Marcus Washington gone?
 

[B]Hey, check this out. This is from Yahoo Sports about the needs of the NFC. Look at the write up on our LB corp. This has to be BS. Are there plans for the FO to get rid of Marcus W? I thought he was the one of the only bright spots on a lackluster defense. He is probably our most skilled defensive player why would we get rid of him?[/B]

[B]Please tell me this is inaccurate.[/B]


[B]----YAHOO NEWS-----[/B]
[B][URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/was/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Washington Redskins[/COLOR][/URL]
Team needs:[/B] DE, CB, OG, S, LB
[B]Overall pick/round:[/B] 6 (1), 143 (5), 179 (6), 205 (6), 216 (7)
[B]DE:[/B] They need a pass rusher, but they have to decide if it's worth bypassing a chance to take Gaines Adams or Jamaal Anderson to trade down for an extra choice. If the Redskins were to deal down, they could set their sights on someone like Jarvis Moss or Charles Johnson, and then still have the ability to add a defensive back from the extra pick for dropping down.
[B]CB:[/B] [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/3952/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Shawn Springs[/COLOR][/URL] could be a cap casualty come June 1 and [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/7185/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Carlos Rogers[/COLOR][/URL] needs to rebound from an average campaign last season. They have only one choice on the first day, so unless that changes, they will be finding more of a raw-tools prospect in the later rounds.
[B]OG:[/B] They lost [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6417/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Derrick Dockery[/COLOR][/URL] via free agency and have failed to a long-term replacement on the open market, although they feel veteran [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5082/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Todd Wade[/COLOR][/URL] might be able to fill the void for next season. It would be a good investment to spend a late-round choice on a guy like Robert Turner, Aaron Brant or Corey Davis.
[B]S:[/B] The Redskins signed and then misused [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5467/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Adam Archuleta[/COLOR][/URL], who was recently dealt to the Bears. They now have an array of veterans on the roster that they will try to pair with All-Pro [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6764/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Sean Taylor[/COLOR][/URL]. Second-year pro [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/7922/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Reed Doughty[/COLOR][/URL] may have the best upside, but either way, this position needs an upgrade in quality depth.
[B]LB:[/B] Even with the signing of [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/4539/"][COLOR=#0000ff]London Fletcher[/COLOR][/URL] and the expected development of Rocky McIntosh, this is still an area of concern. However, they have been the market-setters in terms of trying to acquire Bears All-Pro OLB [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6404/"][COLOR=#810081]Lance Briggs[/COLOR][/URL]. There is a chance that veteran outside linebacker [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5088/"][COLOR=#810081]Marcus Washington[/COLOR][/URL] could be a June 1 cap casualty. If not, he is likely to be jettisoned after next season, so finding a mid-to-late round prospect is a smart move.
----------

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

This is BS. Washington is one of the best, if not the best, all around player we have on the team.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=Skinny Tee;294393][B][I]S: The Redskins signed and then misused [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5467/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Adam Archuleta[/COLOR][/URL], who was recently dealt to the Bears. They now have an array of veterans on the roster that they will try to pair with All-Pro [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6764/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Sean Taylor[/COLOR][/URL]. Second-year pro [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/7922/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Reed Doughty[/COLOR][/URL] may have the best upside, but either way, this position needs an upgrade in quality depth. [/I][/B]

----------[/quote]


this is the part that gets me...we didn't misuse him...we had injuries, he's a football player, we expected him to help pick up the slack...just because he sucked doesn't make it our fault

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

Washington's cap figures aren't anything outrageous, I really don't think he's in danger of being cut.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

Can you say bullshit. Last time I checked M Washington was arguably our best defender and a team leader. You let those kind of guys go???

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

Can I please get paid to write opinions that contain no actual thought, investigation, or basis in fact? Pretty please?

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

These guys don't follow the Skins like we do. This type of outrageous punditry is very common. Washington is not going anywhere.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

Yeah, you didn't hear, we're also cutting Portis and trading Campbell. Sheesh. What a load of crap.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

I call BS...if they wanted Washington out they would have offered him in the Briggs trade.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=saden1;294411]I call BS...if they wanted Washington out they would have offered him in the Briggs trade.[/quote]I think they want this Briggs deal so bad because they are looking at Rocky to replace Marcus on the strong side.

I don't think they'd do it prior to this year though.

I could see them being willing to throw in Marshall, but Rocky is exactly what this team needs: youth.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

They may have meant Lemar Marshall instead of Marcus.....just a guess.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=RMSkins;294423]They may have meant Lemar Marshall instead of Marcus.....just a guess.[/quote]

Doubt that. More like they don't have a clue. I don't believe for a minute MW is going to be cap casulity.

However, I do hope his hip PT is going as planned, haven't heard anything on how he is recovering. We will need a healthy MW.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

????

This is called wild speculation without one bit of credibility. I am not even sure how they came to this decision. Even someone with only a modicum of football sense wouldn't come to this type of conclusion. Musta been written by an intern.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=GMScud;294407]Yeah, you didn't hear, we're also cutting Portis and trading Campbell. Sheesh. What a load of crap.[/quote]

WE ARE? anybody wanna by a clinton portis jersey real cheap?

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

If they think that they will cut Springs with no back-up plan they might as well go sniff glue.

Cutting Springs and Washington when we have no cap issues, that makes a sh$tload of sense.

If these guys have nothing intelligent to write, they just make stuff up...

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=skins009;294397]Can you say bullshit. Last time I checked M Washington was arguably our best defender and a team leader. You let those kind of guys go???[/quote]


Well...........
Smoot
Pierce
Lavar (i know, but i still miss the guy)
Clark
Champ (i am happy w/ the trade though)
Kenny Wright (j/k)


Washington is one of our top 3 defensive players - but werent all of these guys top 5 when with us. Old Gregerory thinks anyone is interchanble is his genious D.

I do think this yahoo artical is complete bs, but bringing in a big time FA to replace Washington could be a "priority" for this FO. Its not like a overachieving team leader has been replaced before with a big FA contract

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;294413]I think they want this Briggs deal so bad because they are looking at Rocky to replace Marcus on the strong side.

I don't think they'd do it prior to this year though.

[B]I could see them being willing to throw in Marshall, but Rocky is exactly what this team needs: youth.[/B][/QUOTE]

Problem is, these coaches don't seem to have much faith in their "youth". They're more reluctant with rookies than practically any team in the league.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

If they were going to cut Washington, wouldn't it make sense to offer him to the Bears?

These guys need to focus on the women's final four. They have no clue.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

the womens final four? whats that? and what kind of money is washington scheduled to make next season?

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=dmek25;294471]the womens final four? whats that? and what kind of money is washington scheduled to make next season?[/quote]

Something they proabably know more about.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=Skinny Tee;294393][B]Hey, check this out. This is from Yahoo Sports about the needs of the NFC. Look at the write up on our LB corp. This has to be BS. Are there plans for the FO to get rid of Marcus W? I thought he was the one of the only bright spots on a lackluster defense. He is probably our most skilled defensive player why would we get rid of him?[/B]

[B]Please tell me this is inaccurate.[/B]


[B]----YAHOO NEWS-----[/B]
[B][URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/was/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Washington Redskins[/COLOR][/URL][/B]
[B]Team needs:[/B] DE, CB, OG, S, LB
[B]Overall pick/round:[/B] 6 (1), 143 (5), 179 (6), 205 (6), 216 (7)
[B]DE:[/B] They need a pass rusher, but they have to decide if it's worth bypassing a chance to take Gaines Adams or Jamaal Anderson to trade down for an extra choice. If the Redskins were to deal down, they could set their sights on someone like Jarvis Moss or Charles Johnson, and then still have the ability to add a defensive back from the extra pick for dropping down.
[B]CB:[/B] [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/3952/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Shawn Springs[/COLOR][/URL] could be a cap casualty come June 1 and [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/7185/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Carlos Rogers[/COLOR][/URL] needs to rebound from an average campaign last season. They have only one choice on the first day, so unless that changes, they will be finding more of a raw-tools prospect in the later rounds.
[B]OG:[/B] They lost [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6417/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Derrick Dockery[/COLOR][/URL] via free agency and have failed to a long-term replacement on the open market, although they feel veteran [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5082/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Todd Wade[/COLOR][/URL] might be able to fill the void for next season. It would be a good investment to spend a late-round choice on a guy like Robert Turner, Aaron Brant or Corey Davis.
[B]S:[/B] The Redskins signed and then misused [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5467/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Adam Archuleta[/COLOR][/URL], who was recently dealt to the Bears. They now have an array of veterans on the roster that they will try to pair with All-Pro [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6764/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Sean Taylor[/COLOR][/URL]. Second-year pro [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/7922/"][COLOR=#0000ff]Reed Doughty[/COLOR][/URL] may have the best upside, but either way, this position needs an upgrade in quality depth.
[B]LB:[/B] Even with the signing of [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/4539/"][COLOR=#0000ff]London Fletcher[/COLOR][/URL] and the expected development of Rocky McIntosh, this is still an area of concern. However, they have been the market-setters in terms of trying to acquire Bears All-Pro OLB [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/6404/"][COLOR=#810081]Lance Briggs[/COLOR][/URL]. There is a chance that veteran outside linebacker [URL="http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/5088/"][COLOR=#810081]Marcus Washington[/COLOR][/URL] could be a June 1 cap casualty. If not, he is likely to be jettisoned after next season, so finding a mid-to-late round prospect is a smart move.
----------[/quote]

There's an old saying, "Don't believe everything you read." Most of these so-called experts are nothing more than blabbering blowhards!

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=mlmpetert;294441]Well...........
Smoot
Pierce
Lavar (i know, but i still miss the guy)
Clark
Champ (i am happy w/ the trade though)
Kenny Wright (j/k)


Washington is one of our top 3 defensive players - but werent all of these guys top 5 when with us. Old Gregerory thinks anyone is interchanble is his genious D.

I do think this yahoo artical is complete bs, but bringing in a big time FA to replace Washington could be a "priority" for this FO. Its not like a overachieving team leader has been replaced before with a big FA contract[/quote]

You can cross Mr. Smoot off that list. Pierce is the only one of those guys I miss, we should've never let him get away. Lavar was much better at running his mouth and being a malcontent than actually playing football.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

total bullshit, don't even pay attention to it. Gibbs uses Marcus Washington as proof free agents can pay out every time someone says we are idiots.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=ncskinsfanec;294522]You can cross Mr. Smoot off that list. Pierce is the only one of those guys I miss, we should've never let him get away. Lavar was much better at running his mouth and being a malcontent than actually playing football.[/quote]

You don't miss Ryan Clark? Man, I sure do. We could have kept him for pennies on the dollar compared to Archuletta's contract. Plus he and Taylor were great together. #21 regressed in Clark's absence.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[QUOTE=mlmpetert;294441]Well...........
Smoot
Pierce
Lavar (i know, but i still miss the guy)
Clark
Champ (i am happy w/ the trade though)
Kenny Wright (j/k)


Washington is one of our top 3 defensive players - but werent all of these guys top 5 when with us. Old Gregerory thinks anyone is interchanble is his genious D.

I do think this yahoo artical is complete bs, but bringing in a big time FA to replace Washington could be a "priority" for this FO. Its not like a overachieving team leader has been replaced before with a big FA contract[/QUOTE]

WIth the exception of Lavar, these were all guys whose deals were up. Washington is still under contract. Different situation.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=GMScud;294546]You don't miss Ryan Clark? Man, I sure do. We could have kept him for pennies on the dollar compared to Archuletta's contract. Plus he and Taylor were great together. #21 regressed in Clark's absence.[/quote]Count me in the we handled our safety situation improperly last year group, but I'm not convinced it has much to do with Ryan Clark. By most accounts at the time, Archuleta was an upgrade. He ended up being unecessary with Taylor still around and also ended up being damaged goods, so we kinda got screwed also. We didn't get screwed any worse though then if we were to find out that Ryan Clark had gotten hurt and couldn't run or tackle well anymore. We just spent a lot of money to get unlucky.

I'm starting to think that while Free Agency is a viable way to build a roster, big money signings are almost never going to help your team. The best values as players come without hype. The only players that you should overpay for are ones that have unique attributes that you can't get anywhere but that one player. I'm starting to think you should never spend big for need alone.

One lesson that has to come out of this is that investing big into a 2nd safety is never a good idea because crap like that happens. People like Ryan Clark are all over the waiver wire. Heck, Pierson Prioleau is on our team and should do exactly what Clark did for us in 05. Safety is a position where you can always find a long term solution cheap, especially if you have a dominant player at the other safety.

I'm not sure that Sean Taylor will ever be a dominant player because his cover skills are barely adequate, even for a safety. In today's game, the truely dominant safeties have to be able to cover. If Taylor stops playing out of position, he can be a slightly above average player in this league (as compared to Roy Williams who will never even be average because he's playing in the wrong era).

But unless slightly above average is unacceptable for a safety (and on a defense thats this bad, its not like a poor covering safety is the reason for everything that goes wrong--far from it), Taylor's good enough to be a playmaker in the secondary. I just don't see him getting all that much better over time. His skill set seems better build for the NFL of the 1990's than the present day game.

The point still stands though. As long as we are going to pay Taylor like a No. 1 safety, we don't bring in another expensive option. Too much can go wrong for very little payoff. (See: Archuleta, Adam)

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=Beemnseven;294442]Problem is, these coaches don't seem to have much faith in their "youth". They're more reluctant with rookies than practically any team in the league.[/quote]Well, that's OK from a coaching standpoint. If they are playing the best players and they happen to be older, theres nothing wrong with that.

It's not excusable from a roster building standpoint. Veteran players are expensive and a team full of veterans will regress every year. To date, we've counteracted this phenomenon by signing younger, expensive FAs who are right in their prime. But because we don't have the cap to sign 53 players in their prime every 3 years or so, we end up just counterbalancing the veteran regression and spinning our wheels.

The solution is to bring in players who wont begin to regress after their 3rd year on the team (draft picks). They don't have to play right away, because the coaches should be playing the best guys. They just have to be on the roster so that our team gets better over time, not worse.

Like I've said many times, Free Agency is a very legit method to roster building. But the key is to find the best players that no one else wants (or that few teams want), maybe due to age or a perceived flaw that really doesn't matter. That's why London Fletcher was in theroy a good signing. We didn't break the bank for him. Smoot, another good signing, same reasons. If I have a problem with either signing, its that we signed them for too long a time period. 3 year contracts are ideal with this type of player. It's also the reason why Briggs would be a bad trade, because he's too much money.

The best way to fill a gaping need in this league is to fill it twice, veteran free agent who isn't wanted by teams (i.e. NOT somebody in the prime of his career) who you can get on a short deal, and then a high draft pick at the position who takes over for the signing when he proves better.

Draft picks don't fill immediate needs, and aging vets don't fill future needs. That's why the market is so ridiculous for 4th and 5th year players, and exactly why its cheaper, smarter, and less risky to put your eggs in two baskets instead of one.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

I agree with the above post. Wasn't the reason the Bears didn't accept the deal was because we wouldn't throw MW into the mix also? Crap.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

Good post, G.

I especially like this part:
[QUOTE=GTripp0012;294549]Draft picks don't fill immediate needs, and aging vets don't fill future needs.[/QUOTE]

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

This is only worthy of considerating it to be credible if MW's hip isn't going to be 100% and he's deemed damaged goods for the regular season. Marcus' value to the team is practically immeasurable. He is the only one that seems to know where to be on any given play. I don't feel he's much of a vocal leader but he most certainly leads by example in both game prep and gametime.

Rocky McIntosh is very lucky to be able to work alongside Washington and Fletcher. I think we'll see a huge upgrade in his developement this year.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;294413]I think they want this Briggs deal so bad because they are looking at Rocky to replace Marcus on the strong side.

I don't think they'd do it prior to this year though.

I could see them being willing to throw in Marshall, but Rocky is exactly what this team needs: youth.[/quote]

How is Rocky going to play strongside over the TE at 235lbs? Rock is a weakside backer. If the coaches have this plan in mind then they really don't have a clue what they are doing.

Marcus Washington isn't going anywhere. He's a team leader that can still perform.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=Beemnseven;294442]Problem is, these coaches don't seem to have much faith in their "youth". They're more reluctant with rookies than practically any team in the league.[/quote]

You are correct. They don't have much faith in young players. It seems our coaching staff would rather play with ineffective older guys like Wynn, Daniels, Brunell and Holdman. Makes no sense. How does Rocky not get more playing time over Holdman last year? If I were the owner I would just go off on these guys. It's the coaches job to get Rocky ready. You mean to tell me Rocky couldn't do any worse than Holdman? C'mon! What a bunch of BS!

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

can't see that happening!

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=jbcjr14;294394]This is BS. Washington is one of the best, if not the best, all around player we have on the team.[/quote]

STFU!!! ... I love Washington. He cannot go ANYWHERE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

Yahoo news. That should tell you everything you need to know. These guys are the dumbest SOBs in the world. They make esbm look like geniuses.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

Why is this even a thread Title?!?!?!...wasting everyone's time reading this CRAP....let alone the missed heart beat....****

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;294574]How is Rocky going to play strongside over the TE at 235lbs? Rock is a weakside backer. If the coaches have this plan in mind then they really don't have a clue what they are doing.

Marcus Washington isn't going anywhere. He's a team leader that can still perform.[/quote]I wouldn't put a lot of stock into his size on the strong side. He has to be able to jam the TE, not take him to the ground.

WLB is a position that inherently has more responsibility. I feel it's easier for any player to look good on the strong side.

It probably isn't as big a difference as I'm making it out to be, but after watching the difference between our defense with Lavar and with Holdman, I'm beginning to think that WLB is the key position for LB play.

It might also explain why they didn't replace Holdman with Rocky, but allowed him to take over for Washington at the SLB when he was hurt. As a rookie, he probably lacked the experience to play a good WLB, but could be masked somewhat at SLB.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

Remember, Holdman's postion in Chicago was SLB. Roosevelt Colvin played the WLB. Back then, the general consensus on Holdman was that he was really solid. My theory is that his position and responsibilities masked his ineffectiveness.

Playing WLB here he was just too poor of a player to shoulder that extra responsibility.

I guess my theory also assumes that Marcus Washington is overrated because he doesn't have the responsibility of the other two linebackers. My response to that would be that as the defensive captain, it's quite important that we keep him in a role where he is comfortable. If we were to move him to the weak side, and he were to end up getting beat a lot by slot receivers as opposed to TEs, and was unable to account for the extra space he has to cover running lanes, it could have an effect on his leadership skills. Leading by example becomes a lot harder when the example isn't a good one.

He's certainly one of the key's to the defense, but I'm guessing the general lack of responsibility (compared to the other LBs) masks a lot of his weaknesses.

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

Marcus is here to stay!

#53 is an invaluable player currently. Attitude + performance = A+!

Re: Marcus Washington gone?
 

MW is staying in washington