Darth Tater

The Colts have lost to Jacksonville in Jacksonville the last 6 times. The game is in our commode, anyway.

Yeah, I was being a bit generous (?) with just before Gibbs. Even in Pardee's last year, we did have a good defense (I recall, that is why Gibbs was told to keep Petitbon). They also had a lot of the core for the teams of 1981 through 1984 already in place. I kind of skipped over Lombardi because he really only had 1 year so you'd have to extrapolate (we did have a decent offense to 1972, which I think may have been Lombardi's legacy).

He is a 5th rounder. He was not picked primarily to be a starter but as another quality arm which we needed bad. That we were going to pick a day 2 or 3 QB was almost a given. The nice thing is that we were able to get one with some game-day potential so late. This was NOT a wasted pick. A good backup QB is a harder find than a your number one.

Fixed it for you.

Well, Dallas has only had 3 consecutive losing seasons 3 times over a 60 year span. The Eagles have gone from 0s to multi-year heroes two times since 1999 and are working on a third. Meanwhile, we haven't had 3 consecutive winning seasons since 1989 thru 1992 and last went from 0 to multi-year heroes in the 80s.

Okay, how are we going to top Phidarian? I can't believe we topped Jahan. We've shot our name quota already! Already having trouble with that one

Over Antenna, you should be well ahead of cable in terms of timing. When I watched the Redskins on cable, I'd usually see the play about 20-40 seconds after it occurred.

Huh? Must be a problem with timing because I saw the Olave pick a good 30 seconds before anybody posted the actual pick.

Keep seeing people post this but I've not seen a pick being talked about before I have known it for at least 30 seconds.

AWESOME!!!!! Hope it is for what I wanted. Trade down is what I hoped but only if we got a good deal.

Many people seem to read 'make of break' as 'win or get fired'. No, 'make or break' simply means that this season actually determines whether Ron will be a successful head coach here or not.

This is a big part that now worries me: We changed our name to something that has very little to do with our history, colors and location. There is a strong contingent that wants to erase the Washington Redskins from history and the NFL is showing signs it will at least crumble to their demands. Dan looks like he'll be forced to sell. This team absolutely needs a new stadium. Adds up to a drastic move like Houston to Tennessee or Cleveland to Baltimore. Sadly, I think our only hope is that the latest accusations on Dan are just persecution and really nothing

My 'holy grail' game is the 1972 REGULAR season home game versus the Cowboys. The SJ9 comeback game that made me a die hard! Down 20-7 in the third and scored 17 unanswered points to win 24-20.

Appear that this thread is worthless then if that is your attitude, Again anything but history in this context is BS!!!!!!!

History is all that matters in when discussing the draft, everything else is pretty much either bull **** or depends on history.

Our biggest successes have usually come via free agency and trades at the WR. We really have has only two elite MIKEs. We've never had real success at taking RBs high (unless you include Charlie Taylor but his big success did not come as a RB). Our best TE's have been mid to late round guys and a few FAs. Buffalo? Finding a good one seems to be more about coaching, timing and luck. Of the positions you listed, only OL seems to be the position we can count on filling in the draft at the high-end (only 1 true bust in years). Almost looks like our best strategy at RB and TE is to just keep picking them in the later rounds until we hit. WR? Free agency or get lucky seems to be our only hope. Terry is the first near elite guy (maybe elite) we've got via the draft since Gary Clark. Just 2 guys we picked in the top 2 at WR have ever gone on to be worth the pick (Taylor was picked as a RB). If Terry plays here for another 5-6 years, he is on pace to be our top WR EVER. I could see him getting into our top 10 this year. Our WR picks usually seem to be no better than a 4 (about what you should expect for a mid to late guy on a rookie deal). Crowder was a decent slot guy and did have a few OK games as the man.

Ryan gives you a bridge and only a bridge no matter what you are going to have to find his replacement soon, either this season or next. We haven't drafted a stud QB high since Baugh and not for lack of trying. While we may still have to find a guy, Wentz has some probability of turning out as a long-term solution. Even if he fails, he is still cheaper than RG3 (pretty much the consensus #2 QB available) and probably Haskins (this pick arguably is what really cost us seconds in 2019 and 2020 as Sweat was probably the guy the coaching staff wanted at the Haskins pick and, BTW, most people rated Haskins as a top-10 guy). The biggest issue is if Wentz is just a better option than rolling with TH but not a stud.

And we don't have a good history when it comes to drafting WR. Our last high round WR that at least met expectations was Gary Clark (far exceeded in his case, we seem to be boom or bust with high WR picks). While Crowder was an excellent 3 and a good backup to two, Terry has been the last WR we picked that has shown multiple times he can be the 1 and is the first guy we've actually drafted since Clark that has led us in receiving yards for three straight years. For the most part we get top WR production from FAs and trades.

That is because we'd probably have had to move to 9 or give NY a premium.

Totally disagree with you about average. Average means we still need an elite QB to become a consistent winner and would probably mean we will still be looking at the same time the rest of the roster needs an upgrade. Average means a 9-8 season losing a game or two we should not lose. Good enough for that three to become a two but not worth that amount. Smith, while not great QB, was a great athlete before the big injury. Reid's offensive system fit his style perfectly. Smith was a great field general. Reid is also the most awesome guy at selecting and developing QBs currently in the biz (he also is of the lineage of Holmgren and Walsh). Smith withheld his negative opinions about the organization until he was done. Wentz reminds me of the good employee who can't hold his tongue about incompetent management and withhold unwelcome opinions, even if he thinks he is right.

My actual biggest fear is that Wentz is just average, still our best option but not one we like going forward. We are as protected as possible from him sucking as we can be (we can walk away without extensive damage to our draft capital and almost none to cap). If he is close to his former self, he's young enough to be here for a long enough that he'd be relatively cheap to extend. I also think we can extend our downside risk protection by figuring out how to trade picks this year for two ones next year (this would give us better access to move on from him in the downside case). On the upside case where we can kick the QB can down the road again, we would have options to build a multi-year competitor around him. I also think that such a move would reduce the mediocre problem though you still might have the problem of good personal performance with bad team performance.

I have become certain that saying 'Dan was heavily involved' has simply become the way people excuse their **** ups.

John was supposed to be able to compete. Jack set it up this way as an estate planning strategy and John was really supposed to own the team but not via a taxable event (which would have forced John to sell anyway). Of course,football teams became crazy valuable at the time of execution so things did not go according to plan.

It is now about year 24 of our rebuild.

People reject a media report when it denies their desired narrative and accept them with little criticism when it supports their desired narrative.