Network News

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

Samuels's Contract in Detail

According to a source who has reviewed Chris Samuels's new deal, it's very much in line with the approach the Skins took on the Andre Carter and Antwaan Randle El deal, only the figures are higher.

Samuels's $5 million base salary for 2009 is now down to $2 million, with a $3 million signing bonus (he ends up getting the same $5 million in cash, just $3 million of it now). The deal saves the Skins about $2.5 million.

In 2011 (prior to that season), the Redskins will have an $11.475-million option bonus on him, so essentially this new deal binds Samuels here for two more years. Samuels is coming off a serious injury now, and two years from now he might be more of a right than left tackle. This deal is kinda complicated and there are some other option variables that come into play, but this is the thrust of it.

If the Skins exercise that option then, they would d pick up the 2011-2014 portion of the deal.

The new deal adds two years to his old contract (which was set to expire in 2013, but it
contains voidables - as the old deal did - that kick in after 2012.

Whew. This is the fourth deal the Skins have done with Samuels since 2005. I should have taken a minor in accounting.

By Jason La Canfora  |  February 25, 2009; 6:25 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Griffin Restructuring Nearly Done
Next: Free Agency Countdown -- and a Chat

Comments

No way I'm first!!!!

Posted by: MeatShalom | February 25, 2009 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Snidely Owl is up to his old tricks ... sigh ...
Haynesworth.

Posted by: periculum | February 25, 2009 6:36 PM | Report abuse

BONG!

Posted by: bigmurf08 | February 25, 2009 6:36 PM | Report abuse

This talk of getting big ticket DL is nuts!

Don't think the Redskins need to spend big draft picks or FA $ on the DL. Last year's defense was more than adequate (10th in points allowed). They didn't get many turnovers, but it's not a given that a better pass rush will increase picks. For example, Dallas lead the league in sacks, yet had only 1 more pick than the Redskins.

Where they need lots of help is in SCORING POINTS. They were 28th. Only 3 plays over 40 yards. Only 1 rush over 30 yards. A serious lack of game-breaking plays.

Offense was adequate in yards/carry, and passing efficiency was also good, so it's not a matter of execution per se. They need to improve the O-line, and hope that their receivers will start getting open on crossing and seam routes.

Those 8 yard digs are killing them.

So, it's difficult to see how Haynesworth or any other DL can improve the offense's ability to score points. I just don't think the turnovers will increase enough to get that done.

Whereas, an offense scoring a lot of points will make the defense they have even better, for all the obvious reasons.

Posted by: dpc2003 | February 25, 2009 6:39 PM | Report abuse

JLC -

Great reporting! Accounting is for Geeks, humm, maybe you should have taken it then...jk. Looking at the salary cap and the fact that only base salaries can be spread out to make cap room I would expect something to be done with Jason Taylor now that the skins have decided to keep him. How we get enough room to sign Albert is beyond me...Jason, can you ask around and see how the Synder machine would have to work the numbers to make this $100 Mil deal happen?

Posted by: 1footballguru | February 25, 2009 6:40 PM | Report abuse

"Where they need lots of help is in SCORING POINTS. They were 28th." It is only one point, and the Skins are in need of many more, but it is a good one. If there is one aspect of team performance that is sucking pond scum it is point scoring. This rests at the doorstep of (a) the QB and (b) the coaching staff. There is not much that can be done right now with (b) but there is something that can be done with (a). It won't take much in the way of $$$ to get the other Collins, Kerry. JC hasn't exactly lit the place up and this will put pressure on him to ramp it up several notches. Collins knows the WC because that is what they use in Tenn. As of right now he could do a lot better with Zorn's offense than JC could, unless he taps into some hidden performance wells that we haven't seen yet. With Collins at the helm it will give the Skins some time and another chance to do better at the "QB of the future" game.

Posted by: AntonChigurh | February 25, 2009 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the reason our D didn't get as many turnovers is because we never had the offense to back us up. When a team has an offense that gives them a lead, they can hunt and focus more on turnovers rather than not letting the other team scor 17 points

Posted by: DaFunBunch | February 25, 2009 7:08 PM | Report abuse

former redskin great lav coles was let go by the jets

Posted by: drewkinnear | February 25, 2009 7:12 PM | Report abuse

So, it's difficult to see how Haynesworth or any other DL can improve the offense's ability to score points. I just don't think the turnovers will increase enough to get that done.

Whereas, an offense scoring a lot of points will make the defense they have even better, for all the obvious reasons.

Posted by: dpc2003 | February 25, 2009 6:39 PM


The offense will improve immensly in the second year of our implemented offense. Remember how brutally basic our plays were last year, well those days are gone. I can see us being alot more aggressive on offense with another year under our collective belts under Zorny

Posted by: DaFunBunch | February 25, 2009 7:13 PM | Report abuse

I am for the record (because I know you were dying to know my official stance) against signing Haynesworth. But do I think it's a huge mistake? No. If we draft well and pick up a starting OT in the first round - which even Cerrato should be able to do given the tackle depth in this draft - and just one of the 3 2nd rounders develops into a legit pass catcher (my money is on Kelly), this offense could be at least average. Add the best DT in the game to a Top 10 defense and you could easily have a playoff contender next year. Also keep in mind that 2010 could be an uncapped yr.

All that said, i think we should save the money but we could do worse things (see Archuleta, Lloyd, etc)

Posted by: Notorious_LMG | February 25, 2009 7:13 PM | Report abuse

The New York Jetshave parted ways with receiver Laveranues Coles, an NFL source told ESPN.com

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3934737

Posted by: DaFunBunch | February 25, 2009 7:16 PM | Report abuse

And on the looming Haynesworth contract, it would make sense pay him an inordinate amount of money in the uncapped year, taking the pressure off of the other years of the contract, and giving him most of his bonus at that time so we dont take a huge cap hit if we release him after

Posted by: DaFunBunch | February 25, 2009 7:19 PM | Report abuse

Its on the way Cindy, lucky for me recent stock market events make it not that special....

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 25, 2009 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Coles was never great for the Skins. He was injured and wined himself into a trade for Moss -- I believe he also cost the Skins a 9 mil dead cap hit that year just to get rid of him...

Posted by: siris | February 25, 2009 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Lets not forget that every agent says that the Redskins are trying to sign their player because it drives up the price for the player because we over pay for everything.

Posted by: peteywheatstraw | February 25, 2009 8:03 PM | Report abuse

Just checking, but you're all aware that the Skins will have only have two DTs on the roster as of Friday.

They have to sign at least two more...

I'm rooting for Haynesworth and Golston. Although, I suspect RFA Golston will receive an offer larger than the Skins are willing to match -- leaving them with Haynesworth and Montgomery.

Posted by: siris | February 25, 2009 8:07 PM | Report abuse

The only way the 'Skins begin to improve is to restructure Cerrato's contract down to zero and get rid of him. If he were working for any other team, he would have been fired long ago. Last year when he was promoted to head of football operations, a reporter for the other daily said that when he mentioned this to an executive from another team in the NFC East, the guy fell down laughing. When I read about it, I cried. Fans, get used to 8-8. maybe 9-7. That's the level of this front office.

Posted by: pjente | February 25, 2009 8:11 PM | Report abuse

Let's also not forget special teams.
How about signing a good punter and kicker?

With better field position and a few more field goals we would probably have won a least one or two more games last season, which would have put us in the playoffs.

Posted by: _Stumped_ | February 25, 2009 8:13 PM | Report abuse

If our players are overpaid, then it's okay to let them hit free agency without a contract. Perhaps they can be had for less.

Posted by: _Stumped_ | February 25, 2009 8:16 PM | Report abuse

SALARY CAP CLIMBS EVEN HIGHER
Posted by Mike Florio on February 25, 2009, 8:16 p.m.

On a day that the Tampa Bay Buccaneers added more than $12 million to a salary cap bulge that already exceeded $50 million, the Bucs and every other team unexpectedly picked up another $4 million.

According to Adam Schefter of NFL Network, teams were informed that the salary cap will move from $123 million to $127 million.

The increase comes from a tweak in the CBA, which increases the cap if teams didn’t spend close enough to the limit in 2008.

The increase in the spending maximum also increases the mandatory spending minimum by more than $3 million.

From a competitive standpoint, teams who were pressed against the prior maximum have gotten some relief. And the agents for free agents and for players already under contract will surely do their best to get some of that money diverted to their clients.

Heads up!!!!! No some Haynesworth, Canty, Hall talk isn't as crazy as earlier.......any news on this Cindy?

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 25, 2009 8:20 PM | Report abuse

Why won't JLC give a little feedback on the whole Haynesworth rumor?

Posted by: Fuzzy21 | February 25, 2009 8:24 PM | Report abuse

jesh!
So, $4M is what? A second round draft pick?

I guess some relief is better than no relief.

What I'm wondering is what will the Danny do in an uncapped year? Would he really be willing to zero out all that cap hell?

Posted by: _Stumped_ | February 25, 2009 8:25 PM | Report abuse

well we were under a little anyway, Daniels voids off Friday, a couple restructures and Taylor or Springs cut and we could be 15 - 20 in cap space.

Posted by: zjfr2 | February 25, 2009 8:27 PM | Report abuse

It's something.

Posted by: _Stumped_ | February 25, 2009 8:33 PM | Report abuse

Wouldn't it be interesting if teams could trade salary cap room over a certain period of say 5 years in exchange or draft picks or other players

Posted by: DaFunBunch | February 25, 2009 8:35 PM | Report abuse

that way we could have even less draft picks

Posted by: DaFunBunch | February 25, 2009 8:36 PM | Report abuse

It's not really good to have pass rushing problems on the DL and to have a weak OL to go with it. In practice, it would appear that big problems are actually small ones.

Posted by: _Stumped_ | February 25, 2009 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Wouldn't it be interesting if teams could trade salary cap room over a certain period of say 5 years in exchange or draft picks or other players

Posted by: DaFunBunch | February 25, 2009 8:35 PM

They can, at least when players are involved. Happened with Archuleta. Archuleta renegotiated his contract to reduce the cap hit and Chicago paid him what he gave up from the Skins. We could trade Portis and reduce his cap hit to zero if he`d renegotiate his contract, pay back bonuses, and then collect new bonuses from his new team. Also, Arrington gave back money to reduce his cap hit in exchange for his release -- and a big new signing bonus from the Giants.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 25, 2009 8:43 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand the talk about Springs playing safety. Why?

The Redskins have LaRon Landry, Chris Horton and Kareem Moore.

No need for Springs, his salary or his injuries.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 25, 2009 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Gotta hand it to Vinny, these restructures are pretty brilliant. Salary cap space now, easier to cut later. Virtually no downside (only way there is downside is if one of them plays to the point of an all-pro, in which we would actually want to keep them longer. Don't really see that happening though.)

Posted by: psps23 | February 25, 2009 8:50 PM | Report abuse

Which leads me to my second point...now the Haynesworth signing makes sense. Vinny's implemented the 2-year plan. Not saying I agree with it, but it looks like that's what Vinny's building. And if that's his goal, who better to bring in than the most dominant defensive lineman during his prime.

Posted by: psps23 | February 25, 2009 8:53 PM | Report abuse

Jasno says

'... and two years from now he might be more of a right than left tackle....'


Samuels will be more of a right tackle later in his career?

Hey: anybody playing more than 6 years in a league where 3-4 years is the average is already in the later stages of his career.

Moe says, "Promote from within--move Chris Samuels to right tackle now. Stat!"

Get it over with and put Heyer in the position to back up left or right tackle.

This move further supports the notion that the 13th pick must be a left tackle prospect who can come in and start on day one.

Andre Smith or Michael Oher--if either of them is there when the pick comes up-- must be taken to make this move practical.

The skins will have two bama tackles and the ability to run right or left with maulers--this removes the annoying tendency to run left and stops the protection breakdowns from the right side.

No brainer, isn't it?

It isn't if you don't have no brains.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 25, 2009 8:54 PM | Report abuse

Call me when the dust settles...

Posted by: _Stumped_ | February 25, 2009 8:57 PM | Report abuse

++++Haynesworth isnt like stubblefield at all. While the contract they get will look similar, their playing styles are completely different.

Posted by: DaFunBunch++++

Not the playing style we’re referring to, Fun…It’s the fact that Stubby & Big daddy (the same year) were gobbled up by the redskins for waaaay too much money, and neither played worth a damn for the team.

Stubby went back to SF and was successful, after his big payday in DC.

I suspect word got around the league. Come to the Redskins for your Big Payday.

Not only is Haynesworth injury prone, and a face stomper who likes to eat, he also only shows up Big Time for salary drives. You’d think the franchise would learn.

Granted, when he’s after the money he’s an absolute beast, but given Redskins history and his, the odds are too good he’ll be a fat washout.


Posted by: TheCork | February 25, 2009 9:00 PM | Report abuse

psps23

'...who better to bring in than the most dominant defensive lineman--Haynesworth-- during his prime...?'


The singular issue is what happens if one or two of the low cost young'ns on D or somebody in last year's draft class becomes a keeper in three/four seasons and wants money eaten up by Fat Albert's contract?

Re-do the deal, right?

But then you're re-creating the same dead money, let players of need walkaway situation that has the team in the talent bind it's in now.

Why not just draft BJ Raji if you want a monster in the middle of the skins' D? He'll be cheaper, coachable and have less mileage on his frame.

Moe says save the money and start undoing the sal cap mismanagement that hampers the team.

Leave the fat titan to tennessee-- he's only playing the field to get a raise anyways.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 25, 2009 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Haynesworth ... only shows up Big Time for salary drives.

Posted by: TheCork | February 25, 2009 9:00 PM

Mr. Crock, sir,

Use your imagination. Guy does well in salary drives? No problem. We give him a one-year contract and he`ll be even bigger next year than this year. Then, next year, another one year contract. That eliminates all risk that he`ll ever stop being the beast he is.

Of course, each one-year contract will have to contain a $30 million signing bonus. Will that be a problem?

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 25, 2009 9:10 PM | Report abuse

Channing Crowder has re-signed with the fins.

There goes Moe's dream of him supplanting Rocky Mac at wlb

But wow, just think--they had money to keep a young player of need around.

Trivia question: name the last young quality redskin the FO had the funds to keep in-house.

Betts? Rock?

Ha! on that one.

I wonder if Parcells is innerested in Fat Albert or any other player who'll break the aqua and blue bank.

Doubt it.

Parcells lack 'o interest is instructive as he's a guy who knows what he's doing.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 25, 2009 9:12 PM | Report abuse

John Keim
WarpathInsiders.com
Feb 24, 2009
Updates and opinion on the Redskins including the Haynesworth rumor, DeAngelo Hall and others.
…It’s hard to determine what’s real and what isn’t when it comes to the Redskins and free agency. Yes, we know Dan
Snyder had dinner with the agent for Albert Haynesworth. But that wouldn’t be the first time he’s had dinner with the
agent for a top player he had no intention of signing. Or couldn’t afford to sign.
…If the Redskins do indeed sign Haynesworth, they would still have to make a couple big releases to afford him. You
can’t backload deals like in the past because of the uncapped years. So you have to have the cap room this year for a
large number.

Posted by: TWISI | February 25, 2009 9:13 PM | Report abuse

…It’ll be interesting to watch what happens with DeAngelo Hall. His agent, a league source said, is frustrating the
organization. They would much prefer to deal with his former agent, Joel Segal. But now it’s Alvin Keels, a Virginia
Beach guy who is very young (also represents Andre Smith). Segal, who works well with the Redskins, is not
involved. We know this in part because he’s excellent at returning calls and has not returned any this week. That’s
one sign he’s not involved. We’ve also been told by the league source that it was just Keels doing the deal.
…Yes, a league source said the Redskins might have interest in Chris Canty. However, the source said there’s a
difference between interest and pursuit, the source said. He was not confident the Redskins would go after him but
said it would be a good fit even if he’s spent the past couple years in a 3-4. Canty, though, has the size Greg Blache
likes in a left defensive end, giving him a young anchor. This move wouldn’t be bad at all.
…One league source said the Redskins don’t expect a lot of activity, but it will be more than last year. It’ll likely be
somewhere between last year and the Archuleta-Randle El-Lloyd year (yes, Lloyd was a trade, we know).
…Reed Doughty said his back is feeling great and he’s running on a treadmill. If they had to practice tomorrow he
could. He’s hoping to return and was disappointed by not being tendered. His back will give some teams pause.
Doughty is a good special teamer, but he’s the No. 4 safety here at best. If they keep Mike Green around then
Doughty is the fifth safety. Good guy to have; replaceable.

Posted by: TWISI | February 25, 2009 9:14 PM | Report abuse

The Redskins can always re-sign Demetric Evans if they don’t snag Canty. But it’s a wise move to see if they can
get Canty first. He’s simply much better and is younger. If they got Canty, here’s what we could see: Canty moving
inside on pass rush downs with Brian Orakpo going to end and Jason Taylor rushing as a standup linebacker. That’s
better than what they had this year.
…But we heard from too many people who thought Taylor was simply done. Some said that when the Redskins first
got him and nothing changed their minds. People can’t believe they wouldn’t redo his deal. Nobody else would pay
him what the Redskins are and we mean nobody.

Posted by: TWISI | February 25, 2009 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Discouraging that Keim doesnt say anything about the O. For that matter, most people up here have forgotten that we have an O problem that Haynesworth cant fix -- unless he goes both ways, and I wouldn`t want to be the one who has to ask him about going both ways.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 25, 2009 9:22 PM | Report abuse

Only reason Springs playing safety would make sense is so he can play centerfield allowing for Landry to play more in the box and blitz. But agreed for the amount of money Springs makes to play 6 games is not worth it. If they don't sign DHall they have to keep him. The likes of just Rogers, Smoot and Tryon at CB is not a promising one.

At least the salary cap seems to increase a good deal every year. We need that or the no cap to continue our credit shuffling ways.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 25, 2009 9:25 PM | Report abuse

We tendered Suisham. I was hoping for a better option than him or Rayner.

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

The Redskins have tendered a contract to kicker Shaun Suisham, a restricted free agent this offseason.

Suisham is one of five restricted free agents on the Redskins’ roster.

Under restricted free agency, NFL teams can sign Suisham to an offer sheet, but the Redskins can match any offer to retain him.

If the Redskins do not match, they may receive a draft pick as compensation.

Suisham completed his second full season as the Redskins’ kicker last year.

He converted 26-of-36 field goal attempts and all 25 of his PATs.

Suisham got off to a strong start, connecting on four field goals in games at Dallas and Philadelphia, both wins for the Redskins.

He struggled from long range in the second half of the season, though, and his field goal percentage was among the lowest in the league.

A 3-year veteran, Suisham has been good on 67-of-86 field goal attempts. His career long is a 52-yarder in 2006.

In 2007, he posted two overtime field goals to help lead the Redskins to wins.

Suisham is expected to compete with free agent pickup Dave Rayner for the Redskins’ kicking job this offseason.

Posted by: Posse81_83_84 | February 25, 2009 9:36 PM | Report abuse

'...Call me when the dust settles...'

Are you nuts?

If we wait around for something to happen before we have something to say, that means in the middle of the day when I'm bored with staring at the clock, I'll have to do my job, and not blog.

Who wants to do that?

Blogging only when there's something true and real to discuss would reduce some of us to confronting friends and co-workers and responsility--all things most normal cynical guys avoid.

RI Nayshun allows manly men to gossip like fishwives over a clothesline while their real issues--work,family,money--hangs in the wind of unconcern and disregard.

And that's not a bad thing.

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

"The singular issue is what happens if one or two of the low cost young'ns on D or somebody in last year's draft class becomes a keeper in three/four seasons and wants money eaten up by Fat Albert's contract?

Posted by: MistaMoe"

I agree, which is why I wouldn't want any signings this year (and it's not only the defensive players, and it's not just in 2-3 years. Jason Campbell very well may need a starting QB's salary next offseason).

However, I think Vinny is looking at the roster and saying this group has 2 years to prove itself. He's adding Haynesworth now (if it happens), then within 2 years he sees these names come off the books cleanly (after the 2009 or 2010 season):

-Jason Taylor
-Chris Samuels
-Antwaan Randle El
-Andre Carter
-Cornelius Griffin
-Shawn Springs
-Casey Rabach
-Rock Cartwright
-Phillip Daniels
-Todd Yoder
-Mike Sellers

With the possibility of these 3 being cut with one year left on their deal:

-Fred Smoot
-London Fletcher
-Jon Jansen

That's a lot of money and cap space within 2 years.

Here's the list of youngsters who's contract will be up prior to those names leaving:

-Jason Campbell
-Stephon Heyer
-Chris Wilson
-Lorenzo Alexander
-Rocky Macintosh
-Alex Buzbee
-Matt Sinclair
-Will Montgomery
-D'Anthony Batiste
-Dave Rayner
-Jeremy Cain
-Tyson Smith

At most, that's 3 starters (if Heyer wins a spot, not likely). Only 2 of those are have a decent chance of commanding large money (Campbell and Macintosh). The rest are end of the bench guys or practice players.

So who knows, maybe Vinny does have a plan that we aren't giving him credit for. That's a lot of names and money that will leave within 2 years, with really only 2 or 3 guys that figure to factor in the long-term plans needing to be re-signed before then. And if the 2010 year is indeed uncapped, all 3 of those youngsters can be re-signed easily, then before the supposed new cap is back in place in 2011, all the above names will be gone (without needing to be cut).

Is it possible Vinny actually has a plan?

Posted by: psps23 | February 25, 2009 10:25 PM | Report abuse

"The rest are end of the bench guys or practice players."

I should add that Chris Wilson and L-zo Alexander are role players, not end of bench guys. Still wouldn't command large contracts.

Posted by: psps23 | February 25, 2009 10:29 PM | Report abuse

La Canfora tends to always sound negative for some reason...No knock cause he has good insight.... but just saying tho.

Posted by: beigebandit | February 25, 2009 10:30 PM | Report abuse

Washington, DC (WUSA) - Titans defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth tells 9 Sports Anchor Sara Walsh that as he weighs his free agency options, more doors are opening up.

The Redskins NFC East rival, the New York Giants are now in the mix. Haynesworth told Walsh a decision has not been made, as he ponders which situation will be best for his long term career. Washington is still very much among his top considerations, as is Tampa.

Haynesworth has made it clear he wants to be the highest paid defensive player in the league, however today told Walsh that it is not his top priority.

"The team that gives me the money I get- I want to prove I'm worth every penny; to teammates, coaches, fans and the naysayers," Haynesworth told Walsh. "I want to show I'm better than I was in Tennessee. It's not about the money, it's about being great."

The start of the NFL free agency period officially kicks off Friday morning at 12:01 a.m. Haynesworth believes his decision could come that day.

Read more about Albert Haynesworth on Sara Walsh's blog, Skins Uncensored.

Posted by: TWISI | February 25, 2009 10:34 PM | Report abuse

So, it's difficult to see how Haynesworth or any other DL can improve the offense's ability to score points. I just don't think the turnovers will increase enough to get that done.

Whereas, an offense scoring a lot of points will make the defense they have even better, for all the obvious reasons.

Posted by: dpc2003 | February 25, 2009 6:39 PM

Really? You don't see how a great DL helps an offense score points? Do you watch football? A great DL helps keep the other teams defenses on the field hence making them more tired the longer the game goes. A tired defense that has been on the field a long time is easier to score on. Also, when the other teams defense is on the field longer, that means our offense is on the field longer, giving them more time to score more points.

This may have been posted already but just in case, the salary cap was just raised by $4million. Discuss amongst yourselves.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 25, 2009 10:36 PM | Report abuse

from the blog skins uncensored by Sara Walsh

Decisions, decisions. Albert Haynesworth still doesn't know where he'll land when the free agent market opens this Friday, but the defensive tackle is heavily weighing several options. Aside from Washington, Tennessee, and Tampa, the Giants may also be in the mix.

I spoke with Haynesworth for almost an hour this evening and he truly is torn about where the right fit for him will be. Ironically, he spent much of the conversation grilling me about life in Washington and what the Redskins are like.
Being in the position he's in, he can't help but hear what people are saying about his worth, and he says he's looking forward to the opportunity to prove he's worth it.
"The money is great, but getting the naysayers off my back is better," Haynesworth said. "The team I'm gonna pick, that gives me the money I get, I want to prove I'm worth every penny to teammates, to coaches, fans and the naysayers."
Haynesworth has said he wants to become the highest paid defensive player in the league, but wants to stress that is NOT his top priority.
"It's not about the money, it's about being great."
A Houston Chronicle report said the Skins were willing to give Haynesworth a deal worth more than 100 million. But the Bucs also have change to spare. Today Tampa made massive cuts, releasing five players including Pro Bowlers Derrick Brooks and Warrick Dunn.
While Haynesworth ponders what's next for him, he expects he'll make up his mind pretty soon after the free agency market opens up.

Posted by: TWISI | February 25, 2009 10:39 PM | Report abuse

why not nugent?

Posted by: follybeach | February 25, 2009 10:53 PM | Report abuse

Ted Nugent?

Posted by: NateinthePDX | February 25, 2009 11:02 PM | Report abuse

peri -- point was the Skins defense isn't #4. Maybe 8-10th in the league. Good, not great. I mentioned several games where the 'd' was a problem at the end. The 'd' won the 2nd philly game, but almost gave it back -- no one from our defense was close to their wr when he dropped an easy TD. and we stopped them inside our 1 yard line on the last play.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | February 25, 2009 5:22 PM | Report abuse

What kind of sad ignorant schmuckery is this??? Are you serious?

So in that Philly game where our offense only put up 10 points and 7 of those came when the D turned the ball over and put it in the Philly red zone- you are saying that the DEFENSE almost blew it???

In which other games did our D "fail us: at the end??? The Dallas game that we lost 14-10 when we had a better turnover margin and couldn't score after the first drive???

Was our defense the problem against the Ravens when our offense turned it over 3x, twice in the 1st quarter and one of them resulted in a TD to put us in a 14-0 hole early???

Just b/c we are not the 2000 Ravens doesn't mean the D wasn't worthy of being ranked 4th. Our D played GREAT last year.

Posted by: p1funk | February 25, 2009 11:02 PM | Report abuse

"Is it possible Vinny actually has a plan?"

Sure it's possible. Lots of things are possible.

Posted by: NateinthePDX | February 25, 2009 11:04 PM | Report abuse

The Bucs obviously cut all those players for a reason - to be able to afford Haynesworth.

Posted by: Lisa_R | February 25, 2009 11:09 PM | Report abuse

What's all this talk about Albert Haynesworth?

Erasmus James is still available...

Posted by: Alan4 | February 25, 2009 11:13 PM | Report abuse

One supposed "capologist" has us, after Griffs restructure and a Daniels deal, with the $4 million just added to the cap at around $14 million under. Plenty of money to do whatever.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 25, 2009 11:15 PM | Report abuse

Sorry thats actually Daniels contract voiding.

Posted by: scampbell1975 | February 25, 2009 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Lisa, that's a TON of cap room... doesn't it seem like maybe they're taking advantage of the "regime change" to cut a bunch of veterans this offseason who were "untouchable" under the old regime? Seems like they're going to have the cap room for a lot more big prizes beyond Haynesworth alone.

Posted by: NateinthePDX | February 25, 2009 11:20 PM | Report abuse

Nate,

The "analysts" are saying the Bucs have cut all those players due to the coaching and GM change and that they are "re-building." But I have to believe they are doing it for Haynesworth - and others as well.

John Clayton says Haynesworth will get around 15-16 million per year.

Posted by: Lisa_R | February 26, 2009 12:32 AM | Report abuse

The Bucs no longer have their starting QB, RB, ROLB, LOLB, 2nd WR, and 3rd WR from last season, not to mention they need to implement a new offense, transition to a new defensive coordinator, and they have a new GM putting his stamp on the team. They have a lot more holes to fill than the Redskins, believe it or not.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 12:41 AM | Report abuse

p1funk -- sorry, but sad ignorant schmuckery belongs to you for not reading the post.

Yes, I said the 'd' nearly gave back the philly game. I also said -- really clearly -- that the 'd' WON the philly game.

In my prior post, I mentioned several crushing late game drives against the defense. I think that included the Rams, Bengals, dal and Ravens. The philly game was merely a very very very close call.

The other part of the ranking is turnovers. Top defenses get turnovers. Our defense, not so much.

I never said our defense was a problem, as you indicated. I did say ... and believe that our defense wasn't the 4th best defense in the league. Because they rarely turned the ball over and because they didn't make key stops late in several close games.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | February 26, 2009 1:45 AM | Report abuse

Anton Chigurh: "With Collins at the helm it will give the Skins some time and another chance to do better at the "QB of the future" game."

Always worrisome to comment on something said by an Anton Chigurh because he might have one of those nail guns close at hand.

Interesting idea -- give up on Jason, bring in Kerry. It worked for Tennessee when they're big-money young quarterback went into the dunk tank (at least temporarily). Of course, Kerry has Kurt Warner disease, that creeping malady we all eventually suffer from. The idea, of course, is that we'd be searching around for somebody else to be our QB of the future.

Matt Stafford will be gone. Mark Sanchez looks like West Coaster, that's true.

Nah, the fans'd never go for it.

Posted by: Samson151 | February 26, 2009 3:50 AM | Report abuse

F Haynesworth, sign Mike Nugent! This team will need the offense...

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 6:48 AM | Report abuse

Wow! Three days after everyone else reported Skins having interest in Haynesworth we get something from the post. If picking up Haynesworth means letting Springs go to get cap room. I say do it.

JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | February 26, 2009 7:05 AM | Report abuse

The New York Jets have parted ways with receiver Laveranues Coles, an NFL source told ESPN.com.

Wonder if he got a TV again. lol

JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | February 26, 2009 7:19 AM | Report abuse

The New York Jets have parted ways with receiver Laveranues Coles, an NFL source told ESPN.com.

Wonder if he got a TV again. lol

JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | February 26, 2009 7:19 AM

Funny, JM. And while I still oppose the signing of Haynesworth, I'm all for cutting Springs. Dude is nowhere near worth what he's being paid.

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 7:36 AM | Report abuse

Funny, JM. And while I still oppose the signing of Haynesworth, I'm all for cutting Springs. Dude is nowhere near worth what he's being paid.

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 7:36 AM |

I agree with that, considering he will only be able to play 5-6 games.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 7:45 AM | Report abuse

Flounder, even if Springs played 16 games AND playoffs he's not worth that cap number! Pay Hall, resign Rogers and keep it rollin'...

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 7:50 AM | Report abuse

"Pay Hall, resign Rogers and keep it rollin'...

Posted by: brownwood26"

What makes you think Deangelo Hall, who's already proven once to have a dip in his performance, will play the same way he did for us last season (during his "contract year") if he gets paid?

And I'm not saying that his play will dip, but more along the lines of 'why are you giving Hall the vote of utmost confidence while labeling Haynesworth a bust before anything is signed?'

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 8:21 AM | Report abuse

If Marcus gets cuts then Springs should be given the same thing, they've had very similar injury history in the past few years, for some reason Washington was a no brainer to cut but Springs isnt?

Posted by: Stu27 | February 26, 2009 8:32 AM | Report abuse

I'm gonna barf when I see the offer we make to Haynesworth tomorrow.

I wonder if there will be some action today, or if theyll see if they land him/Canty tomorrow before they cut someone?

I assume they have to be under the cap at ALL times?

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 26, 2009 8:36 AM | Report abuse

Psps23,

The reasoning is simple: Hall played his best ball BEFORE he was in a contract year. I give him a mulligan for Oakland because that place is a black hole (and I'm not referring to their nickname). But I think he'll be properly motivated to play near home and for the team he rooted for growing up.

With Haynesworth, he's got a rap for being lazy and unmotivated (unless of course, he's playing for a big pay day). I read what was said in that Channel 9 interview (which looks to me like a big hint that he WILL be signed here) and I don't believe it until I see it. If he was signing for half of his asking price I'd say 'what the hell'--but this guy wants to break bank in historic fashion. I wouldn't put $100 million and $30 million guaranteed into a guy that is this big a question mark. Especially THIS team that is already saddled with huge contracts they're unable to get rid of.

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 8:39 AM | Report abuse

"* It's Baylor's Jason Smith and then Virginia's Eugene Monroe when it comes to the top-rated offensive tackles. Andre Smith's self-destruction job at the combine may not be as fatal as first appeared, but it now seems likely the Alabama tackle exited both Indianapolis and the draft's top 10 in one fell swoop."

so he hasn't plummeted AS FAR AS ORIGINALLY THOUGHT

but he has plummeted OUT OF THE TOP TEN


SKINS HAVE #13


DRAFT ANDRE!

Posted by: TheTruth11 | February 26, 2009 8:47 AM | Report abuse

with Haynesworth

1) how can we even afford to sign him?

and

2) even when healthy, I was reading that he only plays about 1/3 of defensive snaps a game

This is an obvious no-brainer!

Posted by: TheTruth11 | February 26, 2009 8:49 AM | Report abuse

I think that Snyder has a mental disorder.

Posted by: alex35332 | February 26, 2009 8:50 AM | Report abuse

I think that Snyder has a mental disorder.

Posted by: alex35332 | February 26, 2009 8:50 AM

I wasn't aware that being a d0uchebag was a mental disorder...

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 8:54 AM | Report abuse

Truth - its 2/3, not 1/3.

And, we can't afford him, right now. Unless there is some action today.

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 26, 2009 8:55 AM | Report abuse

I can’t understand why there has been no talk of restructuring Jason Taylor…..he is to be getting 8.5 million for one year left on his contract. It’s pretty obvious that they guy will only settle for his full payout of 8.5. Why not do the “usual” with him and give him a new contract for 2 years with, say, a 6 mill signing bonus and 2 million salary this year, with a vet min salary for 2010. They could spread the cap hit for the bonus over the 2 years and free up 3 million for this season….although it would add in about 4 mill dead cap space for 2010, but if there is no cap in 2010………..and they could do the same thing with Springs, but apparently he does not renegotiate.

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 8:56 AM | Report abuse

How insane is this constant redoing,extending contracts of players that are done or not that good? What's the use of being a fan anymore. Snyder is clueless and has devalued the once most beloved franschise in town. Let's Go Caps!

Posted by: ridgely1 | February 26, 2009 8:57 AM | Report abuse

Help me understand this:

"The Washington Redskins plan to pursue Tennessee Titans defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth if he becomes a free agent tomorrow -- though it appears their salary cap situation might prevent them from signing the Pro Bowl performer"

So, in other words, we can't afford him. I mean, tell me how this makes sense??

I'm going to date supermodels, but I'm ugly...

I'm going to play professional sports, but I'm 39, and past my physical prime...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 8:58 AM | Report abuse

dl,

Or they could just cut him and save the entire 8.5mil, that would be the smart thing to do.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 8:58 AM | Report abuse

And I'm curious to people's thoughts on Vinny's 2-year plan that I described above.

Within 2 years, these names should come off the books cleanly (following the 2010 season):

-Jason Taylor ($8.5 million cap figure in 2009)
-Chris Samuels ($9.3 million)
-Antwaan Randle El ($4.1)
-Andre Carter ($6.1)
-Cornelius Griffin ($6.1)
-Shawn Springs ($8.5)
-Casey Rabach ($3.6)
-Rock Cartwright ($1.0)
-Phillip Daniels ($2.6)
-Todd Yoder ($.89)
-Mike Sellers ($.92)

With these names alone, it looks as though following the 2010 season, approximately $43 million in cap space will be cleared, with respect to this year's cap.

Add in cutting these names (with release fees included) and the team saves:

- London Fletcher ($2.2 million net)
- Fred Smoot ($2.6 million net)
- Jon Jansen ($2.5 million net)

Together, those names added to the ones above them clear approximately $50 million in cap space (relative to this year's cap number).

The only players to get significantly more expensive between now and then are Clinton Portis (cap number rises from $5.6 to $10.6) and Chris Cooley (rises from $3 to $6). Santana Moss actually becomes cheaper ($1.5 million net). Randy Thomas' contract remains the same. Moss could also be cut to save $5 million relative to this year's cap. Portis could be cut with zero savings relative to this year's cap, as can Randy Thomas.

So basically what it looks like is following the 2010 season, if all those names, minus Cooley, are let play their contracts out and/or cut, the team would create $55 million in cap space (and the cap number is sure to rise, if it is indeed brought back, creating even more space). It would also mean 12 starters would need to be replaced (10 starters if Portis and Moss are still here, but the cap savings would drop to $51.5 million).

So for those that want to "blow the whole thing up", or are truly waiting for the rebuilding year, it looks like the 2011 offseason will be it.

This also makes sense as to why Vinny wants to sign Haynesworth, especially if the 2010 season will be uncapped. He gives this team the best shot at winning within the next 2 years, all he really has to do is fit him under the cap for this year, if there is no cap in 2010 then there would be no problem re-signing Campbell, Macintosh, Heyer, Alexander, and Wilson (the only guys the team may realistically want to re-sign following 2009), and then in 2011 (if a cap is brought back) all those names are gone and all that cap space is available to use. Even if there's an agreement to keep a cap in place for 2010, the only risk is losing some of the 5 names who's contract runs up after this season (and there will be cap room for at least some of them, because Springs and Taylor alone will create $17 million after this year).

Again, I ask, is it possible that Vinny actually has a plan?

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 9:00 AM | Report abuse

dl,

Or they could just cut him and save the entire 8.5mil, that would be the smart thing to do.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 8:58 AM

Agreed. He won't be missed.

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 9:02 AM | Report abuse

I am 80% sure that there is a mental disorder associated with D-bagery

Posted by: alex35332 | February 26, 2009 9:02 AM | Report abuse

Greg,

I think they could clear the room but it will take some drastic measures, thats why the article says might prevent them from doing it.

I would sign Canty and a O-Line guy and resign Hall.

There is no way they can sign Hall and Haynesworth.

There are rules for the uncapped year about pushing cap money into the future.

I will post the Uncapped year rules.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 9:05 AM | Report abuse

F Mike Nugent! Sign Ted Nugent! CAT SCRATCH FEE-VAH!!!

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | February 26, 2009 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Salary Cap 101: The Final Capped Year

At present, due to the NFL owners opting out of the current collective bargaining agreement the league is about to enter it's last capped year under the current agreement (this assumes no deal is struck before the start of free agency which is highly unlikely). The cap in 2009 is projected to be $123m.

Therefore, there are several differences in how the league does business and how the salary cap/free agency works:

1. Prorating Of Bonuses: In 2008 bonuses given to players (signing or roster bonuses with language in the contract allowing them to be prorated) were spread over six years. In 2009 these bonuses can only be spread over five years.

2. The 30% Rule For Salaries: Any player signing a contract in 2009 can only see his base salary and incentives increase by 30% each year. For example, if a player earns $1m in base salary in 2009 for a contract signed this season, he can only see his salary increase to $1.3m in 2010. This is used to stop teams loading up contracts ready for an uncapped season (which would be in 2010 if things stay as they are). Again, it only applies to contracts signed in 2009 and the 30% rule takes into consideration base salary, likely to be earned incentives and roster bonuses. It does not take into consideration signing bonus.

June 1st: The traditional date for releases late in the off-season so the dead cap hit can be spread over two seasons has no significance this year due to 2010 being an uncapped year at present.

3. Guaranteed Salary's: Any player with guaranteed salary's in years following 2009 will have his cap hit for those amounts brought forward to 2009 hence counting on the 2009 cap. The exception is if all the 2009 salary is guaranteed. Any guaranteed contracts beyond 2012 see only 50% of that money brought forward.

Continued

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 9:08 AM | Report abuse

4. Incentives: Usually there are two types of incentives: Likely To Be Earned (LTBE) which count against the cap in the present year and Unlikely To Be Earned Incentives (UTBE) which count on the following years cap if earned. In the past, if a team has a LTBE incentive counting on their current years cap and the player doesn't earn it, it is given as a cap credit the following year (a common cap trick a lot of teams used in the past). In 2009, all incentives count against the 2009 cap and will be credited in season once the player is assured he can not earn it (ie, if the player goes to IR, if the player misses a couple of games and cannot make a certain number of starts or snaps required for an incentive).

5. No "Deion Sanders Rule": This will not be in effect in 2009. It is basically a rule to stop more signing bonus than salary being applied to contracts and also is also in effect for contract extensions.

What does this mean for 2010 if it is an uncapped year:

1. Free Agent Designations: Instead of a player being a free agent after four years of experience that is raised to six years. Anyone with five or less years experience only has restricted free agent rights.

2. Franchise/Transistion Tags: In addition to one franchise and one transition tag, teams can name one additional transitional player in 2010.

3. The Final Eight Plan: All the teams that win their divisions in the 2009 season have additional free agent restrictions for 2010. The four teams that make the Championship games are only allowed to sign as many free agents as they lose. Teams that make the divisional rounds can sign free agents on a one of one basis too but also other free agents but with certain financial parameters.

4, Rookie Cap Pool: The NFL will make a decision if there is to be a rookie pool in 2010. They have the right to this decision under the agreement.

5, No Minimum Team Salary: Teams can spend as much or as little as they want in an uncapped year.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 9:09 AM | Report abuse

but by 2011 we'll have restructured everybody's deal to extend them to 2015, right?


Isn't psps's post assuming we'll let every contract play out as is.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | February 26, 2009 9:11 AM | Report abuse

Again, I ask, is it possible that Vinny actually has a plan?

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 9:00 AM

Any plan that involves spending the kind of money the Redskins spend and keeping together a core of players that went 6-10, 10-6, 5-11, 9-7 and 8-8 the last 5 years isn't much of a plan...TIME TO BUILD IT RIGHT!

If 2010 is truly uncapped, then this team has a once in a lifetime chance to wash itself of all the big salaries they wouldn't otherwise be able to get rid of. If they're smart, they'll do exactly that. But they aren't, so they probably won't...

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 9:11 AM | Report abuse

looks like Stafford, Andre Smith, and/or Mark Sanchez will fall to us.

If Staff falls, do we take him and trade back, possibly to Detroit's #19 (I think they're #19 overall?) and grab another of their second rounders? I think so.

If Smith falls back, we take and keep him.

If Sanchez falls back, we trade him for a handful of Mexican jumping beans.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | February 26, 2009 9:13 AM | Report abuse

psps23, are you saying that Vincento plans to align all these resignings to allow the team to get out of this reneg to get under the cap situation?

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | February 26, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

Isn't psps's post assuming we'll let every contract play out as is.

Posted by: TheTruth11

----

Yes it is. But (1) The way Carter/ARE/Samuels/Griffin were restructured, they were tailor-made to let their contracts play out in 2 years, (2) If there is no cap in 2010, what possible reason would Vinny have to restructure anybody else's deal, provided he has the space right now to do what he wants?

And as scampbell said last night, a certain capologist with knowledge of the Redskins situation is reporting that with the restructures and the $4 million increase in the cap, the Redskins will have $14 million of space this year without making any more moves. More than enough to sign Haynesworth to his monster deal.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 9:17 AM | Report abuse

"psps23, are you saying that Vincento plans to align all these resignings to allow the team to get out of this reneg to get under the cap situation?

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz"

Isn't it possible? Why else would Carter's, Samuels', ARE's, and Griffin's ALL be restructured with a clause that the team can void them in 2 years?

Maybe we're not giving him enough credit.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Looking at Bank's mock last night, I was unaware that Philly had 2 firsts. I'd be willing to give them the #13, for the 28, and a second rounder.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 9:20 AM | Report abuse

IF the league doesnt negotiate a new CB deal, I read somewhere that the players unioin vows to NEVER agree to a salary cap again... anyone hear different? That would mean Big time change in this league.

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | February 26, 2009 9:20 AM | Report abuse

Psps23 is right...we've got to clear up cap space for the FA class of 2010! LeBron has wanted to play in a bigger market...and you see what he did in a Browns uniform in that commercial! Imagine the amount of blocked field goals! And most importantly, the jersey sales! And if all else fails we can get Chris Bosh and/or Dwayne Wade! Viva Vinny's plan!

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 9:22 AM | Report abuse

Maybe we're not giving him enough credit.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Its quite possible. But its also quite possible that its not just Vinny, or not Vinny at all (Danny). But regardless of who, I hope you are right. That would mean they might actually know what theyre doing (fiscally speaking, not player acquisitionally speaking)

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

"The Seahawks are looking for an impact player in this spot, and the game film says no one impacted games like Crabtree last season. Between checking in a bit shorter than expected and discovering that he had a slight stress fracture in his left foot that will require surgery, Crabtree didn't have a good weekend in Indy. But I'm not over-reacting to those two headlines, because most NFL talent evaluators aren't either. Crabtree remains an undeniable top five talent. "


so let's see

Crabtree (who is a great player) is physically shorter than expected and might have health issues and he stays in the top 5


Andre Smith spoke with an NFL agent like 3 weeks before he was allowed and left the good ol' NFL Combine after finishing everything he had to do, but before he was given permission, and moved from #1 overall to the second round.


Sounds like the wittle NFL Combwine got his wittle feelings hwurt cause big bad left twackle didn't pway by deir rules!

Funny, if the media had decided to jump on Crabtree, they honestly could probably move him from #4 to early in the 2nd round.

Posted by: TheTruth11 | February 26, 2009 9:26 AM | Report abuse

truth, thats a good point, but I'm not complaining, if it means Smith falls to the redskins.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 9:31 AM | Report abuse

Truth, its definitely not fair to the draftee that the media has such power. But I tend to take the side of the teams. Now some team can pick up a 1st rounder and also get a 1st round talent (damaged by negative media coverage) in the second. Works out for the team, and the poor wittle dwaftee only gets 2 mill instead of 3 mill.... awwww!!! So sad!

Posted by: VaBeachBlitz | February 26, 2009 9:31 AM | Report abuse

I'm not complaining at all, just laughing at how pitiful it really is when you think about it. Where is all the media who said the Texans were idiots for passing up Reggie Bush?


also, just a side point before I leave, am I the only one that buys into this crap? Every year it seems, we hear about "The Skins might get so-and-so". Last year it was that dancing guy. Me? I complained and complained, but the minute he became a Skins I got excited.

Same thing will happen if we get Haynesworth. I know our D is fine and I'd hate the deal, but the minute we get him I can't help but think how much better our D is gonna be. But in reality he'll be a bust and have 1 sack and 8 tackles. FROWN

Posted by: TheTruth11 | February 26, 2009 9:36 AM | Report abuse

The salary difference for Smith who was going 1 or 2, is going to be huge even if he only drops to 13.

If he drops out of the 1st round all together it will be astronomical.

There is no way he drops out of the first round if we don't grap him, one of the better teams will get him late in the first round.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 9:38 AM | Report abuse

I wonder if JLC has called the NFL yet to "ask" if the Redskins are tampering with Haynesworth.

Posted by: paperwc | February 26, 2009 9:40 AM | Report abuse

I wonder if JLC has called the NFL yet to "ask" if the Redskins are tampering with Haynesworth.

Posted by: paperwc

LMAO!
JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | February 26, 2009 9:41 AM | Report abuse

I'm really conflicted about Haynesworth. Every so-called "expert" has stated he will be a MAJOR upgrade to any team that signs him - a game changer. However, we really do not have the $$$$ to spend on him. Plus, with our luck he would get hurt in training camp.

On the other hand, if he stayed healthy and productive, the Skins could be a true force.

Posted by: Lisa_R | February 26, 2009 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Same thing will happen if we get Haynesworth. I know our D is fine and I'd hate the deal, but the minute we get him I can't help but think how much better our D is gonna be. But in reality he'll be a bust and have 1 sack and 8 tackles. FROWN

Posted by: TheTruth11 | February 26, 2009 9:36 AM

Oh, but how those Snyder/Vinny apologists will cherish that one sack!

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

From PFT,

FLOOD OF RFA TENDERS LIKELY COMING TODAY
Posted by Mike Florio on February 26, 2009, 9:13 a.m. EST
The deadline for using the franchise and transition tag on potentially unrestricted free agents came and went last week.

But the deadline for extending tender offers to restricted free agents doesn’t hit until 4:00 p.m. EST today.

Look for a bunch of players to be tendered, since not that many have received the designation just yet.

An explanation of how the RFA tender process works is after the jump.

Restricted free agents are players with three years of service and whose contracts have expired. Many players who have three years of service simply aren’t eligible because they signed contracts that cover four years or more after being drafted.

Teams can limit the ability of restricted free agents to sign with a new team by extending a tender offer at one of four levels. The level of the tender dictates the amount of the compensation that the current team will receive, if the player leaves.

In all cases, tendering a restricted free agent gives the current team a right to match any offer that the player receives from another team. If the the offer is matched, the player is then off the market and under contract.

This year, a one-year offer in the amount of $1.01 million results in a draft pick from the same round in which the player was picked. If the player was not drafted, there’s no compensation at this specific level.

A one-year contract worth $1.545 million triggers a second-round pick as compensation.

A one-year deal of $2.198 million equates to a first-round pick.

And a one-year of $2.792 million triggers to a first-round pick and a third-round pick.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

flound, he'll drop out of the top 10, I'd bet, but after that, I don't see him getting past the Redskins.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Really? You don't see how a great DL helps an offense score points? Do you watch football? A great DL helps keep the other teams defenses on the field hence making them more tired the longer the game goes.....

Posted by: scampbell1975

Yeah, I watch football. I pay attention to things like stats. You are right as far s the time of possession argument goes, but you're wrong to apply it to the Redskins.

Redskins defense was 5th in the league in opponents TOP. FIFTH. Put another way, last year the Redskins offense were 8th in TOP. In either category, the Redskins were less than 2 mins behind Baltimore, the league leader. Time of possession was not a problem for the Redskins on either side of the ball.

The only place the Redskins defense needs a lot of help is in interceptions. They didn't get nearly enough, and I'm not sure that one guy -- besides maybe LT in his prime -- is going to change that. Besides, if you look at sacks and picks, they're not well correlated: teams with few sacks get lots of picks (e.g. Cincinnati) and those with lots of sacks get few picks (e.g. Dallas).

And this just in: in 2009, the NFL will declare the team that scores the MOST POINTS the winner of any game.

I accept your argument that a good defense helps the offense, and a great defense helps the offense a lot.

That's NOT the problem with the Redskins. The problem is a LACK OF BIG PLAYS. Period, dot.

They lack big plays in the passing game because the offensive line cannot give WR the time to run deep routes. You can have Kerry Collins or JC back there, the problem is they will be joined by a DL way too soon.

Here's my secret plan: have Albright the full-time center and ine Campbell up 15 yards deep, with CP a 7 yards. Maybe then the opponents DL will be really tired by the 4th quarter!

Posted by: dpc2003 | February 26, 2009 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Tommorow is going to be fun, the blog will be rocking.

If the Skins are going to get Haynesworth it will be done while most of us are sleeping.

I guarantee you they will have signed atleast one player by Friday morning, I hope it is not Haynesworth but it could be.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 9:47 AM | Report abuse

PSP - thats a good post. But would the only uncapped year affect the offseason BEFORE next year (2010)? So, wouldn't we have to unload all those contracts BEFORE the start of next year? Won't the cap be back in place in between the 2010 and 2011 seasons? So technically a one year plan?

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 26, 2009 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Lisa, I'm with you, I'm torn on this one. While I'd rather see the team focus on signing GOOD/YOUNG guys for the offensive line, AH intrigues me, and scares me at the same time.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 9:49 AM | Report abuse

flound, agreed, it will be kind of fun up here...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 9:50 AM | Report abuse

So, wouldn't we have to unload all those contracts BEFORE the start of next year? Won't the cap be back in place in between the 2010 and 2011 seasons? So technically a one year plan?

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 26, 2009 9:47 AM |

No the players would have to agree to go back to a cap, and depending on who takes over the union that is most likely not happening.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Skins have 12 million in Cap room as we speak and will get another 6 when the cut Springs. Sounds like Plenty to make some BIG moves.

Sign Hall cut Springs, Hall signs elsewhere, keep Springs.

Sign Haynesworth.

Posted by: ryan_conaway | February 26, 2009 9:51 AM | Report abuse

Pat Kirwan (NFL.COM) has Smith going 13th to us.

JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | February 26, 2009 9:56 AM | Report abuse

"But would the only uncapped year affect the offseason BEFORE next year (2010)? So, wouldn't we have to unload all those contracts BEFORE the start of next year? Won't the cap be back in place in between the 2010 and 2011 seasons? So technically a one year plan?

Posted by: Rypien11"

If there's no cap in 2010, there's no reason why those players need to be unloaded before that season. Their salaries would have no effect. Then after that season, if the cap is brought back, THAT'S when they need to be released (or let leave). And most of them would occur automatically, simply by virtue of their contracts running out. Sure, you could cut the 3 guys with a year remaining on their deals during that time (Smoot, Jansen, and Fletcher), but the rest of the guys that I mentioned don't need to be cut because their contracts will be finished regardless.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 9:56 AM | Report abuse

If the Skins are going to get Haynesworth it will be done while most of us are sleeping.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 9:47 AM

Let's hope not. This is one of the ways the Skins screw the pooch in free agency. They bring a guy in and then let him name his own price. I'd rather Haynesworth visit five teams and we bid against others instead of bidding against ourselves.

The problem with bidding against ourselves is that the other bidder had no idea what talent is worth in this league. If we bid against other teams, they will drop out when the price gets too high. Snyder has no clue whether the price is too high.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 26, 2009 9:59 AM | Report abuse

If the team somehow, resigns hall, drafts smith, and a LB in the third, signs Canty to a "some-what" reasonable contract, and signs some OL Depth...thats a pretty good offseason isn't it??

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Looks like everyone has us taking him now,

This is from WalterFootball.com

Washington Redskins: Andre Smith, OT, Alabama
The Redskins really need help on their offensive line, given the problems they have at guard and right tackle. Despite what happened at the Combine, Andre Smith is a very strong option here.

I personally wouldn't touch Smith because of his work-ethic issues, but we have to remember who Washington's owner is. Daniel Snyder makes free agent and draft moves as if he were playing fantasy football. Remember, he brought in DeAngelo Hall last season, despite the fact that Hall was kicked off the Raiders because of his attitude. It doesn't get any worse than that.

I feel as though Snyder will find Smith's talent level too appealing to pass up. Combine that with the fact that right tackle is an enormous need for the Redskins, and you have what seems to be a draft pick that makes a lot of sense.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 10:03 AM | Report abuse

ps -- if the Skins can afford to spend big $$ on FA, why not get the top OL available?


This fascination with Haynesworth is very Danny-like: great player, but not the difference you need to become a SB contender.

Posted by: dpc2003 | February 26, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

On the other hand, if he stayed healthy and productive, the Skins could be a true force.

Posted by: Lisa_R | February 26, 2009 9:43 AM |

This is what I don't understand, at all. The 'Skins already are strong on defense. What the 'Skins can't do is to score points. I would have thought that, to become a force, we need to improve the offense, not the defense.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 26, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

I'm with the truth on this; I tend to get excited no matter who they pick up in FA, or draft. I still get disappointed when they don't sign/draft who I hoped, but I still find a way to talk myself into being excited about the moves that were made and the upcoming season. I am NOT in the school of "as long as Dan and Vinny blah blah blah".......I hvae eternal hope that they know what they are doing and will turn it around.


Someday.

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

I think it is a ttal waste of time to talk about the draft and who is going where until FA get's going. So many things can change in the next 2 months. Also, just becasue "Pat Kirwan" has Smith going to us at 13.. What does that mean? Are you really going to sleep tonight knowing we will get him because 2 months prior some radio talk host said he could see him going there? This blog has either really good points/posts or terrible one that are just a watse of space like...


Pat Kirwan (NFL.COM) has Smith going 13th to us.


Posted by: slimbo-Rice | February 26, 2009 10:04 AM | Report abuse

13. WAS: Andre Smith, OT, Alabama
Andre Smith's stock seems to take a hit every other week, but he should be a nice fit with Washington. Smith can play right tackle initially, which fills an immediate need, and then take the time to see if he can transition to the left side down the road.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 10:06 AM | Report abuse

If the team somehow, resigns hall, drafts smith, and a LB in the third, signs Canty to a "some-what" reasonable contract, and signs some OL Depth...thats a pretty good offseason isn't it??

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 9:59 AM

I would take this in a heartbeat. Haynesworth? In a heart attack.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 26, 2009 10:07 AM | Report abuse

slimbo-Rice it's not that deep. I don't rest well no matter what the Skins do during the season or off season. It's only a game. Take a deep breath.

JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | February 26, 2009 10:08 AM | Report abuse

They should have read rest well and don't lose any sleep over the Skins.

JM220

Posted by: icetotalpackage | February 26, 2009 10:09 AM | Report abuse

This is what I don't understand, at all. The 'Skins already are strong on defense. What the 'Skins can't do is to score points. I would have thought that, to become a force, we need to improve the offense, not the defense.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 26, 2009 10:04 AM

TE, if I was in a bad mood, I would say something along the lines here of "spoken like a true loser". But I'm in a good mood so I won't say that. If you think like a winner, like you are supposed to, you look to improve in all areas of your team. If you do not strive to improve in all areas, you will be left behind the competition.

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:09 AM | Report abuse

The word from down here in Buc land now that they are like $50-60 million under the cap is that they are targeting

Haynesworth, TJ Hou..., a vetran QB maybe Leftwich and a LB.

I did not understand the Cato June cut unless they are moving to a ery different defensive scheme and they think he does not fit at all. Brooks while a fan fav was showing his age last year and he has started dowb the injury path so many older vetrans do

Posted by: noonefromtampa | February 26, 2009 10:09 AM | Report abuse

PSP - I see - I was thinking along the lines of letting guys go before the 2010 season whose contracts/release fees are too big and would bog us down AFTER the 2010 season (Randy, Clinton, Jansen, Collins, Smoot).

If I'm the Skins, and theres no cap pre-2010 and we can cut at will, I would shave Randy, Jansen, Collins, and Smoot before the start of next season. Then we don't have to worry about the hit or their 2011 salary if a CBA is back in place.

ARE and Carter can be voided after 2010, so theyre gone as well.

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 26, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

‘SKINS TO PURSUE HAYNESWORTH
Posted by Mike Florio on February 26, 2009, 9:37 a.m. EST
A day after the Washington Post seemed to be taking issue with reports linking the Redskins to free-agent defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth, the Post now says that the Redskins will make a run at the crown jewel of the 2009 free-agent class.

Per the Post, the Redskins have already “laid the groundwork” to attempt to land Haynesworth.

We’d love to know what “groundwork” has been “laid”; even something as innocuous as making arrangements with Haynesworth’s agent for the player to fly to D.C. on Friday morning constitutes a blatant violation of the tampering policy.

On Tuesday, Lance Zierlein of the Houston Chronicle reported that Haynesworth will land with the ‘Skins. Zierlein’s report resulted in a flood of calls and e-mails to agent Chad Speck, who came out with an adroitly-worded statement that, while accurate, did not address the question of whether Redskins were “laying the groundwork” for signing Haynesworth.

Of course, none of this means that Haynesworth will actually sign in Washington. Even if there’s a wink-nod-fart deal in place, it’s not binding until it’s signed.

Three years ago, for example, center LeCharles Bentley was widely believed to have a deal in place with the Eagles. But then the Browns got involved, and Bentley signed in Cleveland.

The Eagles likely were pissed (if the rumors were true). But, as a practical matter, there’s nothing that the Eagles could have done about it.

And there’s nothing that the Redskins will be able to do, if some other team ends up building a house on the groundwork that the ‘Skins have laid.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 26, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

If you do not strive to improve in all areas, you will be left behind the competition.

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:09 AM

Um, that should read, "if you do not strive to improve in all areas THROUGH THE DRAFT, you will be left behind the competition."

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Pat Kirwan (NFL.COM) has Smith going 13th to us.


I just heard Dr. Phil (ABC) saying the same thing.

Posted by: slimbo-Rice | February 26, 2009 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Is everyone on the Haynesworth bendwagon?

We are getting ready to leave the Bus Depot at 11:59pm tonight.

All haters stake their claim now.

Posted by: RightWay | February 26, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

"ps -- if the Skins can afford to spend big $$ on FA, why not get the top OL available?

Posted by: dpc2003"

Do you have one in mind?

Almost all of the linemen that would be an upgrade are either old or injury-prone. None of those guys help the age/injury issue that plagues our line.

I can think of one player: Jason Brown. And teams will be fighting over him. Hard. (Remember, Derrick Dockery received a record contract for a guard in free agency. I expect nothing less for young guy in weak free agency class).

If we can get him for relatively cheap, I'm all for it. But if it takes anywhere in the same vicinity as the same money Haynesworth will get, I wouldn't think twice before crossing him off my list.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 10:14 AM | Report abuse

Um, that should read, "if you do not strive to improve in all areas THROUGH THE DRAFT, you will be left behind the competition."

Posted by: brownwood26 | February 26, 2009 10:11 AM |

I wouldn't rule free agency out of the statement.....

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:16 AM | Report abuse

slim, give it a rest, people post info up here for different reasons. I for one, cannot access this info at work, so I'm appreciative of whatever gets put up regarding the Redskins, and draft related stuff. Relax a little....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

If you do not strive to improve in all areas, you will be left behind the competition.

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:09 AM

Deep, haze. This is the Dan Snyder Big Plash theory of free agency. The Vinny Cerrato "Best Player Available" theory of the draft, where you take a TE in the second round so that you "won't be left behind the competition."

I thought that, with limited resources, you have to put them where you can get "the biggest bang for the buck" or, during the Cold War, "the most rubble fore the ruble." On the 'Skins that would be the offense, not the defense.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 26, 2009 10:17 AM | Report abuse

"If I'm the Skins, and theres no cap pre-2010 and we can cut at will, I would shave Randy, Jansen, Collins, and Smoot before the start of next season.

Posted by: Rypien11"

I can agree with that, and it would actually add another $11.8 million to what I originally put would be the cap space following the 2010 season. Instead of $51 million, it would be closer to $63 million in cap space. Talk about cap room.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

way to go JLC!!!!!

you told us for weeks how the skins wouldnt go after haynesworth...even upto yesterday when you got scooped by a Houston reporter and now you "break" news that is days old.

oh BTW DJ hacket got cut yesterday...maybe the skins were right not to sign him..hmmm

Posted by: sources | February 26, 2009 10:19 AM | Report abuse

I think the Haynesworth thing is a smokescreen so Vinny can get the people he really wants

Posted by: noonefromtampa | February 26, 2009 10:20 AM | Report abuse

I think the Haynesworth thing is a smokescreen

Posted by: noonefromtampa | February 26, 2009 10:20 AM

Let's hope so, but why would the Post fall for something like that? I thought that if you read it in the Post it was backed up by several sources and you could take it to the bank. Of course, the bank is already in receivership...

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 26, 2009 10:22 AM | Report abuse

"I can agree with that, and it would actually add another $11.8 million to what I originally put would be the cap space following the 2010 season. Instead of $51 million, it would be closer to $63 million in cap space. Talk about cap room."

Of course, that's not counting whatever contracts they add over the next 2 years.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 10:23 AM | Report abuse

te, I think the post saw what was happening in other media outlets regarding a team they primarily cover, and decided to jump into the fray.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Skins mgmt and Post do not get along, so I would not put it past some people to put the word out we are going after Haynesworth so the Post reports it and then the Skins go in another way and a couple of people can sit there and snicker how they put one oer on the Post yet again

Posted by: noonefromtampa | February 26, 2009 10:29 AM | Report abuse

Wow, the Bills released Derrick Dockery....maybe we can get him back for the cheap....

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:29 AM | Report abuse

I heard the Buffalo Bills released Derrick Dockery.

I wonder is there's any interest in bringing him back.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 26, 2009 10:29 AM | Report abuse

derrick dockery is back on the market...might be able to get him on the cheap...a young guard who knows joe bugel's system...might be perfect for us

Posted by: altarkenton | February 26, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

dlhaze, we must have been reading the same article at the same time...lol

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 26, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

deception -- it's not just for Internet dating :)

Posted by: noonefromtampa | February 26, 2009 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Have we ever had a problem singing FA's? WE always make room. If they want someone they will get them period. I wouldn't be shocked if we sign TJ Who's yo mama as soon as 12:15 am. Where is why..

We can't wait and see another year for our WR's.. WE loved CJ and TJ is probably better. It will stop him going to Phily or NYG which we proved with TJ dukkett we will do it and lastly.. Most FA signings come out of the blue. Keep an eye on it!

Posted by: slimbo-Rice | February 26, 2009 10:31 AM | Report abuse

I'm confused...this si from Adam Schefter's blog on NFL dot com:
_____________________________________
Miami continues to be one of the most aggressive teams before the free-agency signing period begins after midnight on Friday morning. It did it again this morning.
The Dolphins signed safety Gibril Wilson, who was released by Oakland last week, to a five-year, $27.5 million contract that includes $8 million guaranteed and $16.5 million in the deal’s first three years.
Next up for Miami is re-signing free-agent safety Yeremiah Bell, which it hopes to do today.
______________________________________
Wouldn't this be signing a free agent before the start of free agency?

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Are you kidding me about Dock?? What was he with Buffalo for 2 years. Sure, I'd bring him back for short money. He's what, 28 years old?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 10:33 AM | Report abuse

yo slimbo rice chill, people share info you picked like reason #4034 to get your pink panties in a bunch over...

4th, put me down as a hater....

I am also not excited about this time of year and skins. its hollow and depressing...call me kooky but i prefer games and teams that look like they have half a clue while playing....

this "time of year" is just Snyder bragging he can collect more/bigger toys than the other Robber Barons...

Posted by: chrislarry | February 26, 2009 10:33 AM | Report abuse

If players are cut or released you don't have to wait until tomorrow.

Posted by: slimbo-Rice | February 26, 2009 10:34 AM | Report abuse

"I thought that, with limited resources, you have to put them where you can get "the biggest bang for the buck" or, during the Cold War, "the most rubble fore the ruble." On the 'Skins that would be the offense, not the defense.

Posted by: talent_evaluator"

Only if all things were equal. Unfortunately, none of the offensive linemen on the market = Albert Haynesworth (in overall ability, or ability relative to what you can reasonably expect the asking price will be).

That's why it's my contention the skins should focus the offensive upgrade (particularly on the line) during the draft, where that position is actually strong compared to the defensive line (which happens to be the opposite of how the free agent class shaped up).

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 10:35 AM | Report abuse

I would take Dockery back in 2 shakes of a stick...

Posted by: chrislarry | February 26, 2009 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Wouldn't this be signing a free agent before the start of free agency?

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:33 AM |

He became a free agent as soon as he was released. The others that haven't been outright released are still under contract and don't become free agents until midnight tonight.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 26, 2009 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Bring Back Dockery!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: BurgwithaU | February 26, 2009 10:37 AM | Report abuse

"Are you kidding me about Dock?? What was he with Buffalo for 2 years. Sure, I'd bring him back for short money. He's what, 28 years old?

Posted by: BeantownGreg"

Now this may be someone worth attacking.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 10:37 AM | Report abuse

I guess the Skins weren't so dumb letting Dockery go for all that money after all.

I would bring him back on the cheap he knows the guys and Buges.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 10:37 AM | Report abuse

Bills free up cap space by releasing Dockery
Posted: February 26th, 2009 | Adam Schefter | Tags: Buffalo Bills, Derrick Dockery

Two years after Buffalo made Derrick Dockery the highest-paid guard in the game, the Bills released him Thursday.

In 2007, Buffalo awarded Dockery a seven-year, $49 million contract. Two years later, he is out of work.

The Bills will have to accelerate $5.4 million against their cap, but a big contract is off their books. And Dockery is on the market.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 26, 2009 10:38 AM | Report abuse

If players are cut or released you don't have to wait until tomorrow.


Posted by: slimbo-Rice | February 26, 2009 10:34 AM |

Didn't know that.....thanks. So that means they could go out and sign Dockery as soon as Danny can get the plane gassed up. Wouldn't that be kick in the pants.....

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:39 AM | Report abuse

Derrick Dockery wouldn't be high on my list of priorities, unless we could get him CHEAP. He hasn't played up to his potential yet as a pro, and he may never do it. This offense stunk when he was here before...don't see how it would improve much with him back.

Posted by: TWISI | February 26, 2009 10:40 AM | Report abuse

psp, your statement confused me?

were you suggesting attacking me, or Dock?

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 10:41 AM | Report abuse

Dockery sounds like he could be Smoot 2.0. Just don't overpay him.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 10:41 AM | Report abuse

I'd even offer Dock a midsized contract. I don't think you have to lowball him. The dude can play, knows our system, knows buges and is still young. No brainer there...for a moderate contract...like goldylocks porridge...

Posted by: chrislarry | February 26, 2009 10:42 AM | Report abuse

THat would be a great signing tonight. (DOckery) I am sure we would have the inside track to get him.

Posted by: slimbo-Rice | February 26, 2009 10:42 AM | Report abuse

psp, your statement confused me?

were you suggesting attacking me, or Dock?

Posted by: BeantownGreg

-----

Attack you? Never. I was Speaking about Dock.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Kendall is 35, Thomas is 33, Dockery is only 28.

They should get him back if they can (and if the price is right).

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 26, 2009 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Derrick Dockery wouldn't be high on my list of priorities, unless we could get him CHEAP. He hasn't played up to his potential yet as a pro, and he may never do it. This offense stunk when he was here before...don't see how it would improve much with him back.

Posted by: TWISI | February 26, 2009 10:40 AM |

The offense has stunk for the last 15 years, had nothing to do with Dockery.

He was a good player and a very good run blocker, if we can get him cheap I say get him.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 10:42 AM | Report abuse

PSP - Am i correct in assuming we still have to pay a release fee (which counts against the cap) to the NFL (or is it to the player?) if we cut them early, and it just doesn't matter if it happens next year because theres (hypothetically) no cap ceiling?

Posted by: Rypien11 | February 26, 2009 10:43 AM | Report abuse

twis, I think at this time, the Redskins could probably get him for short money, and he's familiar with the team/OL coach. I don't think he'd be able to command a lot of money at this point.

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 10:44 AM | Report abuse

TWISI....I don't share your view there...still young, beast run blocker (Bills had very good run game), Guard is huge area of need.....

To me, even for mid level contract...its a no brainer.

Posted by: chrislarry | February 26, 2009 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Dockery = Superbowl

Posted by: Original_etrod | February 26, 2009 10:46 AM | Report abuse

PSP - Am i correct in assuming we still have to pay a release fee (which counts against the cap) to the NFL (or is it to the player?) if we cut them early, and it just doesn't matter if it happens next year because theres (hypothetically) no cap ceiling?

Posted by: Rypien11

----

That's what I'm assuming, unless there's a rule specifically in place to avoid this (like any player released during the offseason of 2010 will have their release fee added to the first year of the next salary cap).

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 10:46 AM | Report abuse

Note To All Intelligent Football Fans:

'...I guess the Skins weren't so dumb letting Dockery go for all that money after all....I would bring him back on the cheap he knows the guys and Buges....

Posted by: Flounder21

Moe is applauding this development.

Let's move on this and get the guy back here on the cheap.

Move Rhino to the right side as a back up to Thomas.

Move Samuels to right tackle, draft a starting left tackle, left Heyer back up both tackle spots.

Andre Smith Michael Oher: whoever is there at 13 will satisfy the whims of the Madden GM will get drafted.

This is looking like a nice day..now if I can just catch a baseball game Sunday...

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 26, 2009 10:47 AM | Report abuse

It would be nice if they could put in a clause for Dockery to cut $100K off his salary/Bonus for each false start he gets called for. Other than that I have no worries about the guy. I would say that at the least, he is an improvement over Kendall.

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

He was a good player and a very good run blocker, if we can get him cheap I say get him.

Posted by: Flounder21


He was a part of an offense that had CP in his prime averaging 3.0/carry. I'm not saying he's not a good player, but he's not someone I'd rush to re-sign. He was overpaid by the Bills, and he shouldn't be overpaid by the skins. He's not very good at hitting a moving target, which he'll need to do on the outside zone plays CP likes to run now. I don't see him as much of an upgrade to the line.

Posted by: TWISI | February 26, 2009 10:48 AM | Report abuse

I have a strange feeling that when I climb into my car tomorrow morning at 5:30, and turn the radio to ESPN 980 that the first thing I'm going to hear is that the Skins sign AH.

That will make my trek down GW parkway very interesting, I will be mad at first but then will come around once I realize there is nothing that can be done about it.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Hey there. It's gonna be a long day, so stock up on coffee. Alex had asked if we'd be doing mobile text alerts and the answer to that is oh, yeah. Just in case you're in a meeting or something....Obv, will also be tweeting like a fiend.

Posted by: CindyBoren | February 26, 2009 10:49 AM | Report abuse

I would say that at the least, he is an improvement over Kendall.

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:48 AM

If Dockery had caught that pass that Kendall snagged, he would have turned it into a TD.

To the others, four words: "Don't knock the Dock." Getting him would be like when Deangelo Hall fell into our laps.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 26, 2009 10:51 AM | Report abuse

flound, I'm the same way. I'll probably be pissed at first, but, eh, what can I do...hey, did I tell you to pick up Lego Star Wars yet?? My kids absolutely love it...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 10:51 AM | Report abuse

I think you'all are going to be suprised a bit by Dockery's next contract, by whoever signs him, its going to be a chuncky mid level NFL deal. Bills overpaid no doubt and suffered from Levy's desire to build winner in his short window. Also they are a low earning team. So they had to cut bait.

But look at the deal Gabril Wilson signed. Raiders overpaid, shocker, but his next deal from Dolphins was still hansome for a quality every down NFL player.

I hear up here a lot "I wishes" that are not grounded in reality. Like "Taylor should play but at reduced rate" Huh? in what universe would that happen?

If I dropped 25 pounds my clothes would fit.....true in isolation but somewhat detached from reality....

Posted by: chrislarry | February 26, 2009 10:51 AM | Report abuse

I guess the only question is who will get their info from Adam Schefter first, Cindy/Jasno or the rest of us.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 26, 2009 10:52 AM | Report abuse

I don't think we can make a move on Dock until tomorrow, unless we want to claim him off waivers, under his existing contract. He has to clear waivers before he is a free agent.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 26, 2009 10:53 AM | Report abuse

Nice Flound, I'd probably be similar. Its like a slow killing disease....

Posted by: chrislarry | February 26, 2009 10:54 AM | Report abuse

psps23


The 10:23 pm post was what the young people call the 'shiznik'.

When seen from the light of the data you provide, adding Haynesworth doesn't look as bad as it does now.

Your post was like beer in a bar in that it made an ugly situation look a little better.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 26, 2009 10:54 AM | Report abuse

flound, I'm the same way. I'll probably be pissed at first, but, eh, what can I do...hey, did I tell you to pick up Lego Star Wars yet?? My kids absolutely love it...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 10:51 AM |

I'm assuming that is a Wii game I will check it out.

I've been playing a ton of Guitar Hero!!

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 10:54 AM | Report abuse

"He was a part of an offense that had CP in his prime averaging 3.0/carry."

He was also part of the line that let Ladell Betts average over 5 YPC.

"He's not very good at hitting a moving target, which he'll need to do on the outside zone plays CP likes to run now."

I was always under the impression that's exactly what his strength is. Athleticism and pulling. That was a staple of Saunders' running scheme, that's how Betts averaged such a high YPC, and that's why the Bills paid him so much money.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 10:54 AM | Report abuse

Guitar Hero rulz!
Popping wood over free agency droolz..

Posted by: chrislarry | February 26, 2009 10:55 AM | Report abuse

From what I remember, Dockery left here on good terms. Although I don't think anyone "cried" when he left, the way they did when the great Leigh Torrence was cut.

RI November 9, 2008: "I'm about to cry," one Redskin said when informed that Torrence was on waivers. "Why would they let Leigh go? That dude did a good job for us and was only getting better. That doesn't make sense."

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 26, 2009 10:56 AM | Report abuse

flound, I'm the same way. I'll probably be pissed at first, but, eh, what can I do...hey, did I tell you to pick up Lego Star Wars yet?? My kids absolutely love it...

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 10:51 AM

I actually bought it over the past weekend. It's fun, but get's a little boring as it's not very challenging. If you want a really cool Star Wars game, try Battlefront's 1 and 2.....I know they are old, but they are awesome. Not sure if they make them for Wii though.

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 10:58 AM | Report abuse

psp,

Agreed on Dockery not sure what TWIS is talking about, we hardly did any pulling last year.

When Dockery was here he was pulling all the time.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 10:58 AM | Report abuse

fl, yeah, sorry, its a Wii game. They haven't played anything else since we got it. There's something like 160 levels, my girls like it a lot, my son however asked me if there was any way he could buy his own light saber.....

Posted by: BeantownGreg | February 26, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

dlhaze...maybe b/c you are not a kid....

Can someone get MrSkin a scotch and a valium? Lighten up once in awhile my man...its fun.

Posted by: chrislarry | February 26, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

Although I don't think anyone "cried" when he left, the way they did when the great Leigh Torrence was cut.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 | February 26, 2009 10:56 AM

Samuels was pretty upset. Dock was his wingman. But Samuels isn't a crier. The one who cried when Torrence was cut was Tryon because it meant he'd be more exposed.

Posted by: talent_evaluator | February 26, 2009 10:59 AM | Report abuse

"I heard the Buffalo Bills released Derrick Dockery.

I wonder is there's any interest in bringing him back.

Posted by: MrRedskin21 |

YES! Bring back Dock - for less $$$ though. Guess this proves the grass is not always greener.

Posted by: Lisa_R | February 26, 2009 11:00 AM | Report abuse

Lisa I am pretty sure Docks grass is plenty green...he still banked a huge amount he is keeping and now will get another decent contract with the upside of getting the helll outta buffalo.

Posted by: chrislarry | February 26, 2009 11:02 AM | Report abuse

'...Dockery sounds like he could be Smoot 2.0. Just don't overpay him...'


Again: more truth.

Now, if we could only get Leigh Torrance to re-sign.........

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 26, 2009 11:02 AM | Report abuse

The 10:23 pm post was what the young people call the 'shiznik'.

When seen from the light of the data you provide, adding Haynesworth doesn't look as bad as it does now.

Your post was like beer in a bar in that it made an ugly situation look a little better.

Posted by: MistaMoe

-----

Thanks Moe. I think most people are holding out for the "I'll believe it when I see it", and I can't say I really blame them. But there is a lot of data there that is hard to ignore.

Posted by: psps23 | February 26, 2009 11:02 AM | Report abuse

My kids love Super Mario Galaxy and Raving Rabbids, I told them I was going to get the microphone for Guitar Hero so I could sing, and they both started crying.

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 11:02 AM | Report abuse

I just thought of something. Brooks and Dunn were released by the Bucs. Can we sign them to a record contract? Get it? "Record" contract? Country music stars? Is this thing on?

Posted by: dlhaze1 | February 26, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse

Beep Beep

Posted by: Flounder21 | February 26, 2009 11:04 AM | Report abuse

beep beep...although no newz beeps

Posted by: chrislarry | February 26, 2009 11:05 AM | Report abuse

First, I never mentioned pulling, I said the outside zone play. Second, having Dock in open space is playing against his strenght. Third, Dock wasn't that good pulling while he was here. Buges used to say that Dock had great potential, he had to play up to it. I don't recall the year but I remebered when Ray Brown was on the redskins staff how he repeatedly mentioned the Dock had to play lower when he pulled. Dock kept getting blown up in the hole, particularly on short yardage plays. I looked at ESPN break down of him, and they mentioned the same thing about Docls pulling ability. If they get him it would be a whatever move IMO.

Posted by: TWISI | February 26, 2009 11:09 AM | Report abuse

'...When Dockery was here, he was pulling all the time....'

This scheme advantage is what was a missing part of the Redskins' running scheme the past two seasons.

Betts is the kind of back who reads off blocks, Portis the kind who feels for daylight, which is why an athletic pulling guard is so important.

Dockery would allow the quick toss-trap, the power-O, the toss sweep, the ol' Green Bay power sweep to the wide side of the field: plays other than the 'stretch' which made the running game stale in the second half of the second as only CP excelled at it.

Again: Mr. Zorn must bend his WCO tendencies and call the kind of running plays his backs excell at and call a variety of plays to confuse tendencies.

But Dock's not signed....yet.

Posted by: MistaMoe | February 26, 2009 11:10 AM | Report abuse

mrredskin: "I don't understand the talk about Springs playing safety. Why?The Redskins have LaRon Landry, Chris Horton and Kareem Moore.No need for Springs, his salary or his injuries."

I suspect there is. Landry's fine. Horton played really well last season, so they dropped Doughty. Moore played well once he got over his injuries and they seem to think he has more upside than Horton.

But neither Horton nor Moore is primarily a pass defender (Horton INTs last year notwithstanding). More and more pass defense skills required of safeties in this League. Springs, like Rod Woodson, might actually revive his whole career with a move.

If he stays healthy, that is.

Posted by: Samson151 | February 26, 2009 11:17 AM | Report abuse

If I remember right, it was mainly the coaches who cried when Dockery left because they'd so much time working with him, and thought it was about to pay off.

He's not a Zorn type player, though. He's in the Gibbs mold.

What's the saying? You can't go home again?

Posted by: Samson151 | February 26, 2009 11:20 AM | Report abuse

I say do your best to sign Hall, cut Springs, the guy is not worth the money he couldn't stay healthy in 07,or 08 and will be a year older there is no logical reason to expect him to be able to stay healthy this year. Forget about Haynesworth he's not all that(talent notwithstanding) he's injury prone, is a potential characther/behavior/weight issue threat, and we NEED O LINE HELP!!! If we can sign Canty that's fine, but square away the O Line so that our offense can score some points, sustain drives(run out the clock in the fourth quarter) and keep our defense off the field as much as possible so that they will not be worn out in the fourth quarter which is what cost us some games last year!!!

Posted by: 72Redskins | February 26, 2009 11:51 AM | Report abuse

The bills just cut Dockery after 2 seasons

Let go skins!!!!

Posted by: 1skinfan | February 26, 2009 12:54 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company