praise_gibbs Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 omg our FO isnt dumb after all Oh, there's still time for them to mess up something else! Different screen name yet.. they are the same person. Gotta love the negative ones of the bunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatSkins27 Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 how about trading #6 and campbell for briggs and rex grossman?:laugh: DONT POST THINGS LIKE THAT HERE...Vinny may come here for FO advice and I wouldnt want that thought in his head on a dare...... Ever wonder if Vinny, Matt Millen, Al Davis and Charlie Casserly get together for a couple beers and share war stories about screwing over thier franchises? :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 The Washington Redskins' refusal to part with Rocky McIntosh may have stalled the team's proposed trade with Chicago for linebacker Lance Briggs, but at the same time sent the strongest signal yet that the 24-year-old linebacker may be an important part of the long-term plan after all. Let me get this straight: the Skins couldn't figure out that they wanted McIntosh until the Bears told them they did? If McIntosh couldn't get on the field last year, he must have looked awful in practice. Nothing has changed since then. But suddenly -- just because the Bears express some mild interest in him -- the Skins like him? This is embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurf85 Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Let me get this straight: the Skins couldn't figure out that they wanted McIntosh until the Bears told them they did? If McIntosh couldn't get on the field last year, he must have looked awful in practice. Nothing has changed since then. But suddenly -- just because the Bears express some mild interest in him -- the Skins like him?This is embarrassing. No sorry you are wrong there.Everyone knows that GW waits awhile before he starts his defensive rookies.It took ST about four or five games to start and he was the 6th pick.It took Rogers half the season to start and he was what the 9th pick.It took Rocky all away up to about week 13 or 14 to start.He was picked in the second round.If you look at it that way its not that bad.GW doesn't like to rush the rookies it helps them grow as players.Thats one thing i can say thats smart about GW.Another thing i can tell you right now that this Briggs thing was more Snyder than anything.He heard a big name and got a hard on.Thats how he is i doubt GW was asking for this trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Let me get this straight: the Skins couldn't figure out that they wanted McIntosh until the Bears told them they did? If McIntosh couldn't get on the field last year, he must have looked awful in practice. Nothing has changed since then. But suddenly -- just because the Bears express some mild interest in him -- the Skins like him?This is embarrassing. Who knows how Rocky looked in practice. What I do know is that Lindsey lost his job this offseason. If it had something to do with Rocky is any guess, but there hasn't been any doubt that the Redskins think a lot of Rocky. So, why Briggs? A chance to bring in a Pro Bowl caliber player? Why not? I never thought it was a no confidence vote in Rocky, because the Redskins had two other LB positions that didn't exactly have young bucks in there. Personally, I didn't want to see it happen, but I wouldn't have jumped out the window if it did happen, as far as the Skins offer went. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mi6 Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Wow...our front office actually not getting played? no way! gotta be something else brewing...but i hope not!! Rocky for 07 !!! It about time Gibbs and Vinny got their ****ing act together. They traded away a ton of drafts to get "losers" in the free agancy. Other than Santana Moss, noone has earned their keep. Adam Achulleta, Brandon Llyod figure prominently in the poor decisions. We gave up way too many draft picks to get Rocky (2), and Jason (3) not to have them as part of the Skins! The suggestion of a trade for Lance Briggs was just plain idiotic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 From the little we saw of Rocky in the B&G he looks like he is a 'playmaker' mentallity player. He has the speed and strength to make it happen too. Thing is you need to get it right almost all the time playing like that or it hurts the team, and may harm th elong term development of the player (further hurting the team). This is why IMO Rocky was not played more/earlier last year. He just needed time to get used to the extra speed at which the NFL is played over college. Remember in college if he makes a mistake his physical attributes may well be such to cover it. That is not the case in the NFL where all players (regardless of what we think of them) are physically gifted freaks of nature. Taylor Jacobs is a good example of someone who apparantly could do it all yet never in a real NFL game. We wouldn't want a series of rookie mistakes turning Rocky into a doubting self shadow of what he can be... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 They also thought highly of Adam Archuletta and Warrik Holdman. Not Holdman. This Bear staff got rid of Holdman a while ago. I believe his last year in Chicago was 2003, that's a couple of years before Lovie and company. As for Arch, let's wait and see how he does in Chicago before throwing dirt on him. If I were a betting man, I'd bet that Lovie will get far greater production out of him than our resident "genius". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 I still have a feeling that if Quinn falls to 6, Angelo will be calling Snyder on draft day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langford78 Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 I really want to see what this kid can do. Glad to see we're showing some sense here. Me too. It seems like our front office maybe learning from past mistakes. (fingers crossed) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Day Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 maybe the defensive staff has a plan with rocky...god i hope so I just hope it is better then the AA plan :laugh: Seriously though, thank god they are not willing to part with him, I never thought they would for less then our second back. RM is def going to be a future replacement for either LF or MW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 I remember we tried to get Holdman in 2004 and missed out then picked him up in 2005 as a back up and in resignation re-singed him again in 2006 late on when it became clear no one else would be as cheap or as "good" as Holdman. So waving Holdman as one of the many mistakes is pushing it a little . I think the sacking of Dale tells us alot about the situation in the LB corps last year and the Williams and Gibbs may have been thinking about getting Rocky into games earlier but if his possitional coach Lindsey was not getting him ready to play they had few options. As for Archuleta you think Lovie Smith can do better with him, you may be right Arculeta thrived in Smiths tampa 2 scheme and with Smith as his DC... but i think it says something about the player if they cannot adapt to Williams schemes . Lets not forget Williams has been a sucessful DC for a number of years now not just in DC but with the Titans and the Bills. He made Blaine Bishop a pro bowler and to those wanting to shove him under the bus for not making it work with Archuleta are sufferning from hateritis. Especially considering that there are so many other things to shove Williams under the bus for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Then why'd they pose the trade in the first place? Its just pure stupidity. Don't get me wrong, I DID NOT WANT BRIGGS HERE, but this whole stream of stories has me hanging my head wondering what the heck we're thinking over in our front office! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Prime Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Maybe the thought of this trade will light a fire under Rocky and he comes out killin people next season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audible_Red40 Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 With all the Briggs talk and rumours, I think I have developed a man crush for Rocky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rumpshakers Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Glad we didnt get punked. Rocky has a great upside, so I hope GW uses him wisely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorPainTrain Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 One thought I have is that the Bears counter by asking for Lemar instead of Rocky. While Lemar may have lost his starting MLB job, he provides a ton of depth at WLB, MLB, and SLB as well as a great teams player (maybe even as an extra saftey in certain packages). I never know what our FO is capable of doing, but I sure hope we let this Briggs trade die and use what we have. If Rocky is the real deal and he ends up starting, then we have Marcus, LFB, and Rocky starting with Lemar & Khary as backups. That is a pretty good LB corps. Rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 The price is already too high. I think the Redskins' staff knows this. It's not too high in the sence that Briggs might not be worth the 6th pick plus the 31st pick, but it's way to high considering Briggs wants out of there or at the least Briggs and the Bears are in a very hostile contract feud. When we had to trade Ramsey because the relationship soured, the first round pick the Jets offered a year earlier shrank to a sixth rounder. Adam Archuletta is worth way more than a sixth pick. Champ Bailey was not a hand me down who warranted extra picks from us. The Bears should be squeezed in this circumstance. We'd be doing them a favor. Briggs is a luxury, not a necessity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loxley Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Not Holdman.This Bear staff got rid of Holdman a while ago. I believe his last year in Chicago was 2003, that's a couple of years before Lovie and company. As for Arch, let's wait and see how he does in Chicago before throwing dirt on him. If I were a betting man, I'd bet that Lovie will get far greater production out of him than our resident "genius". Didnt we get Lyndsey from the Bears too? Or am i getting mixed up with Gregg Blache... I thought it was Lyndsey anyway and he said how good Holdman was... So yeah look where that all got us. As for Arch, I wouldnt be surprised if Lovie got more out of Arch, he seems to be one of those born optimists and he coached AA in St Louis I believe so he knows what his perceived strengths are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soup Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 OR the Bears Knew that the Redskins didn't want to give a player so the Bears asking for Rocky was just to STop all Trade talk between the team and had nothing to do with Rocky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McMetal Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Rocky is still sort of a mystery personality-wise, so it's tough to say how he will react to all of this. Too bad we don't have a local beat writer that could run down those types of angles. You'd like to think he would respond to the challenge, but at this point it could just as easily go south as well. I'd really like to know what the exact problems are with him - out of position? Poor decision-making? Is the defense too cerebral for him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Didnt we get Lyndsey from the Bears too? Or am i getting mixed up with Gregg Blache... I thought it was Lyndsey anyway and he said how good Holdman was... So yeah look where that all got us. As for Arch, I wouldnt be surprised if Lovie got more out of Arch, he seems to be one of those born optimists and he coached AA in St Louis I believe so he knows what his perceived strengths are. I thought we got Blache (our D-Coordinator) from the Bears? But I'm just going off memory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fifty Gut Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 this still doesn't make up for the fact they made the trade offer in the first place Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrfriedm Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Never had a doubt. :whew: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 this still doesn't make up for the fact they made the trade offer in the first place I'm with you 100%. This is a hell of a way to motivate players. "Hey Rocky, YOURE FIRED!!!! Nah, just kidding, but I want you to work harder next year." If that was the motivation, then I can just see my trust in the front office dwindling more and more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.