When will we EVER learn? Redskins fans, some of the biggest hypocrites around .....

[1972FAN]

Sorry I fell asleep after reading We're? Boring,,,,ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZz

[Califan007 The Constipated]

By all accounts, from every coach and player I hear on him, like London he's a unique locker room influence loved by all that leads by example. I wouldn't want him to see much of the field if at all next year, but I could maybe find a roster spot for all he brings off the field.

Hail.

If I could field an entire team of players with the heart, intelligence, maturity and character of Fletcher and Daniels, I'd rarely have a losing season.

But still, wouldn't you prefer giving his roster spot/playing time (regardless of how small it may end up being) to a player who would be close to 14 years younger? lol...

I should add though, I hope/presume that Chris Wilson doesn't make the team. After four years, he hasn't proven he can be more than a meddling, sparsely effective backup. And he's 29. If we were to replace his spot on the roster, along with HB Blades' (who is only 26), with say a 31 year old inside linebacking veteran, I think that's a good move.

Yes, technically, we get older. But Blades doesn't have a long-term future here any more than Wilson or this hypothetical ILB. Plus, between Fletcher (35), Riley (23), and Henson (25), we have inside linebackers that are on the polar extremes of age. I think this team needs a veteran linebacker to take over for Fletcher when he inevitably declines/retires. And provide stable, spot-starting duties, with competition in camp/practice. Of course, I love Lorenzo Alexander as a player on this team and am hopeful he can be a highly effective run-stopping ILB, I like him more as that wild card linebacker who can do a bit of everything.

And to clarify, if we can add a free agent nose tackle, I don't expect Bryant to be back (with Neild ideally winning that backup spot). Sellers I'm not sure makes it but Shanahan seems to like him, he still excels on special teams, is one of those Fletcher/Daniels type lockerroom vocal leaders, and isn't a bad 52nd or 53rd guy to have on the team (filling the sort of Rock Cartwright role of old).

I also expect us to sign a veteran corner to go along with Hall, Barnes, and Westbrook. Maybe two. And who the hell knows what Shanahan plans to do on the offensive line -- he did mention a while back that he wanted our young guys like Robinson and even Lichensteiger to be ideally backups, but there's no way I'll be able to find that quote.

For a rebuilding team, it really seems like we're going to have a relatively paltry amount of veterans, 30 years and older

My main fear with keeping Sellers is if he continues to slide in his production and play like it appears he's been doing over the past few seasons. Might be worth keeping someone like Young instead (ironic name, I know lol)...

Free agency is not evil...picking the wrong free agent is evil.

Going against conventional wisdom about the Cowboys is apparently evil as well lol ...

[CommDownMan]

Not true about dead cap money.

If they sign 4 year deals and play 4, they have no future dead cap space. Which is why the length of the deal for 30 yr old vets is more important than anything else.

What we have been used to seeing in the past has been 6 yr large contracts. We know the player will only play 3-4 years at a high level. Which is what leads to dead cap space because 2-3 years are remaining on the contract.

I meant when they get cut from not performing, I wasn't very clear there.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

Oh, if it came down to a younger guy I projected as being here for a good duration, he'd get the lot Cali, no doubt. And of course FA changes a lot. I was just going on an "as of now" scenario, and right now, given our choices, I cold find one place out of 53 for PD.

Hail.

[jflow78]

On veteran leadership, let's not forget we've players along the lines of Alexander (28- 6yrs); Cooley (28- 7 yrs); Doughtey (28- 5yrs); Hall (27- 8 yrs) and even Landry at 26 with 4 yrs who should be stepping up within the locker room.

Hail.

Out of all those, Alexander and maybe Doughtey are the only ones who are actually leaders. Landry regularly shows up to zero off season events, Cooley's had the chance to be a leader several times and hasn't stepped up in that role (nor do I believe he has the personality to do that), and Hall is what he is, a corner who talks trash and plays his lights out.

Of the starters you named, only Alexander fits the bill as a leader, IMO. That's why I say we have London, Atogwe, Rabach, Alexander, and you could consider Beck as actual leaders (since he seemed to be pulling people together this off season), other than that I don't think we've got any more.

But, I also don't know that we need any more "leaders". I think we need more guys who are examples, and even though Landry never shows up for the off-season, I'd say he and a lot of other guys are good examples during the season. They practice hard and play with everything they've got.

I actually think our team is set up fairly well right now. I don't want to bring in more than an OL or two, really, and that's only because I don't believe we can answer all our needs on OL (or even depth) in next year's draft. We need a RT, unless we can resign Brown, and I wouldn't cry if we got a center (or guard so that one of our guys can switch to center, like Montgomery).

[Bang]

I have no problem with them spending money.

I have a problem with them spending money on players that don't fit.

if they want to throw tens of millions at a guy we need and does fit, such and a Nnamdi Asamoghua, what is the problem?

~Bang

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I have no problem with them spending money.

I have a problem with them spending money on players that don't fit.

if they want to throw tens of millions at a guy we need and does fit, such and a Nnamdi Asamoghua, what is the problem?

~Bang

He's 30 and all 30 year old football players are useless.

You realize that by this logic, James Harrison would never have been allowed to be a starter.

Also, this leader horse **** is hardly relevent. The team needs players and talent. If that talent is 30...so be it.

Deciding that the young guys who have never played before should be starters is just the opposite of what Gibbs did where once you were given a big contract, you could never lose your job. Unless you were Archuleta.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I don't want the Skins to draft 11 guys a year and have them all make the roster. Down that path madness lies. I want the Skins to have 9 to 10 picks a year and get four to five good players out of that.

If you draft four or five quality guys a year and add two to three solid Free Agents' date=' you will compete for a division within two years and a Super Bowl within four.[/quote']

My opinion is this team is not ready to add 3-4 starters via FA yet. I really want to see 1 year, just 1, where we play young guys, let them get experience, grow and develop together and see what happens.

At that point you start filling in the holes, move people around who aren't what you expected and use resources besides the draft to do it.

If the CBA somehow blows up and we end up only playing 10 games, this would be the perfect season for it.

[CrypticVillain]

I have no problem with them spending money.

I have a problem with them spending money on players that don't fit.

if they want to throw tens of millions at a guy we need and does fit, such and a Nnamdi Asamoghua, what is the problem?

~Bang

Apparently, he is old and he can only play man coverage. He doesn't have the skills to play zone.

:doh:

[darrelgreenie]

Out of all those, Alexander and maybe Doughtey are the only ones who are actually leaders.

I wouldn't be surprised if coach Gray gets the Titans to sign Doughty/Horton.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

My opinion is this team is not ready to add 3-4 starters via FA yet. I really want to see 1 year, just 1, where we play young guys, let them get experience, grow and develop together and see what happens.

Who are these magical ****ing "young guys?" Seriously, what do you need to see from...whoever the hell you are talking about?

Our roster has no talent. None. Giving guys with no talent "experience" means that they will be no talented guys with experience.

You seem convinced that the Skins are a Triple A Hockey team.

Here is something that no one seems to be considering. You can roll out a team of scrubs and rookies and whatever in MLB and the NBA and nothing bad happens. You can even do it to some degree in hockey.

If you do it in the NFL, people get hurt.

[Oldfan]

SkinsTil I Die,Because a player picked higher means he's a better player, right? C'mon, I don't have to give you a list all of the QBs that were picked in the middle-to-late first round that far outperformed their peers picked higher in the draft. My point is that we will be able to grab a superb QB prospect more or less regardless of where we pick -- he might not be the highest acclaimed prospect heading into the draft, but ultimately that's meaningless.

Because a player is picked higher, he’s PROBABLY a better player. QBs drafted #1 hit at about a 48% rate. The hit rate drops sharply after that. The hit rate varies by position, but the #1 selections hit at a higher rate for all positions.

And currently, we have so much youth with comparatively so few veterans that our youth will get a chance regardless. If Jarmon plays well enough in practice and proves he's worth being given playing time, he'll get some. If he doesn't, he won't, and we're no worse off. All it means is that he is replaceable next offseason, for younger and better.

We’re going to add more FA vets. But, however many vets we have on the roster, my principle holds. The more reps the young guys get, the better their development will be.

I agree with you. I'm not talking about overpaying big names in free agency. I'm talking about adding valuable veterans to an incredibly youthful roster. We had 12 draft picks this year. 6 might make the team. That's a phenomenal grab -- hopefully we can continue this run next year, supplemented by further free agents as we re-make the makeup of the team.

I would put this team into rebuilding mode until we have a solid core of young players built. Until that happens, I would sign only FAs 26-27 years old. That plan would probably sacrifice two years, but it would provide the thrust necessary to blow us out of the mediocrity treadmill.

How can you possibly make the claim that he[Moore] doesn't need veteran guidance? You don't think a veteran would've helped him learn a few things about taking proper angles, about studying opposition, anticipating? Improving his mental game? Because by all accounts, he is physically an NFL player -- he's got great hands, a great leaper, he's got size and speed. It's his mental game that's lacking. Clearly his position coach hasn't done enough.

If the position coach can’t teach him those things, either the position coach or Moore should lose his job. Signing a veteran to take most of the snaps at FS is counter-productive on a team that isn’t one or two players away from being championship caliber.

And one could argue that OJ Atogwe IS a long-term solution. In the NFL, with such season-to-season roster upheaval (something like 20% on average per season I believe, though I can't recall where I read then), 4 or 5 years is a long time to be with a team. It's the rest of the duration of Shanahan's contract.

Atogwe showed lots of promise early in his career, but his star faded. He’s an average player now and his grade is expected to decline. 4 or 5 years of good service is too optimistic in his case.

Why do you believe we have to draft and groom 22 starters? When Atogwe declines and is no longer a starting-caliber safety, what's to stop us from signing another free safety to step in? What's to stop us from SIGNING Nate Allen whenever is contract is up, 3 or 4 years from now (after all, the Eagles won't be able to keep all of their young talent in Jackson, Maclin, McCoy, Vick, with other high-priced vets like Peters, while Andy Reid will almost certainly be gone by then. but I digress).

I don’t believe we have to draft and groom 22 starters. But I think we need four to six more before we start looking for FA gap fillers. If we do fairly well in the draft, we could be there in two years.

I should also add, and I'm curious -- in your mind, is Anthony Armstrong/Kory Lichensteiger/Ryan Torain a draft pick or a free agent? This doesn't really have any bearing on any argument.

I’d classify them as FAs and I’d sign all those you can find because they are young and cheap. They aren't all likely to become average NFL starters, but we could hit on one of the three.

Yes it does. How much time and commitment will most players put in in the film room if the season is already deemed lost? It's human nature. Not everyone is a London Fletcher.

The player we want is the guy who is trying to get better regardless of whether win or lose.

And I have to ask -- this is also vaguely off-topic but I think it's applicable -- if London Fletcher was a free agent right now, would you sign him to a 1-year deal?

No. I would probably cut him and allow him to sign with a team with a better chance to win another ring.

If you wouldn't sign him, then surely that means you would cut him? You couldn't possibly be in support of us starting a 35 year old on this team?

Right.

Bill Belichick would staunchly disagree with you. Over the last decade, he has added a number of key veterans discarded from other teams --

Bill added those players as gap fillers. He didn’t add them to help him coach and motivate. And that was the point we were discussing.

We need players like Artis Hicks and Adam Carriker to come in and compete. We need players like Jamaal Brown and OJ Atogwe to come in and solidify major holes in our lineup. If we hadn't signed Brown last year, would you have wanted Heyer to start? Or Selvish Capers? .

Adam Carricker is 27 and could become a useful player going forward. Brown, Hicks and Atogwe are not long-term solutions.

Frankly, that seems like the Cerrato mold.

Absurd. Cerrato, like Bruce Allen, probably doesn't know what the word "rebuild" means.

Completely agree. That's generally been the Eagles way, for about half of their promising young over the last decade. Though we don't have too many players to re-sign -- I'd be for re-signing Fred Davis but I'm not certain he isn't looking to bolt for a better chance to start somewhere else.

I would favor trading Cooley for the best pick I could get, then re-signing Davis. Alternatively, Mike could go to a two TE base, so we’d keep both.

If Atogwe can give us 3 good years starting at free safety, he'll be more than worth it.

In that time, we can spend our high draft picks rebuilding the lines and adding to the front seven..

I place no value on Atogwe because I place no value on the wins of a mediocre, or less than mediocre, NFL team.

In Mike Shanahan's first season, he instilled a competitive spirit within the team. We had less talent on the field than even most Redskins teams in recent memory, but we were in it in the 4th quarter in almost every game we played (the Eagles debacle notwithstanding).

You think Mike had less talent to work with than Jim Zorn? For that to be true, all the changes Mike made would have had to subtract from the roster. Is that your final answer?

i

t doesn't just happen. It's a process. And you can't do it with a team of only 22-27 year olds. That's never how it's worked in the NFL, and that's not how it's ever going to work. And it would be impossible to keep all of those players -- if they were to all pan out as you hoped -- from signing elsewhere in free agency.

Now, you’re shooting from the hip. By avoiding all but the young, cheap FAs, we could build a core of young talent and afford to resign them, or at least most of them. Green Bay did it. The Steelers did it. The Patriots did it.

Because you love Belichick (don't we all), look back at all of those old Patriots teams. Look at how many veterans he added, from one offseason to the next. Sometimes they were high-priced, other times they were below the radar.

What high-priced FAs were added to the Patriots roster? How many FAs added were starters? Most were cheap gap fillers. Bill doesn't pay anybody enough money to land free agent starters. He doesn't keep his own guys when they want big paydays.

And if you don't think that a player like Robert Henson would get more out of playing 40 snaps a game in a win or a close loss then 70 snaps a game in a blowout loss (which is what we would be facing if we were to, say, start all 12 rookie we drafted and only play the players that we have -- that are 27 years old or less -- for 16 games a season) -- then you're crazy.

Did you notice that last season, when Mike started the younger guys, after the team was mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, that the team played better? Why? Because the vet starters weren’t very good, but like most coaches, Mike is reluctant to replace vets with young guys -- afraid he might lose a football game because of inexperience -- even if the vets are playing lousy.

He was playing at a much higher level then "average," and the number of turnovers that he's caused in that time is unquestionably "elite." Who's to say his performance will decline? He's never played with a strong safety as good as Laron Landry. He's never played with a pass rusher as good as Brian Orakpo. Perhaps Haslett will put him in the ideal spots for him to succeed. Perhaps he won't be asked to do as much as he will before. Predicting his level of play at this juncture is essentially an exercise in futility. By all means, he could have a career year. With the way top professionals exercise, eat, train, and prepare themselves physically and mentally, 30 might be the new 28, especially for someone like Atogwe.

After the McNabb trade, I authored a thread predicting that he would not be much of an upgrade over Campbell. The arguments that opposed me were as homer-optimistic as the one you just gave for Atogwe.

I rested my case on the fact that Andy Reid knew more about McNabb than anyone and he found him expendable. I think the Rams know more about Atogwe than anyone else -- and they found him expendable. I rest my case.

He's not. And even after signing him, we're still $45 million below the salary cap basement. His presence, logistically, will not alter a single move that we would like to make, from a salary cap standpoint, at any point during his duration with the Redskins.

This is a claim that you could not possibly support. When we bump up against the salary cap, all the contracts will have their effect. Atogwe’s can’t be excluded.

Wins always mean something. You're not a player (and neither am I, I know), so it's hard for you (us) to understand that. But many players after the Jacksonville game spoke about how important that game was for their confidence, their belief in the system and each other. Cooley spoke fairly extensively if I recall. Don't you think Kevin Barnes has replayed his key interception in OT in his head over and over and over? It's plays like that that will give him necessary confidence to evolve as a player and develop. Football, like any sport, is a game of confidence. Wins intrinsically shape confidence. And it's why a relatively 'mediocre' team like the Giants can go on the type of run at the end of the season to win a Super Bowl.

Confidence is an effect nor a cause. When they build a better team, they will win games. When they win games, they will gain confidence. But, when they face an even better team, they will lose. That confidence won’t help them a bit.

Who's to say a player like Gomes isn't taken under the wing of Atogwe and develops into a key special teamer and backup because of it? Or, who knows, even a starter? Or perhaps another player next year?

Is that an argument? Does something remotely possible count as evidence?

Orakpo has talked extensively about how much of an impact Fletcher has had on him. Veteran leadership is essential for young talent to blossom. Atogwe, by virtue of age and experience, becomes an immediate alpha dog in the lockerroom. He's exactly the type of alpha dog you want. Sean Taylor's maturation was partially credited for his decision to switch lockers and move across the room to be locker buddies with, I believe, Renaldo Wynn and another vet (Philip Daniels?).

It was determined that Sean Taylor and Brian Orakpo were NFL studs when they were conceived. I realize that doesn’t make for a good story for the media, but there it is.

Sure, there are some players who are good models, but do we have to hear this about every veteran? The WRs need Santana Moss to help them develop; the safeties need Atogwe; the D-line needs Cullen Jenkins; McNabb’s leadership in the lockerroom and his mentoring of our undetermined rookie QB made him a good long-term move.

How can you possibly say that when the Redskins teams in the past looked to add about 5 or 6 free agent starters every year?

They didn’t try to add 5 or 6 every year, but they still bumped into the cap and could not re-sign some of their best players even though there weren’t that many.

A team that builds through the draft, and does well drafting, will be hard-pressed to add one or two FA starters each year and still re-sign the cream of the draft crop. Green Bay hasn’t added even one FA per year, but they are still bumping up against the cap and can’t re-sign all the players they'd like to keep.

Shanahan has already proven that he can find players that can effectively contribute from unorthodox means. Anthony Armstrong. Brandon Banks. Kory Lichensteiger, out of football a year ago. Ryan Torain, undrafted free agent originally, signed for the vet minimum (I believe). Keiland Williams, who didn't even start in college. And we didn't have to spend even a single draft pick for any of these players.

If Mike is as good as you say, why isn’t he still in Denver?

None of those players on your list is a sure thing to be on next year’s roster.

Free agency is another tool at Shanahan's disposal to shape his roster. It is a necessary means to make our team more competitive and our young prospects better. Quite simply, adding the right free agents is essential for the health of this franchise, short-term and long-term. As it was for the Patriots

.

You are wrong on how the Patriots used FA. Besides, Belichik didn’t have to start with a roster as weak as ours, so he never faced the rebuilding problem. Parcells didn’t leave the cupboard as bare as Cerrato has.

I appreciate the level of discourse in this thread; it's a refreshing read. I look forward to your counter-arguments. Unfortunately I probably won't get a chance to respond for a while. Cheers.

It’s been a pleasure.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Who are these magical ****ing "young guys?" Seriously' date=' what do you need to see from...whoever the hell you are talking about?

Our roster has no talent. None. Giving guys with no talent "experience" means that they will be no talented guys with experience.

You seem convinced that the Skins are a Triple A Hockey team.

Here is something that no one seems to be considering. You can roll out a team of scrubs and rookies and whatever in MLB and the NBA and nothing bad happens. You can even do it to some degree in hockey.

If you do it in the NFL, people get hurt.[/quote']

With the "talent" we have, this is more like an ECHL team. 3 "young" players I would consider part of the future (Orakpo, Landry, and Williams) and a whole ton of spare parts.

I don't see any point in spending money this offseason, in particular on a guy coming off a Superbowl win, to see them do the usual Redskins FA dance and be cut before the team is anywhere competitive.

Lets see how these kids play this season. Get our dream QB next year. Start to build around him.

Going the old route of bringing in older guys gives you the 2004-2006 Redskins. 1 year of adjusting, 1 year of maxing out at 10 wins, and 1 year where the bottom drops out and you are thinking just happened

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Lets see how these kids play this season. Get our dream QB next year. Start to build around him.

What kids? The rookies? Do you really want to start a bunch of fifth round rookie picks in the NFC East? Do you think that will actually benefit them?

[SkinsHokieFan]

What kids? The rookies? Do you really want to start a bunch of fifth round rookie picks in the NFC East? Do you think that will actually benefit them?

Long run it probably will. And lets be honest also, we aren't talking a whole bunch of 5th round rookies. You still have a fairly veteran secondary, a LB corps which will have some experience with Fletcher, Orakpo, Riley, and Henson, and a youthful d-line.

Really the additions that would/could be made would be at o-line (interior), QB and WR. And I see no point in bringing in any of the WRs on the market when they won't have anybody good to throw to them for at least 2 years (assuming a rookie QB next year)

We just don't need to go out and bring in that NT from San Fran, Cullen Jenkins, Davin Joseph, Ryan Harris and Sydney Rice. Because until proven otherwise, thats how we do FA around here.

Lets see what Hankerson, Kerrigan, Jenkins, Nield, Paul and Robinson can do. Lets see if we can salvage anything out of Malcolm Kelly and if Kevin Barnes can play a significant role on D. "The Tris" said it best, allow "organic" losing to occur, rather then tape together a team that squeezes out 7 wins

[darrelgreenie]

Part of the hidden cost of FA is it often prevents a team from knowing which young guys can play because they don't get chance to get on the field.

Kinda like how FA NT Kemo was allowed to struggle the whole season while Bryant sat the bench.

Bryant only got his chance to play after Kemo went to IR and Bryant was an obvious improvement.

Armstrong was on the bench for several games behind, lol, old man Joey.

Even despite the fact that these young guys are often hidden b/c of FA signing there are some that were discovered that slipped away:

I think OF mentioned Pierce then there's Ryan Clark, Tryon kinda fits too.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Part of the hidden cost of FA is it often prevents a team from knowing which young guys can play because they don't get chance to get on the field.

Kinda like how FA NT Kemo was allowed to struggle the whole season while Bryant sat the bench.

Bryant only got his chance to play after Kemo went to IR and Bryant was an obvious improvement.

Armstrong was on the bench for several games behind, lol, old man Joey.

Even despite the fact that these young guys are often hidden b/c of FA signing there are some that were discovered that slipped away:

I think OF mentioned Pierce then there's Ryan Clark, Tryon kinda fits too.

There is no rule that says you have to play the free agents if the other guys are better.

---------- Post added July-11th-2011 at 09:32 PM ----------

In all honesty, the biggest problem I have with this discussion is that everyone here remembers how the Cowboys went from 1-15 to a dynasty in two seasons and wants to re-create that. Unfortunately, that's impossible in the current NFL. A team cannot be built that way.

[Going Commando]

You wouldn't sign Ashomaongauglaugguaogogooa?

I wouldn't. Age + money are both too high. Let Barnes have a chance to win the starting job in TC. Look to sign a lowkey veteran to compete for the nickel job.

Also remember Hall and Asomugha weren't a good tandem in Oakland because of the differences their talents mandate in scheme.

---------- Post added July-11th-2011 at 10:53 PM ----------

In all honesty' date=' the biggest problem I have with this discussion is that everyone here remembers how the Cowboys went from 1-15 to a dynasty in two seasons and wants to re-create that. Unfortunately, that's impossible in the current NFL. A team cannot be built that way.[/quote']

This isn't the NBA LKB. All of the best teams are built primarily through the draft. The Packers are built almost exclusively through the draft and they are coming off a SB win and have a chance to become a league power. 39 of their week 17 53 man roster were their draft picks. 35 of New England's players were their draft picks. 39 of Pittsburgh's were their draft picks. 41 of Indianapolis'. 33 were Baltimore's, 30 were Philadelphia's, etc.

By contrast only 23 players on our roster were our draft picks last year. That's tied for last in the league. Not only that, those other franchises I listed each drafted over 50 players that are still in the league. The Redskins are also last in the league in that department with 34 players.

So in summary: the Redskins are the worst drafting team in the league, and the best drafting teams in the league are the short list of the perennial best teams in the league.

Perhaps the reason your skeptical of building through the draft is because you're a Redskins fan and the Redskins are absolutely ****ing dreadful with the draft. But that doesn't change the simple truth that every team should focus on building through the draft if they want to be good.

The Redskins are the quintissential build through FA franchise and we've got a decade of fourth place finishes to show for it. Come on guys. This **** is self evident now--big FA spending is a ****ty way to build that doesn't work and the draft is the only sustainable way to build.

And also it's absolutely true that big FA spending is harmful to the careers of younger drafted players at those positions. What's the point of drafting 12 players if half of them will get cut by default because we went out and bought a bunch of Cullen Jenkins and Braylon Edwards types?

[Oldfan]

...That makes 8 players who will be 30 or older at some time during the season. How many 30+ year olds should the Skins carry on the team right now? (if you had to pick a number)..

One. John Beck.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Part of the hidden cost of FA is it often prevents a team from knowing which young guys can play because they don't get chance to get on the field.

Kinda like how FA NT Kemo was allowed to struggle the whole season while Bryant sat the bench.

Bryant's gonna be 30 this year lol...

And you kinda contradict yourself here. You claim the "young guys" should get on the field in order to see if they're good or not...but the same could be said of Kemo, that he also needed to get on the field in order to see if he had regained his form or not.

---------- Post added July-11th-2011 at 08:09 PM ----------

One. John Beck.

Why one? And why Beck?

[Going Commando]

Who are these magical ****ing "young guys?" Seriously' date=' what do you need to see from...whoever the hell you are talking about?[/quote']

We've got a lot of young players who deserve a real shot at meaningful snaps:

Defense:

Barnes at CB

Jarmon at DE

Jenkins at DE/NT (if not this year, then next)

Riley and Henson at ILB

Kerrigan and Wilson at OLB

Kareem Moore at FS

Jackson at the nickle end

Neild at backup NT and jumbo tackle

Gomes/Thompson at the dime package

On offense we have barely any young/drafted talent whatsoever. Even so, I'd like to see both Royster and Helu make the roster. I'd also like to see Robinson and Hankerson make the team and Austin keep his spot. Malcolm Kelly should be given a chance to prove himself in TC and get some snaps during the year. Armstrong should definitely be a week 1 starter based on last year's performance. Austin and Banks should split our ST duties, maybe carrying 6 receivers into the season is the right choice. On the OL, I think it makes sense to extend Montgomery and eventually see how Eric Cook and Selvish Capers are progressing. Logan Paulsen is also a keeper.

[Oldfan]

... Why one? And why Beck?

Only one because I'm being hard. I'm being hard because that's what it takes to beat 31 competitors to the top. We need to build a young core.

I allow QBs to be a little older than players at other positions, especially those like Beck who haven't seen much action.

Since QBs that play for poor teams are often underrated, there is a decent chance that the Steve Young phenomenon ( a bust in Tampa) could happen to John Beck. I haven't seen much of him, but his mechanics look good. I don't think Mike is worried about a low release. It doesn't bother me either. He has good mobility. I don't think Shanahan was lying when he said he liked him coming out of college and I can understand why.

[CrypticVillain]

Steve, why are you so high on Barnes? You mentioned him twice in your last two posts.

[darrelgreenie]

There is no rule that says you have to play the free agents if the other guys are better.

You're right there is no "rule" and I never said there was but wouldn't you agree usually when a FA of a certain level and cost are signed they are given the nod at their position?

And if a FA is signed and it turns out the team's own guy is better then its an admission that the FA move was a mistake or at least unneccesary.

[Going Commando]

Bryant's gonna be 30 this year lol...

And you kinda contradict yourself here. You claim the "young guys" should get on the field in order to see if they're good or not...but the same could be said of Kemo, that he also needed to get on the field in order to see if he had regained his form or not.

Kemo is an old player coming off multiple serious injuries, including an Achilles tear, plus he was a mediocre player even when healthy. It should have been obvious he was done in TC. Even if he had been healthy for last season it would have still been fruitless to start him because he had no future here no matter what happened.

---------- Post added July-11th-2011 at 11:31 PM ----------

Steve, why are you so high on Barnes? You mentioned him twice in your last two posts.

Ask Tris. He's a good player. He stepped in and played really well at FS during the final games last year, but when he started getting time after week 9 he was actually our best CB on a per play basis last season.