Bifflog

Members
  • Content Count

    469
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Bifflog

  • Rank
    The Special Teams Ace
  • Birthday 12/04/1987

Profile Information

  • Location
    Aroda, VA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Including TE definitely makes it a different story, there's not much to say there other than we probably don't have an answer there this year. Like the post above me, if you extrapolate out the production over the span that Simms and Harmon started geting meaningful tagets, I think you start to see the potential. DO you think all 3 are as good as they're ever gonna be?
  2. I understand the trepidation about our inexperienced WR room but can anybody honestly tell me that they liked any group we've had since Garcon and DJax were here better in practice—not on paper—than the handful of rooks last year? If one or two of them take another step in year two (Terry doesn't really need to but he's probably not as good as he's ultimately gonna be yet), we could be sitting pretty with an inexpensive set of WR's who you'd have to hope continue to gel with Dwayne as they came into the league together.
  3. Bifflog

    Ooooweee Dunbar wants to be traded!

    Man, I sure do hope so.
  4. If you really want to try and keep the homers in check who love every draft pick, I mean I get it, but I don't know if it's that helpful of a service. Would your draft assessment amount to totaling up the value chart numbers in a spreadsheet and sorting by that column and whichever team bubbles to the top had the best draft, because guys just are just always a reflection where they were drafted? I'd much rather hear why, for example, you think Charles, or anyone else we took, was properly available where we took them. I mean, the purpose of building through the draft is attempting to beat the league average on any given pick, if you don't believe in that or something, why even discuss the picks?
  5. God took care of this by only crafting exactly 32 2nd round talents in any given calendar year
  6. On the other hand, the position of "its very possible we got ****ty players in the good rounds, and we definitely got ****ty players in the ****ty rounds" isn't much more of an informed take.
  7. I'd wager somebody knows. I'm certain under a coach-first regime, the players are selected purposefully (with scheme in mind). Whether it will translate to wins or not remains to be seen, but we've moved on from the disconnect between those shopping for the groceries and those cooking the meal as they are now one in the same.
  8. Those two future picks are probably mid round, best case scenario. Without knowing what havoc Covid is going to wreak on ability to scout at least the 2021 class, and considering they could be even more of a crapshoot, sometimes the big, badass bird in the hand is worth the entirety of the bush.
  9. about a tenth of a second slower forty... but also 40 pounds heavier
  10. Bifflog

    Welcome to the Redskins Chase Young DE Ohio State

    Well, I mean... imagine who we might be able to pick if we lose out next season? (Don't kill me I'm just playin' )
  11. Just because someone suits up in a position at the start of game doesn't make them a weapon by default. I love McClaurin and I am optimistic about Simms, but I bet that's where it ends for most people. Find anyone of note who wouldn't rank this set of "weapons" in the bottom 5 of the league as it currently stands. And that isn't to say I can't be on board with the idea that we have 3 second year players at WR who could all take a jump, one RB we haven't even unwrapped from the plastic yet, and we're gonna add more in the draft such that by 2021 season we have a legitimate set of weapons. But as it stands, that's a lot of dicerolls we're looking to hit on, and how to evaluate Haskins if most of the guys we start would be looking to crack the starting lineup for other teams given the exact same draft spot?
  12. Not exactly what I meant, I am cool with rolling over cap money if we decide at any given time there's no one worth spending on, what I wouldn't be cool with is routinely cruising well under the cap as a matter of principle, because all that leads to is more in Dan's pocket; not scrappier, or hungrier players, but worse ones. Not saying that's what they're looking to do either. Little bit in the weeds, but just wanted to clarify.
  13. I just want a team that keeps spending the entirety of the salary cap to try and get better, whether that is this year or next. I don't think we want an owner convinced he can start being super cheap because the fanbase will find virtue in it.