Redskins; Here we go again...

Larry Gude

Strung Out
...free agent time again.

London Fletcher is likely to be a Redskin soon.

Why? He's supposed to be durable and a good run stopper and he is a 'Greg Williams' guy. That's why.

Antonio Piece wasn't a Greg Williams guy.

London has played nine years, hasn't missed a game. In the NFL, that means he is a ticking time bomb way, way over due. 9 years.

All I remember of his Ram years was he was a smaller, quicker type guy who got pushed back when you had to have that one yard. Quick doesn't get better with age.

FWIW, Fletcher was an undrafted free agent.

We may not re-sign Dockery because he might be worth $12 mil, guaranteed, on the market. So what? We give away $10 mil to pretty much anybody for being average somewhere else. Why not 2 more for a guy who has actually proven himself, here? If he were someone else's free agent, we'd give up $12 mil to get him. We'd give him more than that.

Smoot might be coming back. It made no sense letting him go. It makes less getting him back.

Shaw Springs is like Dockery; apparently not worth keeping. He's our best cover guy, by far, and made the entire D better when he played. He's coming off a season slowed by that surgery which, by the way he finished the season, is just fine. It's just as reasonable to expect him to play a full season as it is Fletcher, or anyone else, at his age. Maybe more so. Why is your #1 corner worth planning on paying $7 mil when he reaches this point in the contract when you sign him, but no now, especially when he is still, by a good bit, your #1 corner? We'd pay $10 to get him if he wasn't ours. Hell, the paper says a possible replacement, Nat Clements, might get $20 mil somewhere.


Why the hell not just play Rocky, a first round pick, btw, and pick up another young guy or two to develop?

We gotta sign Doc.

Getting Smoot back is as absurd as remarrying your ex. You already know what she/he is and didn't want it. Now they have more miles on them you do want them???


It seems to me the policy of getting rid of people who have been here in favor of getting the new, more expensive shiny things is still alive and well.
 

blitz10

New Member
Larry Gude said:
...free agent time again.

London Fletcher is likely to be a Redskin soon.

Why? He's supposed to be durable and a good run stopper and he is a 'Greg Williams' guy. That's why.

Antonio Piece wasn't a Greg Williams guy.

London has played nine years, hasn't missed a game. In the NFL, that means he is a ticking time bomb way, way over due. 9 years.

All I remember of his Ram years was he was a smaller, quicker type guy who got pushed back when you had to have that one yard. Quick doesn't
get better with age.

FWIW, Fletcher was an undrafted free agent.

We may not re-sign Dockery because he might be worth $12 mil, guaranteed, on the market. So what? We give away $10 mil to pretty much anybody for being average somewhere else. Why not 2 more for a guy who has actually proven himself, here? If he were someone else's free agent, we'd give up $12 mil to get him. We'd give him more than that.

Smoot might be coming back. It made no sense letting him go. It makes less getting him back.

Shaw Springs is like Dockery; apparently not worth keeping. He's our best cover guy, by far, and made the entire D better when he played. He's coming off a season slowed by that surgery which, by the way he finished the season, is just fine. It's just as reasonable to expect him to play a full season as it is Fletcher, or anyone else, at his age. Maybe more so. Why is your #1 corner worth planning on paying $7 mil when he reaches this point in the contract when you sign him, but no now, especially when he is still, by a good bit, your #1 corner? We'd pay $10 to get him if he wasn't ours. Hell, the paper says a possible replacement, Nat Clements, might get $20 mil somewhere.


Why the hell not just play Rocky, a first round pick, btw, and pick up another young guy or two to develop?

We gotta sign Doc.

Getting Smoot back is as absurd as remarrying your ex. You already know what she/he is and didn't want it. Now they have more miles on them you do want them???


It seems to me the policy of getting rid of people who have been here in favor of getting the new, more expensive shiny things is still alive and well.


Dont you think it would be best for them to clean out some coaches first?
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
What?

blitz10 said:
Dont you think it would be best for them to clean out some coaches first?


...we have, what, 53 players, not counting practice squad. Or does that count practice squad? And only, what 20 some odd coaches? Obviously, we need more coaches, not less! And we need someone in charge of whether or not the 53 is active roster or includes practice squad.

:jameo:
 

Softballkid

No Longer the Kid
Larry Gude said:
...we have, what, 53 players, not counting practice squad. Or does that count practice squad? And only, what 20 some odd coaches? Obviously, we need more coaches, not less! And we need someone in charge of whether or not the 53 is active roster or includes practice squad.

:jameo:


Its the no player left behind program. For every player, there should be a coach :biggrin:
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Ok...

Softballkid said:
If Synder runs out of cash, maybe we can borrow from Tom and his scientificology or whatever its called :lol:

...THAT is not funny. Your owner hanging with TC is like finding out Joe Gibbs has kept Brunell because he drives fast.
 

Softballkid

No Longer the Kid
Larry Gude said:
...THAT is not funny. Your owner hanging with TC is like finding out Joe Gibbs has kept Brunell because he drives fast.


:lmao:


So is that why all of a sudden, we aren't looking at the Bills corner, because they aren't sure what exactly to do with Springs(who though getting older, should be re-signed), Smoot and all the others available...
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Same reason...

Softballkid said:
:lmao:


So is that why all of a sudden, we aren't looking at the Bills corner, because they aren't sure what exactly to do with Springs(who though getting older, should be re-signed), Smoot and all the others available...


...we hang with TC; because we can. Even if it's crazy and makes no sense. Especially because it's crazy and makes no sense. :jameo:
 

BuddyLee

Football addict
I thought they were decent pick-up's considering what's out there compounded by the fact that teams are paying outrageous sums of cashola this year.

London led all linebackers last year with four interceptions. One thing that is extremely hard to do is over the last five years London has had more tackles than anyone else in the NFL. He has also (started) in 103 straight football games. In practice he takes every snap. He won’t come out of the games. He plays first down, second down and nickel. He is one of those guys that loves to play and that is exciting for us.”
http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=191932

Fletcher sounds like an improvement pick-up; pan back to last year. We didn't get any turnovers, London had four alone last year leading all linebackers in the NFL. We were shady on tackling, London has had more tackles than anyone else in the NFL over the past five years. Last year, we were plagued by injury, London has started in 103 straight games so he's durable (to this point at least).

I can see the pessimism about Smoot, however, give him a chance. It's a new start for the guy, he may do alright or bomb but we shouldn't throw him under the bus like he's Brunell. Not yet at least.

However, I am concerned if they sign this O-guy from Arizona, Leonard Davis. I only hear horrible things about this guy.

Gibbs also mentioned in the Fletcher press-conference that there will be numerous changes. Fletcher will be used as the D-QB, the play caller and leader the 'D' seemed to be lacking last year.

On the different approach he is taking to the off season work outs:

“I am going to take a different approach in a lot of areas for us. I sent out a letter to the players about the off season. The veteran players we are going to put it on them. They have promised me that if I gave them more time to themselves that they would come back ready to roar. Several of them thought that might help in being fresher towards the end of the year which is great. I am worried about starting. I want to start fast. We are going to change quite a bit. We tried to research as best we could and are trying to be smart about it. We talked to the players and are analyzing things with the coaches.”
Have hope, even if it's miniscule.
 

LuckyDog4

Live2Ride; Ride2Live
ChumpChange said:
Hail to the Redskins
Hail Victory
Bababumbumbum
Somethin Somethin Somethin
Fight! For ol DC

:getdown: :getdown:

:howdy: Thought you might like this. Here is the song.. So get down with your bad self.. :lmao:
Hail to the Redskins
Hail Vic-tor-y
Braves on the Warpath
Fight for old D.C.
Run or pass and score -- we want a lot more!
Beat 'em, Swamp 'em,
Touchdown! -- Let the points soar!
Fight on, fight on 'Til you have won
Sons of Wash-ing-ton. Rah!, Rah!, Rah!
Hail to the Redskins
Hail Vic-tor-y
Braves on the Warpath
Fight for old D.C.
:larry: :larry: :larry:
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Ok...

...we got Fletcher which sounds great except for the 'never missed a game' hex. He's still a major new addition and I don't care how well he knows Greg Williams defense. I presume the guys who were here last year and the year before 'know' it as well. London still represents the quick fix mindset around here. He was paid $10 mil to sign and got a 5 year, $25 million contract which, of course, is absolutely meaningless past the second year in today's NFL.

What is meaningful is that, overall, he didn't get that huge of a deal and, even more meaningful, is that Buffalo, with way more dollars to spend than us, let him go. For all the things we're supposed to think are so great about him, they don't see it the same. They think he's a bit small for run stopping (rut ro shaggy) and, obviously, don't much care that he's never missed a game. Are they as stupid about him as we were about Antonio Pierce? Or, are they selling a stock on its way down?

Getting Smoot back is beyond absurd. He's a decent player but, if anyone recalls, was rather prone to personal fouls after the play for poor sportsmanship. Ask San Diego if that matters or not.

Now, the flip side, losing Doc. If a guy is gonna get that kind of money, there isn't much you can do, no matter how good he is. That's how we do business' offer so much that the player can't say no and the team can't match it. We know how that tends to work.

My issue is why let it get to that point? Rumor is that they could have signed him a month or two ago for $12 million or so signing bonus which is absolutely reasonable as Randy Thomas got almost $10 three years ago and, for sure, in light of what he ended up getting, $16 m which, frankly, is what Steve Hutchinson got last year.

So, we're better at middle linebacker, have a HUGE hole in the O line and may have added depth at db if...

...if we keep Springs. The Skins want him to play for less than what they agreed to pay him this season, $7 million. He's already re-structured once and is, damn sure, our best corner, by far, and anyone his caliber is gonna cost more than that, if you can find somebody. If we play the 'never missed a game, therefore never will' fantasy with Fletcher, why not the 'he's been hurt and is due a full healthy season' game with Springs? With Shawn our backfield still needs a safety. Without, we need a safety and a corner.

If anyone recalls, we were instantly better when Shawn was on the field, so much so that it is arguable that he is more important than an upgrade at middle LB.

At this point we are not better off than a couple months ago, having lost Doc, and, for sure not better off if Springs goes.
 

kom526

They call me ... Sarcasmo
Consider Springs gone...If he goes (I THINK) it frees up something like 7 mil of cap money. From what I have gleaned from the Post he doesn't seem willing to restructure. If he can make more somewhere else, moer power to him. The skins will just have to try and generate a serious pass rush to compensate. :waitwhileIwipethespitoffmymonitor:
 

BuddyLee

Football addict
jazz lady said:
:poorbaby: It sucks to be a diehard Redskins fan. :huggy:
Shhh...I'm still young and have hope. Don't tell me I'm going to end up all old and decrepit like Larry, one day.:jameo:
 
Top