ESPN.com-Sources: 48 percent share for players

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I wouldn't make Moss a priority at all.

[MattFancy]

I wouldn't make Moss a priority at all.

I'd bring him back, but I wouldn't break the bank for him. I'm a little nervous going into the season with Armstrong, Hankerson, Paul, Kelly, and the other rookie we drafted. I'd like to see a veteran in there somewhere.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

For those of you keeping score at home.

The current formula has the owners taking $1 billion off the top and the players getting 60 percent of the remaining $8 billion. The players got $4.8 billion.

The owners wanted $2 billion off the top and a 50/50 split of the remainder. This meant the players got $3.5 billion.

The new deal is 48 percent of $9 billion. The players get 4.32 billion.

They split the goddamn difference.

What' date=' you don't believe that should have taken 3 months?

---------- Post added June-21st-2011 at 04:42 PM ----------

I wouldn't make Moss a priority at all.

I agree...if we're going to sign a veteran FA WR, why not go for someone with more size or who is younger? I love what Moss did for us over the years, but this year is as good a time as any to cut ties with the Gibbs guys and move forward.

[AKM311]

I agree...if we're going to sign a veteran FA WR, why not go for someone with more size or who is younger? I love what Moss did for us over the years, but this year is as good a time as any to cut ties with the Gibbs guys and move forward.

I disagree. Well kind of. I do think if we can land someone younger who can produce at a modest contract, then we should do so. But I don't see that happening.

With Moss we know what we are getting. He knows the system. He is still producing. So why not have him instead of a Chad Johnson, Sidney Rice, etc. when he fits better and is much cheaper?

[elkabong82]

What, you don't believe that should have taken 3 months?

---------- Post added June-21st-2011 at 04:42 PM ----------

I agree...if we're going to sign a veteran FA WR, why not go for someone with more size or who is younger? I love what Moss did for us over the years, but this year is as good a time as any to cut ties with the Gibbs guys and move forward.

Shanahan wants team leaders, Moss wants to retire a Redskin, and the insiders say the FO wants him back. Let him lead with vet experience, we have young guys, with size, to step up into the role, so why bring in a FA who doesn't know the system and will play for longer when the goal is to have one of the rookies replace Moss in a few seasons?

[MattFancy]

I disagree. Well kind of. I do think if we can land someone younger who can produce at a modest contract, then we should do so. But I don't see that happening.

With Moss we know what we are getting. He knows the system. He is still producing. So why not have him instead of a Chad Johnson, Sidney Rice, etc. when he fits better and is much cheaper?

I agree. With all the turmoil on offense last year, Moss was our most consistent guy and had a great year. People want Sidney Rice, but he's had one good season. Give me Moss who has proven he knows how to play here and could help the younger WRs grow. Like I said, I wouldn't break the bank to keep him, but I would certainly put him on the list of players I want to see back here.

[angel2]

I hope you're wrong, because NFLN games are God-awful!! But i see what you're saying.

Correct me if I am mistaken, but if the NFL Network carried the 16 game schedule on thursday nights how would it profit? Isn't the network owned by the NFL owners?

[Unforgiven]

Correct me if I am mistaken, but if the NFL Network carried the 16 game schedule on thursday nights how would it profit? Isn't the network owned by the NFL owners?

Ad revenue (commercials). Games draw a much larger audience and thus allow the network to charge more for commercial time.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Correct me if I am mistaken, but if the NFL Network carried the 16 game schedule on thursday nights how would it profit? Isn't the network owned by the NFL owners?

The owners would own a network that could charge higher ad rates and possibly higher fees to cable providers.

ESPN figured out the real way to make money is to extort the cable providers. People think of ESPN as "basic" cable, but it costs the providers a lot more money to carry it than, say, TLC.

[The Tris]

if we're going to sign a veteran FA WR, why not go for someone with more size or who is younger?

I'm curious who is this young, cheap, tall WR in FA you are thinking of.

[GhostofSparta]

I'm curious who is this young, cheap, tall WR in FA you are thinking of.

Anthony Mix

[angel2]

Ad revenue (commercials). Games draw a much larger audience and thus allow the network to charge more for commercial time.

What you suggest is true, but the NFLN would be wise and frugal to get another television network to carry the games on thursday nights, say one of the existing carriers of the games or maybe ABC Sports.

[Stew]

With losing Rogers this offseason, resigning Buchannon becomes much more important then resigning Moss in my opinion.

[angel2]

The owners would own a network that could charge higher ad rates and possibly higher fees to cable providers.

ESPN figured out the real way to make money is to extort the cable providers. People think of ESPN as "basic" cable' date=' but it costs the providers a lot more money to carry it than, say, TLC.[/quote']

That would upset Directv's programing strategy by letting a cable provider share Directv's market.

---------- Post added June-21st-2011 at 05:37 PM ----------

With losing Rogers this offseason, resigning Buchannon becomes much more important then resigning Moss in my opinion.

Let them both walk. Try out the new blood, that's what turn-over is all about.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

That would upset Directv's programing strategy by letting a cable provider share Directv's market.

What do you mean? Is NFL Network exclusive to Directv?

I have Directv so I don't know.

[skins2victory]

With losing Rogers this offseason, resigning Buchannon becomes much more important then resigning Moss in my opinion.

I agree with this, CB has me worried

[Stew]

---------- Post added June-21st-2011 at 05:37 PM ----------

[/color]

Let them both walk. Try out the new blood, that's what turn-over is all about.

I think if all we had was Hall and Buchannon, Barnes is still on the field the majority of the time and if we use more DB's then the young guys get game time reps as well. The problem is if we let Buchannon walk, then our only starting DB is Hall. Im all for Hall, Buchanon, Barnes and Whatever youth/fa gets inserted into the line up. I think not addressing the loss of Rogers would be a mistake.

Im more in line with your thinking if that line of thought were posed to the WR's. I think we have loads more potential with our young unproven wr's then with our group of unproven DB's. Id feel better letting our young wr's learn on the fly like Armstrong did last season, then I would be letting young inexperienced DB's cover in game time situations.

Either way though, we arent going to the superbowl so whatever the choice, Ill be fine with it.

[angel2]

What do you mean? Is NFL Network exclusive to Directv?

I have Directv so I don't know.

If you subscribe to the NFL Sunday Ticket package only offered by Directv, then you would know of its exclusivity rights. Directv has a contract with the NFL to carry the games. I can't imagine a cable provider getting in on the thursday night deal.

[AKM311]

I think if all we had was Hall and Buchannon, Barnes is still on the field the majority of the time and if we use more DB's then the young guys get game time reps as well. The problem is if we let Buchannon walk, then our only starting DB is Hall. Im all for Hall, Buchanon, Barnes and Whatever youth/fa gets inserted into the line up. I think not addressing the loss of Rogers would be a mistake.

Im more in line with your thinking if that line of thought were posed to the WR's. I think we have loads more potential with our young unproven wr's then with our group of unproven DB's. Id feel better letting our young wr's learn on the fly like Armstrong did last season, then I would be letting young inexperienced DB's cover in game time situations.

Either way though, we arent going to the superbowl so whatever the choice, Ill be fine with it.

While I agree we have more potential at WR than CB, it will not be a mistake if all the CBs worth getting get top dollar. We cannot just identify a need and sign whoever at whatever, just to address a need. It needs to take patience. We are not competing for a ring this year, so we need to take our time and find the right player (whether its a rookie or a veteran) at the right price.

---------- Post added June-21st-2011 at 09:49 PM ----------

If you subscribe to the NFL Sunday Ticket package only offered by Directv, then you would know of its exclusivity rights. Directv has a contract with the NFL to carry the games. I can't imagine a cable provider getting in on the thursday night deal.

Why? Wouldn't it be just like the current ThNF deal? Most cable providers have the NFLN, so we would get the ThNF game as well.

[Truant]

What do you mean? Is NFL Network exclusive to Directv?

I have Directv so I don't know.

NFL Network is not exclusive to Directv.

I think he's talking about Sunday Ticket. Taking one of the Sunday games and putting it on NFL Network lessens weakens the Sunday Ticket package and strengthens basic cable (so long as the basic cable has NFL Network). That could give people less reason to get/keep Directv and Sunday Ticket.

[addicted]

I agree...if we're going to sign a veteran FA WR, why not go for someone with more size or who is younger? I love what Moss did for us over the years, but this year is as good a time as any to cut ties with the Gibbs guys and move forward.

Man when in the heck are we ever going to stop loving other teams players and respect our own? Every single year, its the same thing. Free Agency doesn't mean you toss your own guys out, we need to keep our own players who produce.

I'd bring him back, but I wouldn't break the bank for him. I'm a little nervous going into the season with Armstrong, Hankerson, Paul, Kelly, and the other rookie we drafted. I'd like to see a veteran in there somewhere.

A little nervous? Who on this team last year did as well as 4th in receptions in the league like Moss did? In his first year in this offense, he was 4th best in the entire league man. You don't just replace that with some rookies. Who expects anything out of rookie WR's anyway? Our rushing game last year was 30th in the league. Without Moss we don't have any kind of offense to speak of. Seriously I can't understand how year after year we underappreciate our own players. I never seen another fanbase have such short term memory and undervalue its own family like this, its disgusting to me.

[Stew]

While I agree we have more potential at WR than CB, it will not be a mistake if all the CBs worth getting get top dollar. We cannot just identify a need and sign whoever at whatever, just to address a need. It needs to take patience. We are not competing for a ring this year, so we need to take our time and find the right player (whether its a rookie or a veteran) at the right price.

---------- Post added June-21st-2011 at 09:49 PM ----------

.

Im not sure we understand each other. Im not in favor of signing a FA cornerback for top dollar. I don't think we need to do all that. I also don't think Buchanon is a DB that would get "top dollar" on the open market. With that said, I think he could give us comperable production to what Rogers gave us, and he has been in this defense for a season already, and I think that makes him almost the best possability for our system, our needs. I would rather re-sign Buchanon to a two or three year deal giving Barnes time to grow another season in this scheme, and get his game time reps, before he gets put directly in as the #2 db.

We do agree that we arent going to win a Superbowl next season, and for that reason letting youth get reps and playing time in game situations should be important, but you don't throw in the towel before the season even starts. Year two in Shanny system, I expect a bette record then last year, hopefully 7-9/8-8.

[tr1]

Looks like the 4th of July was the deadline.

[angel2]

Why? Wouldn't it be just like the current ThNF deal? Most cable providers have the NFLN, so we would get the ThNF game as well.

I don't know if most cable providers have the NFLN. But I am sure if you have Directv you will get the new proposed Thursday Night NFL games.

[AKM311]

Im not sure we understand each other. Im not in favor of signing a FA cornerback for top dollar. I don't think we need to do all that. I also don't think Buchanon is a DB that would get "top dollar" on the open market. With that said, I think he could give us comperable production to what Rogers gave us, and he has been in this defense for a season already, and I think that makes him almost the best possability for our system, our needs. I would rather re-sign Buchanon to a two or three year deal giving Barnes time to grow another season in this scheme, and get his game time reps, before he gets put directly in as the #2 db.

We do agree that we arent going to win a Superbowl next season, and for that reason letting youth get reps and playing time in game situations should be important, but you don't throw in the towel before the season even starts. Year two in Shanny system, I expect a bette record then last year, hopefully 7-9/8-8.

My bad! I misunderstood you. I agree 100% with you! Except that I am not expecting a better record, but better play. Not putting us on a record this year as we do have a damn hard schedule (I think harder than last year) there for I am not comparing last years record to this years.

But I do agree with you 100% as far as what we should do at CB this FA.