ES: Redskins free agency plan: just say no

[jobaga]

this is what frustrates me, the Skins' change their plan every year. Last year Jarmon in the supplemental draft, this year no 3rd round pick and free agent signing of Jarmon's replacement. Granted, Peppers wants to play OLB. Then you spend big $$$ on a guy playing a new position at 30-35 (assuming he will get a 5 year deal). Then you have 2 DEs playing OLB and 2 safeties that can't cover. Who covers a TE or RB....no one

[FatboysSkins]

Well, if the plan is to go to a 3-4, you'd think a guy like Peppers could play DE in that system, with Carter and Rak playing OLB.

I could envision that. Now, the question is, is that what Peppers wants to do?

Peppers already said that he wants to go to a team that is running the 3-4 so that he can transition to the linebacker position.:logo:

[Area51]

Yea, Andre Carter was let go from SF because of his play on the field. I mean, there is no way in hell the real reason that same 49ers team let go of ANY FA they had.

Take Julius Peppers, for example. Man, he sucked in San Fran and boy was he a bust for Seattle....oh wait, nevermind.

BTW, that was the same year the 49ers made the genius move of hiring Dennis Erickson. Oh, and I also recall how the [NEW] ownership was actually 'disappointed' in the teams' lack of success, believing they had the talent to win at least 5-6 games TOTAL...talk about lowered expectations...

Bottom line, ever since Michael York 'inherited' that team from his newly-wed wife, that team has been a joke. [And for anyone who wants to bring up on who "eager" they were to get rid of Brandon Lloyd, please get your facts straight. There is a reason why they tendered him the highest offer as a RFA]

[dfbovey]

Yea, Andre Carter was let go from SF because of his play on the field. I mean, there is no way in hell the real reason that same 49ers team let go of ANY FA they had.

They let him go because he wasn't performing very well in their new defense, which was a 3-4. That and he had struggled with injuries. His production fell off sharply. I remember this vividly because I had an argument with a Cowboy fan who didn't think Carter could get 10+ sacks in a year playing his natural RE position.

Could he have success here in a 3-4 when he didn't in San Fran? Maybe. But I wouldn't be willing to count on it.

[wildbill1952]

Dan Snyder continues to be the biggest competition this team faces.

That's so good that in 5 years I'll pretend I said it first instead of just stealing it from you.

[gaskinsfan]

Any younger starting Oline help would be great. Not going to get a starting left tackle, but maybe a guy that can compete at guard. OL or LB would be the only places I would look at FA to pick up a piece or two.

[dent19]

I agree that signing a big name just because he's a big name is bad for the team, but if Shanahallen have looked at our roster, and who's available in the draft and FA, and determine that a big name is the right fit for us, then I'm ok with it. As in, if we needed Peppers at DE (which we don't) I would be ok with the signing if both Allen and Shanahan signed off on it. However, just getting a big name because he's a big name isn't the way to do it.

Part of me knows the signing of "Big Named Players" are all to boost sales of Tickets, Merchandise , concessions. Snyder made a lot of money with those big names.

We didn't have a great team but Snyder at the least broke even.

[36HAMMER]

yes but not too much.they still need to wind up with one of the top 3lt's in my book.though i am getiing the feeling that theyare going to go after a qb we need soo much along the oline and only 5 picks minus a 32rd.it's a deep draft so do you trade picksfrom last year to get guys this year?i gues that dependant on wether next years draft is all that.how patient are the front office willing and able to be.how much will it cost.we need a player like berry at safety,it would help our secondary soo much as well as the rest of the defense.but our greatest area of need is lt,rt guard and center.also we need lb because we have holesand a mlb that is just about done at 35.this going to be crazy,to get what we need we will have to trade for some of them.which i don't mind as long as they are good and the picks are not and the players are young.

[Ryman of the North]

nope this article is a fail.

1- our problem has never been free agency its that we took some bad risks in free agnecy when we needed key players, thusly our busts looked even worse.

2- if we signed peppers we would be idiots not to use 4-3 principles and I think it would be criminal not to have a line up of Rak Griff Haynesworth and Peppers with carter subbing in a rotation. and using Rak as an OLB in obvious rush situations. as long as we were more aggressive wed be fine.

[Skinsinparadise]

The 04 defense was rebuilt it seemed overnight thanks to FA: Griffin, Springs, M. Washington, P. Daniels. When we had a big gap at middle linebacker -- London Fletcher was a great find. Andre Carter has been good. In their prime Rabach and Randy Thomas solidified the O line.

For the Gibbs 2 and post Gibbs 2 era don't see how FA has been some big disaster. I don't think Archuleta's signing, etc kills all the other good signings.

The disaster IMO have been trading draft picks -- Duckett deal, Lloyd, etc, etc. I thought part of the point of using FA is that it helps you avoid giving up draft picks in trades for players? But the Skins seem to like to do both, and that IMO has been their mistake.

And yeah I won't be crying if they sign FA's like Sproles.

[pez]

Could be that the Redskins are turning a corner... Maybe Jarmon will get his shot...

This should make for a very happy Murph

[pjfootballer]

Actually, if you count the selection of Jarmon, we have had at least 7 picks the last two years.

I'm not sure why you think drafting and signing FAs are considered mutually exclusive. I guess you are expecting the Skins to become the Steelers or the Colts. While they do have a successful formula, it isn't the only successful formula out there.

I don't think they are mutually exclusive. And technically you can't cound Jarmon. I believe a team has to have a balance of both. But over the last 5 or so years, because picks were traded away, we were forced to plug holes with FAs. I would love it if we became the Steelers or the Colts. They do it the right way. How can you argue with their success? Our way of signing the shiny objects and not concentrating on the draft hasn't worked.

I don't want us to not go after FAs, just go after the right ones. Go after the guys who fit the scheme. Save the 7 picks every year and if you absolutely "have" to trade a pick, make sure it is a good deal and not a whim. And we have had to rely on Compensatory picks over the years to have at least a full complement of picks. Think of what might have been had we kept most of our picks AND had 2 or 3 extra Comp picks.

[TheLongshot]

You resurrected this thread for little ol me? Color me flattered....

Before commenting, it seems that Murf's fears were not justified, as some of us suggested it might not.

I don't think they are mutually exclusive. And technically you can't cound Jarmon. I believe a team has to have a balance of both. But over the last 5 or so years, because picks were traded away, we were forced to plug holes with FAs. I would love it if we became the Steelers or the Colts. They do it the right way. How can you argue with their success? Our way of signing the shiny objects and not concentrating on the draft hasn't worked.

I don't argue with their success, tho a lot of that comes from a lot of consistency throughout the organization. Something that we've lacked in most of the 10 years Snyder has owned the team.

I don't want us to not go after FAs, just go after the right ones. Go after the guys who fit the scheme. Save the 7 picks every year and if you absolutely "have" to trade a pick, make sure it is a good deal and not a whim. And we have had to rely on Compensatory picks over the years to have at least a full complement of picks. Think of what might have been had we kept most of our picks AND had 2 or 3 extra Comp picks.

I doubt that the team felt that they were making bad deals when they made the trades that they did. I certainly don't think any of them were whims.

That being said, Gibbs was making a lot of short-term moves to win sooner rather than later. Some of those trades worked, some other didn't. Whether they worked or not, they came at the cost of the future. That changed in 2007 after the spectacular implosion of the 2006 team.