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

Of course this will be portrayed in the national media as a shrewd move rather than vastly overpaying for a guy who played 1 season, with an established offense and two elite wideouts, and faced only one top 10 defense (against which he threw no TDs, 2 picks and 20 incomplete passes). On and they also had the league's easiest schedule.

http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2009/07/14/matt ... ty-chiefs/

I don't understand this. What has he done for the Chiefs? Honestly, I think the guy who is the real deal is Tyler Thigpen. He almost put up almost the same amount of numbers as Cassel but way less talent

jeremyroyce wrote:I don't understand this. What has he done for the Chiefs? Honestly, I think the guy who is the real deal is Tyler Thigpen. He almost put up almost the same amount of numbers as Cassel but way less talent

What has Haynesworth done for us?

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

jeremyroyce wrote:I don't understand this. What has he done for the Chiefs? Honestly, I think the guy who is the real deal is Tyler Thigpen. He almost put up almost the same amount of numbers as Cassel but way less talent

What has Haynesworth done for us?

At least Haynesworth has shown his abilities in the past. Cassel has played one season, under extremely favorable conditions, and did not perform up to a contract of that proportions, IMO.

In Cassel's limited opportunity, he performed. That's why he got paid.

Yeah... well, we'll see, Vet. As Fios pointed out, with the team, coaches and system Cassel had around him in New England, combined with the leagues easiest schedule, you could've produced similar numbers.

Scott Pioli, who is not a coach, I might add, must be in love with Cassel. Pioli is reported to be the one responsible for the Patriots drafting Cassel in the 7th round five years ago, orchestrated a very shady trade with the Pat's for a franchised Cassel and in now going to pay the kid $63 million. All for a QB who until last year, had not been a starter since high school. In fact, as John Clayton reports, Cassel is believed to be the only quarterback in NFL history to start an NFL game without starting a single game in college.

Cassel has been a career backup, both in college and in his first 4 years at the NFL level. The coaching staff he had in New England is well known for taking average, late round QB's and getting them to produce... for their team with their players in their system. They did it with Brady. But Cassel won't have all that around him in KC, so paying him that kind of money, now, seems risky, which is all anyone is suggesting.

Wow, read in to things much? I wasn't condoning it or supporting it. All I did was state the obvious. He performed last year, showing at the least, he can perform in the best of circumstances. This year will show the other side of that coin.

For the record, I don't think he's worth all that money, either.

What would have happened had we done that deal and gave him that money?

Elvis Grbac 2.0.

Smithian wrote:What would have happened had we done that deal and gave him that money?

That's my point, the media would be having a field day with this story if the Redskins have made that signing, we'd be subjected to an in-depth look at his flaws and be told how unprecedented and risky this move is and why it served as another example of a foolish Washington FA adventure.

Fios wrote:

Smithian wrote:What would have happened had we done that deal and gave him that money?

That's my point, the media would be having a field day with this story if the Redskins have made that signing, we'd be subjected to an in-depth look at his flaws and be told how unprecedented and risky this move is and why it served as another example of a foolish Washington FA adventure.

I agree in general with your statement. However, our FO has shown its lunacy so many times I don't neccessarily blame the media for over reacting to Redskins signings. It will take some time to live down Deion Sanders, Jeff George, Bruce Smite, Jerimiah Trotter, Jesse Armstead, and on and on.

cleg wrote:

Fios wrote:

Smithian wrote:What would have happened had we done that deal and gave him that money?

That's my point, the media would be having a field day with this story if the Redskins have made that signing, we'd be subjected to an in-depth look at his flaws and be told how unprecedented and risky this move is and why it served as another example of a foolish Washington FA adventure.

I agree in general with your statement. However, our FO has shown its lunacy so many times I don't neccessarily blame the media for over reacting to Redskins signings. It will take some time to live down Deion Sanders, Jeff George, Bruce Smite, Jerimiah Trotter, Jesse Armstead, and on and on.

You do realize that every player you mentioned last played for the Redskins in 2003; over a half-decade ago, right? How long should it be, before people no longer bring those guys up?

Though I do note that Brandon Lloyd and Adam Archuleta were worse than those guys for us...and they were 2006...so 3 years ago. Even considering those bums (and Duckett), the Skins over the past 5 years overall have been pretty decent at talent acquisition through FA and trades. Remember, even back in 2004, we brought in C. Griffin, S. Springs, and M. Washington, and all three guys were absolute defensive stalwarts for us.

Oh, and Jesse Armstead was actually a pretty good signing for us. His last year with us (and in the NFL) he had 6.5 sacks (including a safety) and 76 tackles. I'll take that production.

PulpExposure wrote:You do realize that every player you mentioned last played for the Redskins in 2003; over a half-decade ago, right? How long should it be, before people no longer bring those guys up?

It will be mentioned until they win CONSISTENTLY! Until then...

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:You do realize that every player you mentioned last played for the Redskins in 2003; over a half-decade ago, right? How long should it be, before people no longer bring those guys up?

It will be mentioned until they win CONSISTENTLY! Until then...

That's a ridiculous standard man, those moves have nothing to do with the team in 2009

Fios wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

PulpExposure wrote:You do realize that every player you mentioned last played for the Redskins in 2003; over a half-decade ago, right? How long should it be, before people no longer bring those guys up?

It will be mentioned until they win CONSISTENTLY! Until then...

That's a ridiculous standard man, those moves have nothing to do with the team in 2009

I don't make the rules. But I'm sure that if the Redskins actually did something decent for a change it'd eventually be forgotten. Hell, the only constants from the half-decade ago are the owner and his lap-dog. The decisions made a half-decade ago were of the owner. So they're looking for a constant and he is it. They saw losing 6 years ago and Dan was there, they see losing now and Dan is there. The fact that he does NOTHING to change is public image worsens it. Daniel brings this on himself and he deserves it because he won't do the small things to change it.

Daniels plan is to hide out in his secret bunker until he strikes oil and then he'll have a manure eating grin on his face and gloat that his way works.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Daniels plan is to hide out in his secret bunker until he strikes oil and then he'll have a manure eating grin on his face and gloat that his way works.

Which wouldn't be such a bad thing. As has been pointed out here on many occasions, to which the media refuses to acknowledge, the FO has been much improved over the past few years, even going back to when Gibbs came back. Snyder has admitted the mistakes of the past, many from almost a decade ago, and has been much more measured in his approach in recent years. So if he wins a SB now and says his new approach works... that's good, because it's much different from when he started. Otherwise, it just comes off that some will continue to not give him any amount of credit no matter what he does.

Well dude has a chance to shine for sure in the most dominating division in ALL SPORTS.. the AFC We... ok ok, I couldn't even finish typing it

Not sure how Cassel had the leverage to demand that kind of money. Must be nice to have such a close relationship with the GM.

cleg wrote:It will take some time to live down Deion Sanders, Jeff George, Bruce Smite, Jerimiah Trotter, Jesse Armstead, and on and on.

We've already lived down those guys. The year that earned the Redskins that reputation is a decade away and four coaches ago. The Gibbs II era and making the playoffs a couple of times killed off any sting that characterization used to have.

People nowadays tend to see us as a mediocre team with some talent, one or two big names, some ?? in key places (like the OL, QB, the #1 WR slot, and depth in our backfield, LBs, and secondary) . . . and, finally, a young coach who is trying to put things together. At worst you hear a mention of Archuleta. Everyone but JLC has forgotten about Lloyd.

Some are brave enough to predict that Haynesworth will be a complete bust, but if that's your biggest critique of the 'Skins then it's clear we don't have that many issues, as far as FA signings are concerned.

No. I'm glad to say that the days of hearing about Bruce Smith and Jeff George are well behind us.

SkinsFreak wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Daniels plan is to hide out in his secret bunker until he strikes oil and then he'll have a manure eating grin on his face and gloat that his way works.

Which wouldn't be such a bad thing. As has been pointed out here on many occasions, to which the media refuses to acknowledge, the FO has been much improved over the past few years, even going back to when Gibbs came back. Snyder has admitted the mistakes of the past, many from almost a decade ago, and has been much more measured in his approach in recent years. So if he wins a SB now and says his new approach works... that's good, because it's much different from when he started. Otherwise, it just comes off that some will continue to not give him any amount of credit no matter what he does.

I'm not saying the guy hasn't improved....he has improved. Budging an inch is an improvement.

Hiring your coordinators before your HC is baffling. The entire Zorn aquisition was baffling. The lack of a "true" GM still doesn't sit well with folks. His involvement however small it may be in contrast to how it was is still troubling for some people. His shrewed tactics in regards to fans still rubs people wrong.

Has he improved? Yes. Is he where he needs to be? Debatable. I'm just playing devils advocate here. I appreciate the change but I can also see why people still don't believe in him yet.

Winning cures all. When he wins consistently, he'll be alright.

I just can't agree with what some of you guys are saying.

Some of our past FA mistakes do have an impact on the present team because they occupied a roster spot where a good rookie could have been developed.

You just can't go from worst to first in this league. It takes quite a while to finally have all the pieces in place to win a SB, and most of them come from YEARS of solid drafting.

Yes, there is much improvement in the current FO, but that does not eliminate all the mistakes they made in the past. It's not feasable, even ifyou start by "purging" the roster they way Marty and Gibbs II did.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

jeremyroyce wrote:I don't understand this. What has he done for the Chiefs? Honestly, I think the guy who is the real deal is Tyler Thigpen. He almost put up almost the same amount of numbers as Cassel but way less talent

What has Haynesworth done for us?

You are comparing apples to oranges. Albert has been playing in the league for what 6-7 years and has proven that he can get the job done. Matt on the other hand started just one season. He in my opinion needs to prove that he can do what he did last season through out his career and not be a one year wonder

jeremyroyce wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

jeremyroyce wrote:I don't understand this. What has he done for the Chiefs? Honestly, I think the guy who is the real deal is Tyler Thigpen. He almost put up almost the same amount of numbers as Cassel but way less talent

What has Haynesworth done for us?

You are comparing apples to oranges. Albert has been playing in the league for what 6-7 years and has proven that he can get the job done. Matt on the other hand started just one season. He in my opinion needs to prove that he can do what he did last season through out his career and not be a one year wonder

You asked what he's done for the Cheifs, insinuating that his success won't translate to them.

Just because Albert has been successful with the Titans does not mean he'll be successful here.

It's the same thing, yet you're holding him to a different standard. The man played exceptionally well and got paid for it.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

jeremyroyce wrote:

Chris Luva Luva wrote:

jeremyroyce wrote:I don't understand this. What has he done for the Chiefs? Honestly, I think the guy who is the real deal is Tyler Thigpen. He almost put up almost the same amount of numbers as Cassel but way less talent

What has Haynesworth done for us?

You are comparing apples to oranges. Albert has been playing in the league for what 6-7 years and has proven that he can get the job done. Matt on the other hand started just one season. He in my opinion needs to prove that he can do what he did last season through out his career and not be a one year wonder

You asked what he's done for the Cheifs, insinuating that his success won't translate to them.

Just because Albert has been successful with the Titans does not mean he'll be successful here.

It's the same thing, yet you're holding him to a different standard. The man played exceptionally well and got paid for it.

The difference is Cassel had one decent year for a loaded Patriots team last year.

Haynesworth has been pretty damn dominant for awhile now. You have a better sense of what you get with Haynesworth (dominant, plays 12 games a year), than you do with Cassel. Especially noting that in KC he doesn't have 2 all-pro WRs to throw to anymore lol.

It would be a stupid decision by somebody if they brought in a player that could only play for 12 games a year

I am hoping that he is a part of this team for 16 games this year and as we get better and start to play in the playoffs, we do not need a guy that cannot play all the time and we certainly did not pay him to be a part-time player.

If this guy gets injured or is injury prone (as reported) then in my opinion we made a terrible decision to bring him here. I presume that our team's medical people think there is a good chance he will not be susceptible to injuries or else whoever signed off on getting Snyder to pay this guy 42 million (or whatever the true value is) should be fired immediately.