Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

I probably would have chosen 'D' had it been an option. Forced to pick between C and F, I picked C.

I think, on the whole, the team has gotten worse between December and now relative to the rest of the league. However, there will be no games played between now and draft day which obviously became the center of the offseason when we dealt up to get RG3. And the fact that I have a stronger belief in the 2012 team than I did with the 2011 team is attributable to that selection of an elite prospect. They picked a good time to trade up, although there will never be a time in NFL history where it was smart to trade what they did to move up.

The Redskins spent a lot of money on the first day of free agency that they'll almost certainly regret spending, but it could have been a lot worse, as we ended up letting San Diego, Jacksonville, and Tampa Bay bite the free agent bullets a lot harder at the receiver market. Sure, the "winners" of the free agent class are the ones who avoided receivers entirely, but the Redskins 1) clearly added a lot of depth to a position they identified as a need, and 2) managed to not piss away quite as many dollars as three other teams. If you lower the standard far enough, that counts as a success.

I can't defend a lot of the teams defensive signings no matter how hard I try. Hey, here's an idea: instead of attributing the inability to lock up London Fletcher to the difficulties of the cap penalty, how about not spending millions of dollars on trash?

I think the Redskins stated goal was to get better on offense in this offseason, and though the high-priced WRs and the trade up to no. 2, I think they have clearly done that. I would not be surprised if the draft leans heavily to the defensive side.

Philosophically though, when do we penalize for the RG3 haul? If you're going to give this offseason an A because you got a quarterback, are we looking at two consecutive years in the C to D range because we don't have a first round pick? Or should we be grading those next two years on a curve because we traded more to get RG3 than any team has dealt for any NFL player in the draft before?

I'm going to dock the Redskins now and grade the future on the curve. Because lets say we get new decision makers going into next year. They can't get that first round pick back, but their job will be to build around RG3, and you don't necessarily need your first round pick to build a supporting cast.

Ill give it A wait and C. Until we get a glimpse of these guys on the field it could B anybody's guess

All I really wanted was RGIII. I voted A.

Philosophically though, when do we penalize for the RG3 haul? If you're going to give this offseason an A because you got a quarterback, are we looking at two consecutive years in the C to D range because we don't have a first round pick? Or should we be grading those next two years on a curve because we traded more to get RG3 than any team has dealt for any NFL player in the draft before?

I'm going to dock the Redskins now and grade the future on the curve. Because lets say we get new decision makers going into next year. They can't get that first round pick back, but their job will be to build around RG3, and you don't necessarily need your first round pick to build a supporting cast.

When RG3 busts or keeps us from winning (significantly) due to being a couple of young players away from big time. I know that you preach us not being only a player or two away so you can't count it now unless RG3s career ends this year, something that would be freak and extremely unforeseen. So in a couple/few of years if you can genuinely say we were short one or two players.. or if one of the second teir QBS ends up being just as good/better than RG3. It is tied to many potential outcomes none of which you can put an exact timeline on.

Eff option D. Should have just put option H after F with the explanation of "Hatte"

b- or c... no OL help, weak secondary (starter wise), no ILB yet.

I think the cap shot really hurt, and hopefully we can get that money back before next FA and fill in some gaps. I just hope RGIII is as good as he's looked and is already picking up and locking into our offense.

We have to keep in perspective how Goodell severely handicapped our offseason with the bogus cap penalty just hours before FA started. We didn't have all of our expected cap space.


I'll take B because of the RGIII pick-up and loading up on quality WRs to support him. We FINALLY have a franchise QB. "Strong, better than expected" perfectly describes what we did with the cap situation we were unfairly thrown into.

What's keeping it from being an A is not signing London Fletcher. We also need a new starting RT...but we do have the draft to address that position along with the secondary. Jammal Brown is very good when healthy, but that's the problem, he needs to stay healthy.

I gave it a B (B- to be exact) We really haven't taken care of the Oline as I expected us to do when we traded up for Griffin. I know everyone is excited about the WR position and the upgrades. I am a tad skeptical because neither of the additions were #1's with their respective teams. It remains to be seen how they will be used here, who will be the #1, if it will be a #1 by committee so to speak.

Also the London Fletcher thing is a bit troubling. They just signed Torrence (which isn't a huge amount of money) but I think they should have signed Fletch right from the get go.

Moving up to #2 gives them a huge jump in my rating. If not they may have gotten a D so far. Moving up to get the "franchise QB" is something this franchise hasn't really done in a while. Also, having a player with RGIII's caliber and talents is something I can NEVER remember this franchise having. Big props on moving up to get him.

I voted C but, it is hard to say until these guys hit the field. On paper, this team sounds pretty good. I like WR signings. I think the deals were fair.

With June 1st cuts still ahead, this team may not be done adding veterans yet.