Dark Acre

6 hours ago, Riggo-toni said:

As good as Young is, and as great as he may become...I can't help wonder what might be if we drafted Herbert instead.

He'd be misused, get injured in camp, and then get pulled over for driving while on his pain meds.

Then this is what XtremeTeam would've done with him: https://tinyurl.com/y3n3j9t2

I had a groin hernia repaired last week.  Been lugging that thing around for a couple of years.  It's a different beast than a groin strain but that area -- try getting out of bed without using your lower abdominal/groin muscles.  It can be done, if you have cables attached to the ceiling to pull yourself up by.  I'm cutting him some slack.  Additionally, if we bash the snot out of the #2 overall pick, whom almost everyone here was itching to draft, because of his still-good play despite injury and a LB corps that might as well be me and a couple of friends of mine, who's going to want to come here in FA?

1 hour ago, kingdaddy said:

 I think Ion has been our best DT when he plays, great motor and good pressure. He reminds me of a poor mans Dave Butz from the 80's.

Dude, you're selling Dave Butz short.

The entire DL is hampered because it's wearing concrete galoshes.  We have Rich Milot, Neal Olkewicz, and Mel Kaufman at linebacker, which was fine in the early 80's, but ain't going to cut it today.  Get a real MLB.  Then watch Chase Young dominate.

1 hour ago, Florgon79 said:

There's zero way for you to know that and you can't prove it in a scientific or meaningful way.

Seriously?  On a football fans board?

When you lose on a 59 yard field goal with 3 seconds remaining, you tip your cap to a guy with ice water in his veins (Prater) and move on.  Blaming Young is irrational.  Look at it this way:  he learned a valuable lesson in a season where winning isn't critical.  He won't make that mistake with a real division title on the line.

Look at the NFL standings, starting with the AFC and then go to the NFC East last.  My reaction doing that was, woah, is this a joke?  We know the NFCE is dismal, but I had not yet looked at the standings until today.  I haven't run the permutations, but it's possible (likely?) that a team could win the NFCE with 5 wins, and maybe even 4.  This may be the first time in history that every team in a division tried to lose to avoid crushing their draft position given the expected first round blowout.  Seriously, the NFL should strip the NFCE of it playoff position and make it another wild card because the NFCW is a tight battle of three 6-3 teams.  The NFL needs to go back to 3 divisions per conference. 

When you get beat by a 59 yard FG with 3 seconds left after your kicker missed a 43 yarder earlier, maybe the problem is your kicker (and running a reverse where you have no business doing so).

That O-line vid was fantastic.  Really a great watch for every American and football fan.

Team is 4th in the league with 27 sacks.  28, 29, 32 are the totals above us.  Rams are #5 at 25.

Lingering groin issue?  That can't help.  Also, a lot of his game is timing and he's got to adjust to NFL timing.  To me, it's almost as if because he's so talented, football smart, etc., that he needs to adjust to the game from the other direction.  Plus no real offseason/preseason, all the hype and turmoil, etc.  Plus, we really need a middle linebacker.

19 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

1.  That was at a different time, the QB position is much more important today but it's always been important.  But it's much more important in today's game. 

 

2. Make no mistake Joe Theisman and Doug Williams were in fact franchise QBs

 

3. He got lucky that Rypien played like a franchise QB for a year.

 

It's as simple as that.

 

Now please address my examples above, all 5 of those teams have totally changed their future prospects because they found a good QB.

I did address your examples (rhetorically).  I asked if you wanted to review the 20 year histories of those teams and the franchise QBs they thought they had found at the time (just as you are taking a snapshot at this moment).  You passed.  Here, you can check out each team and their QB going back to, wait for it, 1922!  (It was the APFA for the 2 years before it.) https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/  Indeed, NFL history is littered with guys who after 1 or 2 good years turned out not to be the franchise QB many thought he would be.  Are you so confident that each of these guys is going to be in the Super Bowl "conversation" for the next 10 years?  How do you know?

Joe Theismann was such a franchise QB that he didn't start until 1978 -- his 5th year in the NFL and he had a couple of years playing in the CFL (huge mistake) before that.  From 1977 through 1981 the Team did not make the paloffs.  And aside from John Riggins, who was occasionally hurt and usually misused, there was nothing in the skill position cupboard.  Even in 1979, when we had a good 10-6 team but lost in that soul-crushing (and TV screen smashing) defeat to Dallas, with Riggins running for 1,153 yards (which was very good), our run O was 12th and our pass O was 22nd.  Who was Joey-T throwing to?  Danny Buggs was #1 with 46 catches.  46, on a 10-6 team.  The next 2 highest receiving totals were Clarence Harmon (a 3rd down RB) and John Riggins.  The next WR on the list is John McDaniel at #5 with 25.  Do you even know who John McDaniel is?  I don't even think Topps made a card for him.  The mediocre OL was Hermeling, Saul, Kuziel, Williams, and Stark -- 3 of those guys were over 30.  The reason the team was 10-6 and on the verge of 11-5 is we had the fewest turnovers and were 2nd in the league in forcing them.  Counting on luck/that's-the-way-the-ball-bounces is not a long-term strategy.  Joe Theismann didn't have success until he had a team to succeed with.  Hell, even HOF QB Sonny Jurgensen's best year in D.C. (1967 - 3,747 yards in a 14-game season), Team went 5-6-3, and the best Team of the Sonny starting years was 1969 at 7-5-2 (3,102 yards).  SONNY was a franchise QB and the Team was mediocre.  Look up his stats as a Team starter. 

Doug Williams was NOT a franchise QB.  He was a good QB who had one of the best OLs of all time which opened holes big enough for pickup trucks to drive through (so said Jeff Bostic, not inaccurately), the best WR trio of all time, etc....

Rypien got lucky that he played lights-out in 1991 because he'd have been gone after that otherwise.  Somehow, Rypien transformed himself that one year into the perfect QB for that team - he was a pretty smart QB, his teammates really liked him and he totally supported them, and he could throw the bomb with uncanny accuracy (that, to me, is my most important criterion -- can the QB put the pickle in the pickle barrel at his will?

Losing culture begets losing culture until you've wandered the wilderness for 40 years.  Sucking begets sucking.  Build a competitive team such that even if it's 8-8, it's a team that you have to go all-in against to beat.  That means a competitive, if limited, QB, which is easy to find.  Basically, eliminate the losing mentality.  Then find your franchise QB -- OR -- (as Gibbs did), build a great team that a good QB or a mediocre QB with a hot year can take to the Super Bowl.

21 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Mark Rypien actually fits my argument, not yours. And that is it's much easier to find long lasting success with a good QB. 

So then why did Joe Gibbs do it the hard way?

3 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

But in that magical season Ryp played like a franchise quarterback, why do posters continue to forget this? When he regressed to who he really was he was no longer of value and he was gone.

I think your beginning "but" should be an "and" because you appear to agree with me.  (Actually, you shouldn't begin with either "but" or "and" because they are coordinating conjunctions.)  Watch the 1991 edition of "America's Game".  Both Rypien and Gibbs are explicit -- you won't be long in D.C. if you can't win the SB.  At 5:20 Gibbs says "Let's face it, he's going to be judged here with the Redskins by whether he can win the Super Bowl because that's what other quarterbacks here [Theismann, Williams] have done."  When that magical season (which I think is how narrator Donald Sutherland actually described it) ended and Rypien reverted to form as you note, he was essentially done.  BTW, Sutherland is the perfect narrator for this script.

What I would love to see is an analysis of the teams that have managed to create sustained winning (not necessarily a SB win, but expected to be in the fight) over a decade or more (the occasional bad year due to injuries, and such, excepted).  Did they build the team around the QB or did they build the team and then get the QB?  The other thing here is how many bad teams tried to right the ship by drafting that franchise QB and then build the team around him but failed to do so and were battered against the Shoals of Suck?  I'm a build-the-team first guy, but I'm ultimately teleological about the whole thing (i.e., whatever works).

5 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Just pointing out how a quarterback can really change a team's fortune and how a Super Bowl appearance is not necessary to show that.

Joe Gibbs disagrees.  By the time Rypien took over, Gibbs was saying that a QB in Washington is judged by whether he can win the Super Bowl. 

4 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Just don't trade him for a 2nd, we always screw those up.   

 

As for the culture of losing again Cleveland, Arizona and Cincy had that culture, then they drafted a QB and look at them now.  

Do you really want to take a walk down memory lane and revere the name of every quarterback those teams annointed to take them to the promised land of winning culture, in just the last 20 years?

You know what the Washington Football Team has in abundance, so much that the Justice Department should open an antitrust investigation?  Losing team culture.  Other than 2012 and the Gibbs II years, Team was been a morale bog for two decades.  We finally have a chance to right the ship and some people here want to ship out the few winning-culture attitude guys, including a still very productive RK (for a 4th!) and even our very own next Keenan McCardell (that being Terry McLaurin), and some guys want to tank again on the theory that we don't have to worry about instilling (or permafrosting) a losing culture for good.  The road to Hell is paved with the souls of QBs taken at the top of the draft by teams who reveled in losing culture.

2 hours ago, PartyPosse said:

If you don’t think you’re getting him re-signed for anything less than 14 a year you’re dreaming.

Look, it's late, so help me out here:  do you mean Jonathan Allen will get less or more than $14million?

2 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

That's just a subset of pressures.  (P-ints, # of pressures resulting in INTs.)  It's probably a random # that generally increases with the number of Ps, but there's really no way to intentionally pressure a QB into an INT rather than just a bad throw.  Like if your CB on the play is Carlos Rogers, you're getting a P but not a P-Int and he gets a PD not an INT.  Kendall Fuller?  You're getting a P-int because he's getting an INT not a PD.  The stat I really care about is OHDs (OTs Humiliated and Destroyed).  It's a team game, and if you're wasting high OHDs, you need a better back 7.

1 hour ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

you can never have too many DBs, he’ll get snaps imo

Well..., 54 would be too many.  The league just won't allow it.  And I'm all for multi-tasking, but so far I don't see Curl or ANY defensive back in the entire NFL solving our woes at LT and LG.  In contrast, Landon Collins has the *attitude* to play C (gonna make it *his* box on both sides of the ball) but in a goal line situation, his road grading doesn't fill me with confidence.  I think it's possible to have too many DBs.

Back to Kamren, I hope this guy sticks.  I want to hear "OHHHHHH!!!  #31 Kamren Curl bringing the curling iron!  Curl hit him so hard, he gave him a new hairdo!  Man, that's one helluva permanent press.  Curl's gonna have some quality highlights when this game's over."

What's the rule on defenders running out of bounds and then coming back in to make the tackle?  That was #21.  Moses did not push him out.  He stepped out when he spun away from Moses.  Not that it affected the play, but it could have.

Notice who placed 2nd. 

2 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

There is no way Cooke would have fired a coach who had just taken the team to the Super Bowl. Why would he? That would completely change the narrative and reasoning for firing Pardee to begin with!

By 1981, Pardee's O would have cratered.  Where do you think Callahan got his run-first philosophy?  (And his run-second, and his run-third)  Pardee couldn't spell pass if you spotted him the *ss.  Everyone talks about modern, wide-open football these days, but it all began in the early 80's when blocking rules were liberalized and mugging was eliminated as a pass defense technique.  Cooke would have pitched a fit over Pardee's failure to adapt.  If there's one thing Cooke was good at was adapting.  Wasn't his last wife 40 years younger than him?

5 hours ago, hail2skins said:

Didn't Riggins get stuffed on a 3rd and short prior to the Cowboys game-winning drive in the 1979 game?

 

And of course he held out the following season.

 

But I agree that, to longtime Skins fans, the 1979 loss to Dallas emotionally completely dwarfs any other one.  The Raiders butt-kicking in SB 18 was so complete that, watching that, it was tough to care after a while. 

Yeah, he did.  I liked Len Hauss, Ron Saul, et. al., but by then Saul should've dropped the Ron, he was that old.  The other things to keep in mind about this game:  1) Team had started 6-0 the year before (1978) before finishing 2-8.  Think about that.  2) Les Bullez were a good basketball team and even won the championship in '78 before losing the rematch in '79, but those games were taped-delayed (think about *that*) and, well, short shorts.  Besides that, the Capitals were still in the Justice Dept's witness protection program, the Orioles were for Baltimorons (and, well, I like baseball now, but baseball is to football like Hamlet is to MacBeth (7th grade boys prefer MacBeth by a greater than unanimous margin)), and there was a decent-but-forever-in-second-place-behind-the-Cosmos Diplomats team (but, eh, socker, or however you spell it)  4) Jimmy Carter was still President.  This was the "America's Team" Cowboys of the 70's, the team everyone loved to hate, it was Dallas week and that was HUGE back then, and the Skins had a very good team.  There were reports of guys throwing their TVs in anger.  On top of that, our points margin for the tie-breaker was so strong, so long as STL stayed within 30 points of Chicago, we're in despite a loss but then STL scores 6 and holds CHI to 42.  You're right about the Super Bowl too.  We're getting creamed by halftime so bad that my friends and I just went numb.

But for those who say that if Pardee had won, no Gibbs, nah....  I liked Jack Pardee as a person but as a head coach, a SB appearance, let alone a win, would've been a fluke and by 1981 we'd be hiring Joe Gibbs.  Remember who the majority owner of the Team was (hint:  some Cannuck named the Squire).

3 minutes ago, kleese said:

It’s funny, Mosley was considered THE money kicker of the early to mid 80’s, but judged against today’s kicker standards he wouldn’t even be in the league. His career FG % was about 65% and he had a number of years sub 62%. As a comparison Dustin Hopkins currently sits at 85% for his career and I think most of us would term him as average to slightly above average. 
 

And by the way, Mosley career from 50+ he was 12-42. 

And the only kicker to ever win season MVP.  "He's the reason I flash the hardware" - Doc Walker.