June 1 no longer a big deal

RedskinsFreak · Post by **RedskinsFreak** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:10 am

GMs are really blase about this year's arrival of June 1.

There aren't going to be that many cap cuts this time around.

You got who you got.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:28 am

New CBA = More Cap Space
the cap hit will be the same if a player is cut next month as it will be today unless he has a upcoming bonus so let them lose there spot in competition.

You keep who wants to stay

DeathByLinebacker#56 · Thu Jun 01, 2006 10:22 am

The Skins will not be forced to release anyone and thats good.

RedskinsFreak · Post by **RedskinsFreak** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:54 pm

DeathByLinebacker#56 wrote:The Skins will not be forced to release anyone and thats good.

Agreed. I found a Pasquerelli column and he suggested that Patten might be vulnerable since he's making in excess of $1M and appears to be no better than the Redskins' #4 or 5 receiver.

Consider the source. Patten's certainly above Randle El in an every-down consideration.

CooleyAsIce · Post by **CooleyAsIce** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:03 pm

Len Pastabelly is a fool. The Skins are gonna carry five WR's, and Patten has proven that he can play in the league. Bye bye Taylor Jacobs.

Californiaskin · Post by **Californiaskin** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:27 pm

we should release Todd Collins and keep Taylor Jacobs

CPallDAY08 · Post by **CPallDAY08** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:28 pm

Californiaskin wrote:we should release Todd Collins and keep Taylor Jacobs

I consider Collins a valuable 3rd QB.

Californiaskin · Post by **Californiaskin** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:36 pm

Ive heard a lot of cr*p about him being our 2........dude is really bad.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:31 pm

Californiaskin wrote:Ive heard a lot of cr*p about him being our 2........dude is really bad.

He is written in has being in competition for the back-up spot, due to his knowledge of the scheme once Campbell picks it up Collins will be use only in emergencies

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:37 pm

Californiaskin wrote:Ive heard a lot of cr*p about him being our 2........dude is really bad.

How could you possibly know that? He he's only thrown 27 passes (for a 105.32 quarterback rating) since 1996 - his first and last year as a starter. Were his numbers lousy with the Bills? Yes - 68.4 rating in 519 attempts. Of course, Joe Theismann had a 60.39 rating through his first 768 attempts, so maybe writing quarterbacks off after a rough start isn't the greatest idea.

Collins might be really bad, but to state is as fact is unfounded and ridiculous.

Californiaskin · Post by **Californiaskin** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 8:48 pm

Your right Steve-o...........Maybe we should pick up Danny Weurfell!

yupchagee · Post by **yupchagee** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 10:19 pm

Steve Spurrier III wrote:
Californiaskin wrote:Ive heard a lot of cr*p about him being our 2........dude is really bad.

How could you possibly know that? He he's only thrown 27 passes (for a 105.32 quarterback rating) since 1996 - his first and last year as a starter. Were his numbers lousy with the Bills? Yes - 68.4 rating in 519 attempts. Of course, Joe Theismann had a 60.39 rating through his first 768 attempts, so maybe writing quarterbacks off after a rough start isn't the greatest idea.

Collins might be really bad, but to state is as fact is unfounded and ridiculous.

He has thrown 27 passes in the last 10 years. I think that says enough.

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 8:40 am

yupchagee wrote:He has thrown 27 passes in the last 10 years. I think that says enough.

What that says is that he has played behind a very good and very durable quarterback in Trent Green.

Californiaskin wrote:Your right Steve-o...........Maybe we should pick up Danny Weurfell!

That's hilarious. You all can make all the assumptions and jokes you want, but that's all they are - jokes and assumptions.

yupchagee · Post by **yupchagee** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:03 pm

Steve Spurrier III wrote:
yupchagee wrote:He has thrown 27 passes in the last 10 years. I think that says enough.

What that says is that he has played behind a very good and very durable quarterback in Trent Green.

Californiaskin wrote:Your right Steve-o...........Maybe we should pick up Danny Weurfell!

That's hilarious. You all can make all the assumptions and jokes you want, but that's all they are - jokes and assumptions.

Were he good enough to start he would have been traded to someone who needed a starting QB. They usually bring a premium.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:36 pm

Were he good enough to start he would have been traded to someone who needed a starting QB. They usually bring a premium.

This isn't Madden--players don't have objective ratings (like 98 throw power) stashed away in a coaches notebook. No one really knows how good Collins is until he plays in a game.

Steve Spurrier III · Post by **Steve Spurrier III** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 1:47 pm

yupchagee wrote:Were he good enough to start he would have been traded to someone who needed a starting QB. They usually bring a premium.

I never said he would be a good starter - other people said that he was incapable of being a valuable backup. Other teams haven't gotten to see him play either, so they too don't know how good he really is or isn't.

I don't understand how people can assume Collins is a bad quarterback based on either his lack of playing time or a bad season he had in 1997 - that's it. Those two things prove that he hasn't had a lot of playing time and that he wasn't very good in 1997. In my mind, the mere fact that Saunders wanted to bring him to Washington tells us more about Collins' ability than those two things.

I also don't understand what people want out of a backup quarterback. In the last seven years, Collins has played extremely well in his relief role (with the huge asterisk being the small sample size). That's what you want out of a third stringer - a guy who can step in and be relativley effective without needing a lot of snaps.

And consider this - if we had some young guy as the third stringer, not only would he need snaps to know what he was doing, but every snap he took in training camp is taking one away from Brunell and Campbell - both of who need to learn the offense. The fact that Collins doesn't need any work to be familiar with the playbook is a huge advantage to this team.

It blows my mind that we can be so far apart on this. I can't imagine a better (realistic) third string quarterback for the 2006 Redskins.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:15 pm

Steve Spurrier III wrote:I never said he would be a good starter - other people said that he was incapable of being a valuable backup. Other teams haven't gotten to see him play either, so they too don't know how good he really is or isn't.

He's not a starter, I don't know why people want to compare him to those that are. He was signed to be the #3 QB and is said to be vying for the No 2 spot versus J. Campbell. That should make fans thing maybe we have a lock at #3. They must forget that we seem to have a different #3 every year

Steve Spurrier III wrote:I don't understand how people can assume Collins is a bad quarterback based on either his lack of playing time or a bad season he had in 1997 - that's it. Those two things prove that he hasn't had a lot of playing time and that he wasn't very good in 1997. In my mind, the mere fact that Saunders wanted to bring him to Washington tells us more about Collins' ability than those two things.

He hasn't played much, not very good when he did almost a decade ago? I don't know When ever I have thought QBs Todd Collins never came up so I don't know much about him. I know he has found his way on a NFL roster year in and year out, and he hasn't bounced from team to team like those 3rd stringers that seem to catch on late in training camp because they are vets and can pick up what they need to know as the season progress. He stayed with the same team in the same scheme for years. Being a 3rd stringers for that long in the system is equal the Duncan donut man baking donuts in the morning (almost 2nd nature, like anyother 9-5). In this case his job moved and he chose to relocate as opposed to finding a new career. This wouldn't have been a option had there been a better option for the Skins

Steve Spurrier III wrote:I also don't understand what people want out of a backup quarterback. In the last seven years, Collins has played extremely well in his relief role (with the huge asterisk being the small sample size). That's what you want out of a third stringer - a guy who can step in and be relativley effective without needing a lot of snaps.

I figured it out but it took some time. These people say Brunell is too old to lead the team to the playoffs, regardless of the fact that the skins made the playoffs last year and Mark threww more TDs than he had in any year. They say JC is unproven and we spent to much to get him, and now Collins sucks as the #3 although he hasn't played a down.

Yep they all want to be the backup QB for the Skins and no one else will do.

Steve Spurrier III wrote:And consider this - if we had some young guy as the third stringer, not only would he need snaps to know what he was doing, but every snap he took in training camp is taking one away from Brunell and Campbell - both of who need to learn the offense. The fact that Collins doesn't need any work to be familiar with the playbook is a huge advantage to this team.

Al Saunders may run the Offense But Joe Gibbs runs the show. Ask Ramsey how many snaps the #2 gets once the season starts.
Gibbs doesn't spend much time with the backup QBs running with the 1st team during practice once the season starts so the #3 will get all of his work during the summer. If he spends the summer learning the offense when will he learn to execute what he has learned?... Not going to happen

Steve Spurrier III wrote:It blows my mind that we can be so far apart on this. I can't imagine a better (realistic) third string quarterback for the 2006 Redskins.

They'll come around or the season will start and hopefully it will be proven that even one of them could have been the #3 this year.

sch1977 · Post by **sch1977** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 8:15 am

Californiaskin wrote:we should release Todd Collins and keep Taylor Jacobs

are you joking? Taylor Jacobs is a bust!

sch1977 · Post by **sch1977** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 8:17 am

yupchagee wrote:
Steve Spurrier III wrote:
yupchagee wrote:He has thrown 27 passes in the last 10 years. I think that says enough.

What that says is that he has played behind a very good and very durable quarterback in Trent Green.

Californiaskin wrote:Your right Steve-o...........Maybe we should pick up Danny Weurfell!

That's hilarious. You all can make all the assumptions and jokes you want, but that's all they are - jokes and assumptions.

Were he good enough to start he would have been traded to someone who needed a starting QB. They usually bring a premium.

How do you know that there werent any trade offers for him in those 10 years?

Californiaskin · Post by **Californiaskin** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 11:07 am

Shane Mathews would be sweet.......not!

xhadow · Post by **xhadow** » Sat Jun 03, 2006 5:00 pm

Quote from Madden 2003 or 04 I can't remember exactly

D Lineman Vs. The skins - SHANE MATHEWS WHO THE HECK IS SHANE MATHEWS?

yupchagee · Post by **yupchagee** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 8:22 pm

Californiaskin wrote:we should release Todd Collins and keep Taylor Jacobs

In case you didn't notice, they play different positions. Comprtition at QB has absolutely no bearing on competition at WR.