Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

NFL Live: Dilfer says Washington had the worst offseason


SkinsAllDay34

Recommended Posts

Isn't this the same Trent Dilfer people here praised because he showed "well, you can win a Super Bowl with a mediocre QB, right?"

Dilfer was actually a good QB. He just didn't have the measurables people look for in a franchise QB and he was already on the back end of his career. Personally I thought the ravens were idiots to let him go.

And if you are trying to compare him to Campbell, get real. They are exactly opposite.

Campbell - Prototype body and arm strength. Lot's of potential never delivered.

Dilfer - Undersized journeyman who constantly overachieved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well every other year we've had the "best" offseason. so maybe having the "worst" will actually help?

i'm not sure how signing one of the best defensive players in the league, plus a solid corner automatically gives us the worst offseason because we "overpaid". how can you overpay for someone before you see how they play on the field. if both haynesworth and hall make the pro-bowl, will we have overpaid then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think if you try and trade your starting qb not once but twice and fail, that is an epic failure for an offseason.

After the first attempt, and if they really meant to go for Mark Sanchez, they should have made damn sure that they got him.

Correct.

What's it tell you that they didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trent who? Lol. Who cares what that chump says?

Whenever I see Dilfer's name on something, I always think to myself "Wow, who does this guy think he is?" And then I laugh because whatever he says is beyond stupid.

:chair:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Got the most dominant DT in the league.

2. Resigned a pro-bowl CB, who people forget played great for us.

3. Got one of the best, if not the best pass-rusher in the draft.

4. Tried to upgrade the QB position, which has been one of the weakest spots on the offense for the past few years.

Oh noes, we did terrible.

I agree with all of these.

#2 is especially frustrating to hear the analysts criticize us on because it's as if none of them bothered to look and see how DeAngelo Hall did here and they just go by his partial season in Oakland.

He admits himself that the scheme here fits him much better than the scheme in Oakland. He has more of a chance to make plays here and is used in run support which he's good at. Not to mention he's a local guy (VA) and will be worth the money as long as he's healthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The crux is what he is sayin is we paid too much money...

HAHAHAHAHAH

money

(in Jim Mora voice)

MONEY? In washington? Give me a break, we could pay people 1 cajillion dollars and we would still

A) Be fine with the cap

B) Make money as a franchise

This aint Buffalo or Seattle where they struggle to make ends meet. Like it or not we are the kings of all things monetary.

Speaking of money....you seen what Jacksonville is paying D. Garrard? We got the same exact QB for 1/10 of the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see Dilfer's perspective.

We had a strong D last year and we improved it (how much is arguable)

We had a weak O last year. Limited production from the receivers, poor o line, declining qb and rb play as the year went on and did nearly nothing to solve the problem. The

Redskins clearly are hoping that some of the Redshirts are ready to step up and if they do than both the Oline and receiving corp will be deeper and much improved. However, if they can't... oh boy....

So, while I wouldn't choose us as the team that did the worst, I can see where the logic arises from. More, because we're such a vocal fan base dissing our team will improve ratings metrics and therefore keep their paychecks coming.

The problem with it is how do you overspend for a DT deemed to be the best in the league for the past two years?

Every team is hoping that someone steps up every year, but this year is actually the first where we've bought in competition from each position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its funny how the opinions on a commentator change when they say something negative about our team

before this comment, compared to the other analysts, judging by the posts on the site, Dilfer was doing ok for himself. lol

You are correct, Still. Though I disagree with Trent's assessment, he is quickly becoming one of my favorite analysts for reasons completely unrelated to any Redskins commentary, pro or con. These comments attacking his character and playing career because he spoke poorly of the team's spring activity are shameful. For shame, indeed! :nono:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Same guy that got a text from Farve saying NO to thinking about coming back...Trent who? is right ..He is worse than Emmit Smith was on ESPN.

At least you can understand Dilfer. Emmitt was making words up as he went along. He made me bust out laughing everytime I heard him.

And as for Dilfer, (from Wikipedia) Dilfer became very popular in Baltimore, but he was surprisingly released after the Superbowl Winning Season. With this, he became the only Super Bowl winning quarterback released the following season.

HAHA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These comments attacking his character and playing career because he spoke poorly of the team's spring activity are shameful. For shame, indeed! :nono:

Agreed. Dilfer is always pretty intelligent and articulate in his analysis. Last year he praised the team most of the year. Lets be rational for a second... he's being paid to make these analytical decisions, and the audience can either agree or disagree. It's nothing personal to Redskins fans, so why in turn attack him personally?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time will tell if Trent Dilfer is right. I personally feel Haynesworth is good but I don't feel he's worth what the Skins gave up.

Hall can be elite but he needs to earn what he's getting.

As for JC we've all debated this. I think out talent evaluators don't look at the whole picture. I think J. Cutler is good but the man played against inferior defenses behind a dominant line in a stable system that he was used to.

Jason on the other hand played in his 3rd or 4th system behind a banged up line and went up against defenses like the #1 Steelers , #2 Ravens , #3Eagles twice, #5 Giants twice, Bengals #12, 49ers #13. Thats 10 games against some of the best defenses in NFl statistically.

The Skins O-line was terrible in the 2nd half of last year but the Skins brass still didn't make serious moves to improve it IMO. I just hope last years bunch who are still banged up rise up and play above their heads this coming season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. While we might have overpaid on Hall we upgraded both sides of our lines (Haynesworth and Dockery) we added a premium draft pick. However we fumbled the Jason Campbell situation and did a piss poor job in the later rounds in the draft. overall I'd give us a B.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think the fact espn is resorting to the trent dilfers on their shows, is an example of how bad they are getting, as well as what a loser trent is. he won a super bowl on a team that was able to dominate with their defense. he has never been successful anywhere, offensively. what makes him any kind of analysts in pro football. i change the channel everytime his spot comes on. oh well, he will move on soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Twist anyway you want, the Skins tried to trade JC twice and failed.

So you must work in the Skins front office then?

From my understanding, they gauged interest, and found that it was not as great as hoped for or expected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...