redskindan07 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 I wonder how much he was asking for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CM916 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 He saw time in every game last year though he only started 3. It's a good depth signing for a year or two. You have to keep in mind that all the younger guys are restricted so you'll have a tough time signing anyone under 28 or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysaskin Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Hicks was on one of the best O-Lines in the league, He'll be good competition so far the Line hopefully will look like this after the draft: LT: Okung/Jones LG: Dockery/Hicks C: Liechtensteiger/Pouncey RG:Hicks/Rabach/Williams RT:Pashos/Williams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corrupt3d Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Oh yeah I forgot we had Lichtensteiger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hieverybody Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Hicks was on one of the best O-Lines in the league, He'll be good competition so far the Line hopefully will look like this after the draft:LT: Okung/Jones LG: Dockery/Hicks C: Liechtensteiger/Pouncey RG:Hicks/Rabach/Williams RT:Pashos/Williams Rabach is going to start at center. And I doubt we get Pashos now. Looks like we'll have Heyer for another year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter_R Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Rabach is going to start at center. And I doubt we get Pashos now. Looks like we'll have Heyer for another year. Yes, because there are no tackles in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfbovey Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 If you had told me before FA started that Hicks and Pashos would be the first two FAs the Redskins sign, I would have called BS. I like the Pashos signing. I think at the very least, he adds much needed depth at the tackle spot and could possibly push for a starting job vs. Heyer. Hicks, doesn't really move my excitement meter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfanno9 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 I'm all in favor of signing linemen that actually belong in the NFL to replace linemen who really don't, but somehow ended up on our roster. No, 31 ain't great, but a bunch of 30ish somethings who have started and can play is better than a bunch of scrubs who probably should be watching the game from the sports bar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfbovey Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Maybe they decided that Pashos was too big (6'6 326) for a ZBS. Height and weight have nothing to do with effectiveness in a zone blocking system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 If you had told me before FA started that Hicks and Pashos would be the first two FAs the Redskins sign, I would have called BS.I like the Pashos signing. I think at the very least, he adds much needed depth at the tackle spot and could possibly push for a starting job vs. Heyer. Hicks, doesn't really move my excitement meter. We didn't sign Pashos, did we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskinzfan30 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 We didn't sign Pashos, did we? No he's going to Cleveland for a visit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 We didn't sign Pashos, did we? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfbovey Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 We didn't sign Pashos, did we? Yeah, I hadn't read that part of the thread yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shannyman1 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 http://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/status/10096261807He is way too old...Good for depth maybe?? where do some of you guys get your opinions from....mad magazine? Nate Newton never made a pro bowl until AFTER he was in his 30's. Hicks is 31 so what makes him waaaaaaaaaaaaaay to old and washed up in your opinion? Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailinginSeattle Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Hey, I'll be 30 next month, and I am not washed up! I'm in my prime baby! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakinaiken Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 couldn't we have signed camp fodder in august? not that i dont like depth, but this guy is so mediocre.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoVaSkins21 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Hey, I'll be 30 next month, and I am not washed up! I'm in my prime baby! I agree to a certain extent. People assume that once players hit the big 3-0, it's all downhill from there. A lot of players can still get it done, especially QBs like a particular 40-year old one who played pretty well for the Vikings last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unforgiven Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Hicks was one of the top backups on one of best lines in the entire league. To say he's camp fodder is utterly ridiculous....we had starters last year that couldn't have made it as backups on the Vikings line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff in D.C. Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Some of you seem to think we signed Hicks for depth - I don't think we'd give him 3 yrs/9 mill $3 mill guaranteed for a backup. He's going to start. I wouldn't mind seeing Pashos here either, he's be an upgrade over what we have. Add another tackle in the draft plus a QB & RB and Bruce & Shanny could almost completely rebuild the offense in one offseason. I like what I'm seeing so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Some of you seem to think we signed Hicks for depth - I don't think we'd give him 3 yrs/9 mill $3 mill guaranteed for a backup. He's going to start. I wouldn't mind seeing Pashos here either, he's be an upgrade over what we have. Add another tackle in the draft plus a QB & RB and Bruce & Shanny could almost completely rebuild the offense in one offseason. I like what I'm seeing so far. Hicks will be battling Rinehart for the starting RG position and as depth at LT (where there is none) and at RT. I hope you've done your homework on Pashos. Not that great, coming off season ending surgery to his left shoulder and really isn't a fit for the ZBS. Pashos is also asking for too much money. Just because we are scraping the bottom of the barrel doesn't mean we have to accept whats down there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty-eight Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 MoveTheSticks Not a sexy signing but I know at least 2 other teams were hoping to land Artis Hicks... Good move by the Redskins Daniel Jeremiah ...former Ravens & Browns scout http://twitter.com/MoveTheSticks/status/10107104083 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hieverybody Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Yes, because there are no tackles in the draft. If you bothered reading my post and the one I was commenting on, you'd see that my response assumed that we draft a LT. Go back to trolling JC threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff in D.C. Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Hicks will be battling Rinehart for the starting RG position and as depth at LT (where there is none) and at RT.I hope you've done your homework on Pashos. Not that great, coming off season ending surgery to his left shoulder and really isn't a fit for the ZBS. Pashos is also asking for too much money. Just because we are scraping the bottom of the barrel doesn't mean we have to accept whats down there. Thanks for the info, I didn't really know Pashos' reputation if he was really good/good/not very good/mediocre. Sounds like we could do much better than him then. I do like the Hicks signing, I think he'll help and improving depth is a huge thing as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L30L Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 No. That's a yes than... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskinzfan30 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 That's a yes than... One of TK's earlier posts said that he asked for too much so no we didn't sign Pashos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.