First

*dropping legal seafood doggy bag next to poor broke blog*

*stupid blog*

I wun b 1st!

*Todd McShay's analysis broke the blog*

And last but not least, 4th is back. I stopped using 'floor' along time ago.....

WOW! I get to post in the post-post-registration world of the blog. This broken blog forced me to do work for 4 WHOLE hours today. I'm very upset at the broken blog.

I'm coming back.

picturing Homer Simpson asleep, drooling, at the blog control panel while it melts down...

We're going 3-2 in preseason. You can go ahead and write that down.

Hail!

picturing Homer Simpson asleep, drooling, at the blog control panel while it melts down...

Posted by: Nate in the PDX | April 7, 2008 4:22 PM

LMAO!

RC, the whole, "Mathis wouldn't be here under Gibbs" is, laughable, as TA pointed out, Gibbs brought back Fred Smoot. Whats the difference? Both guys had character issues, right?

So when Jasno writes:

"I was pretty uninspired overall by the Gibbs Era, save for two spurts, but I will say this for the man. Ain't no way Mathis gets in the building on his watch, not even for a workout. Not even to deliver the mail.

The Redskins may have had more players off their draft board last year for character issues than any club in the league. Gibbs blew it on Brandon Lloyd - and Vinny Cerrato, after all his years in San Fran, should have had the goods on that one - but otherwise proved that character and attitude mattered."

That's a 'broken record' slamming of the Skins?

When he writes:

"In other character-related news, former Skin CB Kenny Wright is in trouble with the law as well. Wright is a player Cerrato and Snyder were high on, team sources said, and wanted to sign early in the free agency period in 2006 (they were ultimately persuaded to wait, withhold a signing bonus and were able to get him on a 1 year, vet. Minimum deal)."

That sounds like a compliment to me. I think Wright is only mentioned here because 7) It's in context with the rest of the piece, and, $) He's a former Redskins player who some fans might have liked. Okay that second point is a 'reach' but you get what I mean.

Some people on this blog are queueing up to be offended by ANYthing Jasno posts. If he was slamming your team I could understand it, but he's not, you're just choosing to read it that way guys (and girls).

Posted by: Redcoat | April 7, 2008 4:20 PM

And t_e, I think you're wrong on this. It's your absolute right to 'look past' a player's character issues whenever it suits you, but you don't have the right to take other people to task if they call the Skins - or any other team - on it.

Too many athletes end up in bad places because people are prepared to do that for them. We let them down as well as ourselves when we do it.

RC, the whole, "Mathis wouldn't be here under Gibbs" is, laughable, as TA pointed out, Gibbs brought back Fred Smoot. Whats the difference? Both guys had character issues, right?

Posted by: Greg(Boston) | April 7, 2008 4:24 PM

I don't agree. There's a huge difference between 'lewd behavio(u)r' between consenting adults and (allegedly) punching out a pregnant woman Greg.

I would like to see JLC rectify these statements from the blog on Mathis:

"I've got no good explanation for it other than to say I am not surprised."

and

"Why on earth would the 'Skins sign Jerome Mathis?" . . . "heck if I know."

How can JLC have no idea why this move would be made, but still not be surprised by it? If he's not surprised by it, it means he was expecting it. That implies there is some logical explaination for the move that JLC was aware of. JLC saying he's "not surprised" by the move shows JLCs complete and utter bias against the skins. He was making a condescending remark solely for the purpose of being condescending. JLC has got something up his rear and its getting old.

Just kidding, I am dcsween. I just feel FREE ... its like not wearing underwear! Even though I'm both dcsween and not dcsween, I am not notguy.

Posted by: not dcsween | April 7, 2008 3:58 PM

Is this an admission or a not admission or not a not admission at all

But we knew and loved Smoot, and there were a LOT of dudes made to look not good in that love boat scandal (though he was the ringleader/event planner/meet-up coordinator), and most significantly that scandal didn't involve beating up a pregnant lady... so Smoot's signing had this redemption arc which made it so much more palatable...

RC,

I don't agree. There's a huge difference between 'lewd behavio(u)r' between consenting adults and (allegedly) punching out a pregnant woman Greg

There is an even BIGGER difference between getting CHARGED with a CRIME, and having the CHARGES DROPPED.

Get that "allegedly" out of there, and you've got a point. But its not going anywhere...she dropped the charges.

Get that "allegedly" out of there, and you've got a point. But its not going anywhere...she dropped the charges.

Posted by: Greg(Beantown) | April 7, 2008 4:32 PM

And moved out of the state first. How incredibly convenient for him. Like I said Greg, you guys can look past it if you want, that's your right. Just don't call anyone else out oif they choose not to.

And remember, Jasno's post was in response to emails he got - presumably from RI readers - so it's not unanimous in Skins-land either.

"...didn't involve ALLEGEDLY beating up a pregnant lady..."

RC, no one is looking past it, but I'll bet you a good amount of cash this guy doens't make it out of camp.

Read through the past few posts by Jason, and you'll find that the majority of them were written with a specific anti-Redskins tone to them. Anti-Redskin, as well as Anti-Snyder/Cerrato.

I hate the Redskins. Barno needs to come back and put me in my place.

Was she allegedly pregnant or allegedly he beat her up or allegedly she moved out of state?

I feel so free!

I definitely see some mild slaps in their Greg, but there are some strokes too.

Everyone here knows that Jasno is never going to be the leader of the Skins glee club, but I also don't think he's making shti up for effect either. I think he's a reporter (which makes him sceptical anyway) who covers a team with ownership/front office that he mostly doesn't have any empathy for - and nor should he.

But even with all that, he does give praise to Snyder when it's due. Or did all the goodwill he accumulated with his posts during the awful period post Sean Taylor's shooting and death run out already?

RC, all I know is that the day JLA did the hatchet job, Wednesday/Thursday of last week, Snyder was giving an interview to the Times. He's not making stuff up, but he's also not letting go of the past either. The Redskins have been pretty darn good the past 2 off seasons, but all he wants to do is talk about signing Jeff George/Bruce Smith, etc.

Not to mention that the team has a new coach, is putting in a new offensive system, has a number of players coming off injury. I'm thinking there should have been many more RELEVANT topics he could have pursued, than the one he did.

upcapped blog? Thall shall be a$$clown run amuck very soon.

Redcoat, JLC goes out of his way to criticize the team. He has been at odds with the franchise for the past year or so. they've locked him out and he no longer gets any "insider" info. he's pissed about it because it has severely limited his ability to be effective in his job as a journalist. If JLC has any hope of wanting to get "insider scoops" in the future, he'd better stop nitpicking the skins.

The fact that Snyder did his first interview in over 3 years with some random schlub from the times as opposed to JLC is very very telling. The times is more and more becoming a better place to get "new" information on our skins. If JLC isnt careful, he may find himself out of the job. He's never been the glee club president for the skins, but he's been mr. negativity for far to long. Its a shame because i really used to enjoy his blog and articles.

I don't come here for the Jasons blog anymore - I come here for the comments. The Links to other sites and user comments are far more current and insightful than anything Jasno writes.

Let's just agree to differ Greg. The fact that Snyder gave an interview to the Times is absolutely a shot across the WaPo's bows, but it's unlikely to have any impact on their coverage regardless - nor should it if they are printing what they believe are the facts.

I think it's also legitimate to note though that the Skins BURIED the release about Mathis, which you don't do if you're proud of the hire or even if you're ambivalent about it. I would suggest that the interview and the 'late' release were the first impact you will see from the new Director of PR. Expect to see plenty of 'news management' like that from now on.

The other difference btwn Smoot (who played here before) and Mathis is the conveniently overlooked and uncriticized factual observation that Sheriff Goodell is currently on a roll and (may) still be on his hysterical witchhunt ... i.e., the bit about drawing the ire of the powers that be in the league.

"... The fact that Snyder did his first interview in over 3 years with some random schlub from the times as opposed to JLC is very very telling. ..."

Posted by: Seth | April 7, 2008 4:59 PM

Not just a random schlub ... but the guy Jasno has called "Day Late Dave." Btwn Jasno and The Owner, be assured that the feelings are (and have for a while) been mutual.

The times is more and more becoming a better place to get "new" information on our skins.

Posted by: Seth | April 7, 2008 4:59 PM

The Times is more than happy to position itself as an extension of Redskins.com in order to get "one up" on the WaPo in their local market competition Seth. That doesn't mean you're going to get anything inherently valuable out of them except rehashed Skins PR releases.

Don't get me wrong, if I were running the Skins PR office I'd recommend that strategy too - that's why I hate PR.

Can we get off the JLaC bashing. I can only bash him but so long. Now I'm ready to get back to talking meats and potatoes...

Re: Mathis - I don't know why you guys don't think he'll stick here through the summer. If we signed a turd, it's ain't going be for the moment.

And t_e, I think you're wrong on this. It's your absolute right to 'look past' a player's character issues whenever it suits you, but you don't have the right to take other people to task if they call the Skins - or any other team - on it.

Posted by: Redcoat | April 7, 2008 4:24 PM

I don't understand what this refers to. My complaint against Jason is his hypocrisy. He praises St. Joe who hired a guy who'd pled guilty, but castigates Vinny who hired a guy who was never even prosecuted because the charges were dropped. The police didn't even have a case against him.

You can go on about "One was consensual" and "The woman moved out of state" but in this country there is a presumption of innocence. Smoot was guilty and Mathis was not.

Re: Mathis - I don't know why you guys don't think he'll stick here through the summer. If we signed a turd, it's ain't going be for the moment.

Posted by: 4th | April 7, 2008 5:12 PM

I don't think he'll be here through the summer because of his injury problems. One of the jokes in Houston was that he tried to run from the police but he pulled a hammie.

beep beep