Darth Tater

On 5/30/2023 at 1:15 PM, Koolblue13 said:

I think it'll be a rough couple of years. Especially if Harris wants to rebuild the way he did with the 76ers, but so so ****ing worth it.

 

Hopefully he treats it like a new team.

That's pretty much a bad strategy in the NFL. KC went from suck to playoff immediately, no multi-year rebuild. RAMS went from suck to playoffs in just one off-season mostly using personnel left over from the previous regime. Philadelphia Eagles have gone from bottom feeders to NFL overnight playoff contenders 3 times in the last 23 years.  This has generally been true since Lombardi took over 1-10 team and with almost no personnel changes, had them 7-5 the next year.  In my own experience as a Washington fan, George Allen had us in playoffs the year he took over.  Pardee failed to get us back after 3 years. Joe Gibbs had us win the SB in his second year. Turner had four very good teams while he was here and only took one to the playoffs.  OK, relatively great success quickly doesn't guarantee anything but unless you have success quickly, you likely never be successful. Yes, if 76er strategy succeeds, its fun for some but definitely not worth it for others, and it rarely works, at least in the NFL.  Hell, so far, as many other strategies that have also work in the NBA, it has not even proven to be worth it in the NBA. Most recent fail of using the 76er strategy in the NFL was Cleveland.

On 5/30/2023 at 11:44 AM, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

I doubt the ownership group plans to completely disregard that group of fans, but the wise business decision would be to deprioritize them more and more. Eventually, they need to realize that even those with fond memories of this team are aging out of ever having the same passion and dying off. That population is shrinking every day/month/year that goes by. 

Many of the fans that remember RFK fondly are those in their late 30s to 40s now.  30 and 40 something die hards are the parents of your future die hards and given the number of die hards I know, most of us were children of die hards ourselves. Further, many of 50 something fans will definitely be both physically and fiscally capable of enjoying going to games in our 60s and early 70s and will help pass our passion on to our grandchildren. I also am sure that many of those in their late 30s and 40s will also be physically capable for another 30, even 40 years.  We represent the people with the money and connections to help get the stadium built. Stadium building is not an investment that only pays off in 30 years but one that is expected to generate current revenues that at least finance the build process if not make a profit. While die hards are not where your going to see a real large growth in your fan base, we are also those that still pony up when things are bad.

22 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

We are allergic to TEs with NFL XP.

 

Not asking for a world beater, especially at this part of the offseason. Just a guy that has been thru the ups and downs of the NFL.

We somehow found a TE w/ less NFL recs than turner... and he only had 2.

 

They are asking for a repeat of last year at TE. Dummy Ball.

Given how the draft fell, there were no TEs available that I'd have taken over what we had and there was now way to know that a roster space for a TE camp body would even be a need There are not now nor in the near future any TEs with NFL XP that are better than either Thomas or Bates at their given roles and such a person would probably be a waste of roster space at best (any guy we bring in should mostly a camp body with potential) . If we bring in a TE now (other than the current camp body we just brought in), he should be what Armani Rogers was supposed to be, another shot at finding a burner at TE.  The only talent part of this offense that is noticeably worse (and is the fault of Rivera) than 2018 is the decline of our offensive line.

41 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

Yeah, I am surprised.  It was a bit of a luxury to have a player with that much playing experience as your fourth corner, but I am a little surprised they waived him.

When he was signed pre-draft, he had a CB 3 spot that was his to lose, with how the draft fell, he was now the odd man out and would have had to win a spot baring injury. He did not play much on special teams and a 4 CB that does not play teams is a luxury. Last season, the only CBs that did not get significant special teams snaps were only 1 and 2.

On 5/28/2023 at 11:49 AM, Koolblue13 said:

Those guys all blow. Bates is better than all of them. It's Cole Turner or bust for us. Maybe Hodges or one of these undrafted, rarely signed gems we keep hearing about.

I suspect that any TE available is either going to be a worse option than what we have now or a pleasant surprise (another team's version of Cole Turner).

18 hours ago, ExoDus84 said:

 

Well, we sure as **** didn't have that before, but I think we just might have it now 🍻

 

 

Colt has everything a person could want in a QB, except for the ability to play QB well.

 

However, I do think Colt found himself a good niche here as QB #2.  He'd should have been a quality 2 QB in Arizona. Though, maybe this speaks more to the lack of good QBs, period.

On 5/22/2023 at 1:28 PM, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I guess we will agree to disagree.  I am somewhat of a process driven guy and i'll forgive mistakes if the process makes sense.  Simply because personnel is a crap shoot --both the draft and FA, you win some and you lose some.  But if I get what they are trying to do as long as most of their moves work, I'll give a lot of slack. The process made sense to me in the first three years.  The process made no sense to me this year unless Ron's goal was to take one for the team by setting them up for a top ten draft pick and set up his successor for success. 

 

Year 1:  Riding with Haskins (the owner's pet QB), drafting Chase Young.  In retrospect were the wrong moves.  But I get why he did it.  Overall the draft was decent.  And they did a very nice job in FA.

 

Year 2.  Fitz made sense -- best FA QB available.  They swung and missed at Stafford  They got unlucky that Fitz got hurt.     Good draft.  So so to poor FA crop.

 

Year 3.  Swung and missed at Russell Wilson.  Wanted Carr but he wasn't made available.  Got Wentz.  They got ripped off big time in the deal but I get the method to the madness of betting on a QB who was still sub 30 with high upside -- boom-bust.  He busted.  Good draft.  They did nada in FA.

 

OK after that off season, I among some others including @Koolblue13 who were optimistic on this roster bought the rhetoric that Ron was upset that the O line regressed and it in turn derailed that season.   But all hands are on deck to fix it.  Lets do the QB spot differently and ride with Howell and as Ron said to help a young QB you need to surround him with a strong supporting cast.

 

Ron also seemed very sensitive to the idea in various interviews that the fans aren't coming to games and he wanted to earn their trust to come back. 

 

For me it all felt great.  Those 3 years are set for the kill for year 4.   Ron will focus on the offense and helping Sam be successful.  And also help Bieiniemy in year 1 to be successful from the start.  Felt like it was no brainer territory.  And I was so convinced that Ron would follow up on his rhetoric that I defended him to his haters on this board in advance that he's got this all handled and they should chill. 

 

But in my book my faith was misplaced.   Ron had more of a defense side of the ball focused draft.    He did very little in FA.   Some who cover the team don't expect either O lineman they took in the draft to contribute this season -- heck Ron even implied the same with one of those two players.   

 

RT slightly improved, depth weaker IMO on O line.  That's Ron's version of all hands on deck to fix what sunk them last season?  And I can forgive that a little if Ron decided not to go full out at O line because he wanted to throw a bone to the new ownership and get a player or two or make a move that would juice the fans a little considering Ron didn't do much of that since he's been here. 

 

Not that I personally care about juicing up the fan base.  But at least I can understand fixing O line might come off boring so I'd sort of get it if Ron drafted or signed some offensive weapon that would sell jerseys and create some buzz for a team that's arguably one of the most boring in the NFL -- I wouldn't like that approach as to making a move like that but I understand it.  But he did neither thing IMO.  Granted he still could.  And who knows just because I among plenty of others don't think he came close to fixing that O line -- doesn't mean its so -- will see.  But right now, I hate his off season.  I didn't hate the previous ones.

In 2020, Ron had a chance to mend fences with Trent Williams and this fail was the beginning of turning our greatest strength into our greatest weakness and he never has focused on it.  A few years later, while Snyder was probably a big part of the problem and maybe his loyalty to Scott Turner, he failed with Scherf. In 2020, while he did have Haskins and defense was a huge problem, so it is a bit understandable but the guys were available to him at QB and that is what makes it bad (though, yes, it is mitigated by other issues). The resources were THERE for his taking. In 2021, we passed on superior resources that were available and again HE SWUNG AND MISSED, this is what makes it bad while ignoring our most critical need. In 2022, he over payed resources-wise for a guy that he knew (or should have known) he was over paying for and ignored our most critical need. This could be over-shadowed IF Howell is what we hope (Dotson and B-Rob look like what they SHOULD be though they do show indications that they might be more). He again failed at doing anything to fix our critical weakness (though I'll admit nothing better might have been available). 2023 is the first year that Ron seems to be addressing the one thing that has gotten worse every year he's been here, our starting field position (we have a potential return specialist and brought in some ball-hawks). He went after guys who show ability to fix our greatest weakness on defense, inability to get off the field on 1st and second downs while getting guys who can potentially bail the offense out. He signed the best DT available. He had no real opportunity at QB but did seem to get himself a huge plus at OC.  Going with Howell is HIS best option given the options available though he made sure that if Howell if an F, we have a floor available to us with probably the best backup QB out there. There were no better resources available to fix the big oline problem after fixing the above. The personnel problems we still have now are primarily due to fails in 2020-2022.

9 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Dan selling is everything.  So love that.  Everything else doesn't matter as to big picture.  And I've been a big Josh Harris fan even before it became clear he'd be the guy.  So i am giddy.

 

I've been borderline pollyana about our seasons over the years.  I've had Ron's back so much I should be on his PR payroll.  But maybe shifting from positive to negative on Ron is a good omen -- maybe it all goes down the opposite way for me?    Maybe its a surprise big season?  I think Ron did a crap job this off season.   Both as to building a winning roster or adding any juice.   But maybe I am wrong will see his hand play out soon enough and he still has some time to add to the roster. 

 

Maybe some of that is selfish on my end, I desperately want to take my kids to a playoff game before they leave the nest.  At the start of this off season I thought it was possible this season-- now am thinking almost no shot. And I am not negative on Ron in general.  But I am just negative on him going forward -- feels like its dancing with a partner in marriage and considering it, having some good times, no regrets but also hitting the conclusion hard that they aren't the one.  

 

But I do think Ron has helped set them up possibly to get a higher draft pick next off season.  And i don't think the typical fan is going to give new ownership a hard time for this group leading the team to a bad season if it happens since they are tied to past ownership.  Especially in Ron's case considering he's the only dude I can tell who is praising Dan right to the bitter end.  But overall, there is a lot to be juiced about, no matter what happens, including even Ron potentially setting up a bad season has upside to it. 

I don't think Ron did a crap job this off season. I actually think that this was his best. I think the problem is how we F'd up the first 3. The only good thing we had (oline) was ignored and actually a bit attacked. You can forgive him some for missing on a QB in 2020 (can make the argument that a former #1 needed a chance and Young was DROY), 2021 (his plan didn't include an exploding thigh and the guy he really wanted was not coming here) and 2023 (tell me, what else he should have done? Lamar was the only guy who anybody talked about that would have improved our QB room long-term and he wasn't truly available). 2022 Wentz was a real bad F'up. If anything, my problem is that the worst outcome for us is probably a 12-13 rounder and I think its very likely we end up with one in the late teens early 20s. That could be a bad outcome given that if we improve our starting field position to just average and become just average in TOs (while still keeping a top 5 defense in terms of yards allowed and the best 3rd down defense in the NFL) could alone get us 2-3 more net wins.

Thing about Haskins was that his only two Ws as a rookie came in his two worst starts. Covid really hurt him or at least prevented Rivera and company getting a good read on him before the season (though, so far, I'm not impressed by this staffs' QB choices of course was it Scott or Ron that was the real issue here?). A lot of the short-leash was probably also due to Rivera's health.  In Haskins' defense, well Scott Turner, a defensive minded HC and his status as a Snyder pick.

44 minutes ago, method man said:

 

Not necessarily. They did what they could this offseason within the constraints. If the goal were a proven veteran, they very likely did not have the authority to give Lamar a fully guaranteed contract and they weren't going to get Carr or Jimmy G. In the draft, they were too far back to move up for Young or Stroud. Jacoby was the best affordable option available in FA and they got that guy. 

 

I see your point potentially being in the same QB hell next year with a mid first. However, with new ownership and a new regime in place, perhaps they go do something ballsy like trade 3 1sts to move up to take Maye or trade for a veteran who may come available

 

Lamar was the only one I'd have even given consideration if not for the fact that he was NEVER going to leave Baltimore in the first place, especially with anything close to the value put on him by Baltimore. We'd have really had to overpay.

18 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

Yep. But you gotta keep taking shots. 

This was in response to us being almost as unlucky as Detroit. In that 50s span, you also have multiple 2,3,4 shots.  At the same time, you have late picks like Starr(HoF), Ryan, Van Brocklin(HoF), Unitas(HOF) and Finks. Late rounders themselves. Last season, 17 franchises did not have first round QB they picked including none of the NFC playoff teams (3 of the teams that did finished below 500).  Only two or three NFL teams have a worse draft history with high QB picks than us though we have had some success with lower round picks, trades(include FAs here) and even street pick ups. Another thing that should be exciting is that EB is in the coaching tree that includes some of the best QB guys ever:

Holmgren -- Young (including developing him in college), Favre, Brunell, Hasselebeck

Reid -- McNabb, Smith, Mahomes and picked Foles, got a good year out of Vick

Pederson -- Smith's OC and only one to get the best of Wentz and Foles

Just now, illone said:

Its flat out weird how UNlucky this team has been at QB the past two decades. 
 

Even Detroit has been luckier. 

1959, 1960 and 1961 we spent a top 5 pick on a QB, none worked out (albeit, Norm Snead was flipped for Sonny). Before our 1959 pick, we spent a top 10 pick on a QB in 1945, 1948, 1953 and 1955, none of these are even in the Hall of the Good. The number of teams less lucky at the QB position than us since the early 1950s can be counted on the fingers of one hand.

1 hour ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Has anyone considered that Harris is just going to view this broken down shoddy organization as a fixer-upper, make a few renovations, and flip it?

Don't even know if that would be possible. Unless the NFL ownership requirements change big time, there's really not much demand. Remember, half the the definition of demand is ability to buy not just the desire.

3 hours ago, Skinsfan1311 said:

What do you think?

Will the "I'm not going to another game until Snyder sells the team" crowd show up, now that the Evil Emperor has fled the building?

My gut feeling is that, initially, there will be a surge of more fans.  After that, it's up to the team to play well to keep those butts in the seats.

l hope so!

 

 

Don't see too many young potential fans right now (most seem to like flash and/or success) with the wherewithal to go to games regularly and I don't think our games going forward will be so heavily discounted. Of course, maybe as we are no longer an extra home game for fans of other teams, those tickets will still be available at a discount.

1 hour ago, CobraCommander said:

I really wanted Sam to play after the bye but I'm hoping it was all for the best that he wasn't the one to lose us the season. I'm hoping EB can get the most out of him and essentially redshirting him his first season is a blessing in disguise. I hated Turner's offense.

Problem is that we don't know if Sam Howell was ready at the time. Also, Turner ran the offense. Renner mentioned that he thought Howell fell because coaches were unsure of his ability to figure out blitz pickup. Both Kurt Warner and JT O'Sullivan weren't sure of his footwork (both thought it went out at the weirdest times).  Possibly all coach-able issues but not sure. It would have taken time to find out and fix the problems.  We still had a very good shot at a playoff spot and, even when you have mediocre to sub-par QB play, you don't bench a guy whose put you back in the race. We then were still in the race but were unhappy with TH so you go with the guy you thought was the guy. If we'd beaten Cleveland or the Giants, I don't think Howell would have started against Dallas.

At this time, 7 is the floor and after I recalculated 12 as the ceiling. I guess that mean 9.5 is the over/under. This assumes nothing bad happens for us on the floor and nothing great happens for us at the ceiling. Part of why I see 7 as the floor is because that is Brissett's floor and I think EB will bench Howell if Howell isn't getting it done.  So either Howell gets us 7 or better or Brissett is the man and gets us at least 7.

Also, from what I believe, there are several good QBs in the draft and a top-10 pick gets us one (6 or fewer might put us there). THIS IS NOT ALLOWED BY THE FOOTBALL GODS!  Washington has not picked a franchise QB in the first round since 1937 and not for the lack of trying. Of the only two true ones in my lifetime, they were trades and the best one (Sonny) didn't have as good a roster as we have now most of his years. The two others who gave us multiple quality years were a late round pick and a 4th round pick. Another, who while his best years came in KC, was looking like our future was originally an 8th rounder who we picked up as a street FA.

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

The last time we played the Cowboys on Thanksgiving and the finale was 2012. That season turned out to be pretty fun IIRC...

2012 was the last time I had even the opportunity to watch Thanksgiving Day games.

5 hours ago, DJD2 said:

So basically the owners are concerned that Harris might end up being "house poor"? I guess it's a legit concern.

Not really, the big problem the owners have is that they are not happy that the team only gets 6B and, according to rumors, may actually be as little as 5.8B actual.  The other owners really wanted the 7B number even more than Dan. Remember, even if they don't plan to sell, having their franchises valued at 7B+ is huge. Technically up to 3.5B tax free cash can be generated (though NFL rules, risk management reasons and other issues depress that by a significant amount). There are myriad of other ways to generate cash flow from an overvalued assets. Finally, many of these guys have huge egos but, even though leadership at the top has a lot to do with team on-field success, there are many factors here that determine on-field success that the owners just don't control but they do know how to do the wealth thing (even if it is just my toy is worth more than your toy).

He just needs to stop skipping leg day.

3 hours ago, RVAskins said:

I agree and find that very sad. The day a team is owned by a corporation is the day when the bean counters decide how a team spends their money. It will not be good for the NFL.

Next team is probably be around 8B while you need to have 30% of that minimum plus enough free cash to support operations until revenue can actually pay expenses and profit can start making your decision a wise and sustainable one. With the size of the Harris ownership team, vetting is getting expensive. Unless something really goes wrong, we are probably talking a very small group of guys who could actually afford that and if something goes that wrong, revenue is probably going down. Further, this specific transactions and at least a couple of future team sales bring up big liability questions.

Selfish but because of my work schedule, I'd hate any Thursday games, especially Turkey Day.  OK, I really hate Turkey Day against Dallas because I have been permanently damaged over the Clint Longley game!

On 5/8/2023 at 1:25 PM, Koolblue13 said:

If we lose what I think is going to be a very high 1rst round pick, that's going to be crushing.

 

Harris did tank the 6ers for 3 years to stock talent. If we lost our first next year, I could see something like that happening. Bring in an entirely new FO/coaching staff in 2024. Jettison everyone worth a draft pick and a complete ground up rebuild.

Tanking rarely works in the NFL. It is especially hard when you've got coaches with scruples, a top 10 defense and probably the 2 or 3 best WR room in the NFL. Hell, we'd probably be struggling for a top 4 pick if Fromm was our starter.  In the NFL, the only team that tanked somewhat successfully (the Colts back in 2011) did not really get that much in the end (getting blown out in the conference PO game was their best result).

10 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Caught up with Keim on a Bram appearance on Friday.

 

Not much. 

 

A.  He knows they want a LB from FA

 

B.  He believes they believe they are good with their O line. but said he got the same vibe years back and they did sign Leno when he was released

 

C.  Maybe another WR.  

On oline, they were sort of right.  Had Roullier stayed healthy, our line would have been above average at least.

One obvious way a RB, WR or DB (those guys are the ones who get return ops) could sneak onto the team is being a great punt returner and being at least a 2-way teams guy (don't think Milne was as he doesn't seem to have any tackles) while offering decent ability to be at least 4-5 on game day. They have to be reliable (Dax, while not even average at most parts of the return game was at least reliable). We did have the worse average starting field position.

18 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

NFL QB play aint what is used to be. Completion % in the 50s used to be common place in my lifetime. Now 70% isnt rare. QBs simply throw INTs less and less and get benched if they do. The Fitzpatrick Grossman Jameis Winston 5 INT games of the past are long gone. A DB with 6 INTs lead the league last year.

 

 

That may be true but we were 28th getting interceptions last year and 26th overall in TOs. Only 2 teams were worse than us at ending opponent drives with TOs. 3 teams lapped us in interceptions and half the NFL had significantly more. We had the worst average starting field position in the NFL and, while much of the problem was that we just were not good in the return game, some of that is due to lack of short field opportunities created by lack of TOs. Lack of TOs were the only real weaknesses of our defense last year and it is a primary reason our top 10 defense is not mentioned with the likes of Dallas and Philadelphia.