Commanders Post at The Warpath  

Home | Forums | Donate | Shop




Go Back   Commanders Post at The Warpath > Commanders Football > Locker Room Main Forum

Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion


Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)

Locker Room Main Forum


 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 11-16-2011, 03:10 PM   #20
GTripp0012
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 37
Posts: 15,994
Re: Smoot Lays the Smack Down (Redskins vs. Dolphins)

Quote:
Originally Posted by NC_Skins View Post
Newsflash to all you kids bitching about our two shitty QBs:


1) You can't force Free Agents to Washington so stop with the Vince Young(and others) talk.


2) Who's to say Hasslebeck, Bulger, Jackson or any other crappy QB you all manage to name would do any better than Rex or Beck?

3) Speaking of Hasslebeck, why would you sign a 36 year old QB to a 3 year contract worth about 8 mil per season with no rookie in the stable?


Like I've said before, you can't turn shit into sugar so stop acting like Shanny had all these great options at the QB spot. He didn't. Had he brought in any of those guys you all mentioned and they played shitty, you'd be bitching about that too.

Yes we have god awful talent at the QB spot right now, but lets see the pieces we have and are building on. We aren't going to be competitive until about 2013 to be honest. I'm going to chalk up 2012 as a learning curve for whatever rookie QB we bring in.
You are missing the point by a lot.

The argument that the Redskins were handcuffed to Rex Grossman and John Beck this season must die. It must die right now. It's an irrational, apologetic argument. Look around. We certainly could have kept three QBs on the active roster.

One of the biggest failures of the 2010 season was that the Redskins didn't go into the year with a long-term development option at QB, and ended up wasting the last three games of the season. At least, once you acquired McNabb, those roster spots seem frivolous. But he's a guy that gets hurt all the time, it certainly would have seemed prudent to bring in a long term option with potential to play if when the season is lost. That's what rebuilding is.

But to enter 2011 with the same quarterback situation minus McNabb isn't rational. It was pure arrogance. You must understand: the downside to the failure of those two quarterbacks was enormous. It means a totally wasted season on offense. But the risk of failure seemed highly likely.

The argument that the Redskins were obligated to already have their long-term franchise QB by now is a strawman. No one is saying the Redskins are worse off long term because they don't have their quarterback right now. They are worse off because the last two seasons would appear to be a total waste of my time and of your time. And so rationally, a new direction would seem to be beneficial for the franchise.

I think your anger is misdirected here. The people that want to hold Shanahan accountable have not run the Redskins into the ground. Mike Shanahan has.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:56 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.
Page generated in 3.28895 seconds with 11 queries