Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

[quote=That Guy;278528]jason campbell gives worthless interviews. it's just coach/athlete speak and cliches 101. as long as he plays well though...[/quote]


I noticed that too....almost like he's been told what to say beforehand. Like you said though, as long as he plays well. oh, and ARE is NOT a bust. The man almost Devin Hester-like on punt returns. At ANY point, he could take that sucker to the house. I've seen him throw some good blocks and make some clutch catches and come on, having that Option play and being able to make it work effectively is a VALUABLE weapon against ANY defense. ARE is not a bust.

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

[QUOTE=That Guy;278528]jason campbell gives worthless interviews. it's just coach/athlete speak and cliches 101. as long as he plays well though...[/QUOTE]

What would you rather he say? Yo, to that chump D-Mac up in Philly, I'm coming fo yo crown brutha! And P Manning, I aint forget what you did to my man Arch up in yo bootleg dome. You may be MVP, but you a ma------g phony to me.

That would be cool actually

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

[QUOTE=saden1;278489]It's times like these I wish I could control my DVR remotely. A big FU goes out to Comcast and their lame DVR.[/QUOTE]

Its called a sling box: [url=http://us.slingmedia.com/page/home]Sling Media - US Home[/url]

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

The only problem I have with getting another DE is that we're still short in the middle then, which means that we'd have to get someone in free agency. We also have other free agency needs though in MLB and CB/Safety depending on Sean Springs...actually...this could end up being a very different defense in 07

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

Randle-El got a $10M signing bonus. Go back and read that sentence again so you don't miss any of the details.

Now, when you have to resort to the argument that someone overlooked his contributions on special teams to justify that free agency signing, you have just made the point that the Skins overpaid him. And that is the other end of the line on calling him a bust. He's not worth a $10M signing bonus.

$10M signing bonus for a #3 WR who returns punts/kicks and allows you one gadget play a game is not exactly what most NFL playoff teams call "a free agency success story".

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon;278564]Randle-El got a $10M signing bonus. Go back and read that sentence again so you don't miss any of the details.

Now, when you have to resort to the argument that someone overlooked his contributions on special teams to justify that free agency signing, you have just made the point that the Skins overpaid him. And that is the other end of the line on calling him a bust. He's not worth a $10M signing bonus.

$10M signing bonus for a #3 WR who returns punts/kicks and allows you one gadget play a game is not exactly what most NFL playoff teams call "a free agency success story".[/QUOTE]

As I think you agree, there's a difference between being a bust (see Archuletta) and being overpaid (see ARE). ARE produced points on special teams, threw several bombs as a QB, caught 30+ passes (which was a lot for our passing attack), and added a threat to the offense that defenses had to respect. And no it is not ridiculous to cite his special teams play in evaluating the merits of his contract. Field position matters and if you disagree, then talk to any football coach at any level.

Moreover, he was in the first year of his deal on a team with a new offensive coordinator, a bad QB situation, and, for the most part, a run first mentality. So, call me crazy but it's a little premature to call him a bust or evaluate the merits of his contract.

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

Randle El thre a td caught 3 of them and returned a punt against the sb champion colts if he was a bust then the raiders will go all the way in 2007

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;278566]As I think you agree, there's a difference between being a bust (see Archuletta) and being overpaid (see ARE). ARE produced points on special teams, threw several bombs as a QB, caught 30+ passes (which was a lot for our passing attack), and added a threat to the offense that defenses had to respect. And no it is not ridiculous to cite his special teams play in evaluating the merits of his contract. Field position matters and if you disagree, then talk to any football coach at any level.

Moreover, he was in the first year of his deal on a team with a new offensive coordinator, a bad QB situation, and, for the most part, a run first mentality. So, call me crazy but it's a little premature to call him a bust or evaluate the merits of his contract.[/quote]
Great post. I couldn't agree more.

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;278566]As I think you agree, there's a difference between being a bust (see Archuletta) and being overpaid (see ARE). ARE produced points on special teams, threw several bombs as a QB, caught 30+ passes (which was a lot for our passing attack), and added a threat to the offense that defenses had to respect. And no it is not ridiculous to cite his special teams play in evaluating the merits of his contract. Field position matters and if you disagree, then talk to any football coach at any level.

Moreover, he was in the first year of his deal on a team with a new offensive coordinator, a bad QB situation, and, for the most part, a run first mentality. So, call me crazy but it's a little premature to call him a bust or evaluate the merits of his contract.[/quote]


I couldnt have said it better myself. excellent points.

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;278566]As I think you agree, there's a difference between being a bust (see Archuletta) and being overpaid (see ARE). ARE produced points on special teams, threw several bombs as a QB, caught 30+ passes (which was a lot for our passing attack), and added a threat to the offense that defenses had to respect. And no it is not ridiculous to cite his special teams play in evaluating the merits of his contract. Field position matters and if you disagree, then talk to any football coach at any level.

Moreover, he was in the first year of his deal on a team with a new offensive coordinator, a bad QB situation, and, for the most part, a run first mentality. So, call me crazy but it's a little premature to call him a bust or evaluate the merits of his contract.[/quote]As a receiver, Randle El wasn't very good. He was adequate, but any receiver who couldn't have made at least 30 catches with the exact same role in the offense that ARE had probably shouldn't be in the NFL.

Randle El's true value to this team is in his versatility. We don't need a special player to play across from Santana Moss to have a great offense. Any decent player will do (ARE fits that bill). But Randle El brings a threat to run the ball (we can line him up in the backfield), a threat to throw the ball, and is one of the better punt returners in the game today. For those reasons, you want him on the field as much as possible even if he's only an adequate receiver.

I don't think that justifies a $10 million signing bonus, but he's certainly not a bust. I think we knew that he was only going to be a replacement level WR when we got him. If only we knew the same about Lloyd before, because he's a guy who brings little versatility and a big attitude to this team.

I like receivers who have versatility. I don't want to give money to a guy who lines up close to the Gatorade cooler, touches the ball 2-3 times a game, doesn't block well, and complains about his role in the offense. I want my receiver to be a player and earn his salary.

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;278566]As I think you agree, there's a difference between being a bust (see Archuletta) and being overpaid (see ARE). ARE produced points on special teams, threw several bombs as a QB, caught 30+ passes (which was a lot for our passing attack), and added a threat to the offense that defenses had to respect. And no it is not ridiculous to cite his special teams play in evaluating the merits of his contract. Field position matters and if you disagree, then talk to any football coach at any level.

Moreover, he was in the first year of his deal on a team with a new offensive coordinator, a bad QB situation, and, for the most part, a run first mentality. So, call me crazy but it's a little premature to call him a bust or evaluate the merits of his contract.[/quote]

good post.

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

I give ARE an incomplete because I just don't think he got opportunities. Quite seriously Brunell checked down to the flat or Cooley 50% of the time and Santana got a majority of the other balls. I didn't notice at any point where ARE played bad more than he just didn't get the ball. I wonder how any other well respected WR2 would have done really. I can't imagine much better. Let's see him in an offense that is functioning relatively well in all respects and then judge him.

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

The problem here seems to me that if Randle-El had signed for a $1M signing bonus and $1M a year salary, everyone would be falling all over themselves saying what a great value he was. And that would be absolutely true if he had signed for such a paltry number.

The fact is that he's a $10M bonus purchase plus annual salary increments. That's what he is; so you kind of have to evaluate him and the value he brings to the team against what he cost. It's kind of like the Mark Brunell situation; if Brunell was making the veretan minimum with no signing bonus money to amortize, he'd be a lot better value as "quarterbacking depth" than he is now.

Randle-El is much better than Archuletta who also got $10M to sign a contract here. But being better than Archuletta last year is hardly a form of high praise.

So in order to try not to be offensive, might I suggest that Randle-El's performance on the field - taking into account all of his field position contributions and receptions and gadget plays - did not merit a $10M signing bonus.

And by the way, all of his accomplishments yielded a 5-11 record... Had he not signed here and had the Skins kept that $10M in the bank, would the record have been all that much worse? I don't think so...

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

[quote=saden1;278489]It's times like these I wish I could control my DVR remotely. A big FU goes out to Comcast and their lame DVR.[/quote]
You can with a slingbox... I watched the playoff championship games in London... changed channels and recorded them too....

Re: Redskins on NFL Live Monday 2/19
 

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon;278814]The problem here seems to me that if Randle-El had signed for a $1M signing bonus and $1M a year salary, everyone would be falling all over themselves saying what a great value he was. And that would be absolutely true if he had signed for such a paltry number.

The fact is that he's a $10M bonus purchase plus annual salary increments. That's what he is; so you kind of have to evaluate him and the value he brings to the team against what he cost. It's kind of like the Mark Brunell situation; if Brunell was making the veretan minimum with no signing bonus money to amortize, he'd be a lot better value as "quarterbacking depth" than he is now.

Randle-El is much better than Archuletta who also got $10M to sign a contract here. But being better than Archuletta last year is hardly a form of high praise.

So in order to try not to be offensive, might I suggest that Randle-El's performance on the field - taking into account all of his field position contributions and receptions and gadget plays - did not merit a $10M signing bonus.

And by the way, all of his accomplishments yielded a 5-11 record... Had he not signed here and had the Skins kept that $10M in the bank, would the record have been all that much worse? I don't think so...[/QUOTE]

Bingo. ARE was a luxury the Skins really couldn't afford. He was a Lexus when a Toyota would have been sufficient.