The McGlouaeiouandsometimesygghhggain Kool-Aid - No thanks. I'll stick to coffee.

[Skinsinparadise]

40 minutes ago, ncr2h said:

 

In summary, the Seahawks had 3 home-run drafts in a row, which has basically set them up for all the success they've had (as well as being able to add undrafted guys like Doug Baldwin).  Since those 3 drafts, they've been pretty cold.  The Skins have had better drafts than the Seahawks starting with 2013, and we got a solid uptick with McLoughan's first class (although his second class looks awful so far - Career AV of 6 compared to the Seahawks' latest class of 15).

 

Anyway, just wanted to do a bit to quantify the point that you were making.

 

Good post.  I think the idea of savior sets up every GM to fail.   I don't think there is such a thing.   If the idea is avoiding failure -- its just not going to happen.  Every GM including even Belichick and the Pats are going to look like dummies some years.   As Bill Parcells liked to say if you are batting 500 as a GM, you are doing really well.  You will have misses.  You will actually have downright bad years in the mix.  Even with all the hoopla of the Scot hire, going through his drafts (like any other GM) he has 2 really bad drafts in that mix of time.  

 

The idea of hiring of a big reputation GM IMO is letting them do their thing without worrying about the bumps along the way.  I am not saying people shouldn't get frustrated and critical about them.  But IMO they should let the movie play out.   The 2016 draft is a prime example IMO.  Yeah no one's draft is going to look good when their first rounder gets knocked out for the season.  But it happens.  The 2nd rounder looked good in spurts -- now he's going to start at safety.  Lets see how that plays.  Fuller looked good then bad.  But a late third rounder isn't automatically a stud -- sites compile stats on this, 25% of CBs drafted in the 3rd round, work out.  Fuller has a fighting chance lets see what happens next year.  The 4th rounder, was traded for a pick next season.    The 5th rounder is a rotational DT who Cooley and some others think is coming along well -- that's actually a good pick statistically speaking.  According to one web site who does metrics 13% of 5th round DTs work out.    

 

And look I am not even saying people need to look at the 2016 draft and like it.  If they want to be pessimistic, that's fine.  But IMO let a class like this play out.  It's not a dud.  It could be a dud.  It could be successful.  There are signs of both.   But yeah if you are going to trust a GM I don't think it works to be impatient -- for example no one says a draft is evaluated in one year and if it doesn't work out, its a failure.  It's practically a cliche that a draft is evaluated in 2-3 years.

 

I got the point that this year is a big one for Scot.  I've suggested the same.  Everything is set up nicely for the kill.  Plenty of cap room, plenty of draft picks.  And the weaknesses on this team are as clear as bell.  As I've said before I'd be surprised if we don't see an aggressive off season.

[SkinsPassion4Life]

How many years in GMSM's contract?

[zoony]

4

 

Here is something else to consider. If GMSM goes crazy in FA this year will it be looked at as desperation?

 

i prefer a more measured approach to FA personally. Keep it medium

[amm0409]

6 minutes ago, zoony said:

4

 

Here is something else to consider. If GMSM goes crazy in FA this year will it be looked at as desperation?

 

i prefer a more measured approach to FA personally. Keep it medium

 

I think some will look at it as desperation, but quite frankly we do need to add Free Agents this year on defense make no mistake about it.  I don't think we go all out and try to get everybody, but we will add "some" pieces.

 

In my mind, this year is on Jay, not SM.  

[SkinsPassion4Life]

12 minutes ago, zoony said:

4

 

Here is something else to consider. If GMSM goes crazy in FA this year will it be looked at as desperation?

 

i prefer a more measured approach to FA personally. Keep it medium

 

I need something more than his first year.    Last year was pathetic.     I'm not asking for what the Giants did last year or to fire up Redskins One, but I need a somewhat aggressive GMSM

[DC9]

While ya'll are finishing up your coffee...

 

Gruden is in the last year before his lame duck year (two years left on his contract).

 

Scot traded back a ton last year and added a couple of picks to this year.

We knew a lot of Cap Space was going to be freed up this year/some decisions would need to be made.

 

Maybe... JUST maybe a grown up planned to give Gruden a good team on both sides of the football this year to see if he was worth re-signing entering the lame duck year of his contract.

 

I know it doesn't necessarily fit your narrative, and of course it's all circumstancial, but it's happening.  Let's see what happens with it.

 

If it doesn't work then Skins Passion needs to send his resume' in to the park. 

 

Just be fore-warned, when I sent my FIFA card into the England FA after they fired Sam Allerdyce, they didn't tweet nor e-mail me back.

[Est.1974]

I think the plan was always to head into this offseason with loaded cap space and draft picks to have a run at pushing the roster to the next level for the 2017 season. Problem is, Scot now has all this other crap flying around. Scot needs a lot to run in his favour over the next 3-4 months.

 

Lead coaching personal on both offense and defence, 'franchise QB' decision to make, key internal FA decisions to make, then onto wider FA and the draft. Thats a lot of calls to make right. Can't say it's not achievable but I wouldn't underestimate what's out there for him to put right in a short space of time. 

 

Lets see if he's up to the task.

[ncr2h]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Good post.  I think the idea of savior sets up every GM to fail.   I don't think there is such a thing.   If the idea is avoiding failure -- its just not going to happen.  Every GM including even Belichick and the Pats are going to look like dummies some years.   As Bill Parcells liked to say if you are batting 500 as a GM, you are doing really well.  You will have misses.  You will actually have downright bad years in the mix.  Even with all the hoopla of the Scot hire, going through his drafts (like any other GM) he has 2 really bad drafts in that mix of time.  

 

Agreed.  Even the best evaluators seem to whiff quite a bit, but they have a home run year every few years that tilts the balance in their favor.  Just as an unscientific study, I took a sample of teams to evaluate their draft history since 2010 based on the Career AV metric to see how we stack up.  I wanted to look at perennial playoff teams (I chose: Seattle, Green Bay, New England, Pittsburgh, Denver, and Cincinnati), some average teams (Redskins, Bills), and some horrible teams (Browns, Jags, 49ers).  That's a total of 11 teams.

 

In terms of overall Career AV of each of these teams' draft picks since 2010, here's the overall ranking:

 

Tier 1:

1. Seattle (789)

 

Tier 2:

2. New England (617)

3. Denver (615)

4. Cincinnati (600)

 

Tier 3:

5. Green Bay (579)

6. Pittsburgh (564)

 

Tier 4:

7. Washington (519)

8. San Francisco (511)

9. Cleveland (510)

10. Buffalo (494)

 

Tier 5:

11. Jacksonville (410)

 

I was surprised how bad our drafts have been, considering we've picked up some great players since 2010 - Williams, Reed, Cousins, Morris, and Kerrigan.  I guess the problem is that all of those guys are good, but Williams is the only perennial Pro Bowler, and we haven't had many good picks other than those guys.

 

Another thing that I noticed is that, even if you have a great year drafting, you're limited by the quality of the draft class itself.  For example, the Packers actually had the best draft class in 2013 by a very wide margin.  The problem?  2013 just wasn't that good of a year.  Just looking at the first round that year, there were just 15 Pro Bowl and 3 All Pro years for players selected in the first round (10 individual players made it, some made multiple Pro Bowls).  In 2014, a class whose players have played for 1 less season, the first rounders have already combined for 20 Pro Bowls and 6 All Pros.  By contrast, in 2011 the draft was completely loaded.  Just the first 6 picks of that draft have combined for 26 Pro Bowls and 10 All Pros.

 

So it's not just about getting a good draft class, it's also about getting a good draft class in a good year.  In 2015, we had the #1 draft class out of these 11 organizations.  We'll see how the 2015 draft class ends up stacking up against previous years.  I think it's unlikely that it will even come close to 2011, but will very likely be better than 2013.

[nemocystem]

i think it's just a matter of talent available.  a simple equation, that Scot is more skillful at executing.  you take players you like from your perspective, & then you need to put great educators in place to make the most of that talent.  Gruden, & his staff have been manageable educators to this point, but i'm not sold on how much guys are improving.  some guys improve more than most think they will....guys like Trent Murphy, or Morgan Moses, or Spencer Long...but others seem to have stagnated.  guys like Kerrigan, or Smith, or Breeland.  

 

we'll call that a wash.  

 

so...maybe we need a new staff, one that McCloughan can hand-pick?  but also...maybe it's most prudent to wait it out another year, & let things play out.  

 

so where does McCloughan fit in, exactly?  well...for me, drafts are nice.  what is different is that he takes a guy who he knows will be able to play, & if he's not perfect...at least it's someone we know we can try to mold.  he has hit on several picks, missed on others, & for just about all of them...IT'S WAY TOO SOON to start issuing pass/fail grades at this juncture.  

 

what do i like? you ask.

 

that's easy.  i like that he has been able to find UDFA's, & wandering minstrels, & he's put them on the squad at key times, & they have come in, & produced.  has he found any gems in the coal bucket?  not particularly...but he has been able to find guys who can maintain a satisfactory level of play at a much larger clip, in most cases, than their predecessors.  what this has done, is help us "stay medium," which...no...it isn't the world beater SB team many Redskins fans insanely expected within 2 short years of the pretty epic undertaking that needed to take place.  remember...we were really, really bad.  in many ways, we still are.  but we've been building positional depth.  we've been building a culture of accountability.  we've been building competition, & plugging holes left, & right.  something we never used to do...EVER.  

 

we now have a mostly complete OL.  we have, what seems, a pretty comfortable QB situation (contract nonsense aside), & we have some young defenders who can grow up with this team if we handle them right.  we now have a draft that is talent laden.  let's let Scot do his work.  let's see who he brings in via FA.  let's see if our scheme continues to fit the will of the coaches, or if the scheme starts to match the players.  

 

& no...i don't think making a few signings via FA would be panic-buying.  in fact...it's the prudent approach at this point.  we have holes to fill, holes we cannot guarantee to fill simply via the draft.  he'll have a better idea today than 4 weeks ago as to who we want to re-sign, & who we need to go after.  & these names may not suit our collective genius fan minds...but i will trust in his method.  i will trust because i understand that he's got a plan, & he knows who sits atop his big board, & who he believes he's got a real shot at landing at what positions.  we know he will go with BPA for the first 3-4 rounds, & so filling certain spots you realize you will not be able to satisfactorily draft for via FA is what i expect to see.  so if we go hard after a couple of DL (for example)...Scot may not be enamored with his early draft options at that position.  

 

i think Scot lets the market kind of point him in the right direction, & i am pleased with this approach.  i still believe we are 1-2 years away from competing.  1 if we absolutely nail this draft...but realistically 2 years from being in that SB conversation.  so i feel that any move on Scot at this point is definitely premature.  

 

am i sipping the McClougheyhighharmony? perhaps a bit...but from what we've witnessed, if it were a GM by any other name, i would feel the same.  

 

frankly...about the only guy i feel who might be rightly on the hot-seat would be Gruden.  i feel like he's getting this year as his prove-it year.  all the Scotty haters will have to wait at least another year, is my prediction.  even if Gruden fails miserably this year...i feel certain that Scot will get to bring in an entire staff of his choosing, & then we will see what happens within the next 1-2 years from there.  so we could realistically looking at another 3 years from Scot, minimum.  get cozy...stay salty...enjoy the ride.

 

HAIL

[DC9]

45 minutes ago, ncr2h said:

 

Agreed.  Even the best evaluators seem to whiff quite a bit, but they have a home run year every few years that tilts the balance in their favor.  Just as an unscientific study, I took a sample of teams to evaluate their draft history since 2010 based on the Career AV metric to see how we stack up.  I wanted to look at perennial playoff teams (I chose: Seattle, Green Bay, New England, Pittsburgh, Denver, and Cincinnati), some average teams (Redskins, Bills), and some horrible teams (Browns, Jags, 49ers).  That's a total of 11 teams.

 

In terms of overall Career AV of each of these teams' draft picks since 2010, here's the overall ranking:

 

Tier 1:

1. Seattle (789)

 

Tier 2:

2. New England (617)

3. Denver (615)

4. Cincinnati (600)

 

Tier 3:

5. Green Bay (579)

6. Pittsburgh (564)

 

Any list that has Green Bay above us is full of crap.

 

They're pathetic.

 

Ted Thompson is still living off of his decision to separate from Brett Favre and go with Aaron Rodgers.

[Skinsinparadise]

3 hours ago, zoony said:

4

 

Here is something else to consider. If GMSM goes crazy in FA this year will it be looked at as desperation?

 

i prefer a more measured approach to FA personally. Keep it medium

 

I doubt Scot goes crazy so medium is probably right.  Will see.  He's been mostly shopping at the flea market aisle of free agency.  I suspect he's going to shop in the higher end part of the store some.  The good thing about that is you are more likely to land a good player if you pay up -- the bad thing about it of course is if you miss, it hurts your cap.   Someone here mentioned D. Jax and Hatcher.  I can see some signings along those lines.

 

I suspect there might be some desperation but a good type of desperation.  That is, they know they have one of the best offenses in the league.   And if you make the defense serviceable to go along with it, they likely can make a good run next year.  To make that defense serviceable -- I don't think they can do that by going bottom fishing in FA for DT and safety.    

 

 I doubt he goes full Vinny or Jerry Reese this off season.  But I think it will more likely go this way -- you know what lets sign an actual starting safety who has had a good run lately like Tony Jefferson and pay him some decent money to lure him here versus lets see if we can take the Seattle or Denver backup safeties who were essentially special teams players and lets see if they can turnaround that position.

 

My point here is Scot is likely very aware the bargain basement FA signings are fliers -- they are hit and miss at best.  I really doubt he goes mainly to that well again.   My rationale for it is looking at the season alone -- if they even had one of these positions fixed (MLB, safety, DT) they would have likely been in the post season.  If we replaced Will Blackmon with Eric Berry IMO they would have made the post season.  If we replaced Ziggy Hood at nose with Jonathan Hankins IMO they would have made the post season.    

 

I think this might guide the mindset for example for signing a marquee DT versus are we going to get lucky with a Ziggy Hood Part 2 type.  The patch work stuff for those key positions haven't cut it.  And I think its unlikely they are going to solve everything in one draft.  Plus I'd assume Scot wants some flexibility in the draft where he doesn't have to draft according to need.  So for me it adds up to a go medium type FA -- I'd guess 2-3 medium type signings -- maybe 1 break the bank type signing if they love a player.

[nemocystem]

yeah...i have my eyes set on these FA possibilities (in no particular order):

 

1) Calais Campbell

2) Dont'a Hightower

3) Dontari Poe

4) Cordarelle Patterson

5) Trumaine Johnson

6) Stephone Gillmore

7) Luke Joeckel

8) TJ Lang

9) Chance Warmack

10) Chandler Jones

 

this is just the top 10 players with a reasonable probability of signing.  i would be more than happy if we could sign 2 off of this list while resigning a few of our key players.  i would have put Eric Berry up there...but there's absolutely no ****ing way they let him walk.  Trumaine Johnson is also a reach, but i feel a relatively possible one considering where they stand in cap-space, & the other positions they'll need to fill.  a big tell there will be if they sign DJax.

 

also the OG's may not get a look...if that happens, i suspect it's because the coaches believe they can get Kouandjio to take another step in the offseason.  DB i'm also less interested in because i feel there's good talent through the 1st 3 rounds at S, & CB.  however, if they decide to acquire a DB, & not a DL in the open market, then we could be looking at going hard after one, or more of the DL via draft.  this is going to be a fun offseason because there are so many variables, but most of them will put us in a better position towards progress.  at least, that's what i  believe. 

 

**edited** removed Te'o, replaced with Stephone Gillmore.  Te'o is a low-price option.

[Boss_Hogg]

On 1/14/2017 at 10:42 AM, cleibo2 said:

He's also drafted Earl Thomas, Kam Chancellor, Bobby Wagner, Bruce Irvin, Russell Okung, Richard Sherman, Delanie Walker, Michael Crabtree, Russell Wilson, Matt Hasselbeck, Patrick Willis, Alex Smith, Marcus Trufant, Steve Hutchison, Shaun Alexander, Golden Tate, and Preston Smith. 

 

Aside from Preston Smith, what have those other guys done for the Skins? And speaking of Preston Smith, I wish he was more consistent. Dude disappears like a fart in the wind way to frequently.

 

And you can't tell me Scot drafted all those Seahawks guys by himself, the head GM for the Seahawks is John Schneider who has a proven track record as a legit NFL GM. 

 

I like Scot and I think he's done some good things for us, but we shouldn't grovel at his feet with every roster move. Especially with names like Stephen Paea, Chris Culliver, Dashon Goldson, Jeron Johnson, Pot Roast, Tyler Larsen, Cody Booth, Ricky Jean Francois (good guy but always a stiff) Ziggy Hood, Kendell Reyes, Cullen Jenkins, Greg Toler, David Bruton, Matt Jones, Josh Doctson, Matt Ioannidis, Keith Marshall. 

 

Stephen Paea, 4 years $21 million

Chris Culliver 4 years $32 million

Dashon Goldson costed a 7th rounder plus an 8 million cap hit thanks to his massive deal with the Bucs

 

I think Scot's greatest quality is that he's not Dan's racquetball buddy 

[Warhead36]

McC was a top advisor in Seattle but he wasn't the GM. He shouldn't get credit for their team's picks(well, maybe some partial credit, but not full credit).

 

I think micro analyzing draft classes every year is cumbersome and not the way to go. You have to give draft classes time, give the kids you draft a few years to blossom and then see.

 

McC gets a full five years in my view and then we'll reevaluate from there.

[TheGreek1973]

1 hour ago, Boss_Hogg said:

 

Aside from Preston Smith, what have those other guys done for the Skins? And speaking of Preston Smith, I wish he was more consistent. Dude disappears like a fart in the wind way to frequently.

 

And you can't tell me Scot drafted all those Seahawks guys by himself, the head GM for the Seahawks is John Schneider who has a proven track record as a legit NFL GM. 

 

I like Scot and I think he's done some good things for us, but we shouldn't grovel at his feet with every roster move. Especially with names like Stephen Paea, Chris Culliver, Dashon Goldson, Jeron Johnson, Pot Roast, Tyler Larsen, Cody Booth, Ricky Jean Francois (good guy but always a stiff) Ziggy Hood, Kendell Reyes, Cullen Jenkins, Greg Toler, David Bruton, Matt Jones, Josh Doctson, Matt Ioannidis, Keith Marshall. 

 

Stephen Paea, 4 years $21 million

Chris Culliver 4 years $32 million

Dashon Goldson costed a 7th rounder plus an 8 million cap hit thanks to his massive deal with the Bucs

 

I think Scot's greatest quality is that he's not Dan's racquetball buddy 

I am with you bro.  Well said.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

On 1/16/2017 at 10:10 AM, DC9 said:

While ya'll are finishing up your coffee...

 

Gruden is in the last year before his lame duck year (two years left on his contract).

 

Scot traded back a ton last year and added a couple of picks to this year.

We knew a lot of Cap Space was going to be freed up this year/some decisions would need to be made.

 

Maybe... JUST maybe a grown up planned to give Gruden a good team on both sides of the football this year to see if he was worth re-signing entering the lame duck year of his contract.

 

I'd like to think they would give Gruden a good team on both sides of the ball regardless of which year of his contract he is in lol...

[DC9]

1 minute ago, Califan007 said:

 

I'd like to think they would give Gruden a good team on both sides of the ball regardless of which year of his contract he is in lol...

 

And yet here we are, lol.

 

This team was good enough to make the playoffs but not do much damage passed that barring Cousins morphing into his most supreme form.

 

I still didn't mind the plan from Scot, but he's going to need to step outside his comfort box this off season.

 

I was just emphasizing that it's especially important this year and it's no coincidence that we have a ton of money AND picks.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

4 minutes ago, DC9 said:

I still didn't mind the plan from Scot, but he's going to need to step outside his comfort box this off season.

 

Man, I have been thinking this exact same thing for weeks now...whoever they hire as DC, I hope they have a great feel for spotting defensive talent and influence the way this offseason proceeds.

[Skinsinparadise]

I've talked about safety on some recent posts -- recalling the coaching staff really thought Hall would be a good FS.  Found an example of it.  If the coaching staff though D. Hall would be one of the better safeties in the league -- why should have Scot gone big in FA for another one?  My other point was Joe Barry talking about not needing a traditional NT and explaining why.  Hard for me to imagine that Scot stuffed that idea down Barry's throat.    Scot talked in the past about trying to get players to please the coaching staff and their scheme.  That's his job. It's not Scot's scheme.  He's not coaching these guys.   Also as evidenced as Barry wanted Cravens at MLB whereas according to JP Finley others (assume that's Scot) saw him as a safety.  When I talked to Scot he admitted after I said such that Cravens build isn't one of a MLB.

 

I am not saying this to take shots at the coaching staff.  I am just saying It is possible that Scot thought he did land a strong safety with Cravens when he drafted him.   I don't think its a reach he was told by the defensive staff that FS is fine considering how high they seemed to be on Hall.  And the one gap D line -- don't need a NT might have been a Barry thing.  

 

Scot clearly has much more work to do to fix the defense.   But IMO the evidence on safety in particular I think points more to the coaching staff -- including Jay saying in one of his last pressers something to the effect of they underestimated the difficulty of the conversion from corner to safety.  As for the D line, when I met Scot it was crystal clear from him (I didn't have to read into it one bit) he knows its a problem and I got the vibe he's going to town to fix it. 

 

What brought all this up in my mind was reading a Tandler article just now about how he thinks they should bank on Breeland to be the FS.  My thought was are we going to go on that rodeo again?  I don't mind easing him into that role but IMO they need to sign a real FS versus do one of these corner conversions again and banking on it working out.

 

Washington Redskins 

 

✔@Redskins

Gruden on DeAngelo Hall moving to safety: "I think he's going to solidify himself as one of the top safeties in the league" moving forward.

3:12 PM - 11 Jan 2016

[lavar1156]

 

[SemperFi Skins]

20 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

Man, I have been thinking this exact same thing for weeks now...whoever they hire as DC, I hope they have a great feel for spotting defensive talent and influence the way this offseason proceeds.

 

That's why I wanted Vrabel. He's a great talent evaluator as well...

[Skinsinparadise]

http://www.espn.com/blog/washington-redskins/post/_/id/29802/redskins-no-longer-have-issues-with-salary-cap

 

The Washington Redskins have finally returned to a position of strength when it comes to the salary cap.

According to NFLPA records, the Redskins will carry over $15,055,131 into their 2017 salary cap (ESPN Stats & Information has it around $16 million).

If the cap reaches $168 million, as predicted, the Redskins could end up having approximately $65 million in available cap space -- the best spot they would be in since before their cap penalty years of 2012-13. For a team that needs to improve its defense, that’s a good place to be.

hey’ve reached this point by striking smart deals in terms of length and structure. They have signed free agents, but have not set the market the way they did once upon a time -- with the notable exception of corner Josh Norman last April. Other deals that have not worked out well haven’t destroyed their cap. They’ll have nearly $7 million in dead cap space this season thanks to failed deals with corner Chris Culliver and Stephen Paea, among others.

So it’s not a given that Washington will lead the way in free agency this offseason, though this cap space does allow the Redskins flexibility if they do want to pursue certain players. Of course, if they have to use the franchise tag on quarterback Kirk Cousins, that automatically takes $24 million of space. They could easily free up more money through cuts or pay reductions.

The Redskins also could sign Cousins to a long-term deal. Even if it averaged around $22 million a year, chances are it would not reach that figure for a couple of years. If they still have cap room at the end of next season, they could convert bonus money into salary, thereby increasing their hit in 2017 -- at a time when they can absorb it -- but limiting it in future seasons.

But this cap room is why any decision on keeping free-agent receivers Pierre Garcon and DeSean Jackson won’t come down to being unable to afford them. Both will have multiple suitors, so their price tag will start around $9 million per year, with Jackson likely being able to command more.

[nemocystem]

@Skinsinparadise

 

was just having this conversation with a buddy regarding FS.  funny how this is working out this offseason.  it's quite possibly the most important position in a modern Secondary.  the more you watch tape of competent/playoff-caliber defenses, the clearer it becomes how insanely important that position has become.  i would be very curious about moving up to acquire one of the 2 big names, with some thought to whether Peppers can pull off playing FS, & perhaps he & Su'a can interchange, should he fall that far? 

 

i half expect a 2016 Giants-esque offseason.  not nearly as big...but i feel like we can expect to land a couple of whales.  

 

i REALLY want us to non-exclusive tag Cousins though.  just dare GMs in their collective faces to sign him & give us their 1st.  if you could pull that into 2 of the players we're all talking about at 17....we should be in good shape going forward.  

 

ahhhh....pipe-dreaming, i know.  & look...i would rather keep Cousins on a reasonable long-term deal...but if he wants these astronomical numbers, i would be highly interested in taking a flier on a guy like Tyrod Taylor, or Romo (bleh), while we continue to build this team through the draft instead.

[Wyndorf25]

On 1/16/2017 at 0:34 PM, zoony said:

4

 

Here is something else to consider. If GMSM goes crazy in FA this year will it be looked at as desperation?

 

i prefer a more measured approach to FA personally. Keep it medium

 

This is sort of my whole issue with the "Let Cousins hit FA because he isn't worth the $24 mil/year" he will command argument. The Redskins are going to have PLENTY of cap dollars to spend to improve this team. GMSM traditionally does not like to bolster teams through FA signings. The argument to not spend cap dollars on Cousins because that money could be spent in FA to bolster the defense and re-sign players like Garcon and DJax doesn't hold much water with me because even if Cousins isn't signed to a long-term deal, I don't believe SM will utilize the extra cap room in FA like we all assume he will (ala the NY Giants).

 

This year the Redskins and GMSM will have PLENTY of wiggle room to sign the player HE believes will help this team win LONG TERM. If Cousins isn't that player, then you tag him with the NON-ELUSIVE player TAG and hope the Kyle-led 49ers agree to a lucrative trade deal and the Redskins lose out on quality player at the QB position in trade for the potential of difference-making players at other positions that mask the downgrade in QB-play.

 

I still hope that the Redskins can work out a long-term deal with Cousins because I DO believe that with a decent supporting cast and a decent defense that gets a lot of attention this year in FA and the Draft will allow this team to take another step towards a championship.

 

To think that this team will be better off without a competent QB at the helm accompanied by a team completely overhauled with FA signings is ridiculous...as Redskins' fans, we have seen that movie play out all too often and GMSM is not the guy to allow that to happen. Sign Cousins to a decent contract and spend money on the team were it is warranted seems to make sense to me.

 

 

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

I expect us to be active in FA, but I think a lot of people are setting themselves up for disappointment if they're expecting a Giants-esque approach.  I think there will be a lot of deals that come off early that will involve some eye popping numbers, as always.  And I think we'll steer clear of that unless we try to ink Hankins or a top ILB.  

 

A lot of people want safety help in FA, but that well looks bone ass dry from where I'm sitting.  I'm still not sure why we passed on Justin SImmons last year in the 3rd.  Great player, monster SPARQ numbers, but whatever.

 

Also, drafting the likes of Kam Chancellor/Earl Thomas/Richard Sherman is mostly a pipe dream.  They hit the freaking lottery and to expect a repeat of that is simply unrealistic.  Are we due to draft a HOF type player?  Yes we are.  We've gotta have things break our way at some point.  Believe it or not, I still hold out hope that Doctson could end up as that guy.  I'm a huge believer in his skills, no matter what he struggled with this year.  When he starts jumping through the uprights in training camp, people will change their tune.  (No need to reply with 'he needs to participate in training camp first!'  I am well aware of the hurdles that he faces)

 

We've been saying 'all we gotta do is fix the defense!' for almost a decade.  Every year we look forward to the additions, breaking down how we're gonna use our personnel packages to strike the fear of God into the rest of the league.  And yet, in my opinion, we're as bad off on that side of the ball as we've been in some time.  It's plain ugly over there.  Hopefully our new DC can instill some confidence in those guys.  It's been a rough ride.

 

I'm not losing hope, and I have faith in GMSM.  He/we just need one of those magic draft/FA years and we could get right in the mix.  I just think it's much harder to come by than some others here.  All we have to do is 'fix the defense', but unfortunately defense is half of our team.

 

Also, if I see Galette's name mentioned as a 'wild card' one more time, my head's gonna explode.