BatteredFanSyndrome Posted July 22, 2018 Share Posted July 22, 2018 Hold on, am I getting this right? You think Shanahan’s beef with Robert is because Shanny had given up on the season and Robert led the team to 7 straight W’s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted July 22, 2018 Share Posted July 22, 2018 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: Kind of splitting hairs, no? Point stands that it's an above average roster. For me above average roster if Jordan Reed and Chris Thompson play. Average if those two aren't healthy. That's a big part with me why 11-5 and 7-9 to me are equally plausible. Though I lean more positive. IMO only way around that is if Guice is an Elliot level stud which to me is more likely to happen than not but still got to see that play out before banking on it. I actually like our defense and the depth better than the offense mainly because of the iffy health situations which are more prominent on offense. I saw in person what happened to the offense when Thompson got hurt in NO and the drop off was noticeable -- you've mentioned the same. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: Lauvao is certainly a weak link, no arguments there from me. But as far as the OL, three of the five are top 5 at their position and another is a young guy with potential who the staff is high on. Still a strength. I've read enough articles about RB's missing holes and leaving yards on the field to be convinced that it was a woeful lack of talent at the RB position that was more responsible than anything for our run game suffering. I was arguably leading that point personally showing still shots of plays in the Guice thread. My issue isn't blaming the O line for the running game woes. It's injuries and LG and depth at guard. Again we need some luck, if everyone comes back healthy then we should be fine. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: As for DL which you didn't really touch on, we were rated as one of the best pressure teams in the NFL last year. That was with Allen and Ioan missing large chunks of time. Ionnaidis didn't miss much time. But Jonathan Allen clearly did. I told you in my response I agreed with your D line pressure point - I focused on Kerrigan and Preston but I like Ionnaidis and Allen. We got a big roster and there is so many hours in the day for me to go over every player. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: We just added another first round DL, who granted we need to see play first, but I think we can all agree he will most likely be an upgrade over the out of position Ziggy Hood and has the upside to be so much more than that. Another year for Lanier who I'm very high on. Added another young guy with potential in Settle. The DL is absolutely another strength of this football team and part of the reason I'm less worried about the secondary. Agree in theory with all of this. Tough for me though to count my chickens on this until I see it go down. There were some draft geeks who weren't high on Payne and Settle. I like but don't love Payne. As for Settle I really got no clue but I am intrigued to see how it all plays outs. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: And I think you can do a lot worse than McPhee and a second round second year player as depth. Let's see what Ryan does this year. If he can stay healthy, I like McPhee. As for Ryan Anderson it was noticeable that he wasn't a factor when they brought him into games last year. I spent a couple of weeks months back just watching the d line -- came away impressed with Ioannidis, Preston, Kerrigan and Galette in particular -- Ryan was "meh" at best at least from my observation. Having said that he admitted he came into the season out of shape and he's a new man now. Obviously I haven't seen the new version of him -- JP Finlay who watched him in the open practices this off season said he thought he still looked "meh" but he's no expert so who knows? I give every rookie another shot so i am not ruling out Ryan but not banking on it either. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: I'm not really counting any chickens here and have stated numerous times in different threads that there are a lot of ifs. But it's more about the depth of the pass catchers. Not many teams boast a top 5 third down back (Thompson), top 5 TE (Reed), and top 5-10 slot (Crowder). Not many teams have VD as their second TE. And I do think Doctson has the goods and Richardson was what we were missing last year. The fact that I'm not even operating from the POV that the pass catchers will be the strength of team, yet there is that much potential, speaks volumes to me. Agree with all of this IF healthy. That's a big IF though. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: Agreed that a productive Guice and healthy Reed will be key. But let's not forget there are 51 other guys on the team and act as if our season rests on just these 2. I agree with Cooley that the team has a lot of good players but not enough great ones and in his view it will limit this team's success. As he likes to say good players can feed off the confidence of great ones -- especially in critical games -- critical moments. We don't have a Fletcher Cox, Beckham, Elliot, Donald, Julio Jones, L. Bell, A. Brown, Von Miller, etc type of player. Jordan Reed when healthy and at his best could be that. Maybe Guice. Maybe Jonathan Allen. But yeah I don't think we can compete with the big boys without some greatness that goes beyond good. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: Also, we went 7-9 with basically no Reed and no Guice last year. I know complementing Kirk isn't chic now that he's gone but I think the offense was on his back along with Chris Thompson and V. Davis. Crowder was good but nothing special. Ditto Doctson. And the O line was in shambles. No real running game either. Is Alex as good? I really don't have a feel for it. I suspect not but if so he won't be a big drop off. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: And I can't imagine a scenario where Guice isn't a massive upgrade to what we had at RB last year. So I guess I kind of see it as inevitable that we get better contributions which should inevitably lead to a better record than 7-9. Maybe. It's really the only thing I hang on as a borderline sure thing as for the offense -- ironic since he hasn't played a down in the NFL. Heck I hope he plays well otherwise I am going to look like a dolt considering how much I've touted him and done so well before we drafted him. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: Why do you never mention Dunbar or Moreau and only Scandrick? That's not painting a very accurate picture of what their plan at CB was to replace Bree and Fuller. Heck Moreau going into this year was Fuller going into last. 3rd round pick that only fell due to injury going into second season. Moreau was a first round talent, just as Fuller was. There are a lot of players I didn't mention. You want me to mention them all? I've gotten into the corner position in depth in plenty of other threads. The cliff notes version of my point: CB is like D line -- the odds that multiple guys are going to play is high. As coaches like to say you can never have enough corners. And I am not an addition by subtraction guy -- next man up guy, especially if the subtraction involves relatively young players. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: I don't mind debating with you, but when you misrepresent the situation and then draw a hard line in the sand that if it were DRC>Scandrick we would have suddenly been destined to be much better its kind of a hard position for me to wrap my head around. DRC and Bree are still FA's right now. A week before camp. Weird point on your end. Do you think I am going over the roster with you to convince you of something where I am bothering to misrepresent things for that reason? You can think whatever the heck you want. If I was worried about your take on things and the purpose of my posts was to convince you otherwise -- I would have stopped responded to your posts months ago. So I know you lock in to your take. I am just explaining my take which you can take or leave. I posted what a gazillion times in the FA thread and the draft thread of what I want to happen. You don't think I spent some time studying DRC and Scandrick? Doesn't mean I am right but I have specific preferences. When the FO does what I like (Richardson -- last year Swearinger, Z. Brown, Pryor) I complement them. When they do stuff I don't like (Reyes, McGee, McClain, Scandrick) I express it. I am not here to spin things in the FO favor just because or spin things against them just because. But yeah to keep it simple. IMO Breeland and Fuller > Dunbar and Scandrick. That's not an indictment of Dunbar. It's about how I feel about the total roster. Moreau is a complete unknown to me -- he seems to get mixed reviews for those who have seen him in camp. Will see. But no sorry I don't think job well done this year for the secondary but I don't rule it out it could work out. It's a wild card position for me. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: A week before camp. PFF isn't gospel, especially in the secondary where it's sometimes tough to attribute who was at fault for what. That's if you want to debate Scandrick, but I think Moreau and Dunbar were much more influential in letting Bree and trading Fuller than bringing in Scandrick as you portray. Look I am not always right when it comes to FA. No one is. I am just running with my opinions which aren't gospel. For example I liked the Pryor signing I was wrong on that. But I've been mostly right when we've gone bottom fishing in FA, getting guys who seem to be on the decline and we hope for a rebound here. The Scandrick singing seems to be right in line of those type of signings which have mostly bombed. The last one that worked out like that thinking about it was Vernon Davis and I wasn't down on that signing. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: Again, we weren't quite there yet. Inconsistency is still present. And no, we have not seen what we saw in those Raiders/Chiefs games in a VERY long time IMO. There were threads popping up on here about how incredible our defense was. 6-10 be damned that was another NFL team. And we made them look literally incompetent. We then almost went into Arrow Head and beat the undefeated Chiefs, and would have if it weren't for Doctson's dropped TD. Had a commanding lead in NO who was 8-2 at the time. Point is, we could play with anybody last year. The FO saw it and believes that with better health and the additions we made that it's enough to win 3-4 more games. I don't think it's that outlandish of a take. It's an outlandish take IMO if they think its slam dunk or close to it. To me its a 50-50 one. But I like their confidence if they are right it should be a fun season and if they are wrong it likely costs Bruce his job in personnel. So i am totally cool with the attitude. It's no lose. I think its not crazy it happens and its not crazy if it doesn't happen. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: Had a commanding lead in NO who was 8-2 at the time. I was there and it was the Kirk Cousins show that day, he was incredible. I know a lot hate the guy now but sorry that's how it looked from the stands to ME -- I was surrounded by Saints fans who actually told me your guy is just about as good as our guy. Personally I don't think Kirk = Brees. But he was on that day for a good part of that game. Ditto Thompson. Perine if I recall had his best game of the year. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: I think we have been drafting well and don't think it's really even debatable. I've read enough of your posts to know you think its not debatable. But to me it 100% debatable. It's debatable for EVERY draft for EVERY team. It doesn't matter how excited we are about the players or whether Mayock or name that draft geek likes the picks or whatever. You have to let a draft play out over at least two years to see. That's not some quirky opinion of mine -- its just about a cliche when it comes to judging a draft. Just because for example I love Guice doesn't make it fact. The movie has to run before the reviews are in. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: Weren't we the most injured NFL team of any since 2002 or something like that lol. I agree that a lot of guys are prone to injury and it wouldn't be prudent to count on all of them for 16 games. But disagree the law of averages won't kick in somewhat for us. I would bet money we are less injured than we were last year where almost everybody was on IR by the end of the season. I'd bet that we don't have as many injuries too. I wouldn't bet though against that they are again among the most injured teams in the NFL -- they got so many injury prone guys on that roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardcoreZorn Posted July 22, 2018 Share Posted July 22, 2018 33 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: There are a lot of players I didn't mention. You want me to mention them all? I've gotten into the corner position in depth in plenty of other threads. The cliff notes version of my point: CB is like D line -- the odds that multiple guys are going to play is high. As coaches like to say you can never have enough corners. And I am not an addition by subtraction guy -- next man up guy, especially if the subtraction involves relatively young players. Weird point on your end. Do you think I am going over the roster with you to convince you of something where I am bothering to misrepresent things for that reason? You can think whatever the heck you want. If I was worried about your take on things and the purpose of my posts was to convince you otherwise -- I would have stopped responded to your posts months ago. So I know you lock in to your take. I am just explaining my take which you can take or leave. Quote But trading Fuller and letting Breeland go and replacing them with a 31 year old injury prone CB with bad PFF rating -- meh. Secondary is questionable and I don't give them an out like hey you can't do everything. And my expectations weren't that high to meet -- heck if all they did was sign DRC instead of Scandrick, I'd have been cool. I was responding directly to that ^. Whether it's intentional or an oversight or not is sort of irrelevant. But that quote right there paints a picture that we traded Fuller, let Bree go, and specifically sought out Scandrick as the replacement for both. It would appear, however, they are very high on Moreau and Dunbar as players, and that it was their presence that made Fuller and Bree more expendable. I don't think for one second the Redskins wanted anything more than veteran insurance. DRC's price tag was clearly that of a starter, which would have kept younger players such as Moreau and Dunny on the bench. When the coaching staff has confidence those are the guys who will step up. Not looking for you to mention every player. But when you make statements like that, which in my opinion don't accurately reflect the process that took place, I'm going to say something. Not sure why you felt the need to respond back with such an attitude. I just have a difficult time understanding how DRC is the guy that would have put us over the top or made FA not such a fail for you. We are talking about a guy that hasn't even been signed to a team yet lol. 33 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: I posted what a gazillion times in the FA thread and the draft thread of what I want to happen. You don't think I spent some time studying DRC and Scandrick? Doesn't mean I am right but I have specific preferences. When the FO does what I like (Richardson -- last year Swearinger, Z. Brown, Pryor) I complement them. When they do stuff I don't like (Reyes, McGee, McClain, Scandrick) I express it. I am not here to spin things in the FO favor just because or spin things against them just because. Did I miss something where I said you spin things just because? I simply thought you misrepresented the approach to replacing Bree and Fuller, not that you are always negative or spin things "just because." 33 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: But yeah to keep it simple. IMO Breeland and Fuller > Dunbar and Scandrick. That's not an indictment of Dunbar. It's about how I feel about the total roster. Moreau is a complete unknown to me -- he seems to get mixed reviews for those who have seen him in camp. Will see. But no sorry I don't think job well done this year for the secondary but I don't rule it out it could work out. It's a wild card position for me. Was Fuller not a complete unknown going into year 2? Nothing has happened yet so it's all conjecture. But I think its a reasonable expectation that Moreau, who before his injury training for the draft was a first round pick, has a similar jump from year 1 to 2 as Fuller did. Especially with Torian Gray in his back pocket. It's a wildcard position for me too, but I think logically it makes some sense as to why they didn't resign Breeland or pay bigger money to a DRC. 33 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: Look I am not always right when it comes to FA. No one is. I am just running with my opinions which aren't gospel. For example I liked the Pryor signing I was wrong on that. But I've been mostly right when we've gone bottom fishing in FA, getting guys who seem to be on the decline and we hope for a rebound here. The Scandrick singing seems to be right in line of those type of signings which have mostly bombed. The last one that worked out like that thinking about it was Vernon Davis and I wasn't down on that signing. I just don't at all view Scandrick as somebody they are counting on to contribute in a big way, and I think that's where the disagreement is. He's a body, Veteran insurance in case the young guys just aren't ready. That's my take. 33 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: I was there and it was the Kirk Cousins show that day, he was incredible. I know a lot hate the guy now but sorry that's how it looked from the stands to ME -- I was surrounded by Saints fans who actually told me your guy is just about as good as our guy. Personally I don't think Kirk = Brees. But he was on that day for a good part of that game. Ditto Thompson. Perine if I recall had his best game of the year. Kirk impressed me the most last year. I was more sold on him last year than I was after his 5K season. I don't at all hate Kirk just for the record. 33 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: I've read enough of your posts to know you think its not debatable. But to me it 100% debatable. It's debatable for EVERY draft for EVERY team. It doesn't matter how excited we are about the players or whether Mayock or name that draft geek likes the picks or whatever. You have to let a draft play out over at least two years to see. That's not some quirky opinion of mine -- its just about a cliche when it comes to judging a draft. Just because for example I love Guice doesn't make it fact. The movie has to run before the reviews are in. I'm not even talking about this years draft, or last. We've been one of the better drafting teams since 2014, and no I don't think it's debatable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: But that quote right there paints a picture that we traded Fuller, let Bree go, and specifically sought out Scandrick as the replacement for both. It would appear, however, they are very high on Moreau and Dunbar as players, and that it was their presence that made Fuller and Bree more expendable. If you listen to the beat guys who have watched camp and commented on said subject. Scandrick played #1 outside corner then shifted to inside when they played 3 corners. So at the moment Scandrick features prominently. Even Jay talked about Scandrick playing outside some in one of his press conferences. As for Moreau, I've heard mixed things from people who cover the team as for what they think of him. Dunbar they are high on. As for Moreau they are hoping he takes a bigger leap this camp than what they've seen thus far or something to that effect. But will see. I hope so on all fronts. But again I think your corners are going to go down at some juncture and depth is important. I'd rather have both Dunbar and Breeland versus just one of them. I'd rather have Fuller over Scandrick. I don't think thus far there is much ambiguity that Scandrick will at least be the nickel corner at a minimum. If you see it differently -- that's cool -- I am just telling you how I see it and its not because I am trying to slant my perspective to win a debate -- it actually is genuinely what I think. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: Not looking for you to mention every player. But when you make statements like that, which in my opinion don't accurately reflect the process that took place, I'm going to say something. Not sure why you felt the need to respond back with such an attitude. I am talking straight football position by position. You are the one who throws at me how I am being purposely misleading. That's a shot. If you take a dig at the integrity of my post -- I'll call you out in my response the same way. I am talking about thing after thing I like about the roster with some disclaimers. Then I come in with a direct criticism that involved the FO. And just by coincidence then you shoot back how i am purposely misrepresenting the facts? That's fine but it doesn't fit the spirit of the FA thread or the draft thread since we lay out our positions in advance versus judge them in retrospect. I like for the most part how they approach the draft. I don't like for the most part how they approach FA. I am far from alone on this count. Cooley even likes to joke about the subject about how much trust they must have in the college personnel group and how little faith they must have in the NFL personnel group evaluators considering their track records. I am in that camp too, sorry. It's not that I dislike everything they do in pro personnel but by and large they are "meh" IMO in that department. I do like the college scouting department a lot though. So its a dichotomy for me. Fortunately, I do think college scouting is more important. 1 hour ago, HardcoreZorn said: I'm not even talking about this years draft, or last. We've been one of the better drafting teams since 2014, and no I don't think it's debatable. 2014 draft IMO good. 2015 draft IMO very good. 2016 IMO good if Doctson emerges. 2017 needs to play out IMO. I am cool with your optimism though I just need the movie to play out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardcoreZorn Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 On 7/22/2018 at 6:15 PM, Skinsinparadise said: If you listen to the beat guys who have watched camp and commented on said subject. Scandrick played #1 outside corner then shifted to inside when they played 3 corners. So at the moment Scandrick features prominently. Even Jay talked about Scandrick playing outside some in one of his press conferences. As for Moreau, I've heard mixed things from people who cover the team as for what they think of him. Dunbar they are high on. As for Moreau they are hoping he takes a bigger leap this camp than what they've seen thus far or something to that effect. But will see. I hope so on all fronts. But again I think your corners are going to go down at some juncture and depth is important. I'd rather have both Dunbar and Breeland versus just one of them. I'd rather have Fuller over Scandrick. I don't think thus far there is much ambiguity that Scandrick will at least be the nickel corner at a minimum. If you see it differently -- that's cool -- I am just telling you how I see it and its not because I am trying to slant my perspective to win a debate -- it actually is genuinely what I think. I am talking straight football position by position. You are the one who throws at me how I am being purposely misleading. That's a shot. If you take a dig at the integrity of my post -- I'll call you out in my response the same way. I don't think you really understand what I am trying to convey. I don't think you are trying to slant anything on purpose to try and win an argument. I do, however, think the quote referenced above is not an accurate portrayal of the plan at CB by the team/FO and so I called you on it. Your quote is directly referencing the FO's decision, and in the same quote you only mention Scandrick as being the replacement for Bree/Fuller. Meaning you left Moreau/Dunbar out of the equation. I found that to be a misrepresentation of what the team FO sought to do, and actually agree with the strategy. For years I called for draft, develop, next man up. If we're being totally honest, a lot of fans were after the Hayneworth, Archuletta, Randel El, on and on and on debacles. So I do find it rather amusing and a little ironic now all of a sudden the craze is to dive back into the deep end of Free Agency just because it has worked somewhat recently with the Eagles and Broncos winning SBs. Great teams are supplemented by free agency. Which is what we have with guys like Richardson, Zach Brown, Josh Norman, Swearinger. Jackson before that. Those are pretty high profile guys all in the past 5 years. Then you have guys like VD and Foster who are really good players that were free agents. We aren't exactly the Ted Thompson Packers, so why such the fuss? If we went to the NFL Championship game last year and were just a guy or two away from a SB, then yeah I could somewhat understand the urgency to make a couple big moves to put you over. Even then, that can disrupt chemistry. To tie this back to Scandrick his contract is not a McGee or McClain who I was super meh on. Bigger money for below average players. His contract is pretty dirt cheap, and along with the fact that DRC continues to be unsigned, would lead me to believe the Redskins did not view corner as a dire need and needed to spend big bucks on the position - even with the loss of Bree and Fuller. They seem very high on Moreau and Dunbar, their words not mine. So the plan appears to be much more about bringing in a cheap body to compete and be veteran insurance in case Dunny and Moreau are not ready. I personally think Moreau, like Ioanidis and Fuller last year, will have a huge jump from year 1 to 2 and make us forget who Bree even is. Then you have Dunbar who they appear very high on (at least higher than Scandrick considering Dunbar received 5 times the amount of GTD money) and will be vying for snaps. Why keep those guys on the bench in favor of a 32 year old CB looking for his fourth team looking for 6+ million a year? We also have some intriguing depth with Alexander joining Stroman and Holsey as guys to keep an eye on. It just seems apparent they are going with younger and cheaper, and nothing wrong with that. It's what most Skins fans called for for years. It wasn't meant to be a shot on your integrity. I just don't think saying "trading Fuller losing Bree and replacing with Scandrick=meh" is a very accurate portrayal of the teams plan at CB. Hope it clears it up. On 7/22/2018 at 6:15 PM, Skinsinparadise said: I like for the most part how they approach the draft. I don't like for the most part how they approach FA. I am far from alone on this count. Cooley even likes to joke about the subject about how much trust they must have in the college personnel group and how little faith they must have in the NFL personnel group evaluators considering their track records. I am in that camp too, sorry. It's not that I dislike everything they do in pro personnel but by and large they are "meh" IMO in that department. I do like the college scouting department a lot though. So its a dichotomy for me. Fortunately, I do think college scouting is more important. To this I will say, go look at the track records of most in free agency. I don't think we are some great team at identifying free agent talent. But we've had some hits, had some misses. I think that's pretty typical. But I think we are doing a great job of supplementing the roster with FA, and being careful not to pay large sums of money to other teams' players. Now, if we don't allocate the money we are saving toward resigning Scherff, Preston, etc. I'll be the first to lead that charge. Preston I'm already getting nervous about because he strikes me as someone that could blow up and hit FA bc his pricetag will be 15-16 M. I say offer him 13M a year now and be done it. Use a little foresight if you will. On 7/22/2018 at 6:15 PM, Skinsinparadise said: 2014 draft IMO good. 2015 draft IMO very good. 2016 IMO good if Doctson emerges. 2017 needs to play out IMO. I am cool with your optimism though I just need the movie to play out. Nothing wrong with your approach to let everything play out. I believe i've said myself numerous times, there are some wildcards and questions, and nothing would surprise me. So on that front maybe we agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 Just to take things off on a little bit of a tangent ... but still looking at the entire progress thing - just something someone said in the OL thread - who would have thought we would have 2 perennial pro bowlers on the offensive line, with two young developing talents (all homegrown) - Who would have thought after years of the fans screaming you need to invest in the trenches 3 out of 4 of the last 4 years top picks have been on the OL and DL + multiple mid-round picks. People screamed we needed to invest more in scouting - which we did - the scouting teams now are around the average in the league but we still use other scouting resources and the guys at the top of the scouting trees for pro and college scouting Alex Santos, Kyle Smith with solid and building reputations (as well as guys like Richard Mann) - The fans screamed put a football guy in charge - we did in Scott who turned out to still be fighting his demons, and imo not ready for the environment he was put in..... but then instead of Bruce just slipping back into role, we put Doug Williams as a figurehead.... Some will say he is a puppet but I am not so sure. From a rocky start, I have been more and more impressed with how he speaks and the actions he takes. It seems he was instrumental in the changing of the guard from the other Scott (Scott Campbell - who has been with the team forever) to potentially open the door to let guys like Kyle or Eric take a bigger role. Eric Schaffer - People will quote just how disrespected Bruce Allen is in the eyes of agents and others - but our point negotiator is Eric Schaffer and most would say he is a shrewd guy - not necessarily a football born and bread guy but a very similar background to Howie Roseman... We have even been able to boost the non-football operations with the appointment of Brian LaFemmina - What role has Bruce had in this - who knows, maybe he is a grand architect of this - or maybe all this has been done in the background to push Bruce out - But while some can get hung up in the personalities and whatnot from the outside this looks like a real football team with a plan and a direction and is night and day when you compare where this team was just 5 or 6 years ago where power was hoared and coveted by the few ... Its not there YET (PR is seriously something that needs an overhaul) and this is not a pat on the back job well-done post - but an encouraging round of applause to keep the momentum going - I also am not sure what Bruce Allens role is in the organization anymore - maybe he is the designated asshole ... and everyone needs an asshole ... but not lots Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 On 7/23/2018 at 11:15 PM, HardcoreZorn said: Your quote is directly referencing the FO's decision, and in the same quote you only mention Scandrick as being the replacement for Bree/Fuller. Meaning you left Moreau/Dunbar out of the equation. I found that to be a misrepresentation of what the team FO sought to do, and actually agree with the strategy. My point was Moreau and Dunbar were already on the team. For the guys that were here: Breeland and Fuller are gone. In comes Scandrick. And yeah from the looks of things thus far Scandrick is ahead of the depth chart of Moreau. Heck there are indications he might be even ahead of the depth chart of Dunbar at outside corner. Who knows but I'd guess at the least he's the slot guy. And yeah at the very least I don't think their depth is as good as last year and Fuller > Scandrick. On 7/23/2018 at 11:15 PM, HardcoreZorn said: I For years I called for draft, develop, next man up. If we're being totally honest, a lot of fans were after the Hayneworth, Archuletta, Randel El, on and on and on debacles. So I do find it rather amusing and a little ironic now all of a sudden the craze is to dive back into the deep end of Free Agency just because it has worked somewhat recently with the Eagles and Broncos winning SBs. Great teams are supplemented by free agency. Which is what we have with guys like Richardson, Zach Brown, Josh Norman, Swearinger. Jackson before that. Those are pretty high profile guys all in the past 5 years. Then you have guys like VD and Foster who are really good players that were free agents. We aren't exactly the Ted Thompson Packers, so why such the fuss? This statement more than anything is why we will never agree on the pro personnel side. The reason why I like to bring up Cooley is he's ok with the front office, knows a thing or two about the NFL and players and he's not some dummy. He thinks they are so comically bad at FA that it turns into a joke. Not that I need to hear it from him -- its pretty obvious to me. But to each their own on it. Why such a fuss? Look if the point is made like Cooley likes to make it -- they are good at draft-college scouting = good. Pro-personnel not so good. So maybe we shouldn't put our hopes in their FA judgment and thereby focus instead on the draft -- the way he articulates it is how I feel which is FA works if you know what you are doing but it doesn't if you aren't that hot at it. So if you don't have faith in their evaluation skills on the pro side but do trust their college side -- then go on that ride. I can see that point. But I don't give them a pass for job well done in FA. To each their own on that. I don't think they are good at it. I do think they are good at that draft, though. When they are batting as someone put up here 19% batting average in FA. Miss many more than they hit on. You cherry pick their FA hits or in one case a potential hit. Heck I can cherry pick draft picks to make Vinny look like a genius. But by and large too many misses for Vinny. Likewise too many misses in FA now. The approach of only 2 year guaranteed money is good except for the case in Kirk -- the idea of bargain hunting for the most part in FA has mostly been a failure. Yeah I know there are exceptions but not enough of them. The idea that some have that I am just going to count on the Redskins for being incompetent when they do delve into the deep pool just because they have had flops in the past to me seems defeatist. Hey we can't do it right so lets celebrate what we can do right -- actually that's part of Cooley's goof. And he's not the only one. I am only bringing up others here because the point comes off to some as what gives, not a big deal, like few others would think this. But a bunch of people who cover the team have made similar points. Some fans I know ditto. I am not on an island on this. And I understand the nature of the thought isn't typically that the Redskins are exclusively bad at it but EVERYBODY is bad at FA. But that's simply not true. There are teams who are aggressive in FA and it actually works. It bugs me for example that the Giants are considered by most a more talented team than the Redskins. And they make that case in part by stressing their FA signings. You can't run on Damon Harrison. Jenkins is a stud. Oliver. Giants had an issue at LT so they signed the top of the market guy -- and people expect the signing to be successful. Why? Because when the Giants sign big FAs it works out for them of late. I think the Redskins have been better at drafting than the Giants but the narrative of why the Giants could be the more talented team is IMO is driven by they go higher end (at least of late) in FA thus may have better players on their roster. It bugs me when I wanted L. Joseph when he was a FA and now I hear from Jay about how you can't run against that team because he is a beast. Our scrub signings at DT haven't matched that guy -- big surprise to me? Nope. I want Richardson this FA season and guess who signs him? The team that already has the loaded D line. Is it because the Vikings are dummies and don't know what they are doing? Doubt it. Jay and Zimmer both inherited teams coming off of bad seasons. Look at both of their rosters now. Vikings roster > Redskins. The Jaguars had a bigger season last year than any season the Redskins had under Dan. I am watching the players top 100 players show, Calais if I recall was number 16. If I recall he was the AFC defensive player of the year. When was the last time we had a player like that on defense. Season before Jax took the best D lineman in FA. Now they have a monster d line -- just like that. Yeah I don't think you need to spend a gazillion dollars in FA. You can spend the same. (Hyperbole on this part of my point to bring it home). Instead of with your $15 buy two slices of pizza versus 12 garlic rolls. Go big or don't go at all. You know where I go heavy into the younger players is on this point -- I'd rather not bother with a Reyes or McClain or name that scrub safety they signed pre Swearinger and ride with a young guy and see how it plays out. I don't care how cheap they got them. If you are swinging in FA -- swing for the fences some. You think Jax. Denver or name that teams cares that the Redskins had some incompetent FA signings when they enter the FA pool? There was an article posted in the FA thread months back interviewing personnel guys who say FA has emerged as a tool to make teams winners and they cited the teams that use it well -- thanks in part to rising cap numbers and guaranteed numbers often only being 2 years long, some of the really good teams have figured out how to exploit it well. Yeah there are exceptions to everything. But if we are having a real argument its not about the outliers its about what is their general approach. And this team in general doesn't believe in big FA signings and prefer to try to get deals instead. And most of it (not all of it) hasn't worked. The draft is a different story. But on pro personnel, IMO they are pretty bad at it compared to some teams. On 7/23/2018 at 11:15 PM, HardcoreZorn said: To tie this back to Scandrick his contract is not a McGee or McClain who I was super meh on. Bigger money for below average players. His contract is pretty dirt cheap, and along with the fact that DRC continues to be unsigned, would lead me to believe the Redskins did not view corner as a dire need and needed to spend big bucks on the position - even with the loss of Bree and Fuller. They seem very high on Moreau and Dunbar, their words not mine. I don't doubt that's what they think. But staying on theme, if they are wrong (it wouldn't be the first time on issues like this) sounds like jobs will be lost in the off season. As for them being very high on Moreau -- sounds like you are very high on him and assume they must be too. I pay attention to what the beat guys say that they hear and so far the impression I get is they like Moreau's talent but they are looking for him to make a climb in other words he wasn't ready last year, they want to see progress this camp. Will see. On 7/23/2018 at 11:15 PM, HardcoreZorn said: We also have some intriguing depth with Alexander joining Stroman and Holsey as guys to keep an eye on. It just seems apparent they are going with younger and cheaper, and nothing wrong with that. It's what most Skins fans called for for years. I think our fundamental disagreement is likely this. My take on Vinny's failure A. Trading too many draft picks B. Signing too many FAs with questionable pedigree. Guys who weren't pro bowler but paid like they were -- Archuleta, Randle El, etc. Bad character guys like Haynesworth. C. When he got off of that track in FA and signed C. Griffin, L. Fletcher, S. Springs, M. Washington = good. D. Good drafter in round 1 bad after that My take on the Bruce/Shanny/Scot era A. Added draft picks -- traded too many too but by and large had more draft picks = good B. Better drafts C. Signing too many bargain basement FAs D. Not signing enough marquee FAs (Shanny being the more aggressive of the three of them on that count) Your take seems to be the formula is that the draft is key (agree) and for the most part eschew fishing in the deep pool of FA (disagree). And to me that philosophy seems to be more about the battered take of a Redskins fan than anything else. Yeah there are some teams that are killer good at drafting like GB (though they are delving harder onto FA now) and Pittsburgh who get away without pushing FA. But a lot of teams who have been successful and won in recent years among them, Denver, Giants (2016 version), Jax, Seattle, Rams, Vikings among others have made major climbs by signing marquee FAs who have worked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OVCChairman Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 1 hour ago, bedlamVR said: Just to take things off on a little bit of a tangent ... but still looking at the entire progress thing - just something someone said in the OL thread - who would have thought we would have 2 perennial pro bowlers on the offensive line, with two young developing talents (all homegrown) - I agree with everything you said, just didnt want to quote the whole text. What I did quote is the part that has impressed me the most. I've said multiple times that I'm still not sold on Bruce or Dan, but the direction we're on and the process we (on the surface) appear to be putting in place, is one that I've aspired to see this team adapt for a long time. I don't think the it can be overstated that 4/5 starting O-lineman, and 2/3 (will likely be all 3 by week 5) starting D-lineman on the depth chart are drafted talent. It's something we've missed forever. I'd like to go back through the roster at some point and see how many contributors to the 53 man roster (once it's cut down) are 'homegrown talent.' I'm not going to say they all have to be draft picks, because that's impossible. I'd be interested to see how many are Drafted, UDFA, or picked up as a young FA and groomed to be here... someone like Mason Foster. He wasn't a 'splash' signing or someone like Alex Smith or Josh Norman. In the moment I remember getting frustrated about some of the moves we weren't making, but after the dust has settled, the last 2 - 3 years have been good in regards to player acquisition. There are 3 major moves that come to mind for contributors. Smith, Norman, Brown. Smith hasn't taken a snap, but the other 2 have proven to be net positive in the pickup. Norman could be BETTER, and we can all debate whether or not he's worth the money we've been paying him, but he has not fallen into the same 'free agent splash' category of years past. I don't think Bruce and Dan are the cause of this direction or process either. I think it's more to do with the football people in Ashburn and it's refreshing to hope that they've been given the freedom to actually do their jobs... Still a lot of work to do to be truly competitive, and some more moves that have to happen... but I like where this team is, like you said, compared to 5/6 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 Wow, wasnt aware this was the Essay thread. Not even sure why this thread is still open, thought everybody knows the obvious facts on this, Bruce is terrible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 1 hour ago, OVCChairman said: I don't think Bruce and Dan are the cause of this direction or process either. I think it's more to do with the football people in Ashburn and it's refreshing to hope that they've been given the freedom to actually do their jobs... Actually, they have to be. None of this is being done behind their backs or outside their sphere of influence. We've complained for years that, at the very least, Snyder has no real clue how to determine who should be put in charge...so we end up with incompetents running things, overlook talent that may already in the building, and see the owner inserting himself too much in aspects of the football operations that should be left to people far more experienced and talented than he is. What the other poster described is the opposite of that. And whether we like it or not, it did start with them (or at least Snyder). The proof will be if their organizational set-up leads to consistent winning, or if it leads to a more traditional structure with a quaified person as GM (or, hopefully, both). While I do think their current set-up can lead to success, I have many doubts that the two men in charge of it all have the necessary skill sets to truly pull it off. But if the people they've put in place DO have the talent and competence needed, it could succeed. In which case I'd have no problem assigning credit where credit is due and saying "You found the right people and they're succeeding under your leadership. Well done." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OVCChairman Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 2 minutes ago, Califan007 said: Actually, they have to be. None of this is being done behind their backs or outside their sphere of influence. you're right, re-reading that I didn't articulate that the way I intended. What I more meant to say was "I don't think Bruce and Dan are DIRECTLY making these personnel decisions, it's the football people..." Meaning they may have made the decision to back off or put these people in place, but they're not the ones instigating the day to day decision making process... and that appears to be a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 5 minutes ago, OVCChairman said: you're right, re-reading that I didn't articulate that the way I intended. What I more meant to say was "I don't think Bruce and Dan are DIRECTLY making these personnel decisions, it's the football people..." Meaning they may have made the decision to back off or put these people in place, but they're not the ones instigating the day to day decision making process... and that appears to be a good thing. 2 Oh, absolutely lol...you're right there. The offseason moves, for the most part, seem to be good ones (some really good). As was stated earlier, the idea that 4 of the starting 5 OLinemen and all three of the starting DLinemen could be homegrown talent is definitely new, and not just that they're homegrown but that they are genuinely, seriously talented. and we have possibly the best combo of OLine coach and DLine coach in the NFL (although I honestly have no clue, just felt good saying that it's possible lol)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted July 24, 2018 Share Posted July 24, 2018 2 hours ago, Califan007 said: Oh, absolutely lol...you're right there. The offseason moves, for the most part, seem to be good ones (some really good). As was stated earlier, the idea that 4 of the starting 5 OLinemen and all three of the starting DLinemen could be homegrown talent is definitely new, and not just that they're homegrown but that they are genuinely, seriously talented. and we have possibly the best combo of OLine coach and DLine coach in the NFL (although I honestly have no clue, just felt good saying that it's possible lol)... That's basically been my approach as a Redskins fan since 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyst Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 Jets get a 3rd round pick for Teddy Bridgewater 5 months later. A guy who hasn’t really played in 2+ years. Allen got nothing for RG3 or Cousins. Allen sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 2 minutes ago, dyst said: Jets get a 3rd round pick for Teddy Bridgewater 5 months later. A guy who hasn’t really played in 2+ years. Allen got nothing for RG3 or Cousins. Allen sucks. And in other news, water is wet, the sun rises in the east, and I wouldn't kick Jennifer Lawrence out of bed for eating toast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyst Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 14 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said: And in other news, water is wet, the sun rises in the east, and I wouldn't kick Jennifer Lawrence out of bed for eating toast. Just in case anyone was still confused Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 48 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said: And in other news, water is wet, the sun rises in the east, and I wouldn't kick Jennifer Lawrence out of bed for eating toast. Plain toast or cinnamon toast? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morneblade Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 16 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said: Plain toast or cinnamon toast? I'm betting it could be burnt toast and it wouldn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
repo_4 Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said: And in other news, water is wet, the sun rises in the east, and I wouldn't kick Jennifer Lawrence out of bed for eating toast. But what if her feet were dirty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbunny Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 1 hour ago, Voice_of_Reason said: And in other news, water is wet, the sun rises in the east, and I wouldn't kick Jennifer Lawrence out of bed for eating toast. Conclusion: Jennifer Lawrence isn't wet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted August 29, 2018 Share Posted August 29, 2018 25 minutes ago, Wildbunny said: Conclusion: Jennifer Lawrence isn't wet... Conclusion: Someone needs an instruction manual. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 On 8/29/2018 at 4:17 PM, Voice_of_Reason said: And in other news, water is wet, the sun rises in the east, and I wouldn't kick Jennifer Lawrence out of bed for eating toast. Hell, she could set up a rotisserie over my side if she wanted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 On 8/29/2018 at 5:06 PM, TD_washingtonredskins said: Plain toast or cinnamon toast? Toast is toast. She could eat plain toast, cinnemon toast,toast with butter, toast with nuttela, doesn't matter. I'm not kicking her out of bed for eating it. On 8/29/2018 at 5:23 PM, Morneblade said: I'm betting it could be burnt toast and it wouldn't matter. Burnt toast is both more crumbly and smells bad. Still not kicking her out of bed. On 8/29/2018 at 5:30 PM, repo_4 said: But what if her feet were dirty? That's why you have a shower (preferably together) BEFORE getting in bed (and probably before the toast.) and I'm thinking it wouldn't matter anyway. And I was shocked to learn that some guys find that a turn-on. That's not me, but to each their own... On 8/29/2018 at 5:34 PM, Wildbunny said: Conclusion: Jennifer Lawrence isn't wet... Oh, she would be if she was eating toast in my bed. 56 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said: Hell, she could set up a rotisserie over my side if she wanted. As long as I could sleep on top of her on her side, I agree, wouldn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearfeather Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 28 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said: Toast is toast. She could eat plain toast, cinnamon toast,toast with butter, toast with nuttela, doesn't matter. I'm not kicking Jennifer Lawrence out of bed for eating it. This conversation is worthless without pics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted August 31, 2018 Share Posted August 31, 2018 2 hours ago, Spearfeather said: This conversation is worthless without pics. And you picked the wrong thing to post a pic of... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.