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

To be honest, I couldn't care less about the NFL right now. The way the owners and the players have allowed this dispute to reach this stage is sickening to me. I can see both sides of the argument, and I can disagree with both. The only people who aren't being heard are the fans.

However, that's not what this thread is supposed to be about. Whilst I am disinterested in the league, I still love the Redskins. And what I want to know is: how will this dispute impact the Redskins in particular? Not all teams are created equal - they all have different issues, and are in different stages of development. The last two occasions that football suffered labour stoppages, the Redskins were coached by a great coach, and had outstanding teams. The organisation was top class from top to bottom. As a result, they were in a position to turn a negative into a positive, and have the rings to prove it.

This time around, the Redskins have been replaced by the Patriots, Steelers, Packers, Colts and Ravens. Those are the teams most likely to flourish next season, if there is a next season. Whilst the Redskins struggle to put a good product on the field.

So, how does this dispute impact the Redskins ability to climb up the NFL ladder? The first thing that came into my head is that they won't be able to trade Haynesworth or McNabb before the draft, hindering any attempts to increase the number of picks they have. Neither will they be able to sign their draft picks to contracts, but then neither will anybody else.

This year's crop of free agents is alleged to be a deep and rich one, but the Redskins won't be able to hit the ground running, and attack the cream of the market (assuming that was in their plan). If their plan was to address the second tier free agency market, they may also be screwed. That market will not become clear until much closer to the season (again, if there is one).

So, if we do end up with a 2011 season, I can foresee the Redskins being badly hit by the dispute, with all attempts to improve being badly damaged by the new timetable.

Maybe there will be no 2011 season. To be honest, I have no idea whether that would be bad, or good for the Redskins. Maybe the possibility of two drafts taking place before the next season, plus a huge free agency splurge, might benefit the team. I honestly don't know.

What are your thoughts guys?

We are a franchise that is basically a part of the bottom tier - I see this stupidity slightly differently - this franchise cannot get much worse so I think that we will not be hurt as much as the franchises that are in the top tier


I hope we have football soon and I hope that both sides get really hurt by letting this happen

I feel really bad for those players that are not currently playing the game - I think the deal that was offered by the NFL at the last moment and which the NFLPA refused to even consider was one that would at least address a lot of those players needs


It seems to me that the 32 owners will end up with a little less but the majority of the players are going to feel the loss of income a whole lot more if this drags out for very long


Given the state this franchise is currently in due to the years of bad ownership and management - we can only get better

I've read a lot the past day about how the lockout will affect this team or that. Consensus seems to be that it is very bad for a team like the Redskins who are already in disarray at a number of key positions (including QB).

I don't know though. Seems like almost everything I've read concerning the lockout has been dead wrong or changes day to day. Who freaking knows.

I'm finding it difficult to sympathize with either side myself. De Smith strikes me as a supreme legal d-bag, and the worst possible person to be negotiating for the players. He's making a name for himself with this case, and that doesn't happen if he cuts a compromise in March. I'm also bothered by this demand that NFL owners open their books. I'm a small business owner myself, and that stuff is my business not my employees. Its a business not a hippie collective. Employees salaries are dictated by the free market, not by how much money I make or don't make.

I have no doubt that on the flip side, owners like Snyder, Jerry Jones, etc; are putting their own financial interests and profits far ahead of what is actually fair to the players and WAY ahead of what is fair to us fans.

We're the catfish bottom dwellers.
The only thing the dispute hits is Free Agency for us.
We swing for Base Hits in the Draft and forget Home Runs.

Personally, I'd like to see the NFL end on this note.

The players have the moxie to run a football show.
They understand that it's an entertainment business.
They don't NEED the owners to make their money and play the game.

Start a player's league and leave the owners where they are.

This would be the last stoppage of play if the players formed their own league.

Give me 22 guys on the field
Cheerleaders with megaphones
a pack of zebras with whistles
and let's play some ball.

F the NFL

riggofan wrote:
I'm finding it difficult to sympathize with either side myself. De Smith strikes me as a supreme legal d-bag, and the worst possible person to be negotiating for the players. He's making a name for himself with this case, and that doesn't happen if he cuts a compromise in March. I'm also bothered by this demand that NFL owners open their books. I'm a small business owner myself, and that stuff is my business not my employees. Its a business not a hippie collective. Employees salaries are dictated by the free market, not by how much money I make or don't make.

I agree about Smith. He comes off as an arrogant jerk. His intention all along was to get to this point. I don't think the players realize who they have leading them. When Pash says there wasn't equal commitment on both sides and Smith got all P.O.'d he knew he was right. Smith never wanted to get this settled.

I think the effect on the Redskins depends on how long this lasts. If they can get this thing done before OTA's or even training camp then the effect wouldn't be that big. However, if this goes into the season then it will effect them a lot more. The new draft picks and pickups won't be able to practice with the team and talk to coaches. Fortunately it is the same for every team, but we also need the new guys more than most teams.

SkinsJock wrote:We are a franchise that is basically a part of the bottom tier - I see this stupidity slightly differently - this franchise cannot get much worse so I think that we will not be hurt as much as the franchises that are in the top tier

There are two sides to that coin Jock: one view is that we have nothing much to lose, given that the team is so poor. The other view is that the Redskins have much more that they need to gain in order to become truly competitive. So, by not being able to do the things they need to improve, they're actually losing.

I'm finding it difficult to sympathize with either side myself. De Smith strikes me as a supreme legal d-bag, and the worst possible person to be negotiating for the players. He's making a name for himself with this case, and that doesn't happen if he cuts a compromise in March. I'm also bothered by this demand that NFL owners open their books. I'm a small business owner myself, and that stuff is my business not my employees. Its a business not a hippie collective. Employees salaries are dictated by the free market, not by how much money I make or don't make.

I disagree completely. Smith is a former US Attorney and partner at both Latham & Watkins and Patton and Boggs. He hardly has to make a name for himself. As for things getting to this point, this makes sense from the players' perspective because they have the leverage now.

If I was an owner, I would be playing this charade to win. Hence, the 2011 season would be cancelled immediately, and the 2012 season may also be cancelled if no agreement is in place. Let the players get a real job and work for peanuts, maybe they would be more thankful for what they had.

I really think it all depends on the decision from the courts to block the lockout. If they let it proceed, the owners can just bleed them for 3 months and then lift the lockout, and start a season with replacements, a 17 game season, and, well anything else they want. The thinking is that the players will then strike, and one by one, they will cross the line. The Skins may be in perfect position to build a team of quality free agents who are desparate for money. If I were the owners, this is what I would do.

The lawyers are only interested in keeping this in the courts as long as they can, and if that is the case, the owners can continue paying legal fees until current players run out of money. The rich players will only be able to fight this over a long term. The guys that have little will have to cross.

Q: Can the owners impose work terms for the 2011 season? If so, what are the players' options?
A: The owners can choose to end the lockout and begin a new league year under any rules they choose since there is no longer a Collective Bargaining Agreement or any union to challenge them. It would then be up to the players to choose to report for work, or go out on strike while they pursue their litigation in court.


If I were the players and this happened, I would start a players league and begin on day one with a revenue sharing league.

Ultimately, this could lead to a split. I lived through this with the CART IRL feud, and it took a league, that was at the time, the biggest racing circuit on the globe, and reduced it to two defunct leagues. That went on for 15 years and only in the last year have they started the climb back to the top when the league married up once more and started Indycar. Sponsorship has finally come back in waves, but it bankrupted many teams, drivers, and owners along the way.

Here is a great article.
http://www.profootballweekly.com/2011/0 ... ckout-faqs

chiefhog44 wrote:I really think it all depends on the decision from the courts to block the lockout. If they let it proceed, the owners can just bleed them for 3 months and then lift the lockout, and start a season with replacements, a 17 game season, and, well anything else they want. The thinking is that the players will then strike, and one by one, they will cross the line. The Skins may be in perfect position to build a team of quality free agents who are desparate for money. If I were the owners, this is what I would do.

The lawyers are only interested in keeping this in the courts as long as they can, and if that is the case, the owners can continue paying legal fees until current players run out of money. The rich players will only be able to fight this over a long term. The guys that have little will have to cross.

Q: Can the owners impose work terms for the 2011 season? If so, what are the players' options?
A: The owners can choose to end the lockout and begin a new league year under any rules they choose since there is no longer a Collective Bargaining Agreement or any union to challenge them. It would then be up to the players to choose to report for work, or go out on strike while they pursue their litigation in court.


If I were the players and this happened, I would start a players league and begin on day one with a revenue sharing league.

Ultimately, this could lead to a split. I lived through this with the CART IRL feud, and it took a league, that was at the time, the biggest racing circuit on the globe, and reduced it to two defunct leagues. That went on for 15 years and only in the last year have they started the climb back to the top when the league married up once more and started Indycar. Sponsorship has finally come back in waves, but it bankrupted many teams, drivers, and owners along the way.

Here is a great article.
http://www.profootballweekly.com/2011/0 ... ckout-faqs

The NFL will lose in court. They are sending a "Boies" to do a man's job.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=A ... abor-boies

UK Skins Fan wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:We are a franchise that is basically a part of the bottom tier - I see this stupidity slightly differently - this franchise cannot get much worse so I think that we will not be hurt as much as the franchises that are in the top tier

There are two sides to that coin Jock: one view is that we have nothing much to lose, given that the team is so poor. The other view is that the Redskins have much more that they need to gain in order to become truly competitive. So, by not being able to do the things they need to improve, they're actually losing.

From what I've heard (and we all know how much BS is flowing right now) in the short term the teams will be able to trade players and the draft will take place


I totally agree that we have a lot more work to do


I still think the players are going to end up looking bad here with the fans - I think that D Smith is not as good at this stuff as the NFL group is - the owners' group have the 'edge' - I might feel differently if Gene Upshaw was still in charge


AND we the fans have nothing but a seat at a fight between 2 greedy parties - stupid


this is going to be V messy

btw - when this is all said and done - I'd be very surprised if the 'deal' the players gets from the owners is as 'good' as the one that was on the table at 4pm on Friday, 3/11

the players made a gamble and should have taken that deal - they are not getting that deal back

SkinsJock wrote:btw - when this is all said and done - I'd be very surprised if the 'deal' the players gets from the owners is as 'good' as the one that was on the table at 4pm on Friday, 3/11

the players made a gamble and should have taken that deal - they are not getting that deal back

I think you're dead wrong. The players have the upper hand in the pr battle and more importantly, have the leverage in the court battle.

But this thread is about the impact on the Redskins specifically, not the league-wide ramifications.

One thing I will say is this - more than one person has commented that strike years are good for the Redskins. As I said in my opening post though, this Redskins team is not in a position to benefit from chaos and disruption to the offseason, compared to other teams. Unless they just get lucky, but that could apply to any given season.

Here's another thought - has anybody told Fat Al that he's been locked out? How will he ever know? This must seem just like any other preseason to him - heck, he might never know there's been a dispute!

UK Skins Fan wrote:But this thread is about the impact on the Redskins specifically, not the league-wide ramifications.

fair enough - sorry

One thing I will say is this - more than one person has commented that strike years are good for the Redskins. As I said in my opening post though, this Redskins team is not in a position to benefit from chaos and disruption to the offseason, compared to other teams. Unless they just get lucky, but that could apply to any given season.

i just love it when guys that think they know aything point to something that happened decades (or more) ago as if it has any relevance at all - it's similar to saying that we have a better chance in a game because we never lose to that franchise on the 3rd Sunday in November!

we do need all the help we can get and we can only hope that the mistakes that these guys have made in the past year will result in better trades and better player acquisitions

THANKFULLY we don't have dumb and dumber running things here any more although some of the fans here think that we are being managed by guys equally as inept

Here's another thought - has anybody told Fat Al that he's been locked out? How will he ever know? This must seem just like any other preseason to him - heck, he might never know there's been a dispute!

As I understand it there's a really good chance that it will be back to business as usual here SHORTLY while the players and the owners keep on trashing each other and try to win 'support' from the fans

It will be interesting to see what Mike & Bruce have in store for Fat Al

CanesSkins26 wrote:I disagree completely. Smith is a former US Attorney and partner at both Latham & Watkins and Patton and Boggs. He hardly has to make a name for himself. As for things getting to this point, this makes sense from the players' perspective because they have the leverage now.

Oh my bad. I forgot De Smith was a household name before all this went down.

looks like a great opportunity for somebody

http://eye-on-football.blogs.cbssports. ... 8/27895672

When I hear stuff like this, it really pisses me off. I hope someone on this team can step up and start leading. I'm all for Shannahan continuing to purge these me first players. How about someone on this team wanting to be a team... The key to the lockout superbowls was that we were organized and held team workouts and the like. I'm so tired of the players we have on this team.

Washington Redskins

Redskins players haven’t made plans for any group offseason workouts or walk-through sessions.