MikeApf

Members
  • Content count

    2,033
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

396 Excellent

About MikeApf

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

3,387 profile views
  1. Redskins homer that watches every game. My observations: his stats, fantasy-wise, appear to be pretty good. You can trot him out there many weeks and pick up some good points. In terms of "real football," I'm less bullish on him being worth $25 million + for the Redskins moving forward. While he's solid, he continues to have issues throwing under durress (as indicated above) and he doesn't always "create plays" when something goes wrong. Maybe he's not a "game manager," but he's also not a world-beating franchise guy. The issue with the Redskins continues to be: "yes, he's good enough to win 9-10 games with, if everything goes right" BUT it's not clear that he's the guy that will win 9-10 games if everything DOESN'T go right and also he's not yet shown that he's the guy to take you deep into the playoffs. Look at the INT late in the Philly game. Under durress he took a TD that many would make and served up an INT...that's the same thing he did at end of season vs. Giants. Ok, no one is perfect, but for 25 million per year, it's ok to expect more. And look at Philly and Washington right now...getting that game would have been huge and season altering at this point. So yes, some of the hesitation to signing him has clearly been Snyder and Allen's butt hurt over the Shanny years and of RGIII (Snyder's guy) not panning out. But, beyond that, many of the Redskins faithful also see this with their own two eyes. In retrospect, they clearly should have signed him for $20 million / year when they had the chance...he's CLEARLY worth that. But, as even Scot M. has said, you have to balance out the entire salary cap issue with signing other players as well, making the decision more complex. If he's the type of guy who will win only if you surround him with other guys (offense AND defense) who will need to be paid, you have to factor in the total cost of the equation. San Francisco is in a bit different situation with tons of salary cap available, but ultimately, the same decision making equation is ultimately applicable. If I'm San Fran, I'm thinking: "do I sign a 30 year old vet for 25 million per year" or do I take my top 3 selection to get a top rookie who will be playing on rookie contract for 4 years. Or, do I roll with Bethard, who looks like he has promise, who is younger and who is on a rookie contract. If there is not much separation between Cousins and Bethard at season's end, it's not a no brainer to break the bank for Cousins. All this talk is predicated on media saying "Shanahan knows Cousins" but that's a tenuous connection at best. Prior to the season, same media said Rams were in play because McVay knew Cousins. How about now? They are winning with the young guy, so it would be insane to make the move. And now Bethard has his chance to proove himself in San Francisco. I dunno. I don't doubt someone will throw money at Cousins, but I'm not sure that the prognosticators have it right that Cousins definitely makes coin in San Fran. It could be a team like the Jets who miss out on top QB prospects and who have no one in the pipeline who are the more obvious choice. I am a Redskins fan who wanted the team to sign Cousins years ago to a favorable contract but now that the price tag has gone up, the level of expectation for his play has gone up. And FFL stats are not the same as "real football performance." That's what we all have to keep in mind when looking at Cousins future. Mind you, I'm not saying the guy stinks...he's solid enough. But how much do you pay a "solid" guy and how much separation is there between one solid guy and another solid guy....
  2. Yes, that was a pivotal play for sure. And props to the team for staying poised and scoring twice in a row following this play. That does show resilience and they should be applauded for it. The Redskins are not good enough anyway to claim that they "should" beat any team. Every game is going to be a dog fight and the one that that will give us a chance is the defense keeping it close. We should be prepared for 12 more close games... It's also worth noting that many very good teams were upset this week, so the mantra "any given Sunday" remains alive and well in the NFL. I'm thinking about cases like Kansas City losing to a Pittsburgh team that many were starting to write off, Atlanta dropping their game to Miami, and Denver getting their doors blown off by the Giants. So, to your point, you can't take for granted that you will even beat these teams for sure. San Fran, while 0-6, has played 6 games within 3 points, so it's not really fair IMO to put them in the "Cleveland bad" category. Shanny, Jr. does have them playing hard and I think they may be building a good thing there. My real worries for the team are not related to the final score but to other things, some of which relate to their play and some of which relate to issues somewhat "beyond their control." Biggest worry is the mounting injuries. On defense, it seem like just as we've solidified the secondary, they are wracked with injuries. Young guys like Nicholson, Fuller, Moreu, Hosby, etc. have done an awesome job stepping up and big time props to the defensive coaches for getting them ready. Still, I don't like the prospect of going against Wentz with both Normal and Breeland out...that is a fairly steep hill to climb. Meanwhile, I agree with the comments on Allen. Gruden does talk highly of Lanier, who will probably get most snaps in Allen's absence...let's hope he can fill in adequately. On the offensive side of the ball, I know Kelley is not a world beater, but I think our offense really misses him. Before he went out, we were building a team around tough, hard nosed defense and power running, with Cousins only needing to throw to support that. And I think that IS the way for the Redskins to thrive. Cousins is good, not great, and when we can't get production from Perine, and when Thompson is not a 25 carry guy, then that leaves us in a position where we have to throw more than we want. My observation of Cousins is that is good but not the guy that will carry you. That may have been good enough vs. San Fran but we have Philly and Dallas coming up and we're going to need more ground production. Honestly, I think our main need this offseason from an offensive perspective is not QB or WR, it's RB. Look at what all the great rookie RBs have done this year, like Hunt, Cook, Fournette, etc. Even in a pass happy league, it makes a big difference. Just MO. I do think we have a chance vs. Philly but it would be good to either get Breeland or Norman back and Kelley. Not sure if that'll happen, but it's still early in the week so I'm hoping for the best...
  3. Blast from the past. Read this article from 1997 and then reflect on what actually happened... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/sports/redskins/longterm/cooke/articles/future7.htm Stable Future for Redskins Is Cooke's Legacy By Bill Brubaker Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, April 7, 1997; Page C1 As recently as Saturday, Jack Kent Cooke was on the phone, working to secure the future of his most beloved possession, the Washington Redskins. "I talked to him three times," said Gerard Evans, the lawyer and lobbyist who has been assisting Cooke with his 78,000-seat stadium project in Prince George's County. "There was a final bill in the [Maryland] general assembly [that passed Saturday] to allow a liquor license for seven days a week. He was very happy." Cooke's death yesterday signals the end of an era in the Washington sports world. But it should have little immediate impact on the Redskins because Cooke's son, John Kent Cooke, has been running the club's day-to-day operations since 1981 and, in recent weeks, Jack Kent Cooke took decisive steps to stabilize the club's future. On March 4, Jack Kent Cooke gave his coach, Norv Turner, a vote of confidence by extending his contract for three years, through the 2001 season. "I think Mr. Cooke has sent a message that we're going to have continuity," Turner said at the time. Cooke said he had never met "a more talented coach and motivator of men than Norv." A week later, Cooke extended the contract of Redskins General Manager Charlie Casserly through the 2000 season. "With the tandem of Charles and the finest head football coach in the league, I am convinced that the Redskins are ready to embark on an era of unsurpassed victories and championships," Cooke said. Though the structure of Pro Football, Inc. — the Redskins' corporate name — should not change significantly, John Cooke will likely take on broader responsibilities, overseeing the franchise as sole owner of Jack Kent Cooke, Inc., which controls Pro Football, Inc. For 16 years, John Cooke has been the Redskins' executive vice president. As for the new stadium in Landover, scheduled to open this fall, "There is no question that this will get built no matter what," Evans said yesterday. "Once the final approvals were made, I think the thing was on its way. ... It will get built on time and on budget. I think over 70 percent [of the construction] is finished." John Kent Cooke, 55, has spent most of his adult life working for his father's sports and cable TV companies. In recent months, John Cooke has told associates he intends to keep the team in the family and maintain control of the day-to-day operations. The seemingly smooth transition from father to son should come as no surprise. In a 1995 interview with the TNT cable network, Jack Kent Cooke said he expected to still be running the Redskins in 10 or 15 years, but that in 20 years, "I imagine my son, John, will be running them and, subsequently, my grandson, John Jr., will be running them." Today, John Jr. is the Redskins' director of stadium operations/club promotions. Contacted at his father's home, John Cooke Jr. said yesterday he and his father would not be available for an interview. John Kent Cooke was groomed as a sports team executive in the 1960s, working as ticket sales director of the NBA's Los Angeles Lakers and the NHL's Los Angeles Kings, which his father owned. When Jack Kent Cooke headed to Washington in 1979, John Cooke and his family followed, purchasing an estate at Byrnley Farms, a short drive from his father's spread in Middleburg, in the heart of Virginia's hunt country. At Redskin Park, John Cooke's job has been to make a multitude of non-football decisions — some big, some minuscule. An avid sailor who now lives in Georgetown, John Cooke keeps track of budgets and contract talks, for example, as well as negotiating radio network rights fees. He also has represented his father at NFL owners' meetings for more than a decade. "I'm a very lucky fellow. . . . I don't think there is anybody alive who is more knowledgeable of professional sports in the country ... than my father," John Cooke said in a 1984 interview. "To be his son and to be as close to him as I am ... is very much like the painter learning under the master. ... [Someday] I want my father to see that these years that I have spent with him have not been wasted, that I have paid attention and that I've learned my lessons well." Even as his health deteriorated over the past year (he had trouble walking and even grasping a pen) Jack Kent Cooke had the final word on major Redskins decisions. But in recent years, as Cooke devoted more time to the stadium project and maintaining his own health, John Cooke has assumed wider authority over the club's day-to-day operations. Jack Kent Cooke hasn't been to Redskin Park in several months and didn't attend the team's final two home games at RFK Stadium last season. With the Redskins poised to move into their new stadium, the franchise should get a flow of revenue it never had in the past. Evans, the lawyer/lobbyist, said John Cooke has been "very much involved" in the stadium project's details. "He was out there [at the construction site] all the time," Evans said. Still, people close to the Redskins — and throughout the sports industry — agree that no one can replace Jack Kent Cooke. "His personal imprint was everywhere on the stadium," Evans said. "He picked the kind of trees [to be planted outside the stadium]. He loved evergreen trees" because "he said there should be green around the stadium all the time and he wouldn't have to clean up" fallen leaves. On Saturday, Evans said, Cooke jokingly warned him of the consequences he would face if the Maryland general assembly did not grant the Redskins that seven-days-a-week liquor license. "He told me that if we didn't get a license, I'd be hawking peanuts at his new stadium," Evans said, several hours after Cooke's death. Staff writers Thomas Heath, Richard Justice and Dave Sell contributed to this report. © Copyright 1997 The Washington Post Company
  4. Good question. I remember one stretch where 2 or 3 QBs in a row had their "first ever win" against us. I'm too lazy to look up the specifics but trust me, it happened. :-|
  5. Re: Bethard, everyone is so certain that SF is going to break the bank to sign Cousins. But, why would you spend a king's random on a 30 year old vet when Bethard is in his early 20s, honestly looks just as good, and is in his rookie contract. Add to that the fact that SF is 0-6 and will be poised to get a top 3 pick this year, in a year where there are several decent QBs to be had. Cousins has looked ok this year, but not sure there is so much separation between him and other options (like Bethard) as to make his signing a no-brainer. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out...but I can see Cousins not staying in D.C. but also not being signed by SF...
  6. Agreed. I think a third down play action call could have provided a very "non-risky" was to go for the first down and keep the clock running even if it would have been short...
  7. Once again, we left a team one minute (an eternity now adays) to drive the field, where only a field goal would win it. I liked our fight in the fourth quarter after the game was tied at 17 to not TOTALLY come unraveled but rather make plays to take back control. But I think Gruden made a serious error running the ball on that last third down play. We then punted through the end zone and if it weren't for Garcon's PI penalty, we may have lost that game. I know the idea was to run more time off the clock, but if you are going to leave them with one minute then I think a better move is to go for that first down on third down. and put the game out of reach. SF was crowding the line every play and I can't help but think that a play action pass to Thompson or Reed for 5 yards would have been there. It's all in hindsight now but Gruden's end game time/play management continues to make me nervous...
  8. Yeah that really sucks for San Fran. Still, Skins need to stay humble and not let this become a "trap game"...
  9. Darnit someone is trying to pull the "reverse jinx" on us!
  10. I will say they *can* win, but only if they play defense like they have for several weeks. They are building a decent team but two things make me nervous: a.) still lots of injuries apparently. and b.) we do not have a track record of consistency and have played down to level of opposition...that was in previous years so don't know if will apply this year...still, nervous. I would definitely say Skins deserve to be favored, but would give them a 3 point edge rather than 9. I definitely don't want our guys going into this game thinking, "We got it."
  11. Seeing Redskins favored by 9 this Sunday. I do not like seeing us favored by so much. Do not like it at all! #hopefulbutnervousbasedonourhistory
  12. Would have liked to win but proud how hard the team played esp with all the injuries. They prooved that the Oakland performance was not a fluke. There is legit reason to hope rhat they'll complete in the division. Bye week comes at a good time to get healthy. Win vs SF after the bye and that Philly MNF game is going to be huge...
  13. True Kelley and Brown may be JAG-ish, but what do you see in Perine that convinces you that he's not a JAG? I'm not going on college...a lot of RBs look terrific in college and don't get it done in pros. Believe me, I totally think we need to upgrade the RB position beyond Kelley...I agree with you there. But I'm not sure that Perrine is the answer. And at 2-1, we're not simply in "lets give guys experience" mode...we actually have something to play and win for, so best guys gotta play IMO. Maybe this is my way of say Kelly is the best of the 3 JAGS out of Kelley, Perrine and Brown. Also, Perrine's fumbling really bothers me. That alone drops him a notch in my book (see Jones, Matt...) If we went 3-1 with a starting schedule of Eagles, Rams, Raiders and Chiefs, that would be just a HUGE win. In fact, the 2-2 we're guaranteed to be at leading up to San Francisco is honestly what I optimistically hoped for and still positions us well, since we will have those 2 tough AFC West games behind us...
  14. Woah...didn't realize about Ty...makes our OLine a little thin. It was nice to have such a capable guy as back up. Don't know much about Clemmings. Sounds like all of those guys are iffy. I'll hold my breath until Monday... In the meantime thanks for the info...