Skins expected to sign Fletcher

Marshall is a perfect guy to have in rotation at LB. He knows every position but has been beat up at MLB. He is just a little small to play in the middle all the time.

I can't think of a better player to be the number 1 back up to each LB position out there. He knows the system and I bet that, even losing his starting job, he will see the field quite a bit.

When did Marshall demonstrate that he knows the system inside and out? Pierce knew it inside and out, Lemar is no Pierce. They were decent in '05 but plain awful last year. As the QB of the defense he should receive a large portion of the blame for that.

So he also gets the credit for helping to field the 9th ranked defense in 2005? I'd say the 9th ranked defense is a little better than "decent."

I would put him on the bench because he isn't as talented as Washington or Rocky. It is as simple as that. To compare Rocky and Lemar phisically is definitely a stretch. Even though the Redskins may have tapped Rocky a little early, he was a stud in college and was definitely a second rounder. Lemar is a "no-name" who did well with his opportunity in '05 and regressed severely in '06.

Marshall certainly isn't as good as Washington, but I have no idea how anyone can compare Marshall to Rocky. In fact, if anything, Rocky's total absence from the field until the last two games of the season seem to indicate that Marshall is (for now) the better player. Moreover, Rocky wasn't able to beat Warrick Holdman (who isn't exactly Pro-Bowl material) at a position that is not nearly as challenging as the MLB spot. And, does it really matter where someone was drafted in determining how good they really are in the Pros (as opposed to how good they were projected to be)?

Marshall was also playing on a bum ankle for nearly the entire season. He sat out most practices and was doped up half the time to deal with the pain. I hate to make excuses for the guy, but I think Marshall is a good player who doesn't deserve to get a substantial part of the blame for the defense's woes in 2006.

i feel that he should know the defense inside and out because he's been a starter in it for the past 3 seasons and the qb of it the last 2. i agree with you that his play slipped last year but i feel that the entire defense slipped and i believe marshall should only be given the same amount of criticism as taylor or anyone else that played last year. i've heard poeple say that the only reason taylor played bad is because he was trying to do too much, well that may be true but the same could be said about marshall.
how can you say he's not as talented as rocky ? sure rocky was good in college but the jury is still out as to how good he'll be in the nfl, were as marshall has proven to be a very good outside lb and a pretty good mlb. if your going say that marshall regressed, would you also say that taylor regessed ?
if rocky beats marshall out during training camp then thats fine but i believe it is marshall's job until that happens.

If 210 solo tackles over 3 years (2 in the middle) are evidence of knowing a system inside and out, we need a new system. Taylor has 205 as a safety with two less games. Ray Lewis had 155 solo tackles in one year!

What is the infatuation with Marshall? I like him and I pull for him but the guy is a mediocre middle and outside linebacker. He is a role player.

How do you laying the same blame on a Free Safety as your middle linebacker. Am I the only one who thinks that is crazy?

So he also gets the credit for helping to field the 9th ranked defense in 2005? I'd say the 9th ranked defense is a little better than "decent."



Marshall certainly isn't as good as Washington, but I have no idea how anyone can compare Marshall to Rocky. In fact, if anything, Rocky's total absence from the field until the last two games of the season seem to indicate that Marshall is (for now) the better player. Moreover, Rocky wasn't able to beat Warrick Holdman (who isn't exactly Pro-Bowl material) at a position that is not nearly as challenging as the MLB spot. And, does it really matter where someone was drafted in determining how good they really are in the Pros (as opposed to how good they were projected to be)?

Marshall was also playing on a bum ankle for nearly the entire season. He sat out most practices and was doped up half the time to deal with the pain. I hate to make excuses for the guy, but I think Marshall is a good player who doesn't deserve to get a substantial part of the blame for the defense's woes in 2006.


Either Rocky is a complete bust or our coaches were promoting their agenda again last year (I believe and pray that it is the latter.

I guess we will see who the better player is in the pre-season, won't we.

Either Rocky is a complete bust or our coaches were promoting their agenda again last year (I believe and pray that it is the latter. I guess we will see who the better player is in the pre-season, won't we.

I don't think Rocky is a complete bust or that the coaches were promoting their agenda (unless promoting their agenda consists of putting the best players on the field). As of last season, Marshall was probably the better player. Everything that I heard of Rocky is that he is very physically gifted, but did not totally understand the system. Rocky might be the better player next season, but his lack of any significant time on defense strongly suggests that he was not last season.

I'm not saying that Marshall is some Pro-Bowl MLB stud, but I don't think he's as bad as you are saying (i.e., that he is a "role player"). Again, I'm not sure how you can honestly attribute our woes on defense last season to Marshall and call him a role player, and simultaneously give him no credit for the defense's play in 2005.

Saw this on profootballtalk.com...looks like Fletcher may be a done deal...

POSTED 8:16 p.m. EST, February 25, 2007

FLETCHER OFF THE MARKET?

One of the hot rumors in Indy is that Bills linebacker London Fletcher already has struck a deal with the Washington Redskins.

Fletcher, a nine-year veteran who has played with the Rams and the Bills, was believed to be a target of the Redskins and the Lions, and possibly others.

Of course, even if the 'Skins and Fletcher have a deal, it doesn't mean that the arrangement is binding. Since any contact between a pending free agent and a different team is prohibited, there can be no binding contract at this point.

Last year, it was widely believed that the Eagles had an agreement in principle with center LeCharles Bentley, who made a beeline for Cleveland once the free-agency period started.

Saw this on profootballtalk.com...looks like Fletcher may be a done deal...

POSTED 8:16 p.m. EST, February 25, 2007

FLETCHER OFF THE MARKET?

One of the hot rumors in Indy is that Bills linebacker London Fletcher already has struck a deal with the Washington Redskins.

Fletcher, a nine-year veteran who has played with the Rams and the Bills, was believed to be a target of the Redskins and the Lions, and possibly others.

Of course, even if the 'Skins and Fletcher have a deal, it doesn't mean that the arrangement is binding. Since any contact between a pending free agent and a different team is prohibited, there can be no binding contract at this point.

Last year, it was widely believed that the Eagles had an agreement in principle with center LeCharles Bentley, who made a beeline for Cleveland once the free-agency period started.

Well we should put something in the title,because my thread was just locked.When you come into this thread you see Clayton.You don't see anything about PFT until this page.So how is anyone suppose to know about it.

Well we should put something in the title,because my thread was just locked.When you come into this thread you see Clayton.You don't see anything about PFT until this page.So how is anyone suppose to know about it.

By reading posts before you start your own thread. (this is probably coming off harsher than it's intended to be)

By reading posts before you start your own thread. (this is probably coming off harsher than it's intended to be)

So i have to read 4 pages of posts before i create a thread?Point that i was trying to make is put something in the title like (PFT Rumor).I mean not everyone is going to go read 4 pages of posts.Thats why you read the titles.Thats why i posted that thread.I didn't see a title about PFT so i created one.

So i have to read 4 pages of posts before i create a thread?Point that i was trying to make is put something in the title like (PFT Rumor).I mean not everyone is going to go read 4 pages of posts.Thats why you read the titles.Thats why i posted that thread.I didn't see a title about PFT so i created one.

I think you're taking it too personally. If anyone here had started that thread Gmanc or any other mod would have locked it just the same. To keep the board free of duplicate threads.

Personally, I've found that adjusting my settings so that the most recent post is listed first helps.