Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=calia;1040098][QUOTE=Mattyk;1040088]Thompson wasn't drafted to play teams though.

Danny Smith had kicks blocked too.

The coverage is what's really killed us, that's where Zo comes in. Plus the guy was a leader on the field. [B]Losing him definitely had an impact.[/[/B]QUOTE]

I don't disgaree. But the loss of one player on D (a non-starting LB) when we were gaining back to starters in Orakpo and Merriweather shouldn't have resulted in the putrid excuse for a defense we now have. Bowen, Golston, and Jenkins are largely non-factors, and Cofield is a decent run stopper -- none gets within the same area code of opposing QBs. Now I realize a 3-4 is designed to get LBs to the QB, but our front three cannot collapse a pocket or even really push it back. I was watching some of the "highlights" (glutton for punishment), and Ponder and Cassel had all freaking day to throw; the opposite of RGIII's experience in the second half, and most of that pressure was up the middle (Montgomery and Lichtgensteiger have become liabilities).[/quote]

I was talking about losing Zo hurting us on teams, not on D.

The D has it's own problems.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1040082]This team is an $110 million operation by cap dollars. If you truly believe an additional $18 million makes this a playoff team, you may be a sucker.[/quote]

18Million in cap dollars is easily 2-3 valuable starters, plus 1-2 role players. I don't think it's unfair to say that defensively that could be the difference between a 3rd and 18 completion, and a 3rd and 18 throwaway/sack.

Does the cap space alone make the difference, no, but it's easy to see how 2 of the "right" guys could fit into that space and make a difference. Heck the average spending for Offensive line positions for all the teams was $19,095,093(compiled from Overthecap.com's positional spending chart) so clearly 18Mil is a substantial amount when it comes to salary cap. Like wise the average spending for safeties and cb's was 18.135Mil. We spent 12Mil on safeties/cb's I would think a few upgrades were available if we had even 9mil extra.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=punch it in;1040096]Is turdble like terrible and turd?[/quote]

exactly, i would like word to replace the word for "Redskins special teams"

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1040084]The special teams sucks because the Redskins don't value it when it comes time to evaluate players. Keith Burns isn't helping, but there's not enough that can be done in November to overcome the negligence this team shows towards special teams in March and April.[/quote]

I really don't believe this. I would be interested in your proof, because I tend to think Shanahan has generally regarded ST as a proving ground and held it in high regard. On the flipside, I can't offer any proof, because I don't really know how you prove it. I do think ST coaching has been lacking though.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1040100]18Million in cap dollars is easily 2-3 valuable starters, plus 1-2 role players. I don't think it's unfair to say that defensively that could be the difference between a 3rd and 18 completion, and a 3rd and 18 throwaway/sack.

Does the cap space alone make the difference, no, but it's easy to see how 2 of the "right" guys could fit into that space and make a difference. Heck the average spending for Offensive line positions for all the teams was $19,095,093(compiled from Overthecap.com's positional spending chart) so clearly 18Mil is a substantial amount when it comes to salary cap. Like wise the average spending for safeties and cb's was 18.135Mil. We spent 12Mil on safeties/cb's I would think a few upgrades were available if we had even 9mil extra.[/quote]

What starters would the Redskins been able to acquire that would have made one of the worst defenses in the NFL that much better?

I don't think the 18 million dollar hit would have bought us that many wins. Look at the Miami Dolphins for example, they got Ellerbe, Wheeler, and Grimes this past offseason.

They went from the 21st ranked defense by yardage... to the 20th. They actually got worst in Points Allowed.

I do not think the 18 million dollar excuse is valid. There are already enough free agents on the Redskins, signing more players that other teams thought were replaceable wouldn't help.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

We're not just talking $18M but $36M over 2 years. That's a pretty significant handcuff.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=GTripp0012;1040082]This team is an $110 million operation by cap dollars. If you truly believe an additional $18 million makes this a playoff team, you may be a sucker.[/quote]

I agree and I'm tired of everyone saying..."oh well if we had cap dollars we'd be better!" ...that's a cop out excuse. This team has free agents that stink. Come March, Snyder will gas on the plane and everyone will be along for the ride. I hope we go out and get a couple guys, but I don't want to see the 2000 Redskins. I'd prefer that we draft more guys like Morris, Amerson and Reed.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040116]We're not just talking $18M but $36M over 2 years. That's a pretty significant handcuff.[/quote]

Skins still made the playoffs last year even with the penalty.

I understand the impact of the penalty, I just do not think its an excuse for Skins not to be performing. Besides Alexander there was no significant player they could not resign, there was no combination of players in free agency that would have changed this 3-6 team into an actual respectable team.

[QUOTE=Chico23231;1040101]exactly, i would like word to replace the word for "Redskins special teams"[/QUOTE]

Consider it done.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=donofriose;1040121]Skins still made the playoffs last year even with the penalty.

I understand the impact of the penalty, [B]I just do not think its an excuse for Skins not to be performing[/B]. Besides Alexander there was no significant player they could not resign, there was no combination of players in free agency that would have changed this 3-6 team into an actual respectable team.[/quote]

I don't think it can be written off as a non-factor.

Take away $36M from any team and there's going to be ramifications.

No free agents could have helped this year? I really find that hard to believe.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

if we could have gotten just 1 more lineman (starter) and then a DB and LB in FA we would be better imo. O well is what it is, I just want to see Griff continue to get better and better

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040124]I don't think it can be written off as a non-factor.

Take away $36M from any team and there's going to be ramifications.

No free agents could have helped this year? I really find that hard to believe.[/quote]

Yeah, I don't see how that $36 million penalty is a non-factor. That's a bit of a stretch.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=Mattyk;1040124]I don't think it can be written off as a non-factor.

Take away $36M from any team and there's going to be ramifications.

No free agents could have helped this year? I really find that hard to believe.[/quote]

The Redskins already have a team pretty much built on free agency. I think not having two first round picks will have more of an impact than the cap penalty.

Free Agency to me will always be one of the most overrated aspects to building a successful NFL team. Teams tend to turn around quicker through the draft than free agency. Resigning players is by far the most important part of free agency.

Plus the concept of a Salary Cap is a joke but that is a topic for another day.

[QUOTE=donofriose;1040128]The Redskins already have a team pretty much built on free agency. I think not having two first round picks will have more of an impact than the cap penalty.

Free Agency to me will always be one of the most overrated aspects to building a successful NFL team. Teams tend to turn around quicker through the draft than free agency. Resigning players is by far the most important part of free agency.

Plus the concept of a Salary Cap is a joke but that is a topic for another day.[/QUOTE]

I think we have a pretty large core group of players that were drafted on this team. The current state of the league pretty much makes it impossible to keep all your draftpicks year after year.

Re: Skins Viks Postgame
 

[quote=donofriose;1040128][B]The Redskins already have a team pretty much built on free agency[/B]. I think not having two first round picks will have more of an impact than the cap penalty.

Free Agency to me will always be one of the most overrated aspects to building a successful NFL team. Teams tend to turn around quicker through the draft than free agency. Resigning players is by far the most important part of free agency.

Plus the concept of a Salary Cap is a joke but that is a topic for another day.[/quote]

I don't see it that way -- important contributors from the draft (or undrafted free agents) include: RGIII, Morris, Amerson, Kerrigan, Orakpo, Reed, Doughty, Montgomery, Williams, Forbath, Golston, Hankerson, Robinson, and probably a bunch of other guys that don't immediately come to mind. And a number of our relatively recent FA signings have been good: D. Hall, Cofield, Garcon, Chester. But our current roster is nothing like the FA hot mess that was the 2000 team. But I wouldn't say our team was built on free agency, and we have recent signings that show that you don't need a lot of money to get value if you're smart. There will be busts from time to time -- true of the draft and true of FAs -- and we have them as all teams do. But with the $36MM in the last two years, had wwe acquired some O line and D line help, or LB help -- even just one impact player in each area -- I imagine that we'd be noticeably better off.