Sebowski
Footballguy
I don't know what was worse; the calls or those announcers. Martz compared Cousins to Terry Bradshaw TWICE!Garcon spins the ball after almost every catch. Santana has been doing it for years. I've never seen that flagged ever.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
***OFFICIAL*** 2012 Washington Redskins Season Thread (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter dgreen
- Start date
I got the impression that the flag on Garcon was for his mouth. Him and Haden seemed to be jawing back and forth the whole game.
dgreen
Footballguy
It doesn't require the Cowboys beating the Saints. The tie breakers within a division are HTH, division record, and then common opponents. If Dallas beats Washington, they'll be tied HTH, tied at 4-2 in the division (assuming Washington beats Philly), and Dallas will have the common opponents tie breaker. So, good luck getting those tickets, Assani.NY can still win the division by winning their last two and Washington AND Dallas each losing one more.
Last edited by a moderator:
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
Pulling for Washington to win the East.
Great win yesterday, and a really fun team to follow. Good luck, Redskins fans!
Great win yesterday, and a really fun team to follow. Good luck, Redskins fans!
fatness
Footballguy
2 points off.
Assani Fisher
Footballguy
did Garcon say anything to get the taunting penalty? He does that ball spin(must've learned from Santana) almost every time so how can they call a penalty just because the defender pushes him after doing it?
Hang 10
Footballguy
I think it was just a bad call. How do you call taunting on Garcon and that's it? Hayden was screaming at Garcon later in the game and gets nothing. Also, I believe TJ Ward taunting Morgan after a hard hit near the goal line...nothing. It was a chippy game, not sure why Garcon was singled out.
dgreen
Footballguy
It's been a while.But, it's also a somewhat meaningless division lead. If we remove the Giants from the scenario (which we obviously shouldn't do), then the only thing that matters right now for the division is week 17. Week 16 is irrelevant. Winner of Dallas-Washington is the champ.Now, of course, the Giants are still there. They can win the division if both Washington and Dallas lose in week 16. And, of course, week 16 will be important when it comes to the playoffs.I have so much confidence in this team right now. I'm going to be totally crushed if they lose to Dallas and miss the playoffs.
Assani Fisher
Footballguy
It'd be pretty wild if nyg and Chi wins out and Dal/Wash goes to OT...then both teams would be eliminated with a tie, so if it got down to around 5:00 left in OT then both teams should start taking crazy chances.'dgreen said:
dgreen
Footballguy
One 9-5 team and five 8-6 right now in the NFC. It's a crazy wild card picture. It may get a little clearer after week 16.
dgreen
Footballguy
Let's say this plays out. It's 4th and 30 from your own 10 yard line with 1:00 left in the game. You have no timeouts. Do you go for it and try to win or punt, play D, and basically give Dallas the finger?
Warrior
Footballguy
Are you asking if the Redskins should purposely give up their chance to win the game so that New York can make the playoffs instead of Dallas?That's something only a homer would suggest...Shanahan could care less which team makes the playoffs if it's not his team.
dgreen
Footballguy
Of course it's a homer suggestion and I understand Shanahan wouldn't think that way. Nor should he. I hate Dallas more than NY. I'm basically saying that I, as a fan, would have accepted missing out on the playoffs at that point. If the conversion rate would be 0.00001% chance (yeah, I made that number up), I wouldn't complain about a punt. In that scenario, the Redskins aren't going to win. They could try all they want, but it just isn't going to happen.Actually, now that I think about it, punting is probably their best path to victory. A fumbled return or a Romo turnover would be much more likely than a 4th down conversion.I think I could play around with the details of the hypothetical to reach the point that "going for it" is the best path to the playoffs, but I'd still be ok with punting.
Warrior
Footballguy
You clearly weren't talking about the punt giving them the best chance to win, you were asking if they would lose on purpose to keep the Cowboys out of the playoffs.With that said, yeah, the punt would probably be a better choice.
fatness
Footballguy
I'd go for a FG. Forbath has a strong leg. With the right wind and enough adrenaline he could nail a 90 yarder easy.
fatness
Footballguy
I'm not feeling that way. I approach each game like they're a mediocre team playing way over their heads, and that every game is going to be a dogfight they could easily lose. "Mediocre teams playing over their heads" sometimes turn out to be just that, and other times turn out to be teams that have legitimately turned a corner and begun the ascent to "good team". Frankly I'm hoping they're the latter, and I think they probably are. But I go into each game they play thinking of the Panther and Steeler games earlier this year, and I'll be that way the rest of the season. I hope "the rest of the season" lasts a lot of games. The cool thing is, it might.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
This is exactly where I am, too. I think of them as about league-average, and they can win or lose any game. They're very slowly convincing me that they might possibly be a little better than that.I also remind myself every week that we're playing under a fraudulent salary cap penalty that we'll be mostly free of in 2013 and entirely free of in 2014. So that's a HUGE reason to think they'll continue to trend upwards in the next couple years even if they are just a "mediocre team playing over their heads" at the moment.
Apple Jack
Footballguy
Yeah, how can any Redskins fan go into games thinking they're going to win after the last 20 years?
Just curious...do you keep Cousins next year or see what you can get for him? I'd like to keep him.
Just curious...do you keep Cousins next year or see what you can get for him? I'd like to keep him.
Go DC Yourself
Footballguy
Given the picks they traded away for Bobby three sticks, and the cap decrease they've been hit with, they don't have the luxury of keeping Cousins should a tempting offer be made. Its not like they are the Packers with Flynn a couple of years back.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Cap penalty is mostly gone next season and entirely gone the season after that, isn't it? How would that restrict the Skins? If anything it gives them increased freedom because they had to work within an artificial constraint that will be removed soon.I already addressed the Cousins trade talk ealier. It is just crazy talk. Cousins is a 4th round draft pick and earnes the league minimum or very close to it. He is a very inexpensive back up quarterback. He earns far less and Rex Grossman, who earns the league minimum for a veteran with lots of years of service. Cap penalties actually make it more desirable to keep Cousins.Also, teams don't get carried away trading for a backup qb who has made 1 NFL start. No one is going to offer the Redskins 2 or 3 first round picks for Cousins. In a couple more years, once Cousins has played a little more and proven himself, and he is closer to free agency, it would be a better time to shop him.
A couple of notes on the cap penalties. 1) Half of the cap penalties still hit next year unless the Redskins accelerated some of the hit to this year. I don't think they did. 2) For all of the stinkiness around the cap penalties and John Mara, the Redskins may not be that much worse off compared to if they did not resturcture Haynesworth's and Hall's contracts. The Haynesworth contract was an albatross and without the uncapped year (or if they heeded the warnings), the Redskins would have to pay the piper with cap space sooner or later.
Well I do think you've got some desperate teams without a franchise QB. If you get an offer from a team panicing in the top half of the draft order I think you need to seriously consider it.I already addressed the Cousins trade talk ealier. It is just crazy talk. Cousins is a 4th round draft pick and earnes the league minimum or very close to it. He is a very inexpensive back up quarterback. He earns far less and Rex Grossman, who earns the league minimum for a veteran with lots of years of service. Cap penalties actually make it more desirable to keep Cousins.Also, teams don't get carried away trading for a backup qb who has made 1 NFL start. No one is going to offer the Redskins 2 or 3 first round picks for Cousins. In a couple more years, once Cousins has played a little more and proven himself, and he is closer to free agency, it would be a better time to shop him.
A couple of notes on the cap penalties. 1) Half of the cap penalties still hit next year unless the Redskins accelerated some of the hit to this year. I don't think they did. 2) For all of the stinkiness around the cap penalties and John Mara, the Redskins may not be that much worse off compared to if they did not resturcture Haynesworth's and Hall's contracts. The Haynesworth contract was an albatross and without the uncapped year (or if they heeded the warnings), the Redskins would have to pay the piper with cap space sooner or later.
dgreen
Footballguy
Because the last 20 years are irrelevant. I'm basing my confidence on what I see from this team. Similarly, I was confident in 2005 when that team got on a roll. I went from turning off the TV when they were down 13-0 to Dallas in week 2 on MNF to thinking it was pretty much a lock that they'd make the playoffs in those final weeks of their 5-game winning streak. (At least that's how I remember it looking back. It's certainly possible that my posts from 2005 show something different.) I'll admit some of that was my blind allegiance to Gibbs and mostly believing in him.
TobiasFunke
Footballguy
Yeah you're right, they still have to come in $18 million under everyone else's cap. For some reason I thought they got 26/10 instead of 18/18.As to the second point, yeah they're not much worse off than if they couldn't restructure those deals, but they should be better off, because the rules allowed them to do so (and other teams took advantage of the uncapped year and were not penalized, eg. Peppers and the Bears).I already addressed the Cousins trade talk ealier. It is just crazy talk. Cousins is a 4th round draft pick and earnes the league minimum or very close to it. He is a very inexpensive back up quarterback. He earns far less and Rex Grossman, who earns the league minimum for a veteran with lots of years of service. Cap penalties actually make it more desirable to keep Cousins.Also, teams don't get carried away trading for a backup qb who has made 1 NFL start. No one is going to offer the Redskins 2 or 3 first round picks for Cousins. In a couple more years, once Cousins has played a little more and proven himself, and he is closer to free agency, it would be a better time to shop him.
A couple of notes on the cap penalties. 1) Half of the cap penalties still hit next year unless the Redskins accelerated some of the hit to this year. I don't think they did. 2) For all of the stinkiness around the cap penalties and John Mara, the Redskins may not be that much worse off compared to if they did not resturcture Haynesworth's and Hall's contracts. The Haynesworth contract was an albatross and without the uncapped year (or if they heeded the warnings), the Redskins would have to pay the piper with cap space sooner or later.
Sebowski
Footballguy
I'm still holding out a shred of the battle of those salary cap hits picks back up after the season. Biggest injustice in recent sports history.Yeah you're right, they still have to come in $18 million under everyone else's cap. For some reason I thought they got 26/10 instead of 18/18.As to the second point, yeah they're not much worse off than if they couldn't restructure those deals, but they should be better off, because the rules allowed them to do so (and other teams took advantage of the uncapped year and were not penalized, eg. Peppers and the Bears).I already addressed the Cousins trade talk ealier. It is just crazy talk. Cousins is a 4th round draft pick and earnes the league minimum or very close to it. He is a very inexpensive back up quarterback. He earns far less and Rex Grossman, who earns the league minimum for a veteran with lots of years of service. Cap penalties actually make it more desirable to keep Cousins.Also, teams don't get carried away trading for a backup qb who has made 1 NFL start. No one is going to offer the Redskins 2 or 3 first round picks for Cousins. In a couple more years, once Cousins has played a little more and proven himself, and he is closer to free agency, it would be a better time to shop him.
A couple of notes on the cap penalties. 1) Half of the cap penalties still hit next year unless the Redskins accelerated some of the hit to this year. I don't think they did. 2) For all of the stinkiness around the cap penalties and John Mara, the Redskins may not be that much worse off compared to if they did not resturcture Haynesworth's and Hall's contracts. The Haynesworth contract was an albatross and without the uncapped year (or if they heeded the warnings), the Redskins would have to pay the piper with cap space sooner or later.
fatness
Footballguy
I can't be the only one who smells John Mara in Black being suspended now. And no, the Redskins aren't going to trade Cousins. They can't get another backup that good, that young, that cheap.
Sidewinder16
Footballguy
Will Montgomery has a sprained MCL. No word on the severity yet.OL shuffling is not a great thing right now.
Sidewinder16
Footballguy
'Skins can clinch a playoff berth this week with a win and losses by the Giants, Vikings and Bears. Week 17 then would just be for NFC East champ.
PinkydaPimp
Footballguy
If we win this week and Dallas loses, does the skins dallas game still decide who wins the division?
dgreen
Footballguy
Yes. But, NY is still in it. In that scenario, if Dallas wins week 17, then Washington and Dallas are 9-7. NY can get to 10-6 with two wins.If either Dallas or Washington come out at 10-6, they are the NFCE winner.If Dallas and Washington (and even NY) tie at 9-7, then the winner of Dallas and Washington is the NFCE winner. For Washington, that would be based on the HTH tie breaker with Dallas and Division Record with NY. For Dallas, that would be based on the Common Opponents Record.
The_Man
Footballguy
Still too early to tell, but Dallas-Washington is starting to smell like the Week 17 flex game. NFL always wants to put 2 teams in that game who both have something to play for, just to prevent tanking. Baltimore-Cincy might be another one. But come on - who does the NFL want in prime time? RG III and Dallas, no doubt.
dgreen
Footballguy
Yeah, I think it is a lock.
Sebowski
Footballguy
That would be awesome, but unlikely if I understand how the flex schedule works. I believe each network has the right to protect 2 games from being pulled and flexed to NBC. No way Fox lets that one go.
Assani Fisher
Footballguy
another really funny side effect of this would be that both teams would want the clock to move as slowly as possible....so both teams would want the offensive player to be able to get out of bounds instead of being tackled in bounds.
Assani Fisher
Footballguy
I can't help but feel the way I feel, and I'm with dgreen on this one- after the awesome week this past week with nyg losing and Skins winning with Cousins, my emotions are totally "convinced" that we are making the playoffs and it'll be a huge huge letdown if we don't.
Apple Jack
Footballguy
You want to be responsible for tempting fate here?
Assani Fisher
Footballguy
Because we realize that, despite what the non-rational part of our brains might tell us, failures from 15-20 years ago have literally nothing to do with the team that is playing today.I think that Cousins is so cheap and RG3 is so injury prone that it'd definitely be best to hold on to him until the final year of his contract and then trade him. If anything, his trade value should only increase as his sample size becomes bigger(assuming he can continue to play well obviously).
Apple Jack
Footballguy
I guess I've just got the conditioning thing. Expect the worst, go full-Greatest American Hero if the best happens.If Griffin wasn't so vulnerable, I'd say shop Cousins for draft picks, but the way it looks now, he's just about the best backup imaginable. Short of somebody backing up a Brinks truck packed with draft picks, he's gotta keep him.
The_Man
Footballguy
You're exactly right, and this whole scenario might be worth creating a separate thread about. It's very interesting. Let's say it's second or third and 10 with a minute left in OT and the Cowboys short of midfield, with no timeouts left. If the Dallas WR catches it in the field of play, but short of the first down, the Redskins DBs should escort him to the sideline.
dgreen
Footballguy
Talk about tempting fate, I'm about to go online and reserve my home game playoff tickets.
Apple Jack
Footballguy
All in favor of dgreen deleting this post and singing seven HTTRs?
