Thoughts of a Negative Poster

[MartinC]

Big difference and that is even more of an ego play.

Wait so you are saying that trying to influence/change any decision made by another person or the thought process that goes into making the decision is 'an ego play'? Thats a very sweeping statement. It is certainly true that ego can play a big part - and sometimes maybe 100% - in making someone challenge another like this. But there are many other reasons and motivations as well.

[Oldfan]

I think I understand the thought behind your thread Oldfan but I guess I quibble with the line that encourages more "NEGATIVE" voices in the forum. Shouldn't it be more "realistic" voices?

I thought I made that distinction with this line in the OP: I'm encouraging those who try very hard to be realistic and fair to speak up and be heard when you don't agree with the decisions of Redskins management.

[SWFLSkins]

I thought I made that distinction with this line in the OP: I'm encouraging those who try very hard to be realistic and fair to speak up and be heard when you don't agree with the decisions of Redskins management.

There's a line that gets crossed at some point. Going from I don't like this decision but I support the team to (Eeyore) This team will never get better unless they.......(insert lengthy never going to happen hindsighful opinions here)

It matters how you see the "Grey Fluff" inside you're own head.



"People who don't think probably don't have brains; rather, they have grey fluff that's blown into "their heads by mistake." -Eeyore-

[Skinsinparadise]

I think there is plenty of negativity on the board, a good balance. IMO its really about whether the posts are interesting and if people are going to debate they are open minded to opposing views.

The Skins have been mostly bad for 20 years, so the negative posts yeah are of course more likely to end up correct. But the interesting thing IMO is the Skins while being bad -- went about building the team in an unconventional way making themselves easy targets not just on the board but really with mainstream media reporters, too. This is mostly Cerrato/Snyder stuff -- they didn't do things like most other clubs, and their off beat moves mostly haven't worked out. This is just a sample:

You bring up Jason Taylor. What team would trade two picks including a high 2nd rounder for a 30 something DE past their prime?

Make a strong safety pushing 30 (Archuletta) who isn't considered elite and coming off a subpar year -- the highest paid safety in the league.

Dump a good quarterback who was successful, Brad Johnson, for a well documented headcase, Jeff George

Let their young upcoming MLB, Antonio Pearce, go to a division rival.

Hire a QB coach who is in their mid 50s who has never even been a coordinator as head coach as a seat of the pants decision after being spurned by others

Give up a third round pick for a veteran Qb who was about to be released

Offer 2 first rounders for a 30 something WR (Chad Johnson)

While other teams mostly avoid sign restricted FAs, they go crazy one year, giving up picks

they have THREE good RBs on the roster, they panic because one of them gets nicked up in a preseason so they give up two high picks for another RB who then sat on the bench for most of the year.

[Oldfan]

I wouldn't consider me not liking a move 'negative'. It may be contrary to the popular vote, but certainly not negative...

I would agree with you personally. But word definitions are based on common usage. I used the word "negative' in the sense that it is commonly used in this forum.

[zoony]

Now, Oldfan, why don't you point out a few times you've been dead wrong. There have been several

I'll go first. I was excited about the move to trade up to get Jason Campbell. I thought he was a great prospect.

[Oldfan]

I think there is plenty of negativity on the board, a good balance...You bring up Jason Taylor. What team would trade two picks including a high 2nd rounder for a 30 something DE past their prime?..

If there is a good balance of negativity on this board as you say, how do you explain that 89% favored what is, in your opinion, a really dumb trade?

---------- Post added December-12th-2012 at 12:13 PM ----------

Now, Oldfan, why don't you point out a few times you've been dead wrong. There have been several

I'll go first. I was excited about the move to trade up to get Jason Campbell. I thought he was a great prospect.

I saw flaws in Jason's mechanics. I wasn't impressed.

I was wrong about the hiring of Spurrier and I was wrong in being even cautiously optimistic about the hiring of Jim Zorn.

I'll give you this, you aren't wrong as often as I am, nor right as often as I am because you rarely stick your neck out to make predictions. Making predictions is what I do.

[Dan T.]

Now, Oldfan, why don't you point out a few times you've been dead wrong. There have been several

I'll go first. I was excited about the move to trade up to get Jason Campbell. I thought he was a great prospect.

I have never been wrong.

EDIT: Oh wait. I was wrong that one time. So I was wrong about never being wrong. So now I've been wrong twice.

[Oldfan]

Being a fan of team and favoring their moves are different concepts than being born Irish, German, etc...

Being a fan of a team is a group attachment like nationality or a religious affiliations. The analogy stops there.

As a fan I didn't feel comfortable with the McNabb trade, mostly because McNabb was an "Eagle"... but, I forced myself to be positive, that he was now a Redskin and he'd be a better option than what we had... still didn't think he'd bomb as bad as he did.

Why did you force yourself to be positive. What's wrong with stating your realistic, negative feelings, but hoping you are wrong?

[stevemcqueen1]

Taking a negative position on another person's decision is a huge ego play. The ONLY reason to ever be negative about another person's is that you actually think you can influence a decision AFTER it is made.

Fans don't have the individual ability to effect anything about their team. But they have a right to be negative when something they think a mistake has been made. I don't think being unwilling to accept horsecrap when it's sold to you by the powers that be is an ego play.

[B&G]

I think the phrase "look at things with a more critical eye" is better than asking for more negative posters. Looking at issues critically allows for the possibility that things will work out well while negativity/pessimism assumes that everything will automatically turn to crap.

I had rather fans be more positive than negative. Just my nature, I guess.

[Oldfan]

Fans like me believe the only mistake Gibbs made was hiring Al Saunders and turning an offense that closed the season on a 5 game winning streak and averaged 30 points a game against the NFC east back to back to back to make the playoffs...

I don't want to take turn this thread into a debate over Gibbs Two. My opinions would serve no purpose here but to piss you off. We disagree on Joe.

[B&G]

sorry, repeat of an earlier post.

[Oldfan]

I think the phrase "look at things with a more critical eye" is better than asking for more negative posters. Looking at issues critically allows for the possibility that things will work out well while negativity/pessimism assumes that everything will automatically turn to crap.

Didn't this line satisfy your objections? From the OP -- I'm encouraging those who try very hard to be realistic and fair to speak up and be heard when you don't agree with the decisions of Redskins management.

I had rather fans be more positive than negative. Just my nature, I guess.

I'd rather fans be intelligent. Both optimism and pessimism without good reason are dumb.

[Captain Injury]

OK. State what you feel. Mammoth, groundbreaking stuff.