Rolle Signed?
 

[url="http://www.profootballcentral.com"]www.profootballcentral.com[/url]

They are reporting that we have agreed to terms with Samari Rolle. So it looks like after 1.5 days of FA, our goal of just re-signing Pierce and Smoot is out the window.

The only good news is, we have a bit more money than we would have had re-signing them both. What does anyone think about the Rolle signing (if it is completed) and what should we do with any more money we have?

I am thinking a solid run at Marcus Pollard might be in the cards. He is a perfect fit for the Redskins offense. He could play the next two years, then Royal could step in full-time and we would be set at TE for years. Also, I wouldn't mind it one bit if we went after Chike Okeafor. He would upgrade that 4 man rush in a hurry.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

If the Rolle deal is true, I'd like to know the terms of the deal

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

I think this is a disasterous day...

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Okeafor? No. Pollard? Maybe. I'm anxious to know the terms of the Rolle deal. Hopefully, is isn't what was initially 'rumored'. And Smoot is still available? Hmmm. It seems other teams are balking at the coveted $15 million dollar (bonus) signing price too. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Yeah I definitely would as well. Apparently they haven't been disclosed the details yet. This is the only source I have heard confirming the signing yet, and so I don't know if I would accept it as gospel.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=celts32]I think this is a disasterous day...[/QUOTE]

Why? As long as the money is right, it's ok. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

I'm just curious, Boss, why no Okeafor?

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

If this is true, and the deal goes through:

1. Draft Williamson in the 1st round
2. Sign Marcus Pollard
3. Draft another Guard/Center in the 3rd round, which would solidify the left side of the line.

We're set on offense.

On defense:
1. Try and sign either Reggie Hayward or Chike
2. Still need a replacement for Pierce - We probably don't have the cap room to sign Ed Hartwell

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

I don't believe this....at least until it is confirmed by another source.....especially with Smoot still out there...

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

seems strange to think that pro football central has a foot up on ESPN, and just about any other publication in the free world

and would Rolle sign without visiting the Skins?

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=BDBohnzie]seems strange to think that pro football central has a foot up on ESPN, and just about any other publication in the free world

and would Rolle sign without visiting the Skins?[/QUOTE]
Exactly.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=BDBohnzie]seems strange to think that pro football central has a foot up on ESPN[/QUOTE]

I've thought this too, but ESPN is virtually last in actually posting signings. I think this is because they are held to higher standards than places such as profootballcentral, and they can't afford to post incorrect material, so they wait until everything is official and signed. Their rumor central does list the Skins as big players for Rolle, though. That said, I won't consider it a done deal until someone else confirms.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=e16bball]I'm just curious, Boss, why no Okeafor?[/QUOTE]

I really don't know much about him. But I believe that what we were able to accomplish as a defense last year works. If Okeafor is a pass rushing DE who plays the run equally well as long as the money is right, sign him. I'm sold on drafting a WR and a DE in the upcoming draft. On my wishlist is DT Shaun Cody USC and WR Troy Williamson SC. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=hurrykaine]...1. Try and sign either Reggie Hayward or Chike...[/QUOTE]

Now, I liked Hayward until he signed with JAX. Okeafor hasn't been plagued with injuries has he? If not, give him a go. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Okeafor is definitely a little weak against the run, but he has 8 and 8.5 sacks in his last two years with Seattle. I was only thinking him because Reggie Hayward has signed with the Jags and the Skins need an edge rusher. Cody is good, but he would be unable to pressure off the edge. Now someone like Shawne Merriman? He would be awesome pressuring the QB. If Williams isn't there at 9, I think we should think long and hard about drafting Merriman, if he's even there.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Merriman is an outside linebacker. If I remember correctly he's even smaller than Freeney who is tiny by DE standards. We have the OLB positioned filled to the brim.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

my thought on mentioned ESPN by name was for that exact purpose...Pastabelly wants to be right about this...and to still call the Skins the main suitor for Rolle, when neither side has met, and the Post reporting those as false rumors, i figure that his article is all but written, sitting in the web director's inbox, with PRINT WHEN THE RED PHONE FLASHES in the subject, and will be posted post haste.

if a deal was imminent, someone would have talked about it this morning over the wires...but there was nothing. he visted KC late yesterday...and with all the resources these guys have these days, someone would have seen Redskins One picking Rolle up in KC if this was true...

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Merriman is a 3-4 LEO guy...can be a 3rd down pass rusher, as well as an OLB. he is definitely best suited for a 3-4, but would work in a 4-3, but not as a DE...

he's 6'4", 255 i believe...

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]Merriman is an outside linebacker. If I remember correctly he's even smaller than Freeney who is tiny by DE standards. We have the OLB positioned filled to the brim.[/QUOTE]

He's actually bigger than Freeney and the remarkable thing about him is that he carries 275 and looks like he is 255. In other words, he could put on another 15 lbs. easily, and be bigger than Peppers. He really won't play OLB in a 4-3 set. He doesn't have nearly the cover skills necessary. His best fit is as the rush LB in the 3-4, but many, including myself, think he would be more than fit to play DE in a 4-3.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

How fast does RedskinOne fly? Will one of you guys walk up the Redskins Park and see who's actually visiting? I don't care if we sign Lucas, Rolle, or Smoot. Let's not break the bank on any one of these guys. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=BossHog]Why? As long as the money is right, it's ok. :oink:[/QUOTE]

I would not sign Rolle over Smoot for the same money. The only way this deal makes any sense to me at all is if Rolle got less than Smoot will get. Smoot is not even in his prime yet. Rolle will be 29 in September. I know that everyone seems to think that 2 or 3 years is not that big an age difference, but when it comes to football players I do not agree. Football players have very short carreers by comparison to other sports. the amount of guys that play at a high level into their mid 30's are few and far between. Most guys are winding it down in their early 30's. We are giving up 2 very productive seasons in choosing Rolle over Smoot. Also Rolle is not even much better than Smoot is now and Smoot may still get better, whereas Rolle is not getting better at 29 years old. Also Smoot is a current Redskin who was drafted by the Redskins. Doesn't that mean anything to the Redskins? This is just spinning wheels I think. They are going to disrupt continuity and go give roughly the same money to a different corner. Why? To prove a point that Smoot is not worth a big bonus, but Rolle is. It makes no sense. It's like they are biting off their nose to spite their face...

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Shaun Cody is a DT/DE tweener. Merriman is a OLB/DE tweener. We don't need another 'Arrington'. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=celts32]I would not sign Rolle over Smoot for the same money. The only way this deal makes any sense to me at all is if Rolle got less than Smoot will get...[/QUOTE]

I agree with your logic. But time is running out. If Smoot is saying no to what we have on the table and another one of these guys says yes, so be it. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

This is true. We should only get him if he can play a pretty pure DE. My point about Cody was, he is nothing different than any player we have right now, in that he would be tough on the run but not really able to bring pressure. I feel like we need a pure rush DE, someone in the mold of Freeney, Kearse, KGB, etc. We have the great bonus of having such good pass-rush from our OLBs, but I think the only real missing link on D (besides MLB now) is a rush DE.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Yeah Boss is right. We can't afford to wait on Smoot, let everyone else get signed, and then find out he has signed with the Cowboys or some other such stab to the heart. If Rolle is wants to sign and Smoot doesn't, then I will be glad to see Rolle in the burgundy and gold.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=BossHog]I agree with your logic. But time is running out. If Smoot is saying no to what we have on the table and another one of these guys says yes, so be it. :oink:[/QUOTE]

Thanks, you may be the first person on this website that ever agreed with me...

I don't want to sign any other corner until Smoot says no. Infact, if they decide that Smoot is to expensive I would rather they let Harris start then pay Rolle big money. The only CB I think they should give a big contract to is Smoot, otherwise start Harris.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

I swear this kid is a legit pass rusher. Coming out of USC he has the size, speed, and stats to be successful in the NFL. I've bought into Okeafor too. We'll see what happens. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=celts32]Thanks, you may be the first person on this website that ever agreed with me...

I don't want to sign any other corner until Smoot says no. Infact, if they decide that Smoot is to expensive I would rather they let Harris start then pay Rolle big money. The only CB I think they should give a big contract to is Smoot, otherwise start Harris.[/QUOTE]

Yeah I had figured the plan was go with Harris (if not Smoot) in 2005 then maybe in 2006 you pass the position on to Wilds. Going with Rolle seems like a decision heavily influenced by Gregg Williams, considering their history. So far his decisions seem to have been dead on...but is he due for a letdown?

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

I don't see a problem with Wilds, he was pretty god in limited action last year, I think that Williams/Springs/Harris would be ideal tutors for him.

Let's save some money and be able to get a decent draft pick. Mike Williams, please.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=celts32]... The only CB I think they should give a big contract to is Smoot...[/QUOTE]

I worry about starting Harris. Too many aging CBs starting on one team is not good. Does any one think Ken Lucas is just as promising as Smoot? His numbers are better and his play seems more consistent. Are we even considering signing a FA CB? Are we planning to draft one? :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Yeah. Wilds was allocted to NFL Europe. We'll have to keep an eye on him. Is it just me or did we play a lot of cover-2 zone last year?

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=smootsmack]Yeah I had figured the plan was go with Harris (if not Smoot) in 2005 then maybe in 2006 you pass the position on to Wilds. Going with Rolle seems like a decision heavily influenced by Gregg Williams, considering their history. So far his decisions seem to have been dead on...but is he due for a letdown?[/QUOTE]

Exactly this is what I thought the plan was as well. Just becasue you lose an expensive player that doesn't mean you need to replace him with just as expensive a player. If they can afford Rolle than they can afford Smoot also, so what's the point? The Redskins need to replace a loss from within for once instead of heading out to the grocery store like they alwasy do! As mad as I will be if we lose Smoot I will be 10 times madder if they replace him with Rolle. Rolle will be 29 on opening day. That means we get one year of him before he turns 30. CB's start to lose their speed in their early 30's, and a slow CB is not worth a whole lot in the NFL. CB's & RB's are the worst positions to spend money when they hit 30. Signing Rolle is a mistake. CB's like Darrel Green that run fast deep into their 30's are a rare breed. I think this is a mistake.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Boss- I will take your word on Cody. I think we could get him all the way back in the 20s of this draft.

I'm not real excited about the Rolle signing, even though he is definitely better than Smoot at this point. Smoot is a Redskin, and I was under the impression that that meant something to the team these days. The age issue which has been brought up often is a factor as well.

I really don't think starting Harris is an option though. He is purely a nickel corner at this point IMO, and I think the team only came out and said that he could start as a negotiating ploy with Smoot. I could be wrong, but that's how it felt to me. I would really just like to re-sign Smoot. Wilds could take over as the nickel guy in 2006 and eventually replace Springs, I guess.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=celts32]... Just becasue you lose an expensive player that doesn't mean you need to replace him with just as expensive a player...I think this is a mistake.[/QUOTE]

When we play OAK at FedsEx field this year, who would you rather have covering Randy Moss and Jerry Porter? Shawn Springs and Samari Rolle or Shawn Springs and Walt Harris? In all fairness, Harris, Rolle, and Rolle are up there in age, but it's clear who's more capable of going against the top WRs in the game. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

I'd like to have Shawn Springs and Fred Smoot when we play Oakland, when we play Dallas, when we play Philly, when we play KC, when we play San Diego, and so on

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

We all agree that big dollars shouldn't be invested in an aging CB. We did sign Springs (an aging, ailing CB) last year for a $10 signing bonus. I believe the same, if not more, is due for Rolle. Remember, Bailey said no to the same offer we had on the table that Springs eventually signed. We cannot afford to let Smoot dictate what we'll spend on a player at this position. Not this year. Too many guys have to be 'taken care of'. He should know this organization isn't one to put a team together with salary cap dollars to spare. If he seeks a team who invests more into thier CBs, adios. We're strapped for cash right now because we needed to secure contracts for guys that made Smoot seem to play better. Something has to give. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=smootsmack]I'd like to have Shawn Springs and Fred Smoot when we play Oakland, when we play Dallas, when we play Philly, when we play KC, when we play San Diego, and so on[/QUOTE]

And you probably wanted Smoot and Bailey too this past year, huh? Let it go people. We'll be more than satisfied with whoever is signed. :oink:

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=BossHog]And you probably wanted Smoot and Bailey too this past year, huh? Let it go people. We'll be more than satisfied with whoever is signed. :oink:[/QUOTE]
Actually, most people last year were fine with Bailey leaving....He didn't want to be here! Whereas Smoot has said numerous times that he wants to be a Redskin. From a business standpoint, he is actually being pretty smart in being able to separate his emotions to try to get the best deal he can. I'm sure the Redskins have a plan for if he gets a rich contract offer and goes elsewhere.....whether it be Harris, signing another FA CB, giving Wilds a shot, or drafting a CB.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=BossHog]And you probably wanted Smoot and Bailey too this past year, huh? Let it go people. We'll be more than satisfied with whoever is signed. :oink:[/QUOTE]

Actually I was really happy that we got Springs, seeing as to how he was my favorite non-Redskin in the league at the time

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

i don't know how much smoot really wants to be here. i mean we ended up offering 11.5 and then he asked for 13.5. I think he is the type of player who will play with the same intensity at what ever club he is with. i am sure he doesn't not want to be here but in other threads people said that if he were offered about 1-2 million more from another team he would stay with us. I think he would take them dollars and again play with that intensity and same amount of leadership. Just because we hear his voice a lot does not mean that he is devoted to stay here.