ESPN: Clayton Expects Skins to Tender Campbell for a 1st and 3rd

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

Is there a program you can apply where if someone repeatedly makes propositions that have been thoroughly explained over and over why they won't work, and they completely ignore them and keep posting the same ridiculous propositions, that their keyboards can be set to shock them back to reality upon contact?

That would be a nice gimmick. I'd like for every person who proposes for our team to go after a RFA to get shocked.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

Is there a program you can apply where if someone repeatedly makes propositions that have been thoroughly explained over and over why they won't work, and they completely ignore them and keep posting the same ridiculous propositions, that their keyboards can be set to shock them back to reality upon contact?

At the least I wish people would read a bit more before posting. So often the answers are right there. Makes you feel like you're talking to yourself sometimes with the way people post the same stuff over and over that's already been addressed, often just a few posts earlier.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

At the least I wish people would read a bit more before posting. So often the answers are right there. Makes you feel like you're talking to yourself sometimes with the way people post the same stuff over and over that's already been addressed, often just a few posts earlier.

I think that's what gets me the most. Reading can be educational fella's.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

At the least I wish people would read a bit more before posting. So often the answers are right there. Makes you feel like you're talking to yourself sometimes with the way people post the same stuff over and over that's already been addressed, often just a few posts earlier.

Your reasoning explains why you asked the question in an earlier thread; What WP frequently discussed topics have you had enough of? Guys want to be heard, and feel if what they have to say is buried somewhere deep in a thread with more than a hundred responses they won't be. Hence we get a lot of repetition and different thread titles that basically express the same point of view and will solicit the same type response.

[Frost]

so a little off the topic but assuming most of us agree by now that the logical choice would be to keep Campbell for this year as our starting Qb and build the O-line and see what he could do under Shanny's regime. If that does not work then you do whatever it takes to move up and get Jake Locker in 2011 who I believe will be alot better than Bradford and Clausen and at least by then we should have a decent O-line. I really don't want Bradford Clausen or McCoy.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

Your reasoning explains why you asked the question in an earlier thread; What WP frequently discussed topics have you had enough of? Guys want to be heard, and feel if what they have to say is buried somewhere deep in a thread with more than a hundred responses they won't be. Hence we get a lot of repetition and different thread titles that basically express the same point of view and will solicit the same type response.

Yeah, not a lot of people want to read through a 40 page thread on say, the D-Line, to get info on something new from Haynesworth. They can search sure, but those long threads get jumbled up so much it's a mess.

Better for the search engines generally to have new topics as well.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

We could use a free agency FAQ, I'm too lazy to put it together though. And it's really just a Google away anyway so I don't feel bad for slapping someone down who doesn't do a basic search before chiming in with their "knowledge".

Exactly

"well I didn't know so..."

what other presentations do you do without actually looking into something? is that how proposals go in the rest of the world?

I realize that this is more of a casual site based on more of a hobby or interest but dang

[CRedskinsRule]

I was just thinking, what about a program that sends a shock feedback to people repeating the same proposition over and over, and not taking time to read the discussions even one or two p [aarrgh] why did my computer shock me, anyway, like i was saying- one or two posts bef[AAARRRRGGHH], my computer must be f'ed up..

SO if Matty could find a program that would shoc [AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGHHHHHHH]
D*** COMPUTER!!

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I was just thinking, what about a program that sends a shock feedback to people repeating the same proposition over and over, and not taking time to read the discussions even one or two p [aarrgh] why did my computer shock me, anyway, like i was saying- one or two posts bef[AAARRRRGGHH], my computer must be f'ed up..

SO if Matty could find a program that would shoc [AAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGHHHHHHH]
D*** COMPUTER!!

YEAH! Got one!!!

[over the mountain]

d boyz - read up on matt schaub and cassel's tender/tags then trades.

you can tender a player for a 1st and 3rd (or fran tag them), then trade them for whatever you want. it doesnt have to be a 1st and 3rd.

the difference in salary owed to JC under a "same pick" or "1st & 3rd tender" is minimal. like 100k difference.

[CRedskinsRule]

I think the tender reflects more about the team's "respect" for keeping their player. As many have pointed out, a trade can be made for anything once the tender is in place. So the question is can you avoid a JCutler scenario where JC feels put down by the tender level. Having said that JC has been thrown under the bus so many times here, that it will be in MS/BA's hands to make sure that if he ends up staying he doesn't end up becoming a distraction, even that is not his natural tendency.

[D'BOYZ]

yes they can do that but it's less likely somebody would ask for him or the settle for a 5th round pick after they put his value at 1 and 3 just plain logic. If you place the value of you player at 1 and 3 you can move down and as for only a 1st maybe a second but no GM would take a 3rd or less for a player they valued at 1 and 3

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by D'BOYZ

yes they can do that but it's less likely somebody would ask for him or the settle for a 5th round pick after they put his value at 1 and 3 just plain logic. If you place the value of you player at 1 and 3 you can move down and as for only a 1st maybe a second but no GM would take a 3rd or less for a player they valued at 1 and 3

In a normal situation, maybe. But, the Skins relationship with JC has been so muddied and botched, that most teams are more likely to lowball the Skins, then offer a tender based trade. IMO of course

[MTK]

Originally Posted by D'BOYZ

yes they can do that but it's less likely somebody would ask for him or the settle for a 5th round pick after they put his value at 1 and 3 just plain logic. If you place the value of you player at 1 and 3 you can move down and as for only a 1st maybe a second but no GM would take a 3rd or less for a player they valued at 1 and 3

Brandon Lloyd was given a 1st round tender by the 49ers but the Skins got him for a 3rd and 4th rounder.

[D'BOYZ]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Brandon Lloyd was given a 1st round tender by the 49ers but the Skins got him for a 3rd and 4th rounder.

yes mattyk but was only a ist round tender which is what I was saying if you put a 1st only you could take a 3rd and 4th for the guy but if you put the highest multiple tender on the guy you can't take less than a 2nd round pick and I don't know if a team will offer a second for Campbell...