The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

HEROHAMO wrote:Ill defend Bash.
He has every right to be angry. This team has been run poorly for the last 15 years.(Exception Gibbs 2)

Hey Bash we all know how poorly Vinny and Snyder drafted and traded. This is not a news flash,however.
I do believe we are now headed in a good direction. So cheer up man.

My guess he's just a troll from another board

Sorry, CH.

I've read, and re-read Bash's post.

I still don't see a hint of a point...

unless it's "I'm pissed, and I type a lot".

HEROHAMO wrote:Ill defend Bash.
He has every right to be angry. This team has been run poorly for the last 15 years.(Exception Gibbs 2)

Hey Bash we all know how poorly Vinny and Snyder drafted and traded. This is not a news flash,however.
I do believe we are now headed in a good direction. So cheer up man.

Yeah, but to have a diatribe that recaps all the crap that the 'critical redskins fans' have said in his first post? tiresome. It's a new angle, a new thought, or anything else.

I give it a 1 out of 10, and that's just b/c it was organized.

PulpExposure wrote:

Principal wrote:Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Brilliance, Pulp, brilliance!

I for one am happy with the conservative approach!! Big names are for teams who are one piece away from a championship. Time to get solid coaching (we now have) and more important football minds in the front office (we now have). This is how you build champions. If we had a similar approach as philadelphia we would've had 3 more championships to our name by now!

crazyhorse1 wrote:It's absurd to remark that Free Agency lasts 130 days when everyone knows that the cream of the free agent crop is usually gone by day 4.

Free Agency does last until training camp opens, so 130 days would be more accurate than absurd. The cream of the crop hasn't done much for this team in the past.

As far as the cream of the crop only lasting 4 days, now that's absurd. Free agency doesn't really get going until after the Redskins get done on day 1 or 2. This year Karlos Dansby was the top LB on the market but he plays OLB and the Redskins need help on the inside.

So what happened when Dansby signed in S Fla? Not much, there are still a few OLB that are UFA still on the market...and playing a position that the Skins don't have a hole at. Oh yeah, I forgot on day 5 right after the cream of the crop was gone, Andra Davis got released and he entered ... wait for it..... wait for it...... YES the free agency market, maybe you've heard of him He's ranked higher than Larry Foote by most and on par with Dansby although he plays a different position. Why would there be a ILB still on the market that has played in the 3-4 scheme still on the market that's ranked so high? Maybe because the signing period is more than 4 days, maybe because so many player were tendered and anyone under 30 years of age are RFA instead of UFA, maybe because teams will cutt players for about 130 days before rosters start to really take shape

crazyhorse1 wrote:If those critical of management weren't fans they wouldn't be so upset. Further, you're making fun of a poster who, first time out, wrote a better balanced and more thoughtful post than anyone else on this site has for awhile.

Fans are fans and we all know why it's short for fanatic. The post was long but didn't deserve some of what was said about it, but what did the post say.

The Skins can't draft players.
The proof was a nine year list that included only 1st round selections (three years they didn't have a 1st round pick, so really only 6 years of 1st round picks, although each draft has seven rounds).

Based on his list the first two were consider bust regardless of the fact that one of them is still in the league.
Mr Taylor was a starter for the Skins until his life was cut short, and everyone else started for the team last year.

Then we have all those other players picked after the 1st round during those years that don't seem to matter when his conclusion was reached. I'm not going to be building any list to prove how they have drafted after round one, but Rocky McIntosh, Chris ey, Kareem Moore, Reed Doughty, and Chris Horton come to mind as not bad selections in what is know as a crap shoot. I grab those names out the air and when back only about 5 years

crazyhorse1 wrote:Just a small part of his post notes that the Skins of the last ten years have been more successful in free agency than they have in the draft. A great point nobody else has mentioned, but should have been obvious.

Of the players he noted only London Fletcher was a day one signing, Springs may have been. Unless you want to look at his other list of signings...Mark Carrier, Deion Sanders, Bruce Smith, Dana Stubblefield, Jeremiah Trotter, Jesse Armstead, Adam Archuleta and Brandon Lloyd. That list contains a bunch of guys that signed the day the market opened

One reason to sign a FA is that he has a track record in the NFL, which is something a draft pick doesn't have.

crazyhorse1 wrote:In fact, if you'd look at the record, as Basher did, you'd see that draft picks in the first round (for the skins) are quite likely to be busts. So why the distain for FA's and the special horror when FA's don't work out.

That list had 1 let me repeat ONE player that you can call a bust and that bust that was Gardner - that's one out of seven, Carlos may not be able to catch a cold but he is always around the ball or it wouldn't keep hitting him in the hands, Ramsey makes someone's roster every year... He listed 14 free agent signings plus BLloyd and labeled 8 of them bust. How does that say the team is better with free agency

crazyhorse1 wrote:I don't have the answer to the above question. Maybe one of you can tell me. Why do you continue to think we should build primarily by the draft, even when it produces bust after bust, and then have a hissy fit when an FA turns out to be a dud?

For a list of a few FA's who've been important to us, check Bash's post.

Again there were more free agent bust than first round picks that were bust according to his post and I'll leave it at that. As far as planning for free agency next year, they might want to make sure there isn't a lockout next year before anybody plans on any kind of spending spree.

TeeterSalad wrote:Good spelling and grammer though!

Yes, it was certainly "chalk full" of good "grammer."

Deadskins wrote:

TeeterSalad wrote:Good spelling and grammer though!

Yes, it was certainly "chalk full" of good "grammer."

I think he used a spel checher

1niksder wrote:

crazyhorse1 wrote:It's absurd to remark that Free Agency lasts 130 days when everyone knows that the cream of the free agent crop is usually gone by day 4.

Free Agency does last until training camp opens, so 130 days would be more accurate than absurd. The cream of the crop hasn't done much for this team in the past.

As far as the cream of the crop only lasting 4 days, now that's absurd. Free agency doesn't really get going until after the Redskins get done on day 1 or 2. This year Karlos Dansby was the top LB on the market but he plays OLB and the Redskins need help on the inside.

So what happened when Dansby signed in S Fla? Not much, there are still a few OLB that are UFA still on the market...and playing a position that the Skins don't have a hole at. Oh yeah, I forgot on day 5 right after the cream of the crop was gone, Andra Davis got released and he entered ... wait for it..... wait for it...... YES the free agency market, maybe you've heard of him He's ranked higher than Larry Foote by most and on par with Dansby although he plays a different position. Why would there be a ILB still on the market that has played in the 3-4 scheme still on the market that's ranked so high? Maybe because the signing period is more than 4 days, maybe because so many player were tendered and anyone under 30 years of age are RFA instead of UFA, maybe because teams will cutt players for about 130 days before rosters start to really take shape

crazyhorse1 wrote:If those critical of management weren't fans they wouldn't be so upset. Further, you're making fun of a poster who, first time out, wrote a better balanced and more thoughtful post than anyone else on this site has for awhile.

Fans are fans and we all know why it's short for fanatic. The post was long but didn't deserve some of what was said about it, but what did the post say.

The Skins can't draft players.
The proof was a nine year list that included only 1st round selections (three years they didn't have a 1st round pick, so really only 6 years of 1st round picks, although each draft has seven rounds).

Based on his list the first two were consider bust regardless of the fact that one of them is still in the league.
Mr Taylor was a starter for the Skins until his life was cut short, and everyone else started for the team last year.

Then we have all those other players picked after the 1st round during those years that don't seem to matter when his conclusion was reached. I'm not going to be building any list to prove how they have drafted after round one, but Rocky McIntosh, Chris ey, Kareem Moore, Reed Doughty, and Chris Horton come to mind as not bad selections in what is know as a crap shoot. I grab those names out the air and when back only about 5 years

crazyhorse1 wrote:Just a small part of his post notes that the Skins of the last ten years have been more successful in free agency than they have in the draft. A great point nobody else has mentioned, but should have been obvious.

Of the players he noted only London Fletcher was a day one signing, Springs may have been. Unless you want to look at his other list of signings...Mark Carrier, Deion Sanders, Bruce Smith, Dana Stubblefield, Jeremiah Trotter, Jesse Armstead, Adam Archuleta and Brandon Lloyd. That list contains a bunch of guys that signed the day the market opened

One reason to sign a FA is that he has a track record in the NFL, which is something a draft pick doesn't have.

crazyhorse1 wrote:In fact, if you'd look at the record, as Basher did, you'd see that draft picks in the first round (for the skins) are quite likely to be busts. So why the distain for FA's and the special horror when FA's don't work out.

That list had 1 let me repeat ONE player that you can call a bust and that bust that was Gardner - that's one out of seven, Carlos may not be able to catch a cold but he is always around the ball or it wouldn't keep hitting him in the hands, Ramsey makes someone's roster every year... He listed 14 free agent signings plus BLloyd and labeled 8 of them bust. How does that say the team is better with free agency

crazyhorse1 wrote:I don't have the answer to the above question. Maybe one of you can tell me. Why do you continue to think we should build primarily by the draft, even when it produces bust after bust, and then have a hissy fit when an FA turns out to be a dud?

For a list of a few FA's who've been important to us, check Bash's post.

Again there were more free agent bust than first round picks that were bust according to his post and I'll leave it at that. As far as planning for free agency next year, they might want to make sure there isn't a lockout next year before anybody plans on any kind of spending spree.

Here's a few FA's that worked out for us. Smoot, Carter, Springs, Hall, Haynesworth, Griffen, Ryan Clark, Antonio Pierce, ARE, Rabach, Dockery, Fletcher, etc. Also, I disagree that Basher is right to say that Trotter, Armstead, and Stubblefield were flat out busts. They were better than average players with us, and Smith was fine for a while. Only Deon and George were spectacular failures. Taylor was both misused and injured and Archeleta was misused.

Also among draft busts in fairly recent years were a certain Michigan receiver we traded up to number one for and a certain quarterback whose name I can't make myself remember whom we took number one. Basher did quite go back far enough to make his point. The draft is,in fact, every bit as risky as free agency, and I stand behind my larger point: it takes the draft, free agency, and trades to make a winner in today's NFL, and many posters don't seem to understand that. It's curious to me that they don't, especially so after this season, when the Saints and Vikings won big, primarily because of FA's.