2018 Free Agency Database - (Signed: WILLIAMS - McPhee - Scandrick - P-Rich) - (Lauvao, Bergstrom, Nsehke, Taylor, Z. Brown and Quick re-signed)

[Califan007 The Constipated]

On 4/21/2018 at 4:18 AM, FrFan said:

Alabama has produced a lot of NFL busts. It also has produced a lot of NFL stars.

"Gruden is fan of Tide products

1

 

 

[Renegade7]

5 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

In terms of Breeland, if difference in money was it they would have made him some offer or reached out when his deal went south and he became available. To me it looks at though they made the decision to not bring him back regardless of money. Not saying it's right or wrong. Just appears to be their decision. 

 

That's what I'm seeing, too, and no explanation for it or clear plan to replace him.  As a fan, I have nothing to work with on that one, it's frustrating as hell.

[bowhunter]

Ok Mr. Hankins, it's officially "next week" now. 3 year $23M. Please 

[markmills67]

2 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

Ok Mr. Hankins, it's officially "next week" now. 3 year $23M. Please 

Signing for the Redskins definitely?. ?

 

HTTR 

[Est.1974]

13 minutes ago, markmills67 said:

Signing for the Redskins definitely?. ?

 

HTTR 

 

My guess IF he was to sign here would be a deal like Pryor got, 1 year 6 mil rising to 8mil with incentives.

 

not sure that gets him here though.

[bowhunter]

16 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

My guess IF he was to sign here would be a deal like Pryor got, 1 year 6 mil rising to 8mil with incentives.

 

not sure that gets him here though.

IMO, the difference between the Pryor/ Galette one year prove it type deals is that Hank has nothing to "prove." He's in the perfect situation where he is young enough to still be in his prime, yet experienced enough to have lots of tape showing what he can do. A one year deal is just leaves us in the very same situation next year. Hank is an exception who can be a anchor/blue chipper for a while. Don't overpay him, but give him enough to be happy. I'd seriously suggest 3yr $23M (8,6,9) is a good deal for both sides involved

[justice98]

10 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

That's what I'm seeing, too, and no explanation for it or clear plan to replace him.  As a fan, I have nothing to work with on that one, it's frustrating as hell.

 

The clear plan to replace him seems like Dunbar. 

[bedlamVR]

2 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

The clear plan to replace him seems like Dunbar. 

 

Or moreau ? 

[Burgold]

15 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

In terms of Breeland, if difference in money was it they would have made him some offer or reached out when his deal went south and he became available. To me it looks at though they made the decision to not bring him back regardless of money. Not saying it's right or wrong. Just appears to be their decision. 

 

I'm with you, if they had just took a swing at bat explaining to him and his agent what the cap restraints were I'd feel better about losing Bree. Moreso, when you lose Fuller, but especially because Breeland's deal fell through. Now, he while he and his agent are stuck in limbo they could turn back to the Redskins' with a good feeling and maybe take the cheap home deal (even if it's a one-year type) because everyone left on good terms.

 

Now, the mulligan can't really be taken advantage of.

 

I do like the potential of Moreau and think Dunbar's gotten better, but DB was our strongest unit before we lost Bree and Fuller. Now, it's a question mark. 

[Renegade7]

17 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

The clear plan to replace him seems like Dunbar. 

 

14 minutes ago, bedlamVR said:

 

Or moreau ? 

 

That's not a clear plan, that's what we have left.  As @Burgold has noted and I've brought up several times, with the loss of Breeland and Fuller, our CB depth has gone from strength to suspect.  Saying we'll be fine knowing we got rid of our #2 and #3 corner is just being optimistic (that's not a plan, either).

 

I'd feel better with a DRC signing, but its been crickets since I last heard about it.

[The Hangman- C_Hanburger]

Maybe it's just me but if you watch Breeland and then watch Norman you see Bree playing off and soft and Norman in your face at the line. Bree played too soft IMO. Now was he coached that way or did he back away from in your face...I don't know. I personally like the at the line 5 yard hand to hand combat and throw the WR off his timing. That and he got beat on too many deep balls

 

I think the younguns can do as good or better..but thats just me. Too many back shots of 26 chasing

[redskinss]

By all accounts its come down to us or the jets for hankins services. 

I was reading reports that the jets are bringing in defensive lineman for workouts this week. 

Maybe nothing but also could be a sign they don't think their going to get hankins. 

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/04/23/jets-working-out-two-free-agent-defensive-linemen/

[justice98]

24 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

 

That's not a clear plan, that's what we have left.  As @Burgold has noted and I've brought up several times, with the loss of Breeland and Fuller, our CB depth has gone from strength to suspect.  Saying we'll be fine knowing we got rid of our #2 and #3 corner is just being optimistic (that's not a plan, either).

 

I'd feel better with a DRC signing, but its been crickets since I last heard about it.

 

You may not like the plan, but it's still a clear plan.  They basically showed zero interest in any vet corner in FA other than somebody to replace Fuller in the slot, where they essentially picked Scandrick over DRC.

 

The extension to Dunbar implies to me that they think they can get what they got from Breeland out of him, for a fraction of the price. 

[goskins10]

6 minutes ago, redskinss said:

By all accounts its come down to us or the jets for hankins services. 

I was reading reports that the jets are bringing in defensive lineman for workouts this week. 

Maybe nothing but also could be a sign they don't think their going to get hankins. 

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/04/23/jets-working-out-two-free-agent-defensive-linemen/

 

Or they could be trying to put pressure on him to decide - probably a bit of both. Need to bring guys in because they want to sign someone and if it happens to push Hankins into making a call, at least they know where they stand. 

 

I would think Hankins would want to sign before the draft. His options get limited. Unlike some that think signing or not signing Hankins does not change our draft, I believe it could change the entire approach. To start, it makes getting a big guy in the middle a nice to have instead of a have to have. That allows the team to look at players thy may not feel they should be looking at with such a huge hole to fill - assuming they see it the same way we do. 

 

While I want Hankins here, I really just want him to decide and let's get on with it. I love what he could bring but if his price is just too high then let someone else pay it. 

[HardcoreZorn]

2 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

You may not like the plan, but it's still a clear plan.  They basically showed zero interest in any corner in FA other than somebody to replace Fuller in the slot.  

 

The extension to Dunbar implies to me that they think they can get what they got from Breeland out of him, for a fraction of the price. 

I really do think that drafting, developing our own, and replacing from within is just a new concept in general for much of our fan base.

[Renegade7]

4 minutes ago, justice98 said:

 

You may not like the plan, but it's still a clear plan.  They basically showed zero interest in any corner in FA other than somebody to replace Fuller in the slot.  

 

The extension to Dunbar implies to me that they think they can get what they got from Breeland out of him, for a fraction of the price. 

No, I don't like that plan (if that's what it is) and nobody has come out and said he's the starter either.

 

The fact Dunbar is making less then $2 million to me sounds like they are either getting away with severely underpaying him to be a starting corner, or they know he's not the starting corner.  He's not more talented then Breeland, though I understand where ya'll are coming from given Panthers offered him $8 million a year. 

 

I'd need to more research into what #2 corners typically make, but the extension Dunbar got doesn't scream #2 corner to me.  I am not comfortable with him starting outside for a full season as much as some of ya'll are.  I'm not looking at it from the "he's good enough to be a starter" standpoint, my head is thinking about who we're going to match up against in regular season and the playoffs. 

7 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

I really do think that drafting, developing our own, and replacing from within is just a new concept in general for much of our fan base.

Am not sure what this comment means in the context of our current conversation, given we drafted Breeland, too.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

31 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

 

That's not a clear plan, that's what we have left.

 

 

 

You really think none of the positional coaches, head coach, coordinators or front office executives had any idea whatsoever what to do when they decided to let Breeland go? They just picked up the depth chart and said "Can't we use one of these guys here?" lol...

[goskins10]

2 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

No, I don't like that plan (if that's what it is) and nobody has come out and said he's the starter either.

 

The fact Dunbar is making less then $2 million to me sounds like they are either getting away with severely underpaying him to be a starting corner, or they know he's not the starting corner.  He's not more talented then Breeland, though I understand where ya'll are coming from given Panthers offered him $8 million a year. 

 

I'd need to more research into what #2 corners typically make, but the extension Dunbar got doesn't scream #2 corner to me.  I am not comfortable with him starting outside for a full season as much as some of ya'll are.  I'm not looking at it from the "he's good enough to be a starter" standpoint, my head is thinking about who we're going to match up against in regular season and the playoffs. 

 

Not sure you can draw that conclusion based on salary. He is not getting paid that because he has not had the starting time yet. By extending him now, they get him on a more team friendly contract, even if they think he could be the long term starter. 

 

Also, why would they name him the starter right now. It's April before the draft. We have the draft, OTAs, and TC. The only thing certain about the team depth chart right now is it in flux. There is absolutely no benefit of naming anyone anything right now. In fact they should not name anyone to anything. They should be fighting for their positions. 

[Renegade7]

Just now, Califan007 said:

 

You really think none of the positional coaches, head coach, coordinators or front office executives had any idea whatsoever what to do when they decided to let Breeland go? They just picked up the depth chart and said "Can't we use one of these guys here?" lol...

I think this was a Bruce decision and not anyone elses.  I believe the plan was to let Breeland go all along and sign somebody to replace that production for cheaper, and that was supposed to be DRC.  That didn't work out, then next thing you know Fuller was gone (I don't believe the went into the offseason planning to trade Fuller, that was probably Breeland's replacement, but we had to trade him to get Alex Smith)

[goskins10]

2 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

You really think none of the positional coaches, head coach, coordinators or front office executives had any idea whatsoever what to do when they decided to let Breeland go? They just picked up the depth chart and said "Can't we use one of these guys here?" lol...

 

i was stuck between the thank you and the haha. I am not the biggest fan of Bruce or how the team is run in general but good grief. It's like people think they just sit there like fans do and look at things in a complete vacuum. 

 

Let's let Breeland go. I hope we have someone. Where is Jay's dart board! 

[Renegade7]

16 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

Not sure you can draw that conclusion based on salary. He is not getting paid that because he has not had the starting time yet. By extending him now, they get him on a more team friendly contract, even if they think he could be the long term starter. 

 

Also, why would they name him the starter right now. It's April before the draft. We have the draft, OTAs, and TC. The only thing certain about the team depth chart right now is it in flux. There is absolutely no benefit of naming anyone anything right now. In fact they should not name anyone to anything. They should be fighting for their positions. 

 

I mean, that's fair not to draw too many conclusions from his contract, I just find that suspect as hell.  I mean, he's in his prime, why would he accept making peanuts for his prime if the plan is to have him start?  They don't have to say he's the starter, and you're right, they shouldn't, but I haven't even seen a hint that they are thinking about it, just that he plays hard and super smart  (that's at minimum what you want from a starter)

14 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

Let's let Breeland go. I hope we have someone. Where is Jay's dart board! 

 

Please don't put words in my mouth.  I don't agree with their plan from what I can tell it is so far, and if they're serious about naming Dunbar the starter, then I'd not only be surprised, I'd be disappointed.  

 

Edit:  I'm mad at them, yes, but I agree that a bad plan and no plan is not synonymous.  In my eye, that might as well be.

 

[HardcoreZorn]

7 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Am not sure what this comment means in the context of our current conversation, given we drafted Breeland, too.

 

 

Well for one, it doesn't always mean resigning the guys you've drafted. It means constantly stocking and restocking through the draft, and UDFA, and then resigning the guys you deem worthy of second contracts while collecting compensation picks for allowing the rest walk out the door. This is the first year we have seen this concept in motion, but it's also really the first time we have started to string together some solid draft classes after purging the Shanny guys and rinsing ourselves of the Griffin fiasco.

 

But really my point was is that some people get antsy when they see a guy like Bree leave and don't bring anyone from the outside that is perceived as good as him. The natural reaction is that we downgraded or took a step backwards. And under Vinny, we probably would have because we literally would have had nobody worthy or capable of stepping in. The FO/coaching staff doesn't view it that way. As somebody said before me, they are excited about Dunbar's potential and got him for a fraction of the cost that Bree was initially commanding on the open market. And they seem to LOVE Moreau's potential who is on a rookie contract. Similar to Ioanidis and Fuller going into last year, no one is counting on those guys to be key cogs. Though the plan reflects the FO/Jay think that may be the case. It may or may not work out, but seeing some say there is no plan makes me think they aren't paying attention to how the current regime is operating.

[Renegade7]

2 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

It may or may not work out, but seeing some say there is no plan makes me think they aren't paying attention to how the current regime is operating.

 

Ok, I see what you're saying.  I think we're "stuck" with this plan right now versus it being the original one going into the offseason.  What you're talking about is not a bad idea, I just don't think we matched or upgraded here.  I feel like we went backwards and hoping it works out now, given I don't hear anything about DRC anymore or seriously drafting a corner with first two picks.  Bruce isn't always wrong, but he's also made a lot of mistakes.  We just went through something similar to this at WR, how am I supposed to feel looking at what we're doing at corner?

[Master Blaster]

27 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

 

The fact Dunbar is making less then $2 million to me sounds like they are either getting away with severely underpaying him to be a starting corner, or they know he's not the starting corner.  He's not more talented then Breeland, though I understand where ya'll are coming from given Panthers offered him $8 million a year. 

 

 

 

Good points.  We need to find a starting RG because ours is not being paid what elite RG's make.  We need to find a slot WR because ours is not being paid what elite Slot WR's make.  We need to find an OLB because ours is not being paid what elite OLB's make.  Hell,  we need 14-15 new starters because ours are not being paid what elite starters make.

 

Excellent post.

[Mr. Sinister]

12 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

That's what I'm seeing, too, and no explanation for it or clear plan to replace him.  As a fan, I have nothing to work with on that one, it's frustrating as hell.

 

Find the silver lining in that it will only hasten the Harvestmasters departure.