Number 44

44 minutes ago, Burgold said:

Because the NFL is trying to grow its female viewership and so need to be seen as taking sexual harassment seriously.

Not seein' it.  Has nothing to do with competition, and the accused parties are already no longer with the team.  Draft picks  won't be involved.  Will there likely be a fine?  Sure.

25 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Back to football.  IF the NFLPA & NFL agree on the covid protocols; rookies are due to report this week.  Then the following week the veterans.  Only exceptions  are the Chiefs,Texans who play Sept. 10. Their players report a little earlier I think.

 

I am going switch my focus to football.  Even though I think Covid-19 will derail the season at some point; I am looking forward to see how Ron starts to shape his team.  However long football is able to be played this year; I am going to enjoy it.

 

For those hoping Snyder is on his way out in the next year; good luck with that.  I figure once the investigation by Dan's lawyer is done.  He'll make the recommended changes. Probably, see a couple of women hired in HR to deal with stuff like this.  The NFL will fine him and take a lower round draft pick or two.  That will be it.

 

Unless there's something tying Dan directly to this; I don't see him being impact personally.  Even if he knew, I don't think that would force to sell.  Now, if some of the other rumored stuff comes out with verified proof; then that's a different ball game.  I'm not pinning my hopes on it.  Any success in the future will be in spite of Dan, not because of him.

 

So, I am looking towards football; forever how brief of time we get it this year.

I don't see why any draft picks would be forfeited.

3 hours ago, Jumbo said:

"

General manager Bobby Beathard made it clear early on that he didn’t want a woman covering his team. “It messes up everything that they’re sending you out here,” he told me.

 

He was concerned about my presence in the locker room, which was the place where reporters interviewed the players. I told him I had no problems with it.

“I know you’re a nice girl and I know you don’t really want to go in there,” Beathard said.

 

I reiterated that it wasn’t an issue. I don’t think he heard me."

Perhaps I'm a bit old-fashioned and prudish, but it seems to me that, in fact, it was she that didn't hear Beathard, not the other way around.

I get the argument that women reporters make about it being a competitive disadvantage for them to not be able to get quotes from players in the locker room, but I agree with Beathard that it is simply inappropriate to allow members of the opposite sex to enter a sex-specific locker room.  People will be in various stages of undress in a locker room.  Reporters of the opposite sex of an athlete should just accept what is appropriate and get their interviews somewhere other than in the locker room, IMO.  For her to say it was OK with her is, IMO, totally beside the point.  It isn't her decision to decide that it is OK.  What if some of the players would prefer privacy or feel somewhat uncomfortable being naked in front of a woman asking them questions?  What about the players' wives and families preferring that women not be in their husband's/son's/father's presence when they were naked?  I've never really understood that; and for players to, in turn, be held accountable for anything they may say in the locker room that might offend a woman reporter seems unfair to me.  For a woman to claim to be offended that a player said something sexually suggestive or the like while she was staring at his naked body just seems bizarre, on its face.  As I said, maybe I'm just old fashioned.

I also didn't understand her story about the player that told his wife that he was out on an interview with her as a cover for his adultery, asking her to confirm that, should his wife ask.  How is that sexual harassment?  Slimy and in poor taste?  Of course.  Inappropriate?  Sure.  I would guess that, more often than not, guys committing adultery use their male friends as their cover story, rather than a female acquaintance.  That is equally slimy and inappropriate.  The reporter being a woman doesn't matter in this instance, does it?  Seems to me she should just have said, "Don't involve me in your family matters.  I'm not going to lie to your wife."  It is certainly wrong to ask such a thing of anyone of either sex, but in any case, I don't see that as being sexual harassment of the reporter.

11 hours ago, duffy said:

 

 Or maybe he just really despises LEDO pizza... 

Impossible.

2 hours ago, Burgundy Yoda said:

It's a lock. Teams are allowed 6 team captains. Terry McLaurin, Dwayne Haskins, Adrian Peterson, Jonathan Allen, Ryan Kerrigan, and Landon Collins are my guesses if we roll with 6. 

Special teams?

3 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

 

Pretty sure they do/did. At any rate, there's a thread in the Tailgate if you have more to say. More people might see it there

Hey, I didn't bring the subject up, it was someone else's "random thot."  I'm on no soapbox here.

Interestingly, I have never in my life heard anyone use the term "redskin" in a disparaging way.  I have, however, witnessed some idiots disparagingly call a native American "chief."  Yet, to my knowledge, the Kansas City team receives no protests.

6 minutes ago, Rex Tomb said:

 

W...T...F? 

 

That might be the most incoherent thing I've ever read by someone pretending to be a sports analyst.

I think source 1 had a few too many of those beers he likes before he wrote this take.

3 minutes ago, MisterPinstripe said:

With the new CBA smoking weed isn't an issue either anymore so we dont have to worry about him there.

2 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

I could be wrong, but I believe something else was increased, like the game-day active roster.

 

Yes, I believe that was increased by 2, as well.  Now 48.

2 minutes ago, CTskin said:

5th rounders don’t often turn into stud LTs, so there isn’t a ton of room for optimism... I think there’s more hope for Charles than Christian fwiw. One of the biggest problems is that we lost Callahan and TW, so I don’t know who we have that will get this kid’s head on straight. 

Few players end up being stud LTs, even 1st round picks.  Charles was taken with the second pick of the 4th round, BTW.

4 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Depth chart predictions

Final 53 Roster predictions

Whether a player is slated as a RB or a WR, could mean 1 of 2 different possible positional players being cut in order to make room for him on the roster

Didn't the new CBA increase the roster to 55?

6 minutes ago, London Kev said:

 

Lol, I've still got this on 12" vinyl.

 

For you young-uns, vinyl was what we had before cassettes.

Cassettes were what we had before CD's.

CD's were what we had before, etc, etc.

You forgot 8-tracks.  😀

3 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

I would certainly feel better with Peters than Lucas who is the definition of a journeyman.  Maybe the guy who played in Chicago is the new Lucas, maybe he really did improve that much.  But I'm not so sure.  

Hard to argue with 1 sack and zero penalties in over 500 snaps.

17 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

It's certainly a possible factor. But to me the enormous difference between Ioan and Payne or Allen on the percentage of snaps where they were double teamed still makes me lean in the direction of offenses seeing him as a bigger threat overall. I can't see him having a bit more snaps on passing downs as being the driving factor in the disparity of double team percentage. 

Interesting.  We disagree on that, as I would think that the majority of double teams vs. DT would be in pass blocking.

13 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

That's very true and my main focus wasn't necessarily so much on how many sacks Ioan had, but on how much attention opposing offenses paid to him. They clearly viewed him as a bigger threat than they did Payne and Allen since he was double teamed more than either of them by a large margin. Based on that plus the fact that he still managed to put up some pretty nice numbers of sacks and TFL at the same time to me indicates that he's currently our best interior DL player.

 

If you have a guy that pretty consistently demands double teams from offenses it will affect that offense's game plan and is on its own disruptive. That's one of the reasons Chase Young not having sacks in his last 3 games didn't bother me...I watched the games and watched the tape and those teams basically altered their entire offenses in order to stay away from him as much as possible (and he still had plenty of pressures and QB hits). Clemson's offense in that semifinal game with OSU was vastly different than their other games. They literally had to eliminate entire mid to deep route concepts and trees because of one player. 

Do you think it would be fair to say that he played on more passing downs than Allen and Payne?  Seems to me that would be a factor in your chart.  Hey, I like having the 3 of them.  I think it provides a really strong rotation at DT.

2 minutes ago, DJD2 said:

 

Lighten up Francis

Don't touch my stuff.

7 hours ago, skins2victory said:

Your score is: 38783 (GRADE: A-)

Your Picks:
Round 1 Pick 2: Chase Young, DE/OLB, Ohio State (A+)
Round 3 Pick 11 (IND): Ezra Cleveland, OT, Boise State (A)
Round 3 Pick 40 (LAR): Albert Okwuegbunam, TE, Missouri (A+)
Round 4 Pick 2: Antonio Gandy-Golden, WR, Liberty (A+)
Round 5 Pick 2: Stanford Samuels, CB, Florida State (A+)
Round 6 Pick 18 (IND): Adam Trautman, TE, Dayton (A+)
Round 7 Pick 2: Anthony McFarland, RB, Maryland (A+)

Your Future Picks:
2021 Round 1 Pick
2022 Round 1 Pick

Trautman in round 6?  I think the programming on this simulator needs some tweaking.

1 minute ago, Wyndorf25 said:

 

Some trade offers you get include future draft picks in the first rounds of coming years, so they list what you currently have plus any new picks that you may have acquired.

Gotcha, thanks.

1 minute ago, Wyndorf25 said:

 

I got some great trade offers to trade out of my 3rd round #2 pick and kept moving back, acquiring additional picks in the 4th round and an extra 5th rounder.

I'm sorry, I believe I misread the post.  It looked to me like you had added a 1st round pick in both 2021 and 2022.  Now I'm assuming that they are just showing that the Redskins have a first round pick in each of those years (which seems strange to me).  You'd think that they would only note any changes to the norm as far as future years' picks are concerned.  Or am I still reading it wrong?

51 minutes ago, Wyndorf25 said:

My personal best score. The site hasn't updated after the Kyle Allen and Quentin all-Dunbar trades yet...

 

Your score is: 41611 (GRADE: A)

Your Picks:
Round 1 Pick 2: Chase Young, DE/OLB, Ohio State (A+)
Round 3 Pick 11 (IND): Hunter Bryant, TE, Washington (A+)
Round 4 Pick 2: Chase Claypool, WR, Notre Dame (A+)
Round 4 Pick 8 (ARI): Calvin Throckmorton, OT, Oregon (A+)
Round 4 Pick 16 (IND): Zack Moss, RB, Utah (A+)
Round 4 Pick 35 (MIA): Davon Hamilton, DT, Ohio State (A+)
Round 4 Pick 36 (COMP): Stanford Samuels, CB, Florida State (A+)
Round 5 Pick 2: Lynn Bowden, WR, Kentucky (A+)
Round 5 Pick 8 (MIA): Jeremy Chinn, FS/SS, Southern Illinois (A+)
Round 7 Pick 2: Jared Rice, TE, Fresno State (A+)
Round 7 Pick 15: Khaleke Hudson, OLB, Michigan (A+)

Your Future Picks:
2021 Round 1 Pick
2022 Round 1 Pick

How did you get all these extra picks and keep pick #2?