiveness on a Gibbs coached team. It isn't going to change one thing. This is the way he was, is , and more than likely always will be. If the running game is going crazy, like it was, its going to be more conservative. The fact the Defense was playing really good, was even more of a reason for him to be conservative. This is not college where we try and put up 40 points in the first half. A win is a win, fact is in the 2nd half we scored two TDs. thats when it really counts. We were up 10-3, the Rams couldn';t move the ball for crap. Why risk a turnover and give them a short field? Not going to happen. We had to crowd out of the game, the QB confused, its all about field position and we had it all day long.First of all, the score was never 10-3, it was 10-7. Second, yeah we had it, but it's a different ballgame if the Rams pick that fumble up in the end zone. Shit happens, and you have to expect it to. It's not running the score up, it's ensuring that if something goes wrong, you're still in control. Gibbs never coached when the 2-pt conversion was in the NFL, and I don't know if he's calculating the scores right. 17-9 is a touchdown away, and 24-9 is still only two scores. If Gibbs can assume his guys are going to play "mistake free football," then he should trust them to make plays. Why on earth did we not try to score before halftime? That's the kind of things that have lost us games in the past. Santana Moss should have touched the ball in the second half. Joe Gibbs' idea of not being conservative involves running a very improperly timed trick play, like a reverse to start the game or a toss-and-pass when we should have just run a toss, or a deep pass. No need to combine the two.

I still firmly believe that we have the talent and desire to go 4-0 regardless of what plays are called. The O Line is looking good, and that's what our success will hinge on.

Well, I'll lead the pessimist (sp?) bandwagon I guess. Im a hardcore fan, have been for 25 years now. Ive been there when this team had its glory years, and during these recent lean times. I rejoice and praise after a victory, and I rant after a loss usually out of total frustration. I think the reason I rant so much is because while I see the play of our team improving, Ive also seen the health of this franchise continue to go down the tubes with squandered draft picks and poor free agent acquisitions. This team is in real trouble in the next 2-3 years if the scouting department and draft selection "committee" are not overhauled. The problem I see, year after year, is that no one person is accountable for personnel moves. When you have a GM, you can fire that person when draft picks or free agents don't pan out. When you have a "committee" that includes the owner, the owner's best friend, and the head coach, no one's head is going to roll when you sign a Brunnell to a highly inflated contract and give up a 3rd rounder. I want accountability, and as much as I love Snyder's passion for this team, I hate his ignorance and his refusal to bring in a GM. So, if Im a pessimist, then so be it, but I consider myself to be a realist who is very, very concerned about the team's future and its lack of young talent.

Where is this "Brunell played poorly" sentiment coming from? Our game plan was to attack with the run and use the pass for third down. He seemed to play rather well within the scheme and minmized mistakes, which is his main job in that scheme, that could have derailed everything. The safety was a complete disaster but it is hard to place blame on him alone. Let's not forget that he is severly lacking in the WR dept right now. Moss is geting doubled and tripled since we have no one else capable of contributing. That makes attacking with the pass pretty hard.


I only thought Brunell started off kind of cold. I think he was like 0-4 or 0-5, but I thought he got better as the game progressed. Certainly nothing was wrong in regards to his ability to manage the game. However, I believe for us to run the table in these last four games, Brunell is going to have to play his best football.

And how is someone acting irrationally after a loss, with talk of dismantling the offense and firing all the coaches any different from people having us winning out, and going into the playoffs, when Washington just got their third win in 2+ months?


I don't believe talk of winning out is irrational at all when you look at the teams and the locations in which we are playing. We can beat the Cardinals on the road, the Eagles are sunk, and both the other divisional games are at FEDEX. There is a great opportunity for us to be 10-6. We have already proven that we can beat the Eagles and Cowboys, now we just have to prove that we can stand up against the Giants and beat the Cardinals - a team we should beat.

I believe there is a world of difference between the two.