2018 Free Agency Database - (Signed: WILLIAMS - McPhee - Scandrick - P-Rich) - (Lauvao, Bergstrom, Nsehke, Taylor, Z. Brown and Quick re-signed)

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

2 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

I don't think Alex Smith signals a "win now" mentality. 

 

The Redskins weren't a winner with Cousins. They aren't going backwards by finishing 8-8.  It would be disappointing of course, another season of being stuck in neutral, but this wasn't a 10+ win team in any recent season. 

From everything I've been reading, the Skins believe they are close.  Guaranteeing Alex Smith 70M+ at age 34 is the epitome of what a 'win now' move is.  Otherwise, you find a much cheaper option and draft a guy.  They were suiting up a scab squad for half a season+ in 2017.  A team without a ton of true impact players lost several they did have.  While I don't think much of this FO setup, I can understand why they 'think' they are close.  Time will tell if that's the case. 

[Thinking Skins]

12 minutes ago, CTskin said:

If we're always comparing our productivity to the past 25 disappointing years of this franchise then we'll never be on the right track. We need to compare ourselves to the league. 8-8 is fine for a year two, but there's no pride to be taken from consistently hovering around there. If we keep signing C+ players then that's what we can count on. Gamechangers are what we need.

 

Difference in opinion. There are examples supporting both our sides. Whose side is this team closer to? But my pride comes from this being the first time since Gibbs that we've had a coach I respected and been in the same system for a number of years and had an opportunity to see players grow in that system. Hopefully we will start seeing C+ players look like superstars, go to other teams and bust out.

[Skinsinparadise]

I don't get this.  IMO they already have three receivers who are better than anyone on our roster at that position.  And they are clamoring for #4?   If so maybe the idea is to release Cobb?

 

LeadingNFL ™‏ @LeadingNFL 18m18 minutes ago

More

The Packers are interested in WR Sammy Watkins and are in play for Allen Robinson. (via @RapSheet on @nflnetwork)

13 replies119 retweets173 likes

 

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I don't get this.  IMO they already have three receivers who are better than anyone on our roster at that position.  And they are clamoring for #4?   If so maybe the idea is to release Cobb?

 

LeadingNFL ™‏ @LeadingNFL 18m18 minutes ago

More

The Packers are interested in WR Sammy Watkins and are in play for Allen Robinson. (via @RapSheet on @nflnetwork)

13 replies119 retweets173 likes

 

 

I'd imagine they'd be looking at cutting Cobb and/or Jordy dependent on what the cap hits look like.  Not sure how you break the bank on Davante Adams and then get into these talks without some type of exit strategy for the guys they already have rostered.

[amm0409]

Hogs Haven saying Skins not expected to e-sign Z. Brown or Compton.  Surprised we wouldnt re-sign Brown

[JSSkinz]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I don't get this.  IMO they already have three receivers who are better than anyone on our roster at that position.  And they are clamoring for #4?   If so maybe the idea is to release Cobb?

 

LeadingNFL ™‏ @LeadingNFL 18m18 minutes ago

More

The Packers are interested in WR Sammy Watkins and are in play for Allen Robinson. (via @RapSheet on @nflnetwork)

13 replies119 retweets173 likes

 

 

 

You gotta be kidding me, they have 3 WR's taking up $35M in cap space and they want Allen?

 

Doesn't seem like a smart move for a team that has holes on defense.

[Est.1974]

Packers clearly want to get a lot younger at WR. Had seen them linked with Watkins earlier on.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 minute ago, amm0409 said:

Hogs Haven saying Skins not expected to e-sign Z. Brown or Compton.  Surprised we wouldnt re-sign Brown

 

Apparently there is a big window between where the Skins value Brown and he values himself.  If the rumors of the #'s are true like Brown wanting 10M per season, than I definitely side with the Skins on this one.  I venture a guess so will the rest of the league, but it only takes 1 team with money to spend and a hole to fill in the middle of their D.

[Thinking Skins]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

appropriate on many points   except I disagree about the word "many".  

 

danny rouhier‏Verified account @funnydanny 51s51 seconds ago

More

Never ceases to amaze me how an organization as unsuccessful as the Redskins, without an 11 win season since 1991 & 5th fewest Ws in that span (including expansion teams), gets the benefit of the doubt from so many fans.

0 replies0 retweets1 like

Reply

 

 

Retweet

 

 

 

Like

 1

 

Why does that 11 win stat matter? If I'm a fan I'm a fan. I watched the Bullets suck for longer and looking much worse in the mean time. Still, I watched the games and cheered. Is he advocating we root against the team because of a bad move? I thought Kwame was a bad pick, I thought Webber was a bad trade, I thought Howard was a bad signing, doesn't mean that I didn't hope they worked. And as much as I wanted Wes fired, it doesn't mean that I rooted against his move. It also doesn't mean that I gave him (or Ernie) the benefit of the doubt.

 

But we (both the Skins and the Wizard) are not this utterly miserable franchise who only makes bad decisions. Both teams make decisions that I disagree with and hope to be proven wrong. I wish we hadn't re-signed Gilbert. But I still rooted for Gilbert. I wish we had re-signed Kirk, but I'm still rooting for my team(s).

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 minute ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

I get what you're saying but its not like we finished 7-9 on a Georgetown out of conference schedule. We were 7-9 on an NFL schedule and within 2 plays of finishing 9-7. This is a league where so many games are decided in the last minute and by a TD or less, so that teams constantly flip from 6-10 to 10-6. The Cardinals went from 5-11 to 10-6. Baltimore has 4 years of finishing with between 7 and 9  wins. Dallas was 8-8 for 3 years before going 12-4. How far away are/were these teams?

 

I know the stuff like the 'dc curse' and the 'X number of years without a championship game', etc, but this team we have right now has a good core of players and they don't need to be abandoned just to bring in a big name.

I'm also on record (and some think this is crazy) that I honestly don't care about schedule or injuries.  They happen to everybody, and sure, they have an effect, but if you're a good team you overcome those things.  Bad or average teams don't.  The 'Skins haven't.  In a long time, but they haven't specifically in the 4 years of Bruce/Jay.

 

The Eagles lost their starting QB (MVP candidate), RB, LT (HOF player) and won the SB with exactly the same schedule we had minus 2 games.  We went 1-5 in the division.  

 

To answer your specific examples:

- The Cardinals have play-makers on defense, Larry Fitzgerald on defense, and a solid QB.  They have play-makers.  They are also extremely well coached.  When they went 10-6, they had a better roster, top to bottom, than us.

 

- Baltimore went from SB to average because they stopped doing personnel things well.  Partly because of Flacco's contract.

 

- Dallas' got a new QB (Dak) and RB (Zeke) which essentially changed the entire team.  They beat us twice last year, once without Zeke.  They have explosive playmakers on offense.  Defense isn't great.  

 

I don't believe in the DC Curse and that nonsense.  

 

We have a good, average roster, with an average HC.  In order to break average we need above average players.  

 

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.  If we line up with Doctson, Grant, Crowder, Perine and Reed on opening day, our absolute ceiling is 8-8, and 6-10 is more likely.  Exactly what I said last year.  

[Skinsinparadise]

7 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

I'll give Bruce this, I don't think he would sign Wilkerson to the type of deal Cerato did for AH.  He's to fiscally conservative.  I agree, this might be a 1 year deal type of thing, unless somebody offers him more. 

 

Though, interestingly, the 2 biggest acquisitions of Bruce's tenure, Norman and DJax both had red flags, and we spent the money.  

 

I feel this is somewhat different though.  

 

Yeah to me this is different because neither had motivation issues.  I guess D. Jax was hit for skipping voluntary practices and hanging out supposedly with the wrong crowd in LA.  But Wilkerson is the closest on point to Haynesworth where you got people questioning his commitment.  Haynesworth had those issues in Tennessee so it wasn't a total shock that it happened here, too. For me It would have to be a 1 year prove it deal. 

[amm0409]

3 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

Apparently there is a big window between where the Skins value Brown and he values himself.  If the rumors of the #'s are true like Brown wanting 10M per season, than I definitely side with the Skins on this one.  I venture a guess so will the rest of the league, but it only takes 1 team with money to spend and a hole to fill in the middle of their D.

 

Do you like Anthony Hitchens?  I mean if we loose two ILB's sign someone like Wilkerson/ Richardson/Poe then more then likely we dont go DL with the first pick?

[Est.1974]

20 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Go get him 49ers, I've been reading to death that the Giants consider him theirs

 

Rotoworld FootballVerified account @Rotoworld_FB

Report: 49ers 'pushing' for Andrew Norwell http://tinyurl.com/y8e7ants 

0 replies0 retweets0 likes

 

 

Damn right SIP, here's hoping there.

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

Apparently there is a big window between where the Skins value Brown and he values himself.  If the rumors of the #'s are true like Brown wanting 10M per season, than I definitely side with the Skins on this one.  I venture a guess so will the rest of the league, but it only takes 1 team with money to spend and a hole to fill in the middle of their D.

Agreed.  Brown's situation hasn't changed much since last year.  In Buffalo, he didn't play on 3rd downs, and last year, he struggled in coverage on 3rd downs.  If the Browns want to toss "10 sticks" (Term I learned from the show Billions) his way, let them.  

[Est.1974]

54 minutes ago, SWFLSkins said:

 

 

I don't think we'll let him get away. We did that with Logan last year after doing the same. Got to think Mo is signing here.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Why does that 11 win stat matter? If I'm a fan I'm a fan. I watched the Bullets suck for longer and looking much worse in the mean time.

 

His point wasn't to bail on the team.  He's a hardcore fan himself.  The context of it was taking the FO's side of what went down on the Kirk contract but it fit other decisions here, too.

 

Them not winning 11 games is him saying its not like Dan and the various front offices here have been vindicated over time as to their decision making. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah to me this is different because neither had motivation issues.  I guess D. Jax was hit for skipping voluntary practices and hanging out supposedly with the wrong crowd in LA.  But Wilkerson is the closest on point to Haynesworth where you got people questioning his commitment.  Haynesworth had those issues in Tennessee so it wasn't a total shock that it happened here, too. For me It would have to be a 1 year prove it deal. 

As much as I detest Bruce as a personnel guy, I just don't think he could bring himself to toss a lot of money at Wilkerson for a long period of time.  Which I agree with. In this instance, is prudence I think will benefit him.  

[NoCalMike]

I really wish the 'Skins would give Carlos Hyde a look....assuming he isn't asking for the world.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

As much as I detest Bruce as a personnel guy, I just don't think he could bring himself to toss a lot of money at Wilkerson for a long period of time.  Which I agree with. In this instance, is prudence I think will benefit him.  

 

Yeah I agree with that.  It would be a weird signing for Bruce.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

8 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Why does that 11 win stat matter? If I'm a fan I'm a fan.

 

Is he advocating we root against the team because of a bad move?

I don't think he's saying that at all.  What he's saying is what many of us have been talking about for what seems like forever.  We cannot wrap our heads around how fans continuously buy into this crap offseason after offseason, given the actual results of the team.  I don't think anyone is saying to give up your fandom.  But it's baffling how folks continuously defend an owner and FO that have way more misses than they have hits over their entire careers.  It'd be different if the guys leading the way had a decent resume, but the fact is - they don't.  Of course one can always hope for the best, but it looks silly when folks are arguing on behalf of these guys as if they've ever done anything worthy of being defended.

[clskinsfan]

23 minutes ago, CTskin said:

I could have sworn that FA opened up on a Tuesday last year and handshakes and unofficial agreements were in place almost immediately even though the signing period wasn't until a couple of days later.

Its kind of like the Alex Smith situation. They can agree to terms right now but nothing official. But I think you are right. They were announcing things during the tampering period last year I thought.

[Sknsnation]

1 minute ago, clskinsfan said:

Its kind of like the Alex Smith situation. They can agree to terms right now but nothing official. But I think you are right. They were announcing things during the tampering period last year I thought.

I seem to remember the same thing.....but didn't the NFL put out some kind of memo to the teams to not do this any more?.........Can't really remember.

[Thinking Skins]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

His point wasn't to bail on the team.  He's a hardcore fan himself.  The context of it was taking the FO's side of what went down on the Kirk contract but it fit other decisions here, too.

 

Them not winning 11 games is him saying its not like Dan and the various front offices here have been vindicated over time as to their decision making. 

 

But he had a guy on his show who pointed out the fan opinion in the Kirk situation and its just funny how much he defends Kirk. Its like he believes that there was NO RIGHT WAY the front office could have responded except taking the 19.5 mil deal or offering more money last year. His own co-host was calling Kirk crap before 2015. Suddenly he goes from being crap to being worth 19.5 mil all guaranteed with no room for negotiation?

 

And I'm not turning this into a Kirk vs Bruce debate, but that's what this is all about. He wasn't saying this 3 years ago before his best bud was throwing for 4000 yards and getting franchised. Do I agree with all of Bruce's moves? nope. Do I think he's trying to build a winning team? Yep. Do I agree with his overall philosophy? Yep. So I (and I think other fans) will defend the moves we agree with. We (DC fans) are not some blind homers who will just fall in line and do as our managers tell us.

[Thinking Skins]

7 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I don't think he's saying that at all.  What he's saying is what many of us have been talking about for what seems like forever.  We cannot wrap our heads around how fans continuously buy into this crap offseason after offseason, given the actual results of the team.  I don't think anyone is saying to give up your fandom.  But it's baffling how folks continuously defend an owner and FO that have way more misses than they have hits over their entire careers.  It'd be different if the guys leading the way had a decent resume, but the fact is - they don't.  Of course one can always hope for the best, but it looks silly when folks are arguing on behalf of these guys as if they've ever done anything worthy of being defended.

 

Its not about defending an owner or Bruce. Its more about defending a particular move after another move. I was very critical of Vinny because I hated almost all of his moves. With Bruce its the opposite. I was mostly mum on the Kirk debate because I thought it was more detailed than just pro-Kirk or anti-Kirk. I've been pretty good on our drafts (wanted Williams over Scherff and Sheldon and a trade down over both), Loved the Brown signing and the DJ signing, was meh on McGee and McClain (thought they would bring more run stopping than they did), etc. If they make a good move then I'll celebrate it. I know everyone wishes we were led by a Parcells and Bellicheat combination but we've got what we've got. And we can check out or we can discuss the moves they make and don't make. But I think the blind hatred (especially by Grant and Danny) is annoying to fans like me.

[Rufus T Firefly]

43 minutes ago, markmills67 said:

Is it just me that thinks we will hear later tonight that Wilkerson will be a Washington Redskins player on Wednesday. 

 

HTTR 

No. I don't know if it's just the pessimistic "the Redskins will surely do something stupid" side of me or something else, but I have a feeling we're about to sign him.