Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

So news the past couple of days out of Houston and San Diego that Dunta Robinson and Darren Sproles will be unrestricted free agents because their teams will not franchise/tender them. They both arguably fit roles that we need to either fill or improve in 2010. Since they are both 'big name players' and are not offensive linemen, would you feel the signing of one or both would reflect 'business as usual' or would they just be clear upgrades to Rogers and Cartwright?

Of course, signing them does not exclude us from addressing OL, LB, etc. so please spare the 'I'd rather spend money elsewhere' lack of logic.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

Not sure either would be high priority type of signings. Yes we could use help at RB but a 3rd down back really isn't what I have in mind. Tender Rogers and I think we're ok at CB.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

I agree, however if we don't think we will be able to resign Rogers to a long-term contract before he becomes a free agent, we might as well make a play for Robinson.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

No, nothing they do would be business as usual to me. If Allen/Shanni sign a high priced free agent I will believe that it's because they think it is in the best long term interest of the Redskins. We have to give them a clean slate...they can not be expected to make decisions just to be different then what Snyderatto would have done.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=celts32;665704]No, nothing they do would be business as usual to me. If Allen/Shanni sign a high priced free agent I will believe that it's because they think it is in the best long term interest of the Redskins. We have to give them a clean slate...they can not be expected to make decisions just to be different then what Snyderatto would have done.[/quote]

Totally agree.

No matter what happens, trades, free agents, etc., we're on a clean slate now and have to forget about the Vinny era.

I know some will want to take the first opportunity to say Snyder is still making decisions, but I'm not buying that crap.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

San Diego's backfield is gone. LT, Michael Turner, Sproles, Neal...they'll be drafting a RB first I assume.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=Mattyk;665698]Not sure either would be high priority type of signings. Yes we could use help at RB but a 3rd down back really isn't what I have in mind. Tender Rogers and I think we're ok at CB.[/quote]

I'd agree that they are not 'high priority' signings but if they represent upgrades to what we have, would you be opposed to them?

I'd be more enthused about a Sproles signing because he represents something we've lacked for more than a decade-explosiveness in the backfield and the return game.

As much as I don't care for Rogers, I'm not opposed to him returning on a tender.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

Well I think Shanahan believes we might already have our Sproles in Anthony Alridge. And as for Dunta Robinson, I look at it like this-I think we sign him only if we find a solid trade partner for Rogers (potentially for another pick). So now we've added a solid DB and added a draft pick with which to address other needs. Now, if we just add Robinson and Sproles to the mix and don't do anything else with what we currently have..then yeah that wouldn't be so good.

For the record, I'd rather break the bank on Dansby than Robinson

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

San Diego might have a hard time if they lose both Sproles and LT in the same offseason. They might become just like the 2009 Colts team -- pass every down..

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;665716]Well I think Shanahan believes we might already have our Sproles in Anthony Alridge. And as for Dunta Robinson, I look at it like this-I think we sign him only if we find a solid trade partner for Rogers (potentially for another pick). So now we've added a solid DB and added a draft pick with which to address other needs. Now, if we just add Robinson and Sproles to the mix and don't do anything else with what we currently have..then yeah that wouldn't be so good.

For the record, I'd rather break the bank on Dansby than Robinson[/quote]

I am in favor of keeping Rogers but that would really make a lot of sense if they could add a pick and replace Rogers with Robinson. That would be a home run.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

I like the idea of a sign Robinson trade los for picks. That is smart business

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

Maybe we can trade Carlos to new Orleans for Jamal brown? Then Id be happy to bring in Robinson. Sproles doesn't do anything for me, he's explosive but can't get alot of carries so I think we look elsewhere. Heck John Clayton said we may be in the tomlinson field.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=celts32;665704]No, nothing they do would be business as usual to me. If Allen/Shanni sign a high priced free agent I will believe that it's because they think it is in the best long term interest of the Redskins. We have to give them a clean slate...they can not be expected to make decisions just to be different then what Snyderatto would have done.[/quote]

Exactly.. and with them being UFA's we're not giving anything up if we do go after them. No need to avoid getting a player if you think that he can greatly help the team, just to not do it.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

Not to pick on anyone in particular, but why do people think that we can trade someone WE don't want (even though I really DO want Carlos) for someone that another team REALLY wants?

Just doesn't make sense to me.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

dunta robinson i would be interested in. we only have to sign him so there are no picks or players we would lose. the question is how much will it take to land him?

5 yrs/40 mil with 18 mil guar.? is that enough? we could give him 10 mil or so as a signing bonus during the uncapped year.

2010 - 5 mil sal/ 10 mil bonus
2011 - 5 mil salary/ 2 mil bonus
2012 - 5 mil sal/ 2 mil bonus
etc.

i would also tender carlos and let hall, carlos and dunta compete things out. im not ready to move on from carlos.

sproles - no thanks. im going to assume he will want more than dunta but for a change of pace, smaller back who cant carry the load, is he worth 5 yrs/50 mil or so? id rather plug in shanny's RBC and look to draft a later round rb this year or next year.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[QUOTE="TheMalcolmConnection"]Not to pick on anyone in particular, but why do people think that we can trade someone WE don't want (even though I really DO want Carlos) for someone that another team REALLY wants?

Just doesn't make sense to me.[/QUOTE]

I hear you. I've been trying to trade you to ES for a while now but they won't even give me a ham sandwich in return. They offered tuna, but I'm holding out for that elusive ham. :)

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

Everyone tries to improve their team with free agent signings. The "business as usual" Redskins approach, though, is to pay way too much for free agents, thus creating locker room resentments. In terms of the theme of this thread, to me the question is not who we sign but how much we pay.

I would not mind signing Robinson, Sproles, or especially Dansby, as long as we do not overpay. Then we will not be doing "business as usual."

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk;665751]I hear you. I've been trying to trade you to ES for a while now but they won't even give me a ham sandwich in return. They offered tuna, but I'm holding out for that elusive ham. :)[/QUOTE]

Vet minimum plus incentives? :(

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

I would like Sproles. Any explosive player that we acquire on offense is a positive. I wouldn't even object to renting T.O. for a year. He was pretty much a perfect soldier in Buffalo and showed that he can still produce. As for Robinson, I don't really care. I think they are fine with the corners that they have. Tender Rogers and let Barnes and Tryon get better. I would rather see a big time linebacker signed than another corner on defense.

Still, the O-line has to be priority number one and I think you could argue that they need 4 starters brought in (through FA or draft). I will feel better when Dockery is th weak link, not the strength...

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=celts32;665704]No, nothing they do would be business as usual to me. If Allen/Shanni sign a high priced free agent I will believe that it's because they think it is in the best long term interest of the Redskins. We have to give them a clean slate...they can not be expected to make decisions just to be different then what Snyderatto would have done.[/quote]

I agree. I have a ton more confidence in who the new regime signs compared to what we had going on before. I don't see us signing "stars" as much as players who can really help the team. I think signing Robinson and Dansby would certainly help the defense and anything that would help us focus on offense during the draft I'm all for. If the coaches feel we need Robinson, I'm all for it. I would think their thoughts on Carlos, Barnes, and Tryon would come into play here. Personally I think CR can play, he just can't catch. CR has 6 INT's in 5 years, DR has 13 in 6. In an uncapped year would having both be overkill? Smoot, Rogers and Springs wasn't too bad.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;665745]Not to pick on anyone in particular, but why do people think that we can trade someone WE don't want (even though I really DO want Carlos) for someone that another team REALLY wants?

Just doesn't make sense to me.[/quote]


I am glad you said that. All these crazy trade scenarios that make no sense. Like the Panthers trying to trade Peppers for 2 firsts. If he is worth two first round picks then he is worth signing for the amount he was asking YOUR TEAM for. Point blank.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=Mattyk;665751]I hear you. I've been trying to trade you to ES for a while now but they won't even give me a ham sandwich in return. They offered tuna, but I'm holding out for that elusive ham. :)[/quote]

I feel I'm worth Pastrami but you'd never get that much for me.



Back to topic, I'd LOVE to get Sproles here. He could stay in the same role as in SD...return kicks (bye ARE) and spell an aging RB to try to keep him healthy.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=ethat001;665717]San Diego might have a hard time if they lose both Sproles and LT in the same offseason. They might become just like the 2009 Colts team -- pass every down..[/quote]

Norv won't let that happen. He's always made an effort to establish a ground game. It's just that this year he didn't seem to have the backs to do it. That or the line became so use to pass blocking that they lost they're rhythm in the running game. I think the same thing happened to the 2007 Patriots. They just became so use to passing that they just didn't feel a need to focus very much on the running game.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=joethiesmanfan;665796]I am glad you said that. All these crazy trade scenarios that make no sense. Like the Panthers trying to trade Peppers for 2 firsts. [B]If he is worth two first round picks then he is worth signing for the amount he was asking YOUR TEAM for. Point blank.[/B][/quote]

You lost me. What do you mean?

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=Lotus;665755]Everyone tries to improve their team with free agent signings. The "business as usual" Redskins approach, though, is to pay way too much for free agents, thus creating locker room resentments. In terms of the theme of this thread, to me the question is not who we sign but how much we pay.

I would not mind signing Robinson, Sproles, or especially Dansby, as long as we do not overpay. Then we will not be doing "business as usual."[/quote]

Well put.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;665806]Norv won't let that happen. He's always made an effort to establish a ground game. It's just that this year he didn't seem to have the backs to do it. That or the line became so use to pass blocking that they lost they're rhythm in the running game. I think the same thing happened to the 2007 Patriots. They just became so use to passing that they just didn't feel a need to focus very much on the running game.[/quote]

I don't think the head coach(es) have much sway in SD. The management/ownership makes a lot of questionable, but big decisions. If you can go 14-2 and get fired, or be a top QB replaced because of injury (Brees)...it's a dictatorship.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

If a player is worth 2 first round picks then he must be great!!!
If the said palyer is so great as in worth 2 first round picks..
Then the said player is worth 20 million dollars a year. So pay him already.
OR get that stupid offer off the table. If he is not worth 20 million to you then why is he worth 20 million to me? Stupid trade scenario. You might as well ask another team to spot you a draft pick.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

I don't think it's so cut and dry like that. What if one team is looking to rebuild and the other is one player away? What if one team is switching to a 3-4 defense and the player is a 4-3 MLB?

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

Y would I give 2 first rounders for Peppers. If you listen to the Panthers he takes plays off etc. etc. etc. That's like selling a used car and then telling about how it over heats, then asking for top dollar for it. Does not make sense. You want to trade me something you don't want and then ask me for everything I got. Come on maaaaaan.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;665741]Maybe we can trade Carlos to new Orleans for Jamal brown? Then Id be happy to bring in Robinson. Sproles doesn't do anything for me, he's explosive but can't get alot of carries so I think we look elsewhere. Heck John Clayton said we may be in the tomlinson field.[/quote]

I don't think NO would trade a pro bowl LT for an average corner especially when they have good depth at that position, Landry on the other hand is a little more likely, Safety is a lighter position of theres and who knows if Sharper comes back there or not.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

I'm all for "business as usual" as far as overpaying for good players in an uncapped year. Give them the max contract number (I think you can only give a player a 20% raise on what they made last year in an uncapped year) for this year and scale it down in the following years of the contract (someone had a decent pay scale for D. Robinson). Players flock to us because we overpay so lets upgrade where we can and focus our attention to filling the gaps in the draft.

Signing a guy like D. Robinson is a great move because it gives us the flexibility to trade Rogers for a pick or keep him. Having Robinson, Rogers and Hall isn't anything to sneeze at.

Sproles...eh. I'm betting Aldridge sticks around and plays that role. Didn't Shannahan highly recommend Aldridge to the coaching staff last year?

I'd rather go after guys like A. Rolle, Dansby, Robinson. All three of those positions are need positions (not the biggest needs i know but they are needs especially if we can squeeze a pick for Rogers after the fact). Maybe we'll get lucky and sign a quality lineman or two.

We can cut players that are dead weight and Danny will bite the bullet and then bite it again when it's time to cut checks for FA. This is the one good thing about him as an owner in my opinion. How many cheap owners are there around the league that won't pony up to make their team competitive. Snyder and Steinbrenner are cut from the same mold...they're not afraid to pay for talent because they want to win. So let our FOOTBALL PEOPLE make some decisions and let danny pay. If we sign 3-4 "big-time" players at big contracts this year and cut the dead weight, we'll end up paying a lot THIS YEAR, but the ARE and Randy Thomas's will be off the books once the cap is reinstated and we'll have a fresh slate with relatively young talent.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

Now is the time to get better with the final 8 rule. The playoff teams can't fire at the big FA like we can so we can make some ground and try to compete sooner. How many other teams do you think that aren't in the final 8 will be as aggressive as us?

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

I don't know that this is true or not, but it makes sense in my mind. If Danny opens the checkbook wide as DN suggests, his expectations may go to high and thus his patience may shrink.

I think the best thing BA/MS can do is approach this offseason with an aggressive, but not blank check, mentality. Get players who are team oriented, doesn't have to be the biggest name (but can be) and demonstrate a long term commitment to growing players here, not scooping off the marquise names.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

Shanahan is pretty famous for not using his backs in the passing game, outside of an occasional screen here and there. In the past, more than 50% of Sproles' total opportunities have come as a receiver. I can't imagine we would make him a good fit here.

Dunta Robinson would be the No. 2 corner here and only if we could move Hall, so I don't really see the fit here either.

But I like the aggression that sniffing around these two players would show. Even if we (correctly) determine that neither really helps our team.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

team-oriented guys...with talent.

Snyder will have high expectations regardless. Don't you?

I think BA/MS will get the benefit of the doubt through at least two years like Zorn because the team will need to gel. We're going to have a high turnover rate and you can't expect 20 new players or so to just step in and become part of a team. They're going to have to feel their way through it and who knows maybe they get lucky and come together quickly.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

I just got it from a very good source - someone who knows Robinson personally - that the Redskins contacted his agent within 2 hours of the news that he would not be resigned.

Not sure if that was even legal for us to do but I trust this source. And with the chance of an uncapped year, I think it is a very real possibility that Robinson is a Redskin next year.

If it happens, remember that you heard it here first.[IMG]http://www.thewarpath.net/images/icons/icon7.gif[/IMG]

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=Paintrain;665697]So news the past couple of days out of Houston and San Diego that Dunta Robinson and Darren Sproles will be unrestricted free agents because their teams will not franchise/tender them. They both arguably fit roles that we need to either fill or improve in 2010. Since they are both 'big name players' and are not offensive linemen, would you feel the signing of one or both would reflect 'business as usual' or would they just be clear upgrades to Rogers and Cartwright?[/quote]

They would be clear upgrades but i don't think the benefit would be worth the loss of team chemistry.

I would rather give our guys a chance before we go outside to address an area.

Give Alridge a chance, give Rogers another year while Barnes and Tryon are learning.

I don't think Sproles is such a great talent because the Chargers are more in need of a RB then we are and they're willing to let him go.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=30gut;665932]They would be clear upgrades but i don't think the benefit would be worth the loss of team chemistry.

I would rather give our guys a chance before we go outside to address an area.

Give Alridge a chance, give Rogers another year while Barnes and Tryon are learning.

I don't think Sproles is such a great talent because the Chargers are more in need of a RB then we are and they're willing to let him go.[/quote]


The "chemistry" on a 4-12 team needs to be lost.

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

[quote=81forHOF;665918]I just got it from a very good source - someone who knows Robinson personally - that the Redskins contacted his agent within 2 hours of the news that he would not be resigned.

Not sure if that was even legal for us to do but I trust this source. And with the chance of an uncapped year, I think it is a very real possibility that Robinson is a Redskin next year.

If it happens, remember that you heard it here first.[IMG]http://www.thewarpath.net/images/icons/icon7.gif[/IMG][/quote]
noted

Re: Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?
 

According to Gil Brandt, Robinson rejected a 30mil (21 guaranteed) contract from the Texans.