Seattle @ Washington preview analyses

by **The Hogster** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:16 pm

In addition to predicting us to win the next two games, I'm pulling for Minnesota to pull off a repeat upset of Green Bay. That would send us to San Fran next week. And, send MIN to ATL.

Not that we can be picky, but I'd rather have the potential to play the NFC Championship game at HOME. Facing Minnesota would do just that.

by **skinsfan#33** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:23 pm

The Hogster wrote:In addition to predicting us to win the next two games, I'm pulling for Minnesota to pull off a repeat upset of Green Bay. That would send us to San Fran next week. And, send MIN to ATL.

Not that we can be picky, but I'd rather have the potential to play the NFC Championship game at HOME. Facing Minnesota would do just that.

Funny I was just taking to a Vikings fan about that exact scenario.

by **SkinsJock** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:26 pm

IF we could play San Francisco, I'd prefer it be the NFC Championship game :twisted:

by **The Hogster** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:37 pm

SkinsJock wrote:IF we could play San Francisco, I'd prefer it be the NFC Championship game

So you'd rather play San Fran on the road, than MIN at home. :shock:

Got it.

Can't say this surprises me.

by **emoses14** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:44 pm

The Hogster wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:IF we could play San Francisco, I'd prefer it be the NFC Championship game

So you'd rather play San Fran on the road, than MIN at home.

Got it.

Can't say this surprises me.

I'm selfish. I'd rather Green Bay win so that the Skins travel to Atlanta so I can go see them next weekend.

by **Deadskins** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:55 pm

emoses14 wrote:
The Hogster wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:IF we could play San Francisco, I'd prefer it be the NFC Championship game

So you'd rather play San Fran on the road, than MIN at home.

Got it.

Can't say this surprises me.

I'm selfish. I'd rather Green Bay win so that the Skins travel to Atlanta so I can go see them next weekend.

That's a tough call, but I think we can win anywhere, so I'm with you emoses.

by **SkinsJock** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 4:57 pm

It's really simple for me ... unlike many others here I don't want to be considered 'lucky' to win a Super Bowl :twisted:

I hope we play Atlanta next week and then whomever is the best team left in the NFC ...

we are playing well enough to win the NFC Championship against any team

I don't need no stinking upsets so the Redskins can play an 'easy' game

In the NFC - I have the 49ers at 1 and the Falcons as 2 - both are playing really well right now - I rate the Seahawks a little behind those 2 ....

I want the Seahawks, then the Falcons and then the 49ers ...

that's how it should be - not some pansy, 'easy' game to get into the Super Bowl

go ahead - be a pansy - hope for the vikings to win 2 in a row ...

:twisted:

by **The Hogster** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:32 pm

SkinsJock wrote:It's really simple for me ... unlike many others here I don't want to be considered 'lucky' to win a Super Bowl

I hope we play Atlanta next week and then whomever is the best team left in the NFC ...

we are playing well enough to win the NFC Championship against any team

I don't need no stinking upsets so the Redskins can play an 'easy' game

In the NFC - I have the 49ers at 1 and the Falcons as 2 - both are playing really well right now - I rate the Seahawks a little behind those 2 ....

I want the Seahawks, then the Falcons and then the 49ers ...

that's how it should be - not some pansy, 'easy' game to get into the Super Bowl

go ahead - be a pansy - hope for the vikings to win 2 in a row ...

Have you ever played a competitive sport? :lol:

There is no such thing as a "lucky" Superbowl. That's an oxymoron.

It took hard work to make the playoffs, win our division. And, all of these games will be hard. But, if you think any competitive player--in any sport--wants to play every game on the road, you're kidding yourself.

History doesn't remember valiant losers. Only winners. There are no pansy Superbowl winners. Whatever you call us, you'd have to call us CHAMPIONS whether we win the NFC at home or on the road.

Geez. I couldn't make this up if I tried.

HAIL TO THE REDSKINS.

by **The Hogster** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:35 pm

One of these was won in a strike shortened year. Do you think anyone cares? It's just as valid as any other Superbowl win. The goal is to add a fourth to this stash. And many more.

By any means necessary.

by **Deadskins** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:55 pm

Two years from now we will be calling him RG3peat.

by **oneman56** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 7:37 pm

The Hogster wrote:
SkinsJock wrote:It's really simple for me ... unlike many others here I don't want to be considered 'lucky' to win a Super Bowl

I hope we play Atlanta next week and then whomever is the best team left in the NFC ...

we are playing well enough to win the NFC Championship against any team

I don't need no stinking upsets so the Redskins can play an 'easy' game

In the NFC - I have the 49ers at 1 and the Falcons as 2 - both are playing really well right now - I rate the Seahawks a little behind those 2 ....

I want the Seahawks, then the Falcons and then the 49ers ...

that's how it should be - not some pansy, 'easy' game to get into the Super Bowl

go ahead - be a pansy - hope for the vikings to win 2 in a row ...

Have you ever played a competitive sport?

There is no such thing as a "lucky" Superbowl. That's an oxymoron.

It took hard work to make the playoffs, win our division. And, all of these games will be hard. But, if you think any competitive player--in any sport--wants to play every game on the road, you're kidding yourself.

History doesn't remember valiant losers. Only winners. There are no pansy Superbowl winners. Whatever you call us, you'd have to call us CHAMPIONS whether we win the NFC at home or on the road.

Geez. I couldn't make this up if I tried.

HAIL TO THE REDSKINS.

Not only that but the thought of hosting an NFC championship game at home after hosting all of 1 game here thus far just makes me smile. Nothing about an 'easy' game was ever mentioned, just that the Hogster would like to host a home NFC Champinship game...who, as a Redskin fan, wouldn't besides apparently SJ.

by **skinsfan#33** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 7:53 pm

The Hogster wrote:One of these was won in a strike shortened year.

Actually two were! And no I can't tell the difference.

The Hogster wrote:
Do you think anyone cares? It's just as valid as any other Superbowl win. The goal is to add a fourth to this stash. And many more.

By any means necessary.

by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:16 pm

Deadskins wrote:Two years from now we will be calling him RG3peat.

Nicely done sir! What a nice RING that has :lol:

by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:17 pm

Deadskins wrote:Two years from now we will be calling him RG3peat.

Nicely done sir! What a nice RING that has :lol:

by **Deadskins** » Fri Jan 04, 2013 11:04 pm

skinsfan#33 wrote:
The Hogster wrote:One of these was won in a strike shortened year.

Actually two were! And no I can't tell the difference.

Actually, there were two strikes, but only one shortened the season. The other had replacement players playing in three games.