hokie4redskins Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 EDIT: Sorry, this was posted as a yahoo source earlier. Just came out on SI though. Weird. Yep, we lose, Dallas wins. Unfrigginbelievable. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/don_banks/03/21/fa.winners.losers/index.html Winners: 3. Dallas -- One big addition alone is responsible for the Cowboys making our winners list, and here's a hint: his name includes a T and an O. Terrell Owens might not be the Cowboys' ticket to the Super Bowl, like he was in Philly, but how often do you get the chance to ramp up a mediocre receiving corps with one of the game's top three play-makers? Owens will threaten the defense throughout a game and make opposing teams game plan for him. The Cowboys haven't had one of those on offense since The Triplets were in their glory days. If Owens has the good sense to stay between the margins in terms of his behavior and comportment, Dallas will have the most impactful signing of the 2006 free agency season. The Cowboys also landed a decent linebacker in Jacksonville's Akin Ayodele, and prepared for the possible release of Larry Allen by re-signing guard Andre Gurode, adding Jets tackle Jason Fabini and picking up Lions guard-tackle Kyle Kosier. Losers: 4. Washington -- The Redskins were saved from salary-cap hell by the new CBA extension, which freed up another $7 million-plus of cap space, allowing them to avoid dismantling their roster. So what do they do? Rush right out and get themselves mortgaged back up to the gills, tossing out a staggering $31.8 million, six-year contract to the Rams' Adam Archuleta, making him the richest safety in NFL history. Receiver Antwaan Randle El and linebacker Andre Carter also got hefty deals, and Washington opted to send both a third- and fourth-round pick to San Francisco in exchange for inconsistent receiver Brandon Lloyd. Even reserve tight end Fauria and backup quarterback Todd Collins got in on the money train. The Redskins' set-the-market contracts are bound to catch up to them one day. My guess is it'll be after head coach Joe Gibbs calls it a career for a second time, in a year or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1 Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 He's such an objective source... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laxpck Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I just read this piece of crap's article YOu forgot to mention that somehow the Giants are a winner, cause they can "mine the middle round talent" or something like that In other words, picking up no talent pieces of crap is much better off season policy then picking up the best possible free agent at every one of your needed positions It just does not end with these guys....Cap Hell Really Are we going there again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
21dave Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I love how he hates on the Skins for signing Randle-El and in the next section claims the Steelers will miss him more then they think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins4eva Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 What I love is how this guy went off on TO, talked about how he wouldn't discuss him again--and now, he's back onboard the TO bandwagon--it's amazing that these guys have jobs...really, anyone can pump out the drivel they write. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laxpck Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Here is the quote for the Giants HONORABLE MENTION • New York Giants -- For successfully mining the middle tiers of free agency for starting players such as cornerback Sam Madison and safety Will Demps, and decent depth in cornerback R.W. McQuarters. Who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I love how he hates on the Skins for signing Randle-El and in the next section claims the Steelers will miss him more then they think. do you realize that these guys put articles like this because Redskins fans give them hate mail. They want the attension. They do even belive what they are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 As I said last year when all the predictors had us rated as low as 28th best team in the league, the skins need to go out and win and prove all these people wrong. The team did it last year and now they have to improve and do it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Moss Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Why can’t anyone simply evaluate the players? Instead they focus on money as if it was coming out of their own meager checking account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hokie4redskins Posted March 21, 2006 Author Share Posted March 21, 2006 I wonder if we would've been deemed "winners" if we signed TO. The SI ilk used to infuriate me, but now their blatant hatred has become comical for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I wonder if we would've been deemed "winners" if we signed TO. The SI ilk used to infuriate me, but now their blatant hatred has become comical for me. I agree, it just makes me smirk now reading these articles. The writiers automatically call the skins the cash cow of the league and don't bother to evaluate the player or the specifics of the contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Good old Banks. You can always count on him to come up with some interesting and original insights. "Cap hell" - huh. We just from there and it feels pretty good. As for TO.. Every time he destroys one team there is someone else offering him even more money to go to screw up another team. Why should he change. At most by the end of next season will see the same old TO. Maybe even earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H@iL2Gibb$ Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 4. Washington -- The Redskins were saved from salary-cap hell by the new CBA extension, which freed up another $7 million-plus of cap space, allowing them to avoid dismantling their roster. Was this guy aware that the "core" players were willing to restructure their contracts? The Redskins' set-the-market contracts are bound to catch up to them one day. My guess is it'll be after head coach Joe Gibbs calls it a career for a second time, in a year or two. I've heard that before :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCMONEY Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I bleed burgundy goal but I don't see how that was a hate article. I think he's possibly right. They keep raising the CAP limit so the Skins are "aggressive" as Gibbs puts it. On the other hand they said they were gonna be fiscally responsible after last season. So much for that. I am a Skins fan and I feel there's truth to that article. People tend to look past the over spending because the Skins won last season but its ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Why can’t anyone simply evaluate the players? Instead they focus on money as if it was coming out of their own meager checking account. lmaooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Yes these articles are like these guys money is coming out of their checking account. You bought a jersey here for 60 dollars when you of got a jersey on ebay for 30 it close quality. I have no idea what i am reading anymore. Articles online never talk about football. It is always about off the feild problems, how much money athleetes are getting and quick sarcastic remarks . How can this idiot say it is going to catch up with us when he said the same thing in 2000? How can he know when Joe Gibbs will quit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Does he just keep copies of past articles and just change the names? Did he live in a cave last year and miss Owens' antics? Did he not just say that Owens isn't worth a minimum contract. He should have put an asterisk next to Owens name there as in "*not worth a minimum contract unless he signs with the Crackboys" This guy is far worse than any of the other writers. He says the same thing about the Redskins every year. King at least said at the end of last year the Skins could be SB bound. Fatassarelli at least gives the skins SOME credit, once in a while. Banks just pummels the Skins, no matter what they do. I really only read his articles to hate him more. I'm sorry does TO block? They gave up 49 sacks last year. Their line has holes and their defense is way overrated. But they have TO - whoop-dee-doo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I bleed burgundy goal but I don't see how that was a hate article. I think he's possibly right. They keep raising the CAP limit so the Skins are "aggressive" as Gibbs puts it. On the other hand they said they were gonna be fiscally responsible after last season. So much for that. I am a Skins fan and I feel there's truth to that article. People tend to look past the over spending because the Skins won last season but its ridiculous. Point one: You can't "over"spend unless it prohibits you from spending in the future. Point two: These moves were made as part of a three-year plan to keep this talent together. So I would look for the next couple offseasons to be much quieter...similar to what last offseason was like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scuppajones Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 4. Washington - The Redskins were saved from salary-cap hell by the new CBA extension, which freed up another $7 million-plus of cap space, allowing them to avoid dismantling their roster. Ummm, wouldn't that make us winners? If we would have signed TO to the biggest contract ever, the article would have said, "TO and Rosenhaus got naive owner Dan Snyder and over the hill Joe Gibbs to sign a sucker deal." "The Redskins overpay again for a player with a bad attitude nearing the end of his career." That is a lock! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunellSuperbowl Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I bleed burgundy goal but I don't see how that was a hate article. I think he's possibly right. They keep raising the CAP limit so the Skins are "aggressive" as Gibbs puts it. On the other hand they said they were gonna be fiscally responsible after last season. So much for that. I am a Skins fan and I feel there's truth to that article. People tend to look past the over spending because the Skins won last season but its ridiculous. What the hell is wrong with people like this? So did you want the Redskins throwing to one reciever for a second yr a in row?' Damn if you do , damn if you do not. If the Redskins got a ball hog like TO people would say Snyder is a star sniffing owner . How will Moss and TO both get the ball? If the Redskins got David Givens. The Redskins over paid for a second yr in a row for another overrated Pats reciever. If the Redskins got nobody. Redskins still have no options in the passing game. What are the clowns in DC going? If the Redskins drafted three rookie recievers the Redskins drafted recievers in the worst reciever draft in recent memory. This internet reporting is a joke. It is almost if they have something against Snyder other then football. Maybe because he does not talk to them? Another Barry Bonds scenario? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SPare Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 Two bones to pick- 1 is the repetition of the claim that Archuleta has the richest contract ever given to a safety. It's true, until he restructures in year 3, which seems to be the pattern with the Redskins contracts. 2 is the recurring discussion of Washington's cap hell. Like the "brutal Afghan winter", it's now 5 years later and we're still waiting for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisFul Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 You know, not to interrupt your h8 train you have going on here, but maybe just MAYBE he's not knocking the quality of players the Redskins have assembled in FA. Maybe he's knocking the price at which they were acquired. I certainly wouldn't have given that much money to a slot reciever like the skins gave to ARE, and I certainly wouldnt have traded a third and a 4th away for Brandon Freakin' Lloyd. Nor would I have made Archuleta the HIGHEST PAID SAFETY IN NFL HISTORY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triple6mafia Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I enjoy reading these articles. We probably won't ever get our due becuase those people hate the fact that they are wrong about everything and keep diggin themselves into a bigger whole and can't admit that we are right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNJfan Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 On offense, Tennessee addressed a weak spot by giving Patriots wideout David Givens No. 1 WR money (five years, $24 million) despite his not yet producing at first-receiver levels. Did they overpay? Probably, but they had to win this particular auction. How is it that Tenn is winners for overpaying for Givens but we are losers for signing our WR's? This whole article is mind numbing that the Redskins didn't even make the honorable mention list but instead are losers. I mean the Saints made the honorable mention list just for signing one player Brees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I bleed burgundy goal but I don't see how that was a hate article. I think he's possibly right. They keep raising the CAP limit so the Skins are "aggressive" as Gibbs puts it. On the other hand they said they were gonna be fiscally responsible after last season. So much for that. I am a Skins fan and I feel there's truth to that article. People tend to look past the over spending because the Skins won last season but its ridiculous. Why do you care what the team pays? Is it coming out of your personal checking account? The team has proven over and over that cap issues never materializes. These "huge" contracts look big on paper, but the reality is much smaller than the numbers actually add up to be. Unless you were happier with the team throwing to Moss as a #1 and the Keystone Cops as #2, #3 and #4 last year, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 You know, not to interrupt your h8 train you have going on here, but maybe just MAYBE he's not knocking the quality of players the Redskins have assembled in FA. Maybe he's knocking the price at which they were acquired. Why does he care? Why does anyone care other than the guy writing the checks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.