Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

!!!!0mgz!!!! Trent Williams finally showed up


Owls0325

Recommended Posts

It baffles me how this stupid idiot Danny boy made the money he did....he must of got real lucky...lottery lucky..because he is one dumb mofo.

 

I am really starting to wonder if something else isnt going on, I wonder if the guy has a drinking problem and is intoxicated all the time....being serious!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something these idiots don’t seem to understand is that fans get more excited when you are rebuilding the right way - loading up on draft picks and stocking the team with young talent. There’s hope. There’s potential for growth. There’s a renewed sense of purpose, where even if you lose every game, at least the young guys are getting better. 

 

When you do this half-ass, “we’re close” BS, and still lose almost every game, and still refuse to trade your aging vets, fans have nothing to look forward to, which means they stop showing up to games and buying merchandise, which means you lose money. The fact that they are either too stupid to understand this, or are so petty that they are willing to sacrifice long-term success AND money to assuage their hurt feelings and bruised egos tells me everything I need to know.  Nothing is ever gonna change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

For quite some time, Bruce Allen has maintained that the Redskins are on the right path despite a hideous record that would suggest otherwise. Because of that record, Washington should, at the very least, entertain whatever offers come their way. 

However, as long as Allen seriously believes that his plan is working, then it's likely no trades will happen, considering he's the one who executes them. 

The deadline strikes at 4 p.m. on Tuesday. Some major swaps have already been made well ahead of it, and more could happen as things wind down. The indication, though, is that the Redskins won't be involved in any them, unless they drastically change their approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the day after the Alex Smith trade I did a post about what defines a loser franchise. To me, that doesn't mean having a bad record or lack of talent. It means teams that don't even try to go for titles, just strive for the 9-7 years perpetually, being content with trying to be "relevant". Competing over contending. I mean, there have to be bad teams, it's the nature of the game. But to accept never being great is what makes you a loser team to me.

 

The other teams I felt were in the same boat were Cincinnati and Miami. While Miami is finally trying to break to of that loop, Cincy has always been the most profit-minded NFL franchise under Mike Brown. It's as unsurprising as the sunrise to see the Bengals and Redskins being the two teams lumped together today as refusing to do what's right for their organizations, no matter how hard the rest of  the league begs them to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not trading Williams is organizational malfeasance.  The Browns are desperate for an OT and would net us a pretty good first round pick. A first round pick we could use to, you know, draft a young, cheap, stud LT with. Yet the ****ing idiots running this team refuse to do what's best for the team.

 

I hope both Dan and Bruce share a cyanide milkshake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HTTRDynasty said:

Something these idiots don’t seem to understand is that fans get more excited when you are rebuilding the right way - loading up on draft picks and stocking the team with young talent. There’s hope. There’s potential for growth. There’s a renewed sense of purpose, where even if you lose every game, at least the young guys are getting better. 

 

When you do this half-ass, “we’re close” BS, and still lose almost every game, and still refuse to trade your aging vets, fans have nothing to look forward to, which means they stop showing up to games and buying merchandise, which means you lose money. The fact that they are either too stupid to understand this, or are so petty that they are willing to sacrifice long-term success AND money to assuage their hurt feelings and bruised egos tells me everything I need to know.  Nothing is ever gonna change. 

 

disrespecting our aging vets and tossing them aside was one of the ways the Skins alienated fans early in Snyder's run and just before

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, carex said:

 

disrespecting our aging vets and tossing them aside was one of the ways the Skins alienated fans early in Snyder's run and just before


These so called “vets” have contributed to our 1-7 record currently.  Why the **** should we give a **** if these vets are on the trading block or eventually traded?  Who cares about these vets anymore?  A smart, progressive front office is able to make those decisions, and think ahead with the future in mind.  Not a terrible, bottom feeding front office like the Redskins.

 

Its going to be really funny when the 1st or 2nd round choice that Cleveland trades to another team not named the Redskins becomes a starter, and pro bowl caliber player in a few years.  Meanwhile this ****show front office with its dumbass President of Football Operations continues to preach how “close” we are while we suffer through more below .500 seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be entirely wrong, I often am, but this looks punitive and petty to me.  Not as bad as threatening Laveranues Coles with a flat screen tv but in that category of behavior.  If the team doesn’t expect him back there is no reason to refuse a trade for him now other than costing Trent money.  

 

But like Ike I said, I could be wrong.  I hope I’m wrong.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Destino said:

I may be entirely wrong, I often am, but this looks punitive and petty to me.  Not as bad as threatening Laveranues Coles with a flat screen tv but in that category of behavior.  If the team doesn’t expect him back there is no reason to refuse a trade for him now other than costing Trent money.  

 

You're not wrong.  This is pure pettiness and vindictiveness. 

 

There is no person on this planet with an IQ over room temperature that thinks we're close to anything.  Time to unload the older vets to pick up additional picks and cut cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keim's latest podcast.  His points:

 

A.  They are unlikely to trade Kerrigan, he said they have told teams they aren't trading him and if anything there is talk about giving Kerrigan an extension.

 

B.  He said they felt from the summer on that Trent's value would be better in the off season.  Keim isn't sure if they are right or not but thinks its negligent on them that they aren't shopping Trent to find out.

 

Keim thinks it would behoove them to add picks for this draft aside from the rebuilding part but also because the job is unattractive to prospective coaches -- and more picks would make it more enticing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, REDSKINS JR said:

 

 

Iwas told trading Trent after the season will save cap$$….Instead of trading now....can someone explain that

 

the fines for not showing up come back from the cap.  As I understand it Trent isn't just not receiving money by not showing up, he 's actually losing money.  Now if he doesn't show up I know his entire contract for this year gets pushed back to next year, he'll be playing in 2020 for his 2019 salary but we'll not only subtract that we'll get a full season worth of fines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Keim's latest podcast.  His points:

 

A.  They are unlikely to trade Kerrigan, he said they have told teams they aren't trading him and if anything there is talk about giving Kerrigan an extension.

 

B.  He said they felt from the summer on that Trent's value would be better in the off season.  Keim isn't sure if they are right or not but thinks its negligent on them that they aren't shopping Trent to find out.

 

Keim thinks it would behoove them to add picks for this draft aside from the rebuilding part but also because the job is unattractive to prospective coaches -- and more picks would make it more enticing. 

Everyone knows it, everyone besides the buffoon that is actually paid to know exactly that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PartyPosse said:

I expect Kerrigan to re-sign for 6 years, 82 million.

 

That scares me.

 

Not necessarily because of the obvious - paying a declining Kerrigan and extending him and not recouping anything for him. 

 

(For the record, I like Kerrigan. If they tried to trade him and couldn't get anything of real value, and they could secure him as a vet backup for a fair salary I'd take him 99/100 times... But that's a lot of ifs)

 

My issue is that I could see them passing on a Chase Young because they have Sweat/Kerrigan/Anderson.

 

Even if Haskins stinks, I'd prefer to sign a quarterback who is a journeyman and is cheap for a season if Haskins isn't ready/isn't the guy. Or use our 1st rounder that the team acquires from a Trent Williams trade for a quarterback ( :ols: ) in that scenario.

 

Best case scenario is Haskins gets some play time, improves, and gets a PR consultant that tells him to let his play talk and to stop tweeting stupid **** and fix his body language. I'm all aboard that train. Then we can use the two first rounders to get a new LT and Chase Young.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...