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

[Mahons21]

Green Bay and Pittsburgh couldn't afford to sign those players. Poor ****s.

Belichik wouldn't spend the money to sign those players. Cheap SOB.

God, I'm glad we have the money to spend to make us great!

(yes, this was sarcasm)

Why complain about a hypothetical situation?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

This is where I stopped reading. The Redskins are STILL a laughing stock. Not everybody has gotten the memo about how suddenly everything is changed. Snyder could fire Shannahan 5 months from now and it's back to square one.

Sorry, but it will take a while for this organization to be "respectable" again.

Our starting QB is probably John Beck.

The league fears the competence of Shanahan and Allen.

[jflow78]

Here's the other thing you guys are forgetting. We HAVE to spend $45 millions just to reach the MINIMUM. How exactly do you propose to do that without dipping into FA a little bit. The rookie contracts are, in no way going to cost us $45 million this season, and probably not in any season they all remain with the team on their rookie contracts. Sure Kerrigan will get a nice number, beyond that you're looking at 11 guys making minimum wage.

[Hitman21ST]

Our starting QB is probably John Beck.

As opposed to?

It's not like we let Aaron Rodgers go so we could start Beck. We got rid of Campbell, who would have more than likely done worse than McNabb and Grossman last year. We gambled on McNabb, which didn't work out, but name me a coach who hasn't taken a gamble on a player.

[Oldfan]

Why complain about a hypothetical situation?

Strange question. Why discuss it in the first place?

It happens to be the topic we're discussing.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

As opposed to?

It's not like we let Aaron Rodgers go so we could start Beck. We got rid of Campbell, who would have more than likely done worse than McNabb and Grossman last year. We gambled on McNabb, which didn't work out, but name me a coach who hasn't taken a gamble on a player.

Our starting QB is probably John Beck.

[Hitman21ST]

Our starting QB is probably John Beck.

As opposed to?

It's not like we let Aaron Rodgers go so we could start Beck

[Mahons21]

Strange question. Why discuss it in the first place?

It happens to be the topic we're discussing.

Oh I love discussing it, it's fun. However complaining about something before it even happens is silly, considering there's a descent probability it won't even happen.

[Oldfan]

Here's the other thing you guys are forgetting. We HAVE to spend $45 millions just to reach the MINIMUM. How exactly do you propose to do that without dipping into FA a little bit. The rookie contracts are, in no way going to cost us $45 million this season, and probably not in any season they all remain with the team on their rookie contracts. Sure Kerrigan will get a nice number, beyond that you're looking at 11 guys making minimum wage.

Most of us aren't objecting to "dipping into FA a little bit."

I think extending the contracts of our good young players Landry, Armstrong, maybe one or two others, would be a good starting point if we need to spend money.

---------- Post added July-11th-2011 at 12:03 PM ----------

Oh I love discussing it, it's fun. However complaining about something before it even happens is silly, considering there's a descent probability it won't even happen.

Allow me to translate my "complaint."

The three teams in the league with the best rosters would not consider spending that kind of money on free agents.

There were a couple of other posts offering their opinions on the hypothetical. Are only complaints on the hypothetical silly?

[jflow78]

Most of us aren't objecting to "dipping into FA a little bit."

I think extending the contracts of our good young players Landry, Armstrong, maybe one or two others, would be a good starting point if we need to spend money.

I'm right there with you. I'm just also not opposed to signing 1-3 FAs who could help us in places like the OL, as some here who have criticized me for that very idea. However, I also don't feel we need to do any more than that. I don't want to sign Asomugha or any of the highest priced guys this off season. It's not necessary for the team's continued progress.

What I'm interested in are the players people are going to have to cut to get under the cap, resign their own FAs, and sign their rookies. Several teams are completely ****** by the new cap, and planned very poorly for it. Luckily we aren't one of those teams. This is the first year since Marty was fired where we don't have to do salary cap yoga to get under it, including the Cowboys, Steelers, Colts, Giants Vikings, and Raiders. The Packers also won't be resigning any more of their own guys, and may have to cut a few to get their rookies signed.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=6749994

The Cowboys in particular are screwed. They're $18 million over the highest proposed cap and can't cut Roy Williams, Marc Columbo, or Marion Barber, because those guys cost twice as much against the cap if they're cut. I can't WAIT to see how they deal with this.

[Hitman21ST]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=6749994

The Cowboys in particular are screwed. They're $18 million over the highest proposed cap and can't cut Roy Williams, Marc Columbo, or Marion Barber, because those guys cost twice as much against the cap if they're cut. I can't WAIT to see how they deal with this.

Hey, all that talent has to get paid...

I read that article, would Shawn Andrews of the Giants be a fit for us?

[Oldfan]

I'm right there with you. I'm just also not opposed to signing 1-3 FAs who could help us in places like the OL, as some here who have criticized me for that very idea.

I'm not opposed to signing FAs not older than 27 and not coming off an injury history. I'd go to 30 on a QB.

[MartinC]

That sounds fine, but what age profile do you have in mind?

Let's use 30 year-old Atogwe as a test case. What's your opinion on signing him?

I oppose that kind of transaction for a team like ours.

I would hesitate to sign anyone over say 28 to a contract which was more than 3 years and which included big guaranteed dollars. There are a clutch of players in free agency this year who have 4 or 5 years in the league (making them 25-28 year old) and who have good starting experience, its in this group I would be looking to hunt.

Thats not to say you can't sign anyone 30 years plus old - but you want it to be a to a modest contract which you can get out of by cutting the player after a couple of years without significant cap liabilities. You also want these 30+ signings to be the exception not the rule. I dont have a problem with the Atogwe signing mainly because we signed him to a reasonable contract. He signed a $26 million contract which includes roughly $12 million guaranteed. For comparison the four-year deal signed last June contained $18 million in the first two years and Antrel Rolle $15 million guaranteed. It looks like Atogwes deal is structured to be a 3 year deal and I think that he can play to a high level for that period.

I get the point that he stops a younger guy getting time, but we had so many holes to fill that we had to fill some of those starting holes with vets. Atogwe is a good starter who has been durable, is a very good character guy and fills one of those holes at a reasonable price.

[Hitman21ST]

I'm not opposed to signing FAs not older than 27 and not coming off an injury history. I'd go to 30 on a QB.

How do you qualify "injury history"? Is it one injury last year, or a series of injuries over the past few years?

As an example, would you call a 26 year old who missed 10 games over three years (say, 4 one year and 6 two years later) has a "injury history"?

I didn't have anyone in mind with that, just curious as to how you define it.

[KCClybun]

I'm not opposed to signing FAs not older than 27 and not coming off an injury history. I'd go to 30 on a QB.

What injury history? He's played in every single game in four of his six seasons. He missed one start in 2010. Not a game. A start. That's it. He went two three straight seasons without suffering a major injury before 2009, and then came back and played in every game in 2010.

Let's be honest here, sir. I think that's fairly normal for a guy who plays safety, certainly not a "OH NO, HE'S GOT AN INJURY HISTORY" thing.

[Oldfan]

...I get the point that he [Atogwe] stops a younger guy getting time, but we had so many holes to fill that we had to fill some of those starting holes with vets...

Why did we have to fill some of those holes with vets? I can't think of a satisfactory answer to that question.

As for the idea that Allen was able to sign him for a reasonable price, that's very unlikely. It's not likely that he came to us offering a discount. It seems more likely we were the high bidder, which makes it very likely he won't be worth what we paid.

[Burgold]

Why did we have to fill some of those holes with vets? I can't think of a satisfactory answer to that question.

You keep saying you're not opposed to free agency and then following it up by saying this. Are you saying you only want to sign free agent back ups and third stringers?

[Mahons21]

The three teams in the league with the best rosters would not consider spending that kind of money on free agents.

I agree, but you don't know that the Redskins are considering it. All we know is a few guys on an internet message board have thrown the idea out there.

There were a couple of other posts offering their opinions on the hypothetical. Are only complaints on the hypothetical silly?

Yes, you're essentially crying over milk that hasn't been spilled. Saying I would hate it if this milk spilled isn't that odd, complaining the milk has spilled when it hasn't spilled is rather odd.

Also this is a question to everybody:

In this past decade what Redskins players have been held down the roster due to FA's that have gone on to have success elsewhere? Off the top of my head Ryan Clark comes to mind.

[jflow78]

Hey, all that talent has to get paid...

I read that article, would Shawn Andrews of the Giants be a fit for us?

I'd rather look elsewhere. I'm also skeptical as to whether the Giants will really consider cutting him. He's one of their younger linemen, and he's coming off the first year of a 6 year $32.5 million contract. He has also had back surgery and a recurrence of the injury since then, not to mention his severe depression which caused problems for him in Philly.

[MartinC]

Why did we have to fill some of those holes with vets? I can't think of a satisfactory answer to that question.

We had a LOT of holes requiring starters let alone depth. DE, NT, OLB, ILB, FS and CB on defense. RG, RT, C and WR on offense. Thats leaving out the whole QB situation. Is it your position we could/should have filled all these 8-10 starting spots with either rookies or young holdovers? I just dont think thats realistic - we needed to get some help in key areas from vets to blend with the young guys we brought in from the draft and the younger guys already here.

As for the idea that Allen was able to sign him for a reasonable price, that's very unlikely. It's not likely that he came to us offering a discount. It seems more likely we were the high bidder, which makes it very likely he won't be worth what we paid.

Time will tell. But when you compare the contract we gave him to others given recently to other safeties it looks pretty reasonable.

[Oldfan]

How do you qualify "injury history"? Is it one injury last year, or a series of injuries over the past few years?

As an example, would you call a 26 year old who missed 10 games over three years (say, 4 one year and 6 two years later) has a "injury history"?

I didn't have anyone in mind with that, just curious as to how you define it.

What injury history? He's played in every single game in four of his six seasons. He missed one start in 2010. Not a game. A start. That's it. He went two three straight seasons without suffering a major injury before 2009, and then came back and played in every game in 2010.

Let's be honest here, sir. I think that's fairly normal for a guy who plays safety, certainly not a "OH NO, HE'S GOT AN INJURY HISTORY" thing.

I would not have signed Atogwe because he’s 30. His injury history is not too bad. However, I read that the drop-off in his play last season was due to playing hurt for most of the year. His injury history would not have bothered me if he was 27.

Cullen Jenkins I would disqualify both on age and injury history. I wouldn't sign him even if he was 27 with that history.

[KCClybun]

Why did we have to fill some of those holes with vets? I can't think of a satisfactory answer to that question.

As for the idea that Allen was able to sign him for a reasonable price, that's very unlikely. It's not likely that he came to us offering a discount. It seems more likely we were the high bidder, which makes it very likely he won't be worth what we paid.

This seems to suggest something different...

And we filled the hole with a vet because 1.) Kareem Moore played badly as the position, 2.) if all else fails we made need Kevin Barnes to be our second corner opposite DeAngelo Hall, so having him play free safety was out of the question, 3.) this draft was very weak for defensive backs, but safeties in particular, 4.) if DeJon Gomes was a guy we were targeting, we'd know that he played more nickel corner than he did free safety, 5.) Chris Horton plays strong safety and we've all seen what happens when you try to play a safety out of position, 6.) Macho Harris obviously didn't impress in his starting time, 7.) Anderson Russell got cut in training camp for a reason and the when he might've had his shot he couldn't stay healthy...basically, there simply no better options on the team or in the draft that would make the team better.

I know "making the team better" is an offensive term to some people, but that should be the goal in the offseason. No stud safeties in the draft, no free safety worth his salt on the roster except maybe one, and we probably need him to play nickel corner, if not have him be a starting corner.

Boatloads of reasons why O.J was signed, if you're not blind and trying to ignore the obvious.

[jflow78]

Why did we have to fill some of those holes with vets? I can't think of a satisfactory answer to that question.

Here's the issue though, who else should we have fill the FS hole? Kareem Moore? If you don't like guys over 26 with an injury history, then what's the difference with him? He's 26 and has a much worse injury history than Atogwe, not to mention he hasn't proven he can cover a receiver, or take a good angle on tackles. Injury or not, taking proper angles is something you should have learned by the time you get to the NFL. Other than him, I'm not sure who we had who has the potential to start, period.

Atogwe is as close to the London Fletcher as any FA signing we've ever made. He wasn't signed because he was a "big name" like most of the Vinny signings, he was signed because he meets every qualifier, except for age (though technically he was 29 when we signed him ). He's a great leader, St. Louis was sad to lose him, he fills a need, he's a hard worker, he knows the scheme, the coaching staff knows him, he plays at a high level, he's had ONE injury in 6 seasons, he's a great fit for an organization that's trying to change the mentality from perennial losers to a team that has the heart to win, which may be our biggest issue. And his contract is pretty friendly to our team. We can easily cut him in 3 seasons, that's not bad. It's not handicapping us, it's not stealing time from younger players (because we don't have anyone besides a 5th round rookie who needs time to develop and, if we're lucky, will be ready to take over in 2 or 3 seasons).

I don't want to sign any more 30 year old guys, but I'm not opposed to bringing in ONE guy that meets all those parameters. I'm hoping, more than anything that London and Atogwe's attitudes rub off on the rest of our young guys. Can you imagine a team that had the heart of those guys?

[Oldfan]

You keep saying you're not opposed to free agency and then following it up by saying this. Are you saying you only want to sign free agent back ups and third stringers?

No. Don't read more into my statement than what I said. I don't see why we have to fill those spots with FAs.

---------- Post added July-11th-2011 at 12:57 PM ----------

... Is it your position we could/should have filled all these 8-10 starting spots with either rookies or young holdovers? I just dont think thats realistic - we needed to get some help in key areas from vets to blend with the young guys we brought in from the draft and the younger guys already here...[

If winning this season isn't the primary goal, I see no reason that we could not have played a pat hand at FS or any other position.

Time will tell. But when you compare the contract we gave him to others given recently to other safeties it looks pretty reasonable.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

The Cowboys in particular are screwed. They're $18 million over the highest proposed cap and can't cut Roy Williams, Marc Columbo, or Marion Barber, because those guys cost twice as much against the cap if they're cut. I can't WAIT to see how they deal with this.

If you want to see how they deal with it, read up on our teams from 2000-2009. People believe we "avoided cap hell" by not having to cut a bunch of players. What really happened is that we were stuck with a group of players and were paying them way more than they were worth when they continued to get older. Also, because of that, we had virtually no depth so whenever an injury hit us (in FOOTBALL), we were crushed. Believe me, I love that this is happening to them and not us, I just don't think many Redskin fans actually realized that we lived through cap hell...it just wasn't some monumental event as much as a slow degradation of our roster and depth.