Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Doughty's Agent Says Skins Still Interested

Jason Reid reports:

Although the Redskins declined to make a tender offer to safety Reed Doughty, they still are interested in bringing him back for the 2009 season, Doughty's agent said tonight.

"The Redskins have made it clear to us that they want Reed," said Doughty's agent, David Butz. "They made a business decision, Reed understands that, and it's not contentious with the Skins at all.

"Reed really likes it with the Redskins. All things being equal, we can easily see him going back there. In the meantime, we have to do our job and see what's available, what the other options are."

A restricted free agent, Doughty began the 2008 season as the starting strong safety. He played in only four games, however, because of a nerve problem in his back that required surgery, and finished the season on injured reserve.

In order to retain Doughty's rights, the Redskins were required to make a tender offer of a little more than $1 million. The Redskins extended a one-year contract proposal to Butz for less than the tender amount, so Doughty will become an unrestricted free agent when the market opens Friday.

Doughty has fully recovered from surgery and is eager to put last season behind him, Butz said. "You can't judge him on his game film from last year because he was hurt," Butz said. "He's not coming back at the same level he was last year. He's coming back at a higher level."

By Cindy Boren  |  February 23, 2009; 9:10 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Skins Like Canty ... and Other Free-Agent Buzz
Next: Samuels Agrees to Restructured Deal

Comments

First

Posted by: jgr007 | February 23, 2009 9:21 PM | Report abuse

Raiders just released starting OT Kawayme Harris. ....

good fit in DC?

Posted by: thehogs | February 23, 2009 9:25 PM | Report abuse

no chance his agent is THE david butz right?

Posted by: chrislarry | February 23, 2009 9:34 PM | Report abuse

no chance his agent is THE david butz right?

Posted by: chrislarry | February 23, 2009 9:34 PM

I'm sure that his wife, mother, children all regard him as THE David Butz.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 23, 2009 9:45 PM | Report abuse

Here's why you bring back Taylor. You paid 8 million dollars and two draft picks for him. I would be on board if he played 16 games with those numbers, but you have to figure that last year's numbers were a mirage.

I think he'll have a better year.

I like the Canty move, but I'm sure if they sign him, we'll say we shouldn't have done that either.

Posted by: rickyroge | February 23, 2009 9:51 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, even JLC is right about that. Why in the world pay taylor 8mil?

Posted by: kdjsgreen | February 23, 2009 8:16 PM

Because he has put in his time in the league and one bad season shouldn't paint a fotball player's overall qaulity......

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 9:53 PM | Report abuse

You mean THE DButz55 whose always looking to us nerds and geeks for a good place to eat?

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Kwame Harris is as bad or worse than Jon Jansen and Jason Fabini currently are.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 23, 2009 9:56 PM | Report abuse

I'd rather get ANt Weaver then Canty. He is a true DE......

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Kwame Harris is similar to another Kwame that played in Washington.

Last name Brown. Harris only started 16 games TWICE in his 6 year carrer....

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 10:00 PM | Report abuse

We can get HAynesworth on the cheap. I highly doubt he will make over 8 Mil a year on average. No one is chasing him.........

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 10:02 PM | Report abuse

Because he has put in his time in the league and one bad season shouldn't paint a fotball player's overall qaulity......

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 9:53 PM
===========================================
Yep. And Bruce Smith is in the HOF. But there's no reason for the Redskins to keep making the same mistake. Over and over. Again, just like the time before, etc.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | February 23, 2009 10:08 PM | Report abuse

http://was.scout.com/2/841569.html

Wow. I actually don't think Tandler has his numbers right. He is going even more negative than JLaC as far as Cap Issues and free agency for the skins......

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 10:12 PM | Report abuse

Hey - BSmith wasn't 'that' bad. He didn't lose us any games, but he was in his last fading years.

I don't think he signed with us until he was 36 and he played until he was 40, so I can't say this is the same situation.......

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 10:14 PM | Report abuse

"I'd like to hear psps23 explain how keeping Jason Taylor on the payroll @ $8 million is a good thing again.

As far as I can tell, the rationale is this keeps DannyVinnie from doing something stupid in free agency, so that next year they can shock the world with their free agency genius (or genii, depending on how you want to label the DannyVinnie for verbalization porpoises).
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya"

I'll give it a shot. The basic principle behind it is the Redskins only need the cap space if they're going to smartly spend the money in a positive manner for the future.

Earlier on this post, somebody suggested signing Canty and re-signing Evans while letting Taylor and Daniels go free. Keep in mind 2 things: (1) Canty's career high in sacks is 3.5, which happens to be Jason Taylor's career low (outside of his rookie year), and (2) JLC is reporting that Canty could receive offers in the range of $8 million a year.

Now I ask you, is this really an upgrade? I say, emphatically, no. This is not an upgrade. All this signing would be is an attempt to settle with something less because this team was disappointed with Jason Taylor. It would NOT make this defense better than it was last year. Now maybe this defense wouldn't be worse than it was last year (after all, Jason Taylor did only have 3.5 sacks), but instead of expecting similar results for one more year (as would be the case with Taylor), we could expect these results for the next 5 years or so (whatever the length of Canty's contract). Add in the suggestion that Canty's contract could average around $8 million (Jason Taylor is on the books for 8.5) and you're not saving ANY money for the EXACT same production, only for a much longer time.

continues...

Posted by: psps23 | February 23, 2009 10:21 PM | Report abuse

Now for the other side. Taking a look at the Redskins situation right now, I see a mystery team. This team is unsure of where it will be 2 years from now. The foundation for the future (specifically speaking about the QB situation) isn't set right now. The Redskins don't have a good vision of what they think this team will look like 2, 3, or 4 years down the road. Until the Redskins have that vision (or plan) they CANNOT commit money long-term for questionable talents.

I get the impression that the consensus up here is that this team needs to rebuild. One of the primary things to consider when rebuilding is a timetable for when you feel you can compete again. With an aging roster, only 4 draft picks, and uncertainty at the most crucial position on the field (QB), the Redskins have little idea of when this will be. For this reason, the smart move is to have short-term contracts. Once the young foundation proves they're worthy of building around, that's when you spend the money to get a continuous roster around them. If you don't have that proven foundation, you run the risk of continually having an unbalanced team. That's what has plagued this team for the past decade. When our offensive line was in its prime (around 2005-2006), our QB position was under the guidance of a far-past-his-prime Mark Brunell. When the defense was at its best (last season), the offense was struggling with inconsistency due to age/talent issues. When the running game has been on fire, the passing game has been far behind. The idea is to get all of that in sync at one point in time.

That's why I view it as a good thing if Taylor comes back. This allows:

(1) The Skins the best shot at being competitive this year.

(2) The Skins the best flexibility going into next season, when they'll have to decide on the future of their franchise.

continues...

Posted by: psps23 | February 23, 2009 10:22 PM | Report abuse

Fine, 4th, but doesn't that put you closer into the camp² of people who say don't bring Taylor back at anywhere close to his current salary?

(²Smell the fire, it's warm by the fire. Maybe we'll even break out the marshmallows!)
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | February 23, 2009 10:23 PM | Report abuse

The redskins interested in #37 Doughty? Say it isn't so, better yet, what player are they're not interested in? What a bunch of idiots!! As the days turn into months , and the months into years, the more I hate Danny Boy and his Midget Vinny the Jackass!!

Posted by: joe12341 | February 23, 2009 10:23 PM | Report abuse

continued...

If Jason Campbell proves he IS worth it, that means he'll have played well and will likely need big dollars in order to stay. Having the cap space provided by Jason Taylor's expiring contract will be a positive in this scenario. On top of that, this team will need more cap space regardless of Campbell's situation, because they will have a larger collection of draft picks AND Carlos Rogers' contract will be up.

If Campbell proves he is NOT worth it, then this team will likely be a few years away from contending anyway because they'll need to find another QB. In that scenario, what you don't want is a bunch of guys under contract that are entering their prime. All that will do is lead to another unbalanced team that is just good enough in certain aspects to tease the fanbase into considering playoff contention, but never good enough to consistently vie for a title. Then, when the hypothetical next QB is ready a few years down the road, the other guys will be aging and have large cap numbers, not unlike what we see now.

To me, in both cases, the smart thing to do is to keep Jason Taylor and Shawn Springs under contract for one more year, then plan on having space after this season. At that time, they'll have a better idea as to what their biggest needs are. They'll know if they have to employ a full-blown youth movement, or whether they have to find talent that matches up with Campbell in terms of the timing of hitting their prime. They'll also have a much better idea as to whether guys like Devin Thomas, Malcolm Kelly, and Fred Davis can be relied upon to be the primary playmakers (something we force ourselves to consider right now, but in reality have no idea whether or not it's true).

Basically, Jason Taylor provides the Redskins the flexibility to move in a number of different directions in the offseason of 2010. Signing mediocre free agents long term right now severely limits that flexibility. Until the Redskins sign a QB of the future long-term (whether it's Campbell or not), they have to keep their options open.

Posted by: psps23 | February 23, 2009 10:24 PM | Report abuse

Possible Bad Newz:

STRONG WORKOUT COULD PUSH CURRY TO THE TOP OF THE DRAFT
Posted by Mike Florio on February 23, 2009, 9:38 p.m.
With a strong showing at the Scouting Combine on Monday, Wake Forest linebacker Aaron Curry could be positioning himself to become the first overall pick in the 2009 draft.

Curry’s performance drew constant raves from the NFL Network crew. Given the questions surrounding quarterback Matt Stafford, who opted not to work out at the Combine, and left tackle Andre Smith, who might now be had by the Lions at the top of round two, Frank Tadych of NFL.com points out that Curry could indeed be the safest pick in the draft.

The possibility of being selected by Detroit added to Curry’s motivation.

“Just to know that they’re considering taking a linebacker No. 1 overall . . . just that whole thought process is amazing,” Curry said. “I came out here today with that in the back of my head.

“It did motivate me to know that if I put on a good enough show, maybe they may feel like they could build a team around a linebacker. Add me with Ernie Sims, and maybe we could make some big plays.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not good at all........

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 10:25 PM | Report abuse

We're going to get younger by remaining older, psps23?

Yoda like, understand you I do.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | February 23, 2009 10:29 PM | Report abuse

I always give full disclosure.

I did want them to bring him back at a lessor amount. Between $4-6Mil........

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 10:33 PM | Report abuse

Basically, Jason Taylor provides the Redskins the flexibility to move in a number of different directions in the offseason of 2010. Signing mediocre free agents long term right now severely limits that flexibility.
Posted by: psps23 | February 23, 2009 10:24 PM
=============================================
Signing some undrafted free agent out of college provides the same flexibility at less cost, and with the prayer of a hope that the roster spot is being used on a player who might be part of the team's future.

Keeping J.T. at his current salary is just saying: this keeps our F.O. from being even stupider!

Possibly true, but still not a good reason to do it.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | February 23, 2009 10:34 PM | Report abuse

Thunder,

As much as you and some of the other RI bloggers would be satisfied for a rebuilding/losing season, Dan Snyder cannot succumb to such. He would rather go 8-8 with the chance that Jason Taylor picks up double digit sacks from out of position than 8-8 with Tony Banks as his qb.

Posted by: bangkokben | February 23, 2009 10:45 PM | Report abuse

no chance his agent is THE david butz right?

Posted by: chrislarry | February 23, 2009 9:34 PM
--------------------

It's Dave Butz's (#65) son. He works for Sportstars Inc. a huge agency.

Posted by: dkidwell61 | February 23, 2009 10:52 PM | Report abuse

Dan Snyder continues to suckcum, but that doesn't mean we can't point and laugh at him.

What's the word for schadenfreude, when the delight in the misfortunes of others is just you looking in the mirror?

Shirley, there's a long word for that...
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | February 23, 2009 10:56 PM | Report abuse

We can get HAynesworth on the cheap. I highly doubt he will make over 8 Mil a year on average. No one is chasing him.........

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 23, 2009 10:02 PM |
---------------------
Where do you get your facts??? Or do you!!!!??? There are several teams lining up for Haynesworth and he is looking to becoming the top paid defensive lineman in the league!!
$8.5 million is not going to get him!!! To think so is stupidity!!

Posted by: dkidwell61 | February 23, 2009 10:57 PM | Report abuse

"Signing some undrafted free agent out of college provides the same flexibility at less cost, and with the prayer of a hope that the roster spot is being used on a player who might be part of the team's future.

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya"

That's true, but that doesn't give Campbell the best resources to prove he can get it done next season. If this team is losing next year, Campbell will most likely not get extended, regardless of the reason behind it. Cutting Jason Taylor in favor of undrafted free agents is stacking the deck against Jason Campbell.

Posted by: psps23 | February 23, 2009 10:59 PM | Report abuse

"We're going to get younger by remaining older, psps23?"

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya

Precisely. Keeping Jason Taylor keeps us older for one year while ensuring youth 2-3 years from now; cutting him and signing an in-his-prime free agent ensures that we'll be younger now, but older 2-3 years from now.

To me, the "cut Jason Taylor" mentality is much more short-term thinking than long term.

Posted by: psps23 | February 23, 2009 11:05 PM | Report abuse

Cutting Jason Taylor in favor of undrafted free agents is stacking the deck against Jason Campbell.

Posted by: psps23 | February 23, 2009 10:59 PM
==========================================
I can't agree with that.

The best way to help Jason Campbell next year is to put a better offensive line in front of him.

I don't see bringing back J.T. at his current salary as helping in this effort.

BTW, I'm reminded of a song:

"You'll get pie in the sky when you die." - Joe Hill
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | February 23, 2009 11:39 PM | Report abuse

Glad that they picked Manuel White Jr. while Canty was still on the draft board. Then again, I guess Vinny didn't have any Madden XBOX player ratings to judge him by yet.

Posted by: shasta_mcnasty | February 23, 2009 11:48 PM | Report abuse

That's it for me, this R.I. insanity has to go to work tomorrow.

But I think I saw someone earlier asking about the 25 reps.

Matt McGuire's NFL Draft blog
Posted Feb. 21, 2009

Don't Stress the Press

It is a very common thing for us as draftniks to overanalyze the draft process.

We see a wide receiver drop an easy pass, and we might drop him on our big board from 78 to 83. A great 40 time even when expected can increase your draft stock on message boards.

I think when it comes to the bench press, we really start to nitpick and overanalyze what is going on.

Michael Oher puts up 21 and Eugene Monroe puts up 23 - not impressive in our eyes. Meanwhile, Jason Smith kills the bench press with 33 reps, and all of a sudden he is the top tackle in the draft in your eyes.

However, last year, a rookie should have been elected to the All-Pro team despite only putting up 24 reps on the bench press in Indianapolis at the Combine.

His name is Ryan Clady. Clady dominated in the NFL last season because of his elite feet, hand use, flexibility, fluid hips, awareness and great size. He was strong enough to only give up half a sack against the likes of very good pass-rushers in Gaines Adams, John Abraham, Jerry Porter, Calvin Pace and Julius Peppers.


~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | February 23, 2009 11:51 PM | Report abuse

This blog has become overly negative and bashing on everything.

Didn't anybody read the Secret?

Posted by: thehogs | February 24, 2009 1:03 AM | Report abuse

No one has seen Kwame Harris play. That includes his teammates. Guys is about as effective in stopping a pass rush as a yard marker. Though yard markers don't commit false starts or holding penalties, so I guess the yard marker is better.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | February 24, 2009 1:45 AM | Report abuse

f the secret.....


thanks dkidwell61 for clearing that up. #65 was the man!

Posted by: chrislarry | February 24, 2009 1:47 AM | Report abuse

+++Draft a rt at 13 and play Fred 'Alge Crumpler,jr.' Davis alongside him and you have two young starters on one side of the line--this is a no-brainer.

Posted by: MistaMoe +++

Genius .Add to your no-brainer list Jason Campbell who will be knocked silly from all the sacks he'll suffer from your devious plan to get Colt on the field.

Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 2:39 AM | Report abuse

+++Because he has put in his time in the league and one bad season shouldn't paint a fotball player's overall qaulity......

Posted by: 4thFloor | +++

Sorry, don't want no $8 million doller merit badge gong to The Dancer. Give him a Rolex and a pat on the azz.

Taylor: Too old, too light, too much to spend.

Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 2:44 AM | Report abuse

If these idiots resturcture a bunch of contracts for guys who will be washed up and still big salary cap hits, then they can kiss my a$$.

They have a chance to clear a bunch of salary by just cutting some players.

Griff did not play very much last year, Springs played less. The defense was still ranked 4th. Taylor is not going to help this team this year get rid of his a$$. If they are going to keep him don't restructure his contract so that two years from now he is still costing you money.

There are some good young players out there, and there is nothing wrong with having some extra salary cap space in case of an emergency.

Cut Springs, Griff and definately Taylor the defense will not be any worse for it, as these guys contributed very little last year anyway.

The fact that Jansen is still a 6mil cap hit and he can't play, should show you that restructuring contracts to get under the cap is STUPID.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 6:45 AM | Report abuse

This is from JLC last post. Can some please explain this to me? He blast the team for old O Lineman and say they refuse to get younger than make this suggest. Hell no they shouldn't go after a 31 year old lineman.

"Tauscher has been a very good right tackle for the Packers for a long time, and is recovering from anterior cruciate ligament surgery. (He will ready for training camp, according to his agent, Neil Cornrich, and, while at 31 he's on the older side, he would be an upgrade if healthy.)"

JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | February 24, 2009 7:37 AM | Report abuse

JM220,

JLC is a tool who pushes his agenda at all cost, even when it makes him sound hypacritical.

If they were to sign a different 31 year old O-Linemen they would be stupid, but since JLC likes this guy this would be a great move.

Whats even worse is that if they signed this guy and he sucked or got hurt JLC would bash them for it.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 7:54 AM | Report abuse

'...If these idiots resturcture a bunch of contracts for guys who will be washed up and still big salary cap hits...'

No greater truth than this when it comes to the redskins Method of Sal Cap Misoperations.

It is also why avoiding FA might be a good idea: not acquiring big contracts and shedding bad ones written for guys at the end of their days is a good way to clear the roster of a bunch of players leftover from the days of Gibbs and Spurrier.

The question is will the fanbase keep quiet while time passes and a couple of really bad seasons come and go?

Doubt it.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 24, 2009 7:59 AM | Report abuse

psp, nicely done above, I'm in agreement with you.
I'm liking the stuff I'm reading about Canty, not so much about a 31 year old linemen, Tauscher.
There was a linemen from Nebraska who ran a sub 5.0 40, trade back, pick him, or Xavier last name escapes me, and hopefully in the trade back get a 2nd, and pick Peria Jerry, who seems to have his first and last name switched.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 8:11 AM | Report abuse

Trust me, I noticed it too JM220..........

Posted by: 4thFloor | February 24, 2009 8:15 AM | Report abuse

Why would we need Doughty when we have Landry, Horton, and Moore? Do we need 4 safeties?

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 24, 2009 8:34 AM | Report abuse

If they can bring Doughty back for the right price, I think they need to do it. He's not exceptionally gifted but the starting job was his before he got hurt and he deserves a chance to come back and compete for a roster spot. This is another brown-bagger that you can't sweep under the carpet. Be loyal to the guys who got you there, Redskins.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | February 24, 2009 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Be loyal to the guys who got you there, Redskins.

Posted by: RedSkinHead | February 24, 2009 8:36 AM |

Got you where to 8-8, we have plenty of safeties and he wasn't that good to begin with. Give me a break with this loyalty crap any of these players would walk for more money.

The Colts just let a guy go who helped them win a SB and went to the Pro Bowl like 8 times. There team will be better because of it.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 8:44 AM | Report abuse

flound, agreed, same with DEvans, he's an ok player, probably better served in a reserve/rotational role.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 8:52 AM | Report abuse

"The best way to help Jason Campbell next year is to put a better offensive line in front of him.

I don't see bringing back J.T. at his current salary as helping in this effort.

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya"

(1) I agree, but I don't see any free agents that fit the Redskins needs in this sense (meaning young, talented enough to be an upgrade over Heyer/Rinehart, and cheap). And once again, the last thing we want to do is bring in long-term contracts for mediocre talent at a bad price.

(2) The best way to improve the offensive line in the way the Redskins need is to draft offensive linemen. Cutting Jason Taylor does not help this, in any sense. In fact, it hurts it because it creates another immediate void that only a top draft pick could be expected to fill in his rookie season.

(3) If we could get Jason Taylor at a cheaper salary, I'm all for it. I don't see it happening. So if it's JT at $8.5 million or nothing, I'm taking JT at $8.5 million.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 8:55 AM | Report abuse

'...Add to your no-brainer list Jason Campbell who will be knocked silly...'

I don't see how a high round drafted starting tackle and a John Mackey Award winning tight end make such a bad starting right side of an offensive line.

This is extremely puzzling as with the Skins being a left-handed running team, improving the right side of their line with quicker, younger players immediately gives Campbell time to throw and Portis better blockers.

Folks keep talking about spending money on D. Watch a replay of Redskins games against the Ravens, Steelers, Bengals, and Giants and ask if the teams needs defenders or blockers who can handle blitz pressure and the elite de's/linebackers those teams feature.

Folks love yakking about Canty, Haynesworth, Orakpo but it's the Redskins offense that's the sick patient who must be made well.

Scan through last season's W-L columns and add 10 points to each Redskins loss and you get what, 3-4 more wins?

11-5 beats 8-8 everyday, and if you don't score, your defense gets tired and gives up in the middle of the second half--and this happens no matter who plays on defense.

We have to score points this season people. And Canty, Haynesworth, Orakpo don't catch or block.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 24, 2009 8:57 AM | Report abuse

"It is also why avoiding FA might be a good idea: not acquiring big contracts and shedding bad ones written for guys at the end of their days is a good way to clear the roster of a bunch of players leftover from the days of Gibbs and Spurrier.

Posted by: MistaMoe"

Exactly.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 8:59 AM | Report abuse

(2) The best way to improve the offensive line in the way the Redskins need is to draft offensive linemen. Cutting Jason Taylor does not help this, in any sense. In fact, it hurts it because it creates another immediate void that only a top draft pick could be expected to fill in his rookie season.

(3) If we could get Jason Taylor at a cheaper salary, I'm all for it. I don't see it happening. So if it's JT at $8.5 million or nothing, I'm taking JT at $8.5 million.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 8:55 AM |

psp,

I'm not going to argue with you about it, but I totally disagree. We have guys on the team already who can be situational pass rushers which is all JT can be on this team.

You still need to clear salary to sign thos draft picks, what are you going to do restructure some more contracts.

Why not get rid of dead weight and clear space to sign the rookies, without getting yourself in more cap hell in the future.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 9:01 AM | Report abuse

"We have guys on the team already who can be situational pass rushers which is all JT can be on this team."

We do not have guys on the team that can fill Taylor's role. Not even close. As Greg Blache pointed out numerous times, he does a lot more than just rush the passer on occasion.

I was as disappointed as anyone seeing only 3.5 sacks and watching him injured on the sideline for a couple games. But the guy provides much more than that. He had more passes defensed (balls batted) than Andre Carter, Cornelius Griffin, Kedrick Golston, Anthony Montgomery, Demetric Evans, Lorenzo Alexander, Chris Wilson, and Rob Jackson had combined. And that's a LARGE part of what this defensive line does -- stay in the passing lanes. He's also the only defensive lineman with the versatility to roam around the field or cover RBs coming out of the backfield. That's not even counting the numerous times you see him disrupt screens out of the backfield, which he is by far the best on the d-line at diagnosing. No, he wasn't a huge pass-rushing threat last year, but his football IQ was a large part of the reason why this defense was so successful despite the lack of a pass rush.

You can count on it, if we cut Jason Taylor without a reasonable replacement (which we don't currently have), you're going to see a decent drop in the production of the defense.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:13 AM | Report abuse

"You still need to clear salary to sign thos draft picks, what are you going to do restructure some more contracts."

This team will have more than enough cap space to sign 4 draft picks, with only one selection in the first 2 rounds. We don't need anything near $8.5 million for that.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:16 AM | Report abuse

psp,

So you want to pay 8.5 mil to a guy that can knock down a few passes, he still can't stop the run.

He was brought here to sack the QB not cover backs coming out of the backfield.

The stats you are giving him credit for would suggest he should play Linebacker, do you think that would be a better move?

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 9:20 AM | Report abuse

This team will have more than enough cap space to sign 4 draft picks, with only one selection in the first 2 rounds. We don't need anything near $8.5 million for that.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:16 AM |

Where are they going to get that money without restructuring deals, or who should they cut?

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 9:22 AM | Report abuse

"He was brought here to sack the QB"

That's probably true, but he's evolved into something different than that.

"The stats you are giving him credit for would suggest he should play Linebacker, do you think that would be a better move?"

On occasion. He should be whatever the situation calls for. And that's what makes him so much different than the other guys on the roster. On any given down, the offense has no idea where Taylor will line up, or what Taylor will do. None of Chris Wilson or Rob Jackson or Andre Carter can provide the same.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:26 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: chrislarry | February 24, 2009 9:27 AM | Report abuse

If I understand things correctly so far from the RI reports. The Skins intend to keep Taylor, Griffen, and Springs as well as resign Hall. Additionally they intend to sign Canty and some Olineman.......

The only way this is possible is if they restructure some deals so who are possibilities for that?

Cooley - year 2 of big extension, but if he gets more guaranteed and extended I'm sure he's fine with that and considering he's a young Pro Bowler thats fine.

Landry - year 3 of a huge rookie deal, but has shown he can play so decent idea to restructure him.

Fletcher? - not sure but obviously a baller, how much left though?

Griffen - very little left in the tank, they better not.

Springs - plays 5 games a year, better not

Samuels - probably has 2 or 3 solid years left

Jansen - ummmmm no

Thomas - ibid

Rabach - no

Taylor - hell no, shouldn't be here now, is a free cut, if they restructure pushing a penalty into the future they officially become the stupidest FO ever

Moss - I guess, has a few good years left probably, assuming his hammy can stay healthy

Portis - the annual restructure, his deal already runs through 2020 or something ridiculous like that and IMHO he has maybe two productive years left.....eventually, his deal is going to cripple an offseason

Nobody else helps and IMHO there has to be one more cut coming for them to be able to do anything, otherwise, there is going to be some really stupid extensions coming that is just more of the same....

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 9:27 AM | Report abuse

Good stuff psp.

Posted by: matthewvickers | February 24, 2009 9:32 AM | Report abuse

psp,

He's not worth 8.5 for the little things he does, no ofense is worried about him.

The defense was good before he got here and would be just as good without him.

This defense would have been 4th last year with or without him.

29 tackles 3.5 sacks and 9 pass defensed = 2mil at best.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 9:33 AM | Report abuse

zj,

There is some rule about pushing money into an uncapped year that will limit who they can restructure.

It was in the article posted earlier in this post, from Scout.com.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 9:35 AM | Report abuse

"Where are they going to get that money without restructuring deals, or who should they cut?

Posted by: Flounder21"

As of right now, the Redskins are at $108 million. The projected salary cap is $123 million. There is room to operate. And if extra room is needed, Phillip Daniels would be the first to go.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:36 AM | Report abuse

As of right now, the Redskins are at $108 million. The projected salary cap is $123 million. There is room to operate. And if extra room is needed, Phillip Daniels would be the first to go.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:36 AM |

Not sure where you got those numbers but the Skins are right at the cap limit, they are not even under the cap yet.

They need to do something quickly just to get under the cap by Friday.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Where in the world did you find that we are at 108?

last week we were 4 million over and they cut Marcus which got them right at the cap, how did they save another 15 mil?

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

I thought Phillip Daniels was already gone. Jasno posted something saying he was a free agent even though there were 2 years left on his deal but never explained it.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 24, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Go to this link and then click on cap summary, you will see that they are still over the projected cap.


http://www.thewarpath.net/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

"He's not worth 8.5 for the little things he does"

He's not worth $8.5 million, but that's not the point. The point is:

(1) There isn't anybody on the roster that can replace what he does, which leaves 2 options if he's cut; sign a FA, or use a draft pick to replace him.

(2) We don't have enough draft picks to replace all our needs this offseason, and offensive line takes the top priority here.

(3) Paying Taylor $8.5 million for one season is better than paying some average talent $25 million over 4-5 seasons.

Again, keeping Jason Taylor is a long-term solution, not a short-term solution. This team will be younger in 2 years by keeping Taylor NOW then letting him walk, rather than cutting him now and signing his replacement.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:45 AM | Report abuse

posse,

Not sure on that one hopefully it will be explained in the next couple of days.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Go to this link and then click on cap summary, you will see that they are still over the projected cap.


http://www.thewarpath.net/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm

Posted by: Flounder21

---

That's not updated, it still has Marcus Washington on the roster.

Here is the updated version:

http://www.thehogs.net/washington-redskins/salary.php

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:47 AM | Report abuse

everywhere I'm reading says right now we're at 121 which is 2 mil under.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Again, keeping Jason Taylor is a long-term solution, not a short-term solution. This team will be younger in 2 years by keeping Taylor NOW then letting him walk, rather than cutting him now and signing his replacement.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:45 AM |

That makes no sense but whatever lets agree to dis-agree, we had people on the roster before he got here that did just fine. The only reason he was brought in was because of an injury. So you are saying that the guy he was brought in to replace is now not a good player.

What if he gets hurt again which is very possible considering his age, you just wasted 8.5 and you still played with the guys you have on the roster.

Anwser this is the team the 4th ranked defense last year without his little contribution?

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Sorry, but I think that's wrong. It doesn't have Albright signed, it has several base salaries not carried over to the cap hit column, Flound your link when I clicked cap summary, it says we're 624 dollars over the cap.
http://www.thewarpath.net/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 9:53 AM | Report abuse

there would have been some news if we went from over the cap to 15 million under it. Cutting Marcus only saved 4 million, they would have had to do a lot more and it would have been reported for them to get down to 108. I think you guys are reading it wrong, 108 is the active figure, but your not adding in the dead cap hits and penalties.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 9:55 AM | Report abuse

Cindy,

Can we can an update on exactly where the Skins stand in relation to the cap? The post on potential FAs was great but do we have any room to do anything?

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 9:57 AM | Report abuse

Here is the updated version:

http://www.thehogs.net/washington-redskins/salary.php

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:47 AM |

That has Jason Taylor at 0 and you are not counting all the dead cap money.

Salaries = 108,043,000
dead cap = 6,716,000
Jason Taylor = 8,500,000

Total equals 123,259,000

So like I said we are over the cap.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 9:58 AM | Report abuse

"So you are saying that the guy he was brought in to replace is now not a good player."

Not as good, no. Sorry, but it's not the same defense as before he came. Before he came, Shawn Springs, Cornelius Griffin, Fred Smoot, and London Fletcher were all 2 years younger and healthier, Phillip Daniels hadn't torn an ACL at the age of 35, Marcus Washington was still the starting OLB, Andre Carter was beasting out, and Sean Taylor was here. So no, it's not the same as before.

"Anwser this is the team the 4th ranked defense last year without his little contribution?"

No, this defense would not be ranked #4 without his "little" contribution.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:59 AM | Report abuse

That also has Albright at 0 so add him in and we are even farther over the cap.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Jasno posted something saying he was a free agent even though there were 2 years left on his deal but never explained it.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 24, 2009 9:44 AM

Because the last 2 years of his contract was voidable automatically. Just like Brunell's was..........

4th

Posted by: RightWay | February 24, 2009 10:01 AM | Report abuse

No, this defense would not be ranked #4 without his "little" contribution.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 9:59 AM |

Thats complete BS, tell me what he did in the run game to help, and a few less batted screens would not have moved there ranking.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:02 AM | Report abuse

So like I said we are over the cap.

Posted by: Flounder21

It looks like neither of those are updated, because that one still has Marcus Washington on the list too. I think ZJ is correct, we're just around $120-121 million, with Philip Daniels under contract.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:06 AM | Report abuse

That also has Albright at 0 so add him in and we are even farther over the cap.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:00 AM | Report abuse

So again, I go back to, how in the world do they think they can resign Hall, and sign Canty while bringing back Taylor Griffen and Springs not to mention we still haven't tendered Monte or Gholston. Something big has to happen in the next 3 days. They are either restructuring 7 or 8 contracts or they have to cut somebody, or they are full of crap in trying to resign Hall. I don't think that happens now thanks to genius Vinny waiting until he became the top option at his position and thus his price tag went up.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 10:06 AM | Report abuse

It looks like neither of those are updated, because that one still has Marcus Washington on the list too. I think ZJ is correct, we're just around $120-121 million, with Philip Daniels under contract.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:06 AM |

It has MW at 0 which is correct.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:09 AM | Report abuse

zj,

They are going to have to pull a diamond out of Vinny's a$$ to even get one of those things done.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

'...keeping Jason Taylor is a long-term solution, not a short-term solution...'


Keeping Taylor is neither.

The guy is a Redskin because the FO believes in the mystical power of big name players developed by other teams.

The 2009 NFL Defensive MVP is a guy who got cut 4 times. How did such a guy become an MVP? He's with a team that saw his skill set as one that fit what they do and put him into position to make plays.

Tell me the skins couldn't turn Chris Wilson--or any other young lb/de defender on the team--into James Harrison if they put him on the field and gave him the scheme packages that let him rush the passer without a thought of nothing else.

The Taylor trade was no different in style and substance than the wacky 2000 moves that brought us Deion, M Carrier, B Smith and Super Bowl dreams that never materialized.

But after burning two picks to get him, the team has to re-do his deal--if possible--and put his a$$ to work and hope to make something out of the nothing they created for themselves.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 24, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

"Thats complete BS, tell me what he did in the run game to help, and a few less batted screens would not have moved there ranking.

Posted by: Flounder21"

What's BS is assuming a defense without its starting LDE, second team leader in sacks, 3rd team leader in passes defensed, most versatile, and 2nd most experienced and intelligent defender would have been the same as with him.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:12 AM | Report abuse


Redskins to pursue Crowell?
Ryan O'Halloran

INDIANAPOLIS

To replace Marcus Washington at strongside linebacker, the Washington Redskins could pursue Buffalo's Angelo Crowell as a short-term option.

In three years as a starter, he posted 119, 82 and 126 tackles but missed last year when he opted to have knee surgery late in the preseason. Even though he would have been out only four to six weeks, the Bills objected to the operation and placed him on injured reserve. A league source said there's "no chance" Crowell will be back in Buffalo.

Crowell will turn 28 in August. If the Redskins sign him, that would allow them to address their offensive and defensive line issues with the No. 13 pick.

- "Ugh" and "Seriously?" were the responses of those at the combine when told the Redskins might bring Jason Taylor back. It makes no sense fiscally or performancewise. He made 37 tackles (according to the NFL) in 526 snaps (according to The Washington Times). Taylor said late in the season, "This dog can still hunt." But what he wouldn't admit is that the hunting conditions weren't optimum.

If Taylor is back, it's up to coordinator Greg Blache to create situations in which Taylor can be productive. They started moving him around the field late in the season - on the same side as Andre Carter and in a two-point stance over a guard - to increase his production.

"There wasn't ever enough time for him to feel comfortable," coach Jim Zorn said.

- In addition to having high expectations for receivers Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly, Zorn plans to use tight end Fred Davis dramatically more this year. He played only 111 of 1,026 offensive plays as a rookie.

"We're glad we [drafted Davis]," Zorn said. "He's a tremendous athlete. He's going to help this football team. ... It was an excellent pick."

- Zorn said the Redskins' sack (24) and interception (13) totals will improve but defended the lack of pressure on first and second downs by pointing out the defense was eighth against the run.

"We had good athletes and our scheme was very run-limiting," he said. "It's not cautious, but it's disciplined. ... We would all like a much stronger pass rush on third down, and we're working on improving that. We're not satisfied with the lack of sacks and the lack of interceptions. We're going to get better in those two areas."

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

It has MW at 0 which is correct.

Posted by: Flounder21

I think they have the years wrong. "2008" is actually 2009, and "2009" is actually 2010. The "2009" tab also has Springs, Campbell, Wilson, and Alexander as zero, which is not true.

The real numbers for this year are under the "2008" column, but hasn't been updated with the cut of Marcus Washington.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:16 AM | Report abuse

When Zorn said that about Davis, someone should have asked him WHY he didn't use him more??

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

psps23, Im with you on keeping JT. You have to look further into the future than this coming 09 season. And Flounder, I believe we had this arguement early in the offseason about cutting guys. You cant just cut guys to save cap space with the intention of getting younger immediately. Who are you going to replace them with and what are the ramifications of that new contract? Yes JT costs too much and yes he underperformed last year and yes we gave up too much to get him. But psps23 is right, hes the best option they have for this season without blowing huge $$$ on some FA who could potentially turn out to be a bust (Haynesworth/Canty). JT is off the books next offseason and some new FA could cost much more down the road. And with the uncapped year approaching... I would think teams can cut whoever they want without having dead cap space and spend as much as they want on any player... man thats gona be interesting.

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | February 24, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

What's BS is assuming a defense without its starting LDE, second team leader in sacks, 3rd team leader in passes defensed, most versatile, and 2nd most experienced and intelligent defender would have been the same as with him.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:12 AM |

Starting LDE only for about 8 games, by the end of the year he was not starting.

Second team leader in sacks 3.5 whoop de do.

Pass defensed a bunch of screen passes.

How many extra rushing yards were given up because he was in the lineup getting mauled by TE's?

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:18 AM | Report abuse

wait, so the rest of the league thinks bringing Taylor back is a bad idea, that seals it then, he's back. Never underestimate the desire of our FO to prove everyone else wrong. For 15 years they have done stupid things opposite of conventional wisdom in an effort to prove they are geniuses so this guarantees Taylor will be back. Because just like Wade to guard, Arch, Duckett, Lloyd, Carter, signing old FAs and trading picks away for old players worked out against conventional wisdom, if Vinny hears one person say something he is thinking about doing is a bad idea that guarantees it will be done, and to hell with everyone else cause we're that smart.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 10:18 AM | Report abuse

VA,

Like I told you before who cares we are not doing anything next year anyway. Get the young guys on your team experience so in 2-3 years you've got a shot.

Why play Taylor one more year who cares if the defense is ranked 4th, the team is a 8-8 team anyway.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:20 AM | Report abuse

btw, I'm not getting in the argument, but ya'lls is insane if you think Taylor contributed anything more than some fringe plays here or there to this defense last season. If anything he was a liability more than a help. Say it was cause of injury or whatever you want, but he was meaningless to our D last season.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 10:23 AM | Report abuse

I know the skins might pursue Chris Canty but what do you guys think about them also pursuing Tank Johnson?

He is a free agent as well and could be a viable rotation DT

Posted by: GreatOne1 | February 24, 2009 10:26 AM | Report abuse

zj,

Thank you,

And all he will do this year is take playing time away from the younger guys who will replace him next year.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Hey, zjfr2...The problem with figuring out exactly where teams are in relation to the cap is that all of the precise info isn't available yet. There's plenty of speculation and ciphering with old numbers, but it's still squishy. By our math, they're probably $3m-$4m under the projected cap with some restructurings pending....You'd think they could get to $8m or so under the cap. Believe me, we keep seeking this info and we'll share it with you when we get it.

Posted by: CindyBoren | February 24, 2009 10:29 AM | Report abuse

I know the skins might pursue Chris Canty but what do you guys think about them also pursuing Tank Johnson?

He is a free agent as well and could be a viable rotation DT

Posted by: GreatOne1 | February 24, 2009 10:26 AM |

No thanks

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

VA,

Like I told you before who cares we are not doing anything next year anyway. Get the young guys on your team experience so in 2-3 years you've got a shot.

Why play Taylor one more year who cares if the defense is ranked 4th, the team is a 8-8 team anyway.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:20 AM | Report abuse

Flounder, giving up on the 09 season is not consistant with reality. Snyder ABSOLUTELY will not accept that and obviously doesnt believe that. And showing fans, players, coaches, agents and all the rest that you gave up on a season.

Anyways, Snyderatto cant figure out how to build a team through mixing FA's, trading picks, a revolving door of offenses and bad contracts. What makes you think they could build a team from the ground up if they did purge their roster and "start anew"?

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | February 24, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

I know the skins might pursue Chris Canty but what do you guys think about them also pursuing Tank Johnson?

He is a free agent as well and could be a viable rotation DT

Posted by: GreatOne1 | February 24, 2009 10:26 AM |


and he could mentor Andre Smith.

Posted by: Original_etrod | February 24, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

No on Tank. Not that good a player, and too much of a risk to sign to a long term deal.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

Cindy,

Any rumblings on if they will cut anyone else like JT.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

I said yesterday, Javon Haye or Tank would be a good signing for us, I also said Crowell and it looks like that one might actually happen, and my man crush for Canty has been well documented.....I still don't get how they intend to do this though without some massive restructuring or cuts in the next three days. Does anybody know the rules on can you sign guys if you're over the cap or do you have to be under first? Can they do all the signings and what not first then make the moves they have to make to comply later?

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

Daniels Salary Cap # will come off the books on the 1st day of the new league year. Which is Friday, I think. That's $2.6Mil

Posted by: RightWay | February 24, 2009 10:32 AM | Report abuse

VA,

Cutting a guy who did nothing for you last year, and two other guys who played half a season is not purging your roster.

These 3 guys will make no difference to the upcoming season, I guarantee that at least two of them miss half the season or more again.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:35 AM | Report abuse

No rumblings yet. These last few days before FA opens seem to be getting going a little later.
Am watching the endless loop of Chucky on the NFLN and he was talking about Haynesworth: "He's unblockable, he's unstoppable. I realize he has some motivational issues when he's in the last year of his contract." Chucky flat-out luvs Haynesworth.

Posted by: CindyBoren | February 24, 2009 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Can they do all the signings and what not first then make the moves they have to make to comply later?

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 10:32 AM |

Nope you have to be under the cap by Friday and you must remain under the cap.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:36 AM | Report abuse

"Like I told you before who cares we are not doing anything next year anyway. Get the young guys on your team experience so in 2-3 years you've got a shot.

Posted by: Flounder21"

I hope you're prepared to find another QB if that's the case (and in the process, wait another 4 years for him to get ready). Jason Campbell will not be here 2 years down the road if this team does not have some sort of success next year. You can take that to the bank.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Cindy,

Care to way in on the JT discussion would you bring him back at 8.5mil?

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Finally the skins know exactly what they are doing!!

They are upgrading at several position. Know don't worry how were going to sign Haynesworth and Canty...and where is the money coming from.

You guy already know. We always find a way.

Is Hayneworth a upgrade?
Yes. put the tape in from last year

Is Canty an upgrade?
Yes....

Stop trying to stay normal...thats what we have now. A normal team.

Lets get a Fitgerald or a top player harrison...(both went to the Super bowl)

Lets get better
Thats what the skins are doing

Why are you guys worried about money!!

Is it your money?
NO....so stop worrying. The skins will be just fine.

If they want to pay JT 8 mill...so what. They must feel and know that he can produce when healty.

They are the ones on the field everyday.


JLC is sad...stop worrying about the money. Redskins always find a way...even if they have cap space or not...and when it come down to when in a couple years its suppose to hurt us. They will find a way. They will just recontruct a couple contracts and continue.

Why would you not want to upgrade your team.

Trust me if everyteam knew how to do what we do they would do it

Do you want to be a normal team that goes nowhere 8-8?

Or do you want to be a team in the playoff contending for a Super Bowl?

If your answer is yes then we need better players.
And thats what the skins are doing. They are bringing better players.

Relax and enjoy the ride yall.

12:01 is going to be a great day.
Airplanes/Jet
Dinner
Wizards game
Money
Money
Money
and oh yeah a better upgraded team
BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)

Trust me everyone will be smilling!

Posted by: 1skinfan | February 24, 2009 10:39 AM | Report abuse

I hope you're prepared to find another QB if that's the case (and in the process, wait another 4 years for him to get ready). Jason Campbell will not be here 2 years down the road if this team does not have some sort of success next year. You can take that to the bank.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:37 AM |

Really it didn't take the Atlanta QB 4 years to be ready or the Ravens QB.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:40 AM | Report abuse

If we get Canty, and keep Taylor, and get Orakpo, and keep Carter and maybe Daniels, where is everyone going to play?

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 24, 2009 10:41 AM | Report abuse

These 3 guys will make no difference to the upcoming season, I guarantee that at least two of them miss half the season or more again.

Posted by: Flounder21


"Again" implies it's happened before. Jason Taylor played in 13 games last year. Cornelius Griffin played in 14 (if that's who you were insinuating).

Believe what you want. You're asking for major trouble if you get what you ask for.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:41 AM | Report abuse

If your answer is yes then we need better players.
And thats what the skins are doing. They are bringing better players.

Relax and enjoy the ride yall.

12:01 is going to be a great day.
Airplanes/Jet
Dinner
Wizards game
Money
Money
Money
and oh yeah a better upgraded team
BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)

Trust me everyone will be smilling!

Posted by: 1skinfan | February 24, 2009 10:39 AM |

Thats good because all the great players they have signed in the past won them all those SB, Oh right they haven't won a SB in 19 years.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:43 AM | Report abuse

If we get Canty, and keep Taylor, and get Orakpo, and keep Carter and maybe Daniels, where is everyone going to play?

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 24, 2009 10:41 AM |

Some of them will have to switch to O-Line.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:44 AM | Report abuse

Really it didn't take the Atlanta QB 4 years to be ready or the Ravens QB.

Posted by: Flounder21

---

Matt Ryan is a once every half-decade player, and Joe Flacco was not good last year. He just happened to have a phenomenal defense led by "washed-up", "overrated", "past-his-prime" superstar.

Good luck banking on 7th round draft picks and UFAs leading this hypothetical QB to the promised land in his rookie year.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:45 AM | Report abuse

"Again" implies it's happened before. Jason Taylor played in 13 games last year. Cornelius Griffin played in 14 (if that's who you were insinuating).

Believe what you want. You're asking for major trouble if you get what you ask for.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:41 AM |

How many of those games did they play hurt and cost the team more then they helped it.

When do you suggest we get younger?

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:47 AM | Report abuse

"If we get Canty, and keep Taylor, and get Orakpo, and keep Carter and maybe Daniels, where is everyone going to play?

Posted by: Rypien11"

Good point. That's why you don't pick up Canty (and in the process, force yourself to "restructure" his high cap number 2-3 years down the road when this rebuilding project is supposed to pay dividends), don't draft Orakpo, cut Daniels to save money, and instead focus on the true needs of the team -- offensive line.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Sure! My two cents' worth of jibbajabba: If I could bring Jason Taylor back for less than $8.5m and use him in the hyrid olb role that seemed to work once he got relatively healthy again, I'd do it. But I would NOT give him $8.5m.

Posted by: CindyBoren | February 24, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Flounder21

Hey u never know.... we may bring in a QB too. You never really know what the skins might do. lol

They make you happy one day and make you mad another day

Yeah ur right we havent won a SB when we did this in the past.

But ask yourself is it not a upgrade to bring in Canty, or another player?

If you had the money and know how to do things with the salary cap why would you not upgrade your team.

I'm sorry those other players did not work out. But was it the players fault, coaching, team, phylosophie like play run first with a player like JT.......

I don't know...I don't have that answer but I know that this year we better put a better team than last year.

And from what I see thats what we are doing.

How can we get mad at that?

Posted by: 1skinfan | February 24, 2009 10:51 AM | Report abuse

How can we get mad at that?

Posted by: 1skinfan | February 24, 2009 10:51 AM |

I'm for upgrading the team, but in a smart way not like they have done in the past.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:53 AM | Report abuse

I tried of losing yall

Let's get it right.

Our team is average right now.

So how do you improve a average team?
Great question...you bring in better players

12:01 baby!!

Were all going to be smilling......:)
Stop worring about money.

Its not your money.
Skins always find a way with or without cap room.

Posted by: 1skinfan | February 24, 2009 10:55 AM | Report abuse

"When do you suggest we get younger?

Posted by: Flounder21"

I thought I went over this multiple times. You get younger in 2010, when this team actually has draft picks to add to the roster, when this team knows whether or not their foundation for the future is in place, and when this team can actually create enough cap room for itself to compliment the two items listed before. Any money spent now is money that is spent blindly for the future.

The whole point is to NOT try and quick fix everything, and say "get younger at all costs". It's to have a plan. It's to say, 'this is when we make our run'. That plan becomes much more concrete after this season. And THAT'S when the cap space will be needed.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Thanks Cindy,

Every football person I've heard on the radio the last couple of days, has said that bringing him back for 8.5 is dumb.

But I'm sure none of them know what they are talking about.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Thank you Cindy!!!! psps, you're off base my man. Taylor is old with a year left, Canty is a 26 year old perfect fit for our system. A 300 pound end to man the right side and stuff the run on 1st and 2nd and slide inside on passing downs. He's perfect for us. Taylor on the other hand was completely miscast in our system and will be again if he stays unless they let him be as Cindy just said a OLB type on 1st and 2nd and a rusher on passing downs. He is not nor was he ever an every down end in the NFC East. Resign Hall, sign Canty, Crowell, two guards and draft a RT at 13, DT in the 3rd and we're done!

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Snyder counts on fans like 1skinsfan, and they come through. Thus the business model.

Posted by: chrislarry | February 24, 2009 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Flounder21

I agree...in the past they went too overboard

Posted by: 1skinfan | February 24, 2009 10:56 AM | Report abuse

Cindy has spoken.

PSP - I actually WANT Canty, I think he could be a good player for us for a while. I just wish he would take the place of Taylor at LDE, and then Orakpo at SAM wouldn't be such a bad idea.

But yes, O-line is more pressing. But again, I don't see us winning the SB this year either way.

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 24, 2009 10:58 AM | Report abuse

I thought I went over this multiple times. You get younger in 2010, when this team actually has draft picks to add to the roster, when this team knows whether or not their foundation for the future is in place, and when this team can actually create enough cap room for itself to compliment the two items listed before. Any money spent now is money that is spent blindly for the future.

The whole point is to NOT try and quick fix everything, and say "get younger at all costs". It's to have a plan. It's to say, 'this is when we make our run'. That plan becomes much more concrete after this season. And THAT'S when the cap space will be needed.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 10:55 AM |

Your assuming they will have the picks, and then the players who are on your roster that have gotten know playing time, because you kept these old guys will still need a year or two to get up to speed.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 10:58 AM | Report abuse

"This year willl be different! Lucy will not pull the ball away on my placekick"

Charlie Brown, lovable loser

Posted by: chrislarry | February 24, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

psps, you can get younger and sign FA as well, its not either or, just don't sign the type of FAs we're notorious for. Nobody over 28, nobody who gets "the richest contract ever for a ______", and nobody to anything over a 3 year deal. Crowell and Canty for 3 years are great signings.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

From PFT,

JENKINS COULD BE SLIDING
Posted by Mike Florio on February 24, 2009, 9:54 a.m. EST
Tony Pauline of SI.com reports that Ohio State cornerback Malcolm Jenkins ran 40-yard dashes on Tuesday ranging from 4.52 to 4.58 seconds.

Per Pauline, a number of scouts believed that Jenkins needed to break 4.50 in order to stay in the top ten of the draft.

He also predicts that some teams will now begin grading Jenkins as a safety and not as a cornerback.

We’ll run a link to Pauline’s daily recap at SI.com when it’s posted later today.

Coverage of the final day of workouts at the Scouting Combine begins on NFL Network at 11:00 a.m. EST.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:01 AM | Report abuse

CL,

How is the baby doing?

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:02 AM | Report abuse

chrislarry

Business model...lol

hold up...last time I check it wasn't my money or yours

So why are you worried about his money.

If he wants to spend 500million on a player...damm thats stupid but is it your money?

NO
NO
NO
all I care about is putting a better team out there this year.

But your worried about business models and too much money...blah blah blah

Its not your money.

ask yourself can we upgrade the team this year and how?

Is it by bringing back D-evans or by getting players like Canty?

I'll make it easier...would you rather a 4'0 WR or a 6'4 WR

Thats what we are doing...upgrading!!!

We have a normal, sub-par team now.

Realax and enjoy!!
Don't worry about money....its not your money or mines......

Whish it was!!! lol

Posted by: 1skinfan | February 24, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse

SAGE TO SAIL TO VIKINGS
Posted by Mike Florio on February 24, 2009, 10:39 a.m.

As it turns out, the Vikings will have an Iowa native playing quarterback in 2009. As it turns out, it won’t be the Iowa native that some had envisioned.

The Houston Chronicle reports that, a year after the Texans nearly traded quarterback Sage Rosenfels to the Vikings, the deal is going down.

Rosenfels will head to Minnesota for a fourth-round pick in the 2009 draft.

The trade will be finalized on Friday, the first day of the league year and the first day on which trades can be made.

Rosenfels grew up in Iowa and played at Iowa State. The move means that fellow Iowa native, Kurt Warner, most likely won’t be landing in Minnesota.

Signed through 2009 at a salary of $1.35 million, Rosenfels likely will be agreeing to a new contract as part of the transaction.


Old Sage, I wonder how he would have looked as a Skins starting QB. It is funny to me how Trent Green, Gus, and Sage all started as Skins and became legit starters elsewhere while other than a brief Brad Johnson stint we have been looking for a long-term QB for 18 years.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse

From PFT,

SAGE TO SAIL TO VIKINGS
Posted by Mike Florio on February 24, 2009, 10:39 a.m. EST
As it turns out, the Vikings will have an Iowa native playing quarterback in 2009. As it turns out, it won’t be the Iowa native that some had envisioned.

The Houston Chronicle reports that, a year after the Texans nearly traded quarterback Sage Rosenfels to the Vikings, the deal is going down.

Rosenfels will head to Minnesota for a fourth-round pick in the 2009 draft.

The trade will be finalized on Friday, the first day of the league year and the first day on which trades can be made.

Rosenfels grew up in Iowa and played at Iowa State. The move means that fellow Iowa native, Kurt Warner, most likely won’t be landing in Minnesota.

Signed through 2009 at a salary of $1.35 million, Rosenfels likely will be agreeing to a new contract as part of the transaction.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Now that I have read the tea leaves, it seems to me that JT55 will either restructure or be cut outright. We still need to open some CAP space and by just releasing JT55, we wouldn't have to release anyone else.

Thoughts?

4th

Posted by: RightWay | February 24, 2009 11:06 AM | Report abuse

"PSP - I actually WANT Canty, I think he could be a good player for us for a while.

Posted by: Rypien11"

JLC is reporting he could be offered in the range of $8 million per year. In no way do I view Canty as worth $8 million per. $4 million? Maybe. Not even close to 8 though.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 11:09 AM | Report abuse

Now that I have read the tea leaves, it seems to me that JT55 will either restructure or be cut outright. We still need to open some CAP space and by just releasing JT55, we wouldn't have to release anyone else.

Thoughts?

4th

Posted by: RightWay | February 24, 2009 11:06 AM |

If they restructure a guy they could cut outright with no cap penalty, they are the dumbest SOB's in the world.

There are only a two choices reales him outright (please) or have him sign for a lot less for one year.

Keeping him is just dumb!!!!!!!

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

JLC is reporting he could be offered in the range of $8 million per year. In no way do I view Canty as worth $8 million per. $4 million? Maybe. Not even close to 8 though.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 11:09 AM |

I agree no to 8mil per year, but 4mil per could be OK.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:11 AM | Report abuse

They have 3 options. Cut some dudes, do some more restructuring or don't sign anybody. It is sounding more and more like they are gonna do the old restructuring again unless they resign Hall and cut Springs within 2 days.

Not sure I would classify Gus Frerotte or Sage Rosenfels as legit starters. We'll see about Sage this year I guess. If he can't succeed with that line and those backs he is terrible.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 24, 2009 11:12 AM | Report abuse

I don't think there is anyway Canty gets 8mil per year, he doesn't have that kind of resume.

It's hard for top flight players to get that much.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Id rather have Canty at $8M than Taylor.

I woulnd't mind Canty at $5-6M. I mean jeez, thats what were paying for freaking Randy Thomas.

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 24, 2009 11:15 AM | Report abuse

"psps, you can get younger and sign FA as well

Posted by: zjfr2"

Yes, but the point is to get younger at the right time. It's all about timing. This team doesn't have enough assets (cap space or draft picks) to do it all right now, so the smart thing to do is to wait until there IS cap space and draft picks, then make your run.

Again, this all points back to the "unbalanced team" I described earlier in this thread. If this team is planning on being a perennial contender 3 years down the road, what you don't want are a bunch of guys that, much like now, are aging and taking up a bunch of cap space. You want as many players hitting their prime at the same time as possible. So again, the smart thing to do is let these players play out their contracts, wait until we know whether JC is our man for the long run, then use the cap space effectively to compliment that.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

The possibility of getting Canty is intriguing; I think it'd work with JT. But they have to split the $8.5m. What the heck, I'd even round it up to $9m.

Posted by: CindyBoren | February 24, 2009 11:16 AM | Report abuse

Is Doughty's agent former Redskins DT Dave Butz? Or is this a different guy?

Posted by: yaser800 | February 24, 2009 11:17 AM | Report abuse

From Gary Fitzgerald

It’s early in the offseason, but every day Malcolm Kelly heads to Redskins Park with a purpose.

Kelly is rehabbing a knee injury that has given him trouble since last August. He had arthroscopic knee surgery in January to make sure those problems don’t resurface.

Next step? Get on the practice fields this spring and showcase his skills as a wide receiver.

“I really can’t wait to get back fully healthy because I know what I can do,” Kelly said. “That’s the biggest thing for me.”

Then Kelly hinted that he is tired of the questions surrounding his knee.

“I would be able to shut everybody up,” he said. “I know once I get healthy and get things rolling, I can do that.”

Kelly first injured the knee in the 2007 Fiesta Bowl as he wrapped up his sophomore year with the Oklahoma Sooners.

He returned for his junior season with the Sooners, caught 49 passes for 821 yards and nine touchdowns, and then entered the NFL Draft.

In an effort to add more size to their wide receiver corps, the Redskins grabbed the 6-4, 219-pound Kelly in the middle of the second round of the draft.


Malcolm KellyHis knee flared up early in training camp, keeping him on the sidelines most of his rookie campaign.

Continued

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:17 AM | Report abuse

For the season, Kelly played in just five games and caught three passes for 18 yards.

Kelly was asked if the knee injury was something that could hinder him his entire career.

“No, I don’t think so,” he said. “I [suffered] the injury in college, and after I rehabbed it, I never thought about it again. I never did anything to keep the muscles around my leg real strong.

“There are things I know now that I didn’t know then [about rehabbing the knee and keeping it strong]. There are a lot of things I can do to prevent it from re-occurring.

“It’s healing up, I just have to make sure I take better care of it.”

Kelly could be limited in off-season workouts as he rehabs from the knee scope. He expects to be full-go once OTAs start in May.

Said executive vice president of football operations Vinny Cerrato: “I think if Malcolm is healthy and on the field, we saw in training camp [last year] that he can be an outstanding player. I don’t think there are any ifs, ands or buts about that.”

Kelly said that, toward the end of last season, his knee felt better in practice. He was able to play against the New York Giants in Week 13 and Baltimore Ravens in Week 14, but he sat out the final three games.

He decided to go ahead with surgery after meeting with Dr. James Andrews, a Redskins medical consultant based in Birmingham, Ala., and team officials.

“They just wanted to go in and make sure I don’t have the same problems I had last year,” he said. “You don’t want it to be a situation where everything looks good and then you get out there and it’s a problem. I’m glad to get it fixed.

“Now I’m just going to focus on strengthening my leg. When the season comes, I’ll hit training camp full speed just like I did last year. And we’ll see what happens.

“I have confidence in what I can do when I’m healthy. I’m looking forward to it.”

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:18 AM | Report abuse

Gus was a Pro Bowler in 1997, he took the Broncos to the playoffs in 2000, last year in 11 games he had one less TD than JC did in 16 games (albeit with a lot more picks but I think all of us would accept a few few more picks for an extra 7 points a game cause 13 TDs from JC in a 16 game season is pitiful), and his last full year as a start 2005 he threw for right at 3000 yards 18 TD's and 13 picks. IF JC is a legit starter Gus is......

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 11:19 AM | Report abuse

If you read extremeskins, theres a pretty funny thread about MalCOMB Kelly.

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 24, 2009 11:20 AM | Report abuse

flound, thanks for posting, didn't JZ say that DThomas and FDavis were also spending a lot of time at the park?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 11:22 AM | Report abuse

At this moment Sage is the better QB.

We must rank 1st with the most QB starters for teams they weren't drafted by since 2000............

Posted by: RightWay | February 24, 2009 11:23 AM | Report abuse

"At this moment Sage is the better QB"

Compared to who? JC??

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Again, this all points back to the "unbalanced team" I described earlier in this thread. If this team is planning on being a perennial contender 3 years down the road, what you don't want are a bunch of guys that, much like now, are aging and taking up a bunch of cap space. You want as many players hitting their prime at the same time as possible. So again, the smart thing to do is let these players play out their contracts, wait until we know whether JC is our man for the long run, then use the cap space effectively to compliment that.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 11:16 AM |

You add as much as you can this year and then add more next year and then you make your run. The players you add this year will not be old in 2-3 years.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:26 AM | Report abuse

The agent David Butz is son of the legendary DT, #65 in your program Dave "The Duck Decoy" Butz!

Flound: Baby Rocks! Sleep thing is touch & go, as expected.....but other than that she is a joy.

Posted by: chrislarry | February 24, 2009 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Danny, Vinny and Co. are going to take the position that this team has the ability to go far this year with just a couple MINOR adjustments. Just remember how quick Vinny is to remind us that we started 6-2..

Taylor WILL be back. Spring WILL be back. Griff and Daniels, MOST LIKELY WILL be back.

I don't understand why every post is so focused on the defense and the JT situation. This defense finished 4TH in the ENTIRE LEAGUE. The only disappointments by them were the couple games that teams ran out the clock by pounding the ball down our throats. If the offense gave us more we wouldn't have to rely on the D to get us the ball back for one more desperation drive and let's be honest.. do we really see the offense all of a sudden being able to score (talking about Dallas, Baltimore and Cincy games)??

Taylor deserves another shot. He has been a class act, productive and injury free with the EXCEPTION of last year. FREAK INJURY. I think Blache will find a way to take advantage of his playmaking ability and be the play maker we are missing to help produce the sacks and turnovers we have lacked.

Some of you guys talk like we got rolled over and Taylor was this HUGE liability everytime he was on the field. NOT the case. He will be VERY hungry to produce and this is not a guy who I would doubt.

We know the FO tendency so forget all this talk about saving money etc. etc. because you know it's not happening with this management.

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 11:29 AM | Report abuse

From Michael Lombardi

After talking to people with knowledge about what the ‘Skins might do, we were told they will probably trade Shawn Springs and are willing to allow teams to talk to his agent in an effort to redo his current contract. The ‘Skins seem willing to invest in DeAngelo Hall and get rid of Springs, thus allowing Hall to get on the field.

The ‘Skins are going to go after one major free agent and appear ready to spend a little money in the free agent market. Is it Albert Haynesworth? Is it Khalif Barnes from Jacksonville? It seems clear from doing research in Indy, the ‘Skins want to improve both lines.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Again:

'...The possibility of getting Canty is intriguing; I think it'd work with JT...'

Why so much attention placed on fixing the D when the skins score like a South American soccer team?


Posted by: MistaMoe | February 24, 2009 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Flound: Baby Rocks! Sleep thing is touch & go, as expected.....but other than that she is a joy.

Posted by: chrislarry | February 24, 2009 11:29 AM |

Thats great,

I had the same problem with my first and the sleep thing, what a nightmare.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:32 AM | Report abuse

flound, thanks again for posting, can't believe they will trade springs. Not sure who is gonna want him for half a season.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 11:33 AM | Report abuse

I like ole'Sage. Outside of that weird fumble-leap he played really well for Texans. He could be exactly what Vikings need combined with that defense and rushing attack.

Posted by: chrislarry | February 24, 2009 11:33 AM | Report abuse

You add as much as you can this year and then add more next year and then you make your run. The players you add this year will not be old in 2-3 years.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:26 AM | Report abuse

Exactly, if you sign nobody over 28, nobody to the richest ever type thing, and nothing above 3 year deals, then you use your 4 picks this year, springs, griffen, taylor all come of the books next year, if its uncapped you can dump Jansen and Thomas and keep all your picks next year. and then if JC is the guy you resign if not you find somebody else and the cycle rolls on.....as long as they don't do stupid signings, young FAs are fine.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 11:33 AM | Report abuse

skins211,

Because that is the only place to clear cap space to get help for the offense.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 11:29 AM | Report abuse

we did get rolled over, the second Dallas game, the Ravens game, the Steelers game the Giants games, all of them, when they wanted to got whatever they wanted on the ground.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 11:36 AM | Report abuse

springs, griffen, taylor all come of the books next year, if its uncapped you can dump Jansen and Thomas and keep all your picks next year. and then if JC is the guy you resign if not you find somebody else and the cycle rolls on.....as long as they don't do stupid signings, young FAs are fine.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 11:33 AM |

Actually they would all come off the books this year.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Gus Frerotte didn't even start Minny's playoff game last year. If he is so great why has he been on half the teams in the league? Sage Rosenfels was a turnover machine in some of the games he played for Houston. He was personally responsible for blowing a 2 TD lead against Indy with under 5 minuntes to go.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 24, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

You add as much as you can this year and then add more next year and then you make your run. The players you add this year will not be old in 2-3 years.

Posted by: Flounder21

----

This is exactly the quick-fix mentality the Redskins need to avoid.

At this point, you have no idea what the team will look like next year. Jason Campbell's contract will be up, Carlos Rogers' contract will be up, Devin Thomas, Malcolm Kelly, Fred Davis, Chad Rinehart, Justin Tryon, Rob Jackson, Chris Wilson, and Alex Buzbee are completely unproven, HB Blades is unproven as a starter, Stephon Heyer needs to prove himself more, and the list goes on. We have very little idea what this teams needs are going to be next season. And for that reason, this team cannot afford to waste the cap space that would be provided by Taylor/Springs/Griffin right now, based on what we think might be a need. That's what I mean by saying any money spent now is spent blindly. That picture becomes much more clear after this season is up.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 11:39 AM | Report abuse

++++Earlier on this post, somebody suggested signing Canty and re-signing Evans while letting Taylor and Daniels go free.
Keep in mind 2 things: (1) Canty's career high in sacks is 3.5, which happens to be Jason Taylor's career low (outside of his rookie year), and (2) JLC is reporting that Canty could receive offers in the range of $8 million a year.

Now I ask you, is this really an upgrade? I say, emphatically, no.+++—PSPS


While I’m not sold on Canty, the stat you use to come to your conclusion is misleading. Sacks are only one element of a 4-3 DE’s worth. And Even less so for a LEFT DE in the Redskins scheme. THAT position requires an anchor against the run, which makes the idea of installing the 240 pound Taylor at that position beyond baffling.

But Canty could be used as more as a Daniels/Evans type, a run stuffer, not a Rushbacker desguised as a hand in the dirt DE. As such he’d be a definite upgrade over the ineffective Taylor, IMO.

I’d even go so far as to say, it almost makes sense signing Taylor as an LB replacement for Marcus Washington (tho not at $8 million) and signing Canty (tho not at $8 million.) Make Canty the DE and Taylor the Sam linebacker. Then on obvious pass downs, either take Canty out or move him inside, and put Taylor on the end.

Of course, since they could probably keep Daniels and sign Evans for the cost of Canty OR Taylor, the idea of payng a ridiculous sum to either is patently absurd.

Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 11:39 AM | Report abuse

skins211,

Because that is the only place to clear cap space to get help for the offense.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:34 AM | Report abuse

Flound on point today....its not that JT might not have a better year, its that we need cap space and he was a way under performer and is the only penalty free cut on our roster. Its not just what he costs, its the opportunity cost of keeping him at 8 mil when you can get younger for the same or better production than the one year you get from him.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

This blog has become overly negative and bashing on everything.

Didn't anybody read the Secret?

Posted by: thehogs | February 24, 2009 1:03 AM |
-----------------

LOL... Best post yet.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 24, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 24, 2009 11:38 AM | Report abuse

How many Pro Bowls or playoff games has JC been to? I'm just saying if you consider JC a legit QB than Gus is.....and Sage who knows, we'll see, after watching him in Houston though, I gotta say I'd still like it if he were in burgundy and gold.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 11:42 AM | Report abuse

If somebody would trade a ham sandwich for springs we should do it as fast as they'll sign the papers and not even ask for mayo.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 11:47 AM | Report abuse

psp,

You know the holes you have now, or the ones that will be created next year when those guys you speak of leave. So replace them now with younger players and then fill the other needs as they arise.

If you wait to fill all your needs at once you will still not have enough money.

You need a LDE now and you still need one next year. You need a younger DT now and you will need one next year. Springs is not even in discussion the dude barley plays if you can't trade him he needs to go.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:48 AM | Report abuse

psp,

Also on the Offense you need a few linemen try to get those now as well, with draft picks.

Fix what you can now and then next year fix the new problems that come up.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:50 AM | Report abuse

we did get rolled over, the second Dallas game, the Ravens game, the Steelers game the Giants games, all of them, when they wanted to got whatever they wanted on the ground.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Are you saying the defense lost those games? Because, the defense kept us in those games in my opinion..

The Dallas game was ONLY that last drive to eat the clock. The Defense held the Cowboys in check ALL game. Offense did nothing... final score 14-10

Ravens game was lost on turnovers. Remember how that game started? The defense got us back in that game with two interceptions. Then they ran the clock out at the end.

Steelers game the offense started INSIDE the 50 of the Steelers I believe 4 to 5 times and produced 6 points. We don't have to go into the sack fest which the Steelers had.

Giants game, the Skins offense was horrible. 2 turnovers. The Giants only had 108 running yards for the WHOLE game so no point there.

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 11:50 AM | Report abuse

skins211,

Because that is the only place to clear cap space to get help for the offense.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:34 AM | Report abuse

I understand you here 100%. I just have fallen in line with the way the FO has operated the past 10 or so years. I just feel that if we free up space it will be wasted on one or two "sexy" names likes Haynesworth or some older O tackle rather than invested in youth as we preach about in here...

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Taylor deserves another shot. He has been a class act, productive and injury free with the EXCEPTION of last year. FREAK INJURY.++++--Skins211

Stop with the crud about the only thing keeping Taylor from success last year was his ONE FREAK INJURY.

First, he was ineffective even when he wasn't injured. For another, he had not one but THREE injury issues.

One, his chronic Plantar Fasciitis. If Taylor was truly classy and still dedicated to football, he'd have forgone DANCING for last year. Parcells, knew hat, and that's why he dumped him. or do you seriously think Vinny cerrato outmaneuvered Tuna?

Then Taylor got a hyperextended knee. I remember theplay,. He arrived late for a tackle, and wasn't spy enough to get out fo the way of the wash.

Then he got kicked in the calf and bled. Unusual, but not freak.

Do you seriously think it was a coincidence or fate an older, undersized player became vulnerable to injury? It happens all the time, every year.

Could he be injury-free this year? Yes. But the odds are against it. Even if he was, he'd still be an undersized DE who can't defend the run.

Offer him a couple of mill, maybe add incentives. Then play him at LB, and DE on third down. He's NOT a full time DE anymore--especially not in the NFC East..

+++Some of you guys talk like we got rolled over and Taylor was this HUGE liability everytime he was on the field. NOT the case. +++

Nobody said Taylor was a liability during pre-game warmups or timesout.

Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 11:53 AM | Report abuse

I understand you here 100%. I just have fallen in line with the way the FO has operated the past 10 or so years. I just feel that if we free up space it will be wasted on one or two "sexy" names likes Haynesworth or some older O tackle rather than invested in youth as we preach about in here...

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 11:52 AM |

Well if they do that then there idiots and this whole discussion is for not, because the team will never be any good.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:54 AM | Report abuse

"You need a LDE now and you still need one next year. You need a younger DT now and you will need one next year.

Posted by: Flounder21"

And I ask you, due to your continuous assertion that this team isn't going anywhere this year regardless, what's the rush?

Why do we need a LDE "now"? Why not wait until next season? If that's when you feel you have this team might be able to compete again, why not wait until then to add a FA?

The draft is different because it takes a couple years for those guys to reasonably pan out. But free agents only have a limited window of true effectiveness. They're brought in to help immediately. Bringing them in this year, when the team likely won't compete for anything, is just wasting a year for these guys. It makes them a year older and a year more expensive when the team IS ready to be back in the mix.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 11:55 AM | Report abuse

exactly, short of an uncapped year you can never do everything in one offseason....we need oline and dline help now, we need a LB or two, we are young in the secondary, and we have another year of young WRs and we're set at TE. IF you can address the lines and LB this year then next year you address JC and if you need to add WRs since Kelly and Thomas are still questions and you can continue to build your lines. But keeping old guys for another year to create 11 needs in one offseason instead of the 3 or 4 next year we'll already have is the reason we're here now. We ignored getting younger on our lines forever constantly adding other things instead of bringing in youth here or there and keeping old guys in key positions. Doing it again would be idiotic.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Why do we need a LDE "now"? Why not wait until next season? If that's when you feel you have this team might be able to compete again, why not wait until then to add a FA?

The draft is different because it takes a couple years for those guys to reasonably pan out. But free agents only have a limited window of true effectiveness. They're brought in to help immediately. Bringing them in this year, when the team likely won't compete for anything, is just wasting a year for these guys. It makes them a year older and a year more expensive when the team IS ready to be back in the mix.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 11:55 AM |

Because if you get them now they will have a full year of playing experience.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 11:57 AM | Report abuse

The skins gave up 3.8 yards a carry on the ground so I have 0 concern about run defense. Was it troubling to see teams running down our throat at the end of the game? Sure it was, but that had little do with personnel and more to do with how much gas is left in the tank at the end of the game. At that point it is ALL will power because everyone on both sides of the line is running on fumes. Name a game this season where we got dominated on the d-line for even a half let alone 4 quarters. I can't think of one.

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 11:59 AM | Report abuse

Sadly, I don't think we will ever see Campbell make a pro bowl or be on playoff teams in DC. If he played in a stable environment he'd be a top 10 QB every year. He just happened to be drafted by one of the stupidest FO's in the league.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 24, 2009 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Its not that the defense lost those games, but in crunch time when we needed to get off the field, they couldn't stop the run, that is a big problem, and contributes to why even though we are statistically the #4 defense, we don't force turnovers, we don't sack the QB, and when teams want to they can just run it out on us. We may have been #4 overall, but I promise if you asked OCs or opposing teams their top 5 defenses they don't want to play we aren't on it.

a list of all scarier defenses than us last year:
Steelers
Ravens
Giants
Tennessee
Chicago
Panthers
Patriots

and at times
the Eagles
and Cowboys

take of the skins colored glasses and realize that other than the second eagles game last year we didn't have a single game where our D was dominant. They gave up the St. Louis game and the San Fran game, they couldn't get off the field in many other games including the Bengals game. We're good, not great and certainly not scary.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 12:03 PM | Report abuse

This is a top 5 defense, and they accomplished that feat even though they almost never sack the opposing QB.

JT should come back if they can sign him for a reasonable number; Hall too, and I like Orakpo.

But the fact is, the most serious issues facing this team are on the offensive side of the ball. The O-line first and foremost. Then there are the WRs. Since there's no talk of the FO going after Harrison or TJ, then I assume they're going to live or die by the production of Thomas and Kelly.

Quite a gamble there.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 24, 2009 12:05 PM | Report abuse

"But keeping old guys for another year to create 11 needs in one offseason instead of the 3 or 4 next year we'll already have is the reason we're here now.

Posted by: zjfr2"

No, it's the opposite. Continually replenishing the roster with free agents and trades is the reason we're here now. That's the reason we had 4 or 5 guys past their prime (Jansen, Washington, Griffin, Springs), 4 or 5 guys leaving their prime (Moss, ARE, Carter, Samuels), 4 or 5 guys entering their prime (Rogers, Hall, Cooley, Mac), 4 or 5 guys developing to hit their prime (Landry, Horton, Golston, Monty), numerous guys nowhere near any of those, and no complimentation between the groups.

This team needs a plan. Cutting some guys and signing others just for the sake of getting younger isn't it.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Please welcome 1stskins fan and Skins211 from Planet Pollyanna! Even though my permanent residence is in Negatoria, I do enjoy vacationing in Planet Pollyanna, the fields are so green there!

Posted by: chrislarry | February 24, 2009 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 11:53 AM | Report abuse

yea Cork, you might want to take a look at EVERY year prior of Taylor's career.

In '07 the guy was on a team that won ONE game the whole year yet he managed to finish with 11 sacks and 4 forced fumbles, an INT and a touchdown. Year before, 13.5 sacks, 9 forced fumbles.

Then, all of a sudden in ONE year he became TOTALLY washed up, injury prone, TOTALLY undersized and not worth a dime.

GET RID OF HIM! HE IS DONE! HE SHOULDN'T PLAY ANOTHER SNAP IN THE NFL!

Also, let's not forget there has to be an adjustment to the defense for BOTH Taylor and Coachins staff. I am sure Blache would admit he didn't know what to do with him. I think an offseason of planning might help and in turn give him another go. We should see VERY early whether he has any magic left..

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 12:08 PM | Report abuse

zjfr2

'...How many Pro Bowls or playoff games has JC been to?...'


Exacta-mundo there, my friend.

While folks yak this-and-that about FA players, sal cap issues, or draft possibilities, the maturation of Jason Campbell is the single most pressing issue for the team.

Think: if the lines get some work, Thomas/Kelly play more, but Campbell's inaccuracies with medium/deep balls continue, does the team look for a q-back in 2010 or turn to Colt?

Yeah and heck yeah it does and should.

No matter what happens on D, the lack of scoring by the redskins offense is scary, and Campbell must take the occasional chance and use his rifle arm to fit balls into tight spaces and avoid the INT fear that stops drives.

Again: add ten points to games lost by the skins and you get 3-4 wins. 10 additional points out of a re-vamped Redskins' offense is both Zorn's and Campbell's concern.

So let's not knock Sage Rosenfels or any other vet q-back out there as in a year, he might be our next new savior.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 24, 2009 12:09 PM | Report abuse

This team needs a plan. Cutting some guys and signing others just for the sake of getting younger isn't it.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 12:06 PM | Report abuse

you're pretty much as wrong as you can be....so by your theory we should sign nobody keep everybody till they all come off the books next year and totally start over with no real base except.....well nothing but tight end???...at that point CP would have maybe one more year, Moss who knows he's always one cut or sprint away from a wrecked season, Fletcher is a year older, you have 4 spots on your Oline you have to replace, 2 on your Dline, potentially 3 at LB, you have to decide on JC, who knows about Kelly and Thomas.

If you Sign Canty, Crowell, and some youth at Guard, and you draft a RT at 13 and a DT in the 3rd then next season you're down to a decision at JC, add another young guy or two to your lines but you're not needed to plug 7 holes, you might need to replace Rocky or Fletcher, and maybe add a receiver. Your plan is push everything to next year and have utter chaos at every position on your roster ours is a slow overhaul a few pieces at a time.....which sounds more logical and doable to you?

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 12:14 PM | Report abuse

"While folks yak this-and-that about FA players, sal cap issues, or draft possibilities, the maturation of Jason Campbell is the single most pressing issue for the team.

Posted by: MistaMoe"

Exactly. And this is why the team can't commit to anything long-term right now. Until a QB of the future is in place long-term (whether or not that's JC), the team has to be able to keep it's options open. And that means NOT tying up its cap space in a bunch of marginal or average free agents.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 12:03 PM | Report abuse

I agree with you there. Our defense is DEFINITELY not feared as some of the teams you mentioned. I think we have a really good defense but not great.

I just have a hard time spending so much time discussing it when we finished 28th in the league in scoring (16.6). We score 20 points a game we win 11 games easy with the schedule last year with the lay-ups we had (thought we had)...

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Exactly. And this is why the team can't commit to anything long-term right now. Until a QB of the future is in place long-term (whether or not that's JC), the team has to be able to keep it's options open. And that means NOT tying up its cap space in a bunch of marginal or average free agents.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 12:16 PM |

Who says they are marginal, and what makes you think they will fine better FA's next year when you want them to rebuild the entire team in one year.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Dan Synder will keep Jason Taylor around next year. PERIOD. Why keep him for an absorbent amount of money, like 8.5$ million, you ask? Because of Daniel Synder.

Dan Synder thinks he knows a thing or two; one thing he knows is that JT will surely dazzle in Hollywood after football (remember Danny boy likes Hollywood and was the bloodline for 'Valkyrie',) and the second is that Vinny can pick #13 with much less of a need at DE.

Danny to Vinny, "Doesn't Jason Taylor resemble Vin Diesel?"
Vinny's response, "Yeah he does. Does Vin have an agent?"

The Oline has youth but Buges chooses to play VETs over young guys; Let Issah Ross or Ruben Riley or Devin Clark or Chad Rinehart take a snap. The LB corp has bodies; Matt Sinclair, Fincher & Tyson Smith. Let theses guys compete to be THE guy at SAM.

Trade Springs - Excellent Idea. Sign Hall - No Brainer. Let Evans test the market - He will surely be playing for an NFC East team and it may not be the Redskins.

From Redskins Team Report - Yahoo Sports -
"“I learned that, especially as a young guy, when you get hurt or take some time off, you still have to study and look at the game plan like you’re playing,” Kelly said. “I kind of got down on myself and when they put the game plans out, I was like, ‘Well, I ain’t gonna be playing for another month, so whatever.’ But now I know what I have to do.”

To that end, Kelly and Thomas were among the handful of players who have spent most of the seven weeks since the season ended at Redskin Park working on their bodies and their games.

“Last year was bittersweet for both Malcolm and Devin,” said Redskins coach Jim Zorn. “They enjoyed being part of the team, but they were disappointed that they didn’t play much. They’ve been working hard in order to contribute a lot more this season.”

Or as Kelly out it, “I’m gonna have the biggest chip on my shoulder.”

Posted by: matthewvickers | February 24, 2009 12:22 PM | Report abuse

zj, you're just not getting it.

Any free agents you sign, unless they're the extraordinary kind like Fletcher, will need to be replaced 3 years down the road. They will hit the ARE/Carter/Rabach end-of-their prime, and we'll all be complaining about how this team ties up cap money in free agents. The goal is to have everyone hitting their prime around the same time, not to have a secondary entering their prime at the same time we have a defensive line standing on their last leg (as we do now).

I find it funny that the biggest critic of the front office is so dead-set on continuing the exact philosophies that brought this team to this state in the first place.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Who says they are marginal, and what makes you think they will fine better FA's next year when you want them to rebuild the entire team in one year.

Posted by: Flounder21

---

I don't. But when the rest of the team is hitting their prime, which right now it's not, that's when it's worth it to risk cap money to sign guys that may put you over the top. This team is nowhere near that point. Signing free agents now will only lessen their ability to do the same 2-3 years down the road, when it may actually be worth it.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 12:35 PM | Report abuse

I find it funny that the biggest critic of the front office is so dead-set on continuing the exact philosophies that brought this team to this state in the first place.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 12:32 PM | Report abuse

How is signing nobody over the age of 28, nobody to the richest ever contracts, not trading picks away, and nobody for more than 3 years the exact same philosophy that got us here? That's pretty much the opposite of what got us here. 4 or 5 reasonable signings of guys 28 or younger would not put anybody in the Carter or Jansen or Thomas or Randel El situations. Canty is TWENTY SIX for crying out loud. There is no guarantee that there will be anybody better next season and I'll take him for 3 years gladly. 4 picks this year, 6 next year (thank you JT) plus reasonable signings and no trades except for trading away of old people is nothing like what this team has been doing. Pushing everything to next year and having to 20 holes in one off season is just the kind of stupid plan that would come from Redskins Park, you can't build a team in one year, it takes time, and signing young FAs to help you now and be productive when everyone matures is just fine by me. We should be looking at no big contracts and should be signing guys at need positions that are 24-28.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Everyone's "prime" is going to be different.

And at any rate, that's not what it's all about. It's mostly about getting hot at the right time, as the Cardinals showed this past year, and as previous wild card teams turned Super Bowl teams have shown.

I'm not too interested in what the Redskins look like in 2011 or 2012 or 2013.

A team can only play season at a time, and so 2009 is what interests most fans.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 24, 2009 12:42 PM | Report abuse

zj,

He will keep arguing all day and night, I'm through.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 12:44 PM | Report abuse

"4 or 5 reasonable signings of guys 28 or younger would not put anybody in the Carter or Jansen or Thomas or Randel El situations. Canty is TWENTY SIX for crying out loud.

Posted by: zjfr2"

You're right.

Andre Carter signs for the Redskins in 2006 at the age of 26-years old. Three years later, he's 29, and the Redskins fans are clamoring about how he is overpaid, not productive, at the end of his prime, and needs to be replaced.

Antwaan Randle El signs for the Redskins in 2006 at the age of 26-years-old. Three years later, he's 29, and the Redskins fans are clamoring about he is overpaid, unproductive, at the end of his prime, and needs to be replaced.

But Chris Canty, not considered a very productive player so far in his career (similar to ARE and Carter), looking for a free agent deal reportedly in the range of $8 million a year (overpaid, similar to ARE and Carter), is at the age of 26 in 2009 (exactly the same as ARE and Carter).

But you're right. There's no comparison between those guys.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 12:48 PM | Report abuse

The money quote, from Vinny Cerrato:

"We're not doing anything with Jason," Washington vice president of football operations Vinny Cerrato said. "He's going to be with us and that's it. That's the plan."


he should have added, "I like to play with play-doh, I read at a 4th grade level, I eat my belly-button lint, I'm afraid of the dark, I think Dan Snyder is sexy, and IQ tests confuse me."

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Taylor/Evans and the rest of the defense are not the problem. While one can make the case that it is not a "scary" defense, it is a very effective one. The D allowed 18.5 points per game which was good enough to rank 6th. The offense scored 16.6 points per game which was good enough to rank 28th. DETROIT outscored us, for cripes sake. You can talk all you want about the D needing to make critical 4th qtr stops or giving up this and that but the fact remains that the only teams we scored more than were Oakland, Cleveland, St. L and Cincy. And we were 8-8 in a really good division. It is not outlandish to think we could compete for a SB next year were we to improve the offense to score several more points per game and basically keep the same D on the field. This team does need to focus where it needs to improve. That focus is on offense, where we were utterly horrible when it came to scoring.

Posted by: amaranthpa | February 24, 2009 12:51 PM | Report abuse

'...when you want them to rebuild the entire team in one year...'

Thinking that a team can be re-built in one year with FA is why the team is where it is.

Adding free agents works better once a committment to the draft establishes a strong enough base of players to which augmented FA's become like frosting on a cake.

The Redskins offensive woes are the result of adding free agents here and there in a way where what they do best didn't match what scheme was being employed.

Presently, the offense is a dink and dunk WCO high accuracy scheme with a big-armed quarterback who doesn't hit guys in stride to get YAC, coupled with pulling guards who block for a pro bowl running back who likes to run to open space.

This is all the result of one year free agent pick ups intended to fix things 'right now' and not as a part of a long term offensive style or scheme.

Yes: coaching changes are reflected here, so that's why adding players who fit what we do is better than just adding a guy because some team didn't want to pay him.

Let's let Zorn chose players who match what he wants to do with the offense. The defensive players would be nice to have, but an occasional 32-21 win would be even better.

Remember: you beat people by scoring points in a league with rules designed to help the offesne.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 24, 2009 12:52 PM | Report abuse

It is not outlandish to think we could compete for a SB next year were we to improve the offense to score several more points per game and basically keep the same D on the field. This team does need to focus where it needs to improve. That focus is on offense, where we were utterly horrible when it came to scoring.

Posted by: amaranthpa | February 24, 2009 12:51 PM |
--------------------

Well put.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 24, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 12:48 PM | Report abuse

ARRRRRGHGGHGHHGH again, read the post, nobody to ridiculous contracts and nobody to longer than 3 year deals!!!!!!!! that is what would avoid the situation we're in now, of extending into eternity bad contracts. After three years everybody you sign now would still be at or below 30 and off the books. If they are still productive and you want them you resign them, if not let them walk....you can sign FA's and not get in the never ending contract scenario we do if you sign them to shorter more reasonable deals which is my point! other teams do it all the time.....

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 12:57 PM | Report abuse

"Adding free agents works better once a committment to the draft establishes a strong enough base of players to which augmented FA's become like frosting on a cake.

Posted by: MistaMoe"

Exactly. This is why signing FAs right now is pointless. There is no long-term base for which to build around.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 12:59 PM | Report abuse

zj, just wanted to say that I don't think Canty would sign a 3 year deal. That limits the amount of money he'd be signing for.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Let's let Zorn chose players who match what he wants to do with the offense. The defensive players would be nice to have, but an occasional 32-21 win would be even better.

Remember: you beat people by scoring points in a league with rules designed to help the offesne.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 24, 2009 12:52 PM |

It's obvious to me that the coaches have no say or JT would have never been brought here. There is no way Blache didn't know JT would be a terrible LDE in his system.

He came from a system where his only job was to get up field and sack the QB, the Skins require there DE's to stop the run first and then get the QB.

A 240 pound player is not stopping the run first, and once you take his quickness factor away he is not going to get many sacks either.

Joey Porter who is the same type of player as JT, stepped in for him in Miami and had 17 sacks. He would have had the same problem that JT had for the Skins.

You can't compare what he did in Miami to what he can do here, totaly different philosophy and responsibilities.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 1:02 PM | Report abuse

"I get the impression that the consensus up here is that this team needs to rebuild...If you don't have that proven foundation, you run the risk of continually having an unbalanced team. That's what has plagued this team for the past decade..."

PSPS23... I agree w/ most of what you're saying but what's missing in what seems to be every season are those draft picks. The entire compliment of draft picks. Why keep plugging holes w/ a guy like Taylor (or even Canty for that matter) if it keeps pushing you back one year. The draft picks are gone from the Taylor trade so giving him one more year to prove his worth is understandable but at $8.5M is difficult to swallow. A contract is a contract and I understand that but I would put the ball in JTs court and have him hit the FA market to see if someone else is willing to pay him that much.

Regardless that core you are talking about is the line (O & D). That's where the 3-5 year plans come from. You can almost throw anyone behind center as long as that line is set. Our D has dreamatically improved since GW put his stamp on it and we seem to have a good mix going on there (minus the LB situation). So we aren't totally out of the hunt if we decided to start over now. You just have to make a plan and stick to it and that's about it. Vinny & Co. can't seem to do that.

Posted by: overzealous08 | February 24, 2009 1:04 PM | Report abuse

"ARRRRRGHGGHGHHGH again, read the post, nobody to ridiculous contracts and nobody to longer than 3 year deals!!

Posted by: zjfr2"

(1) $8 million a year for a DE is not a "ridiculous contract". That's actually pretty standard for a 1st-2nd tier, but not elite, free agent. The franchise number for DE is at $16+ million (which is the average of the top-5 contracts). You'd have to go much higher than $8 million to reach "ridiculous", or even "major" contract status.

(2) No young, entering his prime free agent will sign a 3 year deal when he can easily get the security of a 5 year deal elsewhere. It just doesn't happen. The only way that does happen is if nobody else wants the guy. That won't happen to Canty.

You can scream all you want, but you're living in a dream world if you think Canty is coming here for a moderate, 3-year deal. Saying that is almost as ridiculous as saying 'the Redskins should trade back from the 1st round, pick up 3 extra picks, draft Duke Robinson, Alex Mack, and Phil Loadholt, an LB, and a speedy RB' and expect it to actually happen.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 1:06 PM | Report abuse

zj, just wanted to say that I don't think Canty would sign a 3 year deal. That limits the amount of money he'd be signing for.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:00 PM | Report abuse

You're probably right, and at 26 he's the one guy I'd be ok with a 4 or 5 year deal but 26 is the max age for anything past a 3 year deal, as mentioned above so as to avoid the never ending restructure cap delays.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 1:14 PM | Report abuse

"You just have to make a plan and stick to it and that's about it. Vinny & Co. can't seem to do that.

Posted by: overzealous08"

I agree. The problem is Vinny's plan (save his job by winning now) conflicts with the best plan for the future of the franchise (which would be to sacrifice the season).

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 1:19 PM | Report abuse

A radio host in Houston says he has an inside source that Haynsworth is going to sign with the skins.

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:19 PM | Report abuse

psps23 - "(2) No young, entering his prime free agent will sign a 3 year deal when he can easily get the security of a 5 year deal elsewhere."

Well...if a very aggressive team were to (over)pay the FA and give him the 5 year money in 3 years, he might. FA signings are all about the guaranteed money for the player. Not saying I think we should, just that a team could...

Posted by: amaranthpa | February 24, 2009 1:20 PM | Report abuse

http://blogs.chron.com/fantasyfootball/

Albert Haynesworth will be a Washington Redskin...

Dont know how I feel about this.

Posted by: MondoTE11 | February 24, 2009 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Heard that on Big O and Dukes with from an interview with Sean Saulsbury

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Canty for 5 seasons around 8 mil a year is pretty reasonable and I'm fine with it. There is only one DE even remotely similar to his build rated as a first round pick and that's Tyson Jackson, who would be a reach at 13. Therefore, I'll take the guy who has proven he's durable and a starter on a dline with a lot more talent than ours and has played in the NFC East. At 26 he's only 3 years older than many players about to get drafted, so give me a guy I know is a legit starter over a reach of a draft pick, or Orakpo who we don't really know if he can play end or LB or either for us, or a 3rd round pick that you never know if he'll be any good at a need position. We desperately need help at end. A 300 pound 26 year old is perfect for us. Crowell, and second tier young guards absolutely will sign 3 year deals and be happy to get them.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 1:21 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, Not Sean, Mike Flarrio

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:22 PM | Report abuse

MondoTE11
THats the report they just were talking about.

Boom news I say.

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:23 PM | Report abuse

http://blogs.chron.com/fantasyfootball/

Albert Haynesworth will be a Washington Redskin...

Dont know how I feel about this.

Posted by: MondoTE11 | February 24, 2009 1:21 PM | Report abuse

I really really hope that is wrong.....

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 1:24 PM | Report abuse

A radio host in Houston says he has an inside source that Haynsworth is going to sign with the skins.

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:19 PM |

I'd like to know where the money is going to come from, they would have to cut some people to get that done.

There are not enough contracts to restructure to sign Haynesworth.

And if you could fine the contracts, you would have guys who are off the team still costing you major money against your cap.

That would be very stupid, if you are going after Haynesworth you should cut Griff for sure.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, unless the Redskins clear a HUGE amount of cap space, Haynesworth isn't coming here...Snyder had dinner with his agent, its been widely reported, however they're only roughly 2-3 million under the cap. Until they either clear some space, or release some players, its just not gonna happen.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Alex,
That's terrible news. Haynesworth would destroy this team in the long run because of his cost and durability. He's comparable to Shawn Springs in that he is often injured but dominant while healthy and expensive. The major concern is his character though. He'd probably lose his drive once he signs a contract. Cleats to the face of a guy on the ground doesn't earn yourself a damn thing.

Wouldn't be surprised if it happens tough. That's Danny and Vinny working their miraculous magik.

Posted by: matthewvickers | February 24, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Well...if a very aggressive team were to (over)pay the FA and give him the 5 year money in 3 years, he might. FA signings are all about the guaranteed money for the player. Not saying I think we should, just that a team could...

Posted by: amaranthpa

That's possible, although rare (I can't recall it ever happening to a mid-20's FA). In any case, the Redskins are certainly not in the position to do it.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

take of the skins colored glasses and realize that other than the second eagles game last year we didn't have a single game where our D was dominant. They gave up the St. Louis game and the San Fran game, they couldn't get off the field in many other games including the Bengals game. We're good, not great and certainly not scary.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 12:03 PM

-------------------------------------------

dude check it i will say this once
stop with the b.s there is areason our d couldn't get off the field and it is simple cause the were constantly on the field duh!(because our OFFENSE couldn't give them a rest by sustainin a decent drive) there our no quick fixes but we still have to try and the only way to put forth an effort is to make sum cap space which the easiest most effective way would be drop taylor like the bad habit he is and fill as many wholes as the cap will allow and take that as far as you can and then next year fill as many wholes as possible while all the time keeping the youth movement goin in fact i would try and trade portis for a first and second round pic draft his replacement with the first draft an offensive lineman with our current first and draft d line man with thge second rounder we get for portis and address line backe r in free agency and we have a start on next year where we fix what ever new wholes arrive next year is coming but this year is here now so lets go one year at a time make the best decisions for the team and every bodyget together and on 3.........
1.......
2.......
3.......
!!!!!!! HAIL TO THE MOTHA F@&%IN SKIN!!!!!!

Posted by: all_this_bs | February 24, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Flounder,
I dunno where the money is going to be from either. My gut tells me that you are dead on Good by Griff Hello Al. I mean maybe we restructure Taylor and use what we get out of that to give to Haynesworth. But the article posted by MondoTE11 is the same source, he also has a radio show and, PFT thinks its legit

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:29 PM | Report abuse

15 to 16 mil a year plus the guaranteed money would put him around 20mil a year cap hit.

They would have to cut Springs, Griff and Taylor and restructure contracts to get that kind of money.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 1:29 PM | Report abuse

sometimes guys who report stuff need to dig a little deeper when they hear something. For example, they're reporting that the skins are getting haynesworth, however the team doesn't have the cap space to make it happen. What they should be reporting is that Jon Gruden is enamored with Haynesworth, and has like 40 million of cap space. Which makes more sense, and has a greater plausability of happening??

Doesn't seem like it should be that hard....common sense and all......

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Flounder,
I dunno where the money is going to be from either. My gut tells me that you are dead on Good by Griff Hello Al. I mean maybe we restructure Taylor and use what we get out of that to give to Haynesworth. But the article posted by MondoTE11 is the same source, he also has a radio show and, PFT thinks its legit

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:29 PM |

Why restructure Taylor just release him, he is done after this year if you restructure him he will cost you cap money.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 1:32 PM | Report abuse

sorry, but whats the going rate for swamp land...I've got a bunch of it...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Psps23, you're turning yourself into a pretzel trying to make the argument that bringing J.T. back at his current salary makes any kind of sense.

1) "We need J.T. because he was an important part of our defense." We don't need J.T., he was an impotent part of defense. He had one good game, the 2nd one against the Eagles. Otherwise, you never noticed him because he was either blocked or not playing. I did notice him in the 49ers game...easily being taken out of plays by a tight end.

2) "We shouldn't try much in F.A. now, because we don't know what we'll need a year from now." I've put on my Karnak The Magnificent hat and can predict that we're going to need plenty of linemen and linebackers no matter what system we're running or who our QB is. Furthermore, based on the age of our current players, we are going to need a lot of them sooner, rather than later.

3) "There's nobody good now in F.A., and our F.O. will just do something stupid." What makes you think things will be different a couple of years from now, when our many needs will have multiplied and become even more critical?

*Quotes above are me paraphrasing your arguments, so feel free to object or rephrase.*

But you'd be better off giving this argument up, you're way out a limb, sawing off a branch between yourself and the tree.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | February 24, 2009 1:33 PM | Report abuse

Cindy,

You guys hearing anything about Haynesworth?

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, unless the Redskins clear a HUGE amount of cap space, Haynesworth isn't coming here...Snyder had dinner with his agent, its been widely reported, however they're only roughly 2-3 million under the cap. Until they either clear some space, or release some players, its just not gonna happen.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Bean, that's two in a row I have to agree with. The only way Haynesworth becomes a Skin is if Taylor, Springs, Griffen are all gone, and we restructure like 5 or 6 other contracts.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 1:34 PM | Report abuse

15 to 16 mil a year plus the guaranteed money would put him around 20mil a year cap hit.

They would have to cut Springs, Griff and Taylor and restructure contracts to get that kind of money.

Posted by: Flounder21

----

That's not necessarily true. I'm not a cap expert or anything, but I remember Randle El signed a 7 year, $31 million (about 4.5 million per year) with about $10 million guaranteed in 2006, and his cap hit that year was only $1.5 million with the way it was structured.

Looks like Danny got greedy with the Cardinals hot run, and wants one for himself.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 1:36 PM | Report abuse

you're pretty much as wrong as you can be....so by your theory we should sign nobody keep everybody till they all come off the books next year and totally start over with no real base except.....well nothing but tight end???...at that point CP would have maybe one more year, Moss who knows he's always one cut or sprint away from a wrecked season, Fletcher is a year older, you have 4 spots on your Oline you have to replace, 2 on your Dline, potentially 3 at LB, you have to decide on JC, who knows about Kelly and Thomas.

If you Sign Canty, Crowell, and some youth at Guard, and you draft a RT at 13 and a DT in the 3rd then next season you're down to a decision at JC, add another young guy or two to your lines but you're not needed to plug 7 holes, you might need to replace Rocky or Fletcher, and maybe add a receiver. Your plan is push everything to next year and have utter chaos at every position on your roster ours is a slow overhaul a few pieces at a time.....which sounds more logical and doable to you?

Posted by: zjfr2 |
----------------------------------------

no w yur talkin sum good sh*t man!!!
but my thing is we always hold on to the stars till there is nothin left in them and we get nothin in return if we wait 2 years portis is gonna be broke down and noone will want him right now hes comin off about a 1500 yard season which alota teams out there would gladly give us multiple picks for so lets finally start takin a page from all the other teams out there and use these guys for what we can and just be fore they have nothin left ship them off while the wrapping paper is still on them makin them look pretty that way we get sumthin back 4 what we paid in

Posted by: all_this_bs | February 24, 2009 1:37 PM | Report abuse

sorry, but whats the going rate for swamp land...I've got a bunch of it...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:33 PM |

greg,

I would not dismiss it this has Snyder written all over it. He will mortgage the entire teams future to get this done and you know it.

Let me be the first to say that if the Skins make that signing, the team will not be a contender for another 10 years.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 1:38 PM | Report abuse

REPORT: HAYNESWORTH TO THE ‘SKINS
Posted by Mike Florio on February 24, 2009, 1:09 p.m.

Our pal Lance Zierlein, a Houston radio host who has a blog at the Chronicle web site, reports that the Washington Redskins will sign Titans defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth upon the start of the free agency period.

Unless, that is, the Titans exceed the offer that the Redskins will be making.

Writes Zierlein: “My source tells me to look for a contract that could break $100 million with an average of $15 million to $16 million per. My guy is almost never wrong and [Redskins owner] Dan Snyder gets what he wants.”

The bright side? The next time that Haynesworth tries to remove the scalp of Cowboys center Andre Gurode with a cleat, the behavior will better fit the nickname of Haynesworth’s team.

On Monday, Peter King of SI.com predicted that Haynesworth will land in D.C., pointing out that Snyder was seen dining in Indianapolis with Haynesworth’s agent, Chad Speck.


now its on PFT too

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 1:38 PM | Report abuse

at this point, as currently constituted, salary cap-wise, the redskins are in no position to sign anyone. I'm going to need more than just DS having dinner with a guy, to believe this. Did any of these crack pot reporters cross check to see if Haynesworth's agent represents anyone on the Redskins, or heck any other players going into free agency??

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:39 PM | Report abuse

From ESPN chat today

Jack (Philadelphia, PA): What and who do you think the Redskins will be looking for come the Free Agency Period, starting on friday?


Matt Mosley: (12:31 PM ET ) Redskins are in the process of unloading some of their age (Griffin, Daniels, Springs). They'll free up some room. They may take a run at Al Haynesworth. He's a one-man wrecking crew. I don't know if it's worth ridiculous money for a two-down player but I've seen him take over games. The Redskins have to address the OL and DLs. That's Cerrato's biggest failure if you ask me. Since 2000, they've done an awful job of acquiring interior linemen.

Posted by: TWISI | February 24, 2009 1:39 PM | Report abuse

Where there's smoke....

Posted by: TWISI | February 24, 2009 1:41 PM | Report abuse

That's not necessarily true. I'm not a cap expert or anything, but I remember Randle El signed a 7 year, $31 million (about 4.5 million per year) with about $10 million guaranteed in 2006, and his cap hit that year was only $1.5 million with the way it was structured.

Looks like Danny got greedy with the Cardinals hot run, and wants one for himself.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 1:36 PM |

Psp,

Your salary for the year and a portion of your signing bonus count against the cap for that year.

There is know way to structure it in a way that it will not be a major cap hit, ARE's contract was all bonus so they could space it out.

They would have to give him 80 of the 100mil guaranteed and then sign him to a 10 year contract and even then the hit would be around 9mil a year.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 1:42 PM | Report abuse

We need FRANCHISE LINEMAN.

NOT THREE TO FOUR YEAR STOP GAPS FOR INSANE MONEY.

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 24, 2009 1:43 PM | Report abuse

15-16 per, plus bonus, would be in the 20 million dollar range, wouldn't it??

The team would have to release, JT, CG, and SS, as well as restructuring a bunch of guys.

Sorry, I'm not buying this....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:44 PM | Report abuse

15-16 per, plus bonus, would be in the 20 million dollar range, wouldn't it??

The team would have to release, JT, CG, and SS, as well as restructuring a bunch of guys.

Sorry, I'm not buying this....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:44 PM |

I am buying it because of Snyder, this would be a perfect move for him.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Greg,
I think its 15-16 after the signing bonus and other "goodies". Still a buttload of cashish

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I'm out,

This would be a huge mistake and knowing my luck it will happen.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 1:48 PM | Report abuse

ifthethunderdontgetya,

"We don't need J.T., he was an impotent part of defense. He had one good game, the 2nd one against the Eagles. Otherwise, you never noticed him because he was either blocked or not playing. I did notice him in the 49ers game...easily being taken out of plays by a tight end."

That's a very low level, close-minded view of what Taylor brought to the table. In any case, I'll trust the judgment of Greg Blache, who repeatedly talked about how much unnoticed or under-the-radar stuff Taylor does on the field.

"Furthermore, based on the age of our current players, we are going to need a lot of them sooner, rather than later."

Nope. This is the quick-fix mentality that kills us. We'll need them 2-3 years down the road, not right now. If you were talking about draft picks, I'd agree. But not free agents. Most free agents fall off within 3-4 years, whereas draft picks take 3-4 years to fully develop. By the time we get our "foundation" settled (i.e. a solid base of drafted youth), the free agents we sign now will be at the end of their prime, much like what we talk about with ARE/Carter/Rabach, and we'll be devising ways to rid ourselves of their contracts so we can sign new free agents.

"What makes you think things will be different a couple of years from now, when our many needs will have multiplied and become even more critical"

It won't. But at that time when, hopefully, the team has drafted well and created a solid base of talented youngsters, we can afford to take risks on free agents that may put the team over the top. Right now, it's nearly pointless because, as many say, this team would be very hard-pressed to compete for a SB this year.


Again, the whole "cut JT, sign a FA to replace him" crowd is much more short-sighted than not.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 1:49 PM | Report abuse

+I am buying it because of Snyder, this would be a perfect move for him.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 24, 2009 1:46 PM"

You know what Danny is thinking all of the time? He's thinking to himself, "Can this make it to the big screen?"

My priority would have been D. Hall and drafting a lineman at #13.

Posted by: matthewvickers | February 24, 2009 1:50 PM | Report abuse

until the team releases a good number of players, I'm not buying the AHaynes stuff.....much ado about nothing if you ask me....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Also Florio also said that he does not see Canty in DC but Miami.

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:51 PM | Report abuse

Flounder21 - "You can't compare what he [Taylor] did in Miami to what he can do here, totaly different philosophy and responsibilities."

Yes. The similarity, however, is that he lead each of those teams in sacks. As pitiful as 4 sacks are, he shared the team lead with Evans and Carter. The run defense did not suffer too much with him here. He was a replacement for Daniels/Buzbee which had a whooping total of 2 sacks the year prior... The Skins gave up 4 more yards per game rushing this year with JT than last year without JT. But our scoring defense was about a point better with JT.

The question is when the Skins starter and backup were lost for the season, were they going to get anyone better, regardless of scheme? I don't think so. The cost to get Taylor was a function of the need and timing.

Posted by: amaranthpa | February 24, 2009 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Call me crazy, but I'd take Haynesworth at $15 million per year over Canty at $8 million per year.

I'd also take neither over either.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 1:54 PM | Report abuse

al, Canty to Miami, is another case of looking just a smidgen deeper. Miami drafted 2 DE's last year, does it make sense for them after having done that to turn around and throw somewhat big money at the DE position??

Get past that Parcells drafted Canty, bringing him into Miami would mean he's most likely giving up on either of the 2 guys he drafted, which after 1 year doesn't seem likely.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse

We're so sorry... Uncle Albert....

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 24, 2009 1:55 PM | Report abuse

I am just reporting what he said on the radio show.

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:56 PM | Report abuse

al, 10-4, but when you think about what I said, doesn't what I'm saying make more sense than what he is saying?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

YO WE ARE GETTING HAYNESWORTH!

http://blogs.chron.com/fantasyfootball/

100 million... holy crap!

Posted by: Rashad8o4 | February 24, 2009 1:58 PM | Report abuse

BTW I recommend if you don't listen, to Big O and Dukes to download the pod-cast of their interview with Florio and the post interview rants by them and fans.

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 1:59 PM | Report abuse

I dunno if it does or not, having 3 good DEs in a rotation is how the game is played now.

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

QUESTION FELLAS....

If Andre Smith drops to # 13 do the Skins grab him??

The guy's stock seems to be dropping every minute..

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Greg, the hot trend in the league is to stockpile defensive linemen. I see no reason why having 2 young DEs would stop Parcells from bringing in another if he thinks he could help.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Better yet, I'd take Haynesworth and Canty over keeping hall......Haynesworth and Canty, Smith at 13, a guard in the 3rd and away we go in fantasy land....

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

I'm not seeing it with Canty in Miami. So if his draft choices play, then he's paying big money for Canry to sit, and be a part time player. Doesn't seem like something parcells would do.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 2:06 PM | Report abuse

+++yea Cork, you might want to take a look at EVERY year prior of Taylor's career.
....

Then, all of a sudden in ONE year he became TOTALLY washed up, injury prone, TOTALLY undersized and not worth a dime.++++---SKINS211

You summed it up better than me.

+++GET RID OF HIM! HE IS DONE! HE SHOULDN'T PLAY ANOTHER SNAP IN THE NFL!++++--SKINS211


Here's where we disagree. I say sign him at a greatly reduced figure, with incentives, to replace M. Washington at LB, and be a hand-on-the-ground rusher on obvious pass plays, where a run-stuffing LDE can move inside to tackle.

By doing this, the team fills its LB need with a low risk signing, and lowers the amount of wear and tear on a 35 year old 240 pound player.

The insanity of the JT trade is what the team paid for him, and how they tried to use him last year. The draft picks are gone forever, but maybe they can salvage something this year.

Hey, it's sad seeing out heroes age and lose their skills. Smart coaches utilize what the player has left, not live in the past.

It's not just me who claims a anchor is needed at LDE. Warren Sapp was talking in detail to that matter on the NFL Tv Combine show. 4-3 DE's are a little like forwards in the NBA. You need a small forward (rusher) and a power forward (anchor). Playing both isn't the answer.

If CARTEr had gone down for the year, and not Daniels, the Taylor trade would have made much more sense.

Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse

That little stage called denial. Beantown you are in it. This franchise is run by a pack of ADD riddled idiots. They need a shiny new toy rather than being smart and spreading that money to several good players. Let's break the bank for the next Dana Stubblefield. These guys are f'n morons.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 24, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Sorry, I'm not buying this....

Posted by: BeantownGreg

I totally agree with you B. I am not buying this.

JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | February 24, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

If Andre Smith drops to # 13 do the Skins grab him??

The guy's stock seems to be dropping every minute..

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 2:01 PM |

Yes.

Posted by: matthewvickers | February 24, 2009 2:09 PM | Report abuse

+++SAGE TO SAIL TO VIKINGS
Posted by Mike Florio on February 24, 2009, 10:39 a.m.

The Houston Chronicle reports that, a year after the Texans nearly traded quarterback Sage Rosenfels to the Vikings, the deal is going down....+++

In return they get Parsley, Rosemary & Tyme while a solder stands and polishes a gun.

Two best lyricists of MY generation?..Chuck Berry and Paul Simon...

Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

I think psp23 is spot on.

I want a Rover, but I'm thinking long range.

- Common

Posted by: learnedhand1 | February 24, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

CORK
LMAO

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

pos, either denial or reality depending on what you want to believe.

Just answer me this, at this point how are the redskins going to afford what is rumored to be a 100 million dollar contract at 16 million per, when they are only 2 under the cap presently.

Until they get close to 20 million under it, its poppycock, its just selling newspapers, and advertisements for those websites.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 2:15 PM | Report abuse

bean, they dont have to be under until when though? they could make this move then work on making it fit, right? Or do they need to be under by the start and stay under?

Posted by: Zeebs | February 24, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

Well at least we can look forward to another intriguing season if we sign Haynesworth. Nothing like the Redskins to make a fanbase excited going into the season.

It'd be REALLY interesting if they were able to keep all their pieces from last year and add Haynesworth. The #4 defense getting it's 3 most talented players healthy (Taylor, Springs, Griffin) AND bringing in the most dominant DT in the league? It's a gamble, but imagine all the top healthy guys on the field at the same time.

Not saying I'd want it, but it sure would make things interesting.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 2:18 PM | Report abuse

+++.... I'm going to need more than just DS having dinner with a guy, to believe this. Did any of these crack pot reporters cross check to see if Haynesworth's agent represents anyone on the Redskins, or heck any other players going into free agency??

Posted by: BeantownGreg++

Your usual fine analysis, Beans. I'm SURE they weren't discussing Haynesworth...I'm positive Haynesworth's agent, at the combine right before free agency opens, with the biggest FA catch in the NFL as a client, spent all evening just shooting the bull with The Daniel--maybe talking about Leigh Torrence or bringing back Bruce Smith.

Crack pot reporters indeed! What do they know?

Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 2:18 PM | Report abuse

I doubt they sign Haynesworth. From what I've read, there's been no real interest in him from other teams, so this may be a ploy on his people's part to try and spark interest/raise the $$$ bar.

The Redskins don't need a DT that bad.

I think they'll draft Orakpo, and resign JT, and hope that between the two they get the pass rush they need. Other than a lack of sacks, this defense is solid.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 24, 2009 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Yes Hanysworth and Kelly share agents, so they must have been negotiating Kelly's contract extension for his incredible play last year

Posted by: alex35332 | February 24, 2009 2:21 PM | Report abuse

If they want to give him a 30M bonus and a 7-8 year deal that is backloaded with high salaries it can be done easily. I don't want to believe it but this FO has no credibility.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 24, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

+++Call me crazy, but I'd take Haynesworth at $15 million per year over Canty at $8 million per year.

I'd also take neither over either.

Posted by: psps23 +++

Crazy? I don't think so. In fact that kind of rational thinking will get you kicked off this board if it continues.

Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Nah, I think they go after Smith if he is there. If not, they will go after Cushing or Matthews. I see a run on LB's in the early rounds with Curry going 1

Posted by: Zeebs | February 24, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

bean, they dont have to be under until when though? they could make this move then work on making it fit, right? Or do they need to be under by the start and stay under?

Posted by: Zeebs | February 24, 2009 2:17 PM | Report abuse

have to be under and stay under by Friday

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 2:23 PM | Report abuse

cork, as usual defends the reporter.

Don't take into consideration that the redskins as I've stated NUMEROUS times as currently constituted cannot afford what it would take to sign AH.

Just trot our your standard, "defend reporters", and ignore the facts....

zeebs, I'm not sure about dates and stuff like that.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 2:25 PM | Report abuse

yeah, unless it is a seriously incentive laden contract, just the signing bonus of a 100 mil contract would be between whaT, between 10 AND 20 MIL. So prorate that over 7 years (max contract length yes?)...

hey, if its 10 mil signing, 7 years, 100 mil and only 20% is guaranteed, hmmm

Posted by: Zeebs | February 24, 2009 2:28 PM | Report abuse

psps23 "Right now, it's nearly pointless because, as many say, this team would be very hard-pressed to compete for a SB this year."

After watching the Cards and looking at our team, I disagree. Again, improve offensive scoring, keep current D and we have a decent chance to compete for a SB. I would also argue that in general (perhaps not for our FO) FA's are less risky than drafts because they are more of a known quantity and can be better valued (in theory) - but you pay a premium for that information. A team obviously needs a mix but it comes down to picking the right people for either the draft or FA. You can't build through the draft if you have bad drafts. Similarly, you can't build through FA if you make bad signings. But I believe you can build your team with an emphasis on either one if you choose your players well. The problem with the Skins (IMO) is that our success with picking FAs is marginally above average at best and our success with drafting is substantially below average. That history adds up to dead cap space.

Posted by: amaranthpa | February 24, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

learnedhand1 - You've got it.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 2:29 PM | Report abuse

So Hall is out and Hanyesworth is in?
Taylor is back and Springs is trade bait and Evans is on the market.

Juicy.

Posted by: matthewvickers | February 24, 2009 2:34 PM | Report abuse

we could cut Griffen, trade Springs, restructure Cooley, Landry, Portis, Samuels, and Moss. Sign Hall, Canty, Haynesworth, Crowell, draft Smith or Orakpo, and 2 guards and go the Super Bowl baby!!!!


lol, the sad thing is this might have really been said in Ashburn this week.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

amaranthpa - I don't deny that any team on any given year has a shot at winning the whole thing. But there are reasons teams like Pitt, Indy, and New England are contenders year after year. Sometimes, it's because they have once-in-a-lifetime players leading their teams. Other times it's because they have front office that consistently keeps a very talented overall product on the field. For NE and Indy, it's both. For Pittsburgh, it's a case of the latter.

Every time the Redskins attempt to make that run, they sacrifice a little bit of their future along with it. There comes a point where the risks outweigh the probability of winning. At this point, with a majority of the main parts of the team a year older and more fragile, it's my opinion that time has hit. I could be wrong (in fact, I'd love to be wrong), but I don't see it in the cards for this year.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 2:37 PM | Report abuse

I think you guys have it pegged. Haynesworth is too big a risk and too expensive for a team that has to play dodge ball with the cap. Plus, a lot of people see Haynesworth as afflicted with SPS (Straight Pocket Syndrome).

SPS is characterized by a player who plays extremely well when playing for a contract. Once he gets a contract and his pockets are straight, his overall productivity falls off noticeably.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | February 24, 2009 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Sign Haynesworth to a "7 year deal", then cut him after this season when the CBA runs out.

It's so simple. Danny's a genius.

Posted by: psps23 | February 24, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

if 2010 is uncapped we sacrifice nothing!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

++++
Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse
+++++

I am not agreeing with what the Skins gave up to get Taylor. It was way too much. But like you said, the picks are long gone.

The team has done a pretty decent job in the salary situation because EVERY year it is said the Skins screwed themselves over and won't be able to make moves BUT they find a way to still make some splashes by a lot of restructuring of contracts. As pathetic as it is you have to give credit to the finance department to allow the spending we do even though it hasn't shown for much which is the fault of player pers.. I mean Vinny.

My point is if Taylor get's back to form with 10 sacks and a couple forced fumbles he is worth 8 mil a year. (True or false?)
Look at what the top DEnds are being paid.

Also, do me a favor and take a look at the top sack producers from this past season and look at their stats from the year before. Guys can have one down year and come back. You act like Taylor is some beat up old man. Guy looks like he still takes pretty damn good care of himself to me.

Are you living in a dream world thinking that we should have contracts on a year by year basis? Good luck with that dude...

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 2:48 PM | Report abuse

++++
Posted by: TheCork | February 24, 2009 2:07 PM | Report abuse
++++

continued...

2007 SACK NUMBERS

Joey Porter - 5.5
Julius Peppers - 2.5
Dwight Freeney- 3.5
Lemarr Woodley - 4.0

+++ guess these guys should have been let go and unemployed in 2008...

Posted by: Skins211 | February 24, 2009 2:53 PM | Report abuse

beep beep

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 24, 2009 3:02 PM | Report abuse

they're not 35 and about to retire or paid as highly at the time as JT is now.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 24, 2009 3:03 PM | Report abuse

In Jason Taylor's 2008 season he was playing injured 85% of the season. Let's see if and what he can do at 100% health. If the trend among sack artists & sacks remains the same then he is a sure-fire ten plus sack guy next season.

Posted by: matthewvickers | February 24, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse

psps23 - I believe that with the way the league is these days, there is no "mortgaging your future". It is all about picking players and NE, INDY and PIT do that better than most. NE won 11 games without their once in a lifetime player but with a guy with zero experience replacing him. Don't get me wrong, I am not discounting Brady or Manning who are two of the best to have ever played, but the fact of the matter is they simply have better all around players/coaches than most of the other teams. We have the players on defense to win. We don't currently on offense. If there is an impact offensive player in the first round, the skins should pick him. Otherwise, add offensive FA's that will up your scoring ability and draft for team need. That would allow you to compete this year and develope players for the future. Winning now and building for future are not mutually exclusive. But again, none of this works if you draft poorly and/or make bad FA signings.

Let's face it. 4 years ago we could have built for the future and choosen Jason Campbell or we could have tried to win then and signed over the hill FA Kurt Warner. It cost roughly 19M over those 4 years for both Warner and Campbell (not including the cost of the extra draft picks used to get Campbell). Where was the better value?

Posted by: amaranthpa | February 24, 2009 3:56 PM | Report abuse

From the Houston Chronicle
Albert Haynesworth will be a Washington Redskin

Remember back on December 23rd when I told you guys that Scott Pioli would be the GM for the Kansas City Chiefs before anyone had it? I got it from a very well-connected league source. That source is talking (actually texting) again.

This time around he tells me that the Washington Redskins will break the bank to sign Albert Haynesworth. The Titans could come over the top of the Redskins deal as well, but my guess is that the Redskins will let Haynesworth get the best offer possible from the Titans and then "better deal" it.

My source tells me to look for a contract that could break $100 million with an average of $15 million to $16 million per. My guy is almost never wrong and Dan Snyder gets what he wants. As a Texan fan, I would really be devastated to see Haynesworth leave the division ... only, no I wouldn't. Beat it, Haynesworth.

Posted by: skinswest | February 24, 2009 4:44 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company