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

The only hard on here is yours for a 7th rounder who had a good camp and may or may not become a back up.
That is just silly.

The true homerism is your Anti Haskins diharea of the mouth (fingers typing). He was the BPA and evwn better at rhe biggesr need for us. Skipping on Haskins wouldve been an idioc thing that only arm chair gm fans would have made thinking they know better then Doug Williams and co.

So now after all the worthless draft picks we have made all of a sudden they are beyond reproach and arm chair GMs have to be wrong compared to Doug Williams and co . The actual ones who have blown it in the draft. The true homerism and diharea of the mouth is that statement right there bra.(fingers typing).

Nah fam.
This board is full of arm chair gms... I for one am not one.

Not becuase I'm above it.. But becuase I dont follow NCAA that hard to know better. I see enough know enough.. And would have been happy with Lock IF Haskins was taken by the bonehead Giants.

I like Haskins.
I like our last 2 drafts- the only two with DW in the room?

You can complain about any pick ya want.. Just saying your virtual reality is not fact based... Where me saying Haskins didnt cost us 2 second rounders is IRL.


I need to edit my posts.. Sorry for all the typos.

But keep it coming! Any action here on th.n is good action!

cowboykillerzRGiii wrote:You are spinning off into a new galaxy brother! LMMFAO

Here-
I said- Sweat at 15 is NOW known to have been a reach. Supporting FACTS- we got him much later IRL. (In Real Life)
Haskins cost us- drum roll- a first round pick in the 2019 draft at #15 overall.. Thats it. Fact.
Could he have been had in the 3rd round like you crazily presume? Maybe. Who knows? You dont. Nor I. Why? Becuase it didnt happen IRL. Unless you've seen all 32 draft boards its insane to talk about how far he COULD have fallen. He could've went 16 with a trade. The world will never know.

Hind sight is always 20/20.. But that too is IRL. We soulda took Russel over Rg.. We shoulda took Brady etc etc.. Right now we have 2 top ten draftees that didnt cost us a top 10 pick. DOPE.

Yeah Sweat could have actually gone anytime 1st round and deservedly so.

Right now we have 2 top ten draftees that didnt cost us a top 10 pick. DOPE.[/quote]
Ir's OK to admit if you wanted Haskins that bad he could have been had where he would have actually gone in the 2nd and we wasted a pick. It's true but love is blind.

Sounds like you admitting Sweat was a top ten and could have gone anytime in the 1st round. I agree. A top 10 player and a no doubt second round player cost us a first rounder and two 2nd rounders. Undope. Real life Drew Lock went second round just like Haskins would have. And Sweat being a top 10 talent could have gone anytime 1st round.

"Haskins cost us- drum roll- a first round pick in the 2019 draft at #15 overall.. Thats it. Fact".
That's because we blew it. Sweat at 15 and Haskins in the second was what it should have cost us with a little bit of patience and thought so yea Haskins costs us two 2nd round picks. Fact.

Moreland in the 7th is better than Haskins in the 1st and probably the better player to boot.
Watch out that looks like Morland with another pick 6.

No.
You are wrong.
Your logic might be sound... But it is wrong.

Haskins (top 10 talent, rated higger then Lock by most all scouts) cost us a first round pick. Fact
Could he have been had later? The world will NEVER know.

Sweat (top 10 talent crazy heart issue rumour had him luckily drop) cost us- 2 secound rounders. FACT

Was he worth it? Imo ya. Does that trade/ move in any universe change what we paid for Haskins? No. But if but if but if... No. Still No. Forever No. IRL

You cant switch the picks and justify your stance then call it factual. Its the opposite of fact, since it didnt happen.

Did we over pay for Sweat? That is your only debate on the 2 second rounders he cost us.

Did we whiff on Haskins instead of Lock @ #15? Only time will tell. Neither you nor I can say anything with any substantial evidence to change the FACT that this is unproven on this day.

You may hope to be right. If it makes ME a homer so be it, but I hope he dazzles and kills the cowboys every year for decades en route to numerous conference titles and hopefully some rings to go with it!!


HAIL YA I DO!!

[quote="cowboykillerzRGiii"]No.
You are wrong.
Your logic might be sound... But it is wrong.

Haskins (top 10 talent, rated higger then Lock by most all scouts) cost us a first round pick. Fact
Could he have been had later? The world will NEVER know.

You may hope to be right. If it makes ME a homer so be it, but I hope he dazzles and kills the cowboys every year for decades en route to numerous conference titles and hopefully some rings to go with it!!

You know as well as I Haskins cost us two 2nd rounders. Messing up the picks being backwards doesn't change that.
It's the same logic as saying if we had picked Harmon at 15 then traded up to get Sweat that Sweat cost us two second rounders when in actuality we know for a fact it was Harmon that would have been the one that cost us two second rounders knowing you could have got him later. Haskins just to a lesser degree than Harmon. Or maybe not. So on paper you are correct. In real draft value that could have been used more wisely you are not.

You may hope to be right. If it makes ME a homer so be it, but I hope he dazzles and kills the cowboys every year for decades en route to numerous conference titles and hopefully some rings to go with it!!

I do agree with this and your Midgets being boneheads though. Right on brah

HTTR brother

Last time we were relevant we had the Hogs !! That is how critical it is to draft maulers on the OL instead of play toys running around with the football. Any toy can run with the football when it has some room. Nuff said. Almost. Ill take that arm chair GM strategy against any real GM or one being paid by some team any day. Real is a subjective term. I like keeping it real as an armchair GM.

Danny call me with an offer in the high millions and I will take you there. Guaranteed. As "I'll Take you there" plays in the background by the Staple Singers

Aint nobody crying and aint nobody worried. If Danny calls that is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qsl4A9hZEto

Watch out now what was that? That was Moreland running past me for another damn pick 6. Go ahead Moreland.

We took Haskins with 1 pick.
We traded 2 2nds to take Sweat.
I'm not going to read anything written by someone who thinks it was the other way around just to suit their agenda

ferryrich wrote:We took Haskins with 1 pick.
We traded 2 2nds to take Sweat.
I'm not going to read anything written by someone who thinks it was the other way around just to suit their agenda

You can look at it any way you want. If it makes you feel better. I suppose if they had taken Stidham with the 15th pick then my agenda would change and everything would be right with the draft. Help me laud. But just in case the logic doesn't jump out and scream I'll whisper it. Sweat with the 15th pick. Imagine that no trading away next years 2nd rounder. Then if you really want him bad enough and have to have him wait until the Brocos pick in the 2nd jump up a few spots and maybe trade next yeats 5th instead 6th even and get Haskins. It's that simple and anyone thinking Haskins goes in the first round after our viagra attack is living in fantasy land. But welcome aboard Haskins. Better get er done.

Just because we didn't trade up to get Haskins who nobody wanted doesn't mean it was the time to pick him at 15. A trade up later on like they did with Sweat would of allowed us to at least get a starting OL. If that had been the case I wouldn't be against this so much. Maybe maybe I say I would have taken it mostly in stride. But hard to say. Did I say Hard? Sorry

Sonny9TD wrote:

ferryrich wrote:We took Haskins with 1 pick.
We traded 2 2nds to take Sweat.
I'm not going to read anything written by someone who thinks it was the other way around just to suit their agenda

You can look at it any way you want. If it makes you feel better. I suppose if they had taken Stidham with the 15th pick then my agenda would change and everything would be right with the draft. Help me laud. But just in case the logic doesn't jump out and scream I'll whisper it. Sweat with the 15th pick. Imagine that no trading away next years 2nd rounder. Then if you really want him bad enough and have to have him wait until the Brocos pick in the 2nd jump up a few spots and maybe trade next yeats 5th instead 6th even and get Haskins. It's that simple and anyone thinking Haskins goes in the first round after our viagra attack is living in fantasy land. But welcome aboard Haskins. Better get er done.

Just because we didn't trade up to get Haskins who nobody wanted doesn't mean it was the time to pick him at 15. A trade up later on like they did with Sweat would of allowed us to at least get a starting OL. If that had been the case I wouldn't be against this so much. Maybe maybe I say I would have taken it mostly in stride. But hard to say. Did I say Hard? Sorry

I think you're too stuck on one player. Initially I thought the Skins should take Lock because I a) was sure Haskins would be off the board, and so were all of the pundits, and b) was sold on his arm.

Two things changed that: a) Lock made himself look like an ass during the interview process, thereby turning a lot of teams off to him, and b) Haskins was still on the board.

I've been making that same mistake for a very long time. I get attached to prospects and get it in my head that it's "that guy or nothing!" every year. That's a luxury we have as "armchair general managers" that real general managers don't usually have. We don't have the owner telling us he wants one thing and the coaches telling us they want another thing and the job of keeping the owner happy while building a team the coaches can turn into winners.

We can't evaluate prospects before they have played. If ever there was a lesson to be learned from the 1983 NFL Draft it is that prospects who appear to be virtually identical grades can be very different at the next level. Look at that draft again and look at the quarterbacks teams took or passed up on. It's all you'll ever need to see to know that you have to see a player at the NFL level to know how good or bad he is going to be. Maybe Stidham is a stud and Haskins is a bust, or maybe they are comparable talent, or maybe Haskins was the right pick, but we're going to need to see them both play a number of games to know that.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

Sonny9TD wrote:

ferryrich wrote:We took Haskins with 1 pick.
We traded 2 2nds to take Sweat.
I'm not going to read anything written by someone who thinks it was the other way around just to suit their agenda

You can look at it any way you want. If it makes you feel better. I suppose if they had taken Stidham with the 15th pick then my agenda would change and everything would be right with the draft. Help me laud. But just in case the logic doesn't jump out and scream I'll whisper it. Sweat with the 15th pick. Imagine that no trading away next years 2nd rounder. Then if you really want him bad enough and have to have him wait until the Brocos pick in the 2nd jump up a few spots and maybe trade next yeats 5th instead 6th even and get Haskins. It's that simple and anyone thinking Haskins goes in the first round after our viagra attack is living in fantasy land. But welcome aboard Haskins. Better get er done.

Just because we didn't trade up to get Haskins who nobody wanted doesn't mean it was the time to pick him at 15. A trade up later on like they did with Sweat would of allowed us to at least get a starting OL. If that had been the case I wouldn't be against this so much. Maybe maybe I say I would have taken it mostly in stride. But hard to say. Did I say Hard? Sorry

I think you're too stuck on one player. Initially I thought the Skins should take Lock because I a) was sure Haskins would be off the board, and so were all of the pundits, and b) was sold on his arm.

Two things changed that: a) Lock made himself look like an ass during the interview process, thereby turning a lot of teams off to him, and b) Haskins was still on the board.

I've been making that same mistake for a very long time. I get attached to prospects and get it in my head that it's "that guy or nothing!" every year. That's a luxury we have as "armchair general managers" that real general managers don't usually have. We don't have the owner telling us he wants one thing and the coaches telling us they want another thing and the job of keeping the owner happy while building a team the coaches can turn into winners.

We can't evaluate prospects before they have played. If ever there was a lesson to be learned from the 1983 NFL Draft it is that prospects who appear to be virtually identical grades can be very different at the next level. Look at that draft again and look at the quarterbacks teams took or passed up on. It's all you'll ever need to see to know that you have to see a player at the NFL level to know how good or bad he is going to be. Maybe Stidham is a stud and Haskins is a bust, or maybe they are comparable talent, or maybe Haskins was the right pick, but we're going to need to see them both play a number of games to know that.

I agree with everything you said. Excellent post.

Man, speaking of not always being able to accurately predict a player into the NFL from the NCAA


https://www.espn.com/blog/nfceast/post/ ... -next-year
Redskins WR Josh Doctson: 'I think I'm hitting free agency next year'

"I think I'm hitting free agency next year. I won't be the first, won't be the last," he said. "It's nothing to be sad about, be mad about. Someone wants you there, so it's all love."

And it's nothing he will use as motivation.

"No, because that would mean it would have gotten to me and I'd feel some type of way. There's no motivation," he said. "I'm not trying to prove nothing to nobody. Just trying to get chemistry with the quarterbacks."

Really just seems like something lacking with that guy. I don't know.

riggofan wrote:Man, speaking of not always being able to accurately predict a player into the NFL from the NCAA


https://www.espn.com/blog/nfceast/post/ ... -next-year
Redskins WR Josh Doctson: 'I think I'm hitting free agency next year'

"I think I'm hitting free agency next year. I won't be the first, won't be the last," he said. "It's nothing to be sad about, be mad about. Someone wants you there, so it's all love."

And it's nothing he will use as motivation.

"No, because that would mean it would have gotten to me and I'd feel some type of way. There's no motivation," he said. "I'm not trying to prove nothing to nobody. Just trying to get chemistry with the quarterbacks."

Really just seems like something lacking with that guy. I don't know.

It sounds an awful lot like he's making no effort to improve his game. Another draft pick wasted on a receiver.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:It sounds an awful lot like he's making no effort to improve his game. Another draft pick wasted on a receiver.

I hate to read too much into it, but his answer was really uninspiring. I want to hear a guy who is super motivated to go out and prove that he deserves to get paid.

Man I'm not even convinced right now that he's in the starting 11 this season.

riggofan wrote:

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:It sounds an awful lot like he's making no effort to improve his game. Another draft pick wasted on a receiver.

I hate to read too much into it, but his answer was really uninspiring. I want to hear a guy who is super motivated to go out and prove that he deserves to get paid.

Man I'm not even convinced right now that he's in the starting 11 this season.

I agree. There are too many players on the roster who want the job.

Burgundy&GoldForever wrote:

riggofan wrote:Man, speaking of not always being able to accurately predict a player into the NFL from the NCAA


https://www.espn.com/blog/nfceast/post/ ... -next-year
Redskins WR Josh Doctson: 'I think I'm hitting free agency next year'

"I think I'm hitting free agency next year. I won't be the first, won't be the last," he said. "It's nothing to be sad about, be mad about. Someone wants you there, so it's all love."

And it's nothing he will use as motivation.

"No, because that would mean it would have gotten to me and I'd feel some type of way. There's no motivation," he said. "I'm not trying to prove nothing to nobody. Just trying to get chemistry with the quarterbacks."

Really just seems like something lacking with that guy. I don't know.

It sounds an awful lot like he's making no effort to improve his game. Another draft pick wasted on a receiver.

This is a player with no heart. Just go away, then, Josh...

Sounds like he thinks he's done all he can over his career so far. Badly mistaken on that.
I'm struggling to think of any highly drafted receiver who's just bumbled along through 4 seasons suddenly to come good and prove worthy, if all too late. I can't name any

Well well. It seems like there is another great player the Redskins have had play for them from that risky little school James Madison. Guess who anyone?
Gary Clark. Not going to find players much better than him. Also it seems Moreland got a lot of offers from big time schools. Then guess what. They took them back when they found out he only weighed 150 pounds coming out of high school. Learn more about the future starting CB of the Redskins other than Moreland led the country in pick-sixes (3) and is a pick machine here: Watch out.

https://www.redskins.com/news/seven-thi ... y-moreland

Moreland is about the same size as Darryl Green. Remember him? Yeah, we all do. If Moreland turns out to be half the player Green was, we got the bargain of the draft.

aswas71788 wrote:Moreland is about the same size as Darryl Green. Remember him? Yeah, we all do. If Moreland turns out to be half the player Green was, we got the bargain of the draft.

Yes sir