Seabee1973 Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 What's up with this Champ was unhappy here and wanted out stuff??That's not really how I remembered it Champ was willing to stay but just wanted to be paid what he is worth Danny Lowballed him and just didn't want to pay him the deal he wanted so of course at that point he wanted out If the Skins wanted to keep Champ they could've but he just didn't fit into the Shock and Awe Spending spree plan (Washington, Griffin, Brunell, Springs,) They gave Portis the Contract Champ rejected then went out and got Springs And M. Washington for the money Champ did sign for. But Champ did want out The only way we wouldnt have lost him was to use the franchise tag but that was to costly with everything else the skins needed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Skins_&_'Stons Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 x2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 The Champ Bailey trade is only of continued interest to Skins fans because it is yet another example of the Skins management (Gibbs included) not giving proper value to their draft picks. I would say that most around the league consider Bailey to be a great CB and Portis to be a great RB. Skins were offered a first round pick + extras for Bailey. If the Skins hadn't traded for Portis they would have had a first round pick + their own second round pick + something extra (player or low pick). As good as Portis is that is just too much draft value for one player. Then the Skins go and trade away multiple potential starter picks for Campbell. Recently the traded a third round potential starter for the right to one year of TJ Duckett. Who got the pick? Denver again. They love the Skins. It's like taking candy from a baby. That scenario only takes place if the skins put the franchise tag on bailey which they could not Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 yusof06 the skins could not franchise bailey as at the time it would have put us over the cap. the jets never were serous players in the negotiations the only 2 who were was denver and seattle. Seattle wanted a first to swap bailey for springs and their running back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XdcdiehardX Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 Damn it, talk about the ONE that got away!!:doh: Maybe we can still pick him up in 5 years (or whatever he's serving) when he's out of prison:laugh: I would trade CP for a felon anyday!! maybe we can still pick him up in 5 to 10... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Die Hard Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 yusof06 the skins could not franchise bailey as at the time it would have put us over the cap. the jets never were serous players in the negotiations the only 2 who were was denver and seattle. Seattle wanted a first to swap bailey for springs and their running back. I'm sorry... what were you saying again? The Skins couldn't franchise Bailey correct? I just love to see people formulate opinions not founded in logic, reason or fact. Took me less than 10 seconds to find the answer.... Bailey designated as franchise player http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/WAS/7098977 NFL.com wire reports WASHINGTON (Feb. 18, 2004) -- Four-time Pro Bowl cornerback Champ Bailey, already given permission to seek a trade, was designated a franchise player by the Washington Redskins. The Redskins had until Feb. 24 to make the move, but it became inevitable after contract talks reached a stalemate last week. The franchise tag keeps Bailey from becoming a free agent when his contract expires next month. It also means the Redskins have to make him a one-year, $6.8 million tender -- the average of the top five players at his position. That will put the Redskins slightly over the NFL's salary cap. They have to get under the cap by March 3, and they can do so by cutting players. Bruce Smith, who said he would retire after breaking the career sacks record last season, heads the list of probable cuts. Bailey is one of the team's most popular players, but talks for a new contract have made virtually no progress. The Redskins offered him a nine-year, $55 million contract with $14.7 million in bonus money before the start of last season, but Bailey had problems with several clauses in the deal as well as its overall structure. The Redskins gave Bailey's agent, Jack Reale, permission to talk to other teams late last week. Reale plans to gauge interest in Bailey at this week's scouting combine in Indianapolis. "We've got the ball rolling with several different teams," Reale said. One of those teams is Detroit, where Bailey's younger brother, Boss, is coming off a strong season as a rookie linebacker. Also, Detroit has hired defensive backs coach George Catavolos, who coached Bailey in Washington the past two seasons. "I'm hoping that we can discuss this face-to-face in Indianapolis," Detroit coach Steve Mariucci said. "If the Redskins are willing to talk about it, we're willing to listen. Champ Bailey is worth discussing. There's no question about that." If the Redskins don't trade Bailey, they could have a difficult time pursuing new players when the free agent market opens next month. The salary cap space occupied by Bailey's $6.8 million will be needed to fill holes at defensive line, running back and safety - as well as at the cornerback spot vacated by Bailey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phixius Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 Champ was leaving anyway, so it didnt matter, and Portis is a much better RB than Trung Candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worstSeat Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 Didn't read the whole thread, did you? So I'm not sure I see an argument earlier in the thread that Champ leaving wasn't about money; just some that claim that's not exactly the case -- like your comment, "Again Champ wasn't lowballed. And he didn't leave for the money. He left because he wanted out of D.C." Where's the "first" before the "again"? If you're going to repost, at least cite to save some time for alleged boneheads like me. As I recall when Smoot was leaving, he talked to Champ about the way Champ felt he was treated in negotiations, and used that as part of his reasoning for leaving DC. Sounds like someone who felt he was lowballed. What did Champ dislike about being a Skin? And what is it about being a Skin that he disliked more than LaVar did? (That is, I bet it could have been solved with enough cash.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 OK, OK, one more lick for the dead horse. All of you saying that we shouldn't have made the trade based on how Champ has done in Denver aren't taking into account one very important factor. Bailey has something in Denver that we never really had while he was here - a pass rush. With us he never had many opportunities to defend passers who were hurried into poor throws. He gets that regularly in Denver and his performance is of course better. I guess that goes a long way towards giving away where my draft priorties would lie were I responsible for making our pick(s) in the upcoming draft. Oh, and thanks for pointing that out about us franchising Champ DH. It's nice to know I'm not going completely senile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.