Scot McCloughan to be new Redskins GM

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Garcon's not going anywhere because the McCloughan hire is a clear pivot towards the draft as the source of talent for this team. And since they have $20M in cap space for free agents already, and because they won't be looking to free agency for a huge talent bonanza, they won't feel the pressure to clear additional cap space by cutting Garcon.

He's very safe.

The cap reason not the prevailing factor if he were to be cut, imo. But yeah McC is a draft guy, that could be another reason he might be let go.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

The cap reason not the prevailing factor if he were to be cut, imo. But yeah McC is a draft guy, that could be another reason he might be let go.

They couldeasily restructure his deal to pay him instead of cutting it may have to pay him dead cap

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Garcon's not going anywhere because the McCloughan hire is a clear pivot towards the draft as the source of talent for this team. And since they have $20M in cap space for free agents already, and because they won't be looking to free agency for a huge talent bonanza, they won't feel the pressure to clear additional cap space by cutting Garcon.

He's very safe.

Do you think this means we see a TW extension this year?

Also, here's pretty good write up on the Skins team situation from overthecap.com:

Redskins 2015 Salary Cap Outlook - Over the Cap

for example:

Free Agents to Let Walk
Almost all of them…Washington continues to be one of the worst constructed teams in the NFL and they can help fix that by turning the roster over and rebuilding.

McCloughan has a job cut out for him.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Do you think this means we see a TW extension this year?

if we want to make some room, kerrigan and TW extensions would probably be option 1 and 1A.

[calia]

Not sure I disagree with cutting Bowen. He hasn't exactly been an impact player. And his cap number seels high for what he brings to us.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by calia

Not sure I disagree with cutting Bowen. He hasn't exactly been an impact player. And his cap number seels high for what he brings to us.

Yes. Cutting Bowen would clear $5.5M in space. He is as good as gone, especially since Haslett won't be here to go to bat for him.

[Schneed10]

That makes zero sense, Chico.

If it's not a cap reason, then you must think it's a talent or fit reason to cut him. Which makes me question the way your brain works.

And I don't think McC would advocate cutting Garcon to add another receiver to take his place. Why would that make sense?

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

That makes zero sense, Chico.

If it's not a cap reason, then you must think it's a talent or fit reason to cut him. Which makes me question the way your brain works.

And I don't think McC would advocate cutting Garcon to add another receiver to take his place. Why would that make sense?

I feel like some of the posters on here are like Beatrice and the rest of us are the old ladies on the sofa. "This not how this works, this isn't how any of this works"

I am going to start calling off based posters on here Beatrice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5fn087Jk4I

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

That makes zero sense, Chico.

If it's not a cap reason, then you must think it's a talent or fit reason to cut him. Which makes me question the way your brain works.

And I don't think McC would advocate cutting Garcon to add another receiver to take his place. Why would that make sense?

its just an opinion, but yeah I think the prevailing factor to being cut would just be performance on the field. I dont think he was that great this past year. I dont want to see him go.

I think the reason to cut and add would be to add more talent on the field...thats it.

And my brain is hurting today, but not because of the skins....which is an improvement!

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

its just an opinion, but yeah I think the prevailing factor to being cut would just be performance on the field. I dont think he was that great this past year. I dont want to see him go.

I think the reason to cut and add would be to add more talent on the field...thats it.

And my brain is hurting today, but not because of the skins....which is an improvement!

OK I get it.

I think it's wrong to say Garcon wasn't good this year. I think the right way to say it is that he was way underutilized, partly because the Skins found a new dynamite downfield threat in Jackson, partly because the line couldn't protect adequately, and partly because the QB play was so sub-par.

If you cut Garcon and fix the offensive line and QB play, then WR will be a rate-limiting factor.

In other words: Garcon was not the problem. Someone else said it best, you'd be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[mredskins]

It is funny what people fixate on; Garcon and Amerson. They both seem like low priorities to me.

I doubt they are racing through McC mind right now as things he has to do in his first month.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by mredskins

It is funny what people fixate on; Garcon and Amerson. They both seem like low priorities to me.

I doubt they are racing through McC mind right now as things he has to do in his first month.

To compare Garcon to Amerson is like comparing LaVeon Bell to Roy Helu, big difference there. Not to mention you brought up Garcon if I am not mistaken.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

To compare Garcon to Amerson is like comparing LaVeon Bell to Roy Helu, big difference there. Not to mention you brought up Garcon if I am not mistaken.

????

I was not comparing the two to each other. There is thread about Amerson and talk of what do with Garcon in here.

Neither points were brought up by me. I am just commenting they seem like moot points to me.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by mredskins

????

I was not comparing the two to each other. There is thread about Amerson and talk of what do with Garcon in here.

Neither points were brought up by me. I am just commenting they seem like moot points to me.

My bad only looked at the avatar, didn't see the name, was referring to Chico there. My fault man, 3 young kids in my house. Haven't had my eyes all the way open since I was 23.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

My bad only looked at the avatar, didn't see the name, was referring to Chico there. My fault man, 3 young kids in my house. Haven't had my eyes all the way open since I was 23.

When did the 3 kid come along? I thought it was just twins