BayouBrave86
The 1st Round Pick
Yep scary to imagine how bad this roster looks without Jayden. It masked a lot and outside of Amos and Luke, there isn’t really much else to point to. They really whiffed on this past offseason.
 }})
If you are Josh Harris calling Adam Peters.
- Thread starter Solitary Man
- Start date
Bulldog
The Legend
I think it all goes back to what an experienced organizational hand should have learned from 2024.
To me, I saw this team win games on Hail Marys and fourth quarter comebacks during the season as well as facing a number of teams playing without their starting quarterbacks.
We finished 12-5 and took advantage of those opportunities.
But top to bottom this was not a 12-5 team going forward with solid units on offense and defense.
The NFC Championship Game and the 3 games in total against the Eagles showed that Washington lacked youth, speed and strength on defense.
The playmaking on defense needed to be upgraded SIGNIFICANTLY in the offseason to help this team to continue to advance.
Instead we left almost $30M in cap space on the sideline and signed mostly mid-tier and veteran minimum type guys to come in and make a difference.
The problem with a lot of available 29-31 year old players (or older) is that is when veterans start to break down because of the wear and tear of playing the game hard.
For some players like Marshon Lattimore who we traded for during the season in 2024, at 29 he hit a career wall in terms of both his ability to play the position at a high level but also his ability to stay on the field. That's why he was available.
If you go back and look at his history in New Orleans he was top 5 for a number of years but the past couple of years there before being traded he had a lot of injury problems and he had slowed down.
So, we bought high on a player that was more past than future and for a team with questionable overall depth across the 53 man roster, losing multiple draft picks was a real blow for growth in 2025 and 2026 IMO.
If anything we used to see a contending Patriots or Chiefs team TRADE AWAY 30 year players - a year or so BEFORE their play started to diminish and pick up a bevy of middle round picks to restock the roster.
I think the organization became so enamored with 2024 that the 'group think' was that we were a couple of starters and some depth guys away from passing the Eagles and others in the NFC and going to the Super Bowl.
Instead, this team reminded me more of the 1991 Detroit Lions that went 11-5 and beat Dallas in the playoffs and faced Washington in the NFC title game and lost 41-10.
The Lions that year got a pro bowl season from Erik Kramer at quarterback and the team stood together after the injury to Mike Utley that left him paralyzed.
It was a great run but they were not going to beat Washington and Joe Gibbs or the Bills or other top team at the time for all the marbles.
To me, I saw this team win games on Hail Marys and fourth quarter comebacks during the season as well as facing a number of teams playing without their starting quarterbacks.
We finished 12-5 and took advantage of those opportunities.
But top to bottom this was not a 12-5 team going forward with solid units on offense and defense.
The NFC Championship Game and the 3 games in total against the Eagles showed that Washington lacked youth, speed and strength on defense.
The playmaking on defense needed to be upgraded SIGNIFICANTLY in the offseason to help this team to continue to advance.
Instead we left almost $30M in cap space on the sideline and signed mostly mid-tier and veteran minimum type guys to come in and make a difference.
The problem with a lot of available 29-31 year old players (or older) is that is when veterans start to break down because of the wear and tear of playing the game hard.
For some players like Marshon Lattimore who we traded for during the season in 2024, at 29 he hit a career wall in terms of both his ability to play the position at a high level but also his ability to stay on the field. That's why he was available.
If you go back and look at his history in New Orleans he was top 5 for a number of years but the past couple of years there before being traded he had a lot of injury problems and he had slowed down.
So, we bought high on a player that was more past than future and for a team with questionable overall depth across the 53 man roster, losing multiple draft picks was a real blow for growth in 2025 and 2026 IMO.
If anything we used to see a contending Patriots or Chiefs team TRADE AWAY 30 year players - a year or so BEFORE their play started to diminish and pick up a bevy of middle round picks to restock the roster.
I think the organization became so enamored with 2024 that the 'group think' was that we were a couple of starters and some depth guys away from passing the Eagles and others in the NFC and going to the Super Bowl.
Instead, this team reminded me more of the 1991 Detroit Lions that went 11-5 and beat Dallas in the playoffs and faced Washington in the NFC title game and lost 41-10.
The Lions that year got a pro bowl season from Erik Kramer at quarterback and the team stood together after the injury to Mike Utley that left him paralyzed.
It was a great run but they were not going to beat Washington and Joe Gibbs or the Bills or other top team at the time for all the marbles.
SkinsLife
The UDFA
Its also laughable to listen to mediots like Shehan.. who claim that we only suck on D due to injuries.. like loosing a career journeyman 30+ y old Wise (who was supposed be a rotational back up), Harris (who wasnt playing all that well before getting injured) and Armstrong (who admittedly was playing well but not a big name) completely tanked our D. The fact that this FO and coaching thought it was a good idea to roll in to the 25 season with this joke and depth of a D roster is malpractice. If we have another sub .500 season in 26 and Harris doesnt clean house starting from Peters on down... he is the idiot.
SkinsNumberOne
The Starter
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2013
- Messages
- 1,834
- Reaction score
- 1,183
- Points
- 263
Hm, I'm not sure you are fair to the 1991 Lions or Redskins with that analogy at all.
The 1991 Lions beat a VERY good Cowboys team. That was a Cowboys team that would win multiple Super Bowls starting the following year and going into a few years (over some period). That was a Cowboys team that took an EXCELLENT Redskins team to the last minutes (33-31) and even beat that team in the second game as memory serves.
That Redskins team that stomped the Lions team? They had already beaten them early in the year to the tune of 45-0 (again from memory). For whatever reason, the Gibbs/Petitbon combo knew how to deal with the Lions. It was a really bad matchup for them, and that Redskins team was truly dominant. So I don't think it's a good comparison for much of anything, there are too many outliers there.
I probably agree with a lot of the rest of your post. In some cases, you are hosed if you do and hosed if you don't. I imagine had we NOT gotten Lattimore, there would have been a big clamor on why we didn't take a swing for a FA corner that could have gotten us to the Super Bowl. That said, the team needs to be above that, and this wasn't the way to build a perennial contender. I don't think there was great self-critique in what was happening to a degree.
Bulldog
The Legend
I went to the Lions playoff game and trust me Washington could have run up a 55-10 score if it wanted to. In fact after the game was over both teams assembled at mid-field to give a thumbs up for Mike Utley and Brian Mitchell was very emotional in hugging the Lions coach.
But my point is that Lions team was not expected to do anything in 1991, and instead of finishing in 4th place, it rose and continued to improve as the year went on and got on a roll that the experts could not seem to explain - which of course at the time we Redskins fans were used to because the national media thought the 49ers, Bills or Cowboys should win the Super Bowl every season
Agree though - there was no critique after last season that perhaps we bought a pig in a poke in the 29 year old Lattimore, a player who missed large portions of the previous couple of years with injuries.
For some reason Peters and Harris made the decision that spending draft picks instead of cap space was the way to go, which I don't understand as at the time Daniels was THREE years away from having a new salary hit the cap and so a lot of the guaranteed money in free agent deals would be expended by then.
That $30M in extra cap space we left out there all but guaranteed that this team would not have any appreciable depth, indeed any more than last year's team did.
Our big acquisition was Javon Kinlaw who received $30M in guaranteed money. I don't have a problem with signing a 26-27 year old DT and giving him that contract but my question is - what did Kinlaw do in San Francisco or New York to garner that money?
He had not shown either organization he was a 16 game starter and consistent rusher inside and run defender.
Meanwhile, there were other free agents that could have helped us more at other positions and we dismissed them out of hand evidently as being 'too expensive'.
The joke is that Washington was top 5 in cap space. If there ever was a time to nail down a couple of younger starters with long-term deals to help out the rebuild and see these guys grow with Daniels, it was the 2025 free agency period.
But my point is that Lions team was not expected to do anything in 1991, and instead of finishing in 4th place, it rose and continued to improve as the year went on and got on a roll that the experts could not seem to explain - which of course at the time we Redskins fans were used to because the national media thought the 49ers, Bills or Cowboys should win the Super Bowl every season
Agree though - there was no critique after last season that perhaps we bought a pig in a poke in the 29 year old Lattimore, a player who missed large portions of the previous couple of years with injuries.
For some reason Peters and Harris made the decision that spending draft picks instead of cap space was the way to go, which I don't understand as at the time Daniels was THREE years away from having a new salary hit the cap and so a lot of the guaranteed money in free agent deals would be expended by then.
That $30M in extra cap space we left out there all but guaranteed that this team would not have any appreciable depth, indeed any more than last year's team did.
Our big acquisition was Javon Kinlaw who received $30M in guaranteed money. I don't have a problem with signing a 26-27 year old DT and giving him that contract but my question is - what did Kinlaw do in San Francisco or New York to garner that money?
He had not shown either organization he was a 16 game starter and consistent rusher inside and run defender.
Meanwhile, there were other free agents that could have helped us more at other positions and we dismissed them out of hand evidently as being 'too expensive'.
The joke is that Washington was top 5 in cap space. If there ever was a time to nail down a couple of younger starters with long-term deals to help out the rebuild and see these guys grow with Daniels, it was the 2025 free agency period.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 1,647
- Reaction score
- 921
- Points
- 163
I’d get together with Quinn and Peter’s and tell them I’ve got your back. It’s been a horrible year but have full confidence in you to bounce back from this. Tell me anything you need to do that and you will get it.
Never does any good to beat people down. Try to help them succeed until it’s clear they can’t then go another direction.
Never does any good to beat people down. Try to help them succeed until it’s clear they can’t then go another direction.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2015
- Messages
- 1,299
- Reaction score
- 369
- Points
- 98
Now while I am more on your side than against on this subject, I believe we will be under .500 in 2026. I am hoping they start focusing on youth and future assets. I still understand your sentiment, but I would give Peters much more time. Now if he continues trading away picks for aging vets then I can get on your accelerated program.
method man
The Starter
I like Logan Paulsen but have to remember he works for the team. I got a laugh in the offseason with him trying to hype up the cadre of JAGs that AP had gotten us at the DE spot.
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2015
- Messages
- 1,299
- Reaction score
- 369
- Points
- 98
Yes I can’t listen to Logan anymore for that very reason. I want some real critique from him and we are not gonna get it.
method man
The Starter
It's why I look forward to Steve Suter's film breakdowns every week. The guy knows football, is currently an analyst for the Terps and has zero connection to the team. You get very frank takes from him. His take is no team scores less than 25 against this D the rest of the season
- Called out Coleman and Allegretti for terrible play in the GB game and those guys got replaced the following week
- While everyone is saying Payne is having a fantastic season, he points out that he takes a ton of plays off and doesn't give the effort he should give
- First guy to point out Sainristil is having a terrible season. Flat out said he can't cover anyone in man coverage
- Loves Kinlaw, Jacob Martin, Paul (did say he was terrible against Seattle) and McNichols
Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)
You haven't joined any rooms.