Great Article that sums up the Redskins

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

Couple of issues. One, what is she talking about when she says that Hanyesworth and Hall are not more important to the team than Fletcher? No shit. The article's thesis is that the Redskins hurt themselves by pursing big name free agents, but last time I checked all three of those guys were high profile free agent signings. Does she realize that we did not draft Fletcher? Does she also not realize that Haynesworth has been worth every penny so far? Is she saying that our free agent signings have been bad, except when they've been good? Because that's pretty goddamned dumb.

Second, the best offensive linemen in the league are not searching for loose change, they are paid as highly as anyone except a handfull of future HOF QB's. Remember a mediocre guard like Dockery getting 50 million a few seasons ago? This is the kind of throw away comment that undermines her entire argument by making it look like she doesn't have a good understanding of the NFL.

Third, her analysis of Campbell is at best inchoate. If her point was that Campbell is probably about as good as Cutler and Sanchez and that we are better off having him and Orakpo than either of those guys, fine, I agree. But she seems to be saying the Redskins should be resigning him. OK, that's not a position that is widely held (as far as I know we weren't "outbid' for Cutler, Josh McDaniels didn't think Campbell was someone he could work with) but if that is what you think fine. But you have to do more than trot out his mediocre QB rating and talk about how hard he tries.

We all know the Redskins have big problems, but that's no excuse for printing spaghetti noodle logic and outright falsehood in a newspaper.

To her "finer" points in the article, I agree with you for sure. Although her overall assessment of the importance of having the lesser paid yet harder working nucleus type players shouldn't be understated. She's dead on there. Look at the Pittsburgh, Indy, and NE's of the world. There's a reason those teams can maximize talent like no other. Guys buy in to a locker room. Guys take pay-cuts to play for the Patriots. Some teams just know how to win. Other teams just know how to land talent. The two don't necessarily go hand in hand.

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by GMScud

To her "finer" points in the article, I agree with you for sure. Although her overall assessment of the importance of having the lesser paid yet harder working nucleus type players shouldn't be understated. She's dead on there. Look at the Pittsburgh, Indy, and NE's of the world. There's a reason those teams can maximize talent like no other. Guys buy in to a locker room. Guys take pay-cuts to play for the Patriots. Some teams just know how to win. Other teams just know how to land talent. The two don't necessarily go hand in hand.

Well, I mean, yeah, we know. We all know. Columnists and message boards have been saying exactly this for years. Anytime the Redskins come up anywhere, from a bar to ESPN, people say exactly that. So when Sally, who really bugs me, writes an article that is half what everybody already knows to be true and have been saying for years, and half nonsense, I'm calling her on the nonsense.