Apparently we all are paranoid

SpicyMcHaggis · #1 05-15-2006, 12:30 PM

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/si_...-nfc-east.html

Quote:

2. Washington Redskins: By the end of last season, the Skins were the best team in the division. They handed out whooping to the Cowboys, Giants and Eagles in the final three weeks of the regular season and gave Seattle a hard time in the divisional playoffs despite being totally worn out. They added another group of high-priced free agents in the offseason and have a ridiculous set of assistant coaches under Joe Gibbs. The only glaring question mark is 35-year-old quarterback Mark Brunell, but he was good enough last year. It's hard not to pencil Washington in as a playoff team, even though I would love not to just to antagonize the army of paranoid Redskins fans. Predicted Record: 11-5

Aside from that dumb comment I think he actually was pretty fair, even though on paper I would give the Skins one more win and the 'Boys one less.
But predicting an 11-5 record in the toughest division in the NFL means he thinks we are pretty good.

Keino · #2 05-15-2006, 12:32 PM

SI is still a piece of crap mag, and I wish people would stop linking to them

RedskinsDave · #3 05-15-2006, 12:35 PM

I think we should ban linking to that fish wrap. When some nobody like Perloff makes a crack like that, you know it's something those clowns talk about as if it isn't their biased reporting that ruffles out feathers.

SpicyMcHaggis · #4 05-15-2006, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keino

SI is still a piece of crap mag, and I wish people would stop linking to them

I didn't link to the site (not the mag) because of the comment. I linked to it because it gave IMO a pretty good prediction of the NFC East. I agree that SI often isn't the best read in the world, actually it sucks most of the time, but in this case I didn't see anything wrong with the article (except the comment of course). If he had called us paranoid and then proceeded to say we would go 4-12 because we overpaid our FA and because we cut 15 starters then I assure you I wouldn't have wasted my time making this thread.

The Skinsinator · #5 05-15-2006, 12:47 PM

Still a modest article imo and I haven't even heard of that writer before. They are still on the Dallas bandwagon even though they looked bad at the end of last season. That's going to be a heckuva game that Gibbs and Parcells will be dying for in week 2. I did like the compliments concerning the coaching staff though. That is one thing that it seems everyone is respecting/fearing.

Ibleedburgundy · #6 05-15-2006, 12:47 PM

Paranoid? If you say so bro.

I dunno, I'm not impressed by the girls. I don't think they will go 11-5 or even make the playoffs. I think manboobs is vastly overrated. What has he done sans Belichick?

I also don't think Andy Ried is cocky or any more so than he should be because he's a good coach-hell of a lot more success this century than manboobs.

1. Skins 11-5
2. Egirls 9-7 McNabb makes a comeback. possible wildcard
3. Girls 8-8 manboobs retires and morphs into backboobs
4. Giants 8-8 Great supporting cast with no QB.

Also, I disagree that the NFC East is the toughest division in football, especially after the Skins got swept by the AFC west last year. Even though the AFC West has the Raiders, the Broncos are solid and the Chiefs and Chargers have high powered offenses that could win a lot of games if their defenses can make a few stops.

SpicyMcHaggis · #7 05-15-2006, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibleedburgandy

Paranoid? If you say so bro.

I dunno, I'm not impressed by the girls. I don't think they will go 11-5 or even make the playoffs. I think manboobs is vastly overrated. What has he done sans Belichick?

I also don't think Andy Ried is cocky or any more so than he should be because he's a good coach-hell of a lot more success this century than manboobs.

1. Skins 11-5
2. Egirls 9-7 McNabb makes a comeback. possible wildcard
3. Girls 8-8 manboobs retires and morphs into backboobs
4. Giants 8-8 Great supporting cast with no QB.

Also, I disagree that the NFC East is the toughest division in football, especially after the Skins got swept by the AFC west last year. Even though the AFC West has the Raiders, the Broncos are solid and the Chiefs and Chargers have high powered offenses that could win a lot of games if their defenses can make a few stops.

Well having the Raiders, if they continue to suck, helps, and the Chiefs have no defense whatsoever, lost their OC and have a new head coach, and the Chargers are relying on a qb with no experience whatsoever. Those are all question marks that IMO the NFC East doesn't have..

redskin_rich · #8 05-15-2006, 12:59 PM

He was complimentary of the Redskins and took a little swipe at the fans, taking full advantage of our vanity. Apparently he got the memo from Dr.Z, Peter King and the rest of the hacks at SI, that writing veiled insults at the Redskins fans is guaranteed to get your article lots of attention.

shally · #9 05-15-2006, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/si_...-nfc-east.html

Aside from that dumb comment I think he actually was pretty fair, even though on paper I would give the Skins one more win and the 'Boys one less.
But predicting an 11-5 record in the toughest division in the NFL means he thinks we are pretty good.

still pretty impressive that they would even give us 11-5... we probably will go 13-3 if that is the case..

Ibleedburgundy · #10 05-15-2006, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpicyMcHaggis

Well having the Raiders, if they continue to suck, helps, and the Chiefs have no defense whatsoever, lost their OC and have a new head coach, and the Chargers are relying on a qb with no experience whatsoever. Those are all question marks that IMO the NFC East doesn't have..

You can raise questions about the NFC East as well though, like, Will the Eagles bounce back from all those injuries? Will Eli learn like his brother or pull an Aaron Brooks? Will the Eagles ever have a power running game? Can Roy Williams actually cover anyone?

smoak · #11 05-15-2006, 01:21 PM

Whether you agree or disagree, I find his writing boring. I just want to see how Brunell and the new guys look playing together.

The Jake · #12 05-15-2006, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibleedburgandy

4. Giants 8-8 Great supporting cast with no QB.

I hate the giants as much as anybody, but eli is not a bad qb. Definitely not the weak link at least, they're o-line is questionable at best as are their wide receivers.

The Skinsinator · #13 05-15-2006, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Jake

I hate the giants as much as anybody, but eli is not a bad qb. Definitely not the weak link at least, they're o-line is questionable at best as are their wide receivers.

He's not a bad qb but he hasn't lived up to his billing nor his inflated contract. Roethlisberger has already won a super bowl while Eli got pounded badly in his lone playoff appearance. He didn't come up in big game and made too many costly foolish mistakes. I'm not closing the book on him at all but he has still has a ways to go.

joethefan · #14 05-15-2006, 01:39 PM

I think the Giants will flop and the iggles....will not win 7 games with McCan't...it'll be between us and Dallas..IMO...I think both have the potential to make the playoffs .... can you imagin the skins and girls in a Conference Title game...at Fed Ex!!!...WOW I am beginning to tear up thinking about it....

Ibleedburgundy · #15 05-15-2006, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Jake

I hate the giants as much as anybody, but eli is not a bad qb. Definitely not the weak link at least, they're o-line is questionable at best as are their wide receivers.

Can you name an easier QB job in the NFL than the NY Giants? I can't. He's got Tiki, Plaxico, Toomer, Shockey and a decent O-line in front of him. Hell, the Chargers didn't even lay a finger on him last year. His stats are OK but I think a good QB could have really taken the Giants to the next level last year.