The Curious Case of The "2000" Washington Redskins

[Skin'EmAll]

Credit to Originator & Commenter - "ChampionshiporBust and Jakuviuos from footballsfuture


They were heavily favored to be the 2000 NFC representative at Super Bowl XXXV.
Dan Snyder spent millions.....that team was talented, what happened?

ESPN.com - NFL/PREVIEW00 - Garber: 'Skins step into pressure cooker

quoted from Jakuvious --
The hype was a mixture of the fact that 1999 Brad Johnson was actually an effective pro-bowl level QB. Stephen Davis looked like the next big thing at RB. Larry Centers continued to be the best receiving FB in the NFL. Albert Connell and Michael Westbrook both had 1000+ yard playmaking seasons, with huge yard per catch totals, and both were young, so obviously they would build on their successful seasons. The '99 Redskins had the 2nd best scoring offense in football due to the above, along with a decent OL that had Chris Samuels coming in to solidify as by far the best offensive lineman in that year's draft. All they needed was a defense, and Snyder went very aggressive enticing aging vets to come and finish their careers together in Washington. You had Darrel Green, Deion Sanders, Dana Stubblefield, Bruce Smith, Marco Coleman, and Mark Carrier all as aging contributors, most added in either '99 or '00, to go along with the young talent of Shawn Barber, Lavar Arrington, Dan Wilkinson, Derek Smith, and Champ Bailey. And it worked! They allowed 108 fewer points in 2000 than they did in 1999. They went from 24th in scoring to 7th. They had built, in an aggressive offseason or two, a high quality defense.

Unfortunately, Brad Johnson proved to be who we all remember Brad Johnson to be, which was not a particularly good QB. Michael Westbrook got hurt. I'll be surprised if anyone actually remembers Albert Connell, but he quickly showed the bad sides of being an inconsistent big play threat with attitude problems and an unwillingness to be coached, as he maintained his high yards per catch...while catching 38% of passes thrown his way. Stephen Davis remained productive, but far less efficient behind an OL hurt by youth and injuries. Every bit of progress the defense made, the offense took back. Rising 17 ranks in scoring D is awesome, but now when you fall 22 in scoring O.
tl;dr, basically, the offense showed promise in '99, so they went all in on building the D, but the entirety of the offense's success in '99 was a mirage. Johnson, Westbrook, Connell, Tre' Johnson, all had career years they'd never get close to again. Even Stephen Davis never really had another year as good as that first one.

Thought this was a good read

 

[skinsdad62]

Credit to Originator & Commenter - "ChampionshiporBust and Jakuviuos from footballsfuture


They were heavily favored to be the 2000 NFC representative at Super Bowl XXXV.
Dan Snyder spent millions.....that team was talented, what happened?

ESPN.com - NFL/PREVIEW00 - Garber: 'Skins step into pressure cooker

View attachment 289844



quoted from Jakuvious --
The hype was a mixture of the fact that 1999 Brad Johnson was actually an effective pro-bowl level QB. Stephen Davis looked like the next big thing at RB. Larry Centers continued to be the best receiving FB in the NFL. Albert Connell and Michael Westbrook both had 1000+ yard playmaking seasons, with huge yard per catch totals, and both were young, so obviously they would build on their successful seasons. The '99 Redskins had the 2nd best scoring offense in football due to the above, along with a decent OL that had Chris Samuels coming in to solidify as by far the best offensive lineman in that year's draft. All they needed was a defense, and Snyder went very aggressive enticing aging vets to come and finish their careers together in Washington. You had Darrel Green, Deion Sanders, Dana Stubblefield, Bruce Smith, Marco Coleman, and Mark Carrier all as aging contributors, most added in either '99 or '00, to go along with the young talent of Shawn Barber, Lavar Arrington, Dan Wilkinson, Derek Smith, and Champ Bailey. And it worked! They allowed 108 fewer points in 2000 than they did in 1999. They went from 24th in scoring to 7th. They had built, in an aggressive offseason or two, a high quality defense.

Unfortunately, Brad Johnson proved to be who we all remember Brad Johnson to be, which was not a particularly good QB. Michael Westbrook got hurt. I'll be surprised if anyone actually remembers Albert Connell, but he quickly showed the bad sides of being an inconsistent big play threat with attitude problems and an unwillingness to be coached, as he maintained his high yards per catch...while catching 38% of passes thrown his way. Stephen Davis remained productive, but far less efficient behind an OL hurt by youth and injuries. Every bit of progress the defense made, the offense took back. Rising 17 ranks in scoring D is awesome, but now when you fall 22 in scoring O.
tl;dr, basically, the offense showed promise in '99, so they went all in on building the D, but the entirety of the offense's success in '99 was a mirage. Johnson, Westbrook, Connell, Tre' Johnson, all had career years they'd never get close to again. Even Stephen Davis never really had another year as good as that first one.

Thought this was a good read

Brad Johnson was good enough to win a Super Bowl the next season while Jeff George was a bust because he was a franchise qb

 

[Skin'EmAll]

yeah i remember Brad Johnson in McDonald's commercials and basically destroying defenses everywhere, kinda sad what happened with him.
But wow looking back, this roster was insane, they had champ bailey too

 

[Stymietee]

Brad Johnson was good enough to win a Super Bowl the next season while Jeff George was a bust because he was a franchise qb

The biggest problem with this take is an absence of perspective. Brad Johnson was fortunate enough to have landed in a place where things were done well enough to get them to a SB. Jeff George never had that opportunity, he just got blamed for no being the answer. I don't believe that you see Kirk Cousins as a bust and yet, both Trent Dilfer and Joe Flacco have won SB's. That said, both Johnson and George failed here in D.C. The question about perspective stands because their common failures were in Washington. Effect, not cause!

 

[skinsdad62]

Brad Johnson is the prior history to KC . We had the guy but he wasn’t sexy enough

 

[Stymietee]

Brad Johnson is the prior history to KC . We had the guy but he wasn’t sexy enough

No he wasn't good enough when here, and thus far, isn't good enough for the Vikings either. "Sexy" is the excuse that allows some to feel better about that truth, but it doesn't matter, there's enough evidence in the books now. C'mon, say it with me.. "Kirk Cousins is a decent person, a bit strange, but in as much as a QB goes, he's that tweener... good enough to give you stability and yet is totally dependent upon others to get him to greatness!"

Oh man, I just thought about something... he's a modern Brad Johnson. Perhaps there's a SB in his future too. ( I'm serious, no sarcasm intended)

 

[Sportster 72]

KC could be a modern Stafford. Most were saying the same about Stafford until this year.

Jeff George sucked donkey balls. He was living proof that it takes more than a strong arm to be a good QB.

 

[Skin'EmAll]

I must've been too young to see any different but in my book but Brad Johnson was a hero, haha. He had that neck injury or something, i thought that slowed him down.
Oh man Stafford vs. Cousins is a good debate

 

[skinsdad62]

Stafford went to a team Goff got to a super bowl

KC went to a team that got its ass beat down in the NFC title game after lucking out the week prior

Put a team around a stafford or KC and they can win .

Ask them to carry a team and you get the Detroit Lions

KC ‘s season last year with the vikes would put this urine sample of a team in the playoffs

 

[Stymietee]

I must've been too young to see any different but in my book but Brad Johnson was a hero, haha. He had that neck injury or something, i thought that slowed him down.
Oh man Stafford vs. Cousins is a good debate

If I had to compare Kirk to Stafford, I couldn't because Kirk doesn't quite measure up. Conversely, comparing him to that next level down, say a Jimmy G type, I couldn't do either because Jimmy doesn't quite measure up to Kirk. So, here's what I propose,... wedge Kirk in between the two and give him a category all his own. In a previous post, I labeled him a "tweener" and that seems well suited for him... not quite Stafford, a bit more than Jimmy G.

 

[Rowdy]

Stafford went to a team Goff got to a super bowl

KC went to a team that got its ass beat down in the NFC title game after lucking out the week prior

Put a team around a stafford or KC and they can win .

Ask them to carry a team and you get the Detroit Lions

KC ‘s season last year with the vikes would put this urine sample of a team in the playoffs

Speaking of ole cousin Kirk, doesn’t sound like he’s willing to take a pay cut to stay with KOC

 

[Sportster 72]

Speaking of ole cousin Kirk, doesn’t sound like he’s willing to take a pay cut to stay with KOC

One report so far. If not then I think it is his mistake.

BTW I think a pay cut at this point in his career is $35 million. That is his contract this year but he counts $45 against the cap.

 

[Niner Outlaw]

Speaking of ole cousin Kirk, doesn’t sound like he’s willing to take a pay cut to stay with KOC

One report so far. If not then I think it is his mistake.

BTW I think a pay cut at this point in his career is $35 million. That is his contract this year but he counts $45 against the cap.

KC has no incentive to take a paycut b/c his 35M salary is already guaranteed, so the team can't cut him. That means Minny cannot cut him b/c he’d still cost 45M on their cap whether he’s on the team or not (35M salary and 10M prorated bonus).

The Vikings only realistic options are:
(a) let him play out his lame duck year;
(b) extend and redo his contract to keep him for the future; or
(c) trade him (creating 25M in cap space).

 

[Skin'EmAll]

If I had to compare Kirk to Stafford, I couldn't because Kirk doesn't quite measure up. Conversely, comparing him to that next level down, say a Jimmy G type, I couldn't do either because Jimmy doesn't quite measure up to Kirk. So, here's what I propose,... wedge Kirk in between the two and give him a category all his own. In a previous post, I labeled him a "tweener" and that seems well suited for him... not quite Stafford, a bit more than Jimmy G.

Its tough for me to agree Stafford and Cousins aren't in the same tier. Stafford is a huge numbers guy but didn't do jack even with a generational talent at WR.
Cousins is a very similar case.
I believe Cousins not only would've won the superbowl but would've looked much better than Stafford getting there. Stafford got exposed, for being what he's always been. A great player who can't win unless a defense carries him.
I can't really tell the difference between them.

 

[chillerdab]

KC has no incentive to take a paycut b/c his 35M salary is already guaranteed, so the team can't cut him. That means Minny cannot cut him b/c he’d still cost 45M on their cap whether he’s on the team or not (35M salary and 10M prorated bonus).

The Vikings only realistic options are:
(a) let him play out his lame duck year;
(b) extend and redo his contract to keep him for the future; or
(c) trade him (creating 25M in cap space).

He could restructure his own contract voluntarily so that the vikings could field a more competitive team.

He hasnt shown a willingness to do that during the course of his career ever though, so its doubtful that he’d start that now.

 

[Niner Outlaw]

He could restructure his own contract voluntarily so that the vikings could field a more competitive team.

He hasnt shown a willingness to do that during the course of his career ever though, so its doubtful that he’d start that now.

Sort of. He could voluntarily take less money, but that's a pay cut, not a restructure. He ain't gonna do that, nor should he imo.

And b/c he's in the last year of his deal, he can't do a traditional restructured contract since there are no future years to push some of the 2022 money into.

It's possible that the Vikings could add "fake" years onto his deal (ala Brady and Brees)--but would the Vikings rather take a 45M cap hit now and be free and clear in the future, or would they rather take a 25M cap hit now and a 20-25M cap hit next year when Cousins isn't even on the team? (as TB and NO are finding out, that is the unavoidable result of fake years)

 

[chillerdab]

Sort of. He could voluntarily take less money, but that's a pay cut, not a restructure. He ain't gonna do that, nor should he imo.

And b/c he's in the last year of his deal, he can't do a traditional restructured contract since there are no future years to push some of the 2022 money into.

It's possible that the Vikings could add "fake" years onto his deal (ala Brady and Brees)--but would the Vikings rather take a 45M cap hit now and be free and clear in the future, or would they rather take a 25M cap hit now and a 20-25M cap hit next year when Cousins isn't even on the team? (as TB and NO are finding out, that is the unavoidable result of fake years)

I believe this is only half true. I believe that KC could also spread hos money out over several years to lessen tge cap penalty this year, and also make up the different with some kind of off-schedule payment structure that doesnt factor in to the cap.

I am not 100% confident of this however. I do recall some football player making just this sort of deal in the not-so-distant past, but I cant recall who it was.

In any case, there are definitely things that KC and the vikings could do to lessen KC’s cap hit.

 

[Stymietee]

Its tough for me to agree Stafford and Cousins aren't in the same tier. Stafford is a huge numbers guy but didn't do jack even with a generational talent at WR.
Cousins is a very similar case.
I believe Cousins not only would've won the superbowl but would've looked much better than Stafford getting there. Stafford got exposed, for being what he's always been. A great player who can't win unless a defense carries him.
I can't really tell the difference between them.

Ok, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Breed]

Its tough for me to agree Stafford and Cousins aren't in the same tier. Stafford is a huge numbers guy but didn't do jack even with a generational talent at WR.
Cousins is a very similar case.
I believe Cousins not only would've won the superbowl but would've looked much better than Stafford getting there. Stafford got exposed, for being what he's always been. A great player who can't win unless a defense carries him.
I can't really tell the difference between them.

Dude. Just........dude.

 

[Breed]

Credit to Originator & Commenter - "ChampionshiporBust and Jakuviuos from footballsfuture


They were heavily favored to be the 2000 NFC representative at Super Bowl XXXV.
Dan Snyder spent millions.....that team was talented, what happened?

ESPN.com - NFL/PREVIEW00 - Garber: 'Skins step into pressure cooker

View attachment 289844



quoted from Jakuvious --
The hype was a mixture of the fact that 1999 Brad Johnson was actually an effective pro-bowl level QB. Stephen Davis looked like the next big thing at RB. Larry Centers continued to be the best receiving FB in the NFL. Albert Connell and Michael Westbrook both had 1000+ yard playmaking seasons, with huge yard per catch totals, and both were young, so obviously they would build on their successful seasons. The '99 Redskins had the 2nd best scoring offense in football due to the above, along with a decent OL that had Chris Samuels coming in to solidify as by far the best offensive lineman in that year's draft. All they needed was a defense, and Snyder went very aggressive enticing aging vets to come and finish their careers together in Washington. You had Darrel Green, Deion Sanders, Dana Stubblefield, Bruce Smith, Marco Coleman, and Mark Carrier all as aging contributors, most added in either '99 or '00, to go along with the young talent of Shawn Barber, Lavar Arrington, Dan Wilkinson, Derek Smith, and Champ Bailey. And it worked! They allowed 108 fewer points in 2000 than they did in 1999. They went from 24th in scoring to 7th. They had built, in an aggressive offseason or two, a high quality defense.

Unfortunately, Brad Johnson proved to be who we all remember Brad Johnson to be, which was not a particularly good QB. Michael Westbrook got hurt. I'll be surprised if anyone actually remembers Albert Connell, but he quickly showed the bad sides of being an inconsistent big play threat with attitude problems and an unwillingness to be coached, as he maintained his high yards per catch...while catching 38% of passes thrown his way. Stephen Davis remained productive, but far less efficient behind an OL hurt by youth and injuries. Every bit of progress the defense made, the offense took back. Rising 17 ranks in scoring D is awesome, but now when you fall 22 in scoring O.
tl;dr, basically, the offense showed promise in '99, so they went all in on building the D, but the entirety of the offense's success in '99 was a mirage. Johnson, Westbrook, Connell, Tre' Johnson, all had career years they'd never get close to again. Even Stephen Davis never really had another year as good as that first one.

Thought this was a good read

The 1999 offense was a mirage. Westbrook played 8 seasons and he only played 16 games twice. 1999 was far n away his only season where he had a half ass decent year.

Albert 'Sticky Fingers' Connell was totally counterfeit and 99 was far away the only season where he was a half ass decent WR.

Stephen Davis had a couple more good seasons for the Skins and at least 1 good season for the Panthers, but never came close to his ypa or his TD toal for 1999.

Brad Johnson was an OK QB, but he did a couple things in 99 that he never did before or after in his career. It was the only time he threw for 4000+ yards and he had the highest ypa of his career that year. He had his 2nd highest TD passes in his career and it was the first time he had a 90 QB rating. He would have a 90 rating or better one time in his career.

All 4 of the players mentioned above had significantly worse seasons in 2000 compared to 1999.

Larry Centers was the only offensive player mentioned that had a better year in 2000 than he had in 1999.

That team 's best shot at a SB appearance or title was 1999, but there were 3 plays that were huge in the loss to TB in the postseason. All of which went TB's way.

Play #1) Johnson terribly under-threw Connell who was open and John Lynch picked the ball. The Bucs offense turned the INT into their 1st TD of the game. If Johnson hits Connell in stride he scores giving the Skins a 20-0 lead with about 5 minutes left in the 3rd quarter.

Play #2)) On TB's go ahead TD drive they had a 3rd n 3 or 4 around the Skins 25 yd ln. Shawn Barber stripped sacked TB's QB Shaun King for about a 5 yd loss or so. Unfortunately for the Skins Warrick Dunn scooped up the ball n gained 7 or 8 years for a 1st dn. The Bucs scored the go head TD 5 or 6 plays later.

Play #3) The botched snap by Dan Turk on the potential game winning FG. That led to the rise of Daniel Snyder sticking his nose in Redskins player personnel matters as he personally fired Dan Turk. And while it would take 21 years or whatever that was the day the Washington Redskins died.