Veretax Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 here's a thought... we let them have fletcher and give us drey bly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins4481 Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 THe jetts have two problems1 They need a running back, someone that can carry the ball pretty well. 2 They have a growing locker room problem with Vilma we are happy with betts, and can get buy with out Vilma. When did that happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veretax Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 the first thread I saw about this rumor indicated vilma wasn't happy being in a 3-4 offense and somehow it translated to the locker room if that's false then someone posted incorrect info (shocker) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 When did that happen? I don't know,I just like Vilma!:laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bossman_SKins Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 we should just a price limit as to how far we'd bid for fletcher and just stick to it. but i got a feelin snyder wouldnt want to be outbid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigolRiggo44 Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Both are Ohio guys, and I like em both Clements is fast as hell and fletcher led the conference champion rams in tackles when they were the greatest show on turf... good stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sith lord Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Like many have already said or thought. Here we go again. When will this organization ever learn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supadrummer Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 They need to resign Chris Cooley before they get either of those players. I got a feeling the front offices will goof this up and again we will lose a talented player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 from pft.comPOSTED 9:09 a.m. EST; LAST UPDATED 10:21 a.m. EST, February 15, 2007 FLETCHER-BAKER TO BE IN DEMAND In what's either a sign that the free-agent market will be lighter than usual in 2007 or that there's a sudden demand for thirtysomething linebackers who are a couple of inches shy of six feet, London Fletcher-Baker of the Bills is already on the shopping list for at least two teams. On Wednesday, the Washington Post reported that the Redskins plan to make a play for both Fletcher-Baker and Bills teammate Nate Clements, a cornerback. We've also heard that the Lions intend to take a flyer on Fletcher-Baker in the early stages of free agency. The winner in the process will be Fletcher-Baker. We don't want to knock the guy's abilities, and we're impressed that he has never missed a game in nine NFL seasons. But the apparent fact that two teams who are notorious for overpaying in the early days of the Super Bowl supermarket plan to make a run for him means that he'll likely end up with far more money in his pockets than he objectively would merit. Statistically, Fletcher-Baker had one of the best years of his career in 2006, his fifth season with the Bills. He registered 104 tackles, 42 assists, two sacks, four interceptions, seven passes defensed, and a touchdown. He also spent four seasons with the Rams, and started all 16 regular season games as St. Louis made an improbable run to the NFL Championship. Since when is he London Fletcher-Baker? Is he pulling a Damanic Davis (Williams) or Michael Jackson (Dyson) of the Browns? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Shot Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 out of curiousity, how many of you would support clements coming to washington if Springs left? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterPinstripe Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I would. If springs left we would pretty much have to get him I think. Unless his asking price was just outrageous. :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Shot Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 alright well the reason im asking is another thread was talking about how springs's return is unlikely (i don't know how much truth there is to that) and i know that many people didn't want to pursue clements because of his high asking price, but I think if Springs leaves then we should definitely sign Clements. I already support the idea, if Springs left I would support it hands down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I really want us to sign Clements as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOSKINS_08 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 out of curiousity, how many of you would support clements coming to washington if Springs left? I think we should try and get Clements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THUNDERDOME Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 If we could get both of em and not destroy cap space that would be ok.....but we all know how that works with snyder.....i just hope if we bring them in it doesnt cause any chemistry issues....but with the way they played last year..could it get any worse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjoiram Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 i'd rather get smoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 i'd rather get smoot Why? I liked Smoot as much as the next guy when he was here but I really don't think he is a #1 corner; he would probably be a nickel guy and we don't really need that. We need a true top tier corner who is pretty young and can stay healthy. Sure, he'd come with a much lower price tag but we would just be getting another "ok" CB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HEavyJumbo85 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Since when is he London Fletcher-Baker? Is he pulling a Damanic Davis (Williams) or Michael Jackson (Dyson) of the Browns? I actually thought I remembered hearing that the last name addition is his new wife's maiden name. He apparently just tacked it on the back when they got married, like Courtney Cox Arquette :laugh: . Not something a man usually does, but I'm pretty sure that's what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0mega Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I actually thought I remembered hearing that the last name addition is his new wife's maiden name. He apparently just tacked it on the back when they got married, like Courtney Cox Arquette :laugh: . Not something a man usually does, but I'm pretty sure that's what it is. It was to honor his grandfather or something like that. ______ Baker. Not his wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceviker Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 It was to honor his grandfather or something like that. ______ Baker.Not his wife. That's respectable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsngibbs4life Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 alright well the reason im asking is another thread was talking about how springs's return is unlikely (i don't know how much truth there is to that) and i know that many people didn't want to pursue clements because of his high asking price, but I think if Springs leaves then we should definitely sign Clements. I already support the idea, if Springs left I would support it hands down. I think if springs leaves it is almost a must. Clements is the only real starting CB left out there. While others might have started in the past (smoot) they arn't exactly reliable anymore. Clements is young (27?) so it would help sure up the CB position for years to come with a tandem of him and rogers. Price tag or not, i think it is a must if Springs leaves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyndorf25 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Actually....these are the only big name moves I wouldn't mind seeing. It's not like we're reaching for another bust like AA when we already had Clark. These are holes in our defense that can be immediately improved. If we're going to pickup any other FA's, I just hope that they're the typical character-type players Coach Gibbs sees fitting in. I agree these are areas that need to be adressed. Having Fletcher in the middle will allow Marshall to play on the outside, where he belongs, IMO. As for Clements, I like the idea of him coming here, but Im not sure if paying him what he will likely want will be worth it...and not at the expense of Shawn Springs. If there is a way to have Springs and Clements with Rogers as the 3rd CB then this defense should be in great shape. However this scenario might just be too unweildly towards the cap. Another interesting prospect at CB might be Rodrick Hood. But again, I say this team should do what it can to keep Springs--even if he has lost a step, he still had a step to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweetness09 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I agree these are areas that need to be adressed. Having Fletcher in the middle will allow Marshall to play on the outside, where he belongs, IMO.As for Clements, I like the idea of him coming here, but Im not sure if paying him what he will likely want will be worth it...and not at the expense of Shawn Springs. If there is a way to have Springs and Clements with Rogers as the 3rd CB then this defense should be in great shape. However this scenario might just be too unweildly towards the cap. Another interesting prospect at CB might be Rodrick Hood. But again, I say this team should do what it can to keep Springs--even if he has lost a step, he still had a step to lose. So where does this logic leave our top pick from last year? Does Rocky have a role in your plans or is he going to essentially sit another year on the bench getting older? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Day Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I think Springs leaving is almost a done deal. Too much has been leaked for it not to be true in my opinion. With both players we have basically two realistic options. We need starters and GW does not start rookies so drafting a MLB or CB #1 is not realistic for this year. Clements 1. Sign him and make Springs a June 1st cut and it is basically a wash on the salary cap. This move is pretty likely to happen. I support it as long as we also sign another CB as the nickle and retain wright as the number 4. I would love to see Hood as the three but it won't happen so Ricky Manning Jr or Smoot are probables. 2. Don't sign Clements and go for Harper (32 yrs old I believe) or Hood. Hood has shown up well when asked to start but that would leave either him or CR as a number w1 cb which is not so favourable in my opinion. It could work with Springs in a cover Safety role but I don't think he will be here next year. Fletcher-Baker 1. Sign him and draft a mlb early next year. 2. Go for the mlb from KC Kiwanke Mitchell (SP) -Fletcher gives you experience and knowledge of the system (He is the Favorite for those reasons) -Mitchell brings youth athleticism and size. I prefer mitchell and the Clements route. My favorite option would be to actually keep springs, sign clements (unprecedented versatility in the secondary) and sign mitchell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 why not suck it up...accept the reality of the situation....and build this team over 2-3 years through the draft? kinda like San Diego? then coast for 5-6 years with late first round picks ...:-).....that replenish areas of need. we keep repeating these faulty "get rich quick" strategies that simply do not work. The FO has had the wrong vision all along. we will always be in a 2 year cycle instead of a 6 year cycle as long as we ignore the draft as the foundation to longevity and competitive football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.