**Official** 2015 Washington Redskins Thread YOU LIKE THAT! (1 Viewer)

[MikeApf]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

I'm not saying we shouldn't extend him. But, I don't think we should rush to that decision after 1 good game. As good as he was against the Bucs, he was that bad against the Jets. I wouldn't mind if they brought him back next year if he continues to play well. I just don't understand why that decision needs to be made right now.

I totally agree that we don't have to do anything right now. Basically, he has had 3 games with no interceptions -- we won those three. He's had three games with multiple interceptions -- we lost those three. He definitely has potential but it's not in the bag by any stretch.

At the same time, I think the team needs to start thinking in what scenario do they make "some" kind of offer. Let's say Cousins works out his kinks by the end of the season, and he's unsigned, then he'll be emboldened to test the free agent market, and you may end up paying more for him than if you signed him for a discount early.

If after a few more games he looks like he's trending in the right direction, then maybe they should make him a very reasonable offer -- something that doesn't break the bank. But the longer you wait, the more risk there is if he ends up developing as a player, because you will have competition for him.

It's really all about how much risk Dan wants to take and the dollars involved. Honestly, if extending him didn't hurt the team salary cap wise, there probably is no reason not to sign him as he's bird in the hand and you are not on the hook to start him just because you sign him. On the other hand, if signing him means that you limit yourself cap wise, it's another story.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[Todd Andrews]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

I'm not saying we shouldn't extend him. But, I don't think we should rush to that decision after 1 good game. As good as he was against the Bucs, he was that bad against the Jets. I wouldn't mind if they brought him back next year if he continues to play well. I just don't understand why that decision needs to be made right now.

I totally agree that we don't have to do anything right now. Basically, he has had 3 games with no interceptions -- we won those three. He's had three games with multiple interceptions -- we lost those three. He definitely has potential but it's not in the bag by any stretch.

At the same time, I think the team needs to start thinking in what scenario do they make "some" kind of offer. Let's say Cousins works out his kinks by the end of the season, and he's unsigned, then he'll be emboldened to test the free agent market, and you may end up paying more for him than if you signed him for a discount early.

If after a few more games he looks like he's trending in the right direction, then maybe they should make him a very reasonable offer -- something that doesn't break the bank. But the longer you wait, the more risk there is if he ends up developing as a player, because you will have competition for him.

It's really all about how much risk Dan wants to take and the dollars involved. Honestly, if extending him didn't hurt the team salary cap wise, there probably is no reason not to sign him as he's bird in the hand and you are not on the hook to start him just because you sign him. On the other hand, if signing him means that you limit yourself cap wise, it's another story.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Hes had 4 games with multiple interceptions.

 

[Marvelous]

So now there's people that think Kirk deserves an extension? Let's pump the brakes here a bit. As good as he was this week, he was that bad the previous week. Consistency has always been an issue with Kirk. Let's see him put together a good stretch before we talk about extending him for a few years.

As a general rule, you shouldn't throw out the old until you know you have something better. I think Kirk is in line for an extension unless he gets benched sometime this year.

 

[MattFancy]

So now there's people that think Kirk deserves an extension? Let's pump the brakes here a bit. As good as he was this week, he was that bad the previous week. Consistency has always been an issue with Kirk. Let's see him put together a good stretch before we talk about extending him for a few years.

As a general rule, you shouldn't throw out the old until you know you have something better. I think Kirk is in line for an extension unless he gets benched sometime this year.

If he keeps playing well, sure. But I wouldn't extend him just to extend him. Think Gruden trusts McCoy in a pinch, which is why he was brought back.

 

[Don Quixote]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

I'm not saying we shouldn't extend him. But, I don't think we should rush to that decision after 1 good game. As good as he was against the Bucs, he was that bad against the Jets. I wouldn't mind if they brought him back next year if he continues to play well. I just don't understand why that decision needs to be made right now.

I would agree not to "rush" it, or base the dollar amount on one good game. I'd base the dollar amount on what he's shown over his career. It's like dgreen said: it comes down to dollars, and he'll want more if he finishes the season strong.

I don't know what he'd want now, but if you can sign him now for something like 2/$4m guaranteed with incentives, why not?

I guess the most Skins thing to do would be to sign Cutler for six times as much if/when the Bears cut him.

 

[Marvelous]

So now there's people that think Kirk deserves an extension? Let's pump the brakes here a bit. As good as he was this week, he was that bad the previous week. Consistency has always been an issue with Kirk. Let's see him put together a good stretch before we talk about extending him for a few years.

As a general rule, you shouldn't throw out the old until you know you have something better. I think Kirk is in line for an extension unless he gets benched sometime this year.

If he keeps playing well, sure. But I wouldn't extend him just to extend him. Think Gruden trusts McCoy in a pinch, which is why he was brought back.

Let's assume Kirk plays fairly poorly, but is still the best QB on the Redskins roster. The Redskins should re-sign him to a one year deal, $1 M deal similar to what Rex Grossman signed for the Redskins. Kirk goes in as the starter, but it clear they will be looking a free agents and the draft for other QBs. If they sign one, Kirk could still be the backup.

I think the only question is how much the Redskins need to pay Kirk. They will need to pay market value, whatever that is. And his play over the rest of the season will determine that.

I have no doubt Kirk should be re-signed.

 

[thayman]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

I'm not saying we shouldn't extend him. But, I don't think we should rush to that decision after 1 good game. As good as he was against the Bucs, he was that bad against the Jets. I wouldn't mind if they brought him back next year if he continues to play well. I just don't understand why that decision needs to be made right now.

I would agree not to "rush" it, or base the dollar amount on one good game. I'd base the dollar amount on what he's shown over his career. It's like dgreen said: it comes down to dollars, and he'll want more if he finishes the season strong.

I don't know what he'd want now, but if you can sign him now for something like 2/$4m guaranteed with incentives, why not?

I guess the most Skins thing to do would be to sign Cutler for six times as much if/when the Bears cut him.

There's more balls in the air to consider. If Gruden is gone the new incoming HC will probably want some input on the new QB.

 

[Marvelous]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

I'm not saying we shouldn't extend him. But, I don't think we should rush to that decision after 1 good game. As good as he was against the Bucs, he was that bad against the Jets. I wouldn't mind if they brought him back next year if he continues to play well. I just don't understand why that decision needs to be made right now.

I would agree not to "rush" it, or base the dollar amount on one good game. I'd base the dollar amount on what he's shown over his career. It's like dgreen said: it comes down to dollars, and he'll want more if he finishes the season strong.

I don't know what he'd want now, but if you can sign him now for something like 2/$4m guaranteed with incentives, why not?

I guess the most Skins thing to do would be to sign Cutler for six times as much if/when the Bears cut him.

The one thing I may not be clear on: The Redskins won't do anything until the season is over. That gives them 16 games to evaluate Kirk.

 

[Marvelous]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

Yeah, like just about everything, it will all come down to how much $ he can demand. Finishes the season really strong and he'll want to get paid.

I remember when a 28 year old guy named Trent Green stepped into the starting role, had a good season, became a FA, and we let him walk. He eventually had a few good years once he finally got his chance. In the short term, Casserly shipped off a 1st (Culpepper) and 3rd to Minnesota for Brad Johnson and that seemed ok for one year. I don't remember what Green wanted and I also don't really remember if the Redskins gave him really any interest that offseason. But, if you have a guy that shows promise and is somewhat affordable, he's probably worth keeping. If he wants a lot of money, then pass.

If I recall correctly, Casserly wanted to re-sign Trent Green and like him a lot. But they could not get a contract out to him because the ownership of the team was up in the air. Not sure if the team was still in auction or Snyder was waiting the close the deal. But they could not commit to a contract without ownership.

Once Green signed elsewhere, Casserly traded for Brad Johnson, which Snyder hated, but could not stop since he wasn't he owner yet.

 

[MattFancy]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

I'm not saying we shouldn't extend him. But, I don't think we should rush to that decision after 1 good game. As good as he was against the Bucs, he was that bad against the Jets. I wouldn't mind if they brought him back next year if he continues to play well. I just don't understand why that decision needs to be made right now.

I would agree not to "rush" it, or base the dollar amount on one good game. I'd base the dollar amount on what he's shown over his career. It's like dgreen said: it comes down to dollars, and he'll want more if he finishes the season strong.

I don't know what he'd want now, but if you can sign him now for something like 2/$4m guaranteed with incentives, why not?

I guess the most Skins thing to do would be to sign Cutler for six times as much if/when the Bears cut him.

A deal like that would be fine, but would he do it? That's not exactly starter money and I'm sure Kirk is going to want something in line with most starters. 2/$4M puts him in line with Matt Schaub in per year salary. Sanchez is making almost $4M this year in Philly. Think it would take at least that to keep Kirk here, IMO. Is that a good price? Sure, if he keeps playing well. I don't know what my limit would be for him right now. Hoyer is making almost $5M this year and McCown is close to $4M. I think he'll want at least $6M-$7M/year.

 

[MattFancy]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

I'm not saying we shouldn't extend him. But, I don't think we should rush to that decision after 1 good game. As good as he was against the Bucs, he was that bad against the Jets. I wouldn't mind if they brought him back next year if he continues to play well. I just don't understand why that decision needs to be made right now.

I would agree not to "rush" it, or base the dollar amount on one good game. I'd base the dollar amount on what he's shown over his career. It's like dgreen said: it comes down to dollars, and he'll want more if he finishes the season strong.

I don't know what he'd want now, but if you can sign him now for something like 2/$4m guaranteed with incentives, why not?

I guess the most Skins thing to do would be to sign Cutler for six times as much if/when the Bears cut him.

There's more balls in the air to consider. If Gruden is gone the new incoming HC will probably want some input on the new QB.

Very good point. If Gruden isn't back, then who knows what the QB situation will look like.

 

[PinkydaPimp]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

I'm not saying we shouldn't extend him. But, I don't think we should rush to that decision after 1 good game. As good as he was against the Bucs, he was that bad against the Jets. I wouldn't mind if they brought him back next year if he continues to play well. I just don't understand why that decision needs to be made right now.

I would agree not to "rush" it, or base the dollar amount on one good game. I'd base the dollar amount on what he's shown over his career. It's like dgreen said: it comes down to dollars, and he'll want more if he finishes the season strong.

I don't know what he'd want now, but if you can sign him now for something like 2/$4m guaranteed with incentives, why not?

I guess the most Skins thing to do would be to sign Cutler for six times as much if/when the Bears cut him.

There's more balls in the air to consider. If Gruden is gone the new incoming HC will probably want some input on the new QB.

this. I cant see extending him right now. Its way too early, lets see how he does for the remainder of the season. If Gruden will be gone then i would rather the new coach have input on that.

 

[dehaven123]

Scotch is not pushing for an extension during the season.

after the season, if he's deemed worthy of extending an offer to, it will have to be at least $6/7M a yr.

 

[MattFancy]

Scotch is not pushing for an extension during the season. after the season, if he's deemed worthy of extending an offer to, it will have to be at least $6/7M a yr.

Not sure if autocorrect or interesting nickname

 

[dehaven123]

Scotch is not pushing for an extension during the season. after the season, if he's deemed worthy of extending an offer to, it will have to be at least $6/7M a yr.

Not sure if autocorrect or interesting nickname

i coined that a few wks back. catchy, right?

 

[Don Quixote]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

I'm not saying we shouldn't extend him. But, I don't think we should rush to that decision after 1 good game. As good as he was against the Bucs, he was that bad against the Jets. I wouldn't mind if they brought him back next year if he continues to play well. I just don't understand why that decision needs to be made right now.

I would agree not to "rush" it, or base the dollar amount on one good game. I'd base the dollar amount on what he's shown over his career. It's like dgreen said: it comes down to dollars, and he'll want more if he finishes the season strong.

I don't know what he'd want now, but if you can sign him now for something like 2/$4m guaranteed with incentives, why not?

I guess the most Skins thing to do would be to sign Cutler for six times as much if/when the Bears cut him.

A deal like that would be fine, but would he do it? That's not exactly starter money and I'm sure Kirk is going to want something in line with most starters. 2/$4M puts him in line with Matt Schaub in per year salary. Sanchez is making almost $4M this year in Philly. Think it would take at least that to keep Kirk here, IMO. Is that a good price? Sure, if he keeps playing well. I don't know what my limit would be for him right now. Hoyer is making almost $5M this year and McCown is close to $4M. I think he'll want at least $6M-$7M/year.

I don't know if he would do it. I said in my original reply that they should not pay him starter's money. If they ask him what he'd like to extend now, and Cousins says $6-7 per year, they pass and say maybe they will talk again after the end of the year. But, if they determine they could extend him fairly cheaply now or at a potential discount, I don't think extending is a completely horrible idea in the abstract. That's all that I've said.

 

[(HULK)]

Speaking of nicknames, choose 1:

Comeback Cousins

Kirk Combackins

Clutch Cousins

Kirk Clutchins

 

[MattFancy]

How about, Kirk "Let's win a road game first" Cousins

Edit: Well I guess he does get credit for the Cleveland game in 2012. But still, that seems like forever ago.

 

[Sebowski]

Brad Johnson was worth keeping.

Brad Johnson won a Super Bowl after leaving Washington.

We actually let a good number of QBs go. I remember Rich Gannon being let go and then he goes on to be fairly top notch for a number of years afterwards.

There is something to be said for seeing value in what you have vs. gunning for the next, shiny new object.

As a Seminole alum I was always a big Brad Johnson fan. I would have loved to see him and Stephen Davis stick together with Marty for a few years.

 

[Sebowski]

Scotch is not pushing for an extension during the season. after the season, if he's deemed worthy of extending an offer to, it will have to be at least $6/7M a yr.

Not sure if autocorrect or interesting nickname

i coined that a few wks back. catchy, right?

Don't pat yourself on the back too hard. I've seen it used for months in a lot places.

 

[Sebowski]

Put me down for Clutchins.

 

[dehaven123]

 

Scotch is not pushing for an extension during the season. after the season, if he's deemed worthy of extending an offer to, it will have to be at least $6/7M a yr.

Not sure if autocorrect or interesting nickname

i coined that a few wks back. catchy, right?

Don't pat yourself on the back too hard. I've seen it used for months in a lot places.

 It's mine, dammit!

A product of a creative mind.

 

[dgreen]

How about, Kirk "Let's win a road game first" Cousins

So you want us to wait two weeks?

 

[MattFancy]

How about, Kirk "Let's win a road game first" Cousins

So you want us to wait two weeks?

If we beat NE, that would be amazing

 

[dgreen]

How about, Kirk "Let's win a road game first" Cousins

So you want us to wait two weeks?

If we beat NE, that would be amazing

Well, of course, I think it's going to be ugly.

I posted in the Jordan Reed thread that the NE matchup is kind of scary. If Reed is all we have, Belichick will do whatever he can to take it away. He'll watch film, immediately notice that's what Kirk wants to do, and he'll take it away. Really need Jackson back for that game for the offense to have a chance, IMO. With him, Belichick won't be able to just focus on Reed.

 

[MattFancy]

How about, Kirk "Let's win a road game first" Cousins

So you want us to wait two weeks?

If we beat NE, that would be amazing

Well, of course, I think it's going to be ugly.

I posted in the Jordan Reed thread that the NE matchup is kind of scary. If Reed is all we have, Belichick will do whatever he can to take it away. He'll watch film, immediately notice that's what Kirk wants to do, and he'll take it away. Really need Jackson back for that game for the offense to have a chance, IMO. With him, Belichick won't be able to just focus on Reed.

Definitely going to need DJax for that one. The run game has gone away, so we'll need all hands on deck in the passing game.

 

[(HULK)]

http://www.totalprosports.com/2015/10/27/redskins-fan-receiving-bj-at-skins-game-pic/

Now that's what I call winning off the field

 

[MattFancy]

http://www.totalprosports.com/2015/10/27/redskins-fan-receiving-bj-at-skins-game-pic/

Now that's what I call winning off the field

Bucs weren't the only ones blowin it on Sunday

 

[fatness]

I've been pretty critical of Cousins, but someone has to play QB, or at least backup QB. Assuming they cut RG3, they don't have any QBs signed for next year. It's not as if that if they sign Cousins, they'll be missing out on a great list of free agent QBs -- Fitzpatrick and Bradford are probably the best; maybe Brock Osweiler, but who knows if he'll be any good. Extending Cousins also does not necessarily prevent them from signing one of those QBs too, or drafting a QB either.

I don't think they should break the bank for him or pay him starter's money. But, in the abstract, I don't think extending him is completely horrible.

I'm not saying we shouldn't extend him. But, I don't think we should rush to that decision after 1 good game. As good as he was against the Bucs, he was that bad against the Jets. I wouldn't mind if they brought him back next year if he continues to play well. I just don't understand why that decision needs to be made right now.

It doesn't need to be made now and I doubt the thought has even crossed McCloughan's mind. It was a really good performance a week after a really bad performance on a 3-4 that's soon going to be 3-5.

As far as keeping him vs. letting him go after the season's over, never cut anyone until you have a replacement who's at least as good.

 

[fatness]

http://www.totalprosports.com/2015/10/27/redskins-fan-receiving-bj-at-skins-game-pic/

Now that's what I call winning off the field

What were Sebowski and tangfoot wearing Sunday?

I kid, I kid.

 

[fatness]

Not to spoil the Cousins high, but the team badly needs some injured players to get back to starting in 2 weeks. The offensive line is still a mess and needs Lichtensteiger back (even though I think he's highly overrated, he's still miles better than LeRibeus). We need Culliver back, and Jackson. And I hope Breeland wasn't hurt too badly on Sunday. His huge play making that tackle has gotten a little overlooked in favor of the awesome game-winning drive at the end.

 

[tangfoot]

http://www.totalprosports.com/2015/10/27/redskins-fan-receiving-bj-at-skins-game-pic/

Now that's what I call winning off the field

What were Sebowski and tangfoot wearing Sunday?

I kid, I kid.

 

[MikeApf]

https://twitter.com/NFLTotalAccess/status/658778713786445824?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

[PinkydaPimp]

Kirk just did an AMA

 

[dcgangstas]

No big surprise here:

CSN Washington expects the Redskins to move on from DeSean Jackson after this season.
Jackson hasn’t played since Week 1 with his hamstring injury. He also missed longer than expected with a shoulder sprain in training camp. GM Scot McCloughan wasn’t part of the regime that signed Jackson and reportedly has concerns with keeping him given his durability issues. Washington would save $6.75 million by releasing Jackson next offseason.

Too bad the Redskins missed out on drafting Amari Cooper. Scherff's a decent enough guy, but I agree with Jason Reid that you can't take a guard with the 5th overall pick. They should have taken Leonard Williams.

 

[MattFancy]

Scherff has played well at a position we needed. I had and still have no problems with drafting him

 

[dehaven123]

Scherff has played well at a position we needed. I had and still have no problems with drafting him

100% agree

 

[thayman]

Scherff has played well at a position we needed. I had and still have no problems with drafting him

100% agree

 

[avoiding injuries]

Scherff has played well at a position we needed. I had and still have no problems with drafting him

100% agree

Yeah, better than that Griffin pick.

 

[MikeApf]

Early week thoughts:

1. Fortunate for the Redskins that both the Giants and the Cowboys lost. We're a team in progress -- and I still think making the playoffs is a serious longshot -- but it'll be good for the team to "have something to play for" deeper into the season...and you never know you have a punchers chance at least.

2. That said, I think the Giants are actually pretty good and will likely take the division. Haven't all of their losses been 4th quarter heartbreaks? I know "woulda, coulda, shoulda" but it just feels like that team has a lot of potential, particularly offensively.

3. Cowboys will get better but I feel like they are digging themselves too deep of a whole. Just our luck we get to play them when Romo returns vs. getting to go against Weeden or Cassell. Bleh...bad luck there.

4. Watching New England dismantle Miami...our next game is going to be very, very tough. I hope after we get beat, there is not a chorus of "this team sucks, bench Cousins, fire Gruden!" because New England is just handling everyone. This is one game where if we just look competitive and poised, I'll be happy. I'll even be ok with our losing by multiple scores as long as it doesn't look like "the wheels are falling off." In other words, lose if you must, but avoid the type of game where you have 10-15 penalties and 3 turnovers...keep your poise and fight. We'll see.

What is everyone else's thoughts on the week of football, as it relates to the Skins?

 

[MattFancy]

--New England game could get ugly. I don't have any expectations of us keeping this game close. New England is tough to beat and almost impossible to beat in New England. I just don't want to see us totally fall apart. I don't want to see Cousins go back to being the QB he was against the Jets. Getting back some pieces on offense should help and we're going to need all of them if we're going to keep this game competitive.

--Division is bad, but I still don't think we can win. Our schedule is just too tough. The Bears are the only team we play the rest of the way that is already out of the playoff picture. Yes, I know Dallas has looked bad, but we get them with a healthy Romo and Dez. Their defense has been playing well, but once their offense gets going, they'll be tough. But I agree, think they may have too big of a hole to climb out of. The Giants are playing well and will more than likely take the division.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Early week thoughts:

1. Fortunate for the Redskins that both the Giants and the Cowboys lost. We're a team in progress -- and I still think making the playoffs is a serious longshot -- but it'll be good for the team to "have something to play for" deeper into the season...and you never know you have a punchers chance at least.

2. That said, I think the Giants are actually pretty good and will likely take the division. Haven't all of their losses been 4th quarter heartbreaks? I know "woulda, coulda, shoulda" but it just feels like that team has a lot of potential, particularly offensively.

3. Cowboys will get better but I feel like they are digging themselves too deep of a whole. Just our luck we get to play them when Romo returns vs. getting to go against Weeden or Cassell. Bleh...bad luck there.

4. Watching New England dismantle Miami...our next game is going to be very, very tough. I hope after we get beat, there is not a chorus of "this team sucks, bench Cousins, fire Gruden!" because New England is just handling everyone. This is one game where if we just look competitive and poised, I'll be happy. I'll even be ok with our losing by multiple scores as long as it doesn't look like "the wheels are falling off." In other words, lose if you must, but avoid the type of game where you have 10-15 penalties and 3 turnovers...keep your poise and fight. We'll see.

What is everyone else's thoughts on the week of football, as it relates to the Skins?

#2- We didn't compete at all against the Giants. I think they are a much better team, but who knows, maybe we are improving. #3- I am not worried about Romo on the first week he returns, although you are correct, the other guys are pretty terrible.

#4- The early line is -13.5 for the Patriots. Oof, probably the biggest spread of the week.

 

[fatness]

I see Mike & Mike are now back on ESPN980 in the morning, and I have to put up with their stupid banter because I can't pick up 106.7 on my car radio. I guess whoever didn't want the Mancave show on, delayed it 2 weeks, and got Chuck Sapienza fired must have finally gotten their way. The Mancave was outdrawing the Mike & MIke show on that station, so they cancel it and put Mike & Mike back on. Dolts. There was some decent sports coverage on the Mancave --- John Keim, Tariq el Bashir (sp.), and Andy Pollin's sports wrapup. Now there's 2 stupid guys who never shut up and who never say a word about the Skins.

/rant

As for the Patriots game, I want the Skins to play well. I want them to look like a professional football team and not a clown show. I don't want to see stupid, I don't want to see panic, I don't want to see confusion. If there is a perfect setup for Gruden and/or Couins to panic and fall apart it's the Patriots game. I want to see each of them avoid that. I'm OK with losing by 21. I'm not OK with panicky coaching or lots of stupid turnovers. Big test for those 2 guys.

I'd like to see better run blocking.

 

[MikeApf]

I would also like to see Desean Jackson play a full game without pulling something.

 

[fatness]

I would also like to see Desean Jackson play a full game without pulling something.

Yeah, I remember when he used to play for the Skins. Would be nice to see him back.

Just saw this: Gruden thinks he would have been fired if the lost to Tampa Bay: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/had-redskins-lost-to-bucs--jay-gruden-thinks-he-would-have-been-fired-191820979.html

That was a great comeback against Tampa, no 2 ways about it. I'm not sky high about it though because really, they were trailing a bad team 24-0 and had to rally like hell to eke out a win. I know Sheehan is back to predicting playoffs for them and Cooley has said Cousins is a Super Bowl quality QB (yes, they really did), but it was more an "avoid being the shortest midget" win than a a defeat of a good opponent.

 

[dgreen]

I'll admit I was actually tuning into the Mancave from time to time on my commute. It still wasn't a very good show, but they had some good guests. It was decent enough when the Junkies were talking about something I don't care about.

 

[dgreen]

Patriots are going down!

 

[Swing 51]

Patriots are going down, the field to the end zone again and again!

:(

 

[robb]

To the Redskin Homers and others who have an opinion:

Who is the running back to own here, and in what order would you want them on your PPR team?:

(Thompson, Morris, Jones)

 

[MattFancy]

To the Redskin Homers and others who have an opinion:

Who is the running back to own here, and in what order would you want them on your PPR team?:

(Thompson, Morris, Jones)

Jones, Thompson, Morris