Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

yeah I don't want him to not play his role... but the narrative from the defense, the coaching staff, and even griffin was that mike shannahan held everyone back... specifically to orakpo - that he wasn't allowed to rush.

so if this whole time the issue has been that he's been held back... let's see what happens when he's 'allowed' to rush the passer...

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=tshile;1075745]yeah I don't want him to not play his role... but the narrative from the defense, the coaching staff, and even griffin was that mike shannahan held everyone back... specifically to orakpo - that he wasn't allowed to rush.
.[/quote]

I still haven't seen that said by anyone yet ,people here have suggested it but still haven't heard anyone from the team last year .

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

Everyone wants Rak and Kerrigan to be nfl sack leaders. That's hard to do when your ass is losing. Start winning 10+ games a year and get some nice comfy leads in the second half of a few games and see what happens. Ex JJ Watts. 2013-14.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=Giantone;1075753]I still haven't seen that said by anyone yet ,people here have suggested it but still haven't heard anyone from the team last year .[/quote]

So a team official has to provide the stats for it to be true?

Or maybe you just don't come around enough to have seen the million times these [URL="http://realredskins.com/2014/02/15/haslett-says-hell-turn-orkapo-and-kerrigan-loose/"]stats[/URL] have been posted.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=CrustyRedskin;1075785]Everyone wants Rak and Kerrigan to be nfl sack leaders. That's hard to do when your ass is losing. Start winning 10+ games a year and get some nice comfy leads in the second half of a few games and see what happens. Ex JJ Watts. 2013-14.[/quote]

I like you're thinking :)

A healthy griffin and an offense putting up 30+ points a game on average will do wonders for our defense in terms of sacks and turnovers :)

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

I just read a WAPO article which pointed out that the editors of the various NFL preview magazines think that the Redskins are one of if not [U]the[/U] worst team in the NFL.

I don't think we're nearly that bad. In fact, I think we could win our division this season.

Nevertheless, this has made me wonder if I am indeed wearing burgundy-colored glasses. Am I nuts to think that we have improved and that RGIII can take the next step and become the leader of one of the best offenses in the league?

Also, I wonder if we, as Redskins fans, chronically overestimate our team. Surely, we won't have a repeat of last season's horror show, will we? Now I'm starting to become concerned.

What's your view of these magazine editor's predictions and our ability to see our team for what it is?

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1075792]I just read a WAPO article which pointed out that the editors of the various NFL preview magazines think that the Redskins are one of if not [U]the[/U] worst team in the NFL.

I don't think we're nearly that bad. In fact, I think we could win our division this season.

Nevertheless, this has made me wonder if I am indeed wearing burgundy-colored glasses. Am I nuts to think that we have improved and that RGIII can take the next step and become the leader of one of the best offenses in the league?

Also, I wonder if we, as Redskins fans, chronically overestimate our team. Surely, we won't have a repeat of last season's horror show, will we? Now I'm starting to become concerned.

What's your view of these magazine editor's predictions and our ability to see our team for what it is?[/quote]
I enjoy preview magazine season but they hold very little predictive value or insight. The national detached narrative for the Redskins is easy based on last season. Griffin is still injured/difficult. Rookie head coach replacing a 'legend'. Terrible defense that didn't bring in any names. Desean Jackson is another 'typical Redskins move'.

They don't actually have anyone with direct insight to the team for the most part so they won't have any clue on how Griffin's offseason has been or the change in the team from Shanahan to Gruden.

As fans we will always be more optimistic than the national scribes and certainly have more insight than most preview publications who either hire freelancers on the cheap or have someone do multiple teams so there's no way they will be able to write anything of relevance or value.

Don't worry, they'll be singing a different tune when the results on the field are different.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1075792]I just read a WAPO article which pointed out that the editors of the various NFL preview magazines think that the Redskins are one of if not [U]the[/U] worst team in the NFL.

I don't think we're nearly that bad. In fact, I think we could win our division this season.

Nevertheless, this has made me wonder if I am indeed wearing burgundy-colored glasses. Am I nuts to think that we have improved and that RGIII can take the next step and become the leader of one of the best offenses in the league?

Also, I wonder if we, as Redskins fans, chronically overestimate our team. Surely, we won't have a repeat of last season's horror show, will we? Now I'm starting to become concerned.

What's your view of these magazine editor's predictions and our ability to see our team for what it is?[/quote]

I think we do chronically overestimate the team. We're fans; it's our job to be too enthused.

But those preseason mags typically aren't worth the paper that they are printed on. Every year teams go worst-to-first and vice versa, making July's preseason magazine a joke by December.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=CrustyRedskin;1075785]Everyone wants Rak and Kerrigan to be nfl sack leaders. That's hard to do when your ass is losing. Start winning 10+ games a year and get some nice comfy leads in the second half of a few games and see what happens. Ex JJ Watts. 2013-14.[/quote]

JJ Watt still had 10.5 sacks this year. He is a beast no matter who he plays for. There are plenty of players that rack up sacks even on bad teams. Like Robert Quinn or Mario Williams.

Orakpo and Kerrigan have to produce. There are no more excuses this year.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

^ Again I'll keep going back to opportunities. Those guys simply rush the passer more.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=Mattyk;1075805]^ Again I'll keep going back to opportunities. Those guys simply rush the passer more.[/quote]

I agree but that is only part of it. I have seen Orakpo and Kerrigan get taken out of games even when they were "unleashed".

Part of it is opportunity. Another part is when you watch them play they have two moves... Speed Rush or Bull Rush.

Also pro football focus did a pass rush production article. Orakpo wasn't in the top 10 for edge rushers.

[url]https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/01/14/signature-stats-pass-rushing-productivity-edge-rushers/[/url]

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

The narrative about how Orakpo has only a few pass rushing moves is a poor one, IMO. I've made this DeSean Jackson comparison before, but it's like the DeSean situation in that he put up big numbers even though the fans claimed that he was easy to take out of games. Orakpo may only have a few pass rushing moves but it's propelled him to quite a few sacks. And DeSean may be easy to take out of a game, but at the same time, he still put up 80 for 1300 and 9.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=SirLK26;1075790]So a team official has to provide the stats for it to be true?
.[/quote]


Did you see what I was responding to ? I have heard people here say these things but not any where else ,I never question anyone's stats .

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[QUOTE=SirLK26;1075811]The narrative about how Orakpo has only a few pass rushing moves is a poor one, IMO. I've made this DeSean Jackson comparison before, but it's like the DeSean situation in that he put up big numbers even though the fans claimed that he was easy to take out of games. Orakpo may only have a few pass rushing moves but it's propelled him to quite a few sacks. And DeSean may be easy to take out of a game, but at the same time, he still put up 80 for 1300 and 9.[/QUOTE]


Id have to agree with Raks versatility. I would go so far as to say he has one move.
Maybe his performance has been less than stellar due to our piss poor secondary, or lack of talent around him. I dont know. I hope he proves different this year.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=Giantone;1075813]Did you see what I was responding to ? I have heard people here say these things but not any where else ,I never question anyone's stats .[/quote]

If you took time to click on the link I provided, you noticed not only the numbers, but also this quote by team insider Rich Tandler:

[quote]The “what we want to do” could be taken as a shot at former head coach Mike Shanahan. Word is that he got heavily involved in the defense and Haslett did not have a free hand in running the unit. It appears that Jay Gruden will take the Joe Gibbs approach and let Haslett run the defense as he sees fit.[/quote]

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[QUOTE=SirLK26;1075818]If you took time to click on the link I provided, you noticed not only the numbers, but also this quote by team insider Rich Tandler:[/QUOTE]


Jim haslett has run his own d for many years. Dude is a loser. Im sick of hearing "let haslett call the shots". "Let haslett be in charge". This is not Tomlin holding back Dick Lebeau! It was an extremely questionable hire and I just dont buy the fact that this horrible d had nothing to do with Haz cus he was shackled to a bench during gametime. Dudes only good years were taking over for good d's - and subsequently running them into the ground. Rant over.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=SirLK26;1075818]If you took time to click on the link I provided, you noticed not only the numbers, but also this quote by team insider Rich Tandler:[/quote]
I did ,people and insiders are blaming Shanahan for the Kennedy assassination also. Would you admit that blaming someone that is no longer there is a good way of keeping your own job ?

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=punch it in;1075820]Jim haslett has run his own d for many years. Dude is a loser. Im sick of hearing "let haslett call the shots". "Let haslett be in charge". This is not Tomlin holding back Dick Lebeau! It was an extremely questionable hire and I just dont buy the fact that this horrible d had nothing to do with Haz cus he was shackled to a bench during gametime. Dudes only good years were taking over for good d's - and subsequently running them into the ground. Rant over.[/quote]

Haslett sucks. Even if we had a ton of talent all over the defense, the best we could hope for is a middle-of-the-road D. Jay won't have a Zimmer defense to lean on when the offense stalls, that's for sure.

But who knows. Perhaps when left alone he'll put together a solid defense that can win when coupled with a good offense. But the Packers won the Super Bowl in 2011 with a poor defense, ranked 19th in points and 32nd in yards, although if I remember correctly, they did rank fairly high in takeaways. The point is, we don't need an elite defense to win.

[quote=Giantone;1075825]I did ,people and insiders are blaming Shanahan for the Kennedy assassination also. Would you admit that blaming someone that is no longer there is a good way of keeping your own job ?[/quote]

Sure, I'd admit that, but I'm just pointing out that it's not just us here at the WP, or any Redskins board, that are saying Shanahan stuck his nose into Haslett's business too much.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

So I see that Mr. Commish is running off at the mouth about putting a team in London. I can not believe that they're considering doing this. Just a terrible awful idea. I'm confused as to why they're not looking at US cities as there are plenty that would get behind a team. You mean to tell me a city like Portland wouldn't support a team?

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=Giantone;1075825]I did ,people and insiders are blaming Shanahan for the Kennedy assassination also. Would you admit that blaming someone that is no longer there is a good way of keeping your own job ?[/quote]

Haslett and Jay Gruden are tighter than a tick, so Haz was going to be here no matter what. Now that he has been retained, he should, at least, have the opportunity to run the defense his way.

It has now been confirmed that some of the most egregious decisions on defensive play-calling over the last few years were made by Shanny who overruled Haz. These specific calls were directly responsible for our losing two games to the Cowboys, IMO. I wonder how many other games Shanny lost by micromanaging Haz.

I think we could definitely improve by hiring a DC who has been more successful than Haz has been. History tells us that we'll probably have a middling defense at best under Haz. But I also think that our [U]offense[/U] can be significantly more productive this season. So, if the D and ST can improve some this season, we can win more as a team.

Last season our ST play was the most horrible I've ever witnessed. We've taken some positive steps to improve in that area. That should help both the D and the O by giving us better field position.

In short, for me it's all about the team getting better overall. As I wrote above, I believe that we could hire a better DC than Haslett - but that's not going to happen this year. Regardless of that, if the D and ST can improve some, I think we can win many more games than we did last season because we now have a potentially dominant offense to carry the team.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1075838]So I see that Mr. Commish is running off at the mouth about putting a team in London. I can not believe that they're considering doing this. Just a terrible awful idea. I'm confused as to why they're not looking at US cities as there are plenty that would get behind a team. You mean to tell me a city like Portland wouldn't support a team?[/quote]

Talking about putting a team in London has been around since Tagliabue, if not Rozelle. Maybe it will happen soon, but it's already been 20+ years theyv'e talked about this. And what makes you think Portland would support/could support a team?

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

Portland.....? Is there not a requirement under the NFLPA/NFL agreement stating a potential NFL host city must have at least 32 days of sunshine p/yr?

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

I would think it would bake sense to get a team in LA before they worry about Europe

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=DFI;1075854]I would think it would bake sense to get a team in LA before they worry about Europe[/quote]

LA has little interest in professional football. Which is why multiple teams have already left LA. That is a Lakers and Dodgers city first and foremost. They get their fill of football from UCLA and USC. The LA Rams (Now St Louis Rams) games were usually blacked out in their local market due to not selling out. They eventually moved out of LA to Anaheim to get into a smaller stadium hoping they could get sellouts. Which helped for a few years with new fans, but that ran dry eventually as well, and they started the blackouts again. If you are not the Lakers or Dodgers, LA wont support you unless you consistently win championships.

The NFL is fighting putting a team in LA anyways. They dont want a team there. If there is one in LA, it ruins any attempts by the NFL to pressure other cities to build a stadium for the local team. Because every time there is a problem about stadium funding, the NFL and local team immediately threaten to move to LA. If the possibility of that specific move is gone, due to a team there, less taxpayer money is used to build stadiums elsewhere. The NFL makes more money without a team in LA than they would with a team in LA since every taxpayer dollar used to build a stadium means one less NFL dollar used to build a stadium.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=Skinzman;1075855]LA has little interest in professional football. Which is why multiple teams have already left LA. That is a Lakers and Dodgers city first and foremost. They get their fill of football from UCLA and USC. The LA Rams (Now St Louis Rams) games were usually blacked out in their local market due to not selling out. They eventually moved out of LA to Anaheim to get into a smaller stadium hoping they could get sellouts. Which helped for a few years with new fans, but that ran dry eventually as well, and they started the blackouts again. If you are not the Lakers or Dodgers, LA wont support you unless you consistently win championships.

The NFL is fighting putting a team in LA anyways. They dont want a team there. If there is one in LA, it ruins any attempts by the NFL to pressure other cities to build a stadium for the local team. Because every time there is a problem about stadium funding, the NFL and local team immediately threaten to move to LA. If the possibility of that specific move is gone, due to a team there, less taxpayer money is used to build stadiums elsewhere. The NFL makes more money without a team in LA than they would with a team in LA since every taxpayer dollar used to build a stadium means one less NFL dollar used to build a stadium.[/quote]


Lets not forget the California still has three other teams ,so it's not like there is no Pro football at all out there add in UCLA and USC they have all they need
The league wants this sport to be a world wide sport .

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

The few games the NFL played in London have been well received but would the city support 16 games per season? Also, the travel burden to and from London with a full schedule would be insane. What happens when the London team plays a non-division slate of games versus one of the divisions from the west?

LA is a huge market so it's no wonder that the NFL keeps trying to find a way to make it work with a team located there. In a way, it's a blow to the NFL's credibility to not have a team in LA.

I guess it could work for the 49'ers and Raiders to share a stadium. It doesn't seem to be a problem for the Giants and Jets. I admit that these type of arrangements have surprised me because it would seem that some teams would start to spread out a little more as the population grows.

I would have thought that the Raiders would have made the first move towards the San Jose area to try to add the rich Silicon Valley to their fan base before the 49'ers did so. I suppose that circumstances prevented that from happening. The Raiders should look at Las Vegas as a possible landing place. What team could be more perfect for Vegas than the Raiders?

Some day, I would expect the Redskins to build a stadium in Northern Virginia. I think the Bills should definitely consider a move to Toronto which is a much larger and wealthier city than Buffalo. I wonder if the Jets will some day want their own stadium, perhaps north of NYC.

p.s. Two of the three most populous metro areas in NA do not have NFL teams. They are Mexico City (Ranked 1st at 23.3M) and LA (Ranked 3rd at 18.0M). Toronto is ranked 8th at 6.5M whereas Buffalo is ranked 56th at 1.6M.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

As I stated a couple of times already, being European and living in Europe I am against a Team here.

That said, a possible solution against the travel problems could 4 away games in the U.S. in a row, then 8 home games in London (the opponent coming out or going into the bye week) and then again 4 games in the U.S. And then hope for not-changing homefields throughout the playoffs.

As said, I´m against it - but the travel problem could be solved.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

Goodell isn't the only one talking about this idea

[url=http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/07/17/robert-kraft-a-london-team-by-decades-end-should-be-an-nfl-goal/]Robert Kraft: NFL should strive for London team by decade’s end | ProFootballTalk[/url]

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

Not sure how it would work & they've talked about it forever, but the NFL is smart and the world is much more global now. It's all about money, and it would seem they've just about maximized income potential in the U.S. If it grew internationally, it could get ridiculously more $$. Not sure how much they would care about it there, but at least england already knows rugby. Canada also seems like a natural expansion.

If football became global, it could reach the stratosphere of financial success. They'd just have the name-problem (football vs futbol, etc).

[edit] Did some research, looks like World Cup last month hit records with ~20 million viewers, although the SuperBowl is usually ~110 million. Still, that means there are millions (if not billions) worldwide that are still possible new viewers for NFL.

[url=http://www.theverge.com/2014/6/26/5847778/us-world-cup-game-helps-1-7-million-streaming-record]US World Cup game pushes ESPN past Super Bowl streaming record | The Verge[/url][/QUOTE]

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

I think the NFL is trying to copy FIFA because of all the viewers/sponsors the World Cup gets. Plus the power FIFA has is unmatched.

Not sure how it would work just because of the time difference though. Maybe they should consider starting a European League versus having a single team in Europe.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

Heard a rumor that Jay Gruden was spotted here in Saratoga for the first weekend of the track, found a link that confirms

[url=http://www.saratogian.com/sports/20140718/saratoga-notebook-ortiz-hits-trifecta-on-opening-day]Saratoga Notebook: Ortiz hits trifecta on opening day[/url]

[QUOTE]Washington Redskins head coach Jay Gruden and Cincinnati defensive coordinator Paul Guenther were at the Spa for Opening Day and in the winner’s circle for the Sir Cat Stakes.

The NFL coaches handed out the post-race hardware in the winner’s circle after jockey Joel Rosario rode Tourist to a win for trainer Bill Mott and owner Gary Barber and WinStar Farm.

Gruden was impressed with what he saw from the track.

“It’s my first time,” Gruden said. “It’s a great place, a lot of history. I just wanted to be a part of it with the jockeys and trainers and owners. To see it in person is quite an experience.”

The first-year Washington coach did not make any bets but he did notice the athleticism of the jockeys.

“They’re very athletic and courageous to do what they do,” Gruden said. “With the animals they’re on top of it’s very impressive and you can see they make a huge difference in the race with the positioning and timing that they have.”[/QUOTE]

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1075850]Talking about putting a team in London has been around since Tagliabue, if not Rozelle. Maybe it will happen soon, but it's already been 20+ years theyv'e talked about this. And what makes you think Portland would support/could support a team?[/quote]

I think Portland/Oregon would be the best city/ state to put an NFL team. Look at how they support the Ducks and Trailblazers? Look at how they support their MLS team? Also when they had arena and going way back to the USFL they lead in attendance. Perfect city to go to, not LA.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;1075859]The few games the NFL played in London have been well received but would the city support 16 games per season? Also, the travel burden to and from London with a full schedule would be insane. What happens when the London team plays a non-division slate of games versus one of the divisions from the west?

LA is a huge market so it's no wonder that the NFL keeps trying to find a way to make it work with a team located there. In a way, it's a blow to the NFL's credibility to not have a team in LA.

I guess it could work for the 49'ers and Raiders to share a stadium. It doesn't seem to be a problem for the Giants and Jets. I admit that these type of arrangements have surprised me because it would seem that some teams would start to spread out a little more as the population grows.

I would have thought that the Raiders would have made the first move towards the San Jose area to try to add the rich Silicon Valley to their fan base before the 49'ers did so. I suppose that circumstances prevented that from happening. The Raiders should look at Las Vegas as a possible landing place. What team could be more perfect for Vegas than the Raiders?

Some day, I would expect the Redskins to build a stadium in Northern Virginia. I think the Bills should definitely consider a move to Toronto which is a much larger and wealthier city than Buffalo. I wonder if the Jets will some day want their own stadium, perhaps north of NYC.

p.s. Two of the three most populous metro areas in NA do not have NFL teams. They are Mexico City (Ranked 1st at 23.3M) and LA (Ranked 3rd at 18.0M). Toronto is ranked 8th at 6.5M whereas Buffalo is ranked 56th at 1.6M.[/quote]

LA would be an epic failure if they put another team there. Two college teams, Lakers, Dodgers, Angels, Kings plus all the entertainment. It just seems like more of a college football town.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1075868]I think Portland/Oregon would be the best city/ state to put an NFL team. Look at how they support the Ducks and Trailblazers? Look at how they support their MLS team? Also when they had arena and going way back to the USFL they lead in attendance. Perfect city to go to, not LA.[/quote]

They never lead in attendance in the USFL.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=skinsfan69;1075868]I think Portland/Oregon would be the best city/ state to put an NFL team. Look at how they support the Ducks and Trailblazers? Look at how they support their MLS team? Also when they had arena and going way back to the USFL they lead in attendance. Perfect city to go to, not LA.[/quote]

The commissioner wants teams in LA and London. We may think those cities are bad fits for the NFL but it's pretty much a sure thing that one or both of those cities will get a team before any other city.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

Team will be in la before London. Talk all they want, London team still in the far future.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

from DC to London, nonstop = 7 1/2 hours one way

[url]https://www.google.com/flights/#search;f=BWI,DCA,IAD;t=LCY,LGW,LHR,LTN,STN;q=travel+time+from+washington+dc+to+london;d=2014-08-06;r=2014-08-10[/url]

San Diego to London, nonstop = 10 1/2 hours one way

[url]https://www.google.com/flights/#search;f=SAN;t=LCY,LGW,LHR,LTN,STN;d=2014-08-06;r=2014-08-10;q=travel+time+from+washington+dc+to+london[/url]


i would feel sorry for the London team having to travel up to 8 times per year. Im sure the NFL would schedule it so the London team could play 3-4 consecutive road games ... but then that would still suck for the london team players to be living out of hotels for a month at a time ....

i just dont see how it makes sense unless we are talking special super fast concordia jets ...

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[quote=SmootSmack;1075871]They never lead in attendance in the USFL.[/quote]

In fact they (Portland) only had a team for one year (1985) that averaged 19K/game (in fairness, the arena only held 20K max). The were 7th out of 14 in terms of total attendance behind (among others) Birmingham, Orlando, and Memphis.

Thank you google:

[url=http://www.awesome80s.com/Awesome80s/Sports/USFL/Attendance.asp]USFL Attendance: Awesome80s Sports[/url]

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Breakers]Portland Breakers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]
[quote]Searching for a home, Canizaro was particularly intrigued when he visited Portland. It was a fairly large market with a reasonably adequate facility by USFL standards in 20,323 seat Civic Stadium. Canizaro moved the team there. The team drew an average of 19,919 per game in Portland.[/quote]

[Side note: What a wonderful thing the internet is, almost any purely factual question can be answered by the simple inquiry "hmmm, I wonder if I can find it on google?]

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

[QUOTE=over the mountain;1075888]from DC to London, nonstop = 7 1/2 hours one way



[url]https://www.google.com/flights/#search;f=BWI,DCA,IAD;t=LCY,LGW,LHR,LTN,STN;q=travel+time+from+washington+dc+to+london;d=2014-08-06;r=2014-08-10[/url]



San Diego to London, nonstop = 10 1/2 hours one way



[url]https://www.google.com/flights/#search;f=SAN;t=LCY,LGW,LHR,LTN,STN;d=2014-08-06;r=2014-08-10;q=travel+time+from+washington+dc+to+london[/url]





i would feel sorry for the London team having to travel up to 8 times per year. Im sure the NFL would schedule it so the London team could play 3-4 consecutive road games ... but then that would still suck for the london team players to be living out of hotels for a month at a time ....



i just dont see how it makes sense unless we are talking special super fast concordia jets ...[/QUOTE]


I think they would also maintain a facility here in the states for their home away from home type of deal.

Re: All things offseason discussion part II
 

Chris Snee will announce his retirement from football tomorrow ,opens up a spot and cap room on the Giants .