• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About TD_washingtonredskins

  • Rank
    Ring of Fame

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Birthdate
    February 17
  • Redskins Fan Since
  • Favorite Redskin
    Ricky Sanders
  • Not a Skins Fan? Tell us YOUR team:
  • Location
    Northern VA
  • Zip Code

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm not doing that...there's no way we can replay 2017 with Cousins in Minnesota or re-start 2018 with Keenum there. The BEST (not identical, but best) way we can compare their passing games is looking at both guys when they played with roughly the same supporting cast. That's all I'm saying. I'm not telling you it guarantees or proves anything. I'm telling you that, in my opinion, it's the best. Take Cousins out of it for a second...I think my primary point is this: If I wanted to make a best guess for how Keenum would be doing for the Vikings in 2018, I would look at how he did last year for the Vikings, not look at how he's doing this year for the Broncos. There are FEWER variables in my opinion. Anyway, I feel like we are just talking at each other and not getting I can agree to let it go.
  2. I don't disagree with you. But I'm also not really comparing or ranking the three because we didn't HAVE to sign any of them. Just because one is the best of a group of iffy signings, doesn't mean you do it. Plus, once we got to 2016 it's still unclear if he could have been signed in Washington. My point, independent of Smith or Norman or Haynesworth or's becoming more clear with each passing week why the Redskins were on the fence about committing to Cousins. And, this is happening with a "stable franchise" and not just our perennially dysfunctional organization. So, as the Vikings continue to waffle their way to a 9-6-1 or 8-7-1 record, more people who follow the league will understand the decision we ultimately came to. We can make 10 more horrible personnel decisions and that won't change this one.
  3. TD_washingtonredskins

    A New Beginning - Embrace The Noodle

    This is very close to where I was at. As much as this sucks for Smith and isn't "better" for the team as a whole, I think it will settle a lot of debates (I'm guessing those are both internal to the team and certainly among the fans) heading into 2019. Either it'll be clear that a journeyman/backup can do better than our $71M QB or it'll show everyone that we were falling for the "backup savior QB" syndrome. But, the "good" thing about this is that an injury was the only way a move was going to be made. While we were winning more than we were losing in season 1 with Smith, there's no chance they were going to make a QB change. And I agree with that, btw.
  4. TD_washingtonredskins

    Let's stop pretending that the NFL isn't fixed (Josh Norman holding call)

    Thank you! I think the refs were bad, but I am 100% sure that they don't care who wins. I used this example in another thread, but if the refs wanted to ensure the Texans would win, they wouldn't have called that sketchy block in the back that put Houston in 3rd-and-20 and took them out of FG range (temporarily). If they don't score there, we'd be getting the ball back after 2 straight scoring drives (I think) and the refs would have every reason to believe that we'd keep it rolling. So, if there's an example that proves the NFL doesn't give a **** who wins and isn't fixing games (at least AGAINST us), it's that play.
  5. I don't need to stop doing anything...of course there are a million variables, but the BEST information we can use to project performance is the most recent track record with the same supporting pieces. It's possible they were wrong about those two decisions and still correct not to be sold on Cousins.
  6. Well, we downgraded at QB and have a better record at the 10-game mark than we had in 2 of Kirk's 3 seasons. I don't disagree that you have to try to lock up a QB when you have one. And I was pretty vocal about wanting to keep Cousins here until the outcome seemed obvious. But, the debate I'm having with you isn't that teams should let good QBs's that overpaying QBs who aren't actual upgrades isn't a great plan either. So far the Vikings have gone from the top of the league in passer rating, yards per attempt, and fewest sacks to the middle or bottom of the league in those categories. So maybe they were tinkering with something that wasn't broken?
  7. I get mad about anti-vaxxers...mostly because it's lazy to believe in that BS. With the wealth of information at our disposal, how can you come to a reasoned decision that it's better not to vaccinate? Either you're such a wingnut that you're dangerous to your children or you are too lazy to validate the information you hear from Karen in the carpool line. Either way, it's inexcusable.
  8. OK fine. We are both making assumptions because that's all we can do. To me, the most relevant sample is what both guys did with essentially the same supporting cast just months apart. We can agree to disagree...but until Cousins elevates the team, the signing is going to look bad for the Vikings.
  9. I see what you mean. Again, I'm not trying to argue what a couple teams thought here (because I actually believe the Redskins would have given Trent Green a shot if the ownership issue wasn't in flux). All I'm arguing is that a team making a decision doesn't equate to them being correct. In the case of Trent Green, I think the teams were validated in giving him a shot (injuries aside). In many many other cases, teams chose the wrong QB (go back to guys like Christian Ponder or Blaine Gabbert or any Cleveland QB for 15 years). My premise is that we can't use Minnesota's decision to move on from Keenum as an input into whether they made the right decision. So far, statistically, they are paying about 33% more to get the same statistical results from Cousins that they got from Keenum last year.
  10. Good post. To me, with a developing QB, those numbers don't look ridiculously different. Clearly Green's are better, but to claim to know from that snapshot that one will be good and the other won't is pretty interesting.
  11. TD_washingtonredskins

    A New Beginning - Embrace The Noodle

    If they think Sanchez is the most likely to instantly contribute in a pinch, then it's the right call. Colt's 2018 backup will be here for no more than 60 days.
  12. He came unraveled a little in the second half. I think up until the pick-6 he was playing great. He was hurt by AT LEAST 3 drops which would have added another 80 yards through the air (and potentially a TD, but not sure if Vernon would have scored). Not sure if the pick-6 was on him, Reed, or just one of those timing things...but that plus the ensuing INT were both pretty bad.
  13. TD_washingtonredskins

    Official 2018 Flex Scheduling and Playoff Tracker Thread

    No, I agree. But I think your take above is more how fans or outsiders would view it. I don't see players like DJ Swearinger or Trent Williams being dejected suddenly just because they are only tied for first place now. This team under Gruden doesn't have a history of checking out early, even when they aren't in the playoff driver's seat. We'll see...
  14. TD_washingtonredskins

    Official 2018 Flex Scheduling and Playoff Tracker Thread

    I can't wait to see that...expecting to see a couple entries from 1999 when we just couldn't shake the Giants (albeit against good teams on the road, like the Lions and Colts). Not much is bright going into this game, which has me excited for some reason. We have only beaten Dallas once on Thanksgiving, we are coming off a tough loss, Dallas has gotten their sea legs a bit, etc. I see what you're saying, but it would only be that from a subjective or emotional perspective. We'd still be tied with the Cowboys and ahead of the Eagles (with an easier remaining schedule than both of them). I also don't think teams/players are quite that fragile to pack it in.