Redskins - Losers?
 

Free agency winners and losers
Teams that hit it big or wildly missed this offseason
Posted: Tuesday March 21, 2006 12:05PM; Updated: Tuesday March 21, 2006 12:13PM


I'm unable to post the link to CNNSI, but Don Banks labels the B&G losers! Actually, I don't know how to post a link! Sorry!

Hopefully a moderator can add it later.


Did I miss a memo on us losing in FA or something?

Is Don Banks now doing his best Fat Lenny, or P. King?

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[quote=backrow]I'm unable to post the link to CNNSI, but Don Banks labels the B&G losers! Actually, I don't know how to post a link! Sorry![/quote]

It's real easy, backrow. Just copy and paste the URL from your browser.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[URL="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/don_banks/03/21/fa.winners.losers/index.html"]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/don_banks/03/21/fa.winners.losers/index.html[/URL]

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/don_banks/03/21/fa.winners.losers/index.html[/url]

there you go

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

robh you son of a bitch. You must have been 3 seconds before me...:food-smil

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[QUOTE= Don Dumbass]4. Washington -- The Redskins were saved from salary-cap hell by the new CBA extension, which freed up another $7 million-plus of cap space, allowing them to avoid dismantling their roster. So what do they do? Rush right out and get themselves mortgaged back up to the gills, tossing out a staggering $31.8 million, six-year contract to the Rams' Adam Archuleta, making him the richest safety in NFL history.

Receiver Antwaan Randle El and linebacker Andre Carter also got hefty deals, and Washington opted to send both a third- and fourth-round pick to San Francisco in exchange for inconsistent receiver Brandon Lloyd. Even reserve tight end Fauria and backup quarterback Todd Collins got in on the money train.

The Redskins' set-the-market contracts are bound to catch up to them one day. My guess is it'll be after head coach Joe Gibbs calls it a career for a second time, in a year or two.[/QUOTE]d

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]It's real easy, backrow. Just copy and paste the URL from your browser.[/QUOTE]

I can bring the news, but I can't bring any skills to the computer table! I've heard the term URL, but I can't find that button on the keyboard. The mouse doesn't have any voice, so, I'm at a loss. I've disabled my speakers because I can't stand dings, bells and or whistles.

Now, due to watching the screen for so long, my eyes are going bad. I had to upgrade my reading glasses a while back.

I get stiff while sitting for long periods. My knees won't cooperate on steps. I get Arthur in my thumbs.

My hair is grey/white, and thinning.


Help, I've fallen, and can't get up!

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

I read the article and his only reason for the skins to be a "loser" is that we spent money! This writter has no idea about how to look at moves in a football type manner. Our moves will help us to win games, point blank. I guess he is just bothered that Snyder and the skins can spend what he makes in a lifetime in a blink of an eye.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

"Even reserve tight end Fauria and backup quarterback Todd Collins got in on the money train."

Collins gets a two year 2.5 million$ deal (chooo chooo!?!?!)...
and fauria gets 800,000 in 2006 and 1 million in 2007....


any other questions visit

[URL="http://www.thehogs.net/content/story.php?id=672"]http://www.thehogs.net/content/story.php?id=672[/URL]

This guy is reading headlines and not looking into any facts.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

Ok, so let me get this straight. The Redskins seriously upgrade their WR corp, a major weakness late in the season, even though they still were within 2 games of the Superbowl. Drop L. Arrington and his big contract, who was only on the filed during about a 3rd of their games. Sign a serious pass rusher at DE and a slobberknocker at Safety and they are losers in FA?!?!

These guys are all jealous because their favorite teams won't spend money.
Also, someone please tell me how getting T.O. makes you a winner, when I am sure this same media guy talked about how bad a person T.O. was at some point last year.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[quote=scowan]Ok, so let me get this straight. The Redskins seriously upgrade their WR corp, a major weakness late in the season, even though they still were within 2 games of the Superbowl. Drop L. Arrington and his big contract, who was only on the filed during about a 3rd of their games. Sign a serious pass rusher at DE and a slobberknocker at Safety and they are losers in FA?!?!

These guys are all jealous because their favorite teams won't spend money.
[B]Also, someone please tell me how getting T.O. makes you a winner, when I am sure this same media guy talked about how bad a person T.O. was at some point last year[/B].[/quote]

T.O. was signed to a 3 year 25 MILLION$ deal

so this guy is hating...on the redskins for spending money on proven team players focusing on our needs.... and absolving the cowboys who released one crazy but talented receiver, and signed another even-crazier and talented receiver.

yeah, i refuse to post anymore about this guy, he's obviously smoking somethin.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

My favorite is one paragraph implying that the Antwaan deal was a poor one for us. And then the next paragraph he criticizes Pittsburgh for losing his him.

Do what?

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

These guys kill me when they call Archuletta the highest paid safety in history.

They totally lose perspective. The entire contract isn't guaranteed and more than likely he'll restructure the deal somewhere down the line.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

Hmmmmm?


Maybe this is why these scribes write about the Redskins the way they do. To get us talking!


Otherwise, this is a semi-almost comatose period for the B&G. We've made our FA acquisitions, and are waiting for 50+ picks in the NFL Draft preceeding ours, then waiting for the second day of the Draft, then waiting a long, long time for the start of TC!

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/don_banks/02/10/banks/1.html[/url]

[QUOTE]Washington -- The Redskins' cap situation will be their biggest obstacle to improvement this offseason. Even if LaVar Arrington is cut after June 1 and counts just $5 million against the 2006 cap, Washington still will have to shave another $15 million off the anticipated $95 million cap. [B]Bottom line? It'll be tough for the Redskins to land the top-notch No. 2 receiver they covet.[/B][/QUOTE]

Yeah it was sooooo tough to land that no. 2 receiver. Even harder to land two!

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

....furthermore, every off season they talk about how we'll be strapped for cash and we'll have to purge the roster for the upcoming seasons....amazing how this hasn't happened yet!!

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[QUOTE=Monksdown]My favorite is one paragraph implying that the Antwaan deal was a poor one for us. And then the next paragraph he criticizes Pittsburgh for losing his him.

Do what?[/QUOTE]

You just can't win with these guys for a reason. Most of the writers for SI, ESPN and the like started off as beat writers, and at times their roots as homers come shining through. This definitely explains Peter King's anti-Skin bias, he covered the Giants for years. I mean King defends keeping Monk out of the Hall of Fame by saying that "Gary Clark was a bigger threat" all while forgetting that it was the quiet excellence of Monk who allowed Clark, Brown, Sanders, and all the other big play threats to do their jobs while he only caught the most balls in NFL history up to that point.

As for winners and losers in free agency, to put the Skins down as losers because they've figured out a way to keep attaining free agents and avoid the cap hell that has plagued other teams is ludicrous and I attribute it to one thing. Hate. The league hates Snyder because he took the Skins and made them the most profitable team in the league, because his revenue streams allow him to dish out $5 and $10 mil signing bonuses like bottled water while other franchises try to get the same results on the cheap.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

More ninnyism, from Redskin hatin' ninny's. Is it hard to see why they write a column (such as it is), rather than actually have to produce something, or be accountable for their work? It must be rough to be WRONG, ALL the time. I have to fall back on the recent comments of John Clayton, Mel Kyper, etc. "In 06' the skins will have to be reckoned with", they will be THE team to beat in the east, if not the NFC". They are "DEFINATELY much improved with their FA picks

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

The only thing that will shut these mediots up is winning a Super Bowl.. Until that happens then we will continue to be subjected to all of their Snyder, Brunell and Gibbs bashing..

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

ho-hum, same old cap hell theory at work yet again

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

Yet another biased writer that doesn't know half as much about the Skins as all of us. What else is new? I've said it before, I'll say it again: who cares what this moron has to say?

All I care about is wins and losses. The NFL isn't a popularity contest. They don't give points or championships for being the media's favorite team. And any polls, opinions, or "expert" commentary has zero effect on our team's success.......so screw 'em.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

I'm beginning to love all of the hate. The fact is, that it will most likely provide even more motivation for the team to win the east next year. You have to understand where its coming from. These guys pick the wrong teams annually. They pick based on biases & emotion. So, it will come down to what happens on the field next year.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

I really want to start a sticky thread where all these guys Redskin predictions can be posted. No reply or discussion - just a resource for news articles from the media gathered under one thread. Maybe subcategories under the newswire forum: (1) Predictions, commentary that Skins will fail, and (2) Predictions, commentary that Skins will succeed.

As for Banks article, it's simply pointless to comment on it. First, as I have consistently said, the intellectual dishonesty and inconsistency of these SI writers irks me beyond all reason. Banks says it's okay for the Titans to overbid for Givens b/c he was a need even though he may not pan out as a No. 1 WR. Yet, we had a need at the No. 2 WR spot and got the best we could having to out bid the hometown and local discount. But, of course, sooner or later, we'll pay for all this; the world will end; blah blah blah. Same sh** they have all been saying for years. He did add a new twist, w/ another ever so subtle jab at Gibbs. - Despite Gibbs promises to "right the ship" Gibbs will abandon the team to its cap hell. Okay, you believe that Mr. Banks - you have been so accurate in your previous predictions of the Skins impending cap doom.

BTW - How does Baltimore avoid the worst list?? 10M signing bonus to a 30 year old DE with back problems and signing Mike Anderson to a big contract days before resigning J. Lewis (a similar back) to a big contract??. Meanwhile, losing C. Taylor, Maake K (a great pick-up for Carolina acc. to Banks). And, in the great QB derby, the Ravens signed who?? What needs have they addressed? Why did they not do more to retain those they have lost? How have they exercised financial planning in their signings? What is their offensive plan? Their defensive plan? How do their actions accomplish those plans?

The inconsistency by Banks is just mind boggling. Does he even proof-read his crap? I mean really, what is his criteria for choosing good and bad? I think the legitimate way to do so is to ask, for each team, the questions I went through with the Ravens. But, of course, this is time consuming and simply too much work for the national hacks. Instead, it's read the headlines and shoot from the hip.

Banks article merely confirms that the internal memo referenced in my signature actually does exist.

Bottom line: Only way to shut these idiots up is to win and do so consistently. Until then, they can continue to say - "well, for all your spending, you still don't have a consistent winner."

So let's get this dynasty rolling and flip them all the finger after we win our 4th Superbowl in a row.

P.S. - Despite the pointlessness of it, I apparently had considerable amount of commentary concerning the Banks article. LOL.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[QUOTE=Paintrain]The only thing that will shut these mediots up is winning a Super Bowl.. Until that happens then we will continue to be subjected to all of their Snyder, Brunell and Gibbs bashing..[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin]Bottom line: Only way to shut these idiots up is to win and do so consistently. Until then, they can continue to say - "well, for all your spending, you still don't have a consistent winner."[/QUOTE]

You watch: the moment we win the Super Bowl, the only thing you'll hear is how Dan Snyder [B][I]bought[/I][/B] a championship.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

yeah now this thread is beating a dead horse...:bdh:



we all agree that he's way way way off...

fu*k the naysayers... especially the ignorant ones

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[quote=backrow]I can bring the news, but I can't bring any skills to the computer table! I've heard the term URL, but I can't find that button on the keyboard. The mouse doesn't have any voice, so, I'm at a loss. I've disabled my speakers because I can't stand dings, bells and or whistles.

Now, due to watching the screen for so long, my eyes are going bad. I had to upgrade my reading glasses a while back.

I get stiff while sitting for long periods. My knees won't cooperate on steps. I get Arthur in my thumbs.

My hair is grey/white, and thinning.


Help, I've fallen, and can't get up![/quote]

if your eyes seriously do bother you, consider upping the refresh rate on your monitor or buying an LCD.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

One quick point.. None of the writers ever seem to indicate that they think the players that were replaced (Patten/Thrash, Wynn, Clark, Royal) were [b]better[/b] than the players that we brought in (Lloyd, Randle El, Carter, Archuleta, Fauria) just that we spent a bunch of money on them.. If we were losers in free agency then demonstrate how we are a worse team for bringning those players in not just that you disagree with our economics..

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

Good post, JoeRedskin (and everyone else--this is a little like shooting fish in a barrel...)

I find the bad reasoning most entertaining--they assume we were headed to cap hell. Then, surprise, we somehow (no doubt illegally) avoid it. Then we plunge ourselves right back into soon to happen cap hell. But this falsely assumes we were ever in (or anywhere near) cap hell to begin with. And--and this is the fact that simply cannot compute over at SI (and if it did, they would see how stupid they've been--to tough to admit): WE ARE NOT, AND HAVE NEVER BEEN IN CAP HELL!

So, rejecting the false assumption, and taking the fact thay the Steelers, for example, blew it by losing Randle-el, we spent our money wisely to improve our team in areas that SI was extremely happy to point out we were weak in last year (as if this was somehow missed by the folks in the skins FO). QED.

(Isn't it fun beating a dead horse, especially when we're in the offseason doldrums? ;))

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

im the biggest culprit...
i keep saying "im done with this post" and find myself addicted to the war path... reply after reply

i guess theres nothing else to do in the offseason...

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

I know that everyone pretty much has the same things to say about these guys as far as their hate for the Redskins. Myself I love it, I love to argue and this gives me a reason. The reason these writers come out and say bad things about the Redskins is because it's the "in" thing. If you go against the norm and actually give Washington credit for what they do then you are subjecting yourself to the whipping pole for everyone else. Each writer just about said that Dan Snyder would go out and pay T.O. all the money in the world to get him because he's a star. That he would come in and destroy the team atmosphere, Dallas signs him and Jerry Jones is a genius. Why you may ask ? Because it wasn't us. Each position was upgraded when we signed players. Washington could've kept Lavar he decided to leave and like someone said before, he was hardly used and they still rolled along so I don't understand the hub bub. I love the fact that Snyder will go out and get who the coach says he wants, that's why the skins are worth $1.26 bill and they bring home the bacon for the Falcons and Bengals who for some reason can't make money.

Joe Gibbs said it best, "The thing I want to emphasize is this: We haven't done one thing that anybody else can't do," the Redskins' Hall of Fame coach said following a news conference to introduce free-agent signing Andre Carter. "We have certain rules in the league. Here's the cap, here's the numbers, here's what you can spend, so everybody in the league can do what we're doing, it's just that they choose not to, many of them."

Don't get angry about the practices learn how to do it. T.O. will get $10, $8, and $7 mil for each year he plays for the Cowboys. Wow, talk about a cap number. Peter King said the Skins should be investigated because something has to be up with the contracts and the money we sign guys to. How's about 91,000 + fans a game dummy. That equals $$$$$$ !!!!!! Tell the other teams to make some money, sell some team hot dogs or something. Learn how to market, advertise, whatever they need to do get off their butts and earn some money and buy Head Coaches and make them Coordinators ! Damn it feels good to be a Skins fan !!!!


HAIL !!!!

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

I hate reporters. We can't win in their eyes. We got to the playoffs, and WON in the playoffs.. still...HATRED! Even if we win the Super Bowl, there is still going to be a way for these numbnut mother****ers to bash us. Hey, if we have to spend a billion to get the trophy, then we do. Hey! Thats a lot of respect there. Hey Mr. Lombardi.... we spent 30 billion, just to get a trophy with your name on it! Bottom line is... if we win the big one this year, some reporter is going to say.. .and mark my words people...

"wow, they bought a Championship... "


Regards,
Very angry at reporters.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

what he doesnt seem to get is that most of these players wont see the money at the end of the contracts, they are heaily backloaded. surely they will either be cut or restructure before then. dumbass sports writers

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

After the first Seattle game last year Banks wrote and I quote "Washington is the worst 3-0 team in the history of the NFL."

I don't think he likes us? That Don Banks sure knew what he was talking about with that one! Banks has been approved for the title of "Hack Bitch" along with (Dr. Z, Lenny P and Peter King). You guys wonder why Art Monk isn't in the hall of fame? These 4 represent a vote against almost any Redskin for as long as they are around. It's kind of sad, but I like our chances of shutting these guys up. Then again if we win a Super Bowl I will guarantee all 4 will write something negative about our team. Hack Bitches!

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

Don Banks has been added to my boycott list, which so far includes:

Sean Salisbury
Tom Jackson
Dr. Z
Peter King
Len Pasquarelli (hard to boycott because he's an nfl insider. I am more selective with his articles though)

This is just my own way to stick it to them after hearing years of this shit and do not expect anyone to follow suit. I can't respect their opinion of anything else if they can't even try to respect the team I am a devote fan of (redskins, of course). Just my take on it.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[quote=warriorzpath]

This is just my own way to stick it to them after hearing years of this shit and do not expect anyone to follow suit. I can't respect their opinion of anything else if they can't even try to respect the team I am a devote fan of (redskins, of course). Just my take on it.[/quote]

PREACH ON BROTHA PATH!

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[quote=backrow]Free agency winners and losers
Teams that hit it big or wildly missed this offseason
Posted: Tuesday March 21, 2006 12:05PM; Updated: Tuesday March 21, 2006 12:13PM


I'm unable to post the link to CNNSI, but Don Banks labels the B&G losers! Actually, I don't know how to post a link! Sorry!

Hopefully a moderator can add it later.


Did I miss a memo on us losing in FA or something?

Is Don Banks now doing his best Fat Lenny, or P. King?[/quote]

it's because we are losers, duh. Everyone knows that. We couldn't suck more if we tried. All the media is right.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

Man I forgot about Tom Jackson. HA, how many cigars does he smoke a day ? I don't know if any of you remember this but when Washington beat Tampa I turned to ESPN and Steve Young said that Washington had a chance to beat Seattle. Tom Jackson literally laid his head down on the table and damn near cried because he thought Young was going to pick Washington. It must hurt to have your chance at a trophy snatched away from the Skins ! HAAAAAAAAAAAAA charred lipped loser. I'm black and I smoke and my lips are no where near that shade. I mean geez !!! Damn why can't the season start tomorrow,... I'm like the goo on Ghostbusters 2. The more hate thrown at the Skins the more vibrant I become. Let's start it up now, get the lights on ! I want my football !

John Clayton get's much respect from me because he calls it down the middle ! Did anyone hear how Dan Patrick devoted a weeks worth of shows to refute Joe Theismans prediction that the Redskins would go to the Super Bowl last year ? I loved it when they kept winning and he had to play it off. Down with the Cowdungs, and every other team. Oh thank you Dan Snyder for having the PA guys play "Momma's don't let your babies grow up to be coyboys" after that ass whippin they handed out !

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

Man I forgot about Tom Jackson. HA, how many cigars does he smoke a day ? I don't know if any of you remember this but when Washington beat Tampa I turned to ESPN and Steve Young said that Washington had a chance to beat Seattle. Tom Jackson literally laid his head down on the table and damn near cried because he thought Young was going to pick Washington. It must hurt to have your chance at a trophy snatched away from the Skins ! HAAAAAAAAAAAAA charred lipped loser. I'm black and I smoke and my lips are no where near that shade. I mean geez !!! Damn why can't the season start tomorrow,... I'm like the goo on Ghostbusters 2. The more hate thrown at the Skins the more vibrant I become. Let's start it up now, get the lights on ! I want my football !

John Clayton get's much respect from me because he calls it down the middle ! Did anyone hear how Dan Patrick devoted a weeks worth of shows to refute Joe Theismans prediction that the Redskins would go to the Super Bowl last year ? I loved it when they kept winning and he had to play it off. Down with the Cowdungs, and every other team. Oh thank you Dan Snyder for having the PA guys play "Momma's don't let your babies grow up to be coyboys" after that ass whippin they handed out !

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

[quote],... I'm like the goo on Ghostbusters 2. The more hate thrown at the Skins the more vibrant I become.[/quote]

And I have a new sig. Thank you, MonkFan4Life.

Re: Redskins - Losers?
 

let me tell you how smart Don Banks is

he says minnesota is a winner in free agency because they got a 2nd round draft pick for a qb (culpepper) that sucked last year and is coming off surgery.

then he says miami is a winner because they only gave up a 2nd round draft pick for a qb (culpepper) that is one of the best qbs in the game.

if we can't see that this guy is clearly a genius, well, then we need help.