Ain’t football glorious?


Washington 16, Tampa Bay 10


  1. jones: I get that questions a lot, and I don’t really have a great answer for it. But I’ve been a serious Redskins fan since at least 1981, and I liked John Riggins since before that. I recall an incredible game (it often makes top ten lists and such) where Dallas came back to beat the ‘Skins with two TDs in the last couple minutes in 1979, which would have put me in fourth grade. I grew up in Minnesota, and I hated Dallas since everyone hated Dallas for beating the Vikings so regularly in the playoffs. I also recall a Sports Illustrated article on Joe Gibbs’ rookie season (1981) where he started 0-5 and ended up 8-8. I think the article was written about week 12 or so. I had that magazine for years, but I apparently lost it. I lived in Colorado Springs when Denver played Washington in the Super Bowl in 1988, and got on TV since I was wearing all my Redskins stuff at the mall the week before the game when everything (and I mean everything – you have no idea how nuts Broncos fans are) was painted orange and blue. Hail.

  2. Re: murdoc No, I’m just a somewhat dis-interested football fan. With this year’s Charger, they really stand a good shot at loosing it all. But there are plenty of other candidates (Miami) who might fill the bill.

  3. I think a winless team is slightly more likely than an undefeated team. But just slightly. Very slightly. To go winless, I think you need to first have a significantly bad roster. As in you need to be the unanimous cellar dweller as far as personnel go. Then you need to have a bad plan. If you’ve got a bad team, bad leadership, and a bad playbook, then you need to underperform even relative to your low level of ability. If you do all that, AND you don’t get any breaks, you might go 0-16. (Please, no comparisons to the Kerry campaign, folks.) There hasn’t been an winless team since expansion Seattle in 1976 went 0-14. (In 1982, the Colts went 0-8-1, but that was the big strike season and even they tied a game.) In that same stretch of 27 years, only 7 teams (plus one in 1982) got only one win. Other winless teams: 1960 Dallas Cowboys (0-11-1) 1944 Chicago/Pittsburgh Cardinals/Steelers (0-10) WW2 mongrel 1944 Brooklyn Tigers (0-10) WW2 scrub 1943 Chicago Cardinals (0-10) WW2 scrub 1942 Detroit Lions (0-10) 1934 Cincinnati Reds (0-8) 1929 Dayton Triangles (0-6) 1928 Dayton Triangles (0-7) 1926 Louisville Colonels (0-4) and outscored 108-0 1926 Hammond Pros (0-4) and 14 teams 1922-1925, the first four years of the NFL. So no non-expansion, non-strike, non-World War team has gone winless since 1934. Now that I think about it, I actually think it might be harder to go winless than it is to go undefeated, because even a bad team can get a break, and the players are always trying to win and will try to take advantage of anything they can to win. There isn’t a real loser-version of that will to win. Even the worst teams try to win, just like the best ones. You WANT someone to go 0-16? Morbid. But apparently the Dayton Triangles would have been your team…