Berggy9598 Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Someone called Ray Donovan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallen5862 Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 I wonder if the NFL will just consider Reuben Fosters missed games last year while the matter was being investigated as his punishment. The NFL could just say they consider the games missed as his suspension and no more action would be needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 So, now would have been the appropriate time to inquire about Foster, after having dropped through waivers, out of the league, and as the process has played itself out to this point where some resolution presents itself and he seems to be cleared. Too bad, is all I say to those who'll undoubtedly bring up that his cost would be more than the remaining rookie contract. Maybe, maybe not. Too bad, is all I say to those who'll undoubtedly bring up that other teams would be more attractive to Foster than washington in a free for all bidding process. Thems the brakes. Make your organization better so that they become more attractive, if you actually think other teams have an advantage over washington (which I'm sure they do). The claiming of Foster really exposed the organization's own insecurities. It was clearly a desperation move. They likely believed that in an open market situation, they probably would have lost out on him. That revelation just underscores serval things about the washington culture, identity, etc, that many people are pinging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hailmary Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Looks like a great move by Bruce & Co. Hope we say good bye to SLOW MO Foster! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 32 minutes ago, Monk4thaHALL said: So, now would have been the appropriate time to inquire about Foster, after having dropped through waivers, out of the league, and as the process has played itself out to this point where some resolution presents itself and he seems to be cleared. Too bad, is all I say to those who'll undoubtedly bring up that his cost would be more than the remaining rookie contract. Maybe, maybe not. Too bad, is all I say to those who'll undoubtedly bring up that other teams would be more attractive to Foster than washington in a free for all bidding process. Thems the brakes. Make your organization better so that they become more attractive, if you actually think other teams have an advantage over washington (which I'm sure they do). The claiming of Foster really exposed the organization's own insecurities. It was clearly a desperation move. They likely believed that in an open market situation, they probably would have lost out on him. That revelation just underscores serval things about the washington culture, identity, etc, that many people are pinging. Acquiring a player who was the best player in college at his position and was ranked in the Top 5 prospects throughout most of the process and who, once healthy, as a rookie, appeared to be taking off IS an effort at making your team better, thus more attractive. You now have Allen and Foster from that draft. That's ASTOUNDING. Suggesting we should have waited to compete for his services against 31 other teams once cleared is the height if stupidity as IF you are trying to improve your team, you do so by ASSURING something, which a waiver claim on Foster did, not by HOPING for something, which waiting to negotiate against everyone else would have done. And, to put a frank point on the topic, Williams was actually right. While domestic violence (and this means men against women and women against men, cause, you know, 1 in 4 men are victims of that too, and that's JUST reports, not even men, like me, who took a beating and didn't report) is a serious problem, what was described that night WAS SMALL POTATOES. And it turns out to apparently have been fiction as the "victim" wanted the case to proceed and was told NO by the prosecution. That stiff arm tells you all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HigSkin Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 6 games? Seems a little much but as someone said above, its because its the Redskins and then there's Mara! I think he maybe already served a few games in suspension. I wonder if they count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malapropismic Depository Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Wow, the Redskins won the offseason, already. That was the quickest ever. 4 days ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 So lots of people crowing about the TMZ report about Foster. Seems very premature and even reckless - kind of like the morally bankrupt decision to sign him to start with. First, let's clear up some misinformation. TMZ reported he was cleared - that is not accurate based on the Tampa police. Their statement is below. There is a huge difference between "insufficient evidence to move forward with charges" and he has been cleared. Also, the real problem here - guilty or not - is that at the very least Foster has several times now made very poor decisions. And this is not just with the girlfriend. Let's not forget he failed a drug test already and got run off the combine. He also had a weapons change - yes I know it was dropped. That's 3 arrests just in 2018! How much smoke do you need to see it will eventually turn to fire! But just for argument sake, let's assume he is just an innocent bystander with extremely bad luck. Let's look at from just a football standpoint - he has already had several injury issues. He did not play after week 8. Also, there were questions in the draft about his surgically repaired shoulder. That's the whole bargain basement shopping thing again that bruce is infamous for. So let's say he does not get suspended - any bets on if he gets injured again? When you sign injury prone players- guess what, they get injured. This team can ill-afford to take chances on guys like this. I still say this was a poor signing. Tampa prosecutors declined to file charges against ex-San Francisco 49er Reuben Foster on Wednesday, over a month after he was arrested for allegedly hitting his on-and-off girlfriend. “We take allegations of domestic violence very seriously and thoroughly investigated the facts of this case,” said Estella Gray, a spokesperson for the Hillsborough County State Attorney’s Office. “After a meticulous review of the case, there was insufficient evidence to move forward with charges.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 2 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said: Wow, the Redskins won the offseason, already. That was the quickest ever. 4 days ! Sadly, no. And if Smith can't play this will be the most positive thing to happen to us in the offseason unfortunately. But it is nice to have a player at that spot with the upside to help you get better for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malapropismic Depository Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 3 minutes ago, HigSkin said: 6 games? Seems a little much but as someone said above, its because its the Redskins! He can do what Elliott did - appeal it 23 times, to delay it at the very least. Although it's debatable whether that's in his and the team's best interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HigSkin Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonArtest15 Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 50 minutes ago, Darc Requiem said: Not a fan of Witten but given his background, I understand his reaction to domestic violence. IIRC his mom had to literally sneak out with kids to get away from his abusive father. But he also condemned Foster without any legal decision being made as a result of the accusation. I get why it's personal for him, but he could have at least waited for the entire legal process to play out before getting on his soap box. Also, he didn't exactly sing the same tune when Greg Hardy was on the Cowboys, IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 I didn't think prosecutors had a great chance of winning in court without additional evidence because the victim in this instance previously admitted under oath that she made it all up in an attempt to extort Foster. That torpedoes her credibility in a court room, no matter what we might think. It would be interesting to know exactly why the prosecutor chose no to go forward with charges in this instance. Was it a lack of corroborating evidence or did they find evidence to the contrary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 3 hours ago, Xameil said: If I was a vindictive asshole, I'd bump the other thread where sooo many people were up in arms forming the ES mob... Ok...I really am that vindictive asshole...I just dont have the time to bump ths thread I'm busy, too, but I look forward to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMK9973 Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 36 minutes ago, Gallen5862 said: I wonder if the NFL will just consider Reuben Fosters missed games last year while the matter was being investigated as his punishment. The NFL could just say they consider the games missed as his suspension and no more action would be needed. He was paid - so i doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 17 minutes ago, Art said: Acquiring a player You can refer to my posts in the Comprehensive Draft Database regarding R. Foster prior to the 2017 draft. I'm not confused now, nor was I confused then about the kind of player Foster was/is. Posters like @Skinsinparadise can verify my takes on Foster, as I would argue with him about the worthiness and the grade of Foster. Not many were as high on Foster, including SIP, as I was in the months prior to the draft. And I stayed steady with the grade even after the combine snafu and the rumblings of steroids and shoulder issues. My point here should be obvious. Even I would pass on a player, despite talent, in the interim, contingent on the specific circumstances. Circumstances like these fit my threshold. Once cleared of charges, I'd reevaluate the situation and make appropriate moves, knowing that there would be competition with the rest of the league. I could live with that. I'd take my chances even if it meant losing the player. Short of it being Tom Brady in his prime, or any franchise QB of that ilk, Rodgers, I'd know that no single positional player would single handedly result in a SuperBowl, so I would not be stampeding ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 1 minute ago, Monk4thaHALL said: You can refer to my posts in the Comprehensive Draft Database regarding R. Foster prior to the 2017 draft. I'm not confused now, nor was I confused then about the kind of player Foster was/is. Posters like @Skinsinparadise can verify my takes on Foster, as I would argue with him about the worthiness and the grade of Foster. Not many were as high on Foster, including SIP, as I was in the months prior to the draft. And I stayed steady with the grade even after the combine snafu and the rumblings of steroids and shoulder issues. My point here should be obvious. Even I would pass on a player, despite talent, in the interim, contingent on the specific circumstances. Circumstances like these fit my threshold. Once cleared of charges, I'd reevaluate the situation and make appropriate moves, knowing that there would be competition with the rest of the league. I could live with that. I'd take my chances even if it meant losing the player. Short of it being Tom Brady in his prime, or any franchise QB of that ilk, Rodgers, I'd know that no single positional player would single handedly result in a SuperBowl, so I would not be stampeding ahead. I understand your point and repeat, your point is largely invalid. We are not a church. We are a football team. There's an opportunity to ASSURE you have a player with the upside to help your team out for years to come. Do you take it or let it slip? You suggest the merest HINT at impropriety means you let it slip. This is foolish if your goal is to be better as a football team. I concur with you that Foster, even if great, doesn't solve all our issues. But it's foolishness to suggest it would have been MORE wise to WAIT to compete against 31 other teams for ANY chance at him than to assure you had the ONLY chance at him. If it didn't work out you lost nothing and assured pole position. If it worked out you did it right. And, again, the significance of the reports against him, on this issue, were simply not that serious. The guy CLEARLY has a character flaw and should be sniffing around another honey pot, and I yield he's not shown ANY ability to simply play football and stay out of trouble. So I'm sure he'll do something else stupid that may prevent his potential upside. But, both the future, AND the past are irrelevant. You had a chance for an elite young talent. You have Allen AND Foster from the same draft. That's awesome. False accusations happen a lot. See the Elliott case. See THIS one, where the woman STILL wants the case to proceed and has been told no. See Kavanaugh (this is just to rile the woke). That you feel it appropriate to pre-emptively strike a man of ALL opportunity because someone said something is, simply the immoral thing to do in a country that is predicated on innocence until PROOF of guilt. I COULD say you could make your moral point IF the prosecution kept forward and Foster was convicted. THEN you have a guy with a conviction. Then you have something to argue. Until then it seems you have chosen to punish first and ask questions later. That seems flawed in America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Csup Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 Great job by Bruce, Danny, and Doug. Keep up the good work boys. I see a Super Bowl in the near future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskinscub Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 With Reuben on board maybe HBO will pick us for Hard Knocks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malapropismic Depository Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 59 minutes ago, Art said: Sadly, no. And if Smith can't play this will be the most positive thing to happen to us in the offseason unfortunately. But it is nice to have a player at that spot with the upside to help you get better for sure. What makes you certain that this will be the most positive thing that will happen in the upcoming offseason (other than Smith) ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 9 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said: What makes you certain that this will be the most positive thing that will happen in the upcoming offseason (other than Smith) ? If Smith can't play we can't sign anyone to come in other than drafted players and unrestricted free agents as we'll be cap crushed. So if Smith is out, this will be our best news all offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hazel-Ra Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 3 hours ago, Jericho said: I'm sure it's been said before, but I found it somewhat hypocritical for Witten to come out so strong against Fosters/the Redskins for a mere accusation when the dude played on a team with Ezekiel Elliott who went through very similar things. Where was his strong position back then against Elliott? Maybe I missed it, but it seemed like he was the supportive teammate and not critical of the team/Elliott for keeping him around. I don’t believe he ever said a damn word about Greg Hardy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 3 hours ago, Master Blaster said: Absolutely there is a massive difference. One being that it is impossible for an accuser to drop charges. Thank you for picking out the least important difference. The prosecutor often drops charges because the accuser tells them they wont cooperate. No, the real difference is that when charges are dropped that may or may not mean the prosecution thinks it didnt happen, it means they dont think they can convict. If you paid attention to the last time he got charges dropped, the prosecutors dropped the charges, but said they thought he was guilty, however the accuser said she refused to cooperate and didnt want him charged. This is completely different from being the prosecutor investigating the issue thoroughly, and deciding nothing happened and feeling he is clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rumplestilskin Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 There is a lot to be learned from the fable "boy who cried wolf" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted January 3, 2019 Share Posted January 3, 2019 4 hours ago, Art said: Signing Foster was a great move when we made it purely from a football perspective. It's a young player with zero cap consequence with significant upside at a SEVERE position of need. If the domestic violence charge had merit we lose nothing by controlling his rights through a waiver claim. And if, as was always likely the case, the charge amounted to nothing, you have a guy who was an elite college player who has the sort of upside to get excited about at that position. While there was a PR hit based on the woke media about daring to sign a guy with ZERO football downside, the fact is, we're a football team. That said, and similar to Payne, he's NOT IDEAL in a 3-4. I think he'd be masterful as a WILL backer in a 4-3. I think Payne and Allen would be outstanding as 4-3 tackles. I think our personnel so well aligns with a 4-3 I am going to BEG for someone to make that happen :). Like Payne, though, where I think Payne is not ideal as a 3-4 nose, he CAN play there and Foster CAN play inside in the 3-4. I'm just a bit worried about continuing to have personnel that would seemingly fit perfectly a system like the 4-3 yet we continue to run a 3-4. I can sorta see RF not necessarily being "ideal" as a 3-4 ILB but I think he and SDH could pair well as SDH is the more cerebral and assignment based where RF is a freakish athlete with great range and a nose for the ball. As far as Payne and Allen, not sure why you don't think they're suited to 3-4 in the way we run our scheme. If we were playing a lot of pure old school 3-4 where the DL guys are there solely to 2 gap and eat up blockers I might agree. But with our more 1 gap and Under alignment focused defense the guys we have a pretty ideal IMO as we have 3 excellent guys with the size and skills of 4-3 DTs. Besides, the whole "3-4 or 4-3" thing is borderline moot nowadays anyway seeing as how there's so much use of nickel and Under formations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.