Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

ESPN: How Skins approach FA is anyones guess...


AKM311

Recommended Posts

Oh man...LOL @

"Imagine what the Redskins might offer for a receiver who actually can play.

Lloyd might have become an All-Pro if he could have drawn Adam Archuleta exclusively in coverage. Archuleta, effective as an in-the-box safety early in his career, collected $5 million in bonus money from the Redskins in 2006 before the team realized almost immediately that he wasn't right for their defense"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All though there was lots I disagreed with, at least he backed some up with positive things and said, what they do is not always bad.

But what really scared me was to see how much of our dead money was affecting our cap. If we managed our players better, that would help bigtime for our cap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last article sums it up perfectly...Snyder has the potential to be a great owner if he would get better football men advising him when to open the checkbook and when to keep it closed.

according to Wilbon, Vinny disagreed with Arch and wanted Joe Jurevicious over Lloyd, but Williams and Saunders got their guys. Maybe he's smarter than people think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...but overall a pretty accurate article.

How can one accept his figures as fact when he can't even understand that MB isn't even on our roster and is a FA? If he would have checked, there was a clause in MB's contract which made him a FA due to lack of play, or snaps. Lazy reporting discredits the entire story. Just like we are only $3.9M over the cap right now. This guy repeats others and does not conduct any due diligence; thus, he has no credibility with me and can be labeled a moron like all the other reporters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't say that this article was fair at all. This article was absolutely pointless. Everyone already knew that we were 20 million over the cap. It's 2 weeks before free agency and we're at 4 million over. By the time, free agency starts we'll be well under. So why is he writing this article again?

Plus from my understanding, Snyder's spending is part of what drives the players to perform. They know he's willing to do anything to win unlike most other owners. That's also what keeps us attractive to free agents and will be a key factor to the acquisition that puts us over the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last article sums it up perfectly...Snyder has the potential to be a great owner if he would get better football men advising him when to open the checkbook and when to keep it closed.

I agree completely. I even copied that quote so I could paste it in my post (so here is the complete quote):

"The Redskins are fortunate to have an owner willing to spend whatever it takes to improve his roster. They'll be even better off when Snyder proves he knows when to keep the checkbook in his suit pocket."

It's hard to argue with that. I'm hopeful that last season Danny learned a lesson. The problem hasn't necessarily been in getting FAs, it's been in grossly overpaying for FAs or trade acquisitions that most people recognized as bad deals.

Otherwise, nothing really new in that article. We all know the Redskins carry a ton of dead money every year, but time is the only way to get rid of that (and not continuing to add to it).

I found it interesting that the Giants are one of the highest dead money teams, so clearly dead money isn't a season killer.

Hail,

H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone wants to take the stance of "look at how they failed with free agents". Just imagine if B Lloyd had worked out as planned. We would have three very solid receivers that can catch. If Lloyd had been making those crazy effort catches for us over the last few months we would be in great shape as well as our offense having been much more productive last year and possibly carried us along our hot streak to greater things.

Everyone in the media and some here speak of the cap as if it is some God induced line of obedience. It is a number. Has the team ever ended up over the cap? Have we ever not obtained the player we thought would help us out? Who cares if we are over the cap and Lloyd is cut. Arch & Lloyd didn't come and play as we thought - so what. Get rid of them and start over. Stockpiling talent isn't an exact science - it is a game played by making best guesses based on past experiences. I am responsible for attracting talent and building winning sales teams at my job. I've made my sales number every year/quarter since the beginning of my career. For me it is the same - a best guess based on my past experience and gut feeling.

Could be worse - we could have signed Jamarcus Russel for 70 million before realizing that he probably isn't smart enough to play in today's NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually thought that was a very objective, fair article. He pointed out the bad side, but also metioned the good we have had.

Is this some new guy at espn? Didn't he get the "we hate the Redskins" memo yet?

Sure the figures might not be 100% accurate, but compared to what most of the media turns out these days, this is quality stuff!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can one accept his figures as fact when he can't even understand that MB isn't even on our roster and is a FA? If he would have checked, there was a clause in MB's contract which made him a FA due to lack of play, or snaps. Lazy reporting discredits the entire story. Just like we are only $3.9M over the cap right now. This guy repeats others and does not conduct any due diligence; thus, he has no credibility with me and can be labeled a moron like all the other reporters.

Technically, Brunell still is a Redskin and his salary still is on the books. His contract has voided but that doesn't become effective until midnight on 2/29.

The Redskins could cut him between now and then and then the net savings of about $3 million would go on the books right away, but it's the same either way.

Certainly, the Portis as a FA reference was a goof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...