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

LOL, he is so funny and kinda right. Is it a risk to get Suh and others with baggage? Yes, but that's the risk you take.

Suh is probably the most dominant D lineman today. (Aint'sWorth.....was worthless) but that's for another show.

All this talk about character guys, but that has gotten us seasons of 3-13 or 4-12.


http://www.csnwashington.com/redskinsbl ... mukong-suh

tribeofjudah wrote:LOL, he is so funny and kinda right. Is it a risk to get Suh and others with baggage? Yes, but that's the risk you take.

Suh is probably the most dominant D lineman today. (Aint'sWorth.....was worthless) but that's for another show.

All this talk about character guys, but that has gotten us seasons of 3-13 or 4-12.


http://www.csnwashington.com/redskinsbl ... mukong-suh

I was listening to the radio. It depends on what you mean be character. Mitch was equating it to "being a nice guy."

Thomas Booswell in 2005 wrote:Game after game, Gibbs praises his players' effort. To him, football "character" is a combination of physical toughness and refusal to quit in the face of either mid-game adversity or two- to-three week streaks of bad play. Such qualities might seem a minimum NFL requirement, yet many teams lack them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01327.html

Sure, good character, nice guys...........but if they don't have talent and ballz, then we simply get a 4-12 season.

Get Suh, get J.J..........(not possible)

Get stud players (even if they are questionable character).....and we may be cooking with gas...!!!

tribeofjudah wrote:LOL, he is so funny and kinda right. Is it a risk to get Suh and others with baggage? Yes, but that's the risk you take.

Suh is probably the most dominant D lineman today. (Aint'sWorth.....was worthless) but that's for another show.

All this talk about character guys, but that has gotten us seasons of 3-13 or 4-12.


http://www.csnwashington.com/redskinsbl ... mukong-suh

Not at all. I don't consider our team to be full of "character" guys. I actually think it's the complete opposite. I don't look at DHALL, Desean, RGIII, Garcon, Trent Williams, Merriweather, Orakpo, etc. and think "yeah, those are character guys".....

And haven't we learned enough over the years going after big name DTs like Suh??? Were the experiences with Wilkerson, Stubblefield, Haynesworth, Smith, Taylor, etc. not enough? Defensive production is so reliant on the guys around you. The risk is high.

BMitch is still excited about all the press his November rant got and is hungry for even more press..... This is a perfect example of how the media tries to "create" news instead of reporting it.

Oh my god, this isn't a discussion about acquiring Suh, is it? PLEASE TELL ME WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING THAT.

we don't need Suh - we just need a GM with full authority to make things right here - he needs to be the guy that makes all personnel decisions - Bruce Allen can do the contracts and Dan Snyder needs to stay away - he just signs checks

Specifically Dan Snyder should not be a part of the draft or any of the player or even the HC decisions - that is the GM's job

we might have a chance if Dan gets out of the way ...

SkinsJock wrote:we don't need Suh - we just need a GM with full authority to make things right here - he needs to be the guy that makes all personnel decisions - Bruce Allen can do the contracts and Dan Snyder needs to stay away - he just signs checks

Specifically Dan Snyder should not be a part of the draft or any of the player or even the HC decisions - that is the GM's job

we might have a chance if Dan gets out of the way ...

Man, you got this all figured out bro. (in a perfect world......in a perfect world)

Irn-Bru wrote:Oh my god, this isn't a discussion about acquiring Suh, is it? PLEASE TELL ME WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING THAT.

WE are not.

tribeofjudah wrote:Sure, good character, nice guys...........but if they don't have talent and ballz, then we simply get a 4-12 season.

Get Suh, get J.J..........(not possible)

Get stud players (even if they are questionable character).....and we may be cooking with gas...!!!

You seem stuck on a weird idea of what character is.

Besides, Suh would break the bank. We want to DRAFT a Suh who, BTW, fits the Gibbs definition of character.

No one is saying avoid talent.

Dexter was a coke head but he had good character. He worked his a$$ off, he came on every play, his mates in the trenches could trust him, and when Ritchie told him to stop the run, he did.

A guy can be a dick and therefore have questionable character in the "nice guy" sense Mitch was laughing about. But a guy can also be a dick and have excellent character in the sense that he doesn't take off plays, studies film, puts the team before his stats, etc.

DarthMonk wrote:Besides, Suh would break the bank. We want to DRAFT a Suh who, BTW, fits the Gibbs definition of character. No one is saying avoid talent. Dexter was a coke head but he had good character. He worked his a$$ off, he came on every play, his mates in the trenches could trust

Ding ding ding, we have a winner!

When I think "questionable character", I think F.Davis & T'Jackson. That's the kind of character that hurts a team. That & lazy players can wreck a franchise.

yupchagee wrote:When I think "questionable character", I think F.Davis & T'Jackson. That's the kind of character that hurts a team. That & lazy players can wreck a franchise.

Yeah, when Allen talks about guys with character I think he means hard-working players that put in extra work when practice finishes and study lots of film. The antithesis of Mr. A Haynesworth in other words...

The more of those we have in the organisation the better, their work ethic can be infectious.

It was good to see Trent digging in and playing through the pain as well this season, he's setting a great example now and the suspension is a distant memory.

If Suh is franchised Fairly should be available

If we add anyone it will not be because of their character, good or bad - this new GM will build a winning culture and a group that will play with an attitude - it's not about the players or the coaches - it's about finally having guys play and practice, together as a team

EA7649 wrote:If Suh is franchised Fairly should be available

What did Suh do for the Lions? Suh has been good for sure but really haven't had a consistent impact since his rookie season. With that said, he would be an improvement over the guys we have but he is going to want JJ Watt money and isn't JJ Watt or close! We may be able to draft a guy in Leonard Williams that would be younger won't cost over $100 million. If Williams is gone, I now trust our new GM to find someone with similar impact. Suh is a guy you may want to bring in if you think you need a few pieces and already a playoff team.

Nick Fairly is Chris Baker but with more upside. He's been benched at times over the year for coming into came out of shape and not motivated. Don't want him unless again he is at a minimum type salary.

SkinsJock wrote:If we add anyone it will not be because of their character, good or bad - this new GM will build a winning culture and a group that will play with an attitude - it's not about the players or the coaches - it's about finally having guys play and practice, together as a team

... i.e., with character.

DM - there are so many very talented guys playing the game - I think that players that have more of a team attitude and are better characters on and off the field are more likely to be more 'productive' and less likely to 'hurt' the team by making mistakes both on the field and off it

you don't have to be a dirty player to be good player but if you're a dirty player and you have bad character flaws, you are most likely not viewed as being a good player by others on your team

SkinsJock wrote:If we add anyone it will not be because of their character, good or bad - this new GM will build a winning culture and a group that will play with an attitude - it's not about the players or the coaches - it's about finally having guys play and practice, together as a team

Right. So we'll just bring in a bunch of feel good hand holders with positive attitudes. Because its not actually about the players.

tribeofjudah wrote:Sure, good character, nice guys...........but if they don't have talent and ballz, then we simply get a 4-12 season.

Get Suh, get J.J (not possible) Get stud players (even if they are questionable character) - and we may be cooking with gas!!

Wrong!

Wasn't Dexter Manley a cokehead? Character flaw? Yet he was a STUD on the field...!!!

Maybe he did coke after his playing days. Maybe he began using during his playing days.

that's what we need - go grab every dirt bag, bad ass, free agent pro bowl player we can and give them as much as they want

we don't need no wimpy character guys, we need players that will do anything to anyone ...

can't wait ...


sorry, it's not happening people

I'd be shocked after listening to the new GM speak, if we went after Suh....wouldn't people just this its status quo at Redskins park if that happened??

SkinsJock wrote:we don't need Suh - we just need a GM with full authority to make things right here - he needs to be the guy that makes all personnel decisions - Bruce Allen can do the contracts and Dan Snyder needs to stay away - he just signs checks

Specifically Dan Snyder should not be a part of the draft or any of the player or even the HC decisions - that is the GM's job

we might have a chance if Dan gets out of the way ...

Is it me or has SkinsJock gotten a lot smarter lately......

I agree completely.

Funny, I'd consider Fletcher a character guy. Rodgers seems like a good dude too.

tribeofjudah wrote:Wasn't Dexter Manley a cokehead? Character flaw? Yet he was a STUD on the field...!!!

Maybe he did coke after his playing days. Maybe he began using during his playing days.

DarthMonk wrote:

tribeofjudah wrote:Sure, good character, nice guys...........but if they don't have talent and ballz, then we simply get a 4-12 season.

Get Suh, get J.J..........(not possible)

Get stud players (even if they are questionable character).....and we may be cooking with gas...!!!

You seem stuck on a weird idea of what character is.

Besides, Suh would break the bank. We want to DRAFT a Suh who, BTW, fits the Gibbs definition of character.

No one is saying avoid talent.

Dexter was a coke head but he had good character. He worked his a$$ off, he came on every play, his mates in the trenches could trust him, and when Ritchie told him to stop the run, he did.

A guy can be a dick and therefore have questionable character in the "nice guy" sense Mitch was laughing about. But a guy can also be a dick and have excellent character in the sense that he doesn't take off plays, studies film, puts the team before his stats, etc.

Again you're just stuck on one particular meaning of the word character. You're stuck on the one Brian Mitchell was joking about.