Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic;277341]I am not saying he can't play. My point is we fielded the oldest defense in the NFL last year and we need some younger, quicker, more physical players. what kind of deal do you think he is going to want? do we really want to give this guy the money he wants when we need a lot of different areas upgraded. We drafted a guy last year(Rocky) who should be given a shot at playing, and if Fletcher is brought in to compete or add depth, fine. but at what cost? I just dont see the need to bring in a guy, on the down slope of his career for a year or two, then have to cut him and eat more cap money. We dont have the draft picks, i know that. but why not trade down, get a couple more picks and look at drafting a guy that could compete as well as he could. We gave up picks to move up to get Rocky, are we going to let him rott on the bench? He should be expected to start. to say someone isn't football smart because I dont believe in bringing guys in that are obviously on the downside of their career is crazy. Haven't we gone down that road enough of bringing in people towards the end of their career? There have to be other options out there more attractive than a 32 year old LB.[/QUOTE]

Well first off Rocky is an OLB and despite what many seem to think MLB and OLB are not just interchangeable. Especially in GW's system. In this system the MLB is the QB of the defense. He has to know what everyone is supposed to do so he can adjust when he diagrams what the other team is doing. For some reason I highly doubt anyone at Redskins park is willing to go into the next season with a guy who showed he can play the position average(Marshall) and a second year player who couldn't even crack the lineup at his natural position until mop up time. Rocky is not the answer.

As for trading down I agree it would be great to trade down and pick up several quality players but there are some problems with that too. First and foremost people make the statement 'trade down and pick up some more picks' just like they make the 'hire a GM statement'. Like it is some magical formula where you can go to the GM store or the Tradedown store and magically everything is fine. Well I have news for those people, trading takes two teams and if no one is willing to offer anything of value it won't happen. It is NOT a sound strategy to PLAN ON TRADING. You plan and prepare on NOT TRADING DOWN and if an opportuniy arises then you re-evaluate. The same for a GM. Just because we have a GM doesn't mean everything is fine. He would need to be a GOOD GM. There are plenty of teams who have traded down and ended up with scrap pieces because they traded away a shot at a difference maker and ended up with decent roll players. And there are plenty teams that never win championships with GMs.

That being said, you go into free agency looking to fix as many holes as possible so you dont have to rely on drafting to field 22 decent starters. Then the draft is used for depth. If we can bring a guy who knows the systems and can play why would his age be a problem? No one is expecting the guy to come in be the MLB for the next 8 years. We are talking about getting a good player to play for us while we build depth at the same position and others also.

I totally fail to see why his age is even a consideration other than for health reasons.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=12thMan;277353]Personally, I don't think Fletcher or Clements will be a big help.[/quote]

I don't either. It all starts with the front 4. We need a tackle and an end.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=dmek25;277301]plain and simple, fletcher is an upgrade at middle linebacker, but is probably too old. and clements would be a good fit, and i really don't give a rats ass what the redskins pay anyone. year after year, the skins masterfully move right around the salary cap. one of these years, after the skins have some success, someone is going to recognize how good of a job whomever it is that runs the skins cap[/quote]

if by masterful you mean leading the league in dead cap, not having enough money for decent depth and having to pay more each year for smaller returns. not to mention the fact that the skins overpay all their FA signings anyways.

it hasn't bitten them because of the new TV deals, BUT, right now the skins need to rework four thousand contracts to get an FA while other teams are 30mill+ under the cap. This team is already at a competitive disadvantage as far as cap resources, not to mention draft pick disparity, overpaying (very poor price/performance on very big contracts), and the current lack of depth.

I mean, there's always luck and the chance we'll get 2 HoF guys as UDFAs, but right now next year ain't looking so hot. maybe if no one gets hurt and those 2 signings put the D back in the top 10 we got a shot...

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Nate will cost us money. We need to draft a MLB prospect for the future. Marshall isn't that bad if the d-line does an adequate job of keeping bodies off of him.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277356]There are plenty of teams who have traded down and ended up with scrap pieces because they traded away a shot at a difference maker and ended up with decent roll players. And there are plenty teams that never win championships with GMs.

I totally fail to see why his age is even a consideration other than for health reasons.[/quote]


ditto and ditto. well said.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=hail_2_da_skins;277349]STOP THE MADNESS...The Skins need to stop overspending for mediocre free agents. London Fletcher was good 5 years ago.[/QUOTE]

Respectfully, you are clueless.

Year Team G Total Tkl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def
1998 St. Louis Rams 16 28 25.0 3 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0
1999 St. Louis Rams 16 90 66.0 24 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2000 St. Louis Rams 16 132 105.0 27 5.5 4 33 8.2 12 0 4
2001 St. Louis Rams 16 116 89.0 27 4.5 2 18 9.0 18 0 3
2002 Buffalo Bills 16 147 97.0 50 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2003 Buffalo Bills 16 133 96.0 37 2 0 0 0.0 0 0 4
2004 Buffalo Bills 16 142 92.0 50 3.5 0 0 0.0 0 0 3
2005 Buffalo Bills 16 157 104.0 53 4 1 20 20.0 20 0 2
2006 Buffalo Bills 16 146 104.0 42 2 4 30 7.5 17 1 7


Fletcher had arguably his best season of his career last year.

He was probably the best MLB in the league last year.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

While I'm against the FA spending sprees I think London Fletcher and Nate Clements would be great additions.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

the leaders in tackles this year were zach thomas (REAL f'ing old), demeco ryans (real f'ing young) and london fletcher (somewhat in between). he's been consistent, so as long as it's not a insane 7 year deal, he could really help us.

i think some people are way to hung up on age. 32 != (does not equal) total crap. I mean, peyton's going to be 32 in march, so obviously the colts should dump him as soon as possible, cause we all know no one can possible be any good after 32.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=TAFKAS;277328]I thought the Postons were suspended anyway. So who's representing Lavar these days? Is it #56fanatic?[/quote]

I wish, I could use the percentage of his last contract.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Redskinconfucian wisdom say

If you can get em for the right price.. take em .... If you can't don't

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277361]Respectfully, you are clueless.

Year Team G Total Tkl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def
1998 St. Louis Rams 16 28 25.0 3 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0
1999 St. Louis Rams 16 90 66.0 24 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2000 St. Louis Rams 16 132 105.0 27 5.5 4 33 8.2 12 0 4
2001 St. Louis Rams 16 116 89.0 27 4.5 2 18 9.0 18 0 3
2002 Buffalo Bills 16 147 97.0 50 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2003 Buffalo Bills 16 133 96.0 37 2 0 0 0.0 0 0 4
2004 Buffalo Bills 16 142 92.0 50 3.5 0 0 0.0 0 0 3
2005 Buffalo Bills 16 157 104.0 53 4 1 20 20.0 20 0 2
2006 Buffalo Bills 16 146 104.0 42 2 4 30 7.5 17 1 7


Fletcher had arguably his best season of his career last year.

He was probably the best MLB in the league last year.[/quote]

Buff has a better defense. I would say Buff's d-line is a little more sturdy than ours. He could really struggle on our defense if we don't improve the line. But since we don't have draft picks than this is the option.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

wasn't there a guy from NY who had awesome numbers before he got here at MLB and didn't play a snap for us in a skins uniform... always hurt

MIKE BARROW

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=That Guy;277367]the leaders in tackles this year were zach thomas (REAL f'ing old), demeco ryans (real f'ing young) and london fletcher (somewhat in between). he's been consistent, so as long as it's not a insane 7 year deal, he could really help us.

i think some people are way to hung up on age. 32 != (does not equal) total crap. I mean, peyton's going to be 32 in march, so obviously the colts should dump him as soon as possible, cause we all know no one can possible be any good after 32.[/quote]

C'mon. Playing QB is ALOT less demanding than playing MLB. Since when does Peyton have to take on 250lb fullbacks?

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=That Guy;277367]i think some people are way to hung up on age. 32 != (does not equal) total crap. I mean, peyton's going to be 32 in march, so obviously the colts should dump him as soon as possible, cause we all know no one can possible be any good after 32.[/QUOTE]

I agree. He clearly isn't the long term solution. A nice contract where it is really a 2 or 3 year deal and we don't break the bank is in order I think. I am not advocating we go out and spend a boat load on him but give him market value and plug a hole. Then get us a corner and draft a lineman. Someone who either eats up the middle or can rush the passer. Either way someone who dominates. A lineup that includes Clements, Branch and Fletcher is better than a lineup of Rogers, Golston and Marshall on any planet. Then next year grab a prospect MLB and groom him for two years to replace fletcher. Seems reasonable to me.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=That Guy;277367]the leaders in tackles this year were zach thomas (REAL f'ing old), demeco ryans (real f'ing young) and london fletcher (somewhat in between). he's been consistent, so as long as it's not a insane 7 year deal, he could really help us.

i think some people are way to hung up on age. 32 != (does not equal) total crap. I mean, peyton's going to be 32 in march, so obviously the colts should dump him as soon as possible, cause we all know no one can possible be any good after 32.[/quote]


that isn't even comparable, a QB to a MLB. totally different positions. MLB takes suck a beating game in and game out. at 32 QB's are still on top of their game. MLB's for the most part are on the way down.