Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

The 2017 FA Thread - OP Updated with Signings (Sundberg, Galette, VD, Hood re-signed) *** Terrell McClain, Stacy McGee, DJ Swearinger, Terrelle Pryor, Chris Carter, Brian Quick, ZACH BROWN(!!)***

DC9

By DC9
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

carex

carex

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Do you keep every player to not be re signed on as on the roster? 

 

What about guys we cut and they retire?

 

Who else is still on our roster that we don't have signed?

 

Does this only work for players we don't resign or is every free agent on our roster?

 

You could have just said "Oh, I didn't know he was gone" and moved on instead of trying to prove this as some kind of idiotic theory. 

 

if someone says they're retiring, I take them at their word.  If we cut them I assume we don't want them back(unless maybe someone gets hurt).  And I didn't say " didn't know he was gone" because I don't consider him gone.  And yes it does hold true for all the FA.  I'll say we probably won't re-sign him if he hasn't played well, or we probably can't re-sign him if he's going to be to expensive.  But I don't definitely subtract until someone else a whole lot closer to the situation than I am does

40 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

But when you have 30+ million in cap room, and you spend it without improving one of the worst defenses over the past 2 seasons, it says that.  Of course we should use our draft picks to improve it, but thats not enough for a unit this bad.  At the very least you need to significantly upgrade one position on defense, and if you dont, thats just poor management.  Im hoping we do, but time will tell.

 

okay, but we needed a WR, and we needed a safety and we did sign to DL.  The sad fact is money is not going far this year and that is not the Skins fault

42 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

No, it means you don't COUNT ON THEM. So you get a proven guy and hope they develop when you don't have any other options.

 

I am pretty sure there are teams out there cutting guys or not signing people at certain positions because they expect their next man up to step in

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carex

carex

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

You're ridiculous. You don't let players leave and contracts run out and still pretend they're on your team. :ols:

 

contracts run out whether you like it or not and acting like someone is gone just because it happens is ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morneblade

Morneblade

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, carex said:

 

 

I am pretty sure there are teams out there cutting guys or not signing people at certain positions because they expect their next man up to step in

 

Sure. Because those guys have already shown them something, and the guy in front is making a lot more money. Neither apply to us.

2 minutes ago, carex said:

 

contracts run out whether you like it or not and acting like someone is gone just because it happens is ridiculous.

 

No. It means they are not on the roster. Bennie Logan was not on our roster either. Does that mean he was on our roster until he signed with KC?

 

No

 

It means, until someone signs the dotted line, they don't play here. Period. Are you really this dense are are you trolling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Koolblue13

Koolblue13

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, carex said:

 

contracts run out whether you like it or not and acting like someone is gone just because it happens is ridiculous.

Acting like a guy that's not on your roster, isn't on your roster is ridiculous? 

 

Do you know what "free agent" means?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carex

carex

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

Acting like a guy that's not on your roster, isn't on your roster is ridiculous? 

 

Do you know what "free agent" means?

 

do you know what "he's not gonna get other offers" means.  He's the Skins if the Skins want him and he wants to play, which is the same as anyone actually under contract

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Koolblue13

Koolblue13

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, carex said:

 

do you know what "he's not gonna get other offers" means.  He's the Skins if the Skins want him, which is the same as anyone actually under contract

:ols:No. No it's not.

 

When someone has a contract, they have a job.

 

When someone doesn't have a contract, they have no job.

 

He's not getting offers, because he's not good at his job.

 

IF we sign him. THEN he's on the roster.

1 hour ago, Morneblade said:

 

Except for actually being signed and getting a paycheck. :blink:

 

Hes just saying ridiculously stupid **** for the sake of being a pita now. I'm done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheShredder

TheShredder

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, SkinsGuy said:

ESPN is saying that Logan's deal with the Chiefs is a one-year deal worth $8 million.

 

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/18900178/bennie-logan-kansas-city-chiefs-agree-one-year-deal

yep, not much cap space left to pay him 8M and no upside to the Skins defense. 

 

They need to get a stud LB'er on a long term deal or do some restructuring for sure.  If they're going into the draft missing this much on D then the FO is either screwing up or not interested in winning now. 

As far as BPA...when you are up and the BPA is not in a position of need now or next year, you trade down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Genghis Khan

Genghis Khan

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, TheShredder said:

yep, not much cap space left to pay him 8M and no upside to the Skins defense. 

 

They need to get a stud LB'er on a long term deal or do some restructuring for sure.  If they're going into the draft missing this much on D then the FO is either screwing up or not interested in winning now. 

 

I feel like we can draft mostly defense while also drafting BPA. The draft is defense heavy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheShredder

TheShredder

Posted
Posted
Just now, Genghis Khan said:

 

I feel like we can draft mostly defense while also drafting BPA. The draft is defense heavy.

I'm good with that too.  LB'ers straight out of college aren't beasts and it takes time to learn.  Even if you draft a strong LB'er, he's not the solution this year.  They'll be hard pressed to stop the run up the gut.  Every team just ran straight down the field...even a future Pro Bowl DL won't be the solution in the first year.

Problem is they had an opportunity to get the middle of the field covered in FA and only have signed second and third tier.  That's not fixing anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morneblade

Morneblade

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Genghis Khan said:

 

I feel like we can draft mostly defense while also drafting BPA. The draft is defense heavy.

 

 

Yeah, about that. Sure, you can say we drafted 4 defensive players in your draft...................but if they come on day 3 and you spend your day 1 and 2 on offensive players..............you really can't say you did much to address your defensive issues. Kinda like.......last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HTTRDynasty

HTTRDynasty

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, carex said:

 

 

we've had 17 draft picks under GMSM, using BPA.  13 are still on the team.  10 have played a down, Daniels and Marshall were on IR, Sudfeld was the third QB.  Two have become very good players for us, Scherff and Crowder.  Three have had moments but have been inconsistent or regressed, Smith, Jones and Cravens.  The other five, Doctson, Kouandijo, Spaight, Fuller, and Ioannidis have done nothing and no one here is expecting that to change

 

I don't think I'm alone in disagreeing with your statement about expecting Doctson and Fuller to do "nothing" for us in the future.  And I'm not sure what anyone told you about draft classes, but it's common knowledge that most need 3 years before you can accurately judge the results. 

 

2014 - Trent Murphy, Morgan Moses, Spencer Long, Bashaud Breeland, Ryan Grant

 

Those guys can all easily be put into your "inconsistent or regressed" category 3 years later, which makes Scherff and Crowder stand out even more.  So yes, the 2015 class still has a chance to be the better class.  The rookies on the team definitely performed better than the rookies did in 2014.  They performed about the same their second years.  And the 2016 class is still a huge question mark (which is common for most teams a year after the draft), mostly due to injuries.  I'm sure you were expecting instant results, and the 2015 class did give us those results their rookie year, but that's generally not how this works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redrobert

redrobert

Posted
Posted

WR C. Patterson is a Raider

 

Patterson looked to be headed out of his visit without a contract on Monday night, but he returned to the facility and the two sides quickly hammered out a deal. Likely to serve as the fourth receiver behind Amari Cooper, Michael Crabtree, and Seth Roberts.

 

per Rotoworld 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hail2theSkins24

Hail2theSkins24

Posted
Posted

Redskins fans on philosophy of team building 11 months of the year: "We have to build our team through the draft and be very smart in FA, don't overspend!" 

 

Redskins fans in March: "IF WE DONT SIGN EITHER POE/LOGAN/HANKINS WE WONT WIN 7 GAMES FIRE BRUCE ALLEN (who is actually copy catting Scot's FA approach)" 

 

 There is a lot of time in FA to make some valuable moves. Let's let it play out

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HTTRDynasty

HTTRDynasty

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Hail2theSkins24 said:

Redskins fans on philosophy of team building 11 months of the year: "We have to build our team through the draft and be very smart in FA, don't overspend!" 

 

Redskins fans in March: "IF WE DONT SIGN EITHER POE/LOGAN/HANKINS WE WONT WIN 7 GAMES FIRE BRUCE ALLEN (who is actually copy catting Scot's FA approach)" 

 

 There is a lot of time in FA to make some valuable moves. Let's let it play out

 

I wouldn't call 1 year - $8M overspending, especially when you have a gaping hole at that spot.  Do you think the Giants regret what they spent on Snacks?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stefanskins

Stefanskins

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, Hail2theSkins24 said:

Redskins fans on philosophy of team building 11 months of the year: "We have to build our team through the draft and be very smart in FA, don't overspend!" 

 

Redskins fans in March: "IF WE DONT SIGN EITHER POE/LOGAN/HANKINS WE WONT WIN 7 GAMES FIRE BRUCE ALLEN (who is actually copy catting Scot's FA approach)" 

 

 There is a lot of time in FA to make some valuable moves. Let's let it play out

 

worked out well for us when we signed DeSean and Norman...didn't we get Vernon later in the FA period too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peregrine

Peregrine

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Hail2theSkins24 said:

Redskins fans on philosophy of team building 11 months of the year: "We have to build our team through the draft and be very smart in FA, don't overspend!" 

 

Redskins fans in March: "IF WE DONT SIGN EITHER POE/LOGAN/HANKINS WE WONT WIN 7 GAMES FIRE BRUCE ALLEN (who is actually copy catting Scot's FA approach)" 

 

 There is a lot of time in FA to make some valuable moves. Let's let it play out

You would call spending $8 million on a dominant NT overspending?

 

I find that very odd.  Redskins fans said in the other 11 months of the year "We need to grab a dominant NT this year, it is the one most important position we need!".  Redskins fans in March "HOW IS IT WE SIGNED 4 PLAYERS AND NONE OF THEM WERE THE 1 PLAYER WE NEED".  There, fixed it.

 

Theres only two left, Hankins and Poe.  We NEED one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rattlesnake88

Rattlesnake88

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, -JB- said:

I figured Swearinger would want #36 because he's worn that number his whole career and Cravens only wore it last year because he couldn't wear #21.

I know Swearinger is a huge ST fan too. Not sure if it's why he wore it his entire career. But I know Cravens choose it as an ode to ST. However I would rather has a home grown ST fan wear the number. But it was a deal between two men. Cant be bothered too much really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...