The (only!) official ES all things Kirk Cousins should we shouldn't we off-season thread.

[Warhead36]

I don't think Cousins having a drop in production when his best receiver, a legit elite top 3 TE, is out of the lineup, is a fair argument to use against him. Just about every QB will see their #s drop when a star like that is out of their lineup. I'd love to see Ryan's stats without Jones, or Rodgers without Nelson, or Dalton without Green, etc. etc. Hell I'm pretty sure even Brady's #s dropped off quite a bit when Gronk got hurt(but again he's Brady, they can still win a Super Bowl).

[JSSkinz]

1 hour ago, stevenaa said:

There is no upside to the team coming to a long term deal yet,  and there's no benefit to Kirk doing that.  

 

 

There's no benefit to KC signing a quick LTD but I think the Redskins could benefit by signing him quickly.  I guess the front office needs to weight how much money they will lose by not having a longer negotiation period vs how many free agents they will lose a chance at signing because they dragged out the process and those free agents won't want to commit their future to a Kirkless Redskins team that will win between 4-6 games next year. 

 

 

 

 

[PartyPosse]

53 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I don't think Cousins having a drop in production when his best receiver, a legit elite top 3 TE, is out of the lineup, is a fair argument to use against him. Just about every QB will see their #s drop when a star like that is out of their lineup. I'd love to see Ryan's stats without Jones, or Rodgers without Nelson, or Dalton without Green, etc. etc. Hell I'm pretty sure even Brady's #s dropped off quite a bit when Gronk got hurt(but again he's Brady, they can still win a Super Bowl).

The difference is many of these guys (Ryan, Brady etc) were playing at a high level before their #1s got there. We have yet to see if Cousins can play at a high level for an extended period of time without his #1. Not that it matters really.

[TSO]

3 hours ago, Taylor703 said:

@thesubmittedone I'm basing my argument off of the teams reluctance to hash out a deal with Kirk. I mean there's no middle ground. Kirk has basically made it known he's not taking a discount, which I don't think he should, but the team clearly has reservations about giving him the deal he wants. I ultimately think they will hash out a deal but the teams silence speaks volumes on this front. At least in my opinion. 

 

Then you're basing your feelings off something that's conspiratorial like the RG3 stuff. Don't care which one is worse, it's still "lame ass conspiracy theories". An argument can be made for either one if you want to go there, but they'll both be based on speculation. 

 

First off, you didn't say "reluctance", you said they don't "value him as highly as some fans do". I'm going to assume that by "reluctance" you mean that the team doesn't value him like some fans do who want them to pay him now.

 

I've explained in that post pretty clearly why that's not necessarily true and why it's a "lame ass conspiracy theory" to assume so as well. 

 

I guess I'll try again.

 

Essentially, you're theorizing that the team being driven by deadlines and/or applying the franchise tag is devaluing him (and I get the sense you think they devalue him like you do yourself). Oh, and their "silence" as well... which is so heavily based on nothing but speculation I'm just going to ignore you said that. 

 

It's just as reasonable to believe, for instance, that the team thinks Kirk is worth whatever he's asking for, but that they'll gain an advantage and drive down the price as much as they can by using the tag - which gives them the time they need to see the QB market diminish or get set in their favor as the offseason goes on. They won't be the first team to employ that tactic with a player. 

 

That would have no bearing on how highly they value him, it'd just mean they're employing a strategy they think will benefit the team. They could be willing to pay him, in the end, whatever it takes (because they know he's worth it and that still benefits the team) but would rather take a mitigated risk to see if they can save a little bit. 

 

Or maybe not. Either way, my point was that you're contradicting yourself by claiming one is a "lame ass conspiracy theory" and yours isn't. It is. And I get the sense that you want to apply your own beliefs regarding Kirk to how the team perceives his value. 

[wit33]

@thesubmittedone

 

We do know that what Kirk and reps felt his value was didn't match that of what the organization felt last year, right? 

 

Or...

 

is your thinking all was good last year in negotiations?

 

Admittedly I do believe there was some contention between both sides and that Kirk wanted a long term deal last year. This year he doesn't give a damn, due to leverage and having the gumption to exercise it. 

 

Just want to better understand your thoughts on what transpired last year. 

[CapsSkins]

On 2/25/2017 at 4:32 AM, Taylor 36 said:

Sorry to quote the screen capture here, but it is necessary for my point.  Our QB's name is KIRK, not KURT.  Nice try at a fake text.  Fake News reigning supreme around here, I guess. 

 

Not sure if you're being serious 

[DC Lumber Co.]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

@thesubmittedone

 

We do know that what Kirk and reps felt his value was didn't match that of what the organization felt last year, right? 

 

Or...

 

is your thinking all was good last year in negotiations?

 

Admittedly I do believe there was some contention between both sides and that Kirk wanted a long term deal last year. This year he doesn't give a damn, due to leverage and having the gumption to exercise it. 

 

Just want to better understand your thoughts on what transpired last year. 

 

The team wanted him to prove it for one more year. Simple as that. It was always going to be the franchise tag and the only way they would sign him to a multi year deal is if it was at a ridiculous value for the team that wouldnt hurt them long term if he ended up not proving it, hence the one and only "insulting" offer that they did make.

 

Literally nothing has happened. People freaking out and thinking that if we don't work a LTD out before we place the tag on him = he's gone, are really jumping to conclusions for no reason. He proved it, we've come out and expressed our intent that we want him back, and now its simply the standard posturing and back and forth that happens with any negotiation. We will franchise tag him and continue hashing out a deal up until the deadline. It will ultimately get done.

 

[DC Lumber Co.]

7 hours ago, bobandweave said:

That means for 2 second round picks he gets his QB and another dominating elite player.

 

He will wait a year for Kirk if we play hard ball. Might as well do the deed this off season so we can get picks back instead of losing him for nothing

 

 

Don't know where you got this idea that Kirk's value in trade would be one or even two 2nd rounders. If RG3, Sam Bradford, and numerous other recent QB trades demand a 1st round pick to be included, Kirk would be no different. 

 

And actually, we wouldnt lose him for nothing. Even in the unlikely scenario that we don't get a deal done this year, we can still get compensation for him via the transition tag next offseason. Sure, it wouldnt be as much as we would get now, but teams would be more than happy to bid for his rights instead of having to battle against other teams and the waiver wire.

[TSO]

4 hours ago, wit33 said:

@thesubmittedone

 

We do know that what Kirk and reps felt his value was didn't match that of what the organization felt last year, right? 

 

Or...

 

is your thinking all was good last year in negotiations? 

 

Just want to better understand your thoughts on what transpired last year. 

 

You really don't get tired of this dance do you? 

 

You're posing questions that are in and of themselves assumptions at best and falsehoods at worst. 

 

Why does your first statement automatically mean negotiations were "bad". That that's the only other option? 

 

You see, both parties were perfectly content on the tag. That doesn't have to mean the team didn't value him highly nor does it mean Kirk and his reps didn't understand it or that they valued themselves higher than that. 

 

A long term deal last year, under those circumstances, wasn't the only thing that'd define "value" for either side. 

 

You probably won't understand this simple concept or you'll just be stubbornly unwilling to accept its legitimacy. 

[wit33]

11 minutes ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

The team wanted him to prove it for one more year. Simple as that. It was always going to be the franchise tag and the only way they would sign him to a multi year dear is if it was at a ridiculous value for the team that wouldnt hurt them long term if he ended up not proving it, hence the one and only "insulting" offer that they did make.

 

Literally nothing has happened. People freaking out and thinking that if we don't work a LTD out before we place the tag on him = he's gone, are really jumping to conclusions for no reason. He proved it, we've come out and expressed our intent that we want him back, and now its simply the standard posturing and back and forth that happens with any negotiation. We will franchise tag him and continue hashing out a deal up until the deadline. It will ultimately get done.

 

 

Speaking for myself personally, I'm not freaking out about it; It's just current Redskin news that's not yet been settled. 

 

With that said, nothing you said is based on facts or known information. This is why I phrased the question to other poster in a way that asked him his interpretation or thoughts on it. No one here is breaking news or has insider info on this topic. 

 

History suggests a deal will get done like you say, but history also tells us Qbs don't get franchised. 

[wit33]

3 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

You really don't get tired of this dance do you? 

 

You're posing questions that are in and of themselves assumptions at best and falsehoods at worst. 

 

Why does your first statement automatically mean negotiations were "bad". That that's the only other option? 

 

You see, both parties were perfectly content on the tag. That doesn't have to mean the team didn't value him highly nor does it mean Kirk and his reps didn't understand it or that they valued themselves higher than that. 

 

A long term deal last year, under those circumstances, wasn't the only thing that'd define "value" for either side. 

 

You probably won't understand this simple concept or you'll just be stubbornly unwilling to accept it's legitimacy. 

 

What dance, it's football talk in a sports thread. Who cares.

 

You got me there, as I really don't have factual evidence of Kirk and reps declining a long term offer last year. Maybe they both decided a franchise tag was fine (seriously, this could be right). I have heard Kirk share that he's like to be somewhere long term though. 

 

Talk football, don't concern yourself with other nonsense. You bozo.

[DC Lumber Co.]

7 hours ago, bobandweave said:

Also, if hit does not work he will not be able to recover - So you don't believe in Kirk then? Why wouldn't it work there when we are discussing a player we want to sign ourselves? Time to stop that narrative or admit that Kirk's not worth what he's asking for here if he's a question mark about working out or not. 

 

 

You're ignoring the possibility that if Kirk goes to  a team like the niners, with no weapons and a terrible offensive line that it could hurt his confidence, production, and possibly stunt his development. It happens to QBs all the time, and is arguably the main reason why "sure-fire" rookie QBs don't live up to their potential year after year. We've seen so many stories with the narrative: "You have to wonder how great he could have been if he was in a better situation"

 

People accepting the possibility that Kirk could not pan out for another team under different circumstances (like those mentioned above) does not mean at all that they don't believe in him. There are too many factors that contribute to a QBs success to act like its black and white the way you are to make your point. 

 

With that said, Kirk is worth every penny that he is asking for. I'm actually angry at myself for entertaining these ignorant, baseless scenarios.

 

Kirk will he here on a long term contract which will be signed in the 11th hour after a long and difficult negotiation process that will get serious after we place the franchise tag on him.

 

In a doomsday scenario where Kirk changes his tune and says he won't sign a LTD...He will play his final season for the Redskins under a second franchise tag and then we will get what we can via the transition tag next offseason.

 

Sorry to break the bad news to all the fans that think its "now or never"

 

... man, I really need to stop feeding the trolls.

[DC Lumber Co.]

38 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Speaking for myself personally, I'm not freaking out about it; It's just current Redskin news that's not yet been settled. 

 

With that said, nothing you said is based on facts or known information. This is why I phrased the question to other poster in a way that asked him his interpretation or thoughts on it. No one here is breaking news or has insider info on this topic. 

 

History suggests a deal will get done like you say, but history also tells us Qbs don't get franchised. 

 

I will agree that he first paragraph of the post is not facts or known information. Just like no one can claim that the "facts" were that negotiations were "bad" last year either. Its my interpretation of what took place which I feel is much more rational and makes sense. Other theorys seem to be largely based on the idea that the front office is still a clown show and we don't know what were doing or that Dan is still meddling, all because thats what the fanbase defaults to when we are left to speculate without real news on a situation. 

 

But as you said yourself. History suggests that the deal will get done, and that is factual information. History also suggests that placing a franchise tag on a player happens all the time while working towards a long term deal and doesn't preclude a trade. These simple facts keep getting ignored when people want to drum up drama that "OMGZ KURT NEEDS TO BE TRADED NOW, HE WILL NEVER SIGN A LTD, ANOTHER TAG MEANS WERE DOOMED"

[TSO]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

What dance, it's football talk in a sports thread. Who cares.

 

You got me there, as I really don't have factual evidence of Kirk and reps declining a long term offer last year. Maybe they both decided a franchise tag was fine (seriously, this could be right). I have heard Kirk share that he's like to be somewhere long term though. 

 

Talk football, don't concern yourself with other nonsense. You bozo.

 

It's a dance you've been doing regarding "football on a sports thread". 

 

And you just showed you didn't understand what I was getting at with your post. Declining a long term offer and/or Kirk wanting one doesn't change anything relating to what I said. It doesn't diminish the value of the tag perceived by either side nor the circumstances of which it made sense. 

 

As for your last (completely unnecessary) statement, be careful.

 

You're fortunate I'm going to assume you're not being insulting and that you're calling me bozo jokingly, but I was talking football and calling out your dance relating to football talk here with Kirk includes that. That's not nonsense and I'll absolutely concern myself with it, especially as a Mod that cares about the way discussions and discourse happen here - as is part of my job. 

 

Understood?  

 

If I get anything other than a yes on that it's going to cost you. I hate to be like that, but I've just had it with the direction this board is going in lately. You bozo.  

[wit33]

5 minutes ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

But as you said yourself. History suggests that the deal will get done, and that is factual information. History also suggests that placing a franchise tag on a player happens all the time while working towards a long term deal and doesn't preclude a trade. These simple facts keep getting ignored when people want to drum up drama that "OMGZ KURT NEEDS TO BE TRADED NOW, HE WILL NEVER SIGN A LTD, ANOTHER TAG MEANS WERE DOOMED"

 

QBs on franchise tags is uncommon is what I was saying. 

[HTTRDynasty]

3 hours ago, Warhead36 said:

I don't think Cousins having a drop in production when his best receiver, a legit elite top 3 TE, is out of the lineup, is a fair argument to use against him. Just about every QB will see their #s drop when a star like that is out of their lineup. I'd love to see Ryan's stats without Jones, or Rodgers without Nelson, or Dalton without Green, etc. etc. Hell I'm pretty sure even Brady's #s dropped off quite a bit when Gronk got hurt(but again he's Brady, they can still win a Super Bowl).

 

You might be surprised.

 

Again, it's not about the production dropping, it's about how severe the drop is.  The drop for Cousins with and without Reed at full health has to be concerning to the FO, especially considering the fact that Reed is likely one or two concussions away from retirement.

 

 

I had some time on my hands, so I compiled the stats for the QBs with their elite WRs/TEs in the line-up vs. without.  This is for the past 5 years of regular season games where a QB has started with or without his elite weapon.

 

Matt Ryan w/ Julio - 79 games:

66.6% completion percentage

294 YPG

1.87 Passing TDs per game / 0.01 Rushing TDs per game

0.80 INTs per game

99.65 passer rating

 

Matt Ryan w/o Julio - 17 games:

66.5% completion percentage

259 YPG

1.53 Passing TDs per game / 0.12 Rushing TDs per game

1.00 INTs per game

94.73 passer rating

 

 

Tom Brady w/ Gronk - 71 games:

64.25% completion percentage

288 YPG

2.11 Passing TDs per game / 0.10 Rushing TDs per game

0.51 INTs per game

100.99 passer rating

 

Tom Brady w/o Gronk - 21 games:

63.05% completion percentage

303 YPG

2.14 Passing TDs per game / 0.14 Rushing TDs per game

0.62 INTs per game

100.77 passer rating

 

 

Matt Stafford w/ Calvin - 87 games:

61.04% completion percentage

282 YPG

1.79 Passing TDs per game / 0.13 Rushing TDs per game

1.08 INTs per game

87.02 passer rating

 

Matt Stafford w/o Calvin - 22 games:

63.29% completion percentage

263 YPG

1.41 Passing TDs per game / 0.14 Rushing TDs per game

0.64 INTs per game

90.55 passer rating

 

 

Andy Dalton w/ Green - 83 games:

62.63% completion percentage

237 YPG

1.59 Passing TDs per game / 0.18 Rushing TDs per game

0.88 INTs per game

91.42 passer rating

 

Andy Dalton w/o Green - 10 games:

63.59% completion percentage

253 YPG

1.00 Passing TDs per game / 0.30 Rushing TDs per game

1.00 INTs per game

86.55 passer rating

 

 

Kirk Cousins - Last Two Years ( since some posters here are so quick to discount his 2013 and 2014 seasons):

 

Kirk Cousins w/ Healthy Reed - 23 games:

70.19% completion percentage

292 YPG

1.91 Passing TDs per game / 0.22 Rushing TDs per game

0.57 INTs per game

107.39 passer rating

 

Kirk Cousins w/o Reed or with Injured Reed - 9 games:

63.41% completion percentage

262 YPG

1.11 Passing TDs per game / 0.44 Rushing TDs per game

1.11 INTs per game

85.58 passer rating

 

Cousins is basically equivalent to Andy Dalton without his elite weapon.  Andy Dalton is making $16 million per year, with $17 million guaranteed.

[PartyPosse]

That's as good a stat post regarding Kirk as I've seen. Well done HTTR

[wit33]

41 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

It's a dance you've been doing regarding "football on a sports thread". 

 

And you just showed you didn't understand what I was getting at with your post. Declining a long term offer and/or Kirk wanting one doesn't change anything relating to what I said. It doesn't diminish the value of the tag perceived by either side nor the circumstances of which it made sense. 

 

As for your last (completely unnecessary) statement, be careful.

 

You're fortunate I'm going to assume you're not being insulting and that you're calling me bozo jokingly, but I was talking football and calling out your dance relating to football talk here with Kirk includes that. That's not nonsense and I'll absolutely concern myself with it, especially as a Mod  that cares about the way discussions and discourse happen here - as is part of my job. 

 

Understood?  

 

If I get anything other than a yes on that it's going to cost you. I hate to be like that, but I've just had it with the direction this board is going in lately. You bozo.  

 

You lost me on the Kirk stuff. It seems you are choosing to take everything at face value and that's certainly your right. 

 

I chose "bozo" vs. "You probably won't understand this simple concept". 

 

YES, I was joking.  

 

In my view, your approach to debates on this board do not represent that of some one who is concerned with the direction of discourse and discussions. 

 

 

 

 

 

[TSO]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

In my view, your approach to debates on this board do not represent that of some one who is concerned with the direction of discourse and discussions. 

 

I'll take that as a compliment coming from you. If you thought I was doing something right I'd be worried. My frustrated approach with a few lately doesn't negate the years I've had here of amicable discussion and fruitful discourse, so I don't need to hear that from someone who's brought little to this conversation or debate regarding Kirk outside of a crazy amount of posts regurgitating the same speculation. 

 

I asked you if you understood why I said what I said to you and that anything other than a yes wouldn't suffice. So have it your way. 

 

By the way, if you're coming at me like this because you think I changed your avatar, I didn't, it wasn't me. I'm not the only Mod you've annoyed and you could've changed it at any time. But it's deserved at this point and you've earned what you're going to get now, too. Enough is enough. 

 

As for me taking things at "face value", that's entirely my point in the first place. Which you had to know all too well, but just couldn't help yourself. Everything else is theory and speculation, which is exactly what I was addressing with @Taylor703 when you inserted yourself. 

[RemoveSnyder]

1 hour ago, jschuck12001 said:

There's no benefit to KC signing a quick LTD but I think the Redskins could benefit by signing him quickly.  I guess the front office needs to weight how much money they will lose by not having a longer negotiation period vs how many free agents they will lose a chance at signing because they dragged out the process and those free agents won't want to commit their future to a Kirkless Redskins team that will win between 4-6 games next year. 

 

Next year doesn't apply. 

*Unless you are presuming that the Redskins intend on trading Cousins. Additionally, that players & agents actually believe it's a forgone conclusion. 

 

Once a tag is placed, the deadline is 4pm March 1st, Cousins will not be an unrestricted free agent. By tagging him, the Redskins are declaring to the whole world that they are willing to be legally bound to pay Cousins 23.94 million dollars, fully guaranteed, for the 2017 season. 

 

Free Agent negotiations between the agents of impending UFA players and suitor teams begins at 12-noon on March 7th. The new league year and open Free Agency itself starts at 4pm March 9th. 

 

If Cousins is tagged by March 1st, every single impending UFA will know about it. And presuming Cousins signs the tag, as he did last year within 24 hours, he is then under contract. The Redskins own his contractual rights the second he signs the tag.

 

Of course Cousins can choose to not sign the tag. He can hold out, even decide not to play football in 2017.

He can go to the Himalayas and study with Ras al Ghul if he'd like. 

 

But, for all intents, once signed, Cousins will have been spoken for by the Redskins, for the 2017 season at least. (And there are options after that). 

Everyone will know before FA that he's playing QB for the Redskins in 2017. *Unless ...

That applies irregardless of whether a long term contract is in place prior to the start of free agency or not. The tag binds the two together. 

 

 

Now, you can either choose to believe that the Redskins are tagging him and securing his rights because they want to keep him, or you can believe they are doing all this in order to trade him.

 

As for free agent players trying to gauge the whole situation and thus make long term plans off of their perception of Cousins' long term status, well good luck to ones who convince themselves that the Redskins never get Cousins on a long term contract, only for the Redskins to ultimately get the multi-year contract hammered out this summer. 

 

As for your line of: they [Redskins] dragged out the process, no, it's not just them. It's Cousins and his camp who are mandating the Redskins place a tag on him. And you should know the because: 23.94 guaranteed. Having the tag placed first is the reassurance Cousins wants for the legally binding tag which carries the guaranteed money. 

 

If you're trying to assign blame to someone for the fact that no deal has been made yet, then you have level the complaint at both sides. The Redskins are not unilaterally keeping Cousins twisting in the wind.

[Rattlesnake88]

Good post httr.

 

Very interesting stat pulls recently that tell a little more to the Kirk Cousins story as a starting qb in this league.

 

That being said it made me think of some more "gut feeling" type opinions I have on Kirk...

 

I think he's a solid qb in a great scheme that fits his abilities as a player. Kirk does a decent job staying medium in the media, but on the field I think he can psych himself out from time to time. You can see it in his cadence(snapping ball too early or late situationally, decision making(harebrained ints, knee vs spike, turnover before the half etc), body language (the deer in headlights look people have mentioned, not staying medium emotionally, he's either too up or too down.)

 

My personal experience in the FedEx with him as our qb were rough as well. I've seen him start 3 games there and he was garbage in all three games.

 

-The week four Thursday night game vs the Giants in 2014. The ints he threw in that game were absolutely highscool level terrible. It was his second start of the year. He had a decent game the previous week vs Philly and I expected Kirk to play well and was really talking him up as our guy before the game. The defense gave up once Kirk kept throwing picks in our own side of the field, and Larry Donell destroyed our lives.

 

- MNF vs Cowboys 2015. Cowboys defense was very underrated as a drive stopping unit due to how aenemic their offense was. Kirk played like hot garbage for 3 quarters and our defense actually kept us in this one(due to forced fumbles). Kirk had gangster clutch endzone pass to Desean in the 4th after #11 nearly blew any chance at all to winning with the PR fumble. Special teams letdown and Whitehead/Cassel/Bailey finished us off in a game that Kirk couldn't find any rythym in. 

 

Skins Panthers MNF this year- Kirk was terrible, left early to avoid getting in fight with packers/panthers fans behind me.

 

no more prime time games for me lol.

 

damn it Kirk, take it easy on the skins. We could have shipped you off the Cleveland after all and your now poised to be one of highest paid players. Gruden could have been gun shy and lost his job with RG3 or Colt. But he believed in you. For what it's worth I hope you retire a Redskin. 

 

 

 

 

[TSO]

Since I'm in the mood, @bobandweave, this is the last time anyone is going to reprimand you regarding your approach to this board, as well. I've asked you many times to change your approach publicly and privately. Any issues from here on out will result in some time off, period. 

 

Also, no one needs to further antagonize him if he does something similar to what he's been doing. I'll handle it, just report it. 

[Peregrine]

Again, no one re-signs players before the combine.  Im not sure why people arent understanding this.  This isnt new.  This isnt just the Redskins.  This is how it happens every year, with every team.  Nothing to see here.

[Rattlesnake88]

1 minute ago, Peregrine said:

Again, no one re-signs players before the combine.  Im not sure why people arent understanding this.  This isnt new.  This isnt just the Redskins.  This is how it happens every year, with every team.  Nothing to see here.

Media sharks feeding on chum doesn't help.

[bobandweave]

6 hours ago, Taylor 36 said:

That's all he does.  He can't bring any real knowledge or facts to the conversation, only illogical nonsense that gets shot down by multiple posters but he chooses to completely ignore the facts that shut down his argument and continues spewing the same nonsense over and over.  If you call him on it, he'll whine and cry and call you a meanie and tell you that you should be "professional."  That's why I say:

 

 

 

I dont get this. You complain about me and like other people's posts against me and the mods and admins look the other way all the time when this clearly is against the rules.

 

As a mature person I try and block assholes like you who are so emotionally attached to your online profiles that a discussion is impossible to have with you but the blocking feature does not work.

 

Then when I go and talk to the mods (look not calling who run this  place out but speaking the truth here check my messages) they tell me not to retaliate against jerks like you in public. So it's okay for this asshole to write this personally attacking me ruining my good name and I'm not allowed to defend myself? 

 

I come on here to talk football, to speak about what I hear other places and discuss this team. Not to get trolled by dicks like this guy or the one drop troll but that's all that happens to me here and this is wrong. I don't come here to speak to you personally and I've never said one bad word to you ever. This is so far off topic and inappropriate 

 

I was was told to report posts like this and I have. Can I get a little help here without getting banned for losing my temper because a man can only put up with so much and this has been going on with these two members for weeks now

 

Regardless of what the popular thinking is around D.C. I don't live there and my exposure to the franchise is from a distance. Am I trolling here? Hell no im not. I want to talk Redskins not deal with jerks because they don't like my opinion on the team or where it's going with Cousins. I've never been disrespected like this anywhere and these aren't innocent jabs and pokes I need tough skin for this is harassment and personal 

 

I've never disrespected anyone in any way personally here, I feel like I should be allowed to speak freely as long as it's on topic here and not get attacked like this. Who this hell wants to see this? It feels political to me and like bullying.

 

knock it off and get off my ass guys, find someone else to take your anger out on. I'm not a punching bag and you don't know the future so stop acting like everything I say is wrong all the time when it's not. Ever since I posted my worry about free agency these guys have been relentless like this and it doesn't belong on an NFL teams message forum