Random Commanders Thoughts

Hard to read when this unit was supposed to be Top 5 in the league...

 
Neophyte said:
Hard to read when this unit was supposed to be Top 5 in the league...

Click to expand...


Coaching is so bad. Nothing changes. If they aren't zoomed back before the snap, how often do we not see the CB because he is so far off the line? The LBs run into the backs of the DL while RBs go past them. They tackle poorly. Too much across too many players to think it's anything but coaching and talent evaluation
 
If they are even a top 15 defense we're a playoff team - even WITH Ron Rivera as HC.
 
Boone said:
If they are even a top 15 defense we're a playoff team - even WITH Ron Rivera as HC.
Click to expand...
Comfortably a playoff team in the currently weak NFC.

And if I'm Josh Harris, I'm thinking about what a difference that would make to home ticket sales.
 
Heard on the Craig Hoffman Show on YouTube:

"The game's not rigged. Don't tell me it's rigged. I know it's not rigged. You know how I know it's not rigged, Craig? Cause the guy they tossed is Emmanual Forbes. You're gonna rig a game for the Seahawks maybe toss somebody else." - Michael Phillips (910 the Fan in Richmond)
 
When Red Auerbach ran the Boston Celtics, they never had cheerleaders. When asked why, Red put it this way:

Worst case scenario, players are fooling around with the cheerleaders and the wives are pissed.
Best case scenario is nothing's going on and the wives are still pissed.

I look at the NFL getting in bed with gambling the same way. Nothing may be going on but it looks bad.
Especially when New York can buzz into any game and seemingly put their thumb on the scale.

In game officials and their interpretations of replay is bad enough...but now NY chimes in?

Just looks bad.
 
14 rushes isn't winning in the NFL. Bienemy holds up 5 sheets of plays, but I see 2 formations and the same dropback. He is clearly in over his head when it comes to playcalling.
 
Part-time chronically disgruntled underpaid employees who are largely in control of game outcomes and the NFL embracing legalized gambling?

What, in a million years, could ever, ever go wrong?

One question I cannot believe I have not heard Roger Goodell asked. Is the NFL actively monitoring the potential gambling activity of it's officials?
 
Well, Goodell did once complain that some of his ref buddies were late in placing his bet.
 
Gambling is a bit like drug dealing - it ends up with millions of addicts.

That means team owners, personnel guys, coaches, players, media, fans - the potential is definitely there for gambling to corrupt the authenticity of the league.

Whereas before betting was mostly underground, the advent of betting windows at the ballpark and sports books at visible locations all over the country are changing the dynamics of the game.

As an NFL owner, the fact $30 billion plus in underground betting on my league is not going into my pocket its understandable I would want to be 'cut in' on the action.

The trouble is legitimacy, the doubt that officials, players, coaches and others in individual cases are not 'shading' performances and moves in order to win out on bets and get paid through the 24 hour cash machine.

The NFL is one of the sports MOST vulnerable to corruption of performances on the field because so many of the officials' calls and actions on the field are so subjective and open to interpretation.

And as we know the NFL rulebook has become large enough and complex enough that the league now needs a Commission of Elders to interpret the rules just as the Catholic Church in Rome and the Rabbinical Council in Israel have to do for religions that go back thousands of years.
 
I’m getting a note from my Dr.

‘Please Excuse John from listening to any further Ron Rivera press conferences’
 
IMG_7304.jpeg
 


Maybe the NYG will get confused and think they’re playing Pittsburgh. 🤞
 
The relative positions of our starting DTs on this chart are interesting to me. One because he quietly gets his job done and one because, after getting paid, he has been quiet.

 
That's always the challenge in giving a guy who has performed in a contract year significantly ABOVE what he produced in the seasons before.

We bit and signed Dana Stubblefield to a $6M a year contract back in 1997 from the 49ers after he had a 15 sack season at DT.

The fact he had never had a season with sacks anywhere near that range didn't deter Charley Casserly from making that move.

Washington originally had 4 first round picks on the defensive line.

The test for the staff and front office was to determine what combination ultimately would help the team the most as the cap meant you could only keep 2, perhaps 3 of these players.

Strategically it was perhaps better to sign Sweat after locking up Jonathan Allen at DT and working to trade Daron Payne.

That way you have two anchors and you go into the draft and find younger, cheaper players to plug in at the other DT and opposite side DE positions.

Or you look to fill one of those spots with a veteran free agent at the mid-tier, a player that had proven themselves in the past but may be near or over 30 and comes on a medium-sized deal.

That's the ideal. That's what Bellichick and Reid do. That's what Parcells did.

Under the cap it's imperative NOT to spend too many dollars at any one position as that causes dislocations elsewhere.

Once you sign a LT to a megabucks deal then you likely have to go with a younger draft pick at RT or a veteran at the mid-tier as a free agent.

Watch what Dallas does. CeeDee Lamb is one of the best wide receivers in the league, when he gets his new deal the team is going to continue to draft and sign the Gallups, Cooks type players that come at reasonable cost.

You won't see Dallas go out and try and trade or sign a guy like Hopkins for $20M a year. That money is already at that point going to Lamb.

This is what bothered me about Washington.

The team refused to vest Payne with the fifth year option and the decision seemed to be made that the investment in Allen and the pending contracts for Sweat and/or Young meant that Daron was going to have to move on.

Then everything changed with one season at age 27. There are late bloomers, guys that hit their stride in their middle to late 20's. Perhaps Washington thought what Payne produced in 2022 was a prelude and more indicative of what he was going to do in 2023 and beyond.

But that's what the front office and GM get paid big bucks to evaluate properly. Does the 3 plus seasons BEFORE the incentive of a new deal show the worth of the player or is it that one season when the carrot of the big dollars is put in front of them.

I agree that Payne has been very quiet in 2023. And that was before Sweat and Young were dealt away.

Not only the sacks but the pressures were WAY down from 2022.

This is an issue for the new staff and FO that comes in after 2023 and it will be watched closely.

Washington spent dollars on Payne, Wylie, Gates and Barton in free agency and to date the returns have been anemic.

My guess is Barton and Gates are gone in 2024.

I could see Wylie being moved inside to guard.

Payne? We are stuck with his contract for 2 more years before the cap hit lowers to a point where he can be traded or released.

Or he spends the next 2 years showing a new staff he is a better player in a better system with better teammates on the defense.
 
I wish the media pool would leave some of this stuff until decisions are actually made. Playing the victim card isn't a very attractive look for Ron imho. Yes - he was in a tough situation with Snyder as owner, just as every other HC we've had in the past 20 years has been.. But he took the job knowing what he was getting into. The 'I got us a QB and changed the culture' stuff just seems a little delusional since no HC is hired to do those 2 things. If Howell proves to be the guy long-term, the Rivera regime absolutely should get credit. The fact that it took more than a year for Rivera to realize (probably with some prodding from others) that Howell might be a hidden gem is what it is. But that doesn't negate that they were the team that drafted him.

As far as 'changing the culture', I think it's hard not being in the building to know exactly what 'the damn good' culture was really like just prior to Rivera coming in, and what it's like today, how much validity to assign that? While not a Jason Wright fan, I suspect that he and other younger executives who have actually worked for modern organizations and know at least theoretically how those should operate in terms of equality, respect for staff, professional work practices, and diversity, may have had more to do with improving 'the culture', Rivera has conducted himself as a responsible, respectful, and generally competent team leader and deserves kudos for that. But Rivera certainly didn't change the football culture - in terms of creating a winning tradition. On that front he has been more or less a failure.

Anyway, not a fan of publicly putting Rivera on the spot with these types of questions. What are we really expecting him to say? He knows that in all probability, his tenure in DC is coming to an end. I find it especially awkward, and a little unfair, to ask him to address how he feels about that in-season.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 8, Members: 0, Guests: 8)

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

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top