Genghis Khan Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 What do you mean? Signing big name free agents I mean this is just some report but you know its very likely to happen. Nate Clements wants "Champ Baile money". We wouldn't even give Champ Bailey "Champ Bailey money". If we could sign Fletcher to a resonable contract fine but there won't be anything resonable about nate clements contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HEavyJumbo85 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Making a big splash is fine, as long as we don't do like last year and bring in 50 odd guys, and say play and be great. They can sign a big name, just not a ton of big names. Chemistry is apparently more important to winning teams than talent. We should know that better than any team right now, after several huge free agent classes, with guys that never meshed, and led us to losing records. We dont' want to try and add a ton of starters. I hope we can keep this free agent class rather small, like the '05 class, and trust the core of guys we already have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VuV Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 London Fletcher is fine, but Neal Olkewicz would be a better fit in the middle for this team. Neal is younger and has some history with the skins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan07 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Sweet! I be boosted if we got Nate! Not sure we need an LB though. Start Rocky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jivelikenice Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 I wouldn't mind either or both of those players, as long as we do whats necessary to re-sign Dockery and restructure Shawn Springs. If it comes at the expense of either one of them it will be harmful to the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Sweet!I be boosted if we got Nate! Not sure we need an LB though. Start Rocky Rocky doesnt play MLB. Lemar obviously cant handle it, did obviously nothing this year. He is too small for middle. Fletcher has done well as a MLB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLASH83 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Fletcher and Clements would help the defense a lot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan07 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Rocky doesnt play MLB. Lemar obviously cant handle it, did obviously nothing this year. He is too small for middle. Fletcher has done well as a MLB. But he's old. I dont want another old FA bust here just for the $. It happens too often. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0mega Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Fletcher and Clements would help the defense a lot You won't see much difference if we don't beef up the D line. :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 But he's old. I dont want another old FA bust here just for the $. It happens too often. :doh: He is the same age as Marshall. He has proven that he can still play at a high level. He also wont be asking for as much as other MLBs we might go after. Fletcher would be a good option as he is playing at a high leve, and we can get a couple good years out of him which would give us time to draft someone next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOSKINS_08 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 I wouldn't mind getting them both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatboy41 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 well lets see what happens... if we get them both for a large price, hopefully it all works out, but you never know with the Redskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fdarugar Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 But he's old. I dont want another old FA bust here just for the $. It happens too often. :doh: No way would Fletcher bust, he is smart and plays hard...the only thing I worry about is declining skill. Fletcher has been a top MLB for ATLEAST 5 seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 You won't see much difference if we don't beef up the D line. :logo: I am not worried about the line. We are going to address the line in the draft. We will get a DE. With Griffin 100 % we can rely on Golston to play well enough. He is home grown talent and play well last year in his rookie year. We let him grow he will be good for us. So we get a DE in the draft, prefer Anderson myself, and get a cb or two with a MLB in FA and we will be in pretty good shape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfbovey Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Fletcher is a MLB right? So does that mean Lemar would switch to WLB and Rocky rides the bench again? I love Lemar but i sure hope Rocky beats him out in camp. If this is true and we get Fletcher and Clements, look for the Skins to shore up the middle of the Dline with Branch, since Fletcher is small for a MLB by NFL standards. It would mean that Lemar would compete with McIntosh for the starting OLB position. I'm hoping that Rocky wins, and that Lemar would back up all three positions and play a key role off the bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fdarugar Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 You won't see much difference if we don't beef up the D line. :logo: I have to agree 100%, we have 2 starting calibur players on our line right now, Carter and Griffin...we need some serious revampment in the rotation. Even if that does mean getting rid of Daniels and Renaldo. Hell, I think that Daniels and Renaldo take PT away from our young guys currently...both of these guys need to go, :2cents: . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLASH83 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 You won't see much difference if we don't beef up the D line. Draft Branch hes dominate in the middle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fdarugar Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 It would mean that Lemar would compete with McIntosh for the starting OLB position. I'm hoping that Rocky wins, and that Lemar would back up all three positions and play a key role off the bench. GW needs to stop being scared of playing the young guys. I doubt that in anyway Lemar would have a better camp than Rocky...undoubtably Rocky will make more mistakes BUT he will make more plays. Lemar will be the safer pick to start but this will hinder Rocky's developement. GW was to be one of the most stubborn SOBs in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0mega Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 I am not worried about the line. We are going to address the line in the draft. We will get a DE. With Griffin 100 % we can rely on Golston to play well enough. He is home grown talent and play well last year in his rookie year. We let him grow he will be good for us. So we get a DE in the draft, prefer Anderson myself, and get a cb or two with a MLB in FA and we will be in pretty good shape. I like Golston too, but not enough to bank the season on him. Right now he's an unknown quantity who's shown flashes - nothing more. Griffin at 100%? And why are we expecting this? I hope you're right, but again, I wouldn't have enough confidence to bank the season on it. I would love Anderson as well, but IMO that still leaves a hole at Tackle. Add some more beef to the Golston/Griffin/Sal/Montgomery rotation, and we're set. Let them fight it out and may the best man win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLASH83 Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 I agree I want rocky to start he needs to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 I like Golston too, but not enough to bank the season on him. Right now he's an unknown quantity who's shown flashes - nothing more. Griffin at 100%? And why are we expecting this? I hope you're right, but again, I wouldn't have enough confidence to bank the season on it. I would love Anderson as well, but IMO that still leaves a hole at Tackle. Add some more beef to the Golston/Griffin/Sal/Montgomery rotation, and we're set. Let them fight it out and may the best man win. I understand what you are saying. I honestly would be happy either way if we drafted Anderson or Branch. Both would be a huge help. Maybe we need more help at DT to help stop the run, but I am not really sure. But as I said, Branch or Anderson and I am happy. Even Gains. You have to know we will pick one of those three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Also, we want Golston to play to he can develop. If I remember correctly, one reason he was drafted so low was because he was in an accident or something. Something that put him in the hospital for awhile so people werent sure about him. If that happened he would have been round 2 or maybe even 1 I think. Cant remember exactly though so dont qoute me. EDIT - I swear... I keep typing "so" as "to"... Its starting to get annoying. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0mega Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 I understand what you are saying. I honestly would be happy either way if we drafted Anderson or Branch. Both would be a huge help. Maybe we need more help at DT to help stop the run, but I am not really sure. But as I said, Branch or Anderson and I am happy. Even Gains. You have to know we will pick one of those three. I hear that - I'd be fine with either Anderson or Branch. Either one would show our FOs desire to address the line. I love what I hear about Anderson, and get some serious wood everytime I think of a potential Peppers in B&G, but I really hate to think of the interior of the line going unaddressed. It's a pick your poison situation: either we draft Branch and continue to give QBs more time than we'd like, or draft Anderson and get mauled in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 To get Clements, we may have to give him Champ money. And Nate Clements ain't in the same league as Champ. Fletcher is getting old, but if we could sign him to a relatively cheap (for the skins that is) deal, it would be a nice addition to our linebacking corps. But here's the thing, we had a shutdown corner before and traded him. And we had a stud (and much younger) middle linebacker we got cheap on and let walk away when we later gave players from other teams crazy big deals. I want to be positive, but if you keep changing your longterm plan every year or so... well you just don't have a plan. Just say no to huge deals this year, Front Office. The defense is not one player away. Spread the money around and try to shore up the trenches -- it ain't sexy, but it's where the game is won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 These are two FAs that I hope are Skins next year. It's not like we are just randomly shopping for big names who don't fit the system. Clements was drafted by Gregg Williams. Clements is awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.