In my humble opinion losing those close games are worse.
So what does that say about your statement?
Team Morale: Concerning Article
- Thread starter Shouright
- Start date
So what does that say about your statement?
The reason the close losses are worse is because the ability to finish is so crucial in the NFL and by not finishing it reflects on your shortcomings a lot less than if you simply got blown out.
Which ultimately means it'll be harder to fix your problems since the glaring issues will be masked by the feeling of contentment as if you basically did everything you had to do and had a chance to win after 60 minutes if it weren't for a play or two.
It's more heartbreaking.
When getting your butt whooped the light shines brightly on exactly what you need to do to turn the tides.
Plus the players aren't as emotionally invested as their just going through the motions. Easier to bounce back the next week.
Which ultimately means it'll be harder to fix your problems since the glaring issues will be masked by the feeling of contentment as if you basically did everything you had to do and had a chance to win after 60 minutes if it weren't for a play or two.
It's more heartbreaking.
When getting your butt whooped the light shines brightly on exactly what you need to do to turn the tides.
Plus the players aren't as emotionally invested as their just going through the motions. Easier to bounce back the next week.
I do miss seeing the locker room celebrations they had in weeks 1-3. No team has confidence after losing 3 straight but in reality I don't think it makes a difference. The flip side of that is that they felt they were on top of the world after going 3-0. If true, feeling on top of the world didn't prevent them from losing 3 straight so I think "team attitude" is overrated.
Or it could be that "team attitude" is necessary but not sufficient for winning. If you don't have enough of it, you can't win, but having enough of it, by itself, doesn't necessarily equal a win. Other things are needed as well, perhaps.
So it could be possible, actually, that the attitude they had after three games wasn't enough, in itself, to make the winning continue, while the attitude at this point could be so poor that it permits no winning at all, regardless of whatever the team is bringing to the table in a positive sense.
Losing by 2 points in the final minute is not the same as losing by 30 points to the same team no matter how you look at it. It may sting more losing by 2 points because we were so close, but it does indicate that there is more talent.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2007
- Messages
- 11,067
- Reaction score
- 15,080
A win this Sunday changes everything, Walker would see swagger from every corner of the locker room
Losing a ball game yet having talent does not = moral victory.
Except we arent talking about moral victories. We were talking about if all 3-3 teams are the same.
Actually, we were talking about teams being what their records are.
hoops
Tua time!
the pass pro plays better you are 5-1 folks...no doubt about it
In what alternate universe?
You think we couldnt be 5-1 with a capable offensive line? Were 3-3 with the worst OL in the league. If we had an even capable OL, chances are good we would be 5-1
hoops
Tua time!
go take a look at that "everyone should read this" thread phinatic posted...you could do the exact same for the ravens game...i promise you...i went back and watched that horrid tackle expedition again last night...ugly is an understatement
There are too many variables to take into account to simply narrow it down to one position group and think you'd automatically have more success.
When doing that you go down a never ending slippery slope.
For instance what if Trent Richardson was traded to the Colts before we played them?
What if Brian Hoyer would've started the season for the Browns?
What if Steven Jackson was healthy when we played the Falcons?
I could go on and on and on.
That's why I don't deal with what ifs, I prefer to deal with what is.