DaveThePanther2008

That's a cool name.

Yes, but Redskins was the top name. Many wanted the name to stay the same.

The Redskins name may not be something you like but it is the true name of the team. They named it for the right reasons and should have never been changed. The team has history with it and shouldn't have ever been changed. D. Synder had originally said he would never change the name but the WOKE crowd got to him and they changed it. There are so many team names that could face stupid but similar fates later on. Buccaneers and the Raiders were pirates and murders, the Chiefs fall into the same category as the Redskins. You could go on and on. Just makes no sense. It's a name and shouldn't be destroyed because a couple of whiny little bitches have nothing better to do than to get their panties in a wad and change things.

Seems like there is going to be a change in DC. They might be reverting back to the Redskins. I was never a fan of the move and sadly it was the few ruling the many. I hope they go back. Even though I can't stand the Redskins I hate the new name. I see Red and Gold they are the Redskins and always will be for me. Good Luck Washington I hope you do the right thing. NFL News: Commanders' president unveils team's plans for name change (msn.com)

IMO, right now his trade value is not very high. Canales will have 2024 to do what he can. I do believe if Young can't measure up (pun intended) Canales will find his own QB in the 2025 draft.

I remember the days when playing under center was the norm and shotgun was unusual. I think it would be a dramatic change for Young but they need to drill this over and over until it he's comfortable.

I may be wrong but OTAs is the first time Canales gets to work with this team. Any of you rules experts know about how much extra time new coaches have with their team. Seems to me that new coaches get a couple of extra days. Is that correct? If he only gets OTAs than Morgan is going to have to decide whether scheme or players is at fault and draft accordingly.

The "Superstar" coaching staff, IMO, had a huge impact on this. I think Reich, Thomas and Campen all had different philosophies that confused everyone. Add the injuries and you have a total mess. I think the scheme had more to do with the poor performance than anything else.

Most likely he would get the franchise tag. I don't see Minnesota just letting him walk without some sort of compensation. I agree if we were to trade for him for Burns. The only way is straight up. Best way to deal with it would be for both teams to sign and trade so we have our cap hit already identified.

Unless you are going to grab a sure fire good LT, I think you're right. Worse case we move Chistensen to LT and Icky to LG. OTAs will be interesting to see what Canales does with our offensive line.

People tend to forget that if you get a free agent in the same value as Burns you don't get that compensation. I believe that is how it works. It isn't automatic that you get the 3rd round compensation just because you let a starter go.

Letting Burns walk is about as dumb as paying him 30m. If we're only going to get a 3rd out of him than it's better to Tag him and hope his value improves during the season. Makes no sense to just let him walk. Sweat's a good player but I don't necessarily believe he's better. Burns with the right squad would show his worth. One you will be getting him on a long-term contract. Two as I said earlier there are many teams that value him more than the "Huddle" does. Burns tagged with any good DE makes them a formidable duo. Another reason why I think other teams would still be highly interested in Burns. Our offense did not put any of our opponents' offenses in passing mode. Remember we NEVER lead in the 4th Quarter. Teams aren't pressing to throw the ball. Keep running it and playing solid defense. Make Young march on 14 or 15 play drive. It NEVER happened. So, they run the ball. Hard to get sacks when the opponent is running the ball.

I get sick to my stomach watching Pacheco from KC. The guy runs so hard and is so beastly. He was a 7th rounder. I would love to grab a nasty like him in the 4th or 5th.

You and @mrcompletely11 continue to say the same thing over and over but can't or won't give your reasoning on any of the tags available. Tell me which tag you would use and why? It's tiring to see "Nobody is offering blah blah blah" and nothing substantial to back it up. Your take is purely speculation. There are several teams that would love to team Burns up with their DE. IMO Burn is the perfect Robin to anyone's Batman. His best year was when Reddick on his other side. You put his with a player like Crosby in LV or either one of the Bosa's. That's a good duo. The Lions have been mentioned several times has highly interested in Burns. Tag team him with Hutchinson and you got a nasty duo.

If we can address the WR position through Free Agency and grab some good talent. I'm done with the Chark type players too. Give me top tier WR and we should get Sanders if he falls to 33. I have seen a couple of sites that really like this guy. I, to be honest, am not very up on college players but if this guy is the real deal we definitely could use him. Our TE group has been terrible since Olsen left us.

Exactly what I was saying. If we Franchise tag him, we are stuck with negotiating with him and he's hell bent on getting 30 million and all we get is another year of half-ass performance. If we go Non-Exclusive Tag than we throw him out there and see what other teams are offering without losing him if we want to match their offer.

Exactly. If we outright Franchise Tag him than he can't negotiate with any team. If we use the Non-Exclusive Tag than if someone offers him a better deal than what we are giving him, we simple refuse and take the two picks. If they are offering him something similar to what we were offering, we match the offer and get him for the price we wanted in the first place. If no one offers him a deal than we are in the position to offer him a lower deal than we initially offered him. We lose nothing by going this route.

You may be right; you may be wrong. Either way if we are going to tag him this is the way to go. If no one offers him a contract than we are in the driver's seat.

I remember last season he was all in on Mingo. It's a bit too early to give up on him but Mingo needs to take some big steps forward before we can say Smitty nailed this one too. I do like Smitty's takes on most of these players.

I would use the Non-Exclusive Tag on Burns. Let him negotiate with other teams and if they make him an offer, we can either match it and keep him or refuse and get two 1st round picks for him. Win / Win for us. If another team thinks he's worth 2 first than they can offer him the 30 million he's asking for. If a team offers him basically what we are offering him, we can match the offer and we get him for what we were offering all along. Non-exclusive tag This is the most common tag used each offseason. Under the non-exclusive tag, the player is given a one-year deal based on an average of the top five salaries at the respective position over the last five years, or 120 percent of his previous salary, whichever is greater. So, it is cheaper than the exclusive franchise tag, but more expensive than the transition tag. However, the player is free to negotiate with other teams. Should the player sign an offer sheet from another NFL team, the player’s current team has the right to match the offer. If they do not, they receive two first-round draft picks as compensation when the player leaves for a new team.

I think the good thing is he's still an asset if we have to move him inside. It won't be a total waste of a pick. Plus it seems many believe Brady C. could handle the LT spot. 2024 will be a great time to figure things out. 2025 we can focus on upgrading QB or LT depending on how Young and Icky progress.

I've heard that before as well. That could also be because he's learning the position.

I think the question should be. Is he going to produce enough to warrant such a huge salary? I do believe some Huddlers are underestimating him. Especially if you consider that teams were running on us more than passing. Teams not having to fight in the 4th quarter makes it pretty easy for them to just run the ball. How I feel about it is this. We traded two of our most gifted athletes in CMC and Moore without much in return. That's on Fitterer. We are in a rebuild mode and young talent could help Morgan and Canales build the team in their image. Not to say Burns wouldn't be a good piece but if we received assets for him. I would jump at them as long as a first and a couple other assets came with it. I would not trade him unless the deal was in our favor. As you said many teams value him more than what we (Huddlers) do. We screwed the pooch on CMC and Moore. We basically gave CMC away and Moore is looking very much the same. Trade him for what he's truly worth or keep him. I see both sides.

How does a first round pick go from having a good rookie season with a lot of promise to a bust in one season? Is he just that bad? Or The Panthers had a terrible offensive line scheme? Not to mention the injuries to our interior line. I am hoping it is the latter and not the former. This will be his third season under his 4th regime. I don't know what Reich was trying to do but IMO there were far too many hands in the cookie jar, and it showed on the field. The most difficult part of this is Canales is going to have very little time to figure out which one it is. He'll have to look at tape of 2022 and 2023 and decide whether 2023 was a sophomore jinx or he'll be fine.

No, I never implied he would have to carry this offense. It's why I think we have to have a great offensive line to protect him. He was destined to fail last year that's for sure. Bad free agent signing and terrible draft picks didn't help him whatsoever. I am reserved on Canales and Morgan. I am hoping they have a plan and will implement it and get good players here whether through the draft or free agency.