That being said, I have a feeling the reason we drafted two tackles this year, is in the hopes that one of them (or perhaps Winey) will develop into a viable alternative in case we need to cut Samuels.

If Samuel's has a breakout year, there will be no need to cut him, because team's will be lining up for his services, but if he doesn't then he has a prob., because he want's to stay in DC, he will also probably know he wont be able to get the kind of contract he want's else where, and would prob. renegotiate if we wanted him at all at that point, I think if he has a big year and we have a lot of success thing's will work out for the best, winning help's cure a lot of problem situation's, and I doubt he would want to move on when we are poised to contend for a SB, especially after the last couple of year's.

There is no incentive for Samuels to renegotiate this year, he had a bad 2003.
There might not be any offers from other teams for Samuels in the future, since teams know we will have to cut him if his salary cap number for 2005 does not come down. Why would a team give up something (draft pick or player), when they can have a chance to get him for free.
Samuels needs to renegotiate for us to keep him past this year.
Other NFL teams know this and will use it against us.
Same reason we have not had any offers for Trotter.

[QUOTE=Defensewins]There is no incentive for Samuels to renegotiate this year, he had a bad 2003.
There might not be any offers from other teams for Samuels in the future, since teams know we will have to cut him if his salary cap number for 2005 does not come down. Why would a team give up something (draft pick or player), when they can have a chance to get him for free.
Samuels needs to renegotiate for us to keep him past this year.
Other NFL teams know this and will use it against us.
Same reason we have not had any offers for Trotter.[/QUOTE]

So a team can guarentee that they get him, Samuel's might not be interested in every team out there, and as a free agent he may not give them a chance, where as if they trade for him, he has a contract he has to honor.

I read somewhere that Samuels did not want to restructure this year but is willing to negotiate a long term extension next offseason. If so, that would solve the cap problem he presents. I think he wants to make sure the 'Skins are, in fact, turning it around and want to be sure Gibbs/Bugel are in it for more than a couple of years.

[QUOTE=offiss]So a team can guarentee that they get him, Samuel's might not be interested in every team out there, and as a free agent he may not give them a chance, where as if they trade for him, he has a contract he has to honor.[/QUOTE]

No, I did not say "guarentee(d)" to get Samuels. I said any team has the "chance" to get him.

JoeRedskin,
Regarding Samules willing to renegotiating next year is great news, but Samuels still counts something like $8,000,000 this year. He is being very selfish. We could seriously improve our last remaining weak spot on our roster (the D-line) with some of that money. Plus with a big signing bonus (which he would likely receive if he renegotiated) he could still make his $8M this year and more.
Although, if he plays like last year, he is not worth $8m or signing him to a huge long term contract. Hopefully he will raise his level of play back to the way he played a couple of years ago.

I don't think Samuels is going anywhere this year regardless of his high cap #. I'm confident he'll have a very strong bounce back season under Bugel and Gibbs' protection oriented system.

[QUOTE=Defensewins]Regarding Samules willing to renegotiating next year is great news, but Samuels still counts something like $8,000,000 this year. He is being very selfish.[/QUOTE]


i'm pretty sure he's already restructered things in his rookie contract twice. plus would any of us be willing to restructure a deal like this after two very subpar years, knowing that if u do restructure that the team might try to hose u. i 2 wish he'd free up even just a 1 million or 2 so as to give the team enough room to sign the rookies and give the skins a sporting chance to go out and get a solid pass rushing de, but i can see where he's coming from.

[QUOTE=Defensewins]No, I did not say "guarentee(d)" to get Samuels. I said any team has the "chance" to get him.

JoeRedskin,
Regarding Samules willing to renegotiating next year is great news, but Samuels still counts something like $8,000,000 this year. He is being very selfish. We could seriously improve our last remaining weak spot on our roster (the D-line) with some of that money. Plus with a big signing bonus (which he would likely receive if he renegotiated) he could still make his $8M this year and more.
Although, if he plays like last year, he is not worth $8m or signing him to a huge long term contract. Hopefully he will raise his level of play back to the way he played a couple of years ago.[/QUOTE]

I know what you said, what I said was a team would trade for him to guarentee that they would get him, rather than take a chance that they could get him, risking losing a player they have a big need for, left tackles are possibly the most immportant position on the field, with the exeption of QB., with that said I think thing's will be just fine.