What would you have done?

[Nerm]

It looks like the offseason is nearly over. I was wondering what Skins fans think of their offseason as a whole. In my opinion, I think the Skins should have tried to get younger in the offseason. When you have a core of Arrington, Champ, Smoot, and your OTs, I think you have to try to build a young team that can be a contender for a 3-4 year period. I understand why Green was resigned, although I think it would have made more sense to sign him to the vet min with a 25k signing bonus. The cap hit would have been half as much.

Although Armstead did not cost too much, does anyone think he will be a solid starter when the Skins are in a championship game? As for Trotter, it seems like a waste to spend so much in signing bonus when you already have a good player at MLB. I would have passed on these guys and tried to extend Champ and Jansen. Furthermore, I would have frontloaded the contracts a little to free up future cap space. I just read that Bruce may be restructuring and pushing his salary to future years. This make no sense to me unless you are making a SB run this year or are trying to keep a championship team together. If the Skins are making a run, they should have signed Chandler.

If I were the Skins, these are a few the guys I would have looked to keep/sign in the offseason. They are fairly young, cheap, and have an upside.

Fred Beasly FB from San Fran

Mike Westbrook- WR

Jeremy Newberry - C from San Fran

Corey Raymer - C

Renaldo Wynn ( you got him)

Pat Tillman - S from Arizona

Freddie Jones TE from SD (not sure how he would fit with the fun-n-gun)

In the draft, I liked the Ramsey pick, but they should have signed Chad Hutchinson in the offseason. On the first day of the draft, I would have gone DL, OG and Saftey.

I would have let Bruce, Shade, and maybe Coleman go. I would keep Coleman over Bruce if he came at a cheaper price.

[bulldog]

1. I think you ignore the ages of the players the Redskins DID sign: Moore (26), Jones (28), Green (27), Wynn (27), Trotter (26)...........the over 30 pickups are both just 31 in Armstead and Matthews..................

2. Some of the players on your list simply don't fit our offensive strategy. Spurrier's offense doesn't require a high profile fullback like Beasley or a major tight end like Freddie Jones.............

3. We already have had a 7 year audition of Mr. Westbrook in 2 or 3 different offensive systems and he has consistently failed to live up to even modest expectations. I think it is in HIS best interests to get a change of scenery. No sense in compounding a mistake by making another one in signing Mike to a long-term contract for big dollars.

[Nerm]

Originally posted by bulldog

1. I think you ignore the ages of the players the Redskins DID sign: Moore (26), Jones (28), Green (27), Wynn (27), Trotter (26)...........the over 30 pickups are both just 31 in Armstead and Matthews..................

2. Some of the players on your list simply don't fit our offensive strategy. Spurrier's offense doesn't require a high profile fullback like Beasley or a major tight end like Freddie Jones.............

3. We already have had a 7 year audition of Mr. Westbrook in 2 or 3 different offensive systems and he has consistently failed to live up to even modest expectations. I think it is in HIS best interests to get a change of scenery. No sense in compounding a mistake by making another one in signing Mike to a long-term contract for big dollars.

I think Wynn and Green are OK for the $ they got. Again, Trotter is young but the MLB position was fine and the siging bonus was about $7 million for Trotter. With his knees, I would not of spent that much cash on a minor upgrade. Trotter is very good but he is not 3.5 mill per year better than the MLB you had. For that kind of cash you could have added two of the best young players at their positions (Beasley and Newberry). As for the scheme used... I would have taken Schotty or Lewis as head coach over SS... but that is a whole other conversation.

Westbrook may not be Jerry Rice but he is the best WR that the Skins have had in a long time. He is under 30 years old and has the potential to be a pro-bowler. He can also be signed for $1 mill or less.

[Barney B]

Originally posted by Nerm

Westbrook may not be Jerry Rice but he is the best WR that the Skins have had in a long time. He is under 30 years old and has the potential to be a pro-bowler. He can also be signed for $1 mill or less.

Really? You think Westbrook can be had for less than a million?

If that's the case, he should switch careers, and become a high-price bodyguard. I mean, we already know he has a mean streak, and he can sucker-punch with the best of them, so, why not? I mean, did you see what he did to Stephen Davis? That looked like MR. T. whomping Oprah! You wanna know how much money MR. T. made during his heyday of acting in such timeless masterpieces as "DC Cab"? Lots! Westy could do that! Westy can say, "I pity the foo' !!" And a whole lot more. The man has many talents other than running the wrong route sometimes, and throwing his helmet off in frustration, yes sir. Westy can say, "Stella, Stellllllllaaaaahhhhh", and THEN throw his helmet off in frustration!

THAT would be a masterpiece of acting, yes sir.

[Nerm]

When I watched Westbrook play last year, I had the same reaction as many on this board. There were a lot of times that Westbrook looked wide open, but Banks seemed locked on to Gardner.

As a Dallas fan, I will be glad to see Westbrook sign somewhere else (just not in Philly or NY). I think he is the Skins best receiver. Maybe he will sign for big $$$, but it seems like he could be signed for around $1 mill. Personally, I hope the Skins let him go and sign Freeman for big $.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by The Chief

we already know he has a mean streak, and he can sucker-punch with the best of them, so, why not? I mean, did you see what he did to Stephen Davis? ... The man has many talents other than running the wrong route sometimes, and throwing his helmet off in frustration, yes sir.

Boy, I get tired of defending Westbrook.

It's all too apparent that this board would rather have a receiver with "potential" who catches 45% of his passes (Gardner) than a receiver who catches 62% of his passes and does about one dumb, headline-grabbing thing a year (Westbrook).

So Westbrook punched Stephen Davis once in practice. So he threw his helmet once and drew a 15-yard penalty. So he allegedly has run the wrong route on occasion. Dumb stuff? Sure.

Hmmm.... I seem to recall LaVar Arrington drawing a bushel of 15-yard penalties in just the last two years. I'm not talking about borderline QB hits -- LaVar's had some doozy brain-cramp moments. And don't get me started about Chris Samuels. I use his false start and holding penalties as little in-game reminders to change laundry loads on Sundays. Can't wait til we run that moron out of town.

Is my point clear enough? Westbrook doesn't have some kind of monopoly on stupid moments. Stupid plays are made all the time by team faves LaVar and Samuels. In fact, I'd say LaVar and Samuels make stupid plays a good bit more frequently than Westbrook.

You can't argue the merits of Westbrook as a receiver, either. In his last two years of play (he was injured in 2000), he did everything he was asked to do, with outstanding performance. Marty obviously wanted to make his #1 pick Gardner a star, but that didn't stop Westbrook from catching more passes (with fewer thrown to him) -- with an astronomical difference in reception percentage between Westbrook and Gardner.

Apparently it's not Westbrook who's the problem at this point. It's the fans. Bitter fans who can't forgive Westbrook for not "living up" to his billing earlier in his career as a top #1 pick. I maintain as I always have that if Westbrook had been a 4th or 5th round pick, he'd still be with the team and we'd be pinching ourselves silly about him.

It seems we Skins fans like our 1st round picks in two varieties: franchise players (Monk, Green, Bailey, Arrington, Samuels), and good-for-nothing busts (Schuler as well as others, and now Westbrook). We're not mature enough to handle the idea that a 1st round pick might be something in between.

It's not a player's *fault* that he's picked in the first round. Sure, he's paid a lot of money, but all players are paid as much as they can manage to get. Do you think if we offered millions of dollars to 5th round picks, they'd say, "Aw, shucks, I don't deserve all that!" Are 5th round picks somehow more virtuous because they're paid less and regarded as underdogs?

When I look at Westbrook, I see a player who has given us everything we asked for in his last two (full) years, who has put most of his immaturity behind him, and whose physical skills are easily better than anyone on the Skins WR roster. I don't even think he's expensive at this point -- we probably get him for $1M a year.

But we won't get him. And at this point I blame the fans (and media) as much as anyone, for nursing old grudges and disappointments instead of simply looking at the play of our receivers with an objective view. Don't think the team doesn't listen to the fans and the media. You almost never see popular players in their prime just tossed away by this team.

Westbrook will get a fresh start somewhere else. He'll get new fans who won't start off with grudges. And within a year or two, that team and those fans will wonder how our team and our fans could possibly have dumped such a good receiver on the side of the road.

Please refrain from hyperbole in any response. I'm not saying Westbrook is Jerry Rice. I'm saying he's a *good* receiver and better than anyone we have, with plenty of years left in his body. When healthy and used right , Westbrook in his prime can turn in a performance similar to a typical Art Monk year. (That doesn't make him Art Monk, who was vastly more mature, less frequently injured, and had the dedication that enabled a much longer career at peak performance.) Both are reliable possession receivers, with the great hands you want in a go-to receiver, and with enough speed and moves to go deep on occasion.

But I guess that's not what we're looking for in a receiver. I keep hearing about all the young guys on the roster, from that great kid Gardner to all those other guys who haven't gotten a chance. I hear they've got a lot of "potential".

[Art]

Nerm, the offseason is far from nearly over.

After June 1 a year ago, the Redskins added Banks, Carter, Metcalf, Szott and Jones, all players who played substantial roles with last year's team. That said, even if the offseason happened to be nearly over, your desire to have seen the Redskins get younger has been realized.

We've decreased the age of our players throughout the interior offensive line and at middle linebacker. We got younger at receiver with the presumed departure of Westbrook. Now, I know the natural aging factor plays in here and every player is a year older now than he was, but, I assume you'll grant the point when you really have no choice.

The only position we've gotten "older", other than the natural evolution of having birthdays, is weakside linebacker, where Armstead replaces essentially a free-agent rookie who has promise, considering Barber wasn't around very much. The Redskins core players of Bailey, Smoot, Arrington, Trotter, Samuels and Jansen give us an astonishingly fine young core to build around, and you may be able to add Gardner, Ramsey and a couple of others to that list as well in time.

I understand your excitement with Hutchinson as he will likely unseat Carter and be the Cowboy future starter, but, really, we shouldn't have overpaid for him in the offseason rather than signing Ramsey. Jones did overpay for him and the Redskins did select a guy who's actually played the sport of football. You should have drafted Ramsey perhaps, but that is another story.

In all, everything I'd like to see the Redskins accomplish in this offseason has not been done. Happily it's only May and there's yet time, as you may or may not know.

[NavyDave]

Westy's mouth has had a way of irking fans.

Lavar upset fans only when he wanted independent merchandising which messed up naming rights on Madden 2001.

His hits that lead to fines and 15yd penalties still have their efect on opposing players because they know he will layeth the smakdown and thus he needs to be accounted for thus a nasty streak on Defense we lacked for a while.

And yeah I like the potential of our young guys. Drafting someone in the first round is also based on potential thats just seen more because of playing in a major college

[SkinsNorth]

IMO, we have had a real solid & productive offseason. I think the FO has done a god job signing younger vets who are either in their prime or who are entering their prime.

The FO also did a good job bringing in players who are familiar with the F-N-G at relatively low prices.

Our one big signing (Trotter) didnt really fill a need but it allowed us to replace our former starting MLB, with a younger pro bowl player, who has not yet entered the prime of his career.

I also think that we did a good job not reaching for players who would have filled needs, but would have also had ??? surrounding their play.

[Skins57]

How can someone who defends Westbrook (Whom I really like also) but then say he can't wait for Samuels to leave.

What's wrong with that picture? Chris has proved to be on of the best young Lineman in the league. Mike has had one good year in 7. I can defend Mike also. He has only had a decent QB in his healthy years, early on the Skins were flat out awful, He should never have hit DAvis But Davis was not all innocent if you can believe the story and also Davis laid there like a little B!tch as he got hit I could go on but I won't.

You say we keep Westbrook and hope to let Samuels leave... what can I say...:high: :high:

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Skins57

How can someone who defends Westbrook (Whom I really like also) but then say he can't wait for Samuels to leave.

Apparently I'm going to have to use smileys every time I make a joke. I was *joking* about Samuels. (The penalties are true, but in no way do I want Samuels to leave. I was making the point that even team faves like Samuels and LaVar make dumb plays.)

[Skins57]

Boy I look stupid now don't I....:shootinth

I just crawled out of bed after a late night and that was what I saw, sorry man

I guess maybe I am :high: :high:

[Barney B]

Originally posted by Atlanta Skins Fan

Boy, I get tired of defending Westbrook.

It's all too apparent that this board would rather have a receiver with "potential" who catches 45% of his passes (Gardner) than a receiver who catches 62% of his passes and does about one dumb, headline-grabbing thing a year (Westbrook).

Apparently I'm going to have to use Smileys every time I make a joke.

[bulldog]

Once again, Nerm, I don't think you addressed my points very directly:

1. The Redskins free agents were overwhelmingly UNDER 30 and replaced older players that have since departed.

2. Others such as Beasley and Jones don't fit our current system and thus aren't worth as much to us in terms of contract as they may be to other teams.

3. Westbrook may have talent but he IS nearing 30 (he is 29) and has NEVER made the pro bowl since entering the league in 1995. Saying Westbrook was the Redskins best receiver last year is not saying much when his competition was a career bench-player/#3 receiver in Kevin Lockett and a rookie learning the ropes in Rod Gardner.

Among some other points you made later on:

1. The Redskins are not going to sign Antonio Freeman for BIG dollars. Every indication is that the Redskins are looking at mid-tier free agents such as Willie Jackson, not Freeman or McCardell. In fact the only two players the Redskins have invested large contracts in in the offseason are Wynn (27) and Trotter (26) who are both just entering their primes, so there goes the argument the Skins are screwing their future cap by signing geezers

2. Jeremiah Trotter is the two-time Pro Bowl starter at MLB in the NFC. He has been remarkably durable over that time. So, there goes both your first argument that Trotter is just a 'slight upgrade' at the position and your second that he is damaged goods.

I don't know of too many examples of a 26 year old pro bowler coming in to replace a 30 year old former journeyman signed to near the minimum and that isn't considered more than a slight upgrade by fans, media and people around the NFL :laugh:

3. I agree that signing Newberry would have yielded a better one on one player than Larry Moore. BUT, the COST of such a move would likely have prevented us from swinging the Wynn or Trotter deal and thus would have cost us a valuable performer elsewhere among the starting 22.

[Nerm]

As for the age factor, it isnt so much the age of the players brought in that is the problem. I think extending Bruce Smith and pushing his contract into future years is a mistake if it is done. I think it is usually a waste to have a guy on the roster if he is making much more than the vet minimum and will be unable to contribute meaningfully to a future SB run. There are exceptions like D. Green. Keeping expensive vets (Bruce, Shade, etc.) may cause the Skins to lose some of their better young players in the future. If you belive you have a legit chance at a SB this makes sense, if not, I think it makes more sense to extend and frontload contracts of your younger players.

I think Trotter is an upgrade, but not a 3.5 million a year upgrade. I think the Skins could have gotten 2-3 young players at positions of need for that type of cash. Maybe Trotter will be worth all the money he was given, but with that type of $ there are a lot of different ways to go to improve the team. I would have gone a different rout.

If I owned the Skins, I would rather see Jansen and Champ extended than see Bruce and Shade stay with the team next year. I would rather sign 2-3 young starters at need positions than make Trotter the 2nd highest paid LB in the NFL. And, I would look to clear up future cap space that could be spent on making a SB run.

As a Dallas fan, I have made the same arguments to other Cowboy fans. My original post wasnt intended to say "look how bad the Skins are messing up". Like a lot of guys here, I like to play GM. I would change a lot of things that Dallas has done the past few years as well.

P.S. I think Beasley fits any system. I think he is the most "complete" FB in the NFL as a blocker, receiver, and runner.

[OrangeSkin]

Bottom line is we expected Westbrook to be a superstar, and he's had every opportunity to reach that level for the past 7 years, but he hasn't. Pure and simple.

[bulldog]

what I meant by the comment about Beasley is the Redskins are not in the market for a fullback that comes much over the minimum veteran contract BECAUSE OF the offense the team is contemplating running.

the strategy is to get the ball outside to the receivers and allow the quarterback to find coverage mismatches.

there won't be a Larry Centers-tye back here with 80 receptions.

So to go out and sign a fullback to a large contract makes no sense.

Bryan Johnson is going to make what, a third of what a premier fullback is going to get on the open market?

Just look at the Rams and their revolving door of fullbacks the past 3 seasons.

The fullback is just not a high profile position on their team either.

[redman]

Originally posted by Atlanta Skins Fan

So Westbrook . . . allegedly has run the wrong route on occasion.

It would be more accurate to say that he has occasionally run the correct route on occasion. He's the Norv of WR's, having overstayed his welcome by several years now. Good riddance.

[Barney B]

Originally posted by redman

It would be more accurate to say that he has occasionally run the correct route on occasion.

Redman, I've heard this, too, but I'm not sure how reliable the source is.

Can you substantiate this one solidly for me? It'd make me feel a lot better about losing him.

The Chief

[Luca Brasi]

I'll be so glad when the season gets underway so we don't have to listen to Atlanta wine about Westbrook anymore. The fact that you even mention Westbrook in the same sentence as Lavar and Samuels is insulting.

Lavar Arrington-ProBowl

Chris Samuels- ProBowl

Michael Westbrook- 7 years down the ToiletBowl

As was mentioned earlier, Lavar's penalties were for knocking the sh*t out of somebody. Westbrook's penalty was for taking his helmet off to cry. Similar to what you do everytime someone says something bad about your man Atlanta. Let it go dude. Maybe you'll get lucky and he'll be running bullsh*t routes with the Falcons.

[bulldog]

what ruined Westbrook's early career was his lack of discipline and hard work.

Samuels and Arrington are instinctual football players that have undeniable physical gifts, but they are also smart enough to realize what they have to put in, in order to get the maximum back out...................

Michael spent his first 2-3 years in the NFL worrying about his possessions and showing off his roadster, while Chris Samuels was concentrating on working in the weight room and in the classroom to be the best LT in the NFC.

You can't substitute talent for hard work.

And if you get a superb talent who also works hard, look out

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by bulldog

what ruined Westbrook's early career was his lack of discipline and hard work.

I'll concede that. But how is it relevant what Westbrook did earlier in his career?

Terrell Davis was ripping up the league around the time of Westbrook's early career. Now his knees are all torn up, and he may be done. We don't make evaluations of players (in terms of whether to sign them) on what they did or did not do several years ago. We look at their last two or three years of play, look at their age and health, and try to project from that.

This has been my point all along about Westbrook. People seem to be obsessed with their bitter memories about Westbrook's early career, or blaming him for underperforming as a top #1 draft pick. (The latter isn't entirely Westbrook's fault -- players don't choose their draft positions.)

All the earlier stuff is fairly irrelevant, unless he did something ridiculously bad, such as a felony. In my view, Westbrook has shown in his last two full years of play that he's matured greatly, and he has done everything that has been asked of him.

Maybe he wants too much money -- I have no idea. But if he's available for $1M a year and no one of his talent and projected peformance is available at that price, you have to consider him. This is all a moot point, because the team has apparently decided not to sign him. But I remain puzzled at this forum's obsession over old bitter memories instead of recent performance.

[redman]

Originally posted by The Chief

Redman, I've heard this, too, but I'm not sure how reliable the source is. Can you substantiate this one solidly for me? It'd make me feel a lot better about losing him.

The flippant response would be, "watch some Redskins games."

There was not a single year of Norv Turner's tenure here in which Westbrook was not the most physically talented WR on the roster. Norv ran a passing offense based on timing and route running, that is that each WR was to be at an appointed spot at an appointed time on every play so that the QB could go through his progressions and read, in order, who was open, from one receiver to the next. This requires precision route running.

Out of the five years that Westbrook was in that offense (I'll exclude 2000 because he was essentially lost for the entire season due to the knee injury) he had only one 1000 yard receiving year (1999 - 1191 yds), and he only had one year of more than 6 TD's (1999 - 9 TD's) and two years of more than 4 TD's, and one year of more than 44 receptions (1999 - 65 receptions). His best stats all came about during one year.

Although slightly less bulky than them, Westbrook has all the physical attributes of Terrell Owens and David Boston. Earlier in his career, he ran faster than they did too. To have failed underthose circumstances to put it all together is inexcusable.