Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

i wouldnt call jansens year stellar,especially after the oakland game.but i would leave the o line alone(willing samuels will restructure)bowen gone i would keep harris(as a nickel back-doesnt make alot)lavar stays but with restructure,otherwise-gone.the biggest thing is those 2 guys reworking there deals.everything else is chump change

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

Guys, Samuels base # for 2006 is $1M because he just signed a new deal this offseason.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin]"Teams with constant roster turn over DO NOT win." I am sorry but that statement is just idoitic. Every team, winning or losing has to deal with "constant roster turn over". Let's check the books shall we?

Philly - Wonderful cap space - maintained by constant turnover. They replaced both their CB's last year, made big free agent DL and WR signings, and have been playing ring around the rosie with their LB corp for years. Yet they made it to the SB last year.

Indy - Constantly in "cap hell" due to Peyton's contract (and now Marvin's). Constantly losing decent D starters b/c their offense is too expensive (seems to me they lost a damn good up and coming LB to free agency a couple years ago - Marcus Washington, heard of him? In fact, I think they also lost their starting MLB that year to the Jags). They have added new people - Cory Simon, you know that young DL guy that used to play for Eagles before the birds "managed" their cap by letting him go? For all the roster moves, Indy made it to the conference championship game. On top of that, the turnover has mostly come on the defensive side of the ball which has shown the most improvement.

New England - ARE YOU KIDDING ME?? This is aquisition central. They are constantly signing and losing players - Ty Law, their pro bowl guard who signed with Detroit (don't remember the name), David Patten - and who was that old, over the hill, problem child running back they added to their team last year at the cost of a 2nd round draft pick and that help carry them to the S-Bowl? Cory something... Didnt he play, and star, for another team you site as lacking turnover? Perhaps...

Cinci - Marvin came and turned the whole roster over. Then this year and last continued to cut and pare add and subtract in less dramatic fashion - for all the turnover the last couple of years, they seem to be doing alright.

Jacksonville - Gotta admit a little fuzzy on this one but it seems to me they lost a number one WR (McCardell) and paid a big price for a bust DE (Hugh Douglas - also "managed" by the Eagles). And BTW, it's not like this team has been a powerhouse over the last few years - they seem to be winning now despite the turnover from the last couple of years.

I could go on forever. Turnover in the NFL is now a constant - Every team loses players they want to keep. Every team makes decisions as to where to take those losses. It's not that teams with roster turnover don't win, it's that teams who don't make good roster decisions (regardless of the price) as they constantly build and re-build teams lose. Which brings me to ...



Other than Steven Davis, who of any signifigance has been cut recently? Smoot and Pierce? They weren't cuts - they were given competitive offers and went elsewhere for more money. Thus, following your advice not to overpay - we lost two starters.



You mean like this year? Which was BTW, the second year after Gibbs came in - made a splash and got some quality FA's at a decent price (it seems to me that Gibbs and crew got Washington and Springs rather than overpay for Kearse), took some flyers on injured players before settling down this offseason.

What huge signings did they have this year that cost them players? Moss? That was kinda unexpectedly forced on us by Coles and, even so, appears to be a deal worth it. Brunnell? You got me on that one, but 1) that was Gibbs first foray into the new NFL and 2) I think we like Brunnell now. Overpaid - probably, but injurying our ability to sign needed players? No. Only if we had continued to overpay after Brunnell would it have been a problem.

As to draft picks, I sympathize with you on that one. I agree that we seem to be a bit cavalier about these. At the same time, the only real significant draft choice deal this year was the Campbell deal. If he pans out to be the QB of the future for the next 8-10 years, however, the trade was well worth it. Especially if we do well enough to make it a low first rounder.

IF cap hell strikes, I will do a mea culpa with everybody else. But for now, it seems to me that, on offense, we will have the same starting QB, RB's, Guards and Tackles (but for injury), TE for three years running (including 2006) and likely the same WR's and C two years in a row. On defense, Taylor, Arrington, Washington, Springs, Griffin, Marshall, Wynn (I think both he and Daniels will be back) will be three year starters.

Most of your criticism is about pre-Gibbs tendencies which appeared to be and were criticized as fantasy football GM'ing. It seems to me that Gibbs learned a little from year one to year two. Why don't we give him the same break you appear to be giving Del Rio and M. Lewis?[/QUOTE]

You dont get what I am saying. In regards to you statements, I will respond.

Philly, they draft core players and pick up the 1 or 2 free agents that put them over the top. Not every year, once in a while. Example : Donovan, westbrook, trotter, douglas, corey simon, another DT which slips my mind, both corners, which are not there now, dawkins, all drafted, 3 straight NFC championships. then Free agent pick up of TO and Kerse, reselt : Superbowl. so 2 free agent pickups, key players drafted.
Indy, Peyton, edge, harrison, wayne, pollard(not there now) clark, oline,mostly drafted, D : Doss, most recently drafted, corners, and Corey Simon picked up via Free agency, result : defense playing good, 12-0. Again, mainly key players drafted, 1 or 2 free agent pickups.

New England. Do we even have to go to this one. Everyone drafted, won a superbowl, got Corey dillon, won another two. (Ideal organization, draft players late that have an impact, spend WISELY, build a team of continuity and famaliarity)

Cincy, all key players are draft picks, Palmer, Johnson, TJ, Henry, Rudy. He picked up a few key players on D, but mostly they are all young and drafted, result, 9-3, going to playoffs.

Jacksonville - Key players drafted, few pick ups.


Not to overpay players : Brunell 35 yr old QB, 43 million + 3rd rounder(is that not too much?) 30 yr old CB in springs, 10 million signing bonus(is that not too much?) Trading of a 2nd pick + Bailey for Portis, too much given up!. Walt Harris, making almost 3 million a year, too much. I am not saying these players are not playing well and that I dont want them on the team. Just stating we overpaid them. Also, gave up a 3rd and a 1st for a QB # 3 on the depth chart. when you think about it between Ramsey, Brunell, Campbell we have 4 picks, 3 number 1's and a number 3 tied up in those players, not to mention the money we gave to Brunell.

Regarding this years draft. I think we should have taken a DE with the first pick, and got a quality CB in the 2nd. I am not going to complain about Rogers, I think he will be quality. Though Spears and Ware will now be eating us alive twice a year with the cowboys.

If we about building for the future, then why do we trade picks away for a 35 year old QB to be our starter. Why do you yank your started 1 quarter into the season. Why do you waiste another 1st round pick on another QB. Future building is not in the organization. I give Marvin and Del Rio credit and the owner credit for knowing it was going to be a few years of rebuilding with these young guys, then we will start winning when they grow and learn together. We have not done that since Danny bought the team. If we had done that from the get go with Lavar, Samuels, Jansen, we could have won something by now instead of spending money on guys that arenot here now and guys that probably wont be here in a year or two.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=dmek25]i wouldnt call jansens year stellar,especially after the oakland game.but i would leave the o line alone(willing samuels will restructure)bowen gone i would keep harris(as a nickel back-doesnt make alot)lavar stays but with restructure,otherwise-gone.the biggest thing is those 2 guys reworking there deals.everything else is chump change[/QUOTE]

I agree, I would leave the o-line alone despite the play of the tackles. I think they get even better next year if they stay together. Keep in mind, this unit, so far, got through the season injury free. I think that's the biggest thing working for them next year - more continuity.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]This is the same crap I talk about everyday. Look at all the people that are potential cuts. It is rediculous to build a franchise with constant turnover. It has to happen every year because...[/QUOTE]

no it doesn't happen because of drafting, it happens to everyone (if you draft someone, someone else has to go, which also means turnover). Its the life of free agency, its been 14 years now, please get used to it ;)

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]Jansen has had a stellar year, with two broken thumbs. In point, 1 penalty all year long, a false start in week 5. Samuels not quite as good, but solid.[/QUOTE]

wow, 1 penalty, i guess giving up sacks and letting DEs rip by you doesn't matter if you only have one penalty ;)

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]Didn't Samuels just restructure his contract last offseason? I'm not the biggest CS fan, but I would be surprised if he left[/QUOTE]

Samuels just signed a new deal prior to 2005. We paid a lot, but since we backed ourselves into a corner with CS, we really had no choice. His cap numbers are big and I don't see any restructuring for 2006.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]wow, 1 penalty, i guess giving up sacks and letting DEs rip by you doesn't matter if you only have one penalty ;)[/QUOTE]

I would agree, Jansen's year has been less than stellar. Granted at times he has been dominant, but during key times in the game he as well as Samuels have given up monstrous sacks.

Additionally, Derrick Dockery has only had a couple of penalties the entire year, if that many, so we can't judge performance on penalties alone.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

As for Arrington, his 2006 salary is only $545K so not exactly a great restructure candidate. If I had to guess, I'd say we let Lavar go this offseason, eat his $12M deadcap hit and get him off the books for the future.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

As for other potential 2006 moves I see:

Cuts/Trades:
Ramsey
Noble
Hall
Harris
Bowen
Patten
Raymer
Thrash

Restructures:
Brunell
Jansen
Thomas

(ie same guys who restructured last year)

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

Hey mods, can we start a poll.

Will LaVar stay or go in '06.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]
New England. Do we even have to go to this one. Everyone drafted, won a superbowl, got Corey dillon, won another two. (Ideal organization, draft players late that have an impact, spend WISELY, build a team of continuity and famaliarity)

Cincy, all key players are draft picks, Palmer, Johnson, TJ, Henry, Rudy. He picked up a few key players on D, but mostly they are all young and drafted, result, 9-3, going to playoffs.

Regarding this years draft. I think we should have taken a DE with the first pick, and got a quality CB in the 2nd.[/quote]


Your wrong on some of these things... New england won ONE bowl after dillon, and cincy has 18, EIGHTEEN new non-drafted players over the last two years... there are about 8 people on that team that were there in 2002, so i don't know where you're getting your facts from, but they're obviously wrong. Everyone in NE is NOT drafted, TONS were FA pickups (look at all the DBs they've used this year, guess what? most weren't drafted)

and once again, WE DID NOT HAVE A 2nd ROUND PICK. we could not have picked up a DE and then a CB, we'd have to have picked up one as a FA... which kinda kills your arguement.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

A lot of people are critical of us not taking a DE in the draft. But my question is who should we have taken over Rogers? Especially a rookie?

I don't get it.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

When I say everyone I dont mean every freakin person on the roster. I am referring to the core, key players teams have. If you think I meant every person on the roster then you are wrong. or maybe I should have spelled it out better. ALL THE KEY PERSONEL ON MOST OF THE TEAMS COMPETING FOR PLAYOFFS ARE DRAFTED, with a few of the players being that key pickup to put them over the top. Of the eighteen new players, how many of them are contributing players, and how many are roster spots? I would imagine most of them are roster spots vs. contributing players. People on this site need to learn how to address people in a manner that is not attacking. I have tried not to do that, but continually get bashed by people who think opinions are facts. Some of the stuff I make reference to are facts, and some are opinions. You can not debate the fact that most of the teams competing for playoff spots draft their key players, with a few FA pickups. Exception may be dallas with Bledsoe,Glenn,and ME,ME,ME on the offense. You people need to stop drinking the Redskin Cool-aid and look at the big picture. I hope Joe is sending us in the right direction. This season is an example of building a TEAM atmosphere. But like I have said before, if Danny , Vinny, and pepper rogers keep making decisions and dont hire a GM with some freakin knowledge we will continue to be .500 every year. People buy into their spin every year, "this year is going to be the year" look we got Marty, look we got Spurrier, look we brought back Joe the great!! Its the same thing no matter who is coaching. When do we start winning, next year right?!!

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]When I say everyone I dont mean every freakin person on the roster. I am referring to the core, key players teams have. If you think I meant every person on the roster then you are wrong. or maybe I should have spelled it out better. ALL THE KEY PERSONEL ON MOST OF THE TEAMS COMPETING FOR PLAYOFFS ARE DRAFTED, with a few of the players being that key pickup to put them over the top. Of the eighteen new players, how many of them are contributing players, and how many are roster spots? I would imagine most of them are roster spots vs. contributing players. People on this site need to learn how to address people in a manner that is not attacking. I have tried not to do that, but continually get bashed by people who think opinions are facts. Some of the stuff I make reference to are facts, and some are opinions. You can not debate the fact that most of the teams competing for playoff spots draft their key players, with a few FA pickups. Exception may be dallas with Bledsoe,Glenn,and ME,ME,ME on the offense. You people need to stop drinking the Redskin Cool-aid and look at the big picture. I hope Joe is sending us in the right direction. This season is an example of building a TEAM atmosphere. But like I have said before, if Danny , Vinny, and pepper rogers keep making decisions and dont hire a GM with some freakin knowledge we will continue to be .500 every year. People buy into their spin every year, "this year is going to be the year" look we got Marty, look we got Spurrier, look we brought back Joe the great!! Its the same thing no matter who is coaching. When do we start winning, next year right?!![/QUOTE]

There are top teams that have core players they didn't draft, to name a few:

Seahawks: QB-Hasselbeck, WR-Jurevicius, DE-Wistrom, DT-Darby, DB-Dyson, DB-Herndon, OL-Fisher, Ol-Gray

Panthers: QB-Delhomme, RB-Davis, WR-Gardner (hahaha, damn I'm funny-Rod "core player" Gardner), DT-Buckner, DB-Lucas, DB-McCree

Broncos-QB-Plummer, DB-Ferguson, DB-Bailey, All those former Browns rejects on the D-Line, TE-Alexander

So while a good draft is part of building a good team. It's not the only way to skin a cat as they say

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=12thMan]A lot of people are critical of us not taking a DE in the draft. But my question is who should we have taken over Rogers? Especially a rookie?

I don't get it.[/QUOTE]

And thats the problem you can't alway's draft for need, sometimes you have to draft the best available player if theres a big disparity between need and talent.

Rogers was a good pick, although I was starting to worry a bit about him a few games ago he seems to have really started to pick up his game and show more speed on the field, he was probably the victom of trying to understand the defense and the NFL and was a little slow in reacting because he was thinking to much hopefully he will just continue to progress.

Personally I wanted to trade down and bolster other areas of our team, but you can't cry about Rogers I think he will turn out to be a good one, the only alternative was to draft Merriman, reminds me a lot of John Abraham.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]You dont get what I am saying.[/QUOTE]

Other than the apparent disavowal of your earlier statement that "Teams with constant roster turn over DO NOT win", I get what you're saying. I just disagree with your conclusions and think the facts you use to back them up are outdated, selective in nature, contradictory and disengenous. Further, you simply ignored my questions concerning the practical effects of the disasters you proclaim.

As to the various teams and their keys to winning - Which is it:

1. Teams with constant roster turnover DON'T win.

or

2. Teams that cut ties with players when appropriate i.e. due to age or their cost in relation to the team's salary structure/cap (applicable to each and every team you mentioned), yearly aquire necessary players through FA, regardless of price (i.e. Kearse, TO, Corey Simon), carefully trade draft choices for talent (Dillon), and draft well DO win.

The statements are mutually exclusive b/c the second assumes constant roster turnover. If you are asserting that, actually constant turnover is not the key issue but rather the careful aquisition and retention of talent is, I would agree AND I would suggest that Gibbs' two off-seasons appear to be working towards that goal.

Further, your analysis simply ignores that NE started its run the season after it made a ton of low end FA aquistions (for which it was roundly lambasted) and that each of these teams has lost "core" players along the way (Two seasons ago NE cuts it locker room leader safety but recovered nicely). As to drafting well, the players you mention are heavy in the 1st - 3rd round category. I would suggest that the Skin's have done OK in that department (as evidenced by your later references to Jansen, Samuels, and Arrington). Your analysis of the roster moves is heavy on the "key players drafted" analysis - Let see: Arrington, Marshall, Taylor, Rodgers, Jansen, Samuels, Dockery, Cartwright, Betts, Cooley - sounds like a pretty good list of "key players drafted".

[QUOTE=#56fanatic] Not to overpay players : Brunell 35 yr old QB, 43 million + 3rd rounder(is that not too much?) [/QUOTE]

Didn't I basically agree that the price seemed to high? As I said, I am willing to give Gibbs a pass on this one as it was his first foray into the new NFL. Good move on your part - Way to hammer home a conceded point.

[QUOTE=#56fanatic] 30 yr old CB in springs, 10 million signing bonus(is that not too much?) [/QUOTE]

HOLY CRAP - You cannot be serious. At the time, a slightly overmarket price to lock down a starting CB. A bit of a gamble but one that has paid off in spades. We COULD NOT NOW get a CB of Springs quality at the price he was asking then, regardless of age. If Springs hit the open market, any doubt he could get a deal significantly BETTER than the one Smoot got???

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]Trading of a 2nd pick + Bailey for Portis, too much given up!. [/QUOTE]

Beat that dead horse. Obviously, you would have slyly negotiated the Broncos into at least a straight up deal and probably pried the 2nd rounder from them. If the deal doesn't go through, we lose Champ to FA and get nothing, Denver keeps Portis, we draft Tatum Bell. Unless you were there, this is just your opinion and not one that is the clear majority (Bronco's fans were complaining that THEY got the short end of the stick). You are entitled to your opinion, but b/c you believe don't make it a fact.


[QUOTE=#56fanatic] Walt Harris, making almost 3 million a year, too much.[/QUOTE]

Walt Harris was a flyer picked up in case Smoot departed. He was a former starter who signed a reasonable K that pays 1.5 this year and 2.7 next. He won't be collecting the 2.7 next year. For a starting CB, that's a damn fine bargain. For a back-up, it certainly is not exhorbitant. You want to bitch about his performance, fine. Who would you have picked up in his place? Who would you have started earlier this year in place of him? In lieu of your preference for a DE in the draft, this was a damn fine pick up - or does your well thought out plan include drafting Ware, starting him at the DE spot and starting Ade Jimoh opposite Springs? Yes - that would have worked. Absolutely.


[QUOTE=#56fanatic] I am not saying these players are not playing well and that I dont want them on the team. Just stating we overpaid them. [/QUOTE]

So, in order to aquire players that you generally approve of, we MAY HAVE overpaid them in order to solidify our depth and get players that fit the team mold envisioned by Gibbs. IF we overpaid them, HOW HAS THE TEAM BEEN HARMED?? WHO HAVE WE missed out on? HOW SHOULD we have filled the voids left by the PRE-GIBBS era??

[QUOTE=#56fanatic] Also, gave up a 3rd and a 1st for a QB # 3 on the depth chart. when you think about it between Ramsey, Brunell, Campbell we have 4 picks, 3 number 1's and a number 3 tied up in those players, not to mention the money we gave to Brunell.
...

If we about building for the future, then why do we trade picks away for a 35 year old QB to be our starter. Why do you yank your started 1 quarter into the season. Why do you waiste another 1st round pick on another QB. Future building is not in the organization. [/QUOTE]

So the first thing Gibbs does is lock up an experienced veteran who has shown himself to be a solid starter. Meanwhile, he retains a talented young QB who may yet prove himself to be a solid starter or a valuable back-up/trade bait. After experienciing a year in which the QB play was simply not very good, while still believing he has the right guy for the job, Gibbs moves to aquire a young QB with good talent and put him in a situation where he can sit and learn for at least one, possibly two years a' la Carson Palmer. What an absurd way to build for the future at THE most important position on the field.

The consistency of your various positions is simply astounding.

[QUOTE=#56fanatic] Regarding this years draft. I think we should have taken a DE with the first pick, and got a quality CB in the 2nd. I am not going to complain about Rogers, I think he will be quality. Though Spears and Ware will now be eating us alive twice a year with the cowboys. [/QUOTE]

Tell you what, buy a franchise and you can draft all the DE's you like. But tell me, assuming we don't overbid for Smoot and don't sign Harris - who is your other starting CB? A 2nd round rookie? Again, buy a franchise and you can take that gamble - maybe you get lucky, maybe you don't.


[QUOTE=#56fanatic] I give Marvin and Del Rio credit and the owner credit for knowing it was going to be a few years of rebuilding with these young guys, then we will start winning when they grow and learn together. We have not done that since Danny bought the team. [/QUOTE]

But as we seem to be doing these last two years under Gibbs? Jesus man, give it a break - we are in year 2 of Gibbs. You want slow careful building for the future but you want it, and the results it brings, NOW!!!

If a slow careful building process is what you want, then TELL ME how this last offseason failed to provide that: Compared to last year - we got the same OL (3 of whom were draft picks), the same TE's (oh wait, he was a draft pick to!), the same first and 2nd string QB (didn't we draft one of those guys??), the same back-up running backs (by gosh, those guys are our draft picks also!) and we bring back 9 of 11 starters on D (of which 4 were our draft picks).

[QUOTE=#56fanatic] If we had done that from the get go with Lavar, Samuels, Jansen, we could have won something by now instead of spending money on guys that arenot here now and guys that probably wont be here in a year or two.[/QUOTE]

Okay - after naming several excellent roster moves by the Skins you make an amorphous reference to "spending money on guys that arenot here now and guys that probably wont be here in a year or two". SINCE GIBBS TOOK OVER AND, OTHER THAN BRUNELL, TELL ME: WHO, specifically, are you referring to; WHO, specifically, we lost out on b/c of the expenditure and WHO, specifically, we should have gotten in their place?

Harris? Maybe - but given the position he plays and the team make-up, probably not. Patten? Again, maybe, but who do we sign in his place? SPRINGS?? WASHINGTON?? GRIFFIN??

As I said earlier, you are entitled to your opinion. IF that opinion, as it appears to be, is that the Skins are making disastrous front office moves then I disagree. Could they improve? Well, who can't?

BUT in terms of aquiring and retaining talent, it is just too damn early to be blasting the Gibbs era Skins. Especially since the evidence appears to be that the team is going to make solid efforts to retain home-grown talent and stop paying through the nose for big-name FA aquisitions a' la Kearse or Musin Muhammed.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

think that might be the longest post in warpath history

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

Worth reading though...except Marshall I'm pretty sure was a free agent. Still, good post

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

umm...that was pretty cool. nice work

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

here are some players that should either restructure or be cut

matt bowen- the man just sucks now, his cap number is too huge for a crappy backup

renaldo wynn- he has a big cap number, but i think he would be willing to restructure, he seems like a team guy

phillip daniels- i also think he would consider restructuring, at this point in his career, he has to realize that he doesnt have much of a chance to get as much playing time on a competing team anywhere but here

brunell- i hope we can restructure his contract some, assuming the reports that said he already did are false. we do not cut him, just try and restructure, if he doesnnt then oh well

ramsey-trade him, simple as that. an expensive backup who has no future here. i understand that a backup is needed for the QB, but by next year campbell should atleast be a solid backup

raymer- cut/restructure. either works for me

hall-if we can get novak back, then cut hall. if we cant get novak, then nothin we can do but keep him

noble-cut if he doesnt retire, and try and bring him back as a coach, since that is something the coaching staff has talked about

these are small changes that would free up a lot of space, without changing a lot to the team.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

#56fanatic
you have a somewhat valid arguement , the skins could have done a little bit better job of the way they handled some of thier draft picks but your arguement concerning player turnover in washington is not so valid. the skins have had constant turnover in coaching staffs, with each new staff comes a new offensinsive/defensive scheme and with each new scheme comes new players to fit those schemes. the new coaches tell mr. snyder who they want and snyder delivers. the same has been true with gibbs, he will get rid of a player if that player is not a good REDSKIN, also gibbs will tell snyder of a REDSKIN he would like to keep or of a potential REDSKIN he would like to get. the biggest difference since gibbs has been here is he will not allow snyder to OVERPAY for the players he wants to keep or get. the one exception has been brunell but gibb wanted , more than anything, a good ,solid, veteran qb.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=CrazyCanuck]As for other potential 2006 moves I see:

Cuts/Trades:
Ramsey
Noble
Hall
Harris
Bowen
Patten
Raymer
Thrash

Restructures:
Brunell
Jansen
Thomas

(ie same guys who restructured last year)[/QUOTE]

The only guy on this list that I was somewhat surprised by was Patten. I thought we were pretty happy with him. Why do you think he is gone? What's the hit for cutting him next year pre-June 1/post June 1?

Also, to add something to my super long post - Several months ago Canuck criticized the FO for (as he references here) backing themselves into a corner/mishandling the Samuels, Arrington and Coles situations. I think his analysis of those three transactions was pretty damn good and a fair critique of the FO. Does anyone have the link to that post?

However, as I think I have made clear, I believe that Gibbs is instituting a sea change in the way the front office, and Danny himself, handle the business of aquirering and retaining talent. In terms of FA, I hope this next offseason is just as quietly productive as our past.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

i'd keep thrash, he's a good special teams player and a decent 3rd wr.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

i'm more worried about greg williams leaving than i am about any player. there's already rumors of him going to the rams.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

williams wont go anywhere. he already totally controlls the defense, and is the heir apparent to gibbs, plus he is getting paid like a head coach.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=Big C]williams wont go anywhere. he already totally controlls the defense, and is the heir apparent to gibbs, plus he is getting paid like a head coach.[/QUOTE]

I don't know about that. While he's getting paid like a head coach, I think Williams might have a tough time passing up a head coaching offer. There should be a lot of decent teams looking for head coaches next season.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

I think Williams will be here atleast 1 more year. Here is his best chance to win playoff games. Also if Gibbs/ Williams were to win the whole deal, Williams would be a guaranteed Washington hero and the next head coach. Gibbs won't be here forever, but I think we'll see him for atleast 1 more year. Hopefully Greg can wait. He will have the chance this offseason to get several headcoaching jobs, but truthfully his defense has slipped this year dramatically. Tiki Barber, Priest Holmes and Tatum Bell made us look like a bush league defense. Not to mention Joey Porter's long catch, LT's OT run and Chris Simms (not his dad) throwing on us all damn day!!! Oh and how about Alstott diving over twice?(perhaps once?) I hope we can keep Williams atleast another year and get him some DL this offseason.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]i'm more worried about greg williams leaving than i am about any player. there's already rumors of him going to the rams.[/QUOTE]

There is an entire thread dedicated to this (if anyone is interested):
[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?t=9490[/url]

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]i'm more worried about greg williams leaving than i am about any player. there's already rumors of him going to the rams.[/QUOTE]


Honestly, Wolf I think there will be rumors every year about Williams and Gibbs for that matter go elsewhere.

But wories me more than Williams leaving is him taking all of his assistants with him. Even if he leaves, if we can keep Blache, Lindsay we won't be too far off.

Re: Looks like Skins are $10 mil over cap next year, who goes?
 

[QUOTE=12thMan]Honestly, Wolf I think there will be rumors every year about Williams and Gibbs for that matter go elsewhere.[/QUOTE]




the main reason that the rams rumor concerns me is that i read something about greg williams growing up there (or something to that affect ) basically the story was saying that greg williams going to coach the rams was a definate possibility, more so than any other team. i was also wathing ESPN the other night and they were listing all the possible head coaching candidates for next season and greg williams was at the top of the list but to make things worse , they kept mentioning the rams as the team that would really like to get greg williams.