Are the Redskins a Mess?

You ever had a suspicious girlfriend? Where if you dont respond to her question immediately turns her fear into fact and conducts a whole conversation with herself based on a false premise? That's kind of like what media reporting in the off-season amounts to. There may not be any information, there may not be any answers, but the media still have to produce copy. 

What we do know right now, as of March 7, is that the Redskins have the essentials in place for the coming year. They have a solid, established, well above average QB, and they have a solid, established coach. Both are on the rise, in terms of their learning curve. As an objective matter, good things are likely to happen for the Skins in 2017 - even better things than they have experienced in the last two years, which saw them essentially achieve the playoff qualification level of general competence. 

We don't know who they will be, but the Skins will have good people to receive passes. They will have a better DL coach. They will probably get a decent healthy player back in Galette. They will probably pick up at least one new decent player on defense via the draft or free agency. 

Overall, despite all the unanswered questions, the Redskins are in pretty good shape. Enjoy the hype if that's your taste, but there's no reason to believe it. The Skins....are good. 

No One Knows But the Daily Bugle Blows

Off season is time for stupid reporting. No one has any actual facts, but they still have space to fill. So they speculate. What is more useless than typing about who a team might draft? Or what they should pay a free agent?

Through all the clouds of ink, the squid of NOBODY HAS ANY ACTUAL FACTS gets away and forgotten.

Soon enough we will know. But for now we do not. Let's keep that fact forefront in our minds.

Daniel Snyder, Loxist

Daniel Snyder has come in for heaps of abuse during his tenure as owner of the Washington Redskins. But not for the right reason.

Snyder has been attacked for everything under the sun, but all those attacks have been aimed at him for being an old white guy (he is not, he is a jew) and for being racist. Racism is a bogus concept, so attacks based on it aren't legitimate. Snyder is criticized for not changing the name of his team because jewish antiwhite leftists don't like it. So what? Polls were taken, and they showed Indians themselves don't care. But of course the jews called liberals are the only authoritative voice for all groups at all times.

What deserves discussion is the racial roots of Snyder's jewish antipathy toward whites in general. This is absolutely universal among jews, and it explains most of the commentary and analysis you see. It's the dog that didn't bark in the why wont the Skins resign Cousins debate. Because jews own the media, they create the illusion that jews are victims. In fact, jews are never victims and always aggressors. What is the whole "QB of the future" scam-concept they created but a pseudo-analytical attempt to smuggle in their politics, which call for blacks replacing whites at every position on the field. Just as they do in broader society with the scam concepts of "diversity" and "multiculturalism" and open borders immigration.

"QB of the future" is the sports equivalent of "diversity." The problem is that just like in street society, diversity is a horrible weakness and the QB of the future can't get the job done. But the jew will keep on lying and trying.

This is the hidden grammar of the Cousins debate. You will never see the true reason the Skins' owner is slow to sign Cousins because it is de facto illegal in the controlled media to mention the incredible jewish bias against whites. It's called loxism, and it is the hatred that drives modern American media and politics - and sports media and ownership too.

Move On?

Casserly says he doesn't consider Cousins a top-10 QB. He didn't sound real convinced. Sounded like he was very well aware this clip could come back to haunt him.

One way of thinking is if we can't make a long term deal this year, why franchise him? Since he won't be around next, cuz financial numbers. In that case, "move on." 

Move on...to what? Seriously - move on to what? There's nothing there. An old Tony Romo? How is that better than KC? You going to sign him long term? he's going to get less injury prone, demand less salary, be around in 2-3 years?

Move on translates into start another rebuilding projected based around a gaping hole at the most important position. How does that make any sense? Any drafted QB will take years to mature. That's the rule. Dak Prescott was the exception, but what all these people are forgetting is that now the league grasps his ability, has the video on him, can plot to stop him more effectively. He will not play as well in year two as in year one, you can bet on that. So which QB used or untested are the Skins going to bring in to do better than Cousins? There isn't one. To get rid of Cousins means to go backwards, no matter who they bring in. Even if you truly don't want to pay KC, it makes sense to tag him for this year for reduced-frictional reasons alone. 

If the Redskins were to get rid of Cousins, then the whole Allen-McCloughan project falls apart. Instead of having a great offense in place, they have a big hole in the center, and their weak defense with new coaches will be under much more pressure. 

At this point, one realizes a lot of people, even pros, truly have bought the hype that Cousins is a plug in, that his success is due to those around him more than himself. He promotes this view with his words, but that's him being a leader - distributing credit, not taking it for himself. It's the outsiders, the analysts, who should be saying that he is the #1 reason for the Redskins success. Because that is the fact. But they won't do this, because that would mean crediting a white rather than a bunch of blacks, and the media are jews or those paid by them, and they hate whites. That may mean open raw racial hatred, as the Washington Post jews exhibit toward the new president. Or it may mean begrudging a white Christian QB the full measure of respect his production deserves. This deliberately fostered or honestly held misconception about his true value appears to have the Skins on the verge of a very serious mistake.

I will repeat: it is absolutely insane to do anything but sign Cousins to a long-term (5-year) contract, and it will be seen so within days of their not doing it. You don't want to settle for KC? You can do better? Who? Where? Are you out of your mind? Yes. You are out of your mind, if you believe that.

Snyder's Jewish Bigotry Explains Cousins Footdragging

http://www.hogshaven.com/2017/2/17/14635736/skins-stats-ten-reasons-kirk-cousins-is-worth-the-money

Cousins should be paid pretty much whatever he wants. The reason the Skins are dragging their feet is he's not black. And worse than that, he's a believing Christian. To jews like Dan Snyder, that's like a cross to a vampire. They hate whites. And they hate christians. And they really hate Christian whites. This is why Cousins was never given a chance to compete for the starting job when he was drafted - even though he was better than RGIII from day one. It's pure bigotry. It's already cost Cousins more than a year of devlopment. Snyder's loxism has objectively hurt his team. Of course, it's his decision to make, since he owns the team, but the media should be faulted for not pointing it out. Since they gleefully point to racial motives heading the other direction, even though the vast majority of these are imaginary. Well, this one is real.

There is no rational reason not to sign Cousins to a long-term contract, but there is an irrational one: Snyder's hatred of christian whites. It's just that no one in the controlled media dares to write about it.

Media 101: (((They))) Lie & Smear in Lockstep

Media primer. Understanding how they work. That's what this blog is about. Part of its mission, anyway.

The (((media))) move in lockstep. They take their cues from the top. That means the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Associated Press.

It doesn't matter who invents it, just that all work in concert to promote it. What is it? It's an epithet for smearing some man or group opposed to The Agenda. Examples will occur to you easily - racist, homophobe, misogynist.

It's not just nouns. It's adjectives too. If a Bad Man does something, he obviously does it for Bad Reasons. So bad adjectives and adverbs should be applied to his actions.

A month back it was "dark." Yesterday it was "chaos" or "chaotic." Can you guess who these terms were applied to?

We have a free press, sort of, legally, in the USA, but all the common media use the same terms, arguments and frames. Isn't that interesting?

Just look around, and see how when you see some new adjective applied to Trump - it's used across the board. This is 'best practice' among the media. We'll see what new ones they think up as the Trump administration proceeds.

It works in reverse too. Not just in politics, but anywhere. In sports. So that blacks are always possessors of 'athleticism.' Whereas whites presumably do not. They get by on hustle and grit.

But really...teach yourself about media control by scanning the headlines at Google News and Yahoo daily for a few weeks. You will notice not just that any article that can take a position is leftist and Trump-hostile or -critical. And you will notice the subtler point that the exact same adjective will be used by different sources on the same day. All these "free" and independent sources are promoting the same agenda, the same line, in the exact same terms. And that is the sole takeaway from this blog post.

ESPN Down Trend Continues While More Sports Media Members Get Openly Political

ESPN is at 87.8 million and falling... There are technical reasons and political reasons, the article speculates.

http://heatst.com/culture-wars/is-espns-liberal-political-agenda-contributing-to-its-serious-viewer-slump/

Leftism is a cult for white idiots and malocclusives, sex deviants and grabbag dysfunctionals. It's led by rational, racist jews who see it as the shortest line to their objective of white racial extinction. jews are a race. They hate all others. They perceive Whites as their most dangerous competitors. This  is loxism, and it's not going away until jews are counter-exterminated. Leftism carries its anti-White genocidal agenda, and conceals from the unthoughful its deepest motivation. Sports reporters or analysts are invariably leftists or silent. Jews have long ago gelded conservatives out of any racial views, which means they are de facto liberals too. Any who refused were long ago sent to the unemployment lines. If you weren't leftist, would you apply at ESPN? Or Washington Post? Or New York Times? Or Sports Illustrated? What would be the point?

Sports journalism is the same as political journalism: only one point of view is valid. Any genuinely different view is shunted to the corners of the internet. This ratchets the conformity over time, so that you get to a point, long ago passed in the west, where jew-leftists don't even really believe there is another point of view. The leftists called liberals don't think of their views as a position but as normal. Anyone opposed is a wacko. An extremist by definition. That they consider wanting national borders or keeping men out of women's restrooms an "extreme" position is why they were utterly clueless about the Trump revolution. Everyone they know, or at least everyone they know at work, thinks the same.

Here's an article in Bill Simmons' The Ringer about sports writers opening up about their political views.

https://theringer.com/sportswriters-media-donald-trump-politics-a8b332bc48cf#.fnwu7ao3h

But gaze at this (partial) list of writers and personalities who stuck pins into Trump over the weekend: Zach Lowe, Tim Kawakami, Pete Abraham, Charlotte Wilder, Greg Bedard, Pablo Torre, Howard Beck, Sarah Spain, Molly Knight, Stewart Mandel, Jemele Hill, Spencer Hall, Timothy Burke, Joe Vardon, and the proprietors of the MGoBlog. 

Any that expressed support? I don't watch ESPN or have cable tv, but I'm guessing no.

But read it. It shows the true cult mentality. This quotation, from the very top of ESPN, shows the problem:

 “Diversity and inclusion…are long-standing values that drive fundamental fairness while providing us with the widest possible pool of talent to create the smartest and most creative staff. We do not view this as a political stance but as a human stance.”

See - he doesn't see his politics as politics. It's just "normal" or "human." Everybody thinks this way. Apart from a tiny, weird, sick, disturbed few. This is precisely the problem. The guy has just written off half the country. Talk about solipsism.

These guys actually believe that they're not already injecting their politics into every word they write - and that this injection isnt felt by all who read them. Quite wrong. And they have only to read the comments below their published articles to see this is the case. But they don't. Or they simply don't care. Leftists write and "report" for themselves. They only care about how they look to their peers. The idea they're serving an audience is irrelevant, so long as they're drawing a check. Since these checks come from giant jew-owned corporations, and since the jews put their antiwhite political agenda ahead of profits, they really don't have to worry about "the bottom line." Because if one joint goes out of operation, the politics will be the same at the next.

Sports is mass politics by other means. As we've seen with newspapers, so it will be with cable: they would rather go out of business (or just shrink significantly) than cater to the intelligent white people who are their customer base. Nor is this unique to media. It was the same at, for example, Levi Strauss, the denim sewer.

Opponents of the (((media))) and its ideology are now talking like this:

http://www.rooshv.com/how-to-destroy-the-establishment-media

The fight will go on; the Internet is not quite the Great Equalizer, perhaps, but it certainly shows the distance between the jew-controlled junk media and their middle-class white customers. Sports is not a whit different from politics; indeed, to repeat, mass sports is mass politics by slightly different means. Or should that be memes.

Redskins Need Improvement at All Defensive Positions

The Redskins don't have any defensive players they couldn't upgrade. That's not true on offense. Josh Norman gave them something, but no one could say he's more than above average. He uses his status to get away with look-at-me penalties, because he knows press criticism will be muted or nonexistent. That is selfish.

The biggest unexpected result of the 2016 season was the decline of cornerback Bashaud Breeland. He'd been their best coverage back in 2015, but was as responsible as anyone for their 0-2 start in 2016, played not much better the rest of the year, and only got back to semi-normal in the last couple games. The reason for his decline isn't clear. Perhaps the signing of Norman had something to do with it. What I found odd was that there was not a single article dedicated to explaining the decline of Breeland in the mainstream media. So I genuinely have no idea why his production dropped off. He was not injured, so far as I know. He had no personal life changes that might have affected him. The Norman signing is all I can point to, but I suspect that is not the only factor. His decline was certainly mentioned many times, but never analyzed.

In the offseason before the 2017 season, the Redskins need to do two things:

1) sign Cousins to a five-year contract
2) upgrade their defense as much as they possibly can

If the Skins can become even an average defensive team, they will be no worse than the sixth best team in the league. Their offense is so good now that with any kind of defensive help, it will be able to put up more points than all but the top handful of teams on a good day.

If I were GM, I would try to buy my way to a good defense, as the Giants notably managed to do in the offseason preceding 2016, as well as drafting as many good defensive players as I could find. The Redskins offense is set. If they come across a great running back or left guard, sign him. But if not, they're fine with what they have. They'll get at least decent production out of Kelley, and that's all they need. They have enough reliable hands to catch passes. Their punter is great. Their kicker should be at least above average. What they need is at least low-mediocre run stopping. They should sign no less than two DL who are proven league-average at stopping the run. That is the absolute minimum they should be expected to accomplish this offseason, and it is the most important way they can upgrade the team, assuming, as we must, they bring Cousins back. If they don't do that, then the rest of their changes won't mean much. Lol at those who think Colt McCoy is even 80% of Cousins. If he were, he wouldn't be a backup. It might even be good to trade McCoy for DL help, if they think Sudfeld has potential.

I study the Skins because I intend to make a significant investment on their season win total. I intend to bet over 9 wins, that's the projection, if things proceed as I expect them to. It all starts with bringing back Cousins. If that doesn't happen, then it's a completely different proposition.

The Redskins have gone 9-7 and 8-7-1 the last two seasons. This masks the fact that they played an easy schedule in 2015, and threw away at least three wins in 2016, Contrary to the Bill Parcells statement, in many cases you are what your record isn't, That is, the record conceals as often as it reveals, at least for investment considerations. In this case, the very real development of the Skins is hidden by their record. The 2015 schedule was easy, as the team was coming off a lousy year; the 2016 record was one of the toughest in the league. The 2017 schedule will also be tough, but not as tough as 2016. The Skins true record this year was 10-12 wins, not 8. They will come closer to their 'correct' level in 2017, and that is likely to be 10 or 11 wins. Thus, betting over 9 is probably the way to go. The challenge is to estimate what we think the record is likely to be, then measure off return against risk to find the optimal point. Right now, I believe that point is probably going to be 9. Almost certainly it will be in the five numbers in the 8-10 range: 8, 8.5, 9, 9.5, 10.

So we can derive not only political insight from studying the Redskins, and their media coverage, but financial return. And they are related. The (((media))) loathe white Christian men, particularly conservatives ones. See Tim Tebow. This loathing leads them to lie. Part of the lying is misrepresenting their true potential. So antiWhites like Steven A Smith and lefty flamers like his old partner Skip Bayless underestimate Cousins - out of their racial hatred and their ideology. They're on tv bruiting their nonsense 24/7, and this general environment their ilk creates affects public perception, which in turn affects the betting numbers and linemakers. We evil "racists," to use the common jewish-communist parlance, are the only ones looking at things realistically, the only ones attempting honest evaluation, and we can and should profit financially and politically from seeing through the inverted reality the media jews present. It's the mission of this blog not just to help you understand how we're all being continually gaslighted -- but to profit from it.

Redskins 2017 Schedule (dates not set)

HOME:	Dallas, NY Giants, Philadelphia, Arizona, San Francisco, Denver, Oakland, Minnesota
AWAY:	Dallas, NY Giants, Philadelphia, LA Rams, Seattle, Kansas City, LA Chargers, New Orleans

Opening weekend is September 10th in 2017. We won't analyze the schedule here. That will come later. As of the start of February, we have seven months and a week to study our options.

Whites and Redskins and Mike Shanahan

Back at the height of the whining about the Redskins' name there was an irony that passed unremarked:

People, by which I mean the leftist press, were attacking Mike Shanahan for being red faced. Having leathery red skin. For literally being a redskin. They were attacking him racially, while complaining about racial bias. The reason they attacked him was that he offered valid analysis of Robert Griffin and Kirk Cousins - analysis born out 100% by all subsequent happenings.

Today, Cousins is in line for a 100,000,000+ contract. People believe he is at least a considerably better than average QB, and many believe, as Shanahan and others have said, he can take a team to the Super Bowl. Meanwhile, Robert Griffin struggles to stay on the field with one of the worst teams in the league.

For simply stating facts, or offering reasoned analysis, whites endure racial abuse from the jewish media. Which you know as the mass media. It doesn't matter whether it's politics, business or sports, if you say something that runs afoul of the jewish party line, you are Semitically Incorrect, and the green light flashes for the personal abuse to begin. After you are proved correct, no one comes around and apologizes, either.

Think about all the moking and abuse these white men endured for doing nothing but -- at every point -- what was best for Griffin:

- Kirk Cousins - kept his mouth shut, was completely supportive, never said a bad word in the media
- Mike Shanahan - jiggered his offense to support Griffin's abilities; later went along, per the owner-Griffin demand, with trying to turn Griffin into a pocket QB, though he lacks the ability
- Kyle Shanahan - did all he could to help his father get Griffin set up to succeed.

The latter two were absused in the media. The former was slighted.

How does it look today?

- Cousins is top QB free agent
- Kyle Shanahan is top coaching prospect, with the #1 offense in Atlanta, going to Super Bowl
- Mike Shanahan is called frequently for comments on Cousins

That's all we'll go into now. The key is that sports coverage is driven by ideology. For sports, as someone said of war, is just politics by other means.

Biased Apple Selectively Applies Own Rules to Censor Twitter Competitor Gab.ai

Incredible bias and double standards is the rule for the common media, which are owned by jews and operated to undermine normal white society. Here's a good article explaining this reality, from a non-racial POV. The factual right is censored, while the lying left is promoted.

https://medium.com/@getongab/apples-double-standards-against-gab-1bffa2c09115#.sbv5zad4z

Published rules and standards don't mean anything unless they are even applied. They aren't. The rules are selectively applied, varying by the politics of the person or position in question.

The article above isn't directly relevant to sports, but the bent it shows, the exact same collection of biases, is found at your favorite sports channels too. All media, save some on the internet, are on the same side. The other side is the White Side. Here's a site with news as it could be if it were written from the White perspective:

http://newobserveronline.com/