The Official Warpath Sign Tim Rattay and Cut Todd Collins Thread

[724Skinsfan]

Sometimes I hate it when Schneed writes post on threads like these. He has essentially the same opinion that I do regarding Collins versus Rattay but because he's smarter, he says it better which leaves me with nothing better to do than write this weak post.

To echo. Saunders would not have kept Collins on as part of his offense if he felt he had no ability to perform his duties as a backup. Did anyone in KC challenge Saunders/Vermeil about why are they keeping such a horrible waste of NFL talent on the team?

Brunell, Collins and Campbell looked equally bad in pre-season. Probably because they had a better understanding of the plays but the other 10 guys were intermittently out of postion.

I think I read a while back that Collins keeps himself in great physical shape. At age 37 his body isn't going to break down after a series of hits.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

Sometimes I hate it when Schneed writes post on threads like these. He has essentially the same opinion that I do regarding Collins versus Rattay but because he's smarter, he says it better which leaves me with nothing better to do than write this weak post.

To echo. Saunders would not have kept Collins on as part of his offense if he felt he had no ability to perform his duties as a backup. Did anyone in KC challenge Saunders/Vermeil about why are they keeping such a horrible waste of NFL talent on the team?

Brunell, Collins and Campbell looked equally bad in pre-season. Probably because they had a better understanding of the plays but the other 10 guys were intermittently out of postion.

I think I read a while back that Collins keeps himself in great physical shape. At age 37 his body isn't going to break down after a series of hits.

Or, Saunders realizes exactly who Todd Collins is, but also thinks that his boy Collins has been loyal to him for years, and deserves to reap the benefits of a injury to the guy ahead of him.

From Saunders' point of view, if the season is down the crapper anyway, why not put Collins in charge of his offense and powerful running game so that he can generate some hype around him. Maybe Collins very well deserves his shot in a favorable situation.

But to clarify: What's best for Todd Collins probably isn't whats best for the Washington Redskins.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Or, Saunders realizes exactly who Todd Collins is, but also thinks that his boy Collins has been loyal to him for years, and deserves to reap the benefits of a injury to the guy ahead of him.

That sentiment may be plausible for the short term but he's not going to keep him on his roster for more than a couple of years out of straight up loyalty. People just do not maintain success by sacrificing talent acquisition and winning with something as basic as personal loyalty. Saunders has been in the NFL for a long time. Long enough to know when to draw the line when it comes to loyalty.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

That sentiment may be plausible for the short term but he's not going to keep him on his roster for more than a couple of years out of straight up loyalty. People just do not maintain success by sacrificing talent acquisition and winning with something as basic as personal loyalty. Saunders has been in the NFL for a long time. Long enough to know when to draw the line when it comes to loyalty.

Agreed. GTripp, the way you talk about Saunders keeping Collins around just because he likes him makes it seem like you think Saunders is completely inept at his job. By insinuating that Saunders is playing favorites with Collins, you're basically saying Saunders lacks sound football judgment.

It's a severe overstatement of your case.

[crawfish]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Agreed. GTripp, the way you talk about Saunders keeping Collins around just because he likes him makes it seem like you think Saunders is completely inept at his job. By insinuating that Saunders is playing favorites with Collins, you're basically saying Saunders lacks sound football judgment.

It's a severe overstatement of your case.

What about Gibbs keeping Brunell around? It's the same damn thing.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by crawfish

What about Gibbs keeping Brunell around? It's the same damn thing.

I'm not quite sure where you're going with your post. But I just feel the need to say I'm definitely not arguing that we should get rid of Brunell yet. He's still serviceable as a backup, but I wouldn't want him starting.

Honestly, a lot of this discussion is neither here nor there. My basic feeling is whoever the coaches want to be the backup QBs, fine with me, as long as it makes salary cap sense. It'd be completely stupid to break the bank for a 3rd QB this year, that's the main reason I'm advocating keeping Collins.

I think we'd all agree that we're hitching our hopes to the wagon of Jason Campbell this year, as well we should. He has by far the most talent on our team (and way more talent than Tim Rattay), and he gives us the best chance to win games at this point.

Backup QBs can be left to the coaching staff and whoever they pick, hey whatever. As long as you're not getting us into cap trouble by signing backup QBs, knock yourself out.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I'm not quite sure where you're going with your post. But I just feel the need to say I'm definitely not arguing that we should get rid of Brunell yet. He's still serviceable as a backup, but I wouldn't want him starting.

Honestly, a lot of this discussion is neither here nor there. My basic feeling is whoever the coaches want to be the backup QBs, fine with me, as long as it makes salary cap sense. It'd be completely stupid to break the bank for a 3rd QB this year, that's the main reason I'm advocating keeping Collins.

I think we'd all agree that we're hitching our hopes to the wagon of Jason Campbell this year, as well we should. He has by far the most talent on our team (and way more talent than Tim Rattay), and he gives us the best chance to win games at this point.

Backup QBs can be left to the coaching staff and whoever they pick, hey whatever. As long as you're not getting us into cap trouble by signing backup QBs, knock yourself out.

Well, any move that isn't cost effective is stupid. The point is that backup QB is going to be a need next year anyhow, why not address it now while it is cheap to do so.

I could see us screwing up by not looking into the future to find our needs. Backup QB will be a need in a year. As far as this year goes, it really doesn't matter. Campbell is No. 1, Brunell is No. 2 and we have a really good QB situation. The main focus now should be adding youth to the defense via the draft.

[crawfish]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I'm not quite sure where you're going with your post. But I just feel the need to say I'm definitely not arguing that we should get rid of Brunell yet. He's still serviceable as a backup, but I wouldn't want him starting.

Honestly, a lot of this discussion is neither here nor there. My basic feeling is whoever the coaches want to be the backup QBs, fine with me, as long as it makes salary cap sense. It'd be completely stupid to break the bank for a 3rd QB this year, that's the main reason I'm advocating keeping Collins.

I think we'd all agree that we're hitching our hopes to the wagon of Jason Campbell this year, as well we should. He has by far the most talent on our team (and way more talent than Tim Rattay), and he gives us the best chance to win games at this point.

Backup QBs can be left to the coaching staff and whoever they pick, hey whatever. As long as you're not getting us into cap trouble by signing backup QBs, knock yourself out.

Let's say a 290lb DE falls on JC's ankle during a pre season game. He's out 6 weeks. Who starts? Brunell. But you just said you don't want him starting and neither does 99% of all the Redskins fans. This is why we need to bring in someone else to compete with Collins. We know if Brunell has to start for 3-6 weeks then we are in trouble. But the only guy I see doing this is Casey Bramlet. He's going back to NFL Europe so who knows. Bring on Casey! He could be the next Jack Delhomme or Kurt Warner.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 724Skinsfan

That sentiment may be plausible for the short term but he's not going to keep him on his roster for more than a couple of years out of straight up loyalty. People just do not maintain success by sacrificing talent acquisition and winning with something as basic as personal loyalty. Saunders has been in the NFL for a long time. Long enough to know when to draw the line when it comes to loyalty.

I agree. But as the third quarterback, why not? Who else would fill that role, a role that essentially doesn't matter.

Well, I've suggested that Rattay deserves his roster spot and that we should pay him No. 2 QB money, a role he will step into in 2008. I don't think Al would particualrly enjoy such a suggestion, but I don't think he'd prevent it either if Gibbs came to him. He's too smart for that.

[freddyg12]

best thread on here since the Briggs would be saga. Good job GT.

I think good points are made on both sides of this. I've been sayin on here for a while that we need to find somebody in the draft to groom as JC's backup. Roster space as well as cap space are both an issue.

Regardless of where you stand on this, we must all at least agree that if not this year, certainly next year we must get a young backup, draft or free agency. I actually thought Carr would've been a good signing for us if not for the logjam of old men we now have at qb.

[Master4Caster]

You're just writing this because it's the boring part of the off-season, aren't you?!

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, until you cross over it.

The other lane is always going faster, until you get in it.

The other player always looks better, until you sign him.

Yes, I think Tim Rattay would be a decent back-up somewhere, but exchanging him for Collins is going to have marginal impact on the team -- unless they get into a game. Then, it will probably be worse in either case.

I'd rather see what we have in Hollenbach and Palmer and move one of them up the depth chart.