snort Great house. Thanks for making your team play a road game at home. Cheering an injured QB? Bunch of clueless, classless, drunk motherfuckers.
BTW, the decorators will be around Thursday with the new purple drapes and carpets, is, say, 1:00 a convienent time?
Wait, so you mean we’re giving the effing worthless Ravens back to Cleveland? Excellent! They can have two teams, and we can get a real one. Or just poison Irsay and take the Colts back…
Chargers/Broncos is an AFC game; it was on CBS. You certainly should have had it. Maybe you did!
Ravens are 2 years out from a Super Bowl championship, how long’s it been in Foreskin land, hmmm?
Well, 3 times during my lifetime.
Besides, they have a winnng tradition. The Ravens have a winning fluke.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! 1 Season in the 70s and a couple under Gibbs does not a “Winning tradition” make. 'Skins were the doormats of the league for 40 years. “Winning tradition” indeed. Thanks for the laugh, I needed it!
Annie can you explain why they sometimes switch games that look to be wipe outs in the third quarter?
I mean CBS killed what looked to be an actual game when the titans started to come back week before last and Jerry rice broke an another record but we didn’t get to see any of it cause they switched to a game that well no one around me cared about …
Who makes a decision that a game is too dull to watch? I mean I guess ya have to be interested in the winning team and watching two teams ya don’t care about would be dull
but if ya watched a game for almost an hour in a half they might as well watch ya finish it
erm that was supposed to be let ya finish it …
ok, i know the rams haven’t won a game yet (the # of losses- what difference does it really make?), but aren’t there any loyal fans left? just because they’re having a slump doesn’t mean they can’t still be the greatest show on turf. i think st. louis’s losing streak can be traced to last year’s 9/11 tragedy. think about it…the only team in the league that has a patriotic sounding name, (and where did they come from anyway?) beat the best team in the league (not going to mention a couple of bad calls). remember the world series? i would never make light of the tragedy, but i think it did a lot for new york area sports teams.
The networks, with the blessing of the NFL have what’s called a “flex” policy. That means that if, in the second half of a game, one team is leading the other by 18 points or more, the network can “flex” affiliates to a more competitive game. (The network – FOX/CBS – makes the decision, not the local affiliate. ) There are some exceptions to the rule, however. The home markets for the teams that are playing in the lop-sided game cannot be flexed. They have to stay with that game until the bitter end. Once flexed, however, the network cannot return to the original game, no matter how exciting it may be getting.
A sort of variation on this rule is the “mandatory kickoff rule.” It goes something like this: If your home market team is playing in the second half of a double header, no matter what is happening in the first game, your affiliate station will be switched by the network to the start of the second game. . . including the local station break that precedes the game. Start time for second games is 4:15pm (eastern time), so the network will actually break away from game #1 at about 4:12pm. Viewers cannot fight this; it is an NFL rule!
Ummm, Dave, those 40 years were almost all before you were born. I’m barely old enough to remember the tail end of that era. 
Feel free to count the losing seasons the Redskins had under Allen, Pardee, and Gibbs (that is, between 1971 and 1992). I’d say that’s a long enough period of consistent success to constitute a “winning tradition”. And that period includes three Super Bowl victories and two other Super Bowl appearances, plus a bunch of other seasons where they played in the NFC championship, won their division, or had a wild-card berth in the playoffs.
What was up with that? I had to work sunday, so I missed it. Were they just unhappy with his performance, or was there something more to it?
The first pro football game I ever attended was the last game of the regular season when the Redskins finally returned to the playoffs after lo those many years. They lost 20-14 to the Browns in that game, IIRC, but still made the playoffs. Seems that Juergensen was the QB, maybe in a dual QB situation with Billy Kilmer, although that may have been later. Thanks for the memories.
SenorBeef, I watched the whole game and it seemed the issue was more that the Browns weren’t winning than Couch’s performance, per se. Ray Lewis was a one man wrecking crew again.
It seems that many Cleveland fans think Kelly Holcomb is Jesus in a helmet. They don’t like Tim Couch for some reason, and were cheering that Couch was injured so Davis would have to put Holcomb in. Check out Couch’s post game interview, he was nearly in tears. Looks like we got a fan/QB feud in the mistake by the lake, and I couldn’t be happier. Nobody wins in a situation like that, and teams usually wind up 5-11, 6-10, something like that. 'Bout what Cleveland deserves.
So I went and checked up on it: only four other teams have ever won 3 Super Bowls in 10 years:
Oakland
San Francisco
Pittsburgh
Dallas
Good company (or evil company, where Dallas is concerned).
Moreover, the Redskins won some championships pre-Super Bowl era. They’ve been winning semi-consistently for 25 years. Enough so that they overall club record is well over .500. And I can think of some other great teams with extended periods of suckitude…
The Ravens, on the other hand, won the big one in a year where they went 5 straight games without a touchdown, changed starting QB halfway through the season, cut him after it, had their vaunted D ripped for 500 passing yards in the last game of the regular season, and made it through the playoffs based on the failure of their opponent (Titans) to finish off a game they dominated. I call that a fluke. And the Skins beat em that year
Now, the Ravens had a chance to at least win my indifference, if not loyalty. I went to a few games. They played sissy football. Not just bad football; sissy football. I stopped going to games. We’ll see if they manage to remain respectable (as players, if not people). I doubt it, but there’s a faint chance…
I with the CFL (Colts) hadn’t left town. I’ve still got the hat somewhere…
Ah! Favre is now 17-4 lifetime vs. da Bears! How were the seats?
Qadgop the Packerfan
I’m not talking about it yet.
There’ll be some contrition in this coming weeks thread.
If I’ve correctly added up the numbers at football-reference.com, the Redskins are 62 wins over .500, since their origin as the 1932 Boston Braves.
There are really four distinct eras in Redskins history, and in two of 'em, they’ve been awfully good.
From 1932-48, they went 107-70-11, with 11 winning seasons and only 2 losing seasons, played in 6 NFL championship games, and won 2 of them. Not shabby at all.
The 1949-68 era is the period to which Weirddave refers (and it’s only half as long as he claimed). The Redskins really, truly sucked during this spell, going 90-147-11, with only 2 winning seasons against 16 losing seasons. Needless to say, they didn’t play in the postseason during this stretch.
Then Vince Lombardi came to town in 1969, setting the foundation that George Allen (and Pardee and Gibbs after him) would be able to build on. From 1969-92, the Redskins went 228-127-3, with 19 winning seasons and only 3 losing seasons. They were in 5 Super Bowls, winning 3, and were in the playoffs 13 of those 24 seasons, with an 18-10 record in postseason games. Moreover, they had three playoff-caliber teams (1979, 1985, 1989) that were excluded from the postseason on tiebreak, despite going 10-6 in the regular season.
Finally, there’s been the post-Gibbs era, in which the Redskins, through the end of 2001, are 62-81-1, with 3 winning seasons and 4 losing seasons. They’ve been in the postseason once, with a 1-1 postseason record, and haven’t been back to the Super Bowl. Most of the damage to the W-L record happened in 1993-94; since then, they’re right around .500. It’s an interregnum, really. In another season or two, we’ll know whether Spurrier is starting a new Redskins era, or just continuing the Redskins’ stay in .500 limbo. It’s way too soon to tell.
Well? Where is it?
Slacker