Burgold

This feels like the opening to The Three Little Hogs. Next time, make your post out of bricks.

The most interesting question to me is how much better are we just by swapping out QBs. How much better is McClaurin, Brown, McKissic, and Simms. If they recover from injury how much more dynamic are Samuels and Thomas? Does the QB effect suddenly mean bigger holes for Gibson to exploit for big gainers? For parts of the season, I think Heinike overachieved and was really pretty good. His play saved the season before it and he fell apart. Even so, there were things he couldn't do and the receivers and playbook suffered because of that. Is Wentz a step up? Two steps up? How much better is everyone just because Wentz is our QB? Conversely, how long will it be until we know if Wentz is the right fit or if we miss Heinike?

I think part of the WR question has to be based on recovery. There is an argument to be made that if they recover (or make a normal progression) McClaurin, Samuels, Thomas, Brown, McKissic, and Gibson are a good group with dangerous speed. The problem is, we have no idea how Samuels will do with us, how Thomas will recover, and if Brown can become an NFL deep threat. If we capitalize on all these ifs we have a dangerous group. The likelihood of them all working out though seems sketchy, but I dunno. A receiving room of McClaurin, Samuels, Brown, Simms, and Milne really ain't bad. I do imagine with better QBing and better health (plus a year's experience for the rookies), this group can bring it. Now, adding another killer is always a good thing, but if we stand pat and get our safety and linebacker settled I wouldn't hate it.

If he can get his act back together, I think Chase Young has the energy, enthusiasm, and charisma to be the on field leader the defense needs. I love how he celebrates his team mates and is so involved in the game when he's on the side line.

Because he's obsessed with making money. That, and he thinks he's untouchable and can get away with anything. Honestly, I don't get the question "Why would Snyder try to make more money if he's so obsessed with making money." One thing we know about Snyder is that he is not a long range planner. He impulsively grabs at what's in front of him. He's the kid in the candy shop who never gives a second thought to future stomach aches.

As expected, the Republicans are backing Daniel Snyder. We've heard this throughout. At the original hearings, they assured Snyder that all this will end if Republicans take the House. In the latest reported news, a ranking Republican is calling the Congressional investigation a farce and a waste of time and want Friedman referred to Justice. I mean what's a little sexual harrassment and a bit of fraud? If you want Snyder as an owner of the Commanders then vote Republican. https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/04/21/commanders-investigation-republicans-democrats-spar/ https://www.wusa9.com/article/sports/nfl/washington-commanders/republican-rips-democrats-for-investigation-into-washington-commanders/65-e19c8044-5ecd-4e12-a6cf-ba584c9dc2aa

Yesterday, a number of sources are reporting news over the goings on in and about the Congressional Oversight Committee's investigation. I'm not sure how to post about it without being political, but think it's pertinent to the discussion especially in light of whether anything can/will be done at a federal level. So, I will drop some links. Read them if you will. https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/04/21/commanders-investigation-republicans-democrats-spar/ https://www.wusa9.com/article/sports/nfl/washington-commanders/republican-rips-democrats-for-investigation-into-washington-commanders/65-e19c8044-5ecd-4e12-a6cf-ba584c9dc2aa

I've read that Hamilton is a tight end eraser. Given how this team has been absolutely killed by tight ends over the last decade I would love a tight end eraser. To be honest, that's what I hoped Jamin Davis would be or grow into.

Wasn't the last time we did the double trade down the year we drafted the three second rounders who all busted?

Gibson is better than that. He's pretty good at breaking tackles, has breakaway speed, and has very good hands. He also had the sixth highest rushing total in 2021 (4th highest number of carries). Surprisingly, he ranked second in rush 1st downs. That said, he has weaknesses, too. His vision isn't good and I don't know that he knows how to use his blockers as well as he should. The fumbling is a problem, too. So, I'd say he's a better than average starting QB with homerun ability and some excellent traits.

I don't know. The first tactic is almost always, "Attack the messenger." It doesn't surprise me in the least that they went after Friedman and anyone who thought about it understood that Friedman kept quiet for years while this was going on because he was on the payroll. The fact that he came forward after his firing doesn't change what was done. It only lets us know that Friedman was willing to turn a blind eye to keep his job for a long time. Lots of people out there like that.

My question is whether Hamilton is slow or track slow. A number of these athletes really train on how to run a sprint. Clearly, Hamilton should have. Is he actually slow or is his use of his hands, his explosion off the blocks, etc. shaving tenths of a second off his time. I didn't think he looked slow during games. For the longest time, he was considered one of the very the top athletes and draft prospects... They still call him a unicorn. So, he couldn't have looked that slow on tape. Every year, there are players who rise and fall due to the "underwear" Olympics. I wonder if anyone ever did a study to see how successful the underperformers are and if they wind up being value, busts, or steals in the draft.

That's why they get paid the big bucks. Now, I do agree if you wind up in a Kirk Cousins or Trent Williams scenario then it's better to trade him than get nothing. However, short of that the first effort needs to be to keep the players we designate our core players.

I propose signing him. If he doesn't want to sign with us I propose hypnosis. <iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/3o6fJgEOrF1lky8WFa" width="480" height="480" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/endless-rainbow-submission-3o6fJgEOrF1lky8WFa">via GIPHY</a></p>

So, the last thing I want to do is swap Champ Bailey for Carlos Rodgers again or letting Garcon and Moss both go and replacing them with three second rounders. This team has a history of thinking they can get rid of a highly productive player and replace them with a draft pick. There's too problems with that: 1) In the best case scenario, you're running on mud. You're not getting better you're just trying to keep the status quo. 2) Letting a known go and replacing them with an unknown could be replacing a good player with a bust. In other words, don't draft a wide receiver with the hope he can replace McClaurin. This team is not a finished product. We need to add more good players not run in place.

Makes sense to me. Basically, it's a soft hold out. He's staying with the team, but isn't putting himself at risk of a new injury until his contract situation is settled. Kinda sucks as we need Terry and Wentz to begin building that chemistry and timing. Hopefully, as soon as the draft is done the FO gets to work on Terry and get this done.

Except I'm not sure the talent evaluators who made those picks are still here. (They might be. I'm not sure. I know we got rid of Smith. I'm not sure who was really responsible for evaluating the talent and setting the board.) In the abstract, I love the idea of a trade down, especially if we are thinking wide receiver. I just don't know whether we should trust our front office to trade down.

The thought that keeps circling around my head is... trading down is only good if you have a good front office. You could give Bruce Allen and Vinny Cerrato twenty draft picks and they'd probably strike gold fewer times than some teams with five picks. So, trading down only works if you think Martin and Martin are good talent evaluators. Do we trust our FO to find forgo the bird in the hand?

My biggest question mark when it comes to Cosmi is durability. He suffered two injuries that made him miss multiple sets of games. I don't know if that's fixable (bad technique, not strong enough), but while he was very good on the field he wasn't on the field enough to be good.

No politics in the Stadium. Especially, when there is an obvious political answer.

To be a fan of this team, you have to compartmentalize and stab yourself in the eye a few times a year. Blinking doesn't obscure enough. On the one hand, the Rivera story: good coach, decent man, and cancer survivor is a good one to rally around. Likewise, we have some players on the team that are easy to root for as players and not a lot of villains. However, if you move outside the field, it's nothing but radioactive waste, broken glass, brain eating zombies. I don't have it in me to root against this team or turn away, but I find it harder and harder to amp myself up. Even a great play doesn't elicit that excitement it once did. I think it's important for me to like the team and to believe in them. Sports is an escape so I like to think of my team as the good guys and if I can't do that it weakens the experience a lot. Some people root for the Joker or for Godzilla to trample Tokyo. I want the hero to win. The off field stuff sometimes makes it hard to picture us as the heroes. And that's why Snyder should leave. A team is a part of a community as much as it is a privately owned business. If he's a fan of the team, the best thing he can restore it, even if it amounted to no additional victories is walk away. I mean, the Dawg Pound, the Red Sox, and other teams had been losers for decades. They were completely hopeless team. New Orleans nicknamed their team the "Aints" and yet the fandom stood strong. Our fandom has disintegrated. How can you feel pride about this team? It's funny to say that when two years ago, we made the playoffs and last year we were a game away despite injuries and Covid. Despite playing a backup QB for all 16 games. The team could very well be good next year. On the other hand, even if we make the playoffs and become a good team we will still be a lousy organization.

I think you have your cliches in the wrong order. This isn't about which straw will break the camel's back, but whether the NFL is worried Dan might kill the golden goose.

They certainly have the authority. It'd be part of a separate investigation, but they have oversight should they choose to exercise it.

I think things like this are what the GM is supposed to say. You put a good face on what you have, don't alienate or make the players on the roster or make them feel like they won't be given a chance, and at the same time look to upgrade. Be pretty awful for a GM to say, "We suck at middle linebacker and all our players are losers. We're desperate. Mind you, Rivera has come close to saying that once or twice.