Unbias

Mason Foster would have helped...

The relationship will continue to deteriorate. Trent's agent will eventually make a public statement airing their problems and then we'll end up getting a 3rd for him (hopefully it has some conditions that can make it higher). After the deal is done Allen will come out, talk about how Trent's side messed this up and how he was there to save us by getting a 3rd.

In recent news Kevin O'Connell has taken to publicly begging Trent to come back. It might have been better if O'Connell ended by saying "You know this is a contract year for me, right Trent?". He's got that pity based sales approach of Gil Gunderson from the Simpsons:

Damn. I guess 'doing nothing' didn't get the desired result...

Outside of QB, no one player should determine if a team makes the playoffs or not. It's football, so if we have no depth and can't sustain one player missing we weren't really a playoff team to begin with.

I kinda would swallow my pride and give props. That would be a great haul, but if we ended up only getting a 2nd (or less) would the FO backers all say this was a massive mistake by Bruce? It goes both ways. Right now it appears Bruce is trying to force Trent to play. He's fining him and declining trade calls. Maybe it's all posturing to get a better deal, but ultimately the proof will be in the pudding. Right after trade details are let out we'll know how to judge Bruce no matter what he says.

For those that want Clowney, how would that look on our cap? I'm guessing he'll only agree to a trade if he's getting an extension. If he's unwilling to ride out the franchise tag in Houston he probably wouldn't do it for another team. Top tier edge rushers are not cheap. We have the Khalil Mack, Demarcus Lawrence, Frank Clark and to a lesser extent, Trey Flowers and Dee Ford contracts that recently happened to compare. We can expect to give over $60M in guarantees with an annual average compensation right around $20M-$23M/season. I know we'd get a little over $9M in cap space for shipping off Trent and have just over $11M available, but can we even afford to give Clowney that type of deal without forcing cuts (Norman/Reed) or impacting future extensions (Scherff)?

Bruce Allen cryptically said in early June that knew what the issue was with Trent. Since then it's been almost dead silence from the front office. It seems like they have had at least had 2 months and they are choosing to try and force Trent to play for the Redskins. Not sure if this is because it's the best option or if we are being stubborn.

I'm not sure if this applies to the current situation. Teams are calling about trading for him. If we ignore them those teams might find other solutions. If Bruce is trying to control the supply he should be more concerned about demand shrinking. The market pretty much as as little supply as it can. After the roster cut downs there will be a bunch of new signings. We'd want to get in before that time. There's always a chance of a big injury in preseason or early in the year where a team is very desperate, but that's far from the current picture. For me it's starting to move towards the worst case scenario - He sits for the max number of games he can. when it comes to the week where he's got to report so he doesn't lose the season towards his contract he reports. He's not in 'football shape' and might have some kind of 'soft tissue injury', so he barely plays with us all year long. For the team there's the constant distraction and we end up allocating cap space for a player who just doesn't want to be here. If I was Bruce I'd take all those calls. Call a few more teams letting them know what the current deals are, then go back to one of those teams that called and ask for a bit more. Take a few days and make sure you are getting the most for him, then move on.

So Bruce won't trade him? Super. The people that wanted to move on get nothing. The people that wanted them to make up gets nothing. Is it possible that we've been able to pull off the rare lose-lose-lose scenario where the team, fans and player all are worse off?

How can teams possibly start taking QBs earlier? QBs have been the #1 overall pick in 7 of the past 10 years. It's a position that gets constantly reached for in each draft, largely because of the costs associated with having or not having a good one (cap charge vs. no playoffs). The salary cap is based on a percentage of NFL revenues. When sports betting money starts flowing into that pot of money the salary cap will continue to grow. I don't see this over-saturation you speak of happening any time soon.

Wouldn't trading him away for garbage just be the most consistent outcome of what we've grown to expect? I'm trying not to be negative, but also realistic. IMHO Bruce will get a bruised ego, blame the player/his agent, then celebrate his 'B' plan because it's 'better than nothing'.

I'm curious. Based on the current ownership and leadership of this team do you classify them as a 'good team'? It's hard not to look at the W-L record, lack of any playoff success, lack of consistency at QB and HC spots and/or some of the dysfunction that has made it's way into the media and not see an obviously 20+ year trend. Maybe another way of looking at this, why would we start acting like a 'good team' now? It's completely admirable to want the franchise to make 'good team' moves, but to actually anticipate it is another thing all together.

Overall I was left feeling good about the QB play. Then again in preseason they are facing vanilla D, but it's still a good sign.