Since we have decided this offseason to follow our "principles" instead of common sense by not working harder to resign Pierce and Smoot and by GIVING AWAY Coles (and taking a huge hit on it), I say we follow that same rule and not trade Gardner to the Vikings even if they are the highest bidder because the took Smoot. I know it doesn't really make any sense, and that this type of logic is like "Cutting off ones nose to spite ones face", but I figure at this point we have already sliced off our ears and gouged out at least one eye, so we might as well see it all through to the end.
corner or wideout it will be interesting to see what we do in the draft
That would definitely be cutting off our nose to spite our face. I think at this point, we trade Gardner to the Vikings simply to ensure that they don't screw us again by taking our WR at number 7. Clearly now the only two picks they would really need to make are WR and Derrick Johnson. By sending Gardner their way, we can definitely help to make sure that pick goes our way.
the skins are finally acting like a real nfl franchise and not like a kid in a candy store. the skins have made very fair offers to try and keep their players , some stay and some leave, for the ones who leave the skins expect for their backups to fill in and do the job. thats the way it works. i like that way better than trying to bring in every high priced free agent on the market.
:headbange [QUOTE=wolfeskins]the skins are finally acting like a real nfl franchise and not like a kid in a candy store. the skins have made very fair offers to try and keep their players , some stay and some leave, for the ones who leave the skins expect for their backups to fill in and do the job. thats the way it works. i like that way better than trying to bring in every high priced free agent on the market.[/QUOTE]
Let's remember that when Gibbs came back, he didn't come back to win one real quick and get out again.
He's back to restore the franchise to the prominence it had in the 80's and early 90's.
If that means taking one step back before the team moves forward that's what he's going to do. He's not in it for the short-term gratification, otherwise we would have found a way to re-sign Pierce and Smoot and probably several other big name free agents as well.
Since Snyder took over he's tried time and time again to flash the cash every offseason and where has it gotten us? Absolutely nowhere.
Time for a new approach.
I disagree with the idea that we are finally acting like an NFL franchise. I was not (and did not in any way) suggesting that we should have signed every big name free agent. My point is we couldn't even try hard enough to keep our own players because we went with a knee jerk reaction on Coles. There is no way in the world that you can convince me that sending away a player after picking up the tab for another player who is not as good (even if he is "explosive") and who will require his own new contract was a good decision. Coles could have SAT ON THE BENCH or he could have toughed it out and played. And the money we threw away to get rid of him could have been used to make slight raises in our contract offers to both Pierce and Smoot to keep our defense intact. Look back at the situation with Sean Gilbert. He was a cancer. So he sat. We didn't give him away, we let him stew until we got a deal that was beneficial to us. That made sense. To me, this is like the Raptors letting Mourning decide he didn't want to play for them or Gary Payton deciding he didn't want to be a Hawk. However, the big difference is, we payed full price to let him go and now we are suffering because of it.
And I really don't agree with this whole idea that we are showing financial responsibility even if you don't take into account the Coles situation. The reason we haven't spent big bucks is probably because we don't have them. Brunell is bringing in the big bucks riding the pine because we couldn't control ourselves when the chance to bring him in. If we are so fiscally responsible now, why couldn't we have kept that draft pick and saved all that money and gone with Ramsey from the start. We can't spend money this year because Trotter is sitting in Philly counting his bonus check we gave him so we could release him last year.
C'mon. Everyone on this board knows Rabauch and Patton were good signings and that they show what a free agent signing should represent: good value. But don't kid yourself. The reason that we have not spend more is the same reason I can't afford to go out and replace a jersey everytime we give away a player, because we have no money.
So, have we made smart decisions with the money we have had this offseason? Consider it this way. There is no extension in place with Moss at this point, so our offseason essentially goes like this:
Moss: 1yr/7 million dollar contract.
On the whole, not that great.
P.S. I am not a hater or a fair weather fan. I love the Redskins through and through. But sometimes decisions that are made are bad.
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:24 PM.|
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.