ESPN reports Skins sign Matthews

[Nighthawk]

As crazy as this sounds, I've been a fan of Shane Matthews for quite some time. I've always liked him as a QB and I felt that Matthews could be succesful in the right system. I was hoping he would be the odd man out in Chicago last offseason when we were looking for another QB to backup Jeff George but Chicago instead traded McNown and he won the starting job before getting hurt.

I think he instantly becomes the favorite to start and ensures us of a few more wins running Spurriers system. I'm still hoping that Sage and Ramsey eventually become the starter but until then Matthews is a good insurance policy.

[inmate running the asylum]

First of all the Redskins are not going to keep four QB's. They never have and as SS said earlier, he would only go into the season with three.

Secondly, if Sage loses out, he cannot be put on the practice squad, because that is reserved for rookies and 1st year players only. Sage is now classified as a 2nd year player and therefore would be out on the street if he cannot beat out Wuerffel. Sure as hell we know Ramsey will not be cut, regardless of how bad he plays.

[NavyDave]

Iffe doesnt improve I like the idea of asst QB coach.

Heck he could use that experience to become a college coach and implement the fun and gun jr.

[Om]

Screw it. I don't think I've ever posted the same thing on two separate threads intentionally, but I posted what follows on another thread, and that one has turned into yet another example of some vacuous putz with no apparent reason for being here to find himself being held up and systematically pummeled.

It's a "thank you sir may I have another" thing, I think. I don't understand why, but some of my brothers can't seem to resist obliging. Just being good hosts, I suppose.

*

Re: Shane Matthews ...

Well, it's not quite at sh!t-eating grin I'm sporting ... but it's not bad. Haggis, perhaps.

My feeling from the day SS was hired was that I'd be happy with one of two scenarios; either we'd break the bank for someone like Brunnell (my no. 1 choice among vets) or Bledsoe, and probably wait a year to draft the future starter, OR, we'd go with a middle-of-the-road vet like Matthews and try to bag the future QB this year.

While I suspect NOT bringing in a Brunnell of Bledsoe will cost us any realistic chance (spare me the "anything can happen" posts, please ... I know) at being anything more than a potential wildcard-type club, I'm satisfied that Matthews will get us headed in the right direction this year ... while serving as the steward until Ramsey is ready. And if things break right in terms of injuries and chemistry by midseason, I don't see why we couldn't come down the stretch as a team nobody in contention wants to see on the schedule.

To me we're on a 2-year cycle here. Matthews starts this year, with either Sage/Danny as the backup, with Ramsey charting plays and camping out next to SS 24/7. By next fall, Ramsey heads into camp with the starter's job as his to lose.

With Ramsey in the fold, and Matthews here to provide a port in a storm this year, the boiled goat-parts ain't tastin' so awful this afternoon.

*

Only guy I feel bad for right now is Sage. This might well have cost him any real chance to show his stuff in Washington (not that drafting Ramsey didn't do that already). Hope not, but I wouldn't be surprised. SS would realy show me something if he played Sage much over Danny.

Here's hoping Sage doesn't end up a Cowboy. They could use a decent young QB ...

[Dr. D]

yegad OM!

ok MATTHEWS, yea verily.

I have a few questions:

1. is this a decision based on the fact we MIGHT(injuries, sucking from incumbents) need him so lets go and get him NOW before someone else does, and then sort it all out later?

2.After the last mini-camp WE NEED HIM NOW! are scared about what 4 players we already had slated to play there?

3. WHat next?...

4. how many QB's are we REALLY going to carry next season.

5. What does SS REALLY think about Sage, Danny, Dameyune, Patrick?

6. I thought we were "set" at QB, so WHY are we signing someone OTHER THAN a lineman?

ok thats enough for now.

I have been scratching my head with these guys (front office) all off-season....it seems to work somehow.......

[inmate running the asylum]

The Washington Post just reported that Matthews deal is for one year and $ 775,000. It will only count against the cap though for $ 450,000. :jump:

So if we cut Craig at $ 450k then the deal's cancel out and we are still $ 573k under the cap. Thats means we still got room and can still pig out and sign another veteran like G Bob Hallen under the cap. :jump:

Redskins Agree to Deal With Matthews After All

Shane Matthews, 31, likely will sign a one-year contract that will pay him $750,000 but count only $450,000 against the Redskins' salary cap.

By Mark Maske

Washington Post Staff Writer

Monday, April 29, 2002; 3:41 PM

In a sudden reversal, the Washington Redskins agreed today to a one-year, $775,000 contract with free-agent quarterback Shane Matthews.

Matthews's agent, Steve Mandell, said the deal came together quickly after the Redskins contacted him this morning. Redskins officials expected to receive a signed copy of the contract by fax this afternoon.

Redskins Coach Steve Spurrier, who coached Matthews at the University of Florida, said last week that he did not plan to pursue Matthews after the quarterback was released by the Chicago Bears. The Redskins had tried earlier in the offseason to trade a low-round draft choice to Chicago for Matthews. But those attempts failed and, after the Redskins used their first-round draft selection on Tulane quarterback Patrick Ramsey, Spurrier said last week that the team had made a commitment to Ramsey and the other quarterbacks on the roster – Danny Wuerffel, Sage Rosenfels and Dameyune Craig.

Other team officials apparently continued to push for the Matthews signing, however. After watching the Redskins' three-day minicamp, Spurrier said Sunday he was open to adding players at any positions, and this morning he told Joe Mendes, the Redskins' vice president of football operations, to contact Mandell and sign Matthews.

"Shane has tremendous experience, and Shane can run Coach Spurrier's offense as well as, or better than, anyone else can," Mandell said. "It's a great opportunity for Shane and a great addition for the team."

Matthews, 31, received a $25,000 signing bonus and a salary of $750,000. Under a new NFL rule relating to veterans who sign minimum-salary contracts, he will count only $450,000 against the Redskins' salary cap next season. The deal makes Matthews a contender for the club's starting quarterback job next season.

"It's a chance for him to be reunited with the coach and prove himself," Mandell said.

Matthews resisted the Redskins' efforts to sign him to a two-year contract. He wanted a one-year deal that would allow him to be an unrestricted free agent next offseason. Matthews had been scheduled to leave later today for a visit with the Cincinnati Bengals, and he was to meet the Houston Texans after that. The Minnesota Vikings also expressed interest in him.

Mandell said that Matthews gracefully endured the on-again, off-again nature of his prospective reunion with Spurrier, even when Spurrier said last week he intended to pass on Matthews.

"Shane knows the business," Mandell said. "He knows lots of things happen. He was just going to let things take care of themselves. He certainly always wanted to go there and play for the coach."

The Redskins tried from February to April to trade for Matthews. But the Bears resisted, wanting to first obtain another experienced backup for starter Jim Miller. Chicago accomplished that by signing veteran free agent Chris Chandler. By then, however, the Redskins were focusing on Ramsey and the draft. On draft weekend, the Redskins declined even to switch positions in the draft order in a late round to obtain Matthews.

The Redskins acquired one former Florida quarterback, Wuerffel, in a March 1 trade that sent reserve defensive tackle Jerry DeLoach to the Texans. Matthews becomes the fifth former Gators player to rejoin Spurrier with the Redskins, following Wuerffel and wide receivers Chris Doering, Reidel Anthony and Jacquez Green. Like most of the other former Florida players, Matthews does not cost the Redskins much. The most expensive former Gator has been Green, a free agent who passed up more lucrative offers from other NFL teams to agree to a three-year, $4.3 million contract with the Redskins.

Matthews has spent seven of his nine NFL seasons with the Bears. He began last season as Chicago's starter before getting hurt and losing the job to Miller, and ended up completing 84 of 129 passes for 694 yards, with five touchdowns and six interceptions. He was named the NFC offensive player of the week after relieving an injured Miller to complete 25 of 31 passes, with three touchdowns, in a win over the San Francisco 49ers on Oct. 28, and he threw for a career-best 357 yards in a Nov. 4 triumph over the Cleveland Browns.

He appeared in four games and made three starts last season for Chicago. He has made 15 starts in 20 regular season games in the NFL. For his career, Matthews has completed 366 of 599 passes for 3,461 yards, with 19 touchdowns and 18 interceptions. His best season came in 1999 for Chicago, when he made seven starts in eight appearances and completed 61 percent of his passes for 1,645 yards, with 10 touchdowns and six interceptions.

One of Spurrier's first decisions at Florida was to promote Matthews from fifth-stringer to starter, with superb results. Matthews led the Gators to a 28-8 record as a starter and threw for 9,287 yards and 74 touchdowns. He didn't lose a home game as a starter and finished fifth in the Heisman Trophy balloting as a junior.

© 2002 The Washington Post Company

[BCS:BraveCaringSoul]

Om wrote:

Screw it. I don't think I've ever posted the same thing on two separate threads intentionally, but I posted what follows on another thread, and that one has turned into yet another example of some vacuous putz with no apparent reason for being here to find himself being held up and systematically pummeled.

It's a "thank you sir may I have another" thing, I think. I don't understand why, but some of my brothers can't seem to resist obliging. Just being good hosts, I suppose.

Art's just having a bit of wicked fun. When he was a child he used to entertain himself by pulling the wings off of flies. It just so happens that this particular fly has an apparently inexhaustible supply of wings and truly lives for the masochistic pleasure of having them pulled off.

He'll figure it out soon enough.

[Om]

Put me through my paces, will you, D?

Only have about 5 minutes before I have to run, so don't judge me too harshly for rushing through this:

"1. is this a decision based on the fact we MIGHT(injuries, sucking from incumbents) need him so lets go and get him NOW before someone else does, and then sort it all out later?"

I think this is a decision that was probably made some time ago, all the endless quotes otherwise notwithstanding. My guess is SS has suspected all along that Danny (and/or Sage, who I suspect WAS a surprise to him) probably wasn't going to be good enough to accomplish much this year, but wanted to see what he had, kind of on a "just in case" basis. Had Shane been available 2 months ago, we might have done it then, but I wouldn't be shocked to find out that SS thought he might be able to make a swan out of Danny. Apparently, what he's seen through 2 mini-camps has convinced him otherwise. Circumstances with Shane now having worked out, hewas just 's make the decision to draw another card.

"2.After the last mini-camp WE NEED HIM NOW! are scared about what 4 players we already had slated to play there?"

I think what SS saw at the mini-camps was just confirmation that we need a veteran presence to start the year. Too many kids, no adults. Shane is no saviour, but he HAS at least played some in the league, and DOES have that old college history of success with the SS system. Seems a logical fit, really.

"3. WHat next?..."

We catch Shane the hell up. Wish he had been here from jump, but all I can figure is circumstances got in the way. The Bears looked to squeeze max value out of him, and screwed him in the process. As a result, he's behind the curve here a bit. No way to know this for sure now, but I have to believe he'd have been here weeks ago if things w/ the Bears had broken differently.

"4. how many QB's are we REALLY going to carry next season."

Beats me. Somewhere between 1 and 5. My instinct says 3; Shane, the winner of the Sage/Danny duel, and Ramsey. Love to think he might stash Sage somehow, but I don't really believe it. I think we're going to lose him and keep Danny for his teaching value as the primary backup this year.

"5. What does SS REALLY think about Sage, Danny, Dameyune, Patrick?"

Shane Matthews is here. That's what he thinks.

Seriously, I think he's intrigued a bit by Sage ... I think he's dissappointed a bit in Danny but values him for his experience with the system ... I think he knows Ramsey will be his starter come next year ... and I think he's going to be asking to D. Craig's playbook before long.

"6. I thought we were "set" at QB, so WHY are we signing someone OTHER THAN a lineman?"

Because SS confirmed in his mind that the neither Sage nor Danny were going to be able to make hay this year ... despite the hopes I think he might have had. And Shane was available today for essentially nothing. A one-year stewardship. If he's going to carry four QB's, as some seem to think, basically he's traded D. Craig for S. Matthews. Hard to fault the thought.

(And btw, lest anybody think I've forgotten ... I would really like to see us add an OG and a DT too. Big ones. Good ones. Young ones. Cheap ones. Thank you.

"ok thats enough for now."

Good thing. I'm late.

[Carlito Sway]

My only question is who you guys think will get axed due to the signing . . . gotta figure it's Craig and Sage, unless we really do make Danny a QB assistant.

Feel a lot better about Sugar Shane, but I beg of you guys not to call him the Shane Matthews Band on this board. Not only is it a Bermanism (ugh) but you can't mix p*ssy music and the Skins.

Hail!

[cowboykilla]

Om, or anyone for that matter, I dont think Shane will have that much of a problem catching up. I mean, like Danny Weurffel said, its like learning a language again. When you are a part of something for 5 years, and you are that successful, it can't be that hard to remember how to get back on the bike. I'm sure it will all come back to him.

[88Comrade2000]

:high: :cool:

Welcome aboard Shane.

I feel a little better now. As matter of fact, Shane gives us one more win than I previously thought. I'm up to 9-7 now, previous prediction was 8-8.

I saw D. Craig is gonner. We should just cut him now. Danny or Sage will be gone after camp. I hope Sage beats out Danny. I think he will.

Just think spending a year in Spurrier's system can only help Sage. He will become our backup in 2002 and 2003, assuming Patrick is ready. Or if Patrick flops, Sage can sieze the job in 2003.

Shane will only be here for a year. Then try to get a big contract somewhere in 2003. Shane will be the opening day starter unless, Sage takes the job. This gives us the luxary of letting Patrick sit and learn for while until he's really ready to take over.

So my guess of the final qb roster:

1. Shane M.

2. Sage R.

3. Patrick R.

[Montilar]

Take some time away from the board and looky what happens. :cool: :laugh:

I usually check in quite frequently on my day off but, but today I didn't..........

Shane only gives one more win in your estimation Rdskns2000 :?:

He's as least twice the Qb we had last year (H*LL I'd be about as good as last year's QB), and we went 8-8 last year. With the additions of the coaching staff, players like Trotter, and the shrewd moves the front office has been making to offset the free agent losses, I 'd say a competent QB is worth 2 wins. 10-6 is doable but that remains to be seen.

[indyskinsfan]

Yep you were on it Riggo-Toni and Art hit the cylinders on the way it would affect the cap, the amount and jeeeez ART!!! Were you at the negotiations??? :laugh:

cowboykilla and inmate running the asylum, I feel your joy my brothers!

[bulldog]

and let's not forget that Matthews is one of Spurrier's favorite golfing buddies in the offseason. Who knows, maybe Spurrier was concerned he wouldn't be able to put together a decent four in Washington without reaching back to his Florida roots :laugh:

[indyskinsfan]

yep. I forgot about that one. Bethesda maybe? :laugh:

"Aw heck Shane, you know I needed you to go at a few rounds out here"

[One Dollar]

Easily the best QB on your roster (don't know if that's realy a good thing or not). One thing is for sure, the clash between Spurrier and Dano is alive and well. Already thier opinions are diverse and Spurriers power is controlled. Don't think this will bode well in the future. And here I thought Dano was going to actually stay in the background this time.

[Art]

That's a pretty big late entry into this thread, isn't it OD?

Spurrier was given control over whether the Redskins would bring in Matthews. Officials on the team, and fans throughout the world, have been saying that adding Matthews is a smart move. But, despite that lobbying effort, Spurrier didn't agree until Monday morning when according to the reports on the situation, he told Mendes to try and get something done.

In fact, it wouldn't appear that Snyder had anything to do with it. But, after having an offseason with the Glazers so fresh on your mind, I guess you're preoccupied with ownership issues, eh?

[One Dollar]

Art,

Only redskin fans think Snyder had nothing major to do with this, hence your stance.

As far as the Glazers, they are my heros regarding franchise owners. You have no idea what it's like having a Culverhouse for an owner so I can understand your confusion.

[Art]

OD,

I realize that Snyder's long history with Matthews and his yearly overt wish that Matthews would join the team had a large part to do with this. I mean, as a Redskin fan, I realize Spurrier has no past history with Matthews and Matthews was always a favorite to play for the Redskins as long a Snyder was around.

Oh, wait, that's pretty dumb isn't it?

[One Dollar]

Not dumb, just convienent.

No one else was out there and Snyder didn't want Mathews slipping away like all the others. makes all the sense in the world. Spurriers own words only days prior prove it. But I know there is comfort in thinking he "changed his mind".

[mardi gras skin]

I'm pretty sure Spurrier didn't need to change his mind. None of us has any idea what is on his mind whatever he says to the media. Spurrier's interview are fun, but you cant depend on them to telegraph what we're doing next.

And Art's right. The idea that Snyder pushed Matthews on Spurrier is just surreal.

[CounterTre]

Oh Puhleeze One Dollar you are reaching all the way around the world on this one. Snyder wanted Matthews???? Man bud go do some reading, our minicamp was very lackluster. Spurrier changing his mind after what he saw last weekend makes complete sense. If Snyder was involved and had stars in his eyes like you profess, he certainly wouldn't have gone after Matthews. Bledsoe would have been our guy to pursue if it was big name shopping time. Matthews wasn't even on the radar screen until Spurrier came along...get REAL!

You've had some pretty well informed posts in the past but this one is worthy of a :dunce:

Or maybe you've been doing too much of this today....:high:

Snyder was the driving force...:rotflmao:

[indyskinsfan]

One Dollar,

Though the "opinion" of yours, is well, your own, the facts don't all come out. You clearly state there was no one else out there.

How so? June 1 isn't here yet. By the way, even though we may not have like it, Jeff George and Tony Banks both weren't acquired at convenient moments in back to back years. Saved for the Johnson 2 years, No one QB was ever regarded as being permanent with the Skins, until now (Ramsey) and he has to prove himself.

From the outside we can make opinions, not knowing how a GM, owner, HC or OC or DC takes something personally or otherwise, unless they choose to do so publicly. Taking for granted everything you hear or read or are affectionately swayed by your favorite announcer as THE word spoken by the one they interviewed, can be misleading.

You, I and anyone, other than the ones with the axe to put the player on waivers, etc., have no idea that Mark Rypien won't be somewhere else, or Jay Fiedler, or a few others. However, the Matthews deal wasn't helter skelter at all. It was mainly management strategy and the precise moment to not count so heavy against the cap and other regards.

I see your point that it may have looked like that, "panick", but I see your remarks as nothing more than an adversaries opinion, than a well balanced , unbiased fact.

Oh and I missed my hint that the Matthews deal was never dead, when I overlooked Craig not getting mentioned except in legal terms (as an equal). Other than that he was fodder from the moment go. I think ALL the REDSKINS fans knew this, but when you're outside looking in, it looks different to you.

[One Dollar]

Ok Ok Ok, you got me

Seriously, I like Mathews and think he will win the start (like just about everyone does). I just wanted to give you some of the stuff I always get from you guys regarding Keyshawn, the Glazers, and our offense (before Gruden). you constantly pull out the stale media inflated comments about those. :gus:

It really gets old when people hang on to old media fueled opinions doesn't it?

SOS does and will talk out of the side of his mouth so I realize he is behind this. So with that I bid you good luck to converse again.

[Art]

There's nothing inflated here, One Dollar, except the view Keyshawn holds for himself despite how little he actually impacts a game.

Are those the kind of comments you get tired of?

Just checking, if not those, I've got more. .