Warpath

Warpath (http://www.thewarpath.net/forum.php)
-   Redskins Locker Room (http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/)
-   -   Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'? (http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-locker-room/35345-would-dunta-robinson-darren-sproles-business.html)

Paintrain 02-24-2010 12:44 PM

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.

Mattyk 02-24-2010 12:46 PM

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.

BigHairedAristocrat 02-24-2010 12:50 PM

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.

celts32 02-24-2010 12:51 PM

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.

Mattyk 02-24-2010 12:53 PM

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.

Monkeydad 02-24-2010 12:56 PM

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.

Paintrain 02-24-2010 12:57 PM

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.

SmootSmack 02-24-2010 01:03 PM

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

ethat001 02-24-2010 01:05 PM

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..

celts32 02-24-2010 01:07 PM

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.

diehardskin2982 02-24-2010 01:18 PM

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

skinsfaninok 02-24-2010 01:52 PM

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.

tryfuhl 02-24-2010 01:57 PM

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.

TheMalcolmConnection 02-24-2010 01:57 PM

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.

over the mountain 02-24-2010 02:06 PM

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.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:35 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.

Page generated in 0.11192 seconds with 8 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25