from my perspective i see much of the losing explained by "fisher is an idiot" or before that by "bradford sucks." to me there is very little objectivity in such blanket statements and ignores much of the nuance that is interesting about football.
but i suspect by the rose colored glasses comment, you are referring to the other side where some posters are happy to be 2-1 at this point.
i cant speak for others but i am happy to have a winning record for once. yet i can recognize that we still need an answer at qb..and we have one (hopefully). we are also lacking in skill at the wr position and many people want to hang that on fisher. perhaps he deserves it. but these to me many of these posts are myopic in that they fail to take in the big picture. by focusing on 1 or 2 positions that lack talent you ignore those that do. its not all good or all bad.
look around the nfl. some teams are better then others but no team is perfect. the difference between losing and winning is often a play or 2 a game. at the momement we have come out on top of two such games. is that rose colored glasses? i dont think so. i think its being a realist.
Quote
jemach
we excuse way too many things. We see things through rose colored glasses when their is mud all over the windshield.
I'm saying that in the Vermeil/Martz days, the critique was much more objective and thorough.
On the positive side, I do think the draft evaluations provided by those who do such things has continued to get better and better.
I see rational posted here excusing performance, personnel moves, draft picks, etc. that makes me scratch my head and wonder.
I'm not saying I know it all. I'm saying that I think losing has degraded the quality of analysis.
