shotstoppa Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Hey all - this is my first post here so I'm hoping not to get trashed too much for this post; however, since I feel relatively safe among my Skins brethren, here goes nothing. The Washington Post reports a laundry list of FAs that the Redskins are after/pursueing. My problem is that, as Mark Brunell stated during his contract restructuring, this team has unbelievable chemistry - and I'm a little bit afriad of what will happen if we start adding say 10 free agents into the mix. I know we will always have our "core" Redskins to lead the way (at least on offense) but what happens if we bring in Lloyd, Randle El, a TE, a DT, an OLB, and a new SS? Does this mess with a really cohesive bunch? Also, I know that Joe Gibbs runs the show here and I've really been supportive of Dan Snyder the past couple of years, but does it seem like he may be trying to buy a championship (a la the 2000 offseason)? I know that, with the loss of Arrington, we're going to have to replace him and we do have a genuine need for a pass-rushing DE (can you imagine how sick our defense would be if we could pressure the QB without having to send some of GW's infamous blitz packages?), but do we really need two more WRs? David Patten seems to be a perfect fit at #3 and moving him down to #4 on the depth chart may mess with his already tenuous attitude toward the organization - stemming from his injury status last year. Just thinking out loud I guess... Let me know what you guys think fellow Skins fan and hopefully tell me that I'm a bit off-base... Look forward to talking with you all soon... :eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Yeah, off base when you compare the ages of the 200o Fa's. Plus this is Gibbs, not Norv I learned a long time ago to not question personell moves when it comes to Gibbs and Williams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f_trizzy Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Yeah, off base when you compare the ages of the 200o Fa's. Plus this is Gibbs, not NorvI learned a long time ago to not question personell moves when it comes to Gibbs and Williams. Yes, I was going to point out the age difference between the guys we signed in 2000 and the guys we are courting now as well . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarpon75 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 I wouldn't be to concerned at this point about all the names being thrown out there.There can be a lot of incorrect info being waved around.We do have some holes and I believe there will be some good decisions made to fill them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philal0102 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Yeah, off base when you compare the ages of the 200o Fa's. Plus this is Gibbs, not NorvI learned a long time ago to not question personell moves when it comes to Gibbs and Williams. yeah i agree... now we have gibbs and things should be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbill Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Bowen needs to be replaced. LaVar needs to be replaced. We've needed a pass rushing DE for years. We lost to Seattle because we have two players on the team who can get open, and one of them plays HB. Also, Taylor needs to go, so he also needs to be replaced. As you can see, second round draft picks don't always turn out to be players, so what's the risk in giving one up for a known player? So, from the lists that are circulating, the Redskins appear to be filling needs, not overspending or approaching free agency with reckless abandon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azmodeus13 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 No - not the same - these are proven performers who are 3-5 year... not 12-15th year like Smith, Sanders and the like. These are kids. Young enough to make a difference for years and old enough to have valuable experience. The money will probably be less. Our defense will be helped with Carter and Archuleta... and it was good to begin with. Our offense sputtered without WR help and depth... this is being addressed. Seems like this is a pointed list, specifically drawn up to help positions of weakness with young guys who can be effective for 4-6 years... just getting ready to really hit their prime. Just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
da#1skinsfan Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Way off base....we have our core key players on each side of the ball...Brunell, Campbell, Portis, Moss, Cooley, Samuels, Jansen, Rabach, etc...Taylor, Washington, Griff, Salavae, Springs, Marshall, etc. We are not going out and bringing in old hasbeens to lead this team, we are bringing in young talent to contribute to the cause that already exists. Big difference! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECU-ALUM Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 1st off...Welcome to the board...this is a great place to talk about the Skins, and to talk with people who are extremely football savay. Okay the diffrences between then and now (just IMO so take it for what it's worth). 1) We're not buying the pro-bowl roster of 1991 this time around. Some of the guys are just getting into their prime years. We are not buying "name" players per-se but rather guys with talent and years still left to go. 2) This time we have a coach with proven coaching skills and knows how to get guys on the same page and to work together. If they don't buy into it...hey see ya later have fun somewhere else. 3) The guys who came forward to get their deals redone knew that we needed to sign some other guys to help out. So I wouldn't worry too much about chemestry. 4) As far as Patten goes....the guy now needs to put up or shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugs' Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Well, first of all, welcome to Extremskins! Now for the business at hand.....we have to fill holes that are glaring. Some are due to cap cuts made and others are due to poor performance at positions last year. I think every Owner is "trying" to buy a Championship in one way or another (at least they should be). I don't think the guys we are looking to bring in are the big-named and aged stars that we got in here in 2000. I think some of the guys we are looking at can help us for years to come and address areas of need on our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Every year the papers list all of the FA possibilities for the Skins. However, I expect this offseason to be similar to last offseason, which was pretty quiet......only major thing was the trade of Coles for Moss. If we just land a decent WR I'll be happy with relative quiet again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 We can only PRAY our spending this offseason is as successful as it was in 2000 where the signings were aimed to improve the No. 30 defense and did so to make it the No. 4 defense. We got bitten in 2000 by injuries to the offense after a 6-2 start. A healthy team then would have been hard to handle, just as most good teams are when healthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 great topic for your 1st post. i do see many similiarities to the purge of 2000. but we are not signing old veterans we are signing guys soon to be in their prime. PLus we got gibbs, not norv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drex Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Also regarding the 2000 team, an improved kicking game alone would have enabled that team to win a few more games. There was a kicking carousel as a result of an injury to Brett Conway and even 44 year old Eddie Murray was enlisted to kick some field goals during the latter portion of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjoolius Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Also, look at the type of players the skins are reportedly persuing. For the most part they are very coachable, versatile, and tough players that are solid- but not quite at a pro bowl level to demand ludicrous salary. The only exception might be Lloyd (being coachable). Then again, that just may be a biproduct of playing for a horrible 49ers team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyRules Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 It appears, this time around, we are not going out to find "big names", but big players...there is a significant difference. Welcome; Great 1st post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carter23 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 i disagree... as other people have said, we'll be getting guys entering/or are already in their prime.. plus, there is no way we sign all the names being floated around anyway... i don't think it'll end up anything like 2000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Snyders Capologist Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Welcome I trust joined as well , HTTR !!!! Back to the topic though i think with Gibbs he can add pieces that he can jell into an already great team. In 2000 the Skins brought in guys who couldnt jell because of their age and attitude problems. This year is different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakofthesouth Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 You know that Joe Gibbs will only coach players w/ 'character,' meaning that whoever is on this team will have a team-first attitude. He has an uncanny knack for finding these players, and if he wants to pursue 30 FA's like this, then I am behind him; team chemistry and cohesion is synonymous w/ Joe Gibbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThomasRoane Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Yep; this is night and day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 In 2000 we signed names - and often in positions we had no need. Now we sign players to upgrade in positions of need within a team framework. No comparison. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins838791 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 Also regarding the 2000 team, an improved kicking game alone would have enabled that team to win a few more games. There was a kicking carousel as a result of an injury to Brett Conway and even 44 year old Eddie Murray was enlisted to kick some field goals during the latter portion of the season.hell we would of made the playoffs.that lost to ny the last game was almost enough to drive me crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLEED-B&G Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 I definately see patten becoming a problem, you can already see it with his responses in press, patten is not really a redskin, after this last season with him being "benched" as he put it, and this season with us bringing in another receiver I don't see patten lasting another year after this one. hopefully we draft another receiver in the draft to take patten's place when he breaks out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins838791 Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 I definately see patten becoming a problem, you can already see it with his responses in press, patten is not really a redskin, after this last season with him being "benched" as he put it, and this season with us bringing in another receiver I don't see patten lasting another year after this one. hopefully we draft another receiver in the draft to take patten's place when he breaks outmaybe he'll go back to the pats.i could care less if he's mad that we are trying to make are team better.i thougt x-pat players are supost to be great teamplayers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Pablo Posted March 11, 2006 Share Posted March 11, 2006 I don't get it... everytime you write a check to a player, aren't you trying to buy a championship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.