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

Yep. Last years NFC East champs who were picking late 1st, traded up and got the BEST WR in the Draft.

Yeah we got a guy who's 315 pounds and runs a 4.8 that's nice.

On opening night when we send our D out there, I would've really felt better about Eric Berry beside Landry instead of Reed Doughty. That's just me.

Hopefully the Silverback can win me over with some dware pancakes

So now you were pining for Bryant as opposed to Tebow?

At first when they picked him I thought oh crap, Los is gonna get smoked.. then I said wait a sec, we picked up Buchanon and we already had Hall. To heck wit Dez Bryant!

I wanted to root for Dez Bryant because I thought he was treated unfairly by the NCAA and NFL and no body has the right to ask in a job interview if your mother is a whore or a drug dealer. But, alas, he is a puke now and therefore a villian. I was really hoping the Ravens took him so I did not have to hate him.

cleg wrote:I wanted to root for Dez Bryant because I thought he was treated unfairly by the NCAA and NFL and no body has the right to ask in a job interview if your mother is a whore or a drug dealer. But, alas, he is a puke now and therefore a villian. I was really hoping the Ravens took him so I did not have to hate him.

They asked him questions about his mother and their past??

langleyparkjoe wrote:

cleg wrote:I wanted to root for Dez Bryant because I thought he was treated unfairly by the NCAA and NFL and no body has the right to ask in a job interview if your mother is a whore or a drug dealer. But, alas, he is a puke now and therefore a villian. I was really hoping the Ravens took him so I did not have to hate him.

They asked him questions about his mother and their past??

He said that one team, and his agent confirmed, asked him if his mother was a prostitute and if she still sold drugs. I guess it was to see what type of reaction he would have but I cannot see how it is appropriate in any way. I am sure there are others with similar back stories to him that made it to college and then to job interviews for normal jobs and they never would have been asked those questions.

That's 100% inappropriate but I guess each team and do what they want since they are the hiring party. And it's a legit question.

Here's the thing with WR's, there's only a 50/50 chance that he develops into even a good player - far less than 20% that is great. So I'm not too worried b/c our defense hinges on protection and as long was we don't get beat on double moves, we'll be fine.

The Cowboys gave him Michael Irvin's number.

That's a pair right there.

frankcal20 wrote:That's 100% inappropriate but I guess each team and do what they want since they are the hiring party. And it's a legit question.

Here's the thing with WR's, there's only a 50/50 chance that he develops into even a good player - far less than 20% that is great. So I'm not too worried b/c our defense hinges on protection and as long was we don't get beat on double moves, we'll be fine.

Given his past troubles I have no problem with a team asking him that type of question. I'm glad that the Cowboys took him, he fits in with the rest of the clowns over there. He is a suspension waiting to happen.

I don't like anybody in the division getting dynamic skill players. Be it Desean, Bryant, Burress, T.O., whatever. Because we never attempt to get dynamic WR's and it bothers me.

I do like Thomas and hope he grows with McNabb. Also Kelly didn't look THAT slow at the end of last year. If he stays healthy he might end up ok as well. Mitchell is there. I just wish they would go out and bring in a guy that they know changes games at the WR position, as it is becoming the third most important position on an offense (Qb and LT being the first 2).

brad7686 wrote:I don't like anybody in the division getting dynamic skill players. Be it Desean, Bryant, Burress, T.O., whatever. Because we never attempt to get dynamic WR's and it bothers me.

I do like Thomas and hope he grows with McNabb. Also Kelly didn't look THAT slow at the end of last year. If he stays healthy he might end up ok as well. Mitchell is there. I just wish they would go out and bring in a guy that they know changes games at the WR position, as it is becoming the third most important position on an offense (Qb and LT being the first 2).

I would agree to an extent, but I think that they have to see what they have with Kelly, Thomas, and Mitchell first. They are finally going to play with a real qb and a real HC, so they could shine. Thomas has the physical tools to be a dynamic player, he just has to work on the mental side of the game.

I just hope they drafted the next Devin Thomas, the guy that takes a couple years to contribute. And I hope we didn't just draft the next Andre' Smith.

I think the questions were a head game to see how he'd react. If he clinches his teeth and starts to get pissed in the interview, what's he gonna do when he's on the field with all that adrenaline pumping and some player for the other team starts talking about his mother?

Will he walk away and let his play do the talking, or will he draw a 15-yard personal foul?

Bob 0119 wrote:I think the questions were a head game to see how he'd react.

Maybe, but it still strikes me as pretty inappropriate. Players trash talk on the field all the time — do we really think he hasn't already heard about his mother on the field? — but in a more civilized setting like a job interview I don't see how that's a good idea. You can get an idea of how he will react to things in more appropriate settings and by using more appropriate tactics.

Gibbs4Life wrote:Yep. Last years NFC East champs who were picking late 1st, traded up and got the BEST WR in the Draft.

Yes, but it was also a pick with some risk to it. Don't forget that the Redskins selected the BEST WR and second BEST WR in the draft only a couple of years ago . . .

Well if it was the Cowpies, I can see why they'd want to know if she was still selling drugs. It never hurts to have more supply.

Irn-Bru wrote:

Bob 0119 wrote:I think the questions were a head game to see how he'd react.

Maybe, but it still strikes me as pretty inappropriate. Players trash talk on the field all the time — do we really think he hasn't already heard about his mother on the field? — but in a more civilized setting like a job interview I don't see how that's a good idea. You can get an idea of how he will react to things in more appropriate settings and by using more appropriate tactics.

In a regular job interview, I'd agree, but for one where the pay is counted in the millions of dollars, I'd say suck it up and answer the questions.

I agree it seems like a low class move, but as you said, I'm sure it's not the first time he's heard it. Teams would certainly have a vested interest in a player's character. Will his mother be a distraction (like if she gets arrested and makes national headlines for being the relative of a team's player i.e. "The Mother of Dallas Cowboys safety was arrested Tuesday morning for Solicitation and Possession....")

Will his mother be a liability? When the head games start on the field will her very mention draw a penalty? Did the apple fall far enough from the tree?

Trust me, if a big company knew one of their applicants had that kind of family history, it would matter to them. They may not come out and ask about it; they might just pass him up and go with the next guy.

It clears the air when you ask and get it out in the open, especially if the question is a valid one. It'd be different if there was no reason to believe his mother was ever a prostitute or a drug-dealer; then it's just offensive.

Bob 0119 wrote:It clears the air when you ask and get it out in the open, especially if the question is a valid one. It'd be different if there was no reason to believe his mother was ever a prostitute or a drug-dealer; then it's just offensive.

Hmm. I still find it offensive, so perhaps it's just me.

Irn-Bru wrote:

Bob 0119 wrote:It clears the air when you ask and get it out in the open, especially if the question is a valid one. It'd be different if there was no reason to believe his mother was ever a prostitute or a drug-dealer; then it's just offensive.

Hmm. I still find it offensive, so perhaps it's just me.

Well, that's probably 'cuz your mom's not a drug-dealing prostitute

Is it less offensive to ask if she's a crack ho?

Bob 0119 wrote:

Irn-Bru wrote:

Bob 0119 wrote:It clears the air when you ask and get it out in the open, especially if the question is a valid one. It'd be different if there was no reason to believe his mother was ever a prostitute or a drug-dealer; then it's just offensive.

Hmm. I still find it offensive, so perhaps it's just me.

Well, that's probably 'cuz your mom's not a drug-dealing prostitute

Yeah...prostitute...that's funny...no way she was a prostitute...

Well it looks like that it was Jeff Ireland from the Dolphins that asked that question.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ez-bryant/

SMH...

If this was a player talking about some HC's crackhead mother, this thread would be 20 pages long. Such a double standard.

So, I guess what I'm learning here is that it would be better to simply pass on an individual as a potential problem because you're not to sure he's a "good character" guy instead of asking him the question directly because you might "hurt his feelings" or because it's not "politically correct."

GM's should never ask those kinds of questions. They should leave that to his team-mates, his opponents, the fans and the media.

They should just draft the guy and not worry one day that they might see him being arrested because he was with his mother who had drugs in the car.

They should ignore that little worry about opening up the paper and seeing "Mother of Cowboy's Player Arrested; Again" all over the front page.

Nah, they should just ignore it. It doesn't affect him. It's only his mom; how influential could she be really? I'm sure his mom's arrest history has no impact on how he lives his life or views the world.