Redskins Free Agent Contracts vs. League

I think there are some things being overlooked here, the fact that these huge contracts that are being signed today are huge now, but 3 years down the road they won't be due to the rising salary cap, so thinking along those lines, you can't ever overpay players. Also its not just the amount we paid, but it's also the quality of the player that we got, arch? Lloyd? Randle El? None of these guys could get the contracts that we gave them even if they hit the market today. Smoot got a contract about the same size as the others, and nobody has complained about it because he has preformed well so far. Also, some of the contracts being given out are just plain stupid, just because some other teams are being stupid doesn't mean that we're not, I mean seriously, Javon Walker 55 mil? Hes getting more money than Moss, that's not the market, it's just the raiders being dumb

So what do you guys think, here are the questions I posted:

what is interesting with our over spending for years on free agents is not a single one of our FA signings since Danny took over has been in the probowl. Any one of the Redskin probowlers have been draft picks. That is what I find amazing. We are signing these guys to pretty big ass contracts and not a single one has made it to Hawaii. Bad moves? bad contracts? maybe, but some have been pretty quality players over the last 5 years.



What are you talking about that all of our pro bowlers have been drafted and none of our free agent made it, you only find it amazing cause its wrong!

Santana Moss made the probowl
Marcus Washington made the probowl
Laverneous Coles...

Springs should have made it a fwe times
carter is arguable

So what do you guys think, here are the questions I posted:

Do you think the Redskins are to blame for the new high salaries?
Do you think our recent high priced players turned out to be value, instead of over paying?
Do you think its best to fill all needs via free agency, so at the draft you always pick best available and arent handicapped by any needs?



I dont think they are to blame totally, no one is holding a gun to an owner head when they sign these ridiculous deals this year. If no one would pay the demands, the demands would go down. simple as that. However, most of the deals these guys are signing are not what they seem to be. It is a bunch of fluff. The most important part of those deals are the guaranteed portions. those are the real deals as far as #'s goes. for example, no way Big Ben see's all of the 108million he signed for. He is guaranteed 35 million of that. Same goes for Jevon Walker I am pretty sure.
What I do think the Redskins are on the hook for are the rising salaries of these assistant coaches. what we paid the "fantasy staff" we had in place the last couple of years has definately upset some of the older owners. Look at we we gave Saunders and GW, now look at what these other coordinators are getting, that I can blame on the Danny.

what is interesting with our over spending for years on free agents is not a single one of our FA signings since Danny took over has been in the probowl. Any one of the Redskin probowlers have been draft picks. That is what I find amazing. We are signing these guys to pretty big ass contracts and not a single one has made it to Hawaii. Bad moves? bad contracts? maybe, but some have been pretty quality players over the last 5 years.

I am a firm believer in building through the draft. I hope we keep that philosophy and build on it. Now, I am not a naive person and realize you do need to sign a big FA to push yourself over the top. NE, Indy, Philly all prove this. They build through the draft, and sign those guys that put them over the top. I read a stat that when NE one the last superbowl of the 53 man roster, 49 were drafted, same went for Philly and Indy those superbowl years. there are some examples of draft building not paying off (Bengals, Lions, Cards...) That is a combination of bad picks and bad GM moves.
sorry for the lengthy post

and I wasnt trying to be mean, i get what youre saying and am on the same page. But we have had players make the probowl that were free agents.

Definitly had more that we drafted though (mabye you can thank the free agents for sucking and getting us high draft picks ;) )

There's an article on SI's Truth and Rumors today about how the veteran Jet players are upset about the money just handed out to the new free agent class. They're wondering when they're going to get theirs. You can see the kind of angst a free agent binge causes in the locker room, same thing was happening to us every time we went on a binge. I think it affects team chemistry, besides the fact that new players have a learning curve. You end up with a tough season.

You're best off drafting guys into the program and letting them earn their stripes on the field, and then get paid. It helps breed a blue-collar, hard work equals financial reward kind of mentality.

Work and deserve it, earn it to own it.

And this is where I would get frustrated as a coach and owner. Maybe I'm being naive, but it's not like the veteran Jet players are any less capable of buying a fleet of high-end Italian cars. Maybe I think people should be PUMPED about who they get so they can WIN and not who has the bigger house.

Good thread w/interesting posts. To answer the questions:

1) Snyder may have helped inflate salaries in a given year, e.g. 2000, but not every year since.

The main thing no one has mentioned here (and I'm surprised) is simple economics:
there is less supply and more demand of free agents, so it's a seller's market.
I don't have any links at hand, but there have been a no. of stories about how teams have gotten better at keeping their own players. Less are hitting the market & more are being franchised.

2) We've signed some good fa's, e.g. class of 2004, and several are team leaders. The downside is that these guys cost more & have fewer years of return as they're older.

3) I think an ideal balance would be at least 85%/15% draft-free agency. We've definitely had an imbalance in the past, but that's started to change, especially on the defensive side of the ball.

and I wasnt trying to be mean, i get what youre saying and am on the same page. But we have had players make the probowl that were free agents.

Definitly had more that we drafted though (mabye you can thank the free agents for sucking and getting us high draft picks ;) )


If i remember they were alternates. I was refurring to being voted as starters, not fillers for ones that decline or are injured.

So what do you guys think, here are the questions I posted:

Do you think the Redskins are to blame for the new high salaries?



I'm just going to focus on this question. The Redskins are to "blame" for new high salaries, because there hasn't actually been an increase in salaries relative to the salaray cap. The Skins are still the only team that constantly operates $20 million over the cap. Nearly all of the other teams, without exception, operate under the cap. Therefore, the increase in salaries is proportional to the increase in money paid to the players per the CBA.

If a bunch of other teams began operating well over the cap, than I would say that the Skins are responsible. On a side note, I think we are fortunate that other teams haven't started doing this yet, because I believe the reluctance of the other teams to operate over the cap in effect gives us a higher cap than the rest of the NFL. This is an advantage for the Skins. Perhaps they haven't utilized the advantage as well as we would like to see, but hopefully with time they will.

If i remember they were alternates. I was refurring to being voted as starters, not fillers for ones that decline or are injured.

hm, not sure I have to check. I thought Washington and Moss were starters. That was the year Moss was second best receiver behind Smith.