Random Commanders Thoughts

This team is easily two solid draft classes away from being one that has to legitimately be taken seriously within the conference.

I personally think that partially plays into the approach of the team in free agency.

Some others were expressing concern how there are way too many holes to fill on the defensive side and how Scot can't possibly address them all in the draft.

Standing on the sidelines, letting other teams throw huge sums of money out the window, and picking and choosing from the leftovers and 2nd, 3rd, and 4th tier players in free agency has as much to with Scot's understanding/acknowledgement that this team is a way's away still.

If taking a bit of a step back this coming season means taking two leaps forward in the future, I'm personally okay with that.

A 9-7 division championship cannot cloud anybody's opinion about who we really are.

There will be holes on the roster come September...we are still a definite work in progress and as long as the FA operates under that premise, we are in very good hands.
 
Canadian Hog said:
This team is easily two solid draft classes away from being one that has to legitimately be taken seriously within the conference.

I personally think that partially plays into the approach of the team in free agency.

Some others were expressing concern how there are way too many holes to fill on the defensive side and how Scot can't possibly address them all in the draft.

Standing on the sidelines, letting other teams throw huge sums of money out the window, and picking and choosing from the leftovers and 2nd, 3rd, and 4th tier players in free agency has as much to with Scot's understanding/acknowledgement that this team is a way's away still.

If taking a bit of a step back this coming season means taking two leaps forward in the future, I'm personally okay with that.

A 9-7 division championship cannot cloud anybody's opinion about who we really are.

There will be holes on the roster come September...we are still a definite work in progress and as long as the FA operates under that premise, we are in very good hands.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%. Couple of years away to fill all the needs. Sign value guys if they are there, but no need to make any hasty signings.
 
I was hoping to sign one 'core' free agent such as Gipson that at age 25 has a good chance of still being in his prime when this team is ready to contend for a championship. Especially so at safety where this team has just been snake-bitten with draft picks, free agents and trades in the past.

Anything more than that, such as what the NY Giants did, to me would be irresponsible.

Jerry Reese is on the hot seat after Coughlin was fired and is desperately making moves for 2016 with little thought to the future.

Outside of Beckham the Giants have drafted poorly in recent years and that accounts for a good deal of Reese's desperation.
 
tr1 said:
Expectations are high from the casual fans this year (i.e., most of the fanbase), and an 8-8 record or less, without going to the playoffs changes the whole conversation from 'we're improving' to 'WTF happened.'
Click to expand...
Hopefully, we've gone past the fan revolt leading to significant changes on the team type thing.

There is another observer in the building to lend hand to these decisions.

If it looks like progress is being made knowing that this team is still not complete then the record will not be quite as heavily weighed (within reason) by those making those decisions.

Progress should also affect the so called 'real fan' in a positive way and they can educate those who lack team building acumen and fail to observe same.
 
I don't know whether McCloughan thinks Gruden is the solution as HC but he has seemingly been in agreement with the personnel evaluations Gruden has put on players on that side of the ball. Gruden certainly needed McCloughan's concurrence to make the qb switch last year. It appears they are in agreement on Alfred Morris, Andre Roberts in letting them walk and keeping both Jackson and Garcon for 2016.

As Tandler indicated the Redskins do need to make SOME moves in free agency. The 2011 and 2012 drafts which should have provided us with five or six starters/contributors right now are down to Ryan Kerrigan, Niles Paul, and Kirk Cousins.

We have to fill out that lack of depth from somewhere and we don't have any bonus picks this year. We aren't sitting on the 10-12 picks that New England seems to have every year due to trades, etc.
 
Seems like a logical place to again note the $36 million cap penalty ... which I think had a far deeper and longer-term impact on the depth of this roster than I think anyone has really been able to quantify. It doesn't excuse poor drafting, no, but it's been a considerable obstacle for the organization to have to overcome.
 
tr1 said:
When will the cap penalty no longer be a valid excuse for our poor roster? Five more years? Ten? It happened in 2012 and 2013.

No, the team is suffering from a decade or two of Vinny and Danny running the ship. The impact could last for decades...considering the negative perception of our beloved owner.
Click to expand...
When will people stop saying that mentioning the cap penalty when talking about the roster depth issues over the past few seasons is an "excuse?"

It isn't. It's a valid part of the equation. As noted all along.
 
Good GMs find some guys late in the draft and as undrafted free agents.

The Shanahan/Allen combo didn't do a very good job of that.

That's one reason we don't much depth.

That would have been the case with or without the additional cap space.

The other thing is with the decisions the club was making having that $36M available might simply have lead to MORE decisions like the one to give Jason Hatcher $27M at age 32.
 
Bulldog's Twin said:
I don't know whether McCloughan thinks Gruden is the solution as HC but he has seemingly been in agreement with the personnel evaluations Gruden has put on players on that side of the ball. Gruden certainly needed McCloughan's concurrence to make the qb switch last year. It appears they are in agreement on Alfred Morris, Andre Roberts in letting them walk and keeping both Jackson and Garcon for 2016.

As Tandler indicated the Redskins do need to make SOME moves in free agency. The 2011 and 2012 drafts which should have provided us with five or six starters/contributors right now are down to Ryan Kerrigan, Niles Paul, and Kirk Cousins.

We have to fill out that lack of depth from somewhere and we don't have any bonus picks this year. We aren't sitting on the 10-12 picks that New England seems to have every year due to trades, etc.
Click to expand...

Some of that my be bad drafting.

Some of that is typical Redskin coaching/front office turnover. Jarvis Jenkins is still a full-time starter in this league. Helu and Hankerson are still viable backups. Compton, Robinson, Morris ... even Griffin ... those guys will probably still play somewhere, but just don't fit here with our new coach and GM. This is still the problem we've had since Snyder took over. Front office turnover kills.

Hopefully this current one sticks for awhile.
 
Going into our third and fourth season under the influence of 'the draft' and cap penalty, we're into our second season under the 'football guy'.

Just how quick does things get turned around, couldn't buy any instant impact for two, couldn't draft additional impact for two.

How long does it take to develop draftees again? How many draftees were injured? How many FA's were injured when we actually landed some with talent?

Now we're dealing with keeping what's worth keeping, keeping the cap straight, drafting and developing and filling holes with the 'football players' that Scot wants to buy.
 
Agreed. Anyone that says Scot didn't do well in last year's draft is missing the boat at least from what we saw in Year 1.

Henry - yes, some of those 2011 and 2012 draft picks are still in the league but when you have high picks like Jenkins (Round 2), Hankerson (Round 3), etc. that continue to work on one year contracts because they have not yet proven themselves at age 26 or 27, it's a sign your War Room in those drafts was less productive than it needs to be to put together a winning team.

We can even go forward to the last Bruce Allen draft in 2014 and point to Trent Murphy. He was a very limited athlete to take with such a high pick and project to a 3-4 OLB position.

He seemed better suited to being a 4-3 defensive end.

If the goal was to stay in the 3-4 and fit personnel to scheme, the Redskins could have stayed where they were nearer the top of Round 2 and taken the player Dallas traded up to get from us, DeMarcus Lawrence.

With more athleticism and higher upside Lawrence posted 8 sacks last year for Dallas in a split role.
 
We got two guys when we traded that pick. Murphy to Lawrence straight-up isn't exactly an accurate comparison.

The 34th overall pick of the 2014 draft pick got us 28 starts this season. I probably wouldn't hold that up as an example of a bad use of a draft pick.
 
Well, it depends.

With Kerrigan, Smith and Galette on the roster Trent Murphy may end up a #4 linebacker on this team as a #2 pick.

Even though we received the extra pick (Long) I don't know that's adequate compensation if Lawrence ends up as a double digit sack man and starting OLB.

Plus, the other consideration is 'opportunity cost'.

One of the reasons McCloughan drafted Preston Smith #2 last year was doubts among the staff that Murphy was going to provide the type of edge rush we needed in the 3-4.

So, that #2 pick for Smith could have potentially been spent elsewhere for another need.
 
When I first saw the new stadium model,my first thought was:

How'd they get a pic of my molar before they put the crown on it?
 
The best firm in the world introduces their model, made with white spray-painted burlap and hot wheels tracking?

You've got to be kidding me.

I hope that is a joke - and if it's not, we need to start the petition yesterday!
 
You guys are way to critical about the stadium model IMO. I didn't even need to read the story, and was able to recognize the style and concepts. Strong construction style, that will allow unobstructed viewing for dam near everybody. That fabric is a pretty good representation of modern building material for the projected facade. Ya, a mote is a bit out there, but in actuality, it's a fabulous form of crowd control for security into the stadium. Do all your security screening long before people make it to the "inner circle" so to speak, close to the stadium.

Ya, an ornate, old school stadium would be cool, but they don't hold very many in comparison to something like that model.
 
As long as they don't locate the new stadium in another armpit like Raljon.............err Landover :D
 
I love you Pete, but I have no idea what you are talking about. Don't put out a model if you don't want people to react. And my reaction is that model is a) beyond amatuerish, and b) the ugliest effing thing I've ever seen. I don't know a decent stadium out there where 'obstruction' is even an issue - only when your owner wants to install seats behind concrete pillars or in the 3' of space under the deepest overhang.

Stadiums are ovals. Obstruction shouldn't really be a big issue.

What we need is a more vertical stadium to maximize noise and proximity to the field and noise, and an oldschool traditional DC feel. Typical Snyder to miss the obvious and near universal factors that Redskins fans would immediately applaud.

That may be the ugliest architectural mockup I've ever seen. And I'm not kidding. But to each his own. I probably won't live to see the next one built. But I hope for future generations of Redskins fans that this isn't the plan.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 2, Members: 0, Guests: 2)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 116) Show all

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top