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

DEHog wrote:So if you play Colt, is Cousins the backup? Or is RG active?

I think this will be an interesting decision that they are going to have make only because of RGIII.

Jay Gruden suits up once last time as the third stringer.

Irn-Bru wrote:

riggofan wrote:Been thinking about it. If you have injured guys like Goldson or Moses, might be a good time to give them the week off. Otherwise, I think I would go out and play this game just like any other week. Don't mess with what you've been building.

I think I agree. Let certain o-line and d-line sit and some other injured players. Have Kirk play the first half (I don't think he's in much danger of getting injured) and Colt the second. By the middle of the third quarter start giving players a rest, and by the end of the game have almost all of your backups in there.

That's my feeling too. Treat it like a pre-season game.

What happens if the Redskins are forced to play Robert Griffin III?

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/12/robert-griffin-iii-rg3-injury-payment-2016-16-million-backup-quarterback-if-cousins-mccoy-gets-hurt-playoffs-week-17

Interesting conversation on how RG could be force to be active. The fact that the Skins kept him around is what makes this possible...never understood why they kept him if he was never going to be active because of the injury clause??

DEHog wrote:

What happens if the Redskins are forced to play Robert Griffin III?

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/12/robert-griffin-iii-rg3-injury-payment-2016-16-million-backup-quarterback-if-cousins-mccoy-gets-hurt-playoffs-week-17

Interesting conversation on how RG could be force to be active. The fact that the Skins kept him around is what makes this possible...never understood why they kept him if he was never going to be active because of the injury clause??

They never explain why they would be "forced" to activate him. How is this situation different than any other team that only carries two QBs on their roster? It's just someone trying to stir up controversy where there is none. What else is new?

Deadskins wrote:

DEHog wrote:

What happens if the Redskins are forced to play Robert Griffin III?

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/12/robert-griffin-iii-rg3-injury-payment-2016-16-million-backup-quarterback-if-cousins-mccoy-gets-hurt-playoffs-week-17

Interesting conversation on how RG could be force to be active. The fact that the Skins kept him around is what makes this possible...never understood why they kept him if he was never going to be active because of the injury clause??

They never explain why they would be "forced" to activate him. How is this situation different than any other team that only carries two QBs on their roster? It's just someone trying to stir up controversy where there is none. What else is new?

They kind of did. They're operating under the assumption that either Cousins gets injured or McCoy gets injured. I don't think RGIII would get activated as the emergency quarterback even in those cases.

there's really very little chance of Griffin being activated - it's not like he could be very effective
PLUS even if that happens, there's really very little chance that he gets injured so badly that he cannot pass the physical next spring

it's really just media BS - Griffin is not playing

geez - give it a break, just move on

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

Deadskins wrote:They never explain why they would be "forced" to activate him. How is this situation different than any other team that only carries two QBs on their roster? It's just someone trying to stir up controversy where there is none. What else is new?

They kind of did. They're operating under the assumption that either Cousins gets injured or McCoy gets injured. I don't think RGIII would get activated as the emergency quarterback even in those cases.

I agree, which is why I said we still would not be forced to activate him. It's not like there is some clause in the CBA saying we must play a player whose option year was picked up if the players on the depth chart ahead of him get injured.

Rest the starters and give McCoy a game to play. Yes, the team has momentum but I'd rather the team was healthy for the playoff game.

DEHog wrote:

What happens if the Redskins are forced to play Robert Griffin III?

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/12/robert-griffin-iii-rg3-injury-payment-2016-16-million-backup-quarterback-if-cousins-mccoy-gets-hurt-playoffs-week-17

Interesting conversation on how RG could be force to be active. The fact that the Skins kept him around is what makes this possible...never understood why they kept him if he was never going to be active because of the injury clause??

That article is hilarious. So completely far fetched.

Seriously, there is no way the team can risk activating Griffin. no way. McCloughan would sign Rex Grossman as the emergency QB for two weeks. You cannot risk injuring Griffin in week 17 and being on the hook for $16m next year.

And no matter what SkinsJock says (he's 100% wrong here not surprisingly), Griffin could go out vs. Dallas and shred his ACL on the first play of the game and the team would definitely, without a doubt be on the hook for that salary in the spring. He would not pass a physical. I don't see how anyone believes that couldn't be a realistic possibility.

SkinsJock wrote:PLUS even if that happens, there's really very little chance that he gets injured so badly that he cannot pass the physical next spring

Just made the top ten most ridiculous comments of the year, right there. Good grief.

Spring is four months away. How long do you think it takes to recover from a serious knee injury? Guys have been out that long with freaking concussions. You don't think Griffin would have a chance of picking up one of those injuries?

riggofan wrote:You think Sean Payton is waiting in the wings?

It would make a lot of sense, but Payton would be smart to write his own ticket and get Jerry to give up some control.

Bringing along Drew Brees wouldn't be a terrible move either.

I like the line of thinking here, I do!! but don't feel it's going to happen
considering Jerruh is not willing to fire himself as general manager of
the team even though it's been reported that it's actually Stephen who
has been in charge of the roster either way the Jones's need to step
back and let the head coach do what he is being payed to do

TexasCowboy wrote:

riggofan wrote:You think Sean Payton is waiting in the wings?

It would make a lot of sense, but Payton would be smart to write his own ticket and get Jerry to give up some control.

Bringing along Drew Brees wouldn't be a terrible move either.

I like the line of thinking here, I do!! but don't feel it's going to happen
considering Jerruh is not willing to fire himself as general manager of
the team even though it's been reported that it's actually Stephen who
has been in charge of the roster either way the Jones's need to step
back and let the head coach do what he is being payed to do

haha. Yeah I would hate to see that happen. I'm sure Payton would do a good job.

I actually think they've done a decent job building that team over the past few years. Especially their draft picks. Beastly o-line and best defense in the NFC East in my opinion. Some stupid moves like Greg Hardy though. I just don't see why Jerry won't turn it over to a good coach and let the coach do his job.

Actually having suffered through Dan Snyder, we understand that all too well.

SkinsJock wrote:Now we do have some guys here (Deadskins) that thought we were going to win a bunch of games this season but when the schedule came out and we end up with 2 road games against the eagles and the pukes, I must admit, I never thought the NFC East would be on the line ...

here we are - NFC East Champs - and favored going into a game against the pukes in Dallass - it don't get any better than this

Saturday we eliminated the eagles - this Sunday we could put the final nail in the Jason Garrett coffin

H A I L

As a Cowboys fan I would have no problem with that....but if you could the final nail in "GM" Jerrah's coffin, that would be better. Congrats on the East, and if the Pack comes into town WOOOMP up on them, please!

It's Dallas.

There should be but one mission, as always. Win, and if possible, dominate. That there is a question is disconcerting.

Countertrey wrote:It's Dallas.

There should be but one mission, as always. Win, and if possible, dominate. That there is a question is disconcerting.

We did win already.

We're going to the playoffs and they'll be enjoying the games from the comfort of their own home.

I've never understood this mentality. I hate Dallas more than any team, but I would take 14-2 with two losses to Dallas for the rest of my life rather than being worried about beating Dallas every season.

riggofan wrote:

DEHog wrote:

What happens if the Redskins are forced to play Robert Griffin III?

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/12/robert-griffin-iii-rg3-injury-payment-2016-16-million-backup-quarterback-if-cousins-mccoy-gets-hurt-playoffs-week-17

Interesting conversation on how RG could be force to be active. The fact that the Skins kept him around is what makes this possible...never understood why they kept him if he was never going to be active because of the injury clause??

That article is hilarious. So completely far fetched.

Seriously, there is no way the team can risk activating Griffin. no way. McCloughan would sign Rex Grossman as the emergency QB for two weeks. You cannot risk injuring Griffin in week 17 and being on the hook for $16m next year.

And no matter what SkinsJock says (he's 100% wrong here not surprisingly), Griffin could go out vs. Dallas and shred his ACL on the first play of the game and the team would definitely, without a doubt be on the hook for that salary in the spring. He would not pass a physical. I don't see how anyone believes that couldn't be a realistic possibility.

This is what I don’t understand? If the sole reason you will not activate/play him is because of the fear of an injury, why would you occupy a roster spot for that player? Who does that? The only reason I would see this being done is if you have/had plans of resigning him to a cheaper contract after the season, and we all know that isn’t happening!!

I would play the starters this week; Dallas had the same situation last year and came in a kicked our butts. It’s not like you can treat is as a fourth preseason game, you don’t have the 75 players you have during the preseason.

I’d hate to be Colt playing behind some backups knowing that Greg Hardy needs 2 sacks for a 500K bonus and 4 sacks for a Mil bonus.

DEHog wrote:This is what I don’t understand? If the sole reason you will not activate/play him is because of the fear of an injury, why would you occupy a roster spot for that player? Who does that? The only reason I would see this being done is if you have/had plans of resigning him to a cheaper contract after the season, and we all know that isn’t happening!!

I think they were trying to keep him out of the division during the year. If we released him, he would have signed in Philly or Dallas immediately.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

DEHog wrote:This is what I don’t understand? If the sole reason you will not activate/play him is because of the fear of an injury, why would you occupy a roster spot for that player? Who does that? The only reason I would see this being done is if you have/had plans of resigning him to a cheaper contract after the season, and we all know that isn’t happening!!

I think they were trying to keep him out of the division during the year. If we released him, he would have signed in Philly or Dallas immediately.

So...wouldn't that have been a good thing??

DEHog wrote:So...wouldn't that have been a good thing??

I guess it depends...

- Would we have suddenly turned into a HOF QB? LOL no.
- It would have turned into a media circus and that's the main thing Scot/Jay have worked so hard to prevent.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

DEHog wrote:So...wouldn't that have been a good thing??

I guess it depends...

- Would we have suddenly turned into a HOF QB? LOL no.
- It would have turned into a media circus and that's the main thing Scot/Jay have worked so hard to prevent.

Both of those answers seem reasonable to me. Keeping him away from division rivals and preventing any of the media BS. I'd add that Snyder probably wasn't completely sold on Cousins until about three days ago. lol.

I still believe they did RG3 a huge favor keeping him on the roster this year. It would have been really tough for him to show up in October for some new team - probably a bad team - and be thrown on the field with little preparation. He'll have a much better shot going somewhere new in the offseason and having a chance to prepare.

It seems to me that Griffin has been respectful about that and been a good teammate in return. That's a credit to both the team and the player IMO.

riggofan wrote:haha. Yeah I would hate to see that happen. I'm sure Payton would do a good job.

if given the authority he more than likely would but Jerruh can't stay out the way he is to much of a control
freak and attention whore

riggofan wrote:I actually think they've done a decent job building that team over the past few years. Especially their draft picks. Beastly o-line and best defense in the NFC East in my opinion. Some stupid moves like Greg Hardy though. I just don't see why Jerry won't turn it over to a good coach and let the coach do his job.

before I answer the why? I will say signing Hardy while possible being "dumb" to the outside world
was in fact an actual good signing, in Carolina he'd never have the opportunity to get the real help he's
getting in Dallas through their connections..it draws him away from the spotlight and it allows him to
just play without the constant distraction of media attention hounding him

Now I know the media has commented on Hardy thinks he is a scumbag..but let em talk Hardy doesn't
need to focus his attention on anything but football at this point, so you asked why Jones won't turn it
over to a real head coach? - answer?

the Miami snub Jimmy, Jerruh and the coaches were sitting at a bar down on Miami beach after they
had won the super bowl, they were all drinking and laughing the night away, when Jerruh who had
been at the bar drinking alone..came over to offer up a toast and the coaches refused to raise their
glass

Jerruh walked away fuming mad and never forgot that snub subsequently this is where the demise
of Jimmy took it's final bow and he was fired/mutually agreed he'd no longer be the head coach

since then Jerruh has tried to be Al Davis building up the team proving he's never needed Jimmy
or anyone else in his mind he is perfectly capable of building the "Cowboys" aka clownboys into
a suitable contender and winner (19) years no titles proves otherwise

riggofan wrote:Actually having suffered through Dan Snyder, we understand that all too well.

still suffering meddling owners don't go away and Snyder is no different than Jones he wants to have it
all and it's the fans who suffer at the hands of these idiots when they just need to leave well enough alone

riggofan wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

DEHog wrote:So...wouldn't that have been a good thing??

I guess it depends...

- Would we have suddenly turned into a HOF QB? LOL no.
- It would have turned into a media circus and that's the main thing Scot/Jay have worked so hard to prevent.

Both of those answers seem reasonable to me. Keeping him away from division rivals and preventing any of the media BS. I'd add that Snyder probably wasn't completely sold on Cousins until about three days ago. lol.

I still believe they did RG3 a huge favor keeping him on the roster this year. It would have been really tough for him to show up in October for some new team - probably a bad team - and be thrown on the field with little preparation. He'll have a much better shot going somewhere new in the offseason and having a chance to prepare.

It seems to me that Griffin has been respectful about that and been a good teammate in return. That's a credit to both the team and the player IMO.

Yes they did him a favor. They only way it turns into a media circus is if RG lets it. The same thing will/could happen when we cut him this off season...why not just do it before this past season and have it over with if you had no plans to even have him active?

riggofan wrote:I still believe they did RG3 a huge favor keeping him on the roster this year.

I think at some point, RGIII "got it". And it was too late, he was on the bench for good. I hope that he's taken this oppurtunity to learn and gain a new/better perspective on what he needs to do moving forward.

DEHog wrote:Yes they did him a favor. They only way it turns into a media circus is if RG lets it. The same thing will/could happen when we cut him this off season...why not just do it before this past season and have it over with if you had no plans to even have him active?

Who cares about him during the off-season? It'll move some headlines in April but won't impact the team. It won't impact preparation and/or focus for an upcoming game. It'll be a non-issue.

I think someone said it above, the owner wasn't sold Kirk. Nor should he have been. I'm sure that Robert is a great guy, but he couldn't juggle this media market and his own short comings at the same time. He made some bad moves that I'm sure he wishes he could take back. I think the owner wanted to see him succeed on a personal level, that's just being a decent human being. However, it's time to move on. He can still support Robert as a friend from afar.

DEHog wrote:This is what I don’t understand? If the sole reason you will not activate/play him is because of the fear of an injury, why would you occupy a roster spot for that player? Who does that?

It's a roster spot, yes, but not a game-day active one. He's not keeping someone else from playing in games. Fans need to get that notion out of their heads.