Warpath

Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Locker Room Main Forum (http://www.thewarpath.net/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly) (http://www.thewarpath.net/showthread.php?t=28086)

BigHairedAristocrat 01-26-2009 12:48 PM

Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
Earlier today, PFT posted a blog entry saying we are about to make a "Major Offer" to DeAngelo Hall.

[url=http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/01/26/major-offer-coming-for-deangelo/]ProFootballTalk.com - “MAJOR OFFER” COMING FOR DEANGELO?[/url]

According to two independant and reputable sources on extremeskins [yes, i "slum it" there, on occasion, so sue me! :-) ], the hold up in the deal is that the skins have been offering Hall 12M garaunteed and he wants 16. If true, this really, [I]really[/I] irks me, guys.

In only a few weeks the system, Hall became our best, most reliable corner last year. He will be only 25 when the season starts (for comparison carlos Rogers will be 28), so if we signed him to a 6 year deal, he would still only be 30 or 31 when it came time to renegotiate or extend him. Without a doubt, he is one of the top 10-15 corners in the league right now. Yes, he has had some "issues" in the past, but those issues never affected his play, and he seems to have matured anyways... So why the heck are we only offering him 12M garaunteed?!

is 16 garaunteed really that unreasonable for Hall?

Here are some other recent contracts for CBs:

-Nate Clements got 80M with 22M garaunteed
-Asante Samuel got 57.6M for 6 years with 20M garaunted
-Chris Gamble got 53 M for 6 years with 23M garaunteed

IMO, we are really low-balling Hall with the offer of 12M garaunteed. He is not as good a corner as Clements or Samuel, but i view him as deserving something in the same ballpark as Gamble. With his asking price of 16M, he really seems to be giving us something of a "hometown discount."

Considering how much cap room other teams have, the annual "inflation" for player salaries in the NFL, and the fact that hall is "only" asking for 16M garaunteed, and Rogers is becoming disgruntled, we should sign Hall to that deal ASAP. If he hits the open market, someone else will likely give him significantly more than that.

Personally, I think something along the lines of 52M for 6 years with 16M garaunteed is a very fair price for Halls services. What do you guys think?

MTK 01-26-2009 12:51 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
I'm not a big fan of signing Hall to a long term deal but it appears to be inevitable at this point. I'll comment on the $$ once a deal is finalized.

jamf 01-26-2009 12:58 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
I don't think he is a top tier.

If you don't think his problems effected his play then you need to review his first 6 games with Oakland this year.

A true cover corner is a rarity, D-Hall is not one. But he can be a solid corner and I think he is definitely worth resigning but we should not break the bank for him.

44ever 01-26-2009 12:59 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
Typical Skins neg. They'll pay a guy from somewhere else BIG. But low ball their own. "Self sabotage mentality"

Skins fan 44 01-26-2009 01:00 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
Laveranues Coles got what 14 million signing bonus a few years. So come on give him what he wants. But then again look how things ended with him.

Schneed10 01-26-2009 01:02 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
It would be no surprise to me if it's true that Vinny wants to keep the guaranteed money lower. He has to be concerned about the team's cap situation and knows he needs to keep as much room available to maneuver, or he's going to lose out on free agency altogether.

On a 6 year deal, $12 million guaranteed would take up $2 million in 2009 cap space. $16 million would take up $2.7 million. That's a big difference, an amount that would allow for one additional quality-depth guy in free agency.

It's also quite possible that the Redskins are betting Hall won't be able to do better. Revenue streams are in decline for NFL franchises due to the economy. There may be a lot of teams simply unwilling to pay it.

The way I see it, we should be thanking Vinny here. He's trying to keep a cool head, locking good players up for a reasonable amount. Would you rather he spend $20 million guaranteed on a Nate Clements type like the 49ers did?

freddyg12 01-26-2009 01:07 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
this dude wore out his welcome in oakland of all places!
He could be the best cb in the league, but he has chosen to play his way & gamble a lot. He did play really well here, but it was an audition. How will he play when he's paid & we're stuck w/him?

I've never been a fan of signing him, but considering they're interested, The Skins are doing the right thing here (if this is accurate). Interest in him when he was cut was not that high because any team signing him would have had to assume his full contract. Take a look at that contract w/the raiders. How much was it worth? Whatever the #, Hall is obviously worth less & that was proven on the open market this season.

CRedskinsRule 01-26-2009 01:10 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
I would add that most teams will be looking at Hall's full season, the fact that the Raiders outright released him, and all the worries that could follow. I do like how he has a knack for holding on to the ball, his hands are his talent, but I think you could watch the film and see him out of place frequently also.

44ever 01-26-2009 01:24 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=CRedskinsRule;523102]I would add that most teams will be looking at Hall's full season, the fact that the Raiders outright released him, and all the worries that could follow. I do like how he has a knack for holding on to the ball, his hands are his talent, but I think you could watch the film and see him out of place frequently also.[/quote]

So we have Carlos Rogers who is always in position but has no hands or D. Hall with great hands and frequently out of place. Flip a coin.
I think we have to take a chance on Hall.

CRedskinsRule 01-26-2009 01:53 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
I wouldn't go overboard for him, because that will definitely set the bar for Rodgers, and if I had to choose, I would keep Rodgers. At 12 Million maybe they hope to be able to keep both,which would be the best situation personnel wise.

redsk1 01-26-2009 01:54 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;523090]Earlier today, PFT posted a blog entry saying we are about to make a "Major Offer" to DeAngelo Hall.

[URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/01/26/major-offer-coming-for-deangelo/"]ProFootballTalk.com - “MAJOR OFFER” COMING FOR DEANGELO?[/URL]

According to two independant and reputable sources on extremeskins [yes, i "slum it" there, on occasion, so sue me! :-) ], the hold up in the deal is that the skins have been offering Hall 12M garaunteed and he wants 16. If true, this really, [I]really[/I] irks me, guys.

In only a few weeks the system, Hall became our best, most reliable corner last year. He will be only 25 when the season starts (for comparison carlos Rogers will be 28), so if we signed him to a 6 year deal, he would still only be 30 or 31 when it came time to renegotiate or extend him. Without a doubt, he is one of the top 10-15 corners in the league right now. Yes, he has had some "issues" in the past, but those issues never affected his play, and he seems to have matured anyways... So why the heck are we only offering him 12M garaunteed?!

is 16 garaunteed really that unreasonable for Hall?

Here are some other recent contracts for CBs:

-Nate Clements got 80M with 22M garaunteed
-Asante Samuel got 57.6M for 6 years with 20M garaunted
-Chris Gamble got 53 M for 6 years with 23M garaunteed

IMO, we are really low-balling Hall with the offer of 12M garaunteed. He is not as good a corner as Clements or Samuel, but i view him as deserving something in the same ballpark as Gamble. With his asking price of 16M, he really seems to be giving us something of a "hometown discount."

Considering how much cap room other teams have, the annual "inflation" for player salaries in the NFL, and the fact that hall is "only" asking for 16M garaunteed, and Rogers is becoming disgruntled, we should sign Hall to that deal ASAP. If he hits the open market, someone else will likely give him significantly more than that.

Personally, I think something along the lines of 52M for 6 years with 16M garaunteed is a very fair price for Halls services. What do you guys think?[/quote]

For a guy who hasn't necessarily been known as a team guy, more of a me guy on Atlanta and Oakland I don't think he demands top 10 money. If we sign him, hopefully it will be on our terms. If not, see ya.

He's matured for about 2months prior trying to get a new contract.

GMScud 01-26-2009 02:00 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=redsk1;523106]For a guy who hasn't necessarily been known as a team guy, more of a me guy on Atlanta and Oakland I don't think he demands top 10 money. If we sign him, hopefully it will be on our terms. If not, see ya.

[B]He's matured for about 2months prior trying to get a new contract[/B].[/quote]

Great point. It's pretty easy to say the right things when you're looking for your second $50+ million dollar contract in as many years.

MdBluefinCrab 01-26-2009 02:00 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
You can't judge him on his play with the Raiders, I mean come on...the Raiders!
We need to sign him as I hope Springs is gone and if not, he's usually only good for 5 or 6 games so a solid CB is needed.
Signing Hall will only solidify our backfield (if Vinny can manage to keep Rogers) and with the acquisition of a stud defensive lineman, our defense could be lights out next season. With a solid defense, we can afford to have JC play yet again, another season of mediocre football while he still learns how to play the QB position.

44ever 01-26-2009 02:08 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=GMScud;523108]Great point. It's pretty easy to say the right things when you're looking for your second $50+ million dollar contract in as many years.[/quote]

agreed but. He backed it up with nice skills. Plus they're all saying the "right things" right now.

What do you think we should do with him GMScud?

Dblock804 01-26-2009 02:20 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
What bugs me is when he wore the free Mike Vick shirt on that Monday night game right after the trial. Coach quit and he was traded... I was thinking that he would not fit "the mold" of the current players we have.

GMScud 01-26-2009 02:21 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=44ever;523110]agreed but. He backed it up with nice skills. Plus they're all saying the "right things" right now.

What do you think we should do with him GMScud?[/quote]

I don't know. I'm torn. I think he's a very good player, but not a great one. I think his brief time in Oakland was a debacle, and his only redemption was a few solid games for us.

It really is a game of inches, too - that INT he had against Dallas was thrown right to him by Romo, and I can't help but wondering how eager Skins fans would be to sign him if DeSean Jackson hadn't dropped that ball in the corner of the endzone when he had Hall beat.

The real issue IMO is our other corners, and I think that is ultimately how the decision should be made on Hall. We don't have the luxury of drafting a starting caliber corner this year, Springs is aging, injury prone, and has a huge cap number, Smoot is awful, and Carlos wants a contract or a trade. So we're in a pickle. We may not have much of a choice except to keep Hall, unless we want a big drop off in production from our secondary.

Schneed10 01-26-2009 02:24 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
Whatever we think about Hall, the premise of this thread is just wierd. Why would anyone complain about Vinny trying to save money on players?

We do all understand that cap space = opportunity to sign other players, right? I don't need to launch into a giant salary cap lecture, do I?

tryfuhl 01-26-2009 02:38 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
Our corner situation could drop us from one of the best secondaries to a huge question mark. Meet him in the middle.

tryfuhl 01-26-2009 02:39 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=Schneed10;523115]Whatever we think about Hall, the premise of this thread is just wierd. Why would anyone complain about Vinny trying to save money on players?

We do all understand that cap space = opportunity to sign other players, right? I don't need to launch into a giant salary cap lecture, do I?[/quote]

We understand that, but sometimes you keep a productive player over signing a guy that might be able to come in and follow his assignments half of the time when someone's out for a few drives (of course that might be exaggerated, but there can still only be 53 guys on the roster)

GMScud 01-26-2009 02:44 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=Schneed10;523115]Whatever we think about Hall, the premise of this thread is just wierd. Why would anyone complain about Vinny trying to save money on players?

We do all understand that cap space = opportunity to sign other players, right? I don't need to launch into a giant salary cap lecture, do I?[/quote]

Hahaha, I was thinking the same thing. We always gripe about overpaying, now we're trying to be somewhat reasonable and it's a problem suddenly? Let's not forget BigHairedAristocrat seems to have a pretty negative view about most Skins-related stuff. I like how he puts the phrase "low-balling" in quotes, yet he was the one who said it in the first place.

saden1 01-26-2009 02:46 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
If he's getting anything it should be an incentive laced deal. No way I'd pay him a huge contract after getting cut from the Raiders and playing half a season. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets a fat deal from the Skins though, this is still a team owned by Snyder after all.

Eknox 01-26-2009 02:52 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=CRedskinsRule;523105]I wouldn't go overboard for him, because that will definitely set the bar for Rodgers, and if I had to choose, I would keep Rodgers. At 12 Million maybe they hope to be able to keep both,which would be the best situation personnel wise.[/quote]

I would love to see that happen, to see them sign both at about $12m each

SBXVII 01-26-2009 02:56 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
His whole crap in Oakland is BS. He did not fit the system so they bash him. He did fairly well previously and did well for us so I don't count the Raiders.

As far as gauranteed money? I think it all depends on how much is in the contract and for how long. Perhaps they are offering him 40 mill for 4-5 yrs which is 10 mill more then we have been offering most contracted people especially CB's and WR's, but they lowered his gaurenteed money from 16mill to 12 mill. I don't have a problem with that. I think it all depends on how they tweek the contract. Now if they offered the same typical contract as ARE, Lloyd, Archeletta, 30 mill and for what 4-6 yrs and who knows what gaurenteed then no not fair.

I'm glad Vinny/Snyder are actually thinking about their pockets now so long as the Skins have the rights to try and match any other team who comes up with something better.

TheMalcolmConnection 01-26-2009 02:59 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
I just don't understand why we're going to let Rogers walk or trade him and keep only Hall. I mean are we thinking that Springs can make it through one more season before we draft another corner. I know it's been back and forth on how people feel, but Rogers, dropped interceptions aside is a very, very good corner.

JoeRedskin 01-26-2009 03:05 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=44ever;523098]Typical Skins neg. They'll pay a guy from somewhere else BIG. But low ball their own. "Self sabotage mentality"[/quote]

Wait, he plays for us half a season and somehow he's our own?! Carlos, yes. He's homegrown and, if in the plans, should get a quality offer. Hall? The Raiders were already fleeced for his services - So we should repeat their mistake? This is not someone who has shown that he has a tradition of "team first".

If we can lock him up cheap, great. If not, hasta la vista baby!

steveo395 01-26-2009 03:07 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
This is not low-balling Hall at all. He is not that good in coverage. He gets burned all the time, but he does have good ball skills. Rogers is a much better tackler and cover corner, he just cant catch and he has better character. If we have to get rid of one of them, I would rather it be Hall.

TheMalcolmConnection 01-26-2009 03:08 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
For me, I'm OK with leaving a little bit of a hole if it means we can keep our homegrown talent like Rogers. With limited draft picks this year we need to look at some true blue chip talent with that 13rd round pick. Last year, moving back was definitely feasible. While the draft is truly a crap shoot, there is some great talent at the Skins areas of need, namely along the defensive and offensive lines that will be available.

I don't want us trading pick to pick up a second tier OL, CB, or LB when we have the pick sitting in our laps...

Dirtbag59 01-26-2009 03:15 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
It's looking more and more now like we're going to go into 2009 with Hall, Smoot, and Tryon as our top 3 corners. Not the worse drop off but heres to hoping that Smoot works hard this offseason so we can get at least one more good year from him. My only concern though is giving the front office an out to go after another Corner through the draft.

Trample the Elderly 01-26-2009 03:17 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=steveo395;523126]This is not low-balling Hall at all. He is not that good in coverage. He gets burned all the time, but he does have good ball skills. Rogers is a much better tackler and cover corner, he just cant catch and he has better character. If we have to get rid of one of them, I would rather it be Hall.[/quote]

I agree. We can get more in the long run for Carlos. We've got him on contract for next year regardless. I would see who's available before I'd sign Hall. I'd rather have a crap load of Camp Fodder to bring in an undrafted rookie who is a better cover than to sign Hall.
Then again I'd rather lose a season or two to rebuild the team. Hall isn't taking us to the promise land and we can ill afford to draft another CB right now.

ArtMonkDrillz 01-26-2009 03:39 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=Dirtbag359;523128][B]It's looking more and more now like we're going to go into 2009 with Hall, Smoot, and Tryon as our top 3 corners. Not the worse drop off[/B] but heres to hoping that Smoot works hard this offseason so we can get at least one more good year from him. My only concern though is giving the front office an out to go after another Corner through the draft.[/quote]That's a HUGE dropoff IMO.
Springs can rarely stay healthy thru a whole year, and Smoot's no iron man out there. Plus, God only knows about Tryon.
I don't see why we are just assuming that Rogers isn't here next year? Is his contract up or will he be an UFA after next season so we're just hoping to get something for him while we can?

GTripp0012 01-26-2009 03:43 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=Schneed10;523100]It would be no surprise to me if it's true that Vinny wants to keep the guaranteed money lower. He has to be concerned about the team's cap situation and knows he needs to keep as much room available to maneuver, or he's going to lose out on free agency altogether.

On a 6 year deal, $12 million guaranteed would take up $2 million in 2009 cap space. $16 million would take up $2.7 million. That's a big difference, an amount that would allow for one additional quality-depth guy in free agency.

It's also quite possible that the Redskins are betting Hall won't be able to do better. Revenue streams are in decline for NFL franchises due to the economy. There may be a lot of teams simply unwilling to pay it.

The way I see it, we should be thanking Vinny here. He's trying to keep a cool head, locking good players up for a reasonable amount. Would you rather he spend $20 million guaranteed on a Nate Clements type like the 49ers did?[/quote]Absent a new CBA though, signing bonus money from contracts signed from here through Week 10 of the 2009 season cannot prorate money past 2012.

So this is way more significant than a .7 million difference. A 12 million SB prorated becomes a 3 million hit this year. 16 million SB becomes a 4 million hit this year.

And then the 30% rule makes contracts in this climate a general mess.

I guess the bottom line is that if you combine this with the economy, and this great free agent class is going to get grossly underpaid. It makes sense to free up as much room as possible and get in on the action.

BigHairedAristocrat 01-26-2009 03:54 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=GMScud;523119]Hahaha, I was thinking the same thing. We always gripe about overpaying, now we're trying to be somewhat reasonable and it's a problem suddenly? Let's not forget BigHairedAristocrat seems to have a pretty negative view about most Skins-related stuff. I like how he puts the phrase "low-balling" in quotes, yet he was the one who said it in the first place.[/quote]

Sorry for the confusion, i put low-balling" in quotes because at first glance, how can 12M garaunteed and about 50M total over 6 years be considered low-balling....

But when you consider what other starting CBs are making and where Hall falls when compared to them, 12M is almost insulting. Chris Gamble got 23M garaunteed and i honestly don't think Gamble is a better corner than Hall. Gamble benefits from an excellent pass rush more than anything else. His time in Oakland (where he did not fit the scheme) aside, Hall has been a top corner his entire career. IMO he is worth 16M.

GMScud 01-26-2009 04:00 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;523137]Sorry for the confusion, [B]i put low-balling" in quotes because at first glance, how can 12M garaunteed and about 50M total over 6 years be considered low-balling....[/B]

But when you consider what other starting CBs are making and where Hall falls when compared to them, 12M is almost insulting. Chris Gamble got 23M garaunteed and i honestly don't think Gamble is a better corner than Hall. Gamble benefits from an excellent pass rush more than anything else. His time in Oakland (where he did not fit the scheme) aside, [B]Hall has been a top corner his entire career. IMO he is worth 16M[/B].[/quote]

ohh, gotcha...

As far as him being worth $16M guaranteed, I just don't know. Gamble may have been a bit overpaid, but he's very good and fits their scheme well.

TheMalcolmConnection 01-26-2009 04:01 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
It's the Oakland days that are making him damaged goods. While Gamble, Clements, etc, might have had down years, none of them have been called locker-room cancer or have been victimized more times in a season like Hall has. I don't know if anyone remembers, but Hall was beaten more than ANY OTHER DB IN THE NFL while he was on Oakland.

I think he knows and the rest of the league knows that while the talent might still be there, he's got a lot of red flags that go with it, hence the lower initial salary.

That and the economic restrictions outlined above.

BigHairedAristocrat 01-26-2009 04:08 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=Schneed10;523100]
On a 6 year deal, $12 million guaranteed would take up $2 million in 2009 cap space. $16 million would take up $2.7 million. [B]That's a big difference[/B], an amount that would allow for one additional quality-depth guy in free agency.
[/quote]

I recognize that you know more about the salary cap than i ever will, but i have to disagree with you there.

Considering Smoot is garbage, Carlos Rogers cant hold on to the ball andwants a big payday or a trade, and Shawn Springs is excellent when healthy but is old and a stiff breeze keeps him out of a game, 0.7M is well worth the investment.... especially when you consider that if we let Hall walk, it essentially forces us to keep springs at 8.5M - thats [B]twelve times[/B] $700,000 difference in 2009 garaunteed money it would take to keep Hall here. So by your logic, if paying hall more money means losing out on one additional quality-depth guy, then letting hall walk will cost us twelve of those guys....

On the other hand, if we take the long-term view and give hall his money, we have more flexibility in deciding what we want to do with Springs, and can secure a starting CB spot up for the next 6 years or so.

I understand we have had a problem with overspending in the past... but everyone forgets we also had problems with letting great players walk because we tried to low-ball them. In my view, the approach we are taking with Hall is scarily similar to the approach we took with [B]Antonio Pierce [/B]and [B]Ryan Clark.[/B] We could have kept both those players if we had just paid them what they were worth, instead of playing hardball and letting them taste free agency. We let both of those guys go, and they got respectable contracts with their new teams and went on to superbowls... and what have we done since?

Yes, there is a danger in overpaying. But Hall isnt asking us to overpay him. Hes not even asking for much more than what we're willing to pay. What he's asking for is fair. IMO letting Hall walk because of a 0.7M/year difference would be a mistake of epic proportions.

TheMalcolmConnection 01-26-2009 04:12 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
I don't think we played hardball with Antonio Pierce. NY paid a pretty good contract for him and while I think GW had SOME hand in letting him walk, we definitely would have been a little more strapped now if he were on the team with a similar contract to NY's.

BigHairedAristocrat 01-26-2009 04:14 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=GMScud;523138]ohh, gotcha...

As far as him being worth $16M guaranteed, I just don't know. Gamble may have been a bit overpaid, but he's very good and fits their scheme well.[/quote]

I agree with you that Gambel is overpaid (grossly so IMO), but that doesnt change the fact that it "raised the bar" for what every FA corner is going to expect. Salaries are always going to escalate and we need to keep that in mind. If Hall were 2-3 years older or had ever had discipline problems in the lockerroom or on the field, and we didnt have issues with every single one of our other CB positions right now, I would be singing a different tune.

But to me, Hall isnt asking for anything unreasonable. Negotiating is one thing, but squabbling with him over 4M garaunteed when his his offer is very fair, could be interpreted by Hall as insulting and disrespectful.

TheMalcolmConnection 01-26-2009 04:15 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;523143]But to me, Hall isnt asking for anything unreasonable. Negotiating is one thing, but squabbling with him over 4M garaunteed when his his offer is very fair, could be interpreted by Hall as insulting and disrespectful.[/quote]

Couldn't the Redskins say the same thing?

Sure, he came in and played well for that half of a season or so he was here, but truly he needs to prove he can be mature AND be consistent before he gets any huge money deals...

WaldSkins 01-26-2009 04:18 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
[quote=TheMalcolmConnection;523140]It's the Oakland days that are making him damaged goods. While Gamble, Clements, etc, might have had down years, [B]none of them have been called locker-room cancer[/B] or have been victimized more times in a season like Hall has. I don't know if anyone remembers, but Hall was beaten more than ANY OTHER DB IN THE NFL while he was on Oakland.

I think he knows and the rest of the league knows that while the talent might still be there, he's got a lot of red flags that go with it, hence the lower initial salary.

That and the economic restrictions outlined above.[/quote]

I don't really consider him a locker room cancer. He played for a terrible Atlanta team last year then went to an even worse Raider team. When he came here he came to a team that has the talent to win. Oakland is where players go to die, they call it the black hole because that's what it is a shithole. That team is probaly the worst ran team in the NFL and the only cancer that team has is Al Davis.

gaudiomatt 01-26-2009 04:19 PM

Re: Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)
 
It makes incredible sense to low ball deangelo hall because he's not being low balled, 12m guranteed is all this guy is worth he's not going to be getting a big payday in free agency his true colors are shown and he's a good corner but not elite


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.

Page generated in 0.07516 seconds with 8 queries