Redskins Insider: Draft Review

FRPLG

I call BS on the "being honest with fans" crap. What I infer from that is "being honest with journalists so when we write what they tell us we don't look like idiots after they do something different". I mean really how are they not being honest with fans? That doesn't even make sense. He just seem slightly bitter that his contacts are gone and he is left with the people he just doesn't like and can't get much info from.

SC Skins Fan

For the record, Mike Doss hasn't been a player either and is now a reserve with the Vikings (i.e. not the team that drafted him). Historical analogies are pretty slippery, and not all that useful, when it comes to the draft IMO.

__________________
It has taken a long time, but I have finally realized that nothing I say about the Redskins will have any effect upon anything the Redskins do.

FRPLG

So the Skins are supposed to say to themselves "Say, look who's available. A player rated far and away better than anyone else on our board. Ohhh, but he is a WR and I remembr a couple years ago we drafted a WR in a very similar situation and it didn't work out. We better pass on the guy since we blew this once before."

Is that what you are saying?

irish

No surprise this article isnt liked as JLC doesnt fit into the herd mentaility of this site. I think JLC is more correct than not.

Schneed10

You wouldn't be 'irish' if you didn't.

__________________
Skins' Salary Cap Status | CrazyCanuck's Cap Figures by Player | Salary Cap 101

irish

And you wouldnt be a "knowledgeable" fan if you did. So I guess we are even.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Sometimes the "herd" (if one actually exists) is wrong and sometimes it is right. You are under the mistaken impression that, by disagreeing with nearly every front office move and coaching decision, you are somehow more astute and objective than the rest of us. By reacting in such a knee-jerk fashion to nearly everything that happens at Redskins Park and FedEx Field, you are actually showing that you are totally incapable of viewing things objectively. You are absolutely incapable of seeing the good and the bad.

irish

I think you are seeing it the wrong way. You said I disagree with nearly every move which means I agree with some, which I do. I can hardly think of anyone on this site besides myself that ever says anything negative about the Skins. In fact the way most talk on this board one would think the Skins are the 10 time defending Super Bowl champs instead of barely sniffing the playoffs in the past 15 years. In reality I am much more objective than 99% of the "knowledgeable" fans on this site.

I am certain that if you look back at the past posts you will see that anyone that says the Skins are great and making all the right moves is very astute and knowledgeable while anyone that utters a negative word is labeled as anti-redskin or not objective.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I've been critical of an awful lot of things. If you really need me to, I'll go searching for evidence. I was critical of our failure to get help along the lines in the draft, notwithstanding our "BPA" philosophy. I was extremely critical of the attempt to trade for Chad Johnson. Skinsfan69 has been critical of a fair number of moves. I could go on and on.

As for your posts, I don't think I've EVER seen you say anything positive. You usually pop up when things go wrong and disappear when things are going well. IMO, you've taken things to extreme and go out of your way to complain about the state of the team. You rarely, if ever, talk about the bad AND the good.

irish

You dont see the positive things I say because you are predisposed to viewing my posts as negative. I said I liked the skins getting the OL and punter in the draft and I also remember picking the Skins to win way more games in the weekly prediction than they did. I admit I do talk more bad but thats because the skins havent done much good over the past 15 years to get excited about but I have had positive posts.

SmootSmack

Problem that is that when irish decides to focus on something negative, he'll spin things every way he can to keep it negative. First we're not keeping our own key players he says, then as we start to notice a definite trend that way (Jansen, Betts, Sellers, Cooley) he say it's not enough. Then when we re-sign Cartwright, it's why are we keeping this guy?

He can call it "keeping it real" but as I said in another thread a while back, being "real" is recognizing positive change, it's not all about the negative.

Skinsfan69 can annoy me sometimes (as I'm sure, I do him). But give me his posts and analysis 10 times out of 10 over irish's.

__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

SmootSmack

irish was positive about Todd Collins, if nothing else.

__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

Slingin Sammy 33

From JLC's article:

"No team can go four wide receivers and two tight ends all the time. Just can't be done. Unless they plan on running a whole lot of empty backfield, it's going to be tricky utilizing all of these guys and the existing one. Yes, they certainly have great depth at pass catcher now, but at the expense of how much else?"

I tend not to listen to sportswriters (and fans who think they are "more correct than not") who don't have a clue.... JLC is correct, you can't run four WRs & two TEs. It requires 12 players, or an illegal formation.

JLCs credibility (and yours) just went out the window. JLC is the main Washington Post writer for the Redskins and he doesn't know enough about football to know the VERY basics. Embarrassing! HS players know this stuff.

__________________
...[If] an angel fairy came down and said, '[You can have anything]....you would like to own,' I wouldn't be surprised if you said a football club and particularly the Washington Redskins.'' — Jack Kent Cooke, 1996.