The Definition of a Loser Franchise

[goskins10]

Just now, The Batman said:

 

Correct. This is what I've been trying to say the entire time. The FO screwed up, but Kirk played the situation masterfully, and anyone trying to demonize EITHER PARTY is probably wrong. They just did a business transaction and Kirk's side did better and the FO screwed it up. No nefarious intent, just poor execution.

 

However, I will say this once again. "Winning every contract" is EXACTLY what the fans SCREAMED for for years. We would overpay over and over and over and we would cry and cry and cry about our limited cap and why we couldn't spend less and get better deals and stop overpaying cap for old veterans and folks, this is what it looks like. This is more a missive to ES' past than anything else but just because you spend less doesn't mean you're good.

 

I was part of that throng of stop over-paying. However, I believe Bruce goes too far the other way. Success is somewhere in the middle. It's OK to be spend thrifty. Totally Ok with that. But this has gotten to the point of being detrimental to the development of the team. Neither extreme is effective. 

[The Batman]

6 minutes ago, NewCliche21 said:

 

1)  You respect my posts?  What the hell is wrong with you?!?!?!

 

2)  We've demonstrated to anyone who comes here that we can't recognize talent and that we'll drop you even if you're one of the best in the league.  Breeland has a good shot of being gone.  Norman has already expressed forms of regret for being here since we're not going to be champions.  That's our top three corners either gone or unhappy.

 

3)  Kirk was the guy.  I don't care to argue it, but Kirk was the guy and we would've won with him.  Against Seattle he threw a dime to Doctson to win the game.  Smith can't make that throw.  Kirk did.

 

4)  Giving up a pick and a player for someone older and not a huge step up is just stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

5)  Vinny didn't make half of those hires.  Snyder refused Williams and tried to hire Fassell until we all flipped our **** and nobody wanted the job so he took Zorn.  Snyder is responsible for the splash players and Haynesworth signed the 40 million guarantee under Shanahan/Allen.  Snyder dumped Schotty because he didn't have any say and THEN hired back Vinny after getting the shiny new Spurrier.  Ramsey was destroyed under a non-existent offensive line.  Snyder blew up the 1999 team and added his fantasy roster to the 2000 team, that wasn't Vinny either.  Don't get me wrong, Vinny made a hell of a lot of mistakes (Arch Deluxe as a prime one), but what Allen has done has been atrocious.  Probably worse because he at least gave us hope and then kept dashing it away.

 

5)  The Browns just completely re-did their front office, have over $100 million in cap space, and five picks in the first two rounds.  The Browns of Week 17 are not even close to the same team right now.

 

6)  Yes, Philly was a dumpster fire and is now in the Super Bowl.  Why can they do it in two years and Bruce can't do **** in eight?  You're making my point there.

 

1. Call it a holdover from the halcyon Gibbs days, when I was but a young bard traipsing through these forums. IDK who they body snatched you with since

 

2. Hopefully we resign Breeland. If we do, and Moreau (who by the way, was virtually the same story out of college as Fuller was, high round talent with significant injury that makes him drop) pans out, we good at corner. Big ifs though, I'll admit.

 

3. I respect your opinion that Kirk is the guy, but as good as that dime was, I cannot get past nor explain his performance against the Giants this year. One performance, admittedly, but wow, what a horrible game against a horrible team when the stakes are high. I just can't let it go. It's inexcusable.

 

4. Do you find that the reports of other teams making offers, and the kind of offers they made for him, equally stupid? One of them by a GM that has won a Super Bowl and been to another? It wasn't just our FO that wanted Smith. If it was, I'm with you 100%. 

 

5. I cannot agree with you that giving hope and dashing it is worse than never giving hope at all. If you're giving Vinny a pass on all of these decisions because Snyder overrode him, then Snyder overrode Allen too. I just think that to say that Vinny is not worse requires giving him advantages that aren't afforded to Allen, and that doesn't seem accurate to me. This, from Wikipedia: "Cerrato was hired by the Redskins in 1999. During this time, he acquired older big name stars like Bruce Smith, Deion Sanders, Irving Fryar, Jeff George, and Mark Carrier. He was then fired by Marty Schottenheimer in 2001. During his brief hiatus from the Redskins, Cerrato worked for ESPN as a college analyst." Regardless of if it was Snyder's will, he was still there for it. Just like Allen is right now. Just treat Snyder as the same character in both analyses, because otherwise Snyder has grown, and we all know that hasn't happened.

 

5. Everything you just said has been true of them like 3 times in the last 10 years, and they still suck. They have the same HC and the same roster and the same owner and they play in the same place. Don't give them too much credit, they've done this whole song and dance before and it hasn't worked. No reason to expect it will now. 

 

6. Again, I don't think Bruce called the shots while Shanahan was here. I think some may disagree, but to do so goes in the face of everything that was reported and everything we know about Shanahan as a coach. Either way, we have a coach at .500 right now through his first 3 years and I can't think of the last time that happened to Washington. If we suck next year, or the year after, I hope that wakes Snyder up, but it won't, so instead I just choose to hope for the blind squirrel.

[The Batman]

7 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

I was part of that throng of stop over-paying. However, I believe Bruce goes too far the other way. Success is somewhere in the middle. It's OK to be spend thrifty. Totally Ok with that. But this has gotten to the point of being detrimental to the development of the team. Neither extreme is effective. 

 

As was I, which is why I remember it so well. I also think that Bruce is too cheap, but I tend to think that a period of course correction of too cheap was necessary for the long term health of the team, which is why I hope it either fixes itself or he's gone soon. I also don't think that Cousins was a perfect example of being too cheap, but that's neither here nor there. We definitely need to find the happy medium.

[pjfootballer]

Need a happy medium for contracts. Don’t overpay. Don’t be cheap. Seems Bruce has gone too far to the cheap side. Vinny always wanted to overspend.

 

Negotiate in good faith what the player is worth. They kept wanting Cousins to “prove it.” And he did. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

5 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

 

It's not greed to go and seek what your services are worth

I agree with that.

 

But the primary point is that all this drama being about getting every last dollar he's worth doesn't align with how the story has played out.  Which is why I can't see him signing with the Jets or Browns over a team like the Broncos, Jags or Vikings.

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

14 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

I was part of that throng of stop over-paying. However, I believe Bruce goes too far the other way. Success is somewhere in the middle. It's OK to be spend thrifty. Totally Ok with that. But this has gotten to the point of being detrimental to the development of the team. Neither extreme is effective. 

Ultimately it's about making good moves, whether its for big or little money.

 

As an example, if Calais Campbell went to Jacksonville and laid down on the field like a fatass, that's a bad move.  But he didn't and never showed or exhibited any behaviors that might lead one to believe he would do that.  Therefore paying him elite money isn't a bad move.  When we paid Haynesworth (and I know this was Vinny) there was a lot of information out there to support that this guy could totally lay down once he got paid.

 

It's okay to overpay if you do it sparingly and with all your wits about you. 

[Warhead36]

I'm fine with paying a premium for difference makers that can take you over the top, but we're still lacking core foundation pieces in so many areas that spending big money on one guy just doesn't make sense, with Cousins being the exception because he's a proven top 10 QB and those are simply too hard to find.

 

Signing Josh Norman for example made no sense. We could have gotten similar production from a cheaper, younger player since we don't have the pass rush to take advantage of his abilities.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

10 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Signing Josh Norman for example made no sense. We could have gotten similar production from a cheaper, younger player since we don't have the pass rush to take advantage of his abilities.

I always thought I was alone in that belief.  Even though I liked the player, I thought it was silly to lock up 15M on a corner, when your Dline was basically D3 level.

 

It definitely felt like the move of a loser franchise.  I'm sure Scot loved his underdog mentality and all the work he put in to get where he was, in fact - that's what most people like about him.  It just didn't seem to be necessary at the time.  I'd be shocked if Dan and Bruce weren't spearheading that whole ordeal though.

[The Batman]

24 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

I'm fine with paying a premium for difference makers that can take you over the top, but we're still lacking core foundation pieces in so many areas that spending big money on one guy just doesn't make sense, with Cousins being the exception because he's a proven top 10 QB and those are simply too hard to find.

 

Signing Josh Norman for example made no sense. We could have gotten similar production from a cheaper, younger player since we don't have the pass rush to take advantage of his abilities.

 

So if we don't have the pass rush currently to take advantage of a young player near the top of his position we should just pass on him? That doesn't seem like building for the future, it seems like only considering what you can do this year. We are simultaneously harping on Bruce for being too cheap while also being on him for overpaying a player at a huge position of need (at the time), who was in his prime and previously had been franchise tagged. I think ultimately this comes down to (as it always has, really) whether you think Kirk is worth the money or not. If you do, then it was a bad decision, if you don't, it wasn't a bad decision, but either way we can't have it both ways and say we are too cheap and yet we are too spendy on these other guys. I can't understand how going to get Norman is an example of a "loser's mentality" when he was a good player and young. It makes no sense to me that you just pass on signing a good player in his prime because we didn't at the time have the pass rush to take advantage of him. Why bother signing anyone or doing anything? There's no point if the whole team isn't complete. Norman is a difference maker. The acquisition looks a lot better now that we have Allen on the DL and some better LBs (assuming we can keep Brown, which who knows at this point).

 

Also, the difference between Kirk and Norman in this case is that Kirk was going to cost nearly twice as much on the cap.

 

Bolded: This is complete speculation and we have no idea if it's true or not. 

[Veryoldschool]

We will see where Kirk ends up and then we will have some insight into what he wants.  I expect him to pick a franchise that is owned and run by people he respects and is positioned to win the Super Bowl.  I think the money will be substantial but Kirk is a substantial young man so money will be a secondary concern.

[skinny21]

1 hour ago, The Batman said:

 

Correct. This is what I've been trying to say the entire time. The FO screwed up, but Kirk played the situation masterfully, and anyone trying to demonize EITHER PARTY is probably wrong. They just did a business transaction and Kirk's side did better and the FO screwed it up. No nefarious intent, just poor execution.

 

However, I will say this once again. "Winning every contract" is EXACTLY what the fans SCREAMED for for years. We would overpay over and over and over and we would cry and cry and cry about our limited cap and why we couldn't spend less and get better deals and stop overpaying cap for old veterans and folks, this is what it looks like. This is more a missive to ES' past than anything else but just because you spend less doesn't mean you're good.

The main beefs were 1) signing past their prime guys to big contracts (Deion, Bruce Smith, etc.), 2) signing guys that weren’t very good to overblown contracts (Archuletta, Andre Roberts, etc.), 3) trading away draft picks - particularly for guys that weren’t great fits for us (Taylor, McNabb, Duckett) and 4) not re-signing/lowballing homegrown talent (Pierce).   

 

We just added a 5th big no no (trading away young, cheap talent), committed #4, and arguably #3*.  Sure, there are extenuating circumstances, but it’s still a problem.  

 

* Smith is a good fit for this offense though

 

 

Forgetting who gets credit for what exactly, we’ve in general seemed to draft better and do a better job in FA recently, we’ve extended some key guys and have been generally more cap competent.  We’ve brought in some decent to good coaches too.  In some ways, that makes this situation worse.  

 

The problem isn’t Smith, it’s losing one homegrown talent (and I’m not sure we tried very hard to keep him), trading away a very good (young, cheap, and homegrown) talent, and trading away a draft pick.  3 things we should be trying to avoid.  

 

It comes across as a bid to stay competitive moreso than build a winner, something that has underscored many of our past mistakes.  The fear of short term pain for long term gain.  The desire to keep fans in the seat with “bold” moves rather than (longer term) smart ones.  

 

[goskins10]

1 hour ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Ultimately it's about making good moves, whether its for big or little money.

 

As an example, if Calais Campbell went to Jacksonville and laid down on the field like a fatass, that's a bad move.  But he didn't and never showed or exhibited any behaviors that might lead one to believe he would do that.  Therefore paying him elite money isn't a bad move.  When we paid Haynesworth (and I know this was Vinny) there was a lot of information out there to support that this guy could totally lay down once he got paid.

 

It's okay to overpay if you do it sparingly and with all your wits about you. 

 

I think we are saying the same thing - no? I may have emphasized money but ultimately my entire point was making good moves, not just $ driven moves. Which is what I believe is what you are saying. Maybe I did not make that clear enough.  

[ThomasRoane]

1 hour ago, Warhead36 said:

 

Signing Josh Norman for example made no sense. We could have gotten similar production from a cheaper, younger player since we don't have the pass rush to take advantage of his abilities.

 

I swear he looks like he has really lost a step.  Players were running by Norman like he was wearing concrete shoes.  I doubt the rib injury was affecting him that bad towards the end of the year.  I'd much prefer to keep Fuller and let Norman go. 

[Veryoldschool]

1 hour ago, ThomasRoane said:

 

I swear he looks like he has really lost a step.  Players were running by Norman like he was wearing concrete shoes.  I doubt the rib injury was affecting him that bad towards the end of the year.  I'd much prefer to keep Fuller and let Norman go. 

 

He had a number of bad beats and games.  I don't know how many times he got beat for a long one after getting caught peeking back at the QB.  Maybe he was instructed to look back to provide run support or help coverage elsewhere, it's possible but it just looked like bad technique.

[Killer Rob]

i just wonder if and when we do win another SB title, will Snyder be forgiven for all of this decades of below average misery that has made us all so bitter?

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

1 hour ago, goskins10 said:

 

I think we are saying the same thing - no? I may have emphasized money but ultimately my entire point was making good moves, not just $ driven moves. Which is what I believe is what you are saying. Maybe I did not make that clear enough.  

We are, I probably should have clarified I was just piggybacking off of your point.

[Mr. Sinister]

6 minutes ago, Killer Rob said:

i just wonder if and when we do win another SB title, will Snyder be forgiven for all of this decades of below average misery that has made us all so bitter?

 

No. But the future can be better than his crappy past. It all sounds good, but it will never happen, because he has shown in a spectacular many ways, that he does not know how to foster a super bowl winning culture. The best he can do us have a team limp to the occasional 10 win season

[Rufus T Firefly]

Speaking of Norman, wouldn't this have been the perfect offseason to trade him? Entering his 30s, maybe a hint of decline. If it's true that a lot of people in the Redskin organization are really high on Moreau, then how nicely were we set up there with he, Fuller and Dunbar? With Allen and Ioannidis on the DL and maybe Nicholson at S, there might be a chance to build something of a young defense. Whether you use the saved cap from Norman to sign Cousins, or trade Cousins for more draft picks, it's the kind of thing that at least has some potential to be part of a plan.

 

But none of that feeds the beast. The beast, in this case, being protecting Bruce's job, winning news cycles and selling tickets. 

[The Batman]

1 hour ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

Speaking of Norman, wouldn't this have been the perfect offseason to trade him? Entering his 30s, maybe a hint of decline. If it's true that a lot of people in the Redskin organization are really high on Moreau, then how nicely were we set up there with he, Fuller and Dunbar? With Allen and Ioannidis on the DL and maybe Nicholson at S, there might be a chance to build something of a young defense. Whether you use the saved cap from Norman to sign Cousins, or trade Cousins for more draft picks, it's the kind of thing that at least has some potential to be part of a plan.

 

But none of that feeds the beast. The beast, in this case, being protecting Bruce's job, winning news cycles and selling tickets. 

 

I’m also slightly confused by this notion that trading for Alex Smith is going to sell tickets like gang busters. You want to sell tickets? Trade up high into the first and draft a QB. That gets rears in seats. What does Alex Smith have to do with ticket sales? He might be the least sexy competent QB in the NFL. It feels like this argument just uses an artifact from the past that we are reflexively used to using, that we did something to make a splash, when in reality there’s very little splashy about Alex Smith.

[CousinsCowgirl84]

Personally, i find it amazing that despite trying extra hard to be as bad as the browns we still don’t have that sorted....

[Wyndorf25]

On 1/31/2018 at 9:33 AM, stevemcqueen1 said:

You forgot to mention we traded a third round pick and our best young defensive player when you noted that we downgraded at QB to save a couple of million a year after our moron team president horribly botched the contract negotiations with our QB.

 

The team owned by the most famous spendthrift in the NFL got cheap with a homegrown franchise QB and this was the cost.

 

Anyone who still believes in this disgrace of a franchise is a ****ing sap.

 

On one hand, I agree with what you are saying...this team is completely hamstrung by a buffoon President and money-hungry Owner that continually leads this franchise into HAVING to make moves like this in order to save face. I do not have any faith that this will change as long as Snyder is presiding over this team.

 

On the other hand, if THIS IS where the team is at, and Cousins was NEVER going to resign with the Redskins because of how botched the negotiations have been over the last few years. I simply view this move to trade for a QB like Smith as the FO making surprisingly edible "chicken salad" out of a complete "chicken poop" situation that they created. I HATE the fact that they had to give up Fuller in order to get Smith, but THAT was the sweetener in order to get the deal done (reports are that the Browns were offering one of their early second round picks). That is the reality of the situation this FO is having to deal with and I do give them a modicum of credit for dealing with it in order to obtain a decent QB that will give this team a chance to compete.

 

I disagree that Smith is a downgrade at QB...I think its a step sideways IMO. Smith is more athletic and experienced but four years older. Cousins is more apt and adept at making the tough throws into tight windows but more prone to turnovers (including sacks on fumbles). Both are viewed as terrific leaders and swell fellows. But now the QB position is a bit cheaper and the quality of QB is virtually the same compared to the other options this team would be facing given their current predicament (rookie QB, FAs like Keenum, Bridgewater, Bradford, roll with Colt, etc).

 

I'm not happy the Redskins felt they HAD to make this move, but I can't kill them for doing it either. Unless you are like the OP and are actually rooting for the complete and utter failure of this team for the sake of humiliation in the hopes that Snyder finally reacts in a responsible way, hiring a true GM in the wake of Allens' firing...I just don't have that much faith that Snyder ever will. So for now, while in THIS window of 8-8, I am hoping that this team can field something to root for. Maybe that makes me a bad fan, but I want this team to win, but I also don't think Snyder will ever change his stripes. He tried once, and McGlouhan was the result, everyone loved him and the perceived "change of culture"...we all saw how that turned out thanks to yet another Snyder right-hand man in Allen.

 

Who knows, Snyder sacrificed Vinny after a fan-revolt, maybe that's what it will take for Allen.

[Veryoldschool]

25 minutes ago, The Batman said:

 

I’m also slightly confused by this notion that trading for Alex Smith is going to sell tickets like gang busters. You want to sell tickets? Trade up high into the first and draft a QB. That gets rears in seats. What does Alex Smith have to do with ticket sales? He might be the least sexy competent QB in the NFL. It feels like this argument just uses an artifact from the past that we are reflexively used to using, that we did something to make a splash, when in reality there’s very little splashy about Alex Smith.

 

How many saps are going run to buy tickets to see Snyder next wet dream?  I don't think he can sell tickets to watch his next savior and thankfully he isn't going to try.  Maybe they can stay healthy and be a respectable football team this year.  I'm going to jump on the bandwagon of Kirk's new team but I'd like to see the Skins prosper, I don't expect they will but I'd like to see it. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

2 hours ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

Speaking of Norman, wouldn't this have been the perfect offseason to trade him? Entering his 30s, maybe a hint of decline. If it's true that a lot of people in the Redskin organization are really high on Moreau, then how nicely were we set up there with he, Fuller and Dunbar? With Allen and Ioannidis on the DL and maybe Nicholson at S, there might be a chance to build something of a young defense. Whether you use the saved cap from Norman to sign Cousins, or trade Cousins for more draft picks, it's the kind of thing that at least has some potential to be part of a plan.

 

But none of that feeds the beast. The beast, in this case, being protecting Bruce's job, winning news cycles and selling tickets. 

Several people mentioned that he should have been the one to go rather than Fuller.  That would have been nice to get Josh's 15M off the books and keep the cheap up and coming player.  But I don't think for a second the Chiefs would want his 15M salary.  They knew what they wanted and the Redskins desperately took the deal.

 

I honestly don't know how much trade value Josh has overall due to his contract.  He simply hasn't made game changing plays and has some bad tape out there from last season.  With that said, I don't think the lack of pass rush a lot of the time help his cause for making those game changing plays.  Perhaps another team would see it that way.  It'd be interesting to see what they can get but after giving up Fuller and most likely losing Breeland, they don't have much choice but to keep him in this effort to stay employed.

[Wyndorf25]

4 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Several people mentioned that he should have been the one to go rather than Fuller.  That would have been nice to get Josh's 15M off the books and keep the cheap up and coming player.  But I don't think for a second the Chiefs would want his 15M salary.  They knew what they wanted and the Redskins desperately took the deal.

 

I honestly don't know how much trade value Josh has overall due to his contract.  He simply hasn't made game changing plays and has some bad tape out there from last season.  With that said, I don't think the lack of pass rush a lot of the time help his cause for making those game changing plays.  Perhaps another team would see it that way.  It'd be interesting to see what they can get but after giving up Fuller and most likely losing Breeland, they don't have much choice but to keep him in this effort to stay employed.

 

Without doing any research, doesn't Norman have only one pick in his two years with the Redskins? (I know he has peanut-punched out a few, but damn)

[Spearfeather]

10 minutes ago, Wyndorf25 said:

 

Without doing any research, doesn't Norman have only one pick in his two years with the Redskins? (I know he has peanut-punched out a few, but damn)

 

Three, but none last season, four forced fumbles total.