DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday

[Kindoy]

Biggest concerns: How good will he be on Madden? What number will he wear?

[skinsguy]

The meeting with RGIII is just to help him decide which number he'll switch to when he's dawning the burgundy and gold this coming season.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

The meeting with RGIII is just to help him decide which number he'll switch to when he's dawning the burgundy and gold this coming season.

I like this attitude.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

an OMG from the TMZ:

DeSean Jackson -- Met With RG3 In L.A. ... BEFORE Meeting with Redskins In D.C. | TMZ.com

Sweet baby jesus.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by Kindoy

Biggest concerns: How good will he be on Madden? What number will he wear?

He finished with a 91 overall and 98 speed and I have been giving him 18 for us.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

Guys, I have a problem. I keep checking back here obsessively in hopes I see someone say we either signed DJ or he left Redskins Park. Blaahhhhh.

To free up some time for you, he's not supposed to be at RP until this evening and no solid news likely until tomorrow mid morning at the earliest.

[Kindoy]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

He finished with a 91 overall and 98 speed and I have been giving him 18 for us.

Is 81 taken? I think he might go for that. Paying Aldrick for 11?

I heard once that he chose Cal over SC because he couldn't get #1 there haha.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by Kindoy

Is 81 taken? I think he might go for that. Paying Aldrick for 11?

I heard once that he chose Cal over SC because he couldn't get #1 there haha.

Art Monk would slap the taste buds out of your mouth for even suggesting this.

Learn your history.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by Kindoy

Is 81 taken? I think he might go for that. Paying Aldrick for 11?

I heard once that he chose Cal over SC because he couldn't get #1 there haha.

I never give anyone 81 when I play Madden for us

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Hankerson is over the 51 point, so he would save a miniscule amount, and neither he or Robinson, imo, have done anything that deserves a roster spot if our top 3 for the next 2 years are Garcon, DJax, and Roberts. Let spots 5 and 6 go to mid-late round draft choices in a deep WR draft and see if they can progress.

Even though Hankerson was a solid #2 last year before he got hurt, you really want him gone, don't you? It would be stupid to cut him before next offseason; if he gets hurt again this year, then you let him walk in FA. If he turns in a good performance, then you resign him.

I think a big reason people want Hankerson gone is because they're disappointed that he has never lived up to his draft status. However, just because someone doesn't live up to where they were drafted doesn't mean they should be cut. They can still be solid contributors that can be had at a minimal price, e.g. Hankerson. Don't let sentimentalism dictate who should be cut and who should stay.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by SirLK26

Even though Hankerson was a solid #2 last year before he got hurt, you really want him gone, don't you? It would be stupid to cut him before next offseason; if he gets hurt again this year, then you let him walk in FA. If he turns in a good performance, then you resign him.

I think a big reason people want Hankerson gone is because they're disappointed that he has never lived up to his draft status. However, just because someone doesn't live up to where they were drafted doesn't mean they should be cut. They can still be solid contributors that can be had at a minimal price, e.g. Hankerson. Don't let sentimentalism dictate who should be cut and who should stay.

Hank was never really a solid #2. He's really like a 3 or 4. He shouldn't be cut be he shouldn't be starting as a #1 or #2. He's looking more and more like a depth player.

[SirLK26]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

Hank was never really a solid #2. He's really like a 3 or 4. He shouldn't be cut be he shouldn't be starting as a #1 or #2. He's looking more and more like a depth player.

Fair enough; and while I disagree, I'm not going to argue that because it wasn't the point of my post. Whether or not anybody thinks he's a #2 or merely a bottom-of-the-chart depth player, the point is that you shouldn't let draft position dictate if a player goes or stays. If a guy is solid depth and has a fairly cheap contract, you keep him around, regardless whether he was drafted in the 3rd round, 1st round, or 7th round.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Because at 34 we could also pick:
a) 3yr project like Hankerson
b) failures like DT and MK
c) a possible starting FS
d) a possible starting RT


and, we would have PR and our top 4 receivers set (Garcon, DJax, Roberts, Moss).

your way may be way cheaper, but DJax will produce for the next 3 years. You give him a contract that lets him out in 3 years with minimal cap hit, and makes him happy this year and next. You figure the money, plus vendetta against the Eagles will keep him content at least 2 years. By then maybe his maturity catches up with his talent, maybe not. But DHall certainly shows it can happen.

The bold is where you and I differ. Some people mature, like DHall, some people don't. To me DJax has tattooed on his forehead, in big bright letters, "I'm NEVER gonna get it so my only contribution to the locker room is being destructive of morale."

Don't we want a locker room full of team players? If so, we don't want DJax.

[Kindoy]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Art Monk would slap the taste buds out of your mouth for even suggesting this.

Learn your history.

Apologies. I have an explanation but I doubt it makes any difference.

[sandtrapjack]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

Guys, I have a problem. I keep checking back here obsessively in hopes I see someone say we either signed DJ or he left Redskins Park. Blaahhhhh.

Ed Werder said on ESPN this afternoon that DJ is scheduled to arrive this evening and the first meeting will be over dinner with the rest of the meetings occurring tomorrow.