Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Redskins Locker Room


View Poll Results: Grade the Redskins 2012 Off-Season Moves
A (All I hoped for and more) 27 16.67%
B (Strong, better than expected) 86 53.09%
C (Pretty ordinary) 45 27.78%
F (I hate life) 4 2.47%
Voters: 162. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-12-2012, 08:27 AM   #61
The Starter
 
#56fanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Charlotte NC
Age: 39
Posts: 1,788
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinster View Post
My problem with your assertion that we need to take care of the O-line is it is very hard for us fans to evaluate O-linemen who are not either top or bottom talent. We tried, but did not have the money to get the top talent due to the cap restrictions, and who are we to say that the middle guys are truly enough of an upgrade over what we have to mess with the O-line chemistry?

The Fletcher thing you are saying is ridiculous. I don't even have to look when I say I'm positive Torrence got the league minimum. Fletcher is going to want money that we do not have to give him. We want Fletcher back, but unless he is willing to settle for less, we just don't have the space. Also even if he were to take a paycut to lets say 2 million (not going to happen), I still would take Merriweather or Morgan over him. Those guys have potential to be on the team for some time while Fletcher has 1-2 years of mediocrity left.

We did have the money to address the RT position in FA. We chose to go after other needs, which isn't wrong. My point is, we know we have struggled at RT the last couple of years, and there were several options there.

As i stated regarding Torrence, it wasn't much money. Not electing to resign our QB of the defense would be a huge mistake. He wants to finish here in DC, he WAS the heart and sole of the D last year and has been for the last 5 years. To say its ridiculous is a bit harsh in my opinion. I would imagine we have a # in mind for him, and it will get done. If it doesn't it would be a shame. Regardless of his age, he led the NFL in tackles, is a true leader of that defense, and a positive presence in the locker room. I would hope we take care of that deal and bring him back.
#56fanatic is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 04-12-2012, 08:46 AM   #62
Franchise Player
 
skinsfan69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Arlington, VA.
Posts: 9,368
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chico23231 View Post
I think if it was a 4, 5 year 20+ million dollar deal i might agree, but his contract is really no risk. 2 year deal where we get to find out if he can become a stronger player. Shanny reallllly wanted this guy and there was a lot of interest from other teams. I think he could be an asset.
Even so..we're paying for Morgan to put up numbers he's never produced. Never pay for potential in free agency. I would've signed Garcon and left it alone after that.
skinsfan69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 09:03 AM   #63
Uncle Phil
 
SmootSmack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 44,615
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
Even so..we're paying for Morgan to put up numbers he's never produced. Never pay for potential in free agency. I would've signed Garcon and left it alone after that.
What do you pay for in free agency?
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You
SmootSmack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 09:09 AM   #64
MVP
 
mooby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NoVa
Age: 26
Posts: 11,817
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
Even so..we're paying for Morgan to put up numbers he's never produced. Never pay for potential in free agency. I would've signed Garcon and left it alone after that.
Right, because paying for past production has worked out so well for us in the past.
mooby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 09:35 AM   #65
MVP
 
Chico23231's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 37
Posts: 11,121
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
What do you pay for in free agency?
pie
__________________
@RSherman_25 just make sure you stay in Seattle cause without that pass rush you are who we thought you were. 5th rd PK no speed good hands

DeAngelo Hall (@DeAngeloHall23) March 14, 2014
Chico23231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 09:37 AM   #66
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,655
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Production and potential are both factors when evaluating free agents. Teams pay for both.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 11:02 AM   #67
Franchise Player
 
skinsfan69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Arlington, VA.
Posts: 9,368
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by SmootSmack View Post
What do you pay for in free agency?
I would pay for past production, not potential. Potential is for the draft.
skinsfan69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 11:05 AM   #68
Franchise Player
 
skinsfan69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Arlington, VA.
Posts: 9,368
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by mooby View Post
Right, because paying for past production has worked out so well for us in the past.
Well who are you talking about?
skinsfan69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 11:09 AM   #69
MVP
 
mooby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NoVa
Age: 26
Posts: 11,817
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
Well who are you talking about?
Pretty much all our big name signings since Snyder arrived? Some have actually panned out (like Fletch) but for the most part they haven't. And most of them were signed because the name they made for themselves in other places.
mooby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 11:16 AM   #70
Mann Up HOF!
 
Lotus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 10,445
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
I would pay for past production, not potential. Potential is for the draft.
Why pay for production given to another team? Shouldn't we pay for production given to OUR team? And if so, isn't said production, at the time of signing, potential?
__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.
Lotus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 11:18 AM   #71
MVP
 
Chico23231's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Richmond, VA
Age: 37
Posts: 11,121
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
I would pay for past production, not potential. Potential is for the draft.
it needs to be a balanced, planned approached with both production and potential in mind.

I think if your hung up on a 2 year contract with a young WR who has shown flashes in a fairly poor offensive scheme before last year, you really shouldnt be. Seasons with 40+ and 50+ catches is not nothing and the contract is pays him not to be a no. one, but a underneath possesion scheme compliment who could become more. Tripp stated the guy who I see, is a younger Gaffney. I dont have a problem with that.
__________________
@RSherman_25 just make sure you stay in Seattle cause without that pass rush you are who we thought you were. 5th rd PK no speed good hands

DeAngelo Hall (@DeAngeloHall23) March 14, 2014
Chico23231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 01:47 PM   #72
Registered User
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
Even so..we're paying for Morgan to put up numbers he's never produced. Never pay for potential in free agency. I would've signed Garcon and left it alone after that.
Maybe a better way to say it is don't overpay for potential in free-agency. We (knowingly) used much of our cap space to sign an inconsistent performer in Garcon. IMO that qualifies as overpaying pretty much no matter what. The Morgan signing is even more perplexing given he was cut by a SB contender team that needs more production from WRs. So SanFran doesn't see him as a starter, and he's coming off injury. Back to Garcon, it's significant P Manning didn't lobby Garcon to wait in FA and sign the same place. Obviously if Manning said to Garcon "you're coming w/ me" and said to Denver "he's coming w/ me" it would have happened that way.
The Goat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 02:04 PM   #73
MVP
 
mooby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: NoVa
Age: 26
Posts: 11,817
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Goat View Post
Maybe a better way to say it is don't overpay for potential in free-agency. We (knowingly) used much of our cap space to sign an inconsistent performer in Garcon. IMO that qualifies as overpaying pretty much no matter what. The Morgan signing is even more perplexing given he was cut by a SB contender team that needs more production from WRs. So SanFran doesn't see him as a starter, and he's coming off injury. Back to Garcon, it's significant P Manning didn't lobby Garcon to wait in FA and sign the same place. Obviously if Manning said to Garcon "you're coming w/ me" and said to Denver "he's coming w/ me" it would have happened that way.
Unless Garcon said,"I'd prefer to blaze my own trail." In which case he would be free to blaze his own trail. You don't think RG3/Luck factored into Garcon's decision? Also, correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't Morgan a free agent? If that's the case that would hardly qualify as being cut.
mooby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 02:16 PM   #74
Registered User
 
The Goat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,662
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by mooby View Post
Unless Garcon said,"I'd prefer to blaze my own trail." In which case he would be free to blaze his own trail. You don't think RG3/Luck factored into Garcon's decision? Also, correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't Morgan a free agent? If that's the case that would hardly qualify as being cut.
Thanks for the correction on Morgan...he wasn't retained by his former team. Definitely think RGIII factored into the decision and even remember reading it somewhere. Also read a Garcon quote that made it plain Manning didn't extend an invite or anything of the sort. Maybe I'm reading to much into it...but knowing how important chemistry between QB/WR is I tend to think Manning would have liked continuity in his supporting cast.
The Goat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-12-2012, 02:51 PM   #75
Franchise Player
 
skinsfan69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Arlington, VA.
Posts: 9,368
Re: Grade the Redskins Moves So Far

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chico23231 View Post
it needs to be a balanced, planned approached with both production and potential in mind.

I think if your hung up on a 2 year contract with a young WR who has shown flashes in a fairly poor offensive scheme before last year, you really shouldnt be. Seasons with 40+ and 50+ catches is not nothing and the contract is pays him not to be a no. one, but a underneath possesion scheme compliment who could become more. Tripp stated the guy who I see, is a younger Gaffney. I dont have a problem with that.
Not hung up on it. It's just not a smart signing. We should be able to get that same production from someone that's currently on the team.... Hankerson or Paul to go along with Gaffney and Moss....then take the money that was given to Morgan and sign an o-linemen.
skinsfan69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:00 AM.


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 0.30019 seconds with 10 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