33 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/around_the_nfl/post/Taylor-to-return-to-Washington;_ylt=ArHAY3kvFFNeYb.oAjI16Eo5nYcB?urn=nfl,143118 Taylor to return to Washington By Jason Cole INDIANAPOLIS - Despite an injury-riddled and disappointing season, Washington is expected to bring back defensive end Jason Taylor and not ask him to restructure his $8 million base salary for next season. "We're not doing anything with Jason," Washington vice president of football operations Vinny Cerrato said. "He's going to be with us and that's it. That's the plan." Taylor, 34, played in only 13 games with eight starts last season and was limited to 3 ½ sacks for the season. It was his lowest total since 1999, his third season in the league. That led to speculation that the Redskins would want to restructure his deal. "When we went there, remember, they asked us for a two-year commitment," agent Gary Wichard said. "Well, we asked them for the same thing." Click link for full story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarrellsMyHero28 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 :doh::redpunch::hammer: Stupid, stupid move. He's too expensive, and essentially ineffective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCommiesGo Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 You gotta be ****ing kidding me... 8mil for a 34 going to be 35 year old DE. Ohh shades of Bruce Smith over running the play for the QB travel through my head... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RammsteinSkins Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Good move, I think we should have restructured him though. He needs another chance to prove himself because he was practically injured the whole year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinklein Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 I like bringing him back, because I think he'll still be effective barring any more freak injuries, but seeing him restructure definitely would have been nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrifNick21 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Good move, I think we should have restructured him though.He needs another chance to prove himself because he was practically injured the whole year. I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DButz65 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Good move, I think we should have restructured him though.He needs another chance to prove himself because he was practically injured the whole year. Agreed, but they should of been like loook, take 5 Mil, and if you get 10+ sacks we'll give you a 5 Mil bonus or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJ Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 :doh::redpunch::hammer:Stupid, stupid move. He's too expensive, and essentially ineffective. If this is true, I totally agree. Yes, he Jason Taylor and had some great seasons, but he was ineffective last year and won't be much if any better next year. His 8 mill. salary SHOULD be used on other players of need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCommiesGo Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Good move, I think we should have restructured him though.He needs another chance to prove himself because he was practically injured the whole year. Why should we let him prove himself? You save 8 mil to cut him, you can use that cash to help re-sign Hall to a long term deal. And have enough to pay some mid-tier free agents. Are we going to suddenly switch him to RDE and move Carter to LDE? Their both to light to play LDE, stupid move by the FO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 how can an aging team that needs to get younger invest another $8M in a player that doesn't fit the defensive system the club is running? what this move amounts to is face-saving for Snyder and Cerrato. the team doesn't want to admit it got snookered by Parcells and gave up draft picks for a player that was in and out the door at Redskin Park this quickly. it's obvious why Taylor's agent is so happy. his client put up BUPKIS numbers for the team in 2008 and looks clearly beyond the point where anyone can count on him as a major contributor anymore. like Jon Jansen, Jason Taylor will be on the team for other than purely football reasons. and that in a nutshell is why the Redskins are not a winning organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsMaster88 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Agreed, but they should of been like loook, take 5 Mil, and if you get 10+ sacks we'll give you a 5 Mil bonus or something. Exactly, I wanted to see them restructure his deal by having incentives in there. The pressure on him to perform is going to be even more than last year. Hopefully the defensive coaches work out a good scheme to put him in. $8 million is way too much if he's only a situational pass-rusher like at times last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chump Bailey Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Whatever... I hope they try to at least have Carter and he switch positions to see if that helps any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RammsteinSkins Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Why should we let him prove himself?You save 8 mil to cut him, you can use that cash to help re-sign Hall to a long term deal. And have enough to pay some mid-tier free agents. Are we going to suddenly switch him to RDE and move Carter to LDE? Their both to light to play LDE, stupid move by the FO. He could get 10 sacks easily and then need double teams freeing up Andre so it could pay off. Cap room isn't that big of a deal, we could cut Griffin or Springs and save more then 10 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCommiesGo Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 how can an aging team that needs to get younger invest another $8M in a player that doesn't fit the defensive system the club is running? what this move amounts to is face-saving for Snyder and Cerrato. the team doesn't want to admit it got snookered by Parcells and gave up draft picks for a player that was in and out the door at Redskin Park this quickly. it's obvious why Taylor's agent is so happy. his client put up BUPKIS numbers for the team in 2008 and looks clearly beyond the point where anyone can count on him as a major contributor anymore. like Jon Jansen, Jason Taylor will be on the team for other than purely football reasons. and that in a nutshell is why the Redskins are not a winning organization. It's absolutely ridiculous to allocate more resources to aging non-productive players. I can't for the life of me see how this helps them, tie up 8 mil for a one year run? What the hell are we running at the? The superbowl? Reactionary stupid move, that is going to lead to an even dumber move to save face. Cut your losses admit you made a mistake and move on. We've got some morons working our FO. In short your right on the money bulldog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoCommiesGo Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 He could get 10 sacks easily and then need double teams freeing up Andre so it could pay off. Cap room isn't that big of a deal, we could cut Griffin or Springs and save more then 10 million. Do you think we have the personnel to make a serious run at a Lombardi? I sure as hell don't see that happening, you make decisions for the long term not the short term. This screams of a FO trying to cover their ass and not admit they got federal pound you in the ass raped by Parcells. ---Edit Griffin when healthy is the only DT that can collapse a pocket, without him you can bring edge rushers all day and all the QB has to do is step forward. Short sighted planning. Springs you cut him save some cash but then you have to resign Hall. Because Rodgers, Smoot and Tryon don't make me warm and cozy on the inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJ Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Well if we are going to be active in FA it looks like the money will continue to come from our players restructuring their contracts when it should come from Springs, JT being cut. VC/DS will never learn. When we end the season next year with a record similar to or worse than what we had last year, Zorn unfortunately will be the scape goat and fired. I hope that a big name coach that is available can convience DS to let VC go and blow the entire team up. I don't know what better solution exists. Man, I am hopping mad about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vigilante Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 With the right players surrounding him on the defensive line, I think Jason Taylor can still be effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWinzit Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 So it's okay to spend $8 mil on a broken down almost 35 year old yet we're willing to let the talented and youthful D Hall go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 At this point in the game, does it really matter? I understand the need to get younger, but since we are keeping him and not picking him up or trading for him why not just use him next year. The team can manage the cap this year and understand the 8 mil savings next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 If he's healthy, it's a good move, if he's not healthy, it's a bad move. And to all those "HE SHOULD HAVE BEEN RESTRUCTURED!" people, that is really silly. So, the way restructuring works is not that you give back money, but you essentially make the deal longer, guarantee money now, and then spread it over the length of the contract. And the only reason Taylor would accept a restructured deal would be if they offered him more money, since if they didn't he could just sit pat on the 8mil this year and then be a UFA next year. So, you'd have to give him more money to restructure, make the deal for 2-3 years, which means that if you cut him next year, the pro-rated amount of the money hits the cap next year. Which is why the 'Skins lead the league in dead cap space year after year. So the right answer here was to either cut him outright, which would carry no cap hit because Miami already paid for the signing bonus, or keep him with his current contract. For me, either is fine. If they had 7 draft picks, I would have said, cut the guy lose, draft his replacement. But with only 4 draft picks, it's going to take 2 off seasons to rebuild the D-Line, so I'm ok with having him stick around another year. And, they can cut him whenever they want without penalty, so if they decide to use that money for somebody else later, they can. This was probably the right move... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 So it's okay to spend $8 mil on a broken down almost 35 year old yet we're willing to let the talented and youthful D Hall go? I don't think Taylor is the reason they have not signed Hall. I want to see what kind of money he gets to determine if Hall is trying to break the bank or the skins are being stupid. Just have to wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo2173 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 I think this is a good move. JT can still be effective if healthy. Also if JT is staying we will probably part ways with Springs. We cant afford both high priced veterns. I would like to see springs be the one to go. Also if we do get Orakpo then he can fill in for Washington at SAM next year and if we need to move him to DE the following year after JT leaves then we can do that. Overall this deal is fine, assuming we still have enough cap space for De Hall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsMaster88 Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 So it's okay to spend $8 mil on a broken down almost 35 year old yet we're willing to let the talented and youthful D Hall go? That will really piss me off. If they let D. Hall walk (and potentially Rogers next season), while keeping mid-30s players in Springs and Taylor. Meanwhile, they'll try to feel that they can replace these guys with other FA CBs like Dre Bly or Bodden. :doh: What a nightmare scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 where does Taylor play on this defense? if the Redskins were going to cut Andre Carter I could potentially seeing him at RDE, but Carter's deal was re-done in the offseason. So it appears once again the Redskins are going to have a veteran player without a position looking to move around and play on a situational basis. And that is worth $8M? Come on folks. Let's admit that this is a 7-9 caliber team right now. Jason Taylor at 35 does nothing but maintain the status quo, if that. What this team needs to do is move FORWARD and acquire players that have an UPSIDE for the FUTURE I would rather see the Redskins go 4-12 next year and get a top 5 pick, then go 6-10 or 7-9 by keeping some of these geezers and delaying the inevitable for yet another season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 So it's okay to spend $8 mil on a broken down almost 35 year old yet we're willing to let the talented and youthful D Hall go? If they want to keep DHall, they will. They can do both. It really comes down to the number of draft picks. Since they only have 4, getting younger this off season is just not going to happen. So if they get rid of Taylor, then they're going to have to replace him in FA, most likely. And who knows what you're going to get and how much it's going to cost. The devil you know is better than the devil you don't. Remember, we're not operating with all of the info here: I'm sure that Vinny and Co. have explored options at DE through FA, and they came to the decision that this was the best they could do. Trusting Vinny to make that call is a complete separate issue for another thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.