daveakl Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Dan fired Marty after one season, a season where he went 8-8 and finished on an 8-3 run. Dan is a fan of Dan being involved. Can we stop this narrative? Dan hasn't been involved for the last five years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsailand Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 You really think Dan wasn't involved in the RG3 trade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShredder Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 If nothing earth shattering happens between now and the end of the season, Griffin will be released the day the season ends. Actually NO. The skins will cut him on the last day possible and not when the season ends. They will hold his rights until the very last moment and then he will be dealt or cut. No reason to just cut bait early. However, he has played his last game for the Redskins, obviously. If you were Kirk, would you re-sign with the Skins while RG3 is still on the roster or would you tell the Skins to cut him first? Something tells me Snyder is still an RG3 fanboy. I'd want him out of here before I re-sign with the Skins. First, KC isn't and hasn't been afraid of the RG3 limited skillz that have produced the current situation for KC to be the starter. Why would he care if RG3 is on the roster or not?? I don't think he really cares who is behind him when he just started an entire season and progressed to the point of earning a new contract (and possibly a large one). The point of not wanting to deal with the RG3 issues was already dealt with. No logic says the Redskins will have anything to do with RG3 moving forward, nor that KC has any issues with being on the same team as him. He beat him out over the long haul and solidified his position as the starter for the team now and in the future. Nothing about KC is influenced by the presence or absense of RG3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 You really think Dan wasn't involved in the RG3 trade? As much as any owner would be when you are trading away what they did and picking that person to be the face of the franchise. But that he orchestrated the trade even though Mike S. didn't want it or overruled the rest of the organization for RGIII to play? Not one single bit. Notice how the "I wanted Ryan T." talk from Mike has gone away as he has failed to develop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsailand Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 As much as any owner would be when you are trading away what they did and picking that person to be the face of the franchise. But that he orchestrated the trade even though Mike S. didn't want it or overruled the rest of the organization for RGIII to play? Not one single bit. OK, so you admit he was involved. Do you agree that Dan has something to do with the fact that RG3 is still on the roster now instead of being cut after Week 4? Earlier this year, Cooley said that he had convinced three of the four people (Dan, Bruce, Scott, and Jay) who needed to approve his return to the field. Will you admit that if the owner helps decide what backup tight end to sign, the owner is still involved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Cousins will get offers in the area of 90mil. 6/90, 30-40 guaranteed. You pretty much said the same thing. I had 5yrs/$80M $30M Guaranteed - You just added a year. No way they give him 6 yrs. I was stretching at 5. Either way it's about $16M/yr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 OK, so you admit he was involved. Do you agree that Dan has something to do with the fact that RG3 is still on the roster now instead of being cut after Week 4? Earlier this year, Cooley said that he had convinced three of the four people (Dan, Bruce, Scott, and Jay) who needed to approve his return to the field. Will you admit that if the owner helps decide what backup tight end to sign, the owner is still involved? I think Cooley is in the media and will say what he wants for ratings. If any of the 4 he listed respond it generates ratings. It's more likely not a single one of them was interested and that is why he is not here. I think Dan has nothing to do with Robert still here. What's the point in cutting him? We have been through this before. If Cousins failed then they needed to see RGIII again to know what to do. If he got hurt they were drafting a qb anyway. If he stunk still then they were drafting a qb anyway. If cousins got hurt badly then revert to cousins being bad example. There was no downside to keeping him around except for what the media wanted you to believe. Admittedly Dan is involved with the team because......wait for it......He owns the team. Much like Kraft (whose son is the president) or Brown, or Jones, or every owner except maybe Ross (he lives in NY and does nothing with Miami). But does Dan influence who the 3rd string TE is or put together a package to get a top QB his coach doesn't want? A coach that has total control written into his contract? GTFO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Will you admit that if the owner helps decide what backup tight end to sign, the owner is still involved? Did they sign him? That tells you all you need to know. I totally get the snakebitten attitude towards the organization and Dan Snyder in general, but at the end of the day I think not signing Cooley at that point in time was proof that their has been a changing of the guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 RG3 "could". But RG3 cant stay healthy, read defenses and he has absolutely no pocket awareness. The stats you leave out from 2013 are that he had a 82.3 rating, was sacked 38 times and fumbled 5 times. The only team I could see him really succeeding with would be the Seahags. they run the perfect offense for him. But RG3 cant protect himself and gets battered on just about every snap. I love the guy and what he did in 2012 for us. But he is done. Also, it's interesting that 2013 was being used considering he regressed even further in 2014. He was even less of a threat running the ball, was sacked far more often, and was playing in a non-Shanahan offense (which is more comparable to what Cousins is doing in 2015). Additionally, he still was benefiting somewhat from teams fearing his running ability (simply because no one really knew what he could do after the injury), which seems to have gotten worse each year as well. The only reason to use 2013 at all would be the sample size of 13 games. Griffin is currently the QB we saw during 2014 and this pre-season. He would almost need to prove again that he's even as "good" as he was in 2013. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PortisBetts Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 He is more than likely going to get a 3-4 year deal based on what he is currently doing, front loaded, so we can cut him if he plays badly, or renegotiate if he outplays it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsailand Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Did they sign him? That tells you all you need to know. I didn't say Snyder was exercising total control. But he was involved in the decision process, even though he ultimately let Scott veto Cooley. He will, unfortunately, be involved in the Kirk Cousins salary negotiations. There are a bunch of possibilities, all bad: - He falls in love with Kirk, Kirk's agent figures it out, and takes us to the cleaners. I too would love to see Kirk play another five years in a Redskins uniform, but not if it means we can't afford to surround him with talent. Cousins is not yet at the Drew Brees level, and maybe never will be, so let's not pay him like he is. - The opposite problem: He isn't willing to pay what Cousins is worth. I could easily see him imposing a maximum salary that Scott isn't allowed to negotiate above. Now just look at this thread: at least half the posters are utterly clueless about what a decent starting QB commands, or don't think Cousins is a real starting QB. Dan Snyder has shown himself many times to be dumber than the average football fan, so perhaps we should expect "I'd offer him a 3 year, $21 million contract with $10 million guaranteed" from him, and Kirk walks. - Negotiations fail. Scott wants to use the franchise tag. Snyder thinks $21M (or whatever it turns out to be) for one year is too much when we still have RG3 for just $16M. Kirk walks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Man, some of you guys would argue with a fence post if it sat there long enough. I don't think getting a deal done with Kirk is gonna be very easy to do. I think what the FO is gonna offer him will be below what he would make on the open market, which is always QB needy. I think Cousins has the leverage here because I feel like we need him more than he needs us. So if we offer him an incentive laden shorter term (3-4yr) deal, I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't sign it and we use the franchise tag on him. I think we're in a tough spot. I think Cousins has done enough to earn the right to be our QB during the rebuild, but I'm not super confident that he's done enough to be the QB after the rebuild. He certainly has a chance to prove he's the long term guy, but we'll be making the decision on that before we know for sure. I'm trying to think of a QB that was solid, got paid franchise type money, and then blossomed into a franchise guy. Nobody really comes to mind. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. I just hope we have an enjoyable end to the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I didn't say Snyder was exercising total control. But he was involved in the decision process, even though he ultimately let Scott veto Cooley. He will, unfortunately, be involved in the Kirk Cousins salary negotiations. There are a bunch of possibilities, all bad: - He falls in love with Kirk, Kirk's agent figures it out, and takes us to the cleaners. I too would love to see Kirk play another five years in a Redskins uniform, but not if it means we can't afford to surround him with talent. Cousins is not yet at the Drew Brees level, and maybe never will be, so let's not pay him like he is. - The opposite problem: He isn't willing to pay what Cousins is worth. I could easily see him imposing a maximum salary that Scott isn't allowed to negotiate above. Now just look at this thread: at least half the posters are utterly clueless about what a decent starting QB commands, or don't think Cousins is a real starting QB. Dan Snyder has shown himself many times to be dumber than the average football fan, so perhaps we should expect "I'd offer him a 3 year, $21 million contract with $10 million guaranteed" from him, and Kirk walks. - Negotiations fail. Scott wants to use the franchise tag. Snyder thinks $21M (or whatever it turns out to be) for one year is too much when we still have RG3 for just $16M. Kirk walks. No idea why you're convinced Snyder would be involved with the Cousins salary negotiations. For one, he's never, ever, ever blinked at signing any check so he wouldn't impose a cap like you posit above. Secondly, we have a real GM, a president that is more of a money guy and public face than talent scout, and cap guys. They will be the ones dealing with the contract, not Snyder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I didn't say Snyder was exercising total control. But he was involved in the decision process, even though he ultimately let Scott veto Cooley. He will, unfortunately, be involved in the Kirk Cousins salary negotiations. There are a bunch of possibilities, all bad: - He falls in love with Kirk, Kirk's agent figures it out, and takes us to the cleaners. I too would love to see Kirk play another five years in a Redskins uniform, but not if it means we can't afford to surround him with talent. Cousins is not yet at the Drew Brees level, and maybe never will be, so let's not pay him like he is. - The opposite problem: He isn't willing to pay what Cousins is worth. I could easily see him imposing a maximum salary that Scott isn't allowed to negotiate above. Now just look at this thread: at least half the posters are utterly clueless about what a decent starting QB commands, or don't think Cousins is a real starting QB. Dan Snyder has shown himself many times to be dumber than the average football fan, so perhaps we should expect "I'd offer him a 3 year, $21 million contract with $10 million guaranteed" from him, and Kirk walks. - Negotiations fail. Scott wants to use the franchise tag. Snyder thinks $21M (or whatever it turns out to be) for one year is too much when we still have RG3 for just $16M. Kirk walks. Over half the posters? One idiot made that claim and was discarded by virtually everyone. Serious exaggeration. Also, these Dan Snyder in meddlesome and stupid narrative needs to stop. He may be an asshole sometimes, but make no mistake Dan Snyder is a very bright guy. So please stop with that. Also, he has not been involved in personnel decisions since Joe G. 2. He has let the football people make the decisions. That is straight from the HCs themselves. It's kind of like all the stupid reports about Kirk and RGIII can't be in the same room together only to find out they take bible study together every week. It's all media propagated BS. Has he helped the guys get the players they wanted signed?, Yes. But honestly, if anyone decides to let Kirk walk it's most likely to be SM, not DS. He is putting a model in place. A model that is very much like the NE Patriots. They do not over pay for players, If you look at the contracts he got signed this offseason, the only one you might question as being excessive is Culivers, but that was mostly whining from people who just want to complain. All those contracts are pretty team friendly. I would expect Kirk's to be the same, fair pay for Kirk and still team friendly. I originally had 5 yrs $16M/yr with a $30M signing bonus. I think I am revising my estimation to more like $19M/yr for 5 yrs with $35M guaranteed. Barring a complete collapse of his making, he has earned it. Dan Snyder has been said by Joe G and MS to very helpful with the agents as he has a decent working relationship with most of them. That's a lot different than being meddlesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Kirk walks. Along with Scott, Jay, Bruce and the fan base. Snyder literally has painted himself into a corner. He cannot allow Kirk to leave under any circumstance. I think this means about a 90% chance of him being franchised. If Kirk has a monster 2016, the contract will be the largest for a QB ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Guys its not 2008 with Jim Zorn and Vinny at the helm. I wonder if some of you will ever catch up to the times. Dan hired a real GM for a reason. Dan's name hasn't been mentioned in any legitimate capacity since Scott joined the Redskins. It's refreshing, you should breathe it in a little bit. Griffin would have started the season as QB for the Redskins if he was interfering in any capcity. You live in a hole if you believe that GM's and coaches all over the league for winning and losing franchises don't have to run big decisions such as the starting QB by the owner. Kirk not being signed to a new deal has nothing to do with Griffin or Snyder as much as you would like to believe that. I'm confident that if Kirk walks it will have less to do with Snyder meddling and more to do with Scott not being convinced that he's worth the contract he's seeking. You guys kill me with this BS that we have to pay him whatever he desires because someone else will. This is the exact mindset the prior cronies running the ship held in regards to signing free agents. I realize the high of 2012 followed by the crash and burn of 2013 and 2014 has folks excited to see an offense that actually moves this season. However, we aren't the greatest show on turf and still hold a sub .500 record. Take a deep breath, relax....Scott's got this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsailand Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Over half the posters? One idiot made that claim and was discarded by virtually everyone. Serious exaggeration. Here are some more examples from this thread. Not calling out individual posters, so no attributions. October 26 (right after the Bucs game): (paraphrasing) 2-3 years, ~3-5 M per year. Between 4 & 5 million per x 3 years max. I would need to see him play 2 full seasons as starter before offering him a long term contract. I would give him a one year deal with an option for a second year. The pay range would be on your salary scale: Stewards - maybe $4 million" If he finishes in the top 10 QB's, he's going to be a 10-12 million per year guy. If we don't offer him that, somebody likely will. I'd offer him a 3 year, $21 million contract with $10 million guaranteed. It would start at $5 mil in year one and go up $2 each year there after. This should allow us to get out of with a little pain in year 2, and almost no pain in year 3. I'd put that somewhere 7-12 m per. The exact number is based on his play. He has to show quite a bit more for someone to commit 10+ mil to him for multiple years. If he keeps up his good Kirk/bad Kirk play than he'll see somewhere around $5 mil per. I think 3/30 is solid Nobody's giving him $10+ mil per season unless he has comeback victories every other week for the rest of the year. t I would say something like 3 years for $28 million. I expect an incentive based deal with an opt out in here years. It will average 8-10 mill per season with 12 mill bonus. If he plays up and down rest of way, more like 6-8 mill on 1-2 year prove it deal. If the season ended today, I'd maybe offer a 2-3 year deal worth $10-15M total (average of about $5M). he has not been involved in personnel decisions since Joe G. 2. He has definitely been involved. He has not been exercising total control, Jerry Jones style, which is an improvement over what we had in the early years. Griffin would have started the season as QB for the Redskins if he was interfering in any capcity. The fact that Griffin got as far as he did in preseason shows that Dan was meddling. Eventually things got bad enough that Scott was able to persuade Dan to let Jay start the guy Jay has wanted to start since 2014. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 orr Here are some more examples from this thread. Not calling out individual posters, so no attributions. October 26 (right after the Bucs game): (paraphrasing) 2-3 years, ~3-5 M per year. Edit per the rules..... He has definitely been involved. He has not been exercising total control, Jerry Jones style, which is an improvement over what we had in the early years. The fact that Griffin got as far as he did in preseason shows that Dan was meddling. Eventually things got bad enough that Scott was able to persuade Dan to let Jay start the guy Jay has wanted to start since 2014. Sorry but that's still no where near half the posters. Yes it's, more than one. But it's no where near half. I guess you need to define what you see as involved. Joe Gibbs stated specifically as did Mike Shanahan that he never at anytime said you need to get this player or play that player. The coaching staff would decide who they wanted and Dan would help them get those players. So either Joe Gibbs is a liar and you are right or you are wrong (if it was just MS I would call in suspect). I am banking on you being wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Mike Shanahan is that you? Still pushing the "It was Dan not me" narrative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I seem to recall Scott saying early on in his tenure that you don't give up on a Heisman trophy winning QB that won the division as a rookie. Shortly thereafter, Gruden showed up at the combine and named Griffin the starter. Over the summer, Scott signed off on his extension. There is absolutely nothing factual about your theory that Robert was named starter and played a few preseason games due to Dan meddling. While I know Roberts poor play PO'd alot of you, this is still a business. In a business where you make a hefty investment, you can't just dump it overnight. Robert being dumped in the preseason and delegated to scout team safety and inactive on Sundays says a whole lot more about where we are going than the fact that he was named starter prior to training camp. In relation to this thread, let's say the Skins do give Kirk the contract you believe he deserves. Its a 5/6 year deal and then next year he falls flat on his face and his arrow is no longer pointing up. Unless the contract is created to allow for dumping him with minimal impact to the team, you can guaruntee Kirk will get another season to prove his worth. Big investments that require alot of money and/or draft picks are going to get more rope than they probably deserve. But thats just the way it goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbunny Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 He has definitely been involved. He has not been exercising total control, Jerry Jones style, which is an improvement over what we had in the early years. The fact that Griffin got as far as he did in preseason shows that Dan was meddling. Eventually things got bad enough that Scott was able to persuade Dan to let Jay start the guy Jay has wanted to start since 2014. The fact that the owner is not involved at all in his franchise is as frightening as the owner meddling in play calling and starting lineup... You need the owner to be involved in the process of hiring guys, be them GMs, President, HC, or whatever. You need him to have an overview of what's going on in the building. Heck, I wouldn't even have a problem with Dan telling Scott: "No, you don't sign Greg Hardy, I don't want that kind of guy on my team, find somebody else". A blind owner is even worse.He has every rights to give advice on some subjects, and have a veto when he feels needed. What I don't want him to do is: - Make draft picks. - Make starting lineup. - Sign FA, except those with off field issues that can be detrimental to the team. If you work in a company and your boss doesn't know what the **** is going on in is company, he's a terrible boss. So Dan have to be involved, up to some point. And I do think it's been a long time since he haven't been involved in all of those things above. Regarding the RG3, I believe it's as simple as Jay said: He said it to not be bothered by the same question every day: "Who's gonna be starting?" He most probably informed players in private, and kept it in house. Hopefully, we're not the one making the call on Cousins. Scott and Jay will, Bruce will be involved as well, and Dan will be overlooking this closely has he's the one signing checks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsailand Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Mike Shanahan is that you? Still pushing the "It was Dan not me" narrative? It was all of them. (Maybe not Kyle.) The decision to make the worst trade in Redskins history was made jointly by Dan (knows nothing about football), Bruce (not a real GM), and Mike (good coach, not much of a personnel guy). All three of them were involved. I think some people in this thread need to look up the dictionary meaning of that word. By the way, Bruce was hired by Dan, and Mike was hired by Dan and Bruce together. There wasn't a real GM in the room with them, because Dan didn't hire one, because that's what Dan wanted. Now we have a real GM, one who won't sign off on trading four high picks for ESPN's flavor of the month. But Dan is still involved. He is involved more than any owner should be, especially an owner with his horrific track record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 He is involved more than any owner should be, especially an owner with his horrific track record. Again, a statement that you cannot support with any facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveakl Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 For the love of god. The trade was for a Heisman winning qb that won the rookie of the year, took his team as a rookie to the playoffs, won his division, and had his team up 14-0 in the playoffs before being injured. Remove the salary cap penalty and who knows what happens. Stop pushing some fake narrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 For the love of god. The trade was for a Heisman winning qb that won the rookie of the year, took his team as a rookie to the playoffs, won his division, and had his team up 14-0 in the playoffs before being injured. Remove the salary cap penalty and who knows what happens. Stop pushing some fake narrative. Right. If I had the time, I'd love to go back and see what folks were saying back then. Even the talking heads applauded the move at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.