Author Topic: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)  (Read 32950 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 55318
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #225: March 19, 2012, 04:07:42 PM »
Our starting safeties next year are better than someone who is always hurt and is more worried about bodybuilding and missing tackles because he's always looking for the big ESPN highlight hit and talks crap even after getting owned and better than another one who is always hurt and couldn't grasp his responsibilities in the current scheme and got benched in favor of a rookie

 :|

Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15536
  • Future
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #226: March 19, 2012, 04:09:35 PM »
:|

While I know that's the correct answer, I'd just like to know who. Merriweather and Doughty? :?

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 55318
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #227: March 19, 2012, 04:12:05 PM »
They have Gomes, Horton and D :spaz: ughty to compete at the position.

Offline MarquisDeSade

  • Posts: 13943
  • I don't like white people and I hate needledicks.
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #228: March 19, 2012, 04:16:52 PM »
Isn't Doughty the guy that can't tackle?

Offline InsaneBoost

  • Posts: 1479
  • Censored
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #229: March 19, 2012, 04:50:18 PM »
They have Gomes, Horton and D :spaz: ughty to compete at the position.

Horton? The guy who's a New York Giant?

Offline InsaneBoost

  • Posts: 1479
  • Censored
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #230: March 19, 2012, 04:55:52 PM »
Yes
Didn't seem to stop them from spending a crap ton of money on Garcon
I'm pretty sure the Skins could make his cap hit whatever it needed to be

Bottom line is that the Redskins needed Winston more than they needed Garcon. In fact, offensive line is probably the most critical need on the team after QB.

I don't see how yes is an answer to "was he cut before or after." The answer is after. He wasn't on the market when we signed Garcon. Were the Redskins supposed to predict the future or something?
Do you understand how Garcon's contract works? It's all shoved into bonuses and a bunch of other stuff. Hence the reason they got him signed.
Garcon is going to make 2.1 this year and I believe 5.6 next year. Find me a #3 or #2 WR making that. Let alone show me where Winston is making that.

Garcon is entering his prime, gets massive YAC's. We didn't "need" Winston. Brown is just as capable of doing the job right now. Yeah he's been injured the last two seasons, but he's healthy now. If it weren't for the lockout last season, he might have been healthy then.

I don't understand why the offensive line keeps getting brought up. Did you not see how they dismantled the New York Giants D line IN New York? The Jets? Cowboys? They did a fine job. They could probably add depth, but making the line out to be this horrible #1 need is not true at all.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 15799
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #231: March 19, 2012, 05:09:14 PM »

Do you understand how Garcon's contract works? It's all shoved into bonuses and a bunch of other stuff. Hence the reason they got him signed.
Garcon is going to make 2.1 this year and I believe 5.6 next year. Find me a #3 or #2 WR making that. Let alone show me where Winston is making that.

everything I've read has 21.5 guaranteed- do your sources have a different number, or is that a number that's reasonable for a #2 or #3

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 55318
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #232: March 19, 2012, 05:27:50 PM »
Horton? The guy who's a New York Giant?

I thought he had been re-signed. My bad.

I don't see how yes is an answer to "was he cut before or after." The answer is after. He wasn't on the market when we signed Garcon. Were the Redskins supposed to predict the future or something?


Winston was cut before free agency started.


Garcon is entering his prime, gets massive YAC's.

Where do you get this from? I'm sure watching him break a couple here and there may give that impression but Garcon's best season in that category was 2011 in which he ranked 30th. Garcon averaged about 5 yards after the catch so I wouldn't call that massive. He didn't even rank in the top 50 in the previous two seasons. Hopefully though as you pointed out the numbers are on the rise and he will be able to improve on that. The one positive I see from Garcon is that most of his catches result in 1st downs and moving the chains is huge.


I don't understand why the offensive line keeps getting brought up. Did you not see how they dismantled the New York Giants D line IN New York? The Jets? Cowboys? They did a fine job. They could probably add depth, but making the line out to be this horrible #1 need is not true at all.

Too bad they didn't have Dallas, and the NY teams scheduled for all 16 games. They may have finished the season 6-10 instead of 5-11.  :? They definitely need to address the RT position. This idea of picking certain outings in which they did OK to delude themselves into thinking all is OK with the unit is part of the reason this team has been so bad for so long.






Offline InsaneBoost

  • Posts: 1479
  • Censored
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #233: March 19, 2012, 05:52:21 PM »
everything I've read has 21.5 guaranteed- do your sources have a different number, or is that a number that's reasonable for a #2 or #3

This isn't the NBA. Guaranteed doesn't mean guaranteed. C'mon. I shouldn't have to even explain that.

Offline InsaneBoost

  • Posts: 1479
  • Censored
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #234: March 19, 2012, 05:59:24 PM »
I thought he had been re-signed. My bad.

Thank God he didn't, dude is trash.

Winston was cut before free agency started.

So he was cut right at the same time. My mistake. Problem is two things a) He wanted $$$$ which we weren't going to give up and b) Garcon had told us he'd wait for us to figure out what we were going to do for our cap because he WANTED to play here. That right there is a keeper.


Where do you get this from? I'm sure watching him break a couple here and there may give that impression but Garcon's best season in that category was 2011 in which he ranked 30th. Garcon averaged about 5 yards after the catch so I wouldn't call that massive. He didn't even rank in the top 50 in the previous two seasons. Hopefully though as you pointed out the numbers are on the rise and he will be able to improve on that. The one positive I see from Garcon is that most of his catches result in 1st downs and moving the chains is huge.

Correct, probably shouldn't have used massive, but in comparison to our WR's of late, you could say that. Garcon is very fast and with RGIII, could be deadly. Think of him as the new Kendall Wright for Griffin.


Too bad they didn't have Dallas, and the NY teams scheduled for all 16 games. They may have finished the season 6-10 instead of 5-11.  :? They definitely need to address the RT position. This idea of picking certain outings in which they did OK to delude themselves into thinking all is OK with the unit is part of the reason this team has been so bad for so long.

The really only bad game they had was Buffalo, but even then that was more because of Beck being lost. Grossman holding on to the ball too much also made a big impact. Can't block forever. Not to mention if the WR's just give up on the routes.

The team would have finished better than 6-10, the Eagles game at Fedex and both Dallas games should have been wins if it weren't for Rex. Making us 8-8. Even if you take one of the Dallas games away or the Philly game, were still talking 7-9. Not a huge improvement, but still improved.

Point is, most of our troubles was at QB, either forcing the ball into areas for INT's, or holding on too long.

Brown should be good at RT. He couldn't afford the $5,000 a month health care to get healthy with the stuff he had to take. He was able to do that this year and should be back 100%. For who all was out there and the $$$ they wanted, it was cheaper in the long run to keep Brown.

We still have Hurt who could play there if needed, plus the draft is coming up.

Remember, this isn't the 80's anymore. This is a passer league. You need a QB to succeed. Not saying you totally forget about the line, but it's not as much of a necessity as it once was.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 15799
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #235: March 19, 2012, 06:09:09 PM »
This isn't the NBA. Guaranteed doesn't mean guaranteed. C'mon. I shouldn't have to even explain that.


at least $11 is as a signing bonus, plus the 2.1 million base for next year. 2013's 5.6 million is guaranteed for injury, and 1.8 of 2014's 7.1 is also guaranteed for injury. That's $13.1 with an iron tight guarantee (i.e a good as an nba contract) with an additional  7.4 guaranteed for injury- back to your original point, please point out a number two with those kinds of guarantees

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/14/garcons-deal-comes-close-to-deseans/

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 55318
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #236: March 19, 2012, 06:16:37 PM »

Correct, probably shouldn't have used massive, but in comparison to our WR's of late, you could say that.


Shockingly, Moss ranked better than Garcon in 2010 and 2009 in that category. And even more shocking, Moss was actually top 10 in yards after catch in 2010. In fact, in 2010, Moss was the only WR in the entire league in the top 10 since RB's tend to amass a lot of yards after the catch.


Online Slateman

  • Posts: 26437
  • In Knorr We Trust
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #237: March 19, 2012, 07:43:44 PM »
They re-signed Horton

The safeties are bad. Like almost as bad as the Redskins prior to Sean Taylor.

I think Doughty will do okay, so long as they don't put him coverage. He's an in the box type safety. The rest .... meh. Gomes has the most potential. Maybe we'll get lucky and he'll grow leaps and bounds in his second season.

But that front 7 .... they better get  to the QB quick.

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 55318
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #238: March 19, 2012, 07:59:04 PM »
I thought they had re-signed him as well but it appears Horton signed with the Giants.

:spaz: ughty should be a special teams player who gets limited snaps at strong safety from time to time in certain packages.

Offline Terpfan76

  • Posts: 3882
  • ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #239: March 19, 2012, 08:25:55 PM »
I thought they had re-signed him as well but it appears Horton signed with the Giants.

:spaz: ughty should be a special teams player who gets limited snaps at strong safety from time to time in certain packages.

This. Doughty is a good dude and all, but he's a terrible liability in pass coverage.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 15799
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #240: March 19, 2012, 08:27:32 PM »
This. Doughty is a good dude and all, but he's a terrible liability in pass coverage.

In the fine tradition of our secondary in recent years- Hall is a liability and he's our number 1 cb

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 26437
  • In Knorr We Trust
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #241: March 19, 2012, 08:27:35 PM »
That's essentially what he was. Then Laron Landry decided that becoming a WWE star was his life long goal

Offline cmdterps44

  • Posts: 15536
  • Future
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #242: March 20, 2012, 12:07:47 AM »
In the fine tradition of our secondary in recent years- Hall is a liability and he's our number 1 cb

This most definitely. Hall was MUCH worse than Doughty, and thats saying something since Doughty isn't great.

That's essentially what he was. Then Laron Landry decided that becoming a WWE star was his life long goal

:rofl: :lmao:

Offline PatsNats28

  • Posts: 8456
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #243: March 20, 2012, 07:17:33 AM »
In response to the discussion from a few pages ago, Alex Cora is another discussed potential coach.


Online PC

  • Posts: 42539
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #245: March 21, 2012, 10:45:29 AM »
Yes it is, although it would be absolutely hilarious if they didn't.

Merril Hoge did a comparison between Griffin and Luck and he said he'd pick Griffin.

Offline Terpfan76

  • Posts: 3882
  • ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #246: March 21, 2012, 10:47:21 AM »
Merrill Hoge did a comparison between Griffin and Luck and he said he'd pick Griffin.

Hoge is an idiot though. His hatred for Tebow is kinda disturbing. Don't take that as me saying Tebow could be a great qb or anything, but he's MDS-like in his distaste for Tebow.

Online Slateman

  • Posts: 26437
  • In Knorr We Trust
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #247: March 21, 2012, 11:30:34 AM »
I would pay a lot of money for the Skins to NOT take Griffin, just to see the fan reaction

Offline spidernat

  • Posts: 55318
  • The Lerners are Cheap AND Crooked
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #248: March 21, 2012, 12:22:00 PM »
Hoge is an idiot though. His hatred for Tebow is kinda disturbing. Don't take that as me saying Tebow could be a great qb or anything, but he's MDS-like in his distaste for Tebow.

I disagree. Just because his analysis leads him to conclude that Tim Tebow isn't an NFL level QB does not equate to hatred. I don't think Tebow, at this time, can play and should not be playing QB in the NFL but that doesn't mean I hate Tebow. I don't hear anyone being accused of hating Rex Grossman but plenty of people have said publicly that he sucks and is a joke at QB.

Merril Hoge did a comparison between Griffin and Luck and he said he'd pick Griffin.

I would pay a lot of money for the Skins to NOT take Griffin, just to see the fan reaction

I wouldn't bet that the Colts are going to take Luck for sure. I would not be surprised if they drafted Griffin. It's possible that Shanahan already knows this and this may be the reason why they pulled the trigger on the trade. So it's probably not wise for Redskins fans to have their hearts set on Griffin.

Online HalfSmokes

  • Posts: 15799
Re: Washington Redskins Thread (2012)
« Reply #249: March 21, 2012, 12:40:03 PM »
I wouldn't bet that the Colts are going to take Luck for sure. I would not be surprised if they drafted Griffin. It's possible that Shanahan already knows this and this may be the reason why they pulled the trigger on the trade. So it's probably not wise for Redskins fans to have their hearts set on Griffin.


I think it's a coin toss personally, but does any skins fan really care, sure I have my preference, but I'd take either over any QB we've had since Rypien, and even that would be close