thesubmittedone

Moderators
  • Content count

    14,588
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

1 Follower

About thesubmittedone

  • Rank
    The Coach
  • Birthday 12/23/1983

Profile Information

  • Birthdate
    Some time in 1983
  • Redskins Fan Since
    Since I can remember
  • Favorite Redskin
    Joe Gibbs
  • Not a Skins Fan? Tell us YOUR team:
    This field shouldn't be required
  • Location
    Usually home, I'm boring :p
  • Zip Code
    555555555

Recent Profile Visitors

10,440 profile views
  1. Crowder vs. Richardson

    That would be nice. I’m all for it, lol. Garçon has that size though. Just a big, strong body who can absorb impact extremely well. I’d prefer Richardson to not have to be that kind of guy, and I don’t think he has to in this offense. As for the speed question, I think that’s going to show up real fast and we’ll know right away. Gruden will scheme him open deep (even if he isn’t the priority initially, that can change as they line up dependent on the defense) and Alex should be able to spot it and time it right more often than it occurred with the Seahawks. Even the other speedster they’ve got in Tyler Lockett, it can be argued that his skill set is under-utilized there. But Djax was special in terms of his ability to track the ball and adjust his speed while maintaining his balance in ways few can. It’s damn near impossible to defend when he’s running fast, then kicks it into another gear to get under a ball, only to slow down again at the last second to deceive the DB. Or various combinations of that. It’s special. Richardson, on the other hand, was more of a guy who high points and can really twist his body to adjust to the ball, which means he plays much bigger than his size. I’m not sure I saw him use different levels of speed to deceive like Djax, but again, could be a function of the offense he was in. I think we’ll find out pretty fast. Lot there to be fascinated with, honestly. Can’t wait.
  2. Random "Thot" Thread (Stadium Edition)

    Yeah, I feel like coverage of them has dwindled every year the last 4-5 years. Noticed it, too.
  3. Daniel Snyder ...Dare We Say Maturing....as a competent owner

    I’m sorry, brother, and I really do feel for you and what you think you’re trying to accomplish in terms of fighting negativity... but what kind of ridiculously unfair and irrational thinking has you say something like this? Honestly? You think the vast majority of criticism levied at Dan occurs because “we are not 18-0 every season winning championships by more than 50 points”? For God’s sake, our BEST season under Dan was a 10 win season with one wildcard playoff win that we just barely eked out. That, with the legendary Joe Gibbs on the sidelines! Enough with the hyperbolic misrepresentations that destroy any potential for a meaningful discussion or debate. I mean, man, that one really got to me. Come on now. :/ So you say “this has historically been true” without batting an eyelid, without questioning how long it’s taken, including with Bruce Allen at the helm, but then proceed to only speak about it finally changing now as if that’s the only thing that matters? And if you think that it finally changing now is a good thing, aren’t you essentially agreeing with everyone you’ve constantly put down who’s criticized them for it in the past? I mean, if you’re approach was, “hey, you guys have been right all along, and it’s nice the organization seems to be getting what you’ve been saying about these things, so kudos to you and now let’s give kudos to them”... well, maybe your points here wouldn’t be so ridiculously incoherent and condescending. Alas, you aren’t saying that and, therefore, they are. Yeah, let’s just gloss over it all and immediately forgive Dan and his top executives for almost two decades of poor organizational structure and general management (or lack thereof really) because, hey, Bruce has boosted the scouting department about 8 years into his tenure, making them about on par with the average franchise. Yay, stop living in the past you aholes! Learning from past mistakes is not the same as living in the past. I have no idea why you conflated the former with the latter here. I think you’re just trying to say that you want us all to forgive them for everything and trust them moving forward. As naive as that is, I can respect that if someone wants to do that. Heck, I try to tell myself that all the time. But it isn’t easy and there’s plenty of justification for that. Posts like this one certainly don’t help the cause. Dan has earned much of the criticism he gets. Yes, some of it is over the top and, yes, there have been improvements... but it doesn’t change the very real possibility of those improvements suddenly disintegrating (which has happened numerous times) and it doesn’t change the concern one should have when recognizing just how long it’s taken for even some of those most fundamental and basic organizational principles to be applied. 1) I haven’t heard a single soul say they lucked into anything with him; 2) The vast majority of people who criticize Dan/Bruce on this board like Kyle Smith and assume his good reputation has been earned, and finally; 3) The only real concern anyone has is that he’d be another good personnel executive lost or not given the right title relative to the level of his expertise in the vein of a Schneider or a Thompson because Snyder/his top exec aren’t structuring the organization properly. Basically, Kyle Smith does not aid you in your quest to vilify those who legitimately criticize Dan and his top exec. Sorry. So, actually, the criticism has never been that they’ve got no one worthy within the building, it’s been the process and structure that leads to either losing those who are worthy, undermining them, and/or seeing them regress within a poor support system. I really wish people would understand this. Hopefully that doesn’t happen in this case, either way. We’re all rooting for that.
  4. Crowder vs. Richardson

    Richardson is going to be a fascinating study for me, even within TC and preseason. Watching a lot of his work with the Seahawks last season, it’s crazy just how little separation he had on so many of his catches. That isn’t a knock on him, YET. Especially considering he made so many of those catches anyway. It’s damn impressive for his size. This is why it’s so fascinating. The Seahawks offense with Russell Wilson has not been one of timing or rhythm. As much as fans love to see a QB like Russell make plays, there are negative aspects to it. But without getting into what is a nuanced topic regarding QB play in the pros, one of those negatives leads into the question with Richardson. Was his route running and ability to separate mainly wasted in that offense? Are we going to see him suddenly shine in that department with a coach who runs an offense that’s all about that? How much of his speed wasn’t capitalized on within the Seahawks offense; is he that burner his combine 40 suggests or is that just who he is on the football field? What’s exciting is we’ve seen him show the ability to make catches in traffic. That is already something Djax wasn’t exactly good at. He’ll catch balls in the middle of the field. If he can be anything like the deep burner Djax was and if he can show that his route running skills are as precise as our offense requires, we might actually have a guy who ends up being a steal in Free Agency, which is a tough task considering his contract. Those are significant ifs, of course, and it’s a rarity to see such things pan out so wonderfully in FA... but that’s what makes this case so fascinating because I think there’s a pretty decent shot for the above to happen here. I also think the answers have a good chance of presenting themselves quickly. One has to always be careful to judge FA acquisitions too quickly as they can take time to adjust, but if Richardson’s abilities were under-utilized within the Seahawks offense we’ll see the difference in terms of separation almost immediately. I know Gruden’s offense emphasizes precision route running to an extreme, so it still might take Richardson time to get it... but he’s going to get the ball thrown at him with more rhythm and timing than he’s ever seen.
  5. With every day that passes and the likelihood of what many have said all along about all the Guice “issues” (that it was just a shunned ex-agent causing him problems as well as other inconsequential factors) increases... this pick just looks better and better. Now, before anyone accuses me of redundancy because pretty much all of us agree with the above already and have stated as much, I wanted to take the opportunity to point out how this is the type of resource management that we’ve been clamoring for. We cannot simultaneously recognize just how brilliant the pick seems to be in terms of basic economic principles while ignoring how rarely we get to see such brilliance. And, make no mistake, it was brilliant. It’s everything you want to see from a Front Office. Patience, strategy, trust in the scouting process, etc... Patience? Heck yeah! They could’ve drafted him at 44 knowing how desperate they were for a RB, but instead traded down, picked up an extra 3rd, and waited patiently to see how the draft fell instead. Strategy? Yup. As mentioned above when exemplifying their patience, there had to be a strategy in place with numerous players they were satisfied with falling to the 59th pick they acquired instead. Trust in the scouting process? Absolutely. Again, this is exemplified in the strategy involved as mentioned above, but furthermore they would not have ever been comfortable enough, as many teams weren’t, in drafting Guice had they not had the info on him necessary to overcome the fear of the potential truth of the rumors that were being circulated at the time. That is scouting. So the FO got a player easily justifiable in spending a late-1st, early 2nd on in Guice AND a 3rd rounder to go with him. They took advantage of a situation where other teams were wrongly overcome with fear and were able to do so with sound intelligence gathering. They capitalize on an opportunity presented and acted with conviction. Just excellent all-around in terms of resource management. This is what we’d love to see more of. Proactive versus reactive. Trust versus mistrust. Asset acquisition versus wasteful spending. Patience versus desperation. Foresight versus short-sightedness. All of the above was in play here and it’s a thing of beauty when you see it work out, right? Now, all of this could end up failing if Guice does become the guy those rumors suggest he is, but I’d posit that it doesn’t change the positives here of it all in terms of resource management. At least that’ll be the case if it’s something else versus the rumors actually having been true, which would mean it was a failure on the scouting level and/or organizational hierarchy not listening to the scouts. But, yeah. Awesome. My main point here is, when some of us read the criticisms directed at the top brass and automatically have their defense mechanisms activated to the fullest degree, just remind yourself about the process in which Guice ended up drafted and ask yourself if you’d like to see that more often versus not. And, no, it doesn’t have to be a rarity, as flukey as this particular opportunity seems to be on the surface. This can be the norm. Every offseason presents a myriad of opportunities for the aforementioned positive aspects of an FO to be applied, and every decision within the building can be made in this way, big and small.
  6. It’s a bit of an eyesore, isn’t it? I wrestled with putting him there or not but, I mean, he fits the criteria. Whatever, we’ll all just have to suffer.
  7. Yes, they competed... and lost. That’s the point, hence the “wish we were a tad bit more aggressive” thing I said from the onset. Furthermore, Campbell was just one example. There were other Dlinemen that offseason, including Hankins, that would’ve been better for us. It was discussed ad nauseam last offseason, it’s not hindsight. It’s ok. I like where the Dline is right now, as well, and it should be way better than it’s been. But there are definitely ways they could’ve handled it better and gotten to the point (if not better) where it’s at now quicker. I was actually okay with what they did in the 2016 offseason neglecting the position outside of drafting Ioannidis because there weren’t many options in FA and there were runs on Dline before our picks in the draft. Furthermore, it felt like we were another offseason away from really contending anyway, so I was looking forward to us getting aggressive during the 2017 offseason and putting the final touches on the roster then. I’d say the way 2017 went pre-injuries lends itself well to having had that mentality. That’s why it was so disappointing when we ended up with McClain/McGee amidst a myriad of options, but then having Allen miraculously fall to us was absolutely HUGE. Imagine if he didn’t and he went where everyone expected him to, which was a very real possibility? All the hopeful talk of how they looked pre-injuries, as much as it may be exaggerated/wishful as it stands, wouldn’t even exist! I guess we’d be excited about Ioannidis developing, Lanier to some degree as well... but that’s it in terms of big time potential. Great, wonderful, me too, but that has nothing to do with anyone’s point related to the Dline. And I wouldn’t call them “overrated”, but hey, what do I know, they just beat the Pats in the Super Bowl. No biggie. Teams collapse all the time though, so who knows. But, yeah, discussing the ways they could’ve handled it better and/or managed their resources and/or questioning whether it needed to take as long as it did to reach this point, does not mean anyone thinks the roster sucks as is. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. It’s precisely because we think we’re pretty close that we do so and that we want it set up for the coaches/players to have their best chance at contending, not just remaining static. Dline is a major part of that.
  8. Daniel Snyder ...Dare We Say Maturing....as a competent owner

    But what happens when “accepting that fact” makes you miserable? As for the OP:
  9. Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith!

    MOD DIRECTIVE: Someone will be taking some time off for doing the old "don't talk about Kirk, but in the same post I'm going to push my narrative about the whole thing and that's okay, but everyone else stop talking about him!" ridiculousness that's happened on numerous occasions now. That person has been repeatedly warned about other things so it's not only that trolling obnoxiousness that generated the penalty, but I want everyone to understand that any QB thread, yes even one about Alex, is going to include conversation about the entirety of the QB position, the resources spent on it, and how it's generally been handled. Which, therefore, inevitably brings Kirk into the discussion. That is inescapable and shouldn't be a problem. This is not an invitation to discuss this here. You can PM me if you have any questions or concerns about the matter. Thanks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Side note (no directive or moderating here), but we can both be disgusted by the resource management of the FO at the position AND support Alex. In fact, one lends to the other, as good resource management by the top brass benefits EVERYBODY ON THE TEAM. That is cap space/draft capital/player personnel that will improve everyone's chances. Desiring that from the FO and condemning them for perceived failures at that essential aspect of their job is NOT being unsupportive of coaches/players/staff, just the opposite.
  10. Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith!

    True, but I don't think they were getting into that stuff in terms of who countered who and when, really. Again, it doesn't matter pertaining to the point I was making. I'm sure @Skinsinparadise, who is an encyclopedia of knowledge regarding all of the media narratives out there on the topic, can clarify all of this as he has a million times. But, yeah, I've heard it the other way around, as well.
  11. Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith!

    Yeah, this is the entire quote from that article: I'm not sure they got this exactly right to use the word "counter" here, but like I said, it doesn't really matter. And they don't suggest here that Kirk's camp didn't respond after their $16 million offer. They're just saying "here is what both sides wanted", basically. Either way, I've read it from numerous sources differently but that's not the essence of the point I was making.
  12. Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith!

    That's not what he was suggesting. At least, that's not how it reads. He needs to clarify if this is what he meant. First, he said this: "The $44 million was a sunk cost. Should they have signed Kirk long term early in 2015? Yes. Would anyone have felt comfortable handing out 20+ million at that point? no." His narrative followed off of that. The implication is that Kirk's side wanted $20+ from the onset, which simply wasn't true. The fact that Kirk's side offered under $20 million dispels that notion on its own. Who offered whom what first and who countered doesn't even matter here. But I'd like you to post a link to the source of your info, because I've heard it otherwise, as well.
  13. Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith!

    FALSE. His side countered with under 20 million per year, as stated. The team didn’t respond. Kirk being a good sport and saying what he said is not in any way proof of anything. But keep revising the history to make yourself feel better. The fact is they've allocated at least $115 million in cap space, a 3rd round pick and Fuller over a period of 5 years (2016-2020) to the position. There is no way around that, as much as you’d like Bruce to be an innocent victim to circumstance.
  14. Let's All Get Behind Alex Smith!

    Again, who is being disingenuous here? You claimed it would take “20+ million” early in 2015. 1) NO ONE WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLY 2015. 2) That’s unequivocally false because Kirk’s side countered the team with a 19.5 million/year deal. A lot of us were, who the heck are you to tell me how we felt back then? Would you like me to show you those posts? Many of us didn’t see it as “Kirk’s dismal start”, and fully expected him to get better as the season wore on. But that doesn’t matter. A lot of us felt Kirk was going to maintain at worst and that it’d only increase his price if he played on the tag. This is 100% fact. You’re embarrassing yourself right now trying to revise this history.
  15. The Bruce Allen/GM Thread

    I’m glad you put this strawman killing statement in your post. Nice preemption.