|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
Biggest concerns: How good will he be on Madden? What number will he wear?
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
The meeting with RGIII is just to help him decide which number he'll switch to when he's dawning the burgundy and gold this coming season.
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=skinsguy;1066257]The meeting with RGIII is just to help him decide which number he'll switch to when he's dawning the burgundy and gold this coming season.[/quote]
I like this attitude. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=CRedskinsRule;1066252]an OMG from the TMZ:
[url=http://www.tmz.com/2014/03/31/desean-jackson-robert-griffin-iii-rg3-redskins-meeting-los-angeles/]DeSean Jackson -- Met With RG3 In L.A. ... BEFORE Meeting with Redskins In D.C. | TMZ.com[/url][/quote] Sweet baby jesus. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=Kindoy;1066255]Biggest concerns: How good will he be on Madden? What number will he wear?[/quote]
He finished with a 91 overall and 98 speed and I have been giving him 18 for us. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=DynamiteRave;1066247]Guys, I have a problem. I keep checking back here obsessively in hopes I see someone say we either signed DJ or he left Redskins Park. Blaahhhhh.[/quote]
To free up some time for you, he's not supposed to be at RP until this evening and no solid news likely until tomorrow mid morning at the earliest. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;1066261]He finished with a 91 overall and 98 speed and I have been giving him 18 for us.[/quote]
Is 81 taken? I think he might go for that. Paying Aldrick for 11? I heard once that he chose Cal over SC because he couldn't get #1 there haha. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=Kindoy;1066263][B]Is 81 taken?[/B] I think he might go for that. Paying Aldrick for 11?
I heard once that he chose Cal over SC because he couldn't get #1 there haha.[/quote] Art Monk would slap the taste buds out of your mouth for even suggesting this. Learn your history. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=Kindoy;1066263]Is 81 taken? I think he might go for that. Paying Aldrick for 11?
I heard once that he chose Cal over SC because he couldn't get #1 there haha.[/quote] I never give anyone 81 when I play Madden for us |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=CRedskinsRule;1066251]Hankerson is over the 51 point, so he would save a miniscule amount, and neither he or Robinson, imo, have done anything that deserves a roster spot if our top 3 for the next 2 years are Garcon, DJax, and Roberts. Let spots 5 and 6 go to mid-late round draft choices in a deep WR draft and see if they can progress.[/quote]
Even though Hankerson was a solid #2 last year before he got hurt, you [I]really[/I] want him gone, don't you? It would be stupid to cut him before next offseason; if he gets hurt again this year, then you let him walk in FA. If he turns in a good performance, then you resign him. I think a big reason people want Hankerson gone is because they're disappointed that he has never lived up to his draft status. However, just because someone doesn't live up to where they were drafted doesn't mean they should be cut. They can still be solid contributors that can be had at a minimal price, e.g. Hankerson. Don't let sentimentalism dictate who should be cut and who should stay. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=SirLK26;1066266]Even though Hankerson was a solid #2 last year before he got hurt, you [I]really[/I] want him gone, don't you? It would be stupid to cut him before next offseason; if he gets hurt again this year, then you let him walk in FA. If he turns in a good performance, then you resign him.
I think a big reason people want Hankerson gone is because they're disappointed that he has never lived up to his draft status. However, just because someone doesn't live up to where they were drafted doesn't mean they should be cut. They can still be solid contributors that can be had at a minimal price, e.g. Hankerson. Don't let sentimentalism dictate who should be cut and who should stay.[/quote] Hank was never really a solid #2. He's really like a 3 or 4. He shouldn't be cut be he shouldn't be starting as a #1 or #2. He's looking more and more like a depth player. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=DynamiteRave;1066267][B]Hank was never really a solid #2.[/B] He's really like a 3 or 4. He shouldn't be cut be he shouldn't be starting as a #1 or #2. He's looking more and more like a depth player.[/quote]
Fair enough; and while I disagree, I'm not going to argue that because it wasn't the point of my post. Whether or not anybody thinks he's a #2 or merely a bottom-of-the-chart depth player, the point is that you shouldn't let draft position dictate if a player goes or stays. If a guy is solid depth and has a fairly cheap contract, you keep him around, regardless whether he was drafted in the 3rd round, 1st round, or 7th round. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=CRedskinsRule;1066225]Because at 34 we could also pick:
a) 3yr project like Hankerson b) failures like DT and MK c) a possible starting FS d) a possible starting RT and, we would have PR and our top 4 receivers set (Garcon, DJax, Roberts, Moss). your way may be way cheaper, but DJax will produce for the next 3 years. You give him a contract that lets him out in 3 years with minimal cap hit, and makes him happy this year and next. You figure the money, plus vendetta against the Eagles will keep him content at least 2 years. [B]By then maybe his maturity catches up with his talent, maybe not.[/B] But DHall certainly shows it can happen.[/quote] The bold is where you and I differ. Some people mature, like DHall, some people don't. To me DJax has tattooed on his forehead, in big bright letters, "I'm NEVER gonna get it so my only contribution to the locker room is being destructive of morale." Don't we want a locker room full of team players? If so, we don't want DJax. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=Paintrain;1066264]Art Monk would slap the taste buds out of your mouth for even suggesting this.
Learn your history.[/quote] Apologies. I have an explanation but I doubt it makes any difference. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=DynamiteRave;1066247]Guys, I have a problem. I keep checking back here obsessively in hopes I see someone say we either signed DJ or he left Redskins Park. Blaahhhhh.[/quote]
Ed Werder said on ESPN this afternoon that DJ is scheduled to arrive this evening and the first meeting will be over dinner with the rest of the meetings occurring tomorrow. |
Don't want the dude, he's not what the Redskins were supposedly trying to built. Character guys? Remember? One wankster like him and the whole team goes south.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=Kindoy;1066263][B]Is 81 taken[/B]? I think he might go for that. Paying Aldrick for 11?
I heard once that he chose Cal over SC because he couldn't get #1 there haha.[/quote] You're kidding. Right? |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=SirLK26;1066266]Even though Hankerson was a solid #2 last year before he got hurt, [B]you [I]really[/I] want him gone, don't you?[/B] It would be stupid to cut him before next offseason; if he gets hurt again this year, then you let him walk in FA. If he turns in a good performance, then you resign him.
I think a big reason people want Hankerson gone is because they're disappointed that he has never lived up to his draft status. However, just because someone doesn't live up to where they were drafted doesn't mean they should be cut. They can still be solid contributors that can be had at a minimal price, e.g. Hankerson. Don't let sentimentalism dictate who should be cut and who should stay.[/quote] unequivocally yes. bottomline, if we get Jackson, Hank is the 4th best receiver on our team - at best more likely the 5th behind Moss. That's AFTER 3years in the league. I would have been fine if they cut him last season but everyone said 2013 was his 3rd year, that's the year for receivers. Well it wasn't Hank's year. AND, if we bring a guy from the 4th round in, in this deep receiver draft, then he would need 2-3 years to get ready (or just about the time you would be ready to say see ya to either Garcon or DJackson if either wants to make a salary dispute). Let Hank go somewhere else and prove me wrong, I don't see that his value for his payrate is greater then a cheap 4th round rookie. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=Lotus;1066271]The bold is where you and I differ. Some people mature, like DHall, some people don't. To me DJax has tattooed on his forehead, in big bright letters, "I'm NEVER gonna get it so my only contribution to the locker room is being destructive of morale."
Don't we want a locker room full of team players? If so, we don't want DJax.[/quote] Remember DHall after his 2nd year here, man was griping fussing causing penalties left and right. (probably a bit of exaggeration) Now he has matured. Maybe Djax does, maybe he doesn't, I agree you never know for sure, but DHall is the right kind of guy who's been there done that, and can make a difference for Djax, if anybody can. I think Shanahan brought in a ton of top character guys, and I commend him for that, and if the team decides it doesn't want to risk the lockerroom over a guy like DJax I am ok with that decision. But I think that our locker room (Griffin, DHall, Roberts) would all encourage him to a positive direction. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
Jackson would definitely make this team better. I wouldn't pay him more than 30 million over 4 years and I would make sure there are morality clauses in his contract that prevents him from getting paid if he has any off field issues.
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=CRedskinsRule;1066279]unequivocally yes. bottomline, if we get Jackson, Hank is the 4th best receiver on our team - at best more likely the 5th behind Moss. [B]That's AFTER 3years in the league. I would have been fine if they cut him last season but everyone said 2013 was his 3rd year, that's the year for receivers. Well it wasn't Hank's year.[/B] AND, if we bring a guy from the 4th round in, in this deep receiver draft, then he would need 2-3 years to get ready (or just about the time you would be ready to say see ya to either Garcon or DJackson if either wants to make a salary dispute).
Let Hank go somewhere else and prove me wrong, I don't see that his value for his payrate is greater then a cheap 4th round rookie.[/quote] See, the bold is the biggest beef I have with you. It doesn't matter where a guy was drafted, or how many years he's been in the league; if he's at least good depth and cheap, you keep him. You don't cut Hankerson because he hasn't lived up to his draft status, or because he hasn't developed into A.J. Green yet; it just doesn't make sense. If you go by that, do you want Helu cut too? Because he hasn't exactly developed into Jamaal Charles... And if we do sign Jackson and draft a WR high(no to the former, yes to the latter), we could still keep Hankerson. With Jackson, Roberts, and the rookie on board, Hankerson would probably be the #4 at best, but considering his insignificant salary, why wouldn't you keep him around and at least let him compete in camp? If we had 5 WRs entrenched in front of him on the depth chart, and then drafted a WR or two, then I'd understand cutting him. But as of right now, the WR spot opposite Garcon is Hankerson's to lose. Eh...I suppose it really doesn't matter. And this [I]is[/I] a DeSean Jackson thread, not a Hankerson thread. :Smoker: |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=SirLK26;1066283]See, the bold is the biggest beef I have with you. [B]It doesn't matter where a guy was drafted, or how many years he's been in the league; if he's at least good depth and cheap, you keep him.[/B] You don't cut Hankerson because he hasn't lived up to his draft status, or because he hasn't developed into A.J. Green yet; it just doesn't make sense. If you go by that, do you want Helu cut too? Because he hasn't exactly developed into Jamaal Charles...
And if we do sign Jackson and draft a WR high(no to the former, yes to the latter), we could still keep Hankerson. With Jackson, Roberts, and the rookie on board, Hankerson would probably be the #4 at best, but considering his insignificant salary, why wouldn't you keep him around and at least let him compete in camp? If we had 5 WRs entrenched in front of him on the depth chart, and then drafted a WR or two, then I'd understand cutting him. But as of right now, the WR spot opposite Garcon is Hankerson's to lose. Eh...I suppose it really doesn't matter. And this [I]is[/I] a DeSean Jackson thread, not a Hankerson thread. :Smoker:[/quote] 1) you say he's cheap, but he's not. Hankerson's cap number is 29th on our roster, a 4th round rookie - in the 50's. 2) I am not saying cut him because of where he was drafted. I agree with you, where he was drafted is inconsequential. If he adds value to the team relative to team needs keep him. In my opinion he does not. 3) IF we sign Jackson, Hankerson is at best the 5th best receiver - Garcon, Jackson, Roberts, Moss, then Hankerson or Robinson depending on what you want from the 5th receiver. 4) IF we don't sign Jackson then you draft a guy high, and hope he can develop to a number 2, but we are left with a 1 in Garcon, low 2 or high 3 in Roberts, a backup for Roberts in Moss, and a 3a/3b in Hankerson/Robinson. So we have to hit on whatever receiver we pick. Cutting Hankerson saves $121K on the cap based on rule of 51, yeah it's chump change, but Hankerson doesn't even bring that value at this point. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
Good depth = make tackles on special teams
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=Gary84Clark;1066286]Good depth = make tackles on special teams[/quote]
agreed 100% |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[url=http://www.csnwashington.com/redskins/desean-jackson-arrives-airport-redskins-meeting]DeSean Jackson arrives at airport before Redskins meeting | Comcast SportsNet Washington[/url]
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[url=http://www.hot995.com/onair/toby-knapp-41816/redskins-football-rg-iii-meets-with-12207446/]REDSKINS FOOTBALL: RG III meets with DeSEAN JACKSON in LA before he meets with TEAM HONCHOS??![/url]
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
Kevin @HTTR24_7 6m
Haha RT @CharlesgnrlJr Waiting for redskins news on twitter like.... [IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BkF3rWYIAAAPsBW.jpg[/IMG] |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
@Tim_McManus: Have had a couple people tell me that talks between Jackson's side and Redskins have been going very well. My guess is he signs there.
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
The sad part is, I actually have his twitter open in another box and I'm doing exactly that.
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
@HTTR24_7: Ha RT @TheRaidersDaily TRD EXCLUSIVE: RG3 father telling people that Desean Jackson is going to playing for Redskins.Says it's a "done deal"
If daddy said it, it's a wrap folks! |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
Holy sh*^t well if RG II said it let's get that news out on twitter stat!!
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=SkinzWin;1066333]@Tim_McManus: Have had a couple people tell me that talks between Jackson's side and Redskins have been going very well. My guess is he signs there.[/quote]
Whose Tim McManus? Tony Pepperoni? |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
A Skins fan waiting on the DJax news is like an addict in need of a fix after trying to go cold turkey throughout the free agency period. (Sorry, Jason Hatcher was like a dose of methadone to those of us raised on the Albert Haynesworth highs).
DJax ... now that's quality. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=artmonkforhallofamein07;1066342]Whose Tim McManus? Tony Pepperoni?[/quote]
The unit manager of Emerald City at Oswald Maximum Security Penitentiary. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
lmao Joe sad but so true
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=DynamiteRave;1066347]The unit manager of Emerald City at Oswald Maximum Security Penitentiary.[/quote]
Ha! Loved that show. Ready for Game of thrones next Sunday! |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
True joy:
Retweeted by Kevin Skins Squad @SkinsSquad 30m If Desean signs I'm gonna skip work to sit in the car and listen to sports talk radio in Philly. |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[IMG]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BkGV4tOCAAAUmAZ.png[/IMG]
|
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[url=http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000338548/article/desean-jackson-to-surpass-deckers-3625-million-contract?campaign=Twitter_atl]DeSean Jackson to surpass Eric Decker's contract? - NFL.com[/url]
This is Eric Decker's deal, something like this maybe 5million more guaranteed and 1million more for the last 3 years gets it done. Would cost 5mill against the cap this year. year, base, prorated bonus,,year pay, dead cap 2014 2,500,000 1,500,000 - 4,000,000 15,000,000 2015 5,000,000 1,500,000 - 6,500,000 11,000,000 2016 6,500,000 1,500,000 - 8,000,000 4,500,000 2017 7,250,000 1,500,000 - 8,750,000 3,000,000 2018 7,500,000 1,500,000 - 9,000,000 1,500,00 |
Re: DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday
[quote=artmonkforhallofamein07;1066342]Whose Tim McManus? Tony Pepperoni?[/quote]
Eagles beat reporter here in Philly. Very plugged into the team, as much as JLC and Keim are with the Skins. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:41 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.