Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo

The Great Gallery Smokescreen . . .


Recommended Posts

Do the Redskins really want Gallery. Or, are they really trying to get the Giants to think that's the guy we want, because they too want Gallery. Wow! To only speculate as to what is really going on in the draft game of scheming.

Personally, I think all the Gallery talk is a smokescreen. Yet, we will take him if he's there if not either Taylor or Winslow is there at five. Chances are one will be there. Which is the one we really want. That is the million dollar question.

Personally I think it's Winslow we are targeting. Think about it, if the Lions are interested in Winslow they know they will probably need to jump in front of us to get him. They can offer a pick and player to swap picks with the Giants to drop two spots to six.

It becomes both an offensive and defensive move for the Giants. They get the guy they want, and they keep a team in their division from getting the guy they really covet. That's shrewd.

If we didn't make a fuss for Gallery, that is lock move for the Giants. Drop two spots, pick up a pick and/or player and still get the guy they want. We lose on the guy we really want.

But, our talk of sincere interest in Gallery has to make the Giants wonder are really interested in him, or is it a smokescreen. They need Gallery more then we do.

However, I do think if the Giants trade with the Lions and the Lions take say, Winslow. We will draft Gallery over Taylor. I then think we will look to move Samuals and his contract for a high to mid round second. We may even through in a pick from next year.

That's the fall back plan. By trading Samuals we save almost 15 millions over the next couple of years. Certainly enough money to sign a big time free agent next year.

So in essence, there is someone we are targeting at that fifth pick. The questions is who is it. I don't think Taylor is going to go in the top five. Five to seven is his range. Winslow is kind of dicey. The Raiders, naw. Even though they have a reputation of being unpredictable. Then you never know about Denny Green.

If you are targeting Taylor or Winslow chances are you will have to move in front of the Redskins at five.

If Winslow is on the board at four he is in all intense and purpose, ours. The Gints aren't going to take him. The only thing impeding him being ours is if the Giants trade out of that spot to say the Lions at six.

So the Redskins are planting the Gallery seed. We are making it sound like we are exploring ways to get in front of the Giants to get Gallery.

This gives the Giants the impression they could lose out on the guy they really covet if they decide to trade out of four. What the Gints don't know is are we serious. In some ways the Gallery moves makes some sense, but it is more long term move then an immediate move.

If we do take Gallery, Samuals is as good as gone next Saturday.

This tells me, we are targeting Winslow at five. If you think about it one of the two will be there at five -- Winslow or Taylor. So we could sit back and not worry about what happened in front of us and take who was ever left. But, we're not. We are targeting someone at five. We have a preference.

Of course, this theory can work for both Taylor and Winslow. However, I think Taylor is more likely to be there at five.

So we should be able to get one, but the Gallery talk is designed for one of those two guys. That tells me we have a prefereance for one over the other. We are in essence saying to the Giants, don't get too cute in front of us.

Give our front office some credit . . .

Snyder and the Redskins front office is if anything, shrewd. Notice how we protected our restricted free agents. Even did a clever move with Bryan Johnson. Signed McCants when he was getting attention. Likewise with Pierce.

Last year we set a trend of going after restrictive free agents and it changed the way GM's tendered offers.

Just my theory in regard to Gallery. I could be flat wrong. This all came to me while shaving yesterday. So I thought, why not share it with da gang

New Era

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall, not a bad theory.

I think it has some weight to it.

However, I would not be in favor of losing Samuels. I like him and think that Coach Bugal is going to press the right buttons to get his motor at an even higher gear then we've seen it. Mind you, Coach Gibbs play calling is also going to help drastically in that area as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Utah

However, I would not be in favor of losing Samuels. I like him and think that Coach Bugal is going to press the right buttons to get his motor at an even higher gear then we've seen it. Mind you, Coach Gibbs play calling is also going to help drastically in that area as well.

This is the way I feel too...I'm hesitant to judge anyone's performance over the last year or two...My thought is..most of our players that didn't play up to par under the spurrier era...will excel with the coaching staff...And what a wicked awesome coaching staff it is!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Gallery were to fall to us at #5, we would draft him and trade Samuels for a lower 1st round pick.

Samuels had one good year - 2001 - when all the team did was run the ball. He is a great run blocker but an average pass blocker, which is the LT's primary responsibility. More importantly, he's eating up 1/10th of our cap money this year, and next year would have us over a barrel in negotiations because we wouldn't be able to afford to keep or cut him.

That said, I don't see us trading up for Gallery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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