• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About ConnSKINS26

Contact Methods

  • Redskins Fan Since
  • Favorite Redskin
    Darrell Green
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

2,007 profile views
  1. I think a more interesting question is how low on the 2017 talent totem pole can you go and still pull a 1980's HOFer if that guy was teleported there now, as is with all his modern advantages and insane size/speed ratio? I think on the OL it goes deep. WR, same. DBs too. Passrushers. Any position that relies more heavily on elite athleticism would destroy in the 1980's imo. We're seeing athletes like we've never seen before EXCEPT in pure straight-line speed, and even that isn't really true because the guys running the 4.3's-4.4's are mammoths now. I don't think the intangible "toughness" is enough to balance things out, guys play through a ton of pain nowadays and it's really only concussions that they've become more careful about. Would they get hit more? Yeah, but they have the bodies to handle it and they'd be world-class athletes playing in a league where a lot of guys had off-season jobs and no modern training regimen. I think we think of that era as tough and hard-hitting in comparison partially because the guys ragdolling each other were the same level of athlete, not just because the rules allowed more hitting. Other than a few freaks back then, players are getting hit harder now than ever before even with the safety rules--that's just science. Mass x acceleration = force. Take WR for instance. Take your top 30 great WRs of 2017, how low on that list can you go and have an unstoppable career in the 80's? The athletes at that position are insane, their technique at least as good. Maybe you think it was tougher to get open in that era, with the coverage rules. I think as long as a guy could beat the press he'd basically be uncoverable, the athletes they beat in the modern NFL are incredibly freakish.
  2. Go look at the QBs who make $15-20M in this league besides the obvious outliers (Brady and the old contracts). It's not realistic, no matter what level QB you think he is or what he should be "happy" with. There is no source, we don't even know if that offer's been made, never mind rejected. He basically made that up trying to argue his point.
  3. Make up your mind. You seem perfectly capable of wrapping your mind around it since you did so, quite rationally, earlier in the same post.
  4. The thing is no one of Dorsey's caliber would even interview here knowing Allen's role. That's why our "thorough search" didn't include a single legit outside name. The only reason we were able to pull a respected name like McCloughan was because he was out of the league, known as an alcoholic, with no better options. We aren't lucking into that again even if we were looking for outside help.
  5. Yeah, this hasn't happened. The moment it did the Skins would leak it to put the pressure on Cousin's camp to sign (assuming the guaranteed money was right). There has been no big offer yet imo
  6. For the record, I also think this. I don't think they've offered market value yet but I think they're prepared to at the deadline, because they basically have to. That's why nothing has really mattered until we hit the deadline.
  7. This is ****ing idiotic. We'd be the biggest circus on the NFL and right back to our old ways. This would make the Haynesworth, McNabb, and Griffin sagas look like nothing. Even if Cousins doesn't want to sign here, you don't bench your starting QB because he wants to hit FA. He has no obligation to sign whatever you think is a fair deal, or even an unfair deal. A player's second contract is basically the only time he can count on having a say in his own career. He doesn't owe you anything just because you're a butthurt fan of a team too cheap or lacking the foresight to already get this deal done. Bench him if he doesn't sign. What a ****ing joke.
  8. 19 was a bad joke when we offered it. There's been no report that he's turned down 24. I don't know what you mean by "laughing at us for even offering". The entire league thinks we're idiots for not doing whatever it takes to keep our QB and stay competitive.
  9. The thing is that Kirk has so much guaranteed money coming his way via this year's tag and next year's potential tag that it sets the acceptable floor for guaranteed money in his contract higher than Carr's most likely, regardless of the average per year salary it works out to. He'd be an idiot not to use those tags as a starting point for guaranteed money in the first two years, since if he doesn't sign a LTD he's guaranteed, what, over $52M in just the next two years via the tags if we want to keep him? That's your starting point, not the $40-45M Carr was guaranteed over the first two years, or whatever it was. As everyone, including Cousins and his agent, keeps saying: every time we used the tag on Cousins we set his expectations, and set the floor for his contract for them.
  10. I do have to say that our fortunes have improved greatly when you consider that 10 years ago (woah) we were arguing over whether Jason freaking Campbell (Candle! Captain Checkdown! Soul Glo!) was a franchise QB or not, and now we're arguing whether Kirk Cousins is worth a record-breaking $125M contract. And this is completely skipping over any of the particularly heinous memories from the Colt Brennan years or the Griffin fiasco, because I value my sanity.
  11. I also doubt it, but I think with how high-impact a position is, its possible a team could do it if they feel good enough about the rest of the roster. That's actually why I think it would end up being a surprise contender who is ready to win rather than a rebuild like the Browns or 49ers. But also there will be other extensions by the time he hits the open market--Stafford, for one, and anyone else who gets paid (I'm not sure if there any other big names in line right now to be honest--maybe I'm off on this part and its just Stafford). I think its more likely it settles in between $25-27M/year if it gets to that point. But all it takes is a bidding war over the most important position, so who knows.
  12. I think its certainly possible, if there are two teams vying for his services and he's the only viable QB on the market (likely) while also actually being very good ( I think we can say that at this point). Right now people assume those two teams would be the Browns and the 49ers, but honestly who knows. I would bet right now, if I had to, that if he ever hits the open market its a record-breaking contract.
  13. PartyPosse, I don't know why you'd expect anyone to actually engage you on the topic of "how good or mediocre exactly is Kirk Cousins" at this point. You've made your feelings clear over time, and that's fine. But its clear you at the very least you disagree with the vast majority of Redskins fans on the topic (which is not necessarily the same as saying you're wrong, understand--you could turn out to be right). You can keep diving into the debate, but I don't know why everyone else would follow you--the discussion doesn't go anywhere. Its an agree to disagree thing until we have further information, since everyone is working with the same evidence and entrenched in their opinions.
  14. Would be cool if we were the type of organization to swoop in and take advantage of Reid pushing out Dorsey. We didn't find anyone outside the organization that we liked to run things during our "search" *cough* bull**** *cough*, but here's a guy who could just fall into our laps in the middle of the boring part of the offseason just like Desean Jackson and Josh Norman did on the player side. We aren't that organization, though.
  15. I like Carr. If I could pick either one straight up, would I gamble on Carr's perceived ceiling and youth over Cousins? Probably, if I'm being honest. But I don't know that we can definitively say he's better than Cousins just because he threw more TDs and less INT last year. Carr consistently having a bottom YPA since he entered the league would give me pause that he will grow into the kind of guy who can take over a game consistently--the perception is that he's a gunslinger because he's got a strong arm, but one of his biggest flaws is that he plays too conservatively, in relation to his arm and his weapons. That's shown by his bottom-5 YPA last year and bottom-10 YPA the year before. Despite having great outside WR options in Cooper and Crabtree and a top-5 OL. Kirk might make some dumb throws (though I think those throws will jive better with the WRs we have now) but he also makes some incredibly clutch big plays. Cousins is streakier than Carr but has a longer resume of big throws imo (and I don't just mean deep balls, I mean tough impressive throws that make you go 'wow'). It's not perfect but the guys who make these plays the most are, to my eye, the more impactful talents across the league. Right now imo that's Kirk rather than Carr. Though it's hard to measure the synergy each have with their respective offenses so who knows how much that plays a part. There is a temptation to call Cousins a "system QB" type because he's not perceived as a big arm playmaker, but I don't think that's fair and the efficiency metrics show that Carr is actually the more conservative dink-and-dunker even though he threw more TDs. But Carr is younger and his skill-set and decision-making give him a higher ceiling imo, so I can see preferring him. But people are anointing him as something he isn't yet. Unlike Luck who gets a lot of "overhyped" accusations but even with his flaws and injuries consistently makes wow throws at a high rate, going back to his rookie year.