• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About NewCliche21

  • Rank
    Ring of Fame
  • Birthday 06/09/1984

Contact Methods

  • Redskins Fan Since
    Since 1984
  • Favorite Redskin
    Sean Taylor
  • Location
    Middletown, DE
  • Occupation
    Social Worker
  1. I don't understand how having Cousins for two years counting a full $44 million against the cap with absolutely no certainty moving forward is in any way beneficial for the team. I think your logic is backwards.
  2. Right? I feel like it's looking at the score with two minutes to go in the fourth quarter. It's worth just as much as looking at the score two minutes into the first quarter: Nada. The score only matters when the clock hits quad-zeroes, and this thing won't be resolved until July 15. Until then it's just speculation to sell ads. Unless it's to reaffirm that Kirk gets signed, because I REALLY want that to happen.
  3. Umm...what? pt 3 What does that even mean?...That they feel the Redskins should have franchise tagged Cousins? Since the tag was supposedly used to allow them to negotiate with Cousins for a LTD without any other teams being in the mix, is that what almost ALL GMs/coaches agree with? Because the alternative was basically letting Cousins go to free agency. Or does she mean almost ALL GMs/coaches think the Skins should not sign Cousins to a LTD yet and let him play on the franchise tag this year? That's the impression that I got. Seemed like it would mean that the people she contacted didn't think he was worth a LTD and still had something to prove (or else why tag?). I feel like all of the reporters I trust (Diana not among them but at least she's consistent) just switch back and forth. I know three weeks is a long time, but this thread started with a "Things look good!" and now it's "Not a chance in hell!" and this tweet is "Tag was a good idea because reasons"
  4. Sigh, I could read this all day every day. Can't wait until we're debating between whatever current powerhouse we eventually have and the 1991 team.
  5. Oh Jesus, okay, you're right, your post using Trump's black vote had nothing to do with politics. And no, I couldn't find any examples in three seconds. I'm done with the conversation, take your victory lap. Let's sign Cousins.
  6. Cali, you're not dumb, don't act like you don't understand. You could've used literally any example that isn't political, but you chose one that was political.
  7. Come on man, ES is one of the only escapes from politics. Let's put that in the Tailgate and use some other example.
  8. And my mom still says I'm the best basketball player on the team. While I averaged 0.2 points per game. That is not a typo. Like you said later on in the thread, DW seems to be showing some pessimism. I don't know if he's just trying some gamesmanship, but it doesn't look great from the public side of things when you praise both your backups and hope that the guy you're negotiating with "sees the big picture", whatever that means.
  9. Hap - Hope you don't equate the usefulness of your Twitter work for a lack of appreciation for what you do for us. You *ARE* the breaking news section, and we appreciate every tweet!
  10. Why in god's name would you EVER want to be paid on what you've done unless you're talking about already-established bonuses? Everything is an audition to demonstrate your trajectory. When negotiating a raise, you don't say, "This is how good I have been, so pay me for that level of work because that's all that you can expect out of me." You say, "This is how good I've been, and I've shown that I can do a great job. I'm in demand by others because of it as well as the reasonable prediction that I will continue to do better, so pay me on the basis of what I can be expected to do and how the market looks."
  11. I see your point, but I disagree with your first sentence. How is he going to offer/counter-offer if he doesn't have the numbers from the numbers guy of what he can afford? Why would he assess the market instead of the guy who's doing the finances? He can't go out and say, "We'll pay you X amount" if he doesn't have a good accountant/contract-writer who knows what the team can and cannot afford. The GM/final say person will make the decision on whether or not to push to make something happen, hopefully using a lot of input from Schaffer. Schaffer would make it actually happen if the green light is given. This would include guarantees, base salaries, bonuses, options, etc. Just like you negotiate any sale/hiring (car, house, job, whatever). The reason I talked about the sweet-talker being a separate person is to indicate that he is a separate person who handles that end of things. The GM can't give a framework without being given the information by the cap guy other than "one-year rental/prove it deal/short-term deal/long-term deal/vet min plus ham sammich." The cap guy then receives the basic "make this happen" and does the leg work. The GM gets the credit just like any boss in any field, but his involvement in actually making it happen is going to be minimal beyond giving the go-ahead or lack thereof. TL;DR - Bruce: "Make this happen." Schaffer: Makes it happen.
  12. Well, yeah, that's what contracts are. He's not the one sweet-talking, but he's the one who gets the numbers working for both sides. At the end of the day, the numbers are what matters. Guess we've got different operational definitions there, but I get what you're saying.
  13. To be fair, Schaffer has done ALL of the contracts as far as I know. He's the gap guru that's saved us from cap hell repeatedly, too. Watching this process play out was like watching wrestling. You knew what the main event was going to be at Wrestlemania about ten minutes after the previous year's Wrestlemania ended. All this hype, all these "twists", all these new appearances just to give you the exact same thing you knew would happen. The only twist that mattered here was the seeming (important word here) patronization (likely not a real word) of Campbell. The guy best suited to take over got a pat on the head, a different title, and nothing else. McMahon, err, Allen remains in control even if RAW, err, the front office officially has a different (or no) manager. I never thought it would end differently, yet here I am still disappointed. As long as Allen is in a position of power, we will be 11-5 at best, divisional round moral victors, and more often than not a top-15 pick. So demoralizing.
  14. Door's unlocked. If you want to mock everyone on the board, then why are you here? And I agree with all your points. Just don't be a dick about it.
  15. I think they're letting Jones dig his own grave. I have no idea what that kid is thinking. Nobody is going to want him.