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

Watching NFL Replay's broadcast of the giants super bowl and it strikes me that although those DE's are really good, the key to that defense is Pierce, who all of my friends that never give any credit to my fav. team forget was a Redskin.
If all things we're equal then I would say I'd rather have Pierce simply because he's younger, but all things aren't equal, I think in Fletcher we have a smarter more intense better tackler. Initially the blunder of letting Pierce go was moronic, however Cerrato, Gibbs & the Danny made up for it in my eyes with the signing of Fletcher. That touchdown against the Cards last year was sweeet. Alas Pierce does have a ring.

Gibbs4Life wrote:Initially the blunder of letting Pierce go was moronic

So since it was "moronic" and a "blunder" to let Pierce go, can you elaborate on the cap moves we should have made to keep him and the $26 mil contract the Giants gave him at that time using information they knew then? It doesn't mean much while you're just assuming we can keep whomever we want and not have to deal with cap ramifications. So if you're going to slam us, deal with what management had to while they were being moronic.

It would have been nice for the management to realize the budding star we had on our roster.

At that time in history we seemed a bit more "the grass is greener" in our philosophy. Thankfully that has changed and we're looking to grow and groom our own talent.

I believe that if we had known/realized his potential that provision would have been made to keep a man that would have been able to anchor our defense for many years to come.

The first rule of Monday Morning GM'ing is that you get to pretend that there were never any cap implications to worry about back when. You also get to assume that you should have known then what you know now.

You know... like "how stupid was it to cut Keenan McCardell?" "who was the bonehead who didn't think Frank Wychek could play?"

Sometimes, you eat the bear. Sometimes, the bear eats you. Just how it is. It happens to EVERY team. In fact, I'm hoping that next year, we'll be hearing a loud whining from Minnesota, as their fans complain about the stupidity of letting Erasmus James go, knowing what an incredible year he was about to have.

I would choose Fletcher over Pierce. Fletcher is a tackling machine, a leader, playmaker, and all of the other good qualities that a stud middle linebacker has or that a defensive coordinator would want. How many MLB's can you think of that can cover a WR or be responsible for the middle of the field in pass coverage?

A quote from the blog on redskins.com

Overheard: After running downfield in coverage of Santana Moss, London Fletcher shouts over to Vinny Cerrato, “Hey, Vinny, it takes a special kind of mike linebacker to make that play!"

Yes in deed London, it does take a special MLB to cover Santana Moss.

i like fletcher because of his leadership AND skills. pierce wasnt really a great leader. he is a great player but he wasnt worth the money at the time and still isnt. and he trashes the skins every chance he gets so i hate him and i probaly always will

Are we really serious??? London Fletcher vs. A.P.??? There are no comparisons! London wins that battle all day long! London is a beast...simple and plain. Although I like what A.P. did for us while he was here, but I'm liking a whole lot better what number 59 brings to the table.

Why do you guys antagonize yourself with such annoying questions? i.e., Should we trade Portis? Does Santana have a future, Should we cut Thrash?

You guys kill me! I mean after all, some of you ungrateful fans ran off Coach Joe Gibbs...

Enough is enough. Just sit-back and enjoy the ride and cool-out!!!

Countertrey wrote: In fact, I'm hoping that next year, we'll be hearing a loud whining from Minnesota, as their fans complain about the stupidity of letting Erasmus James go, knowing what an incredible year he was about to have.

it could very well happen. i think he will have a big year too

MDSKINSFAN wrote:i like fletcher because of his leadership AND skills. pierce wasnt really a great leader. he is a great player but he wasnt worth the money at the time and still isnt. and he trashes the skins every chance he gets so i hate him and i probaly always will

Now that's a great point!

ICEMAN wrote:Are we really serious??? London Fletcher vs. A.P.??? There are no comparisons! London wins that battle all day long! London is a beast...simple and plain. Although I like what A.P. did for us while he was here, but I'm liking a whole lot better what number 59 brings to the table.

Why do you guys antagonize yourself with such annoying questions? i.e., Should we trade Portis? Does Santana have a future, Should we cut Thrash?

You guys kill me! I mean after all, some of you ungrateful fans ran off Coach Joe Gibbs...

Enough is enough. Just sit-back and enjoy the ride and cool-out!!!

ICEMAN wrote:Are we really serious??? London Fletcher vs. A.P.??? There are no comparisons! London wins that battle all day long! London is a beast...simple and plain. Although I like what A.P. did for us while he was here, but I'm liking a whole lot better what number 59 brings to the table.

Why do you guys antagonize yourself with such annoying questions? i.e., Should we trade Portis? Does Santana have a future, Should we cut Thrash?

You guys kill me! I mean after all, some of you ungrateful fans ran off Coach Joe Gibbs...

Enough is enough. Just sit-back and enjoy the ride and cool-out!!!

Amen brother, to compare AP to LF is crazy. AP is not on Fletcher's level, I believe AP is overrated he gets to much credit. Also, someone said AP is a great LB, not even, AP is just Good.

This thread is retarded.
We're comparing someone who is a Redskin and wants to be a Redskin and a team leader to someone who isn't a Redskin and didn't want to be a Redskin or a team player, much less a team leader? Por-tiz2skins, is that you again?

Even though I think Fletcher probably edges out Pierce in skill, I still believe it was a mistake on our part to have let AP go to New York. Oh well. It happens, and at least until next year we're set at MLB.

No, not that I have the salary cap table in front of me, etc., but I bet we could have worked out an extension or something.

Irn-Bru wrote:Even though I think Fletcher probably edges out Pierce in skill, I still believe it was a mistake on our part to have let AP go to New York. Oh well. It happens, and at least until next year we're set at MLB.

No, not that I have the salary cap table in front of me, etc., but I bet we could have worked out an extension or something.

The Redskins had no choice. They would have offered Pierce more money than the Giants did (We are talking about The Danny, before this year's change of strategy), but the Giants had more salary cap room to frontload their contract. The Redskins, as usual, would have had to backload the contract. Pierce wanted more up front, so he left. He didn't want to be here. Fine and good. All the more reason to laugh at him when CP beats him like a red-headed stepchild in four games this season.
This really isn't a discussion. Pierce is all about Pierce. Fletcher is all about being a team player and a team leader.

London Fletcher had 128 tackles, 100 solo, while calling the defenses and the defensive audibles.
Antonio Pierce had 103 tackles, 77 solo, doing nothing more than standing behind arguably the best defensive line in football last season.
Both played all 16 games.

Fletcher is the better player, by a long shot. Not even a contest.

We went two seasons without Pierce (and a less-than-Pierce substitute) and won't have Fletcher for more than 2-3 seasons at the most. In the meantime we had to spend a few draft picks grooming youth to replace Fletcher.

OK, maybe things still work out for us, all things considered. I happen to think Blades is a beast. Also, I agree that Fletcher is the better player. Still, I think there's been some opportunity cost with not having kept Pierce, which is why I'd argue it was a mistake to let him go.

Does anyone really think Dan Snyder helped things or did the best thing possible to try and keep Pierce? This is the guy who taunted Clark before Clark went in search of other offers.

Although I believe London is better pound for pound (quite obviously) and the "Tin Man"- AP (no heart) probably would have been smart for years, I am of the belief that we desperately need a monster linebacker, call it a reach, but like Lavaar in his prime. London is a hell of a tackling machine, and an unquestioned leader but not the type of guy to scatter the ball, helmet, and player with a tackle like Lavaar did. AP was smart and so close to Gregg William's he could barely crawl out from under his desk, but he too lacked the ooh and ahh hits.
Especially with 21 gone, this unit could definetely use some intimidation in the middle or strong side. To be honest, Marcus Washington hasn't done a whole lot and I like H.B. Blades but maybe not as starter material. I'm aware that you can't just find them that easily but having just Landry coming from center field won't always cause enough turnovers. The only problem I see with the defense as a whole is that they are not mean enough. Landry stuck out like a sore thumb after 21 passed away as the only other guy who could be crazy enough to take your head off. Our defense(defence? you brits are confusing me) swarms the ball well but to me it just feels technically sound.

Remember when Lavaar Retired Aikman?

Remember that play when he came back from injury and thumped that 49ers Olineman?

That's what I'm talking about, someone who can change the outcome of another team's season by doing his job on a plain old bootleg or handoff. I mean(sorry to rant but) I would be ecstatic if someone could blow up Marion Barber or Brandon Jacobs like a ragdoll.

So having said that, how about a Bring Back Lavaar Thread???

BurgundyandGoldfaith wrote:Although I believe London is better pound for pound (quite obviously) and the "Tin Man"- AP (no heart) probably would have been smart for years, I am of the belief that we desperately need a monster linebacker, call it a reach, but like Lavaar in his prime. London is a hell of a tackling machine, and an unquestioned leader but not the type of guy to scatter the ball, helmet, and player with a tackle like Lavaar did. AP was smart and so close to Gregg William's he could barely crawl out from under his desk, but he too lacked the ooh and ahh hits.
Especially with 21 gone, this unit could definetely use some intimidation in the middle or strong side. To be honest, Marcus Washington hasn't done a whole lot and I like H.B. Blades but maybe not as starter material. I'm aware that you can't just find them that easily but having just Landry coming from center field won't always cause enough turnovers. The only problem I see with the defense as a whole is that they are not mean enough. Landry stuck out like a sore thumb after 21 passed away as the only other guy who could be crazy enough to take your head off. Our defense(defence? you brits are confusing me) swarms the ball well but to me it just feels technically sound.

Remember when Lavaar Retired Aikman?

Remember that play when he came back from injury and thumped that 49ers Olineman?

That's what I'm talking about, someone who can change the outcome of another team's season by doing his job on a plain old bootleg or handoff. I mean(sorry to rant but) I would be ecstatic if someone could blow up Marion Barber or Brandon Jacobs like a ragdoll.

So having said that, how about a Bring Back Lavaar Thread???

Why have a guy that can blow somebody up every once in a while rather than have a guy that is all over the field making plays every time the ball is snapped? I don't care if Fletcher can knock a guys helmet off as long as he drops him in the backfield. Lavar had all of the tools, but wasn't a disciplined player. I'll take Fletcher over Lavar too!

Irn-Bru wrote:Even though I think Fletcher probably edges out Pierce in skill, I still believe it was a mistake on our part to have let AP go to New York. Oh well. It happens, and at least until next year we're set at MLB.

No, not that I have the salary cap table in front of me, etc., but I bet we could have worked out an extension or something.

It was big bucks and we weren't expecting an offer for Pierce to go that high. You're brushing off not having "the salary cap table in front" of you pretty easily. Obviously we could have kept him. My question is who, knowing what we knew then, we were going to give up to keep him.

So having said that, how about a Bring Back Lavaar Thread???

God, not another one... let's stop kicking the dead horse, please....


As for intimidation, LL will strike fear over the middle. He's not as big as ST, but he has just as fierce attitude as ST ever did....

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:Even though I think Fletcher probably edges out Pierce in skill, I still believe it was a mistake on our part to have let AP go to New York. Oh well. It happens, and at least until next year we're set at MLB.

No, not that I have the salary cap table in front of me, etc., but I bet we could have worked out an extension or something.

It was big bucks and we weren't expecting an offer for Pierce to go that high. You're brushing off not having "the salary cap table in front" of you pretty easily. Obviously we could have kept him. My question is who, knowing what we knew then, we were going to give up to keep him.

I'm not sure. I'm just trying to say that sometimes it's fair to look at something in retrospect and say "we lost that bet."

Can I go back and change it? No. Was I vocal at the time? No. That's why I'm not GM. But it would have been worth that extension to keep him. And if you doubt for one moment that our FO couldn't have made him the deal he wanted that would have fit with our cap, then you don't know our FO. That's one thing no one can fault them.

Continuing with the rant, the point I was getting at before I slid off the page is London in my opinion is a better option IF in the upcoming drafts we grab a HUGE hitter, not just a tackling machine but a sledgehammer(I know that's London's nickname) or a wrecking ball. I mean, Merriman would have been a good pickup...and I'm not saying we need a mike. A strong or weak linebacker is fine as long as someone on the offense can't get them out of the back of their mind. Briggs was decent but I really think if they are going to invest in any young linebackers they need to be dynamite and not suitable.

that's all

It bothers me to see a guy who we groomed and went through the growing pains with leave and be a key cog in a SB championship run for a division rival, if that doesn't bother you then you're retarded.
However as I said I think we've more than made up for it with getting Fletch. He is a better Mike LB at this time, still 5 years from now AP will probably be in the league and Fletch might not be, I dunno.
London Fletcher is the biggest positive for our defense this season. If anyone deserved to cry hammi this offseason it was him and he didn't. Looking forward to watching him this season.
As for the cap situation we we're in keeping us from retaining Pierce, I think we just probably should have paid the guy but there is no going back so here we are.

check this video and see if #59 and # 30 are soft

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWi1rzG1U0I

Yep. The team should have kept Pierce. If they really wanted him, he could have stayed. Fletcher is great, but not young.

In retrospect, it cost more time and money to substitute Pierce, groom a young guy who will replace the guy that Pierce substituted and make up for the void he left as the defense was terrible without him.

I think we ended up with a rather costly loss.

Cappster wrote:check this video and see if #59 and # 30 are soft

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWi1rzG1U0I

That video is both awesome and so sad.