Nah Nah Nah…Nah Nah Nah…Hey Hey Hey…GOODBYE CLOWNSHOES

[oraphus]

44 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

Your "point" was ludicrously week (at best). And your follow up doesn't help it.

 

Wentz was given up on by two organizations who clearly wanted him gone, Mayfield was paid to go away and Ryan was an aging, fading QB who went to a team who's OL was falling apart.  If you're using those three as an argument for how it's a bad idea to acquire vets, you really don't deserve to be taken seriously. 

 

And then responding to the point about the previous two SB winners being vet acquisitions by arguing those are okay because apparently circumstances and context matter when you think it helps your argument... well, let's just call that... silly.

 

But, you know, Russell Wilson had a bad year, so, I guess....

let me break it down a bit more since you're not too quick on the uptake.... 

Brady left on his own, he didnt want to stay in NE so he is not part of this discussion

Stafford was on a really bad team with no supporting personal... and i wasnt arguing against vet acquisitions sparky.. i was arguing against trading for vets that failed on other teams. Stafford was the lone bright spot on the Lions for close to a decade  

 

Carr has played on a team with good O line, great O weapons and great running game this year... and only got 6 wins

Has been to the playoffs once in his whole career, had one winning season and now has two coaches that want to get rid of him.... but sure lets get another half-assed qb for all the money and watch him get us to 9 wins.

 

[CobraCommander]

9 hours ago, RVAskins said:

Whoever buys the team, please don't make the new stadium look like this.

You know what pisses me off the most about the moat is that absolutely asinine angle of the bridges. Whomever designed that model can go straight to hell.

[Rufus T Firefly]

11 minutes ago, oraphus said:

let me break it down a bit more since you're not too quick on the uptake.... 

Brady left on his own, he didnt want to stay in NE so he is not part of this discussion

Stafford was on a really bad team with no supporting personal... and i wasnt arguing against vet acquisitions sparky.. i was arguing against trading for vets that failed on other teams. Stafford was the lone bright spot on the Lions for close to a decade  

 

Carr has played on a team with good O line, great O weapons and great running game this year... and only got 6 wins

Has been to the playoffs once in his whole career, had one winning season and now has two coaches that want to get rid of him.... but sure lets get another half-assed qb for all the money and watch him get us to 9 wins.

 

Well this is true. Russell Wilson and Matt Ryan were massive failures in Seattle and Atlanta, respectively. 

 

You have no point. You're just throwing out seemingly random, completely contradictory statements which don't add up to any comprehensible argument.  

[Jericho]

13 minutes ago, oraphus said:

let me break it down a bit more since you're not too quick on the uptake.... 

Brady left on his own, he didnt want to stay in NE so he is not part of this discussion

Stafford was on a really bad team with no supporting personal... and i wasnt arguing against vet acquisitions sparky.. i was arguing against trading for vets that failed on other teams. Stafford was the lone bright spot on the Lions for close to a decade  

 

Carr has played on a team with good O line, great O weapons and great running game this year... and only got 6 wins

Has been to the playoffs once in his whole career, had one winning season and now has two coaches that want to get rid of him.... but sure lets get another half-assed qb for all the money and watch him get us to 9 wins.

 

 

It's not just that. Stafford may end up giving the Rams one good season. He'll be 35 in a month and has a lengthy history of being banged up. We'll see what he does in the future, but guys like Ryan and Eli Manning and Rivers and Roethlisberger show what a normal QB aging curve is. For the Rams, they managed to win the Super Bowl in that one year. But betting everything for one good year of a QB? That's a poor bet. And that's assuming Carr or whoever doesn't go all Russell Wilson. Even the "successes" are pretty low.

 

I still maintain you can pay big money to a mediocre QB (like say Cousins) or you can pay draft picks for a QB, but I don't really think you can do both successfully. If you're investing that much in a QB, you need the picks to fill out cheap talent on the roster. So if for some reason a good QB hits free agency, go for it. Or you can trade for a young QB (though really what team is going to give up a good young QB?) or move up in the draft.

[Rufus T Firefly]

7 minutes ago, Jericho said:

 

It's not just that. Stafford may end up giving the Rams one good season. He'll be 35 in a month and has a lengthy history of being banged up. We'll see what he does in the future, but guys like Ryan and Eli Manning and Rivers and Roethlisberger show what a normal QB aging curve is. For the Rams, they managed to win the Super Bowl in that one year. But betting everything for one good year of a QB? That's a poor bet. And that's assuming Carr or whoever doesn't go all Russell Wilson. Even the "successes" are pretty low.

 

I still maintain you can pay big money to a mediocre QB (like say Cousins) or you can pay draft picks for a QB, but I don't really think you can do both successfully. If you're investing that much in a QB, you need the picks to fill out cheap talent on the roster. So if for some reason a good QB hits free agency, go for it. Or you can trade for a young QB (though really what team is going to give up a good young QB?) or move up in the draft.

Like anything, it depends on the situation and it depends on your goals as a franchise. 

 

Brady and Stafford made sense for the teams they were going to. Honestly, neither really would have been a great fit here, with their ages/health and where this team was.

Russell Wilson made sense for Denver. Have to see if that was a bad/transition year or if he aged out early. 

Wentz was a red flag bonanza.

 

Carr I would stay away from for multiple reasons. trading for him when he's likely to be released would mirror the mistakes of the Wentz situation last year, imo.

[KDawg]

At the end of the day Carr is a good QB. He’d be, talent wise, the best QB we’ve had since Cousins. 
 

But he’s 63-79 as a starter.

 

Stafford was 74-90 so it’s almost the same statistical pace. And Stafford brought them a Lombardi (despite his best attempts to cost them that same Lombardi in a few games).

 

But Stafford is 15-11 as the Rams starter as a whole. 
 

That doesn’t mean that those two aren’t good QBs. They absolutely are. But their cost:production doesn’t necessarily add up.Controversial take here, especially because they got rid of him to win the Lombardi, but I think if McVay supported Goff more he could have won the Lombardi with the Rams last year. 
 

Stats obviously aren’t the end all/be all, but Goff has a 54-45 record as a starter. 
 

If he were available I’d take him over Carr, personally.

 

But people saying he’s (Carr) washed are overboard. The dude can play. He works hard. Teammates seem to like him. Seems like a genuine good dude.

 

A team could do worse.

 

I wouldn’t want to trade for him (his NTC would ensure we didn’t get him anyways if Snyder is still owner) and if he’s released there will be too much interest for him to come here. He can make the Jets better, I think. He makes sense there.

[Andre The Giant]

 

[spjunkies]

NO hard pass on Dan 2.0

[Rex Tomb]

3 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

NO hard pass on Dan 2.0

Seems to be the consensus.  He already has enough sports teams to manage, not sure ours would be a priority.  

[BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen]

12 hours ago, CobraCommander said:

You know what pisses me off the most about the moat is that absolutely asinine angle of the bridges. Whomever designed that model can go straight to hell.

 

 

Don't ya know she has a background in design? She probably unveiled the stadium model with a 'Taa Daa!' too...

 

 

IN OTHER NEWS:

 

 

https://tezlivenews.com/jerry-jones-says-the-relationship-with-commanders-dan-snyder-has-changed/

 

Jerry Jones maintains he is still an ally of struggling Washington Commanders owner Dan Snyder. On the other hand, the relationship is not what it used to be.

 

“I would say we had to be more formal in our conversations,” Jones, the owner of the Dallas Cowboys, told USA TODAY Sports during a December interview. “We’re not as nonchalant as we could be. Follow me? I don’t know who’s listening. who is what? So we had to be more formal.”

 

Snyder has recruited Bank of America as an aide as he investigates the sale of some or all of his franchise, while an NFL investigation by former US attorney Mary Jo White stemming from allegations of sexually harassing a team member more than a decade ago remains open. Snyder, also previously under investigation by the NFL in addition to a panel of Congress and other entities, technically relinquished day-to-day control of the franchise to his wife Tanya, as per his contract with the NFL.

Edited January 13, 2023 by BringMetheHeadofBruceAllen

[gortiz]

Quote

As for Jerry Jones and his stance on Snyder, it was not all positive. “I know Dan is his own worst enemy, his very own worst enemy,” Jones told Bell.

 

not sure if jeruh has ever been this critical of the little guy ... 

 

https://sportsnaut.com/jerry-jones-dallas-cowboys-playoff-futility/

[Spearfeather]

I actually want someone who has experience owning sports franchises.

 

Seems like there are quite a few people here who are a " hard pass" on everyone except Bezos.

[Conn]

Jerry openly saying he has to interact more formally with Snyder now because he doesn’t know who may be listening (a reference to government investigations and the like) is kind of stunning. That’s not a good thing for a billionaire amongst a club of billionaires to be feeling at all, he has to be tired of it to even mention it. 

[formerly4skins]

7 minutes ago, Spearfeather said:

I actually want someone who has experience owning sports franchises.

 

Seems like there are quite a few people here who are a " hard pass" on everyone except Bezos.

 

Bezos would be my first choice because he has the deepest pockets and other business ventures whose complexity, success, and revenue absolutely dwarf anything WAS football related.

 

I actually think a "non-sports" owner who can stay out of the way and let the experts they hire do their thing would be ideal...basically, the anti-Dan. I just have a hunch that the owner-prospects with existing sports ties are more likely to meddle. 

[MisterPinstripe]

29 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

NO hard pass on Dan 2.0

I mean, he has multiple other teams, experience running sports franchises, and he doesnt have the time to focus just on the Commanders like Dan did with everything else he has going on. Don't know if he would be a good owner, but he has won a championship recently.

[method man]

I am not feeling all these PE guys who are in the running to buy the time

[gortiz]

40 minutes ago, formerly4skins said:

 

Bezos would be my first choice because he has the deepest pockets and other business ventures whose complexity, success, and revenue absolutely dwarf anything WAS football related.

 

I actually think a "non-sports" owner who can stay out of the way and let the experts they hire do their thing would be ideal...basically, the anti-Dan. I just have a hunch that the owner-prospects with existing sports ties are more likely to meddle. 

cracks me up when people say no to bezos because he's an evil billionaire. 

 

show me one billionaire that does not have his/her serious detractors ... no one made that much money honestly and fairly.  NO ONE. 

[BrentMeisterGeneral]

Boehly would be a hard pass from me, for two reasons:

 

1. A minor quibble but in his short tenure over here at Chelsea he fired their Champions League winning manager Tuchel and replaced him with an up and comer Graham Potter who last night lost his 8th match in the last 10 games winning just 1. Rumours are he’s considering sacking him too so not exactly a stable start.

 

2. Washington not only doesn’t need any of the above, it needs effort and a big one at that. It’s a new stadium, potentially a new rebrand, a new front office, a new coaching set up a new everything and it’s certainly not “another” project. We need an owner that going to come in and fully turn this thing around properly with full concentration.

 

So thanks Todd but no thanks

[Skinsinparadise]

  Sheehan still thinks everything is proceeding, hope he's right

Edited January 13, 2023 by Skinsinparadise

[woodpecker]

1 hour ago, Rex Tomb said:

Seems to be the consensus.  He already has enough sports teams to manage, not sure ours would be a priority.  

You say that like it’s a bad thing. For me, anyone not named Snyder will do, but after that the less meddling the better! Hire a great GM and stay the hell out of the way.

Edited January 13, 2023 by woodpecker

[Zim489]

Anyone rooting for anyone bezos I think arent seeing the forest through the trees. AWS and what non released stuff that could be in use for us puts us a major leg up on anyone else in an ever growing in terms of importance aspect with Analytics. 

 

I still think itll be bezos in the end.

[fearlessNelms]

1 hour ago, spjunkies said:

NO hard pass on Dan 2.0

I really don't have a preference of who owns the team, as long as it's not Snyder. But the odds of this Boehly guy being Snyder 2.0 are astronomical. Snyder is a one in a few million kind of nincompoop that could screw up our beloved Redskins/Football Team/Commanders in the relative short time and fashion that he did. 

[Skinsinparadise]

Wonder if the Dick Clark connection gives him a connection to Dan?  I am watching an interview of him right now, he's definitely articulate and not socially awkward like Dan.

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/now/todd-boehly-hollywood-quietest-investor-010000296.html#:~:text=To be sure%2C Boehly is,over his 25-year career.

Boehly’s business empire is now enormous, and his dealmaking has him jetting between Los Angeles, New York and London, where he has been attending most of Chelsea’s matches. That’s in addition to an already formidable $32 billion investment portfolio managed through his Eldridge Industries holding company, which owns stakes in the Los Angeles Dodgers and Lakers, the song catalog of Bruce Springsteen, Epic Games, and entertainment brands like Golden Globes’ producer Dick Clark Productions, MRC, A24 and Fullwell Productions. In all, Boehly has stakes in more than 100 companies and business brand names.

To be sure, Boehly is known in the hypercompetitive financial world as a “quiet force of nature,” according to more than one person who has worked with him. He’s not known to be flashy or gregarious, but has developed an image as a relentless dealmaker working mostly behind the scenes over his 25-year career.

 

“I don’t look at him as on the ropes,” said Joe Ravitch, co-founder of merchant bank Raine Group, which was put in charge of managing bidders for Chelsea when Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich was forced to sell the team after his homeland invaded Ukraine.

 

“He has an organization of very smart people, but at the end of the day he makes the decisions himself, he shows up, and he knows every detail. If you look back at the Chelsea deal, we wanted someone who would make the right commitment. He was very convincing about that.”

There were widespread reports across Europe and the U.S. that Boehly’s consortium of investors outbid all of their rivals with a cash-heavy offer. Even so, Abramovich “tried not to sell the team to Boehly,” one entertainment industry executive with knowledge of the deal process said. “Todd’s offer was so much richer than anyone else’s that he had to.”

 

[Zim489]

 

 

Sounds very familar

[HigSkin]