Really Bad Sign for Skins Fans!

[ejthedj]

I know "preseason doesn't mean anything..." -- OR DOES IT?

Check out this article
http://www.twominutewarning.com/preseason2004.htm

The guy has amazing stats on preseason, and the teams who win 1 or less preseason game almost always stink.

Plus, as far back as I could find, No team who lost all 4 preseason games
has even gone to the SuperBowl.

I know Gibbs did it back in the day before the salary cap, but I think with the importance of cheap, quality depth these days, I think the preseason means more.

At the very least, the ps shows how pitiful the Commanders depth really is...No one else is gameplanning either.

Start shakin' skins fans

 

[SkinsHokieFan]

I know "preseason doesn't mean anything..." -- OR DOES IT?

Check out this article
http://www.twominutewarning.com/preseason2004.htm

The guy has amazing stats on preseason, and the teams who win 1 or less preseason game almost always stink.

Plus, as far back as I could find, No team who lost all 4 preseason games
has even gone to the SuperBowl.

I know Gibbs did it back in the day before the salary cap, but I think with the importance of cheap, quality depth these days, I think the preseason means more.

At the very least, the ps shows how pitiful the Commanders depth really is...No one else is gameplanning either.

Start shakin' skins fans

Man, I really wish preseason meant something in 2002

I was told it meant nothing at all back then

 

[EndGame]

I'm not going to go back and look it up, but I'm fairly certain the Cowboys lost all, or at least most, of their preseason games during one of their Super Bowl seasons. I'm not going to put too much stock into the Commanders slide until I see it during the regular season.

 

[InDakWeTrust]

I'm not going to go back and look it up, but I'm fairly certain the Cowboys lost all, or at least most, of their preseason games during one of their Super Bowl seasons. I'm not going to put too much stock into the Commanders slide until I see it during the regular season.

I think he meant during the modern freeagency era.

The Steelers were 0-4 two years ago when they went 15-1 during the season and fell on their faces at New England that year, I think that is the closest a winless PS team has gotten in the modern era...

 

[jimmy40]

I know "preseason doesn't mean anything..." -- OR DOES IT?

Check out this article
http://www.twominutewarning.com/preseason2004.htm

The guy has amazing stats on preseason, and the teams who win 1 or less preseason game almost always stink.

Plus, as far back as I could find, No team who lost all 4 preseason games
has even gone to the SuperBowl.

I know Gibbs did it back in the day before the salary cap, but I think with the importance of cheap, quality depth these days, I think the preseason means more.

At the very least, the ps shows how pitiful the Commanders depth really is...No one else is gameplanning either.

Start shakin' skins fans

Tom Brady throwing 30 passes might not be game planning but it's pretty damn close.

 

[Big Dakota]

Man, I really wish preseason meant something in 2002

I was told it meant nothing at all back then

OK this about the 10th time you have posted the same thing. Why don't you tell us all what people(on which ever Cowboys site you were on then) were saying to you? The Cowboys and Skins both finished 3-1 in the PS that year. I do believe and the Skins went 7-9 and the Boys went 5-11 in the Reg.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

I know one goof Commander fan who now claims I am spouting off in preseason because I wrote if present trends continue, we can go back to counting two wins in our column before the season starts.

Another's response was the typical, we were 0-4 and 1-3 in 82 and 91 then won the SB.

If they want to think 41-0 losses are ok, who am I to tell them any different.

 

[ejthedj]

Let's just summarize what the article says -- in 7 years, only 2 in 17 teams with 1 or less preseason wins have gotten ten wins. Zero teams with zero wins...They better play hard in the next one.

 

[dthahn]

The truth of the matter is the Commanders are a bad team right now. As some objective prognosticators predicted, it will take the offense a year to acclimate to a new offensive scheme by Al Saunders. It clearly is showing on the field that the offense is sputtering BIG TIME!!

Meanwhile, the Commanders fans continue to rationalize that the preseason means nothing while their team plays terribly. Anyone can see it. It would be different if their 1st string offense was moving the ball, gaining a lot of yards, but just not putting a lot of points on the board. However, that's not the case. Brunell is struggling with the new offense and he will continue to until about midway through the season at best.

I picked the Commanders to finish third in the NFC East w/a 9-7 record but it appears I was too generous. I'm really going to enjoy this season.

 

[stealth]

i think next year the skins will be a problem for other teams assuming campbell progresses
new system in its first year, frankly its a joke to think they will be better than mediocre this year.

 

[dmq]

Didn't we go 1-3 in preseason the first year we went to the superbowl under Jimmy Johnson? I don't think you can go at all based upon record in preseason. However, if your fisrt team is getting blown up by another teams first team, well I would take that more seriously. Unless, they are working on plays that they don't do well like Parcells frequently does. I can't speak for the Commanders. The Patriot score doesn't look good, but I didn't see the game. I do however like that Parcells really looks to work on certain things in preseason and we are dominating on defense and scoring on offense. I believe that is a pretty sharp contrast to last preseason for us where our offense struggled and our defense looked average. Like Parcells says, I am trying to keep my own house from burning down. Who cares about the skins. Aren't they without their RB? Lets worry about our house that looks pretty fortified right now.

 

[FRDRCK]

the colts went 0-4 last year and then started off 13-0 and were favored to win it all, those preseason stats are just a coincidence

 

[MiStar]

Whether a team ends up with a W or a L is unimportant, it's how they play the game that is important. Like if a team dominates the game while the starters are in, and then the backups suck it up, so that the team ends up losing, it will indicate that the team should play well unless it is plagued by injuries.

When your starting D doesn't give up a TD in 6 quarters of work, you know that you have a good defense. Shutting offenses down in the preseason does indicate that you will have one of the better defenses in the league.

The preseason does matter.

 

[Big Country]

OK this about the 10th time you have posted the same thing. Why don't you tell us all what people(on which ever Cowboys site you were on then) were saying to you? The Cowboys and Skins both finished 3-1 in the PS that year. I do believe and the Skins went 7-9 and the Boys went 5-11 in the Reg.

I sure appreciate those games even more knowing that it was the Commanders who kept Dallas from going 3 and 13 during 2000 - 2002... mighty kind of em!

:laugh1:

 

[Big Dakota]

the colts went 0-4 last year and then started off 13-0 and were favored to win it all, those preseason stats are just a coincidence

And the baby horses showed what they were made of, FOR WHAT? the 8th YEAR UNDER MANNING????????????????????????????????????????

You can't turn it on and off when you want.

 

[Unforgiven]

Here is something to remember guys, before the two long TD passes to Moss against us last season, the Commanders were playing very badly, and people were starting to question if the game had passed Gibbs by. Then, we were shutting them out through around 58 minutes of that game, when all h@ll broke loose. They rode the momentum from that victory to several wins to follow, and turned their entire season around, until they came back down to Earth towards the end.

My point is, how do we know they simply are not just a bad team, like they started last year, who happened to ride the momentum of the victory over us, into the playoffs. Now, they have come back down to Earth, and are playing like, well, what they really are, bad.

Who is to say, that if we don't give up those passes, and beat the Commanders, that the Skins would have finished below .500, Gibbs would have retired, and everyone would be predicting them to be in the bottom of the NFC East division.

Maybe, the real Skins are shining through.

 

[Big Dakota]

Here is something to remember guys, before the two long TD passes to Moss against us last season, the Commanders were playing very badly, and people were starting to question if the game had passed Gibbs by. Then, we were shutting them out through around 58 minutes of that game, when all h@ll broke loose. They rode the momentum from that victory to several wins to follow, and turned their entire season around, until they came back down to Earth towards the end.

My point is, how do we know they simply are not just a bad team, like they started last year, who happened to ride the momentum of the victory over us, into the playoffs. Now, they have come back down to Earth, and are playing like, well, what they really are, bad.

Who is to say, that if we don't give up those passes, and beat the Commanders, that the Skins would have finished below .500, Gibbs would have retired, and everyone would be predicting them to be in the bottom of the NFC East division.

Maybe, the real Skins are shining through.

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Remember what that Q to AB pass did for us? We went on to win several in a row in 03 and went 10-6. As it turns out, it was a mirage. The Skins have talent(maybe a lot more than the 2003 Cowboys) but the fact is until they prove they can go to the playoffs more than once every 10 years they are an unknown. If they go 10-6 11-5 and make the POs i will be a believer.

 

[SuspectCorner]

The truth of the matter is the Commanders are a bad team right now. As some objective prognosticators predicted, it will take the offense a year to acclimate to a new offensive scheme by Al Saunders. It clearly is showing on the field that the offense is sputtering BIG TIME!!

Meanwhile, the Commanders fans continue to rationalize that the preseason means nothing while their team plays terribly. Anyone can see it. It would be different if their 1st string offense was moving the ball, gaining a lot of yards, but just not putting a lot of points on the board. However, that's not the case. Brunell is struggling with the new offense and he will continue to until about midway through the season at best.

I picked the Commanders to finish third in the NFC East w/a 9-7 record but it appears I was too generous. I'm really going to enjoy this season.

agreed. it's not that they are losing their preseason games - it's how they are losing them.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

the colts went 0-4 last year and then started off 13-0 and were favored to win it all, those preseason stats are just a coincidence

Yet they didn't.

 

[rkstevens]

Here is something to remember guys, before the two long TD passes to Moss against us last season, the Commanders were playing very badly, and people were starting to question if the game had passed Gibbs by. Then, we were shutting them out through around 58 minutes of that game, when all h@ll broke loose. They rode the momentum from that victory to several wins to follow, and turned their entire season around, until they came back down to Earth towards the end.

My point is, how do we know they simply are not just a bad team, like they started last year, who happened to ride the momentum of the victory over us, into the playoffs. Now, they have come back down to Earth, and are playing like, well, what they really are, bad.

Who is to say, that if we don't give up those passes, and beat the Commanders, that the Skins would have finished below .500, Gibbs would have retired, and everyone would be predicting them to be in the bottom of the NFC East division.

Maybe, the real Skins are shining through.

I still think the Skins winning streak last season was a fluke. I think they were fortunate to play an easy part of the schedule and caught teams at the right time. They beat a St. Louis team that was starting their 3rd string Ivy League QB, a bad Arizona team, a Dallas team that didn't come to play and had their own injuries, a Giants team that was missing its starting LB corps, and finally an Eagles team that was missing McNabb, Westbrook, T.O., and Lito Sheppard -- and they barely beat them, having to come from behind and needing a fumble recovery for a TD to seal it. They got some breaks earlier in the season, like Brown missing a field goal at the end of the Seattle game (whereas he made a longer one against us to win it) and playing Philly without T.O. the first game after T.O. was suspended. At most I'd say only the Giants and Cowboys victories were impressive.

Then they beat the Bucs in the playoffs -- a team I didn't think was that good anyway. They only had 120 yards of offense and got a call their way on a potential tying TD. Then they lost to Seattle in a game where Shaun Alexander got injured and hardly played.

Of course the Cowboys had some lucky breaks too (no Antonio Gates in the first game, KC missing a field goal), but I think overall the Cowboys had more breaks go against them last season. With a little bit of Washington's luck they might've had the one win (or field goal) they needed to make the playoffs.