Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Redskin Rich;298188]I am not sold on JC.... I don't think we have had a QB we could be confident in since Brad Johnson. I also want a 6'4" speed demon WR that will scare DB's in the league. In other words, someone built like Westbrook only with the heart to go along with the talent.[/quote]

So would you want them to pick up another QB or are you willing to see what JC can do?

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Mattyk72;298192]So would you want them to pick up another QB or are you willing to see what JC can do?[/quote]
The simple answer is yes.... They should definately send Brunnell to the old folks home at this point and pick up an experienced QB that still has some life in him. While I am not sold on JC, we did trade to get the extra first round pick for him. He did not show last season that he is an unquestionable starter.... let us have a competetion for the job and see what shakes out.

I would rather see us use our pick for a stud WR. Right now we have quality guys... comperable to a Gary Clark (who should be a HOFer).... but without Art Monk, Clark would not have had the success he had.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

Personally I thought JC looked very promising considering what little prep time he had in the preseason and throughout the season while Brunell was starting.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Redskin Rich;298098]I am sure to be attacked for this.... but they have not been making the right moves and I see 5-11 on the horizon.[/quote]

Well let's see we signed Smoot, Macklin, Jimoh CB's
Fleetch MLB
Stoutmire S
Wade OL
Yoder TE

Other than DE, DT and maybe a Safety, what would we possibly need?
What other right moves are needed?

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

I'm going 10-6 and WIN the division!

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Redskin Rich;298196]The simple answer is yes.... They should definately send Brunnell to the old folks home at this point and pick up an experienced QB that still has some life in him. While I am not sold on JC, we did trade to get the extra first round pick for him. He did not show last season that he is an unquestionable starter.... let us have a competetion for the job and see what shakes out.[/quote]

What QB is out there that is worth bringing in at this point??

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

11:5 Regular Season 4:0 Playoffs!

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Mattyk72;298204]What QB is out there that is worth bringing in at this point??[/quote]

Eggs-freakin-zackly! That's an easy one = no one.
I take that back. I would consider Trent Green as a backup to JC in place of Mark Brunell.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=skinsfan_nn;298202]Well let's see we signed Smoot, Macklin, Jimoh CB's
Fleetch MLB
Stoutmire S
Wade OL
Yoder TE

Other than DE, DT and maybe a Safety, what would we possibly need?
What other right moves are needed?[/quote]

I guess you didn't read my follow up?

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=724Skinsfan;298207]Eggs-freakin-zackly! That's an easy one = no one.
I take that back. I would consider Trent Green as a backup to JC in place of Mark Brunell.[/quote]

But is he worth trading for?

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Redskin Rich;298208]I guess you didn't read my follow up?[/quote]

Yea, I just read it. IMO it made no sense.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Mattyk72;298204]What QB is out there that is worth bringing in at this point??[/quote]
724 just took my dream answer... Trent Green is available and has proven he can get the job done.

I know he could never come back to DC, at this point in their respective careers, Gus would hold up better than Brunell. There are several more experienced QB's out there that can be better than where we are.

( and yes, I am well aware of the fact that since I mentioned Gus in a positive light, the attacks will be fast and relentless now)

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Mattyk72;298209]But is he worth trading for?[/quote]

Right now, I would say Brunell for Green, straight up. It would be a slight upgrade at best. In other words, it's not really all that worth it.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Redskin Rich;298211]724 just took my dream answer... Trent Green is available and has proven he can get the job done.

I know he could never come back to DC, at this point in their respective careers, Gus would hold up better than Brunell. There are several more experienced QB's out there that can be better than where we are.

( and yes, I am well aware of the fact that since I mentioned Gus in a positive light, the attacks will be fast and relentless now)[/quote]

I'm not sure of the benefit of bringing in an aging QB who's best days are behind him to replace, well, an aging QB who's best days are behind him.

Gus?

I guess I'll have to ask again... what QB is out there that is worth bringing in at this point??

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

Matty - you asked for my opinion, and I gave it.... the 2 QBs I mentioned still have a year or two left... Brunell should have retired before last season.

There are ALOT of other options out there... I just gave 2

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

9-7

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

I'm just stating my opinion too. I don't see the point of "upgrading" if it doesn't represent a real upgrade.

If we're discussing Gus as an option then we've got serious problems.

And if we did bring him in and JC can't beat him out, we've really got serious problems.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

The only advantage of changing backup QBs is some fresh material for the message boards. Ideally, as is the case with most teams in the leauge, Jason Campbell as the starting QB will be the QB for all 16 games.

Here are some "bold" predictions:

1. Brunell won't take the field in 2007 for any meaningful playing time...yet somehow he'll be brought up in every other thread.

2. Fully healthy Santana Moss will resurrect his early 2005 season, while El and Lloyd will step up as #2 and #3 receivers. But we'll still ask, even at 6-2 at the midway point, why didn't we draft Calvin Johnson who will be tearing it up for the 3-5 Tampa Bay Bucs.

3. We'll barely squeak out a win (or even lose it) after Gibbs decides to play the percentages instead of going for the jugular. Someone will start a "Has Gibbs Lost It" sometime in mid-October

4. Clinton Portis will get stuffed on a 4th and 2 attempt up the gut. All hell will break loose on the warpath

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Mattyk72;298220]I'm just stating my opinion too. I don't see the point of "upgrading" if it doesn't represent a real upgrade.

If we're discussing Gus as an option then we've got serious problems.

[B]And if we did bring him in and JC can't beat him out, we've really got serious problems.[/[/B]quote]
Your last sentence says it all Matty.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Redskin Rich;298196]The simple answer is yes.... They should definately send Brunnell to the old folks home at this point and pick up an experienced QB that still has some life in him. While I am not sold on JC, we did trade to get the extra first round pick for him. He did not show last season that he is an unquestionable starter.... let us have a competetion for the job and see what shakes out.

I would rather see us use our pick for a stud WR. Right now we have quality guys... comperable to a Gary Clark (who should be a HOFer).... but without Art Monk, Clark would not have had the success he had.[/quote]

So what did you expect from a qb who was in his first year starting? Remember the guy got no reps w/ the first team since he was drafted. Who do you want to bring in to compete w/ JC? Who is out on the waiver wire that is better? Do u suggest we trade draft picks for 65 year old Trent Green?

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

The subject of the thread was to make BOLD predictions... Not "Make Bold Predictions that will make everyone get a warm fuzzy."

I have made my prediction on our record... I hope I am wrong.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=724Skinsfan;298213]Right now, I would say Brunell for Green, straight up. It would be a slight upgrade at best. In other words, it's not really all that worth it.[/quote]

Why would T. Green come here? He wants to start. And even if it's an upgrade it's a real small one. We are going to have to go with who we have. Brunell and Collins as back-ups. We should be Ok. Brunell is fine to play 1-3 games if needed.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=skinsfan69;298239]Why would T. Green come here? He wants to start. And even if it's an upgrade it's a real small one. We are going to have to go with who we have. Brunell and Collins as back-ups. We should be Ok. Brunell is fine to play 1-3 games if needed.[/quote]

Correct. Kind of what I said in sentences #2 and #3.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

Depending on how we use our draft pick, I will say anywhere between 9-7 and 12-4. I'm thinking positive, 11-5.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=hooskins;297981]So this is my new annual thread that I will create weekly or monthly(depending on my laziness). It is called "Be Bold". It is a quick and easy thread that will hopefully have a poll in the near future.

The object of the thread is to make a rational but bold prediction between two options. The first annual thread will be the projected record in 2007 barring injury to starters. It is always sexy and easy to pick 8-8 and around there. We will not pick that, but instead we will BE BOLD.

The Washington Redskins will go either:

A)6-10 and lower
OR
B)10-6 and higher

Answer below. Be Bold.[/quote]


13-3 take that to the bank and obey your thirst and taste the rainbow

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

I wasnt drunk when I made this thread, I was just bored and I felt like being bold. I am just gonna throw out threads that are just fun stuff to think about.

It is not meant to be your final and serious choice.

I picked 6-10 or lower because I feel we have a better chance of losing big than winning big.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Redskin Rich;298238]The subject of the thread was to make BOLD predictions... Not "Make Bold Predictions that will make everyone get a warm fuzzy."

I have made my prediction on our record... I hope I am wrong.[/quote]

Exactly my friend, I am glad you see.

The goal is to be bold, and to be bold we only have two choices. We arent just going with the sexy pick, go for the bold one...

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=hooskins;298351]I wasnt drunk when I made this thread, I was just bored and I felt like being bold. I am just gonna throw out threads that are just fun stuff to think about.

It is not meant to be your final and serious choice.

I picked 6-10 or lower because I feel we have a better chance of losing big than winning big.[/quote]


true

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;298342]13-3 take that to the bank and obey your thirst and taste the rainbow[/quote]

Are you a big Skittles and Sprite fan or something?

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=GMScud;298357]Are you a big Skittles and Sprite fan or something?[/quote]


yes i love skittles and sprite is ok but it is an inside joke

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[QUOTE=hooskins;298352]Exactly my friend, I am glad you see.

The goal is to be bold, and to be bold we only have two choices. We arent just going with the sexy pick, go for the bold one...[/QUOTE]

Yeah but you said rational and bold in your original post. Predicting 5-11 largely upon who our backup QB is might be bold, but really how rational is it?

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=SmootSmack;298367]Yeah but you said rational and bold in your original post. Predicting 5-11 largely upon who our backup QB is might be bold, but really how rational is it?[/quote]

I mean rational based on the given assumptions. I mean the study of Economics is exactly the same, you make rational conclusions based on assumptions to make the situation easier to analyze.

The assumptions in this case is that our starters remain the starters. The point is to look at Al's Offense and if it has come around, and to see if the D can hold up.

The question is will we win big or lose big. Again this is just an interesting way of thinking of things. Again I am an Econ major, so maybe that is why everyone isn't following my thought.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

My apologies SmootSmack, I did not read Redskin Rich's previous posts.

My original assumption was NO injuries.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=SmootSmack;298367]Yeah but you said rational and bold in your original post. Predicting 5-11 largely upon who our backup QB is might be bold, but really how rational is it?[/quote]
Actually, you mis read me Smoot.... I said I don't think JC can get it done at this point and has no one behind him that can either.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Redskin Rich;298381]Actually, you mis read me Smoot.... I said I don't think JC can get it done at this point and has no one behind him that can either.[/quote]
and we don't have a true deep threat WR that will scare the DB's... we have a GREAT number 2 acting as a 1

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[QUOTE=Redskin Rich;298381]Actually, you mis read me Smoot.... I said I don't think JC can get it done at this point and has no one behind him that can either.[/QUOTE]

Fair enough. As for the WR situation, I've brought this up in other threads about CJ, when you look at the best receivers in the league (Boldin, Chad Johnson, Harrison, Steve Smith, Andre Johnson) how many actually make their team better? I mean to get someone like Calvin Johnson would be exciting but does it make our team better? The last two games of the year it didn't look like we had any trouble putting points on the board. And if Saunders could score points with guys like Boeritger and Kennison at WR, why couldn't he with Moss and El?

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=SmootSmack;298384]Fair enough. As for the WR situation, I've brought this up in other threads about CJ, when you look at the best receivers in the league (Boldin, Chad Johnson, Harrison, Steve Smith, Andre Johnson) how many actually make their team better? I mean to get someone like Calvin Johnson would be exciting but does it make our team better? The last two games of the year it didn't look like we had any trouble putting points on the board. And if Saunders could score points with guys like Boeritger and Kennison at WR, why couldn't he with Moss and El?[/quote]
I think without a true stud at WR, you can have a good year, but not sustain it... Like I said earlier, we need someone with Westbrook's talent and build, but with a heart of a player.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=SmootSmack;298384]Fair enough. As for the WR situation, I've brought this up in other threads about CJ, when you look at the best receivers in the league (Boldin, Chad Johnson, Harrison, Steve Smith, Andre Johnson) how many actually make their team better? I mean to get someone like Calvin Johnson would be exciting but does it make our team better? The last two games of the year it didn't look like we had any trouble putting points on the board. And if Saunders could score points with guys like Boeritger and Kennison at WR, why couldn't he with Moss and El?[/quote]I agree, and I think thats well documented by now.

Good post, as usual.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

I think everone knows my opinion on another wide receiver by now. No need to bring out the old banned sig.

Re: Be Bold 4/15/07
 

[quote=Redskin Rich;298395]I think without a true stud at WR, you can have a good year, but not sustain it... Like I said earlier, we need someone with Westbrook's talent and build, but with a heart of a player.[/quote]

The league is built on speed now, you no longer need the biggest guy in the world to catch. They call Pass interference alot more due to the rule changes a couple years back.

You just need fast receivers like Smith that can create space. I am not saying CJ will be bad, but we might be fine with what we have.