Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012
Even given the rise in market value, it's a stretch to say that the Redskins aren't paying him like a starter.
If you think he's evidence that the Redskins are developing their own talent, I respect your right to see it that way. And you might be proven right down the road if the Redskins really start to turn out players they draft. But since we don't have the benefit of looking down the road and presuming that the Redskins have it right this time, I think you have to judge moves in the context of the present.
I do think that your definition of a good signing is synonymous with any move the Redskins make. That's fair, no? In a sample size of every move, you've liked for the team on the day it's been made. If it's been proven a bad move later, you've changed your opinion appropriately, but you've always given the team the (unearned) benefit of the doubt on the day of the signing.
Sometimes, moves can be not good and not bad. This one just...is.
|
They are paying him like a starter b/c he is a NFL starter and would be so on easily 30 to 40% of the NFL rosters.
So ... signing and extending folks like Paulsen, Young, Robinson, Baker, Riley are NOT evidence of developing their own.
Okay.