Thinking Skins Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 I am liking our proactive approach to free agency, and while I do think that signing these players improves our depth and and our team as a whole, a part of me is concerned about what its saying about our depth and about our ability to scout youth. Maybe I'm just jumping the gun and this years class is just too crappy at S. But over the past few months we've signed like 4 or 5 safeties. Thats more than some teams had on their roster last year. I realize that most of these guys will be cut, but can't it cause problems when there isn't time for everybody to get reps? Last thing I want to do is to cut a rookie who has talent, but didnt get to show the coaches, in order to keep a player who we signed to be a backup. But I trust Gibbs and Co., so I'm not gonna say that we've made bad moves, but I just hope they've thought this through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidwayMonster31 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Originally posted by blakman211 I am liking our proactive approach to free agency, and while I do think that signing these players improves our depth and and our team as a whole, a part of me is concerned about what its saying about our depth and about our ability to scout youth. Being a Skins fan, I think you know the answer to that. At least under Dan Snyder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDane Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Sean Taylor is 22. Ryan Clark is 25. Andre Lott is 25, soon 26. Pierson Prioleau is 27. Matt Bowen is 28. Cory Hall is 28. If you're worried about age and our safety corps, I think your worries are misguided. And Cartoons82, I really don't understand what you said, so I'll ignore it and pretend you were trying to be funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
33 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 This has been pretty status quo with us since we tend to not have many draft picks, but it also fits into Gibbs mentality. Hey, if there is a good vet out there at the right price, I see no reason not to add them to our team. Hall was the starting safety on a playoff defense last year. I don't see how this guy can hurt us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Originally posted by TheDane Sean Taylor is 22. Ryan Clark is 25. Andre Lott is 25, soon 26. Pierson Prioleau is 27. Matt Bowen is 28. Cory Hall is 28. If you're worried about age and our safety corps, I think your worries are misguided. And Cartoons82, I really don't understand what you said, so I'll ignore it and pretend you were trying to be funny. I think he's implying that since Dan bought the team its been an all-out spending spree getting big-name veterans to "win now." Just another one of those "fans" who thinks its not different this year. Another "fan" who doesn't realize that Gibbs is putting together a team of individuals who fit the classic Gibbs mold. As far as signing veterans compared with scouting youth, look at the starting offense and defense (projected, imho): QB - Ramsey (homegrown) RB - Portis (trade) HB - Cooley (homegrown) LT - Samuels (homegrown) LG - Dockery (homegrown) C - Rabach (trade) RG - Thomas (RFA) RT - Jansen (homegrown) TE - Royal (homegrown) WR - Moss (trade) WR - Jacobs (homegrown) - this is debatable, but I think he will be the starter when camp and preseason are over. 7/11 on offense is a pretty good ratio I would imagine; I bet if you look at the majority of NFL teams, that is around the median value... Defense: WLB - LA (homegrown) MLB - Holdman (UFA) SLB - Washington (UFA) Plenty of homegrown LB depth (McCune, Marshall, Smith, Newberry...) DE - Wynn (UFA) DE - Daniels (UFA) DT - Griffin (UFA) DT - Salavea/Noble (UFAs) CB - Springs (UFA) CB - Harris (UFA) Up and coming homegrown depth at CB (Wilds & Rogers) SS - Bowen (RFA) FS - Taylor/Clark/Lott (all homegrown) On defense we've got a lot of free-agent signings, but as the unit was #3 in the league last year, I'm not sure that matters as much. And there are homegrown players waiting in the wings to take over if any of the veterans go down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thinker Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Somthing to consider is that in the past, fa's signed here because we overpaid. A bunch of these guys had offers from other teams (Holdman for the Pat's - Hall from the Falcons - both seem to have gotten pretty small contracts) Others came here for reasonable salaries - Rabach and Patten. So, if we can fit them under the cap and they're better than the guys we have on the roster - Why shouldn't we sign them?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FS36 Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Originally posted by Cartoons82 Being a Skins fan, I think you know the answer to that. At least under Dan Snyder. It's a troll. Get grab your clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted May 25, 2005 Author Share Posted May 25, 2005 Originally posted by TheDane Sean Taylor is 22. Ryan Clark is 25. Andre Lott is 25, soon 26. Pierson Prioleau is 27. Matt Bowen is 28. Cory Hall is 28. If you're worried about age and our safety corps, I think your worries are misguided. And Cartoons82, I really don't understand what you said, so I'll ignore it and pretend you were trying to be funny. Nah, my purpose for asking the question was NOT to talk about us signing players that are too old. It was a concern that we could be signing too many mediocre players. Every year there are rookies, particularly undrafted free agents who come in here and give spectacular performances. If you look at our safety crops over the last few years its been filled with players like this. My concern then is that with us signing so many players it may take these undrafted free agents out of the picture so we will have no rookies to develop and try to mold into all pro's. If you think about a player like Pierce. This is an undrafted guy who got a chance to shine in training camp. He shined so much that he got the starting job at Mike and played pretty well. But he wouldn't have gotten that chance had we gone out and signed like 4 or 5 MLB's as insurance. I've got no doubts in how Gibbs is running the team, so I'm not saying anything negative about our status or our direction. I mean what fan could possibly get mad at a team signing depth? I praise Gibbs and Williams for filling the holes on our team. But I do question if its going to limit the amount competition the rookies can give. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Originally posted by blakman211 Maybe I'm just jumping the gun and this years class is just too crappy at S. But over the past few months we've signed like 4 or 5 safeties. Thats more than some teams had on their roster last year. I realize that most of these guys will be cut, but can't it cause problems when there isn't time for everybody to get reps? Last thing I want to do is to cut a rookie who has talent, but didnt get to show the coaches, in order to keep a player who we signed to be a backup. Not all these guys will make the final roster and I'm sure there is some thought here for Special Teams, also. Our biggest plays on Special Teams last year came from guys who were primarily DB's. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milliondollarslim Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Gibbs and Williams want to create a super competitive environment up and down the roster so everyone and the team keeps improving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDane Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Originally posted by blakman211 Nah, my purpose for asking the question was NOT to talk about us signing players that are too old. It was a concern that we could be signing too many mediocre players. Every year there are rookies, particularly undrafted free agents who come in here and give spectacular performances. If you look at our safety crops over the last few years its been filled with players like this. My concern then is that with us signing so many players it may take these undrafted free agents out of the picture so we will have no rookies to develop and try to mold into all pro's. If you think about a player like Pierce. This is an undrafted guy who got a chance to shine in training camp. He shined so much that he got the starting job at Mike and played pretty well. But he wouldn't have gotten that chance had we gone out and signed like 4 or 5 MLB's as insurance. I've got no doubts in how Gibbs is running the team, so I'm not saying anything negative about our status or our direction. I mean what fan could possibly get mad at a team signing depth? I praise Gibbs and Williams for filling the holes on our team. But I do question if its going to limit the amount competition the rookies can give. Ah, ok. Here's what I'd say. We've got on our roster three young players, Taylor, Clark, and Lott, who we can do what you're saying. "Mold' into all-pros. We've brought in two players, Prioleau and Hall, who aren't exactly old, but are known veteran commodities. If the coaching staff makes the decision that the help Hall and Prioleau will provide now outweighs the upside of Lott and Clark, then I will agree with them. Don't forget that we've got a number of folks scattered elsewhere about the defense -- Chris Clemons, Garnell Wilds, Demetric Evans, Ryan Boschetti, Rufus Brown, Clifton Smith, Lemar Marshall -- who could arguably fit your profile as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Nah, my purpose for asking the question was NOT to talk about us signing players that are too old. It was a concern that we could be signing too many mediocre players. Funny, but that's the way New England won a bunch of Superbowls. As long as you are signing guys who fit your system, I don't really see the problem. Actually, the guys being signed are at a disadvantage from the standpoint that the guys who are already here know the system, and the coaching staff knows what they can do. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Originally posted by blakman211 Nah, my purpose for asking the question was NOT to talk about us signing players that are too old. It was a concern that we could be signing too many mediocre players. I can understand what you are saying, but this is something Gibbs did even before free agency existed. He scooped up a quite a bit of plan B players to fill roles, and usually they were special teamers and depth, which is the same type of guys he's going after now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 Originally posted by milliondollarslim Gibbs and Williams want to create a super competitive environment up and down the roster so everyone and the team keeps improving. I agree with Slim 100% here and add that the older guys will only help the younger guys improve that much quicker. Obviously Gibbs wants to build a Top 10 Special teams group but if you can prove your value on the playing field as well, you greatly improve your chances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted May 25, 2005 Author Share Posted May 25, 2005 Originally posted by TheDane Ah, ok. Here's what I'd say. We've got on our roster three young players, Taylor, Clark, and Lott, who we can do what you're saying. "Mold' into all-pros. We've brought in two players, Prioleau and Hall, who aren't exactly old, but are known veteran commodities. Thats an interesting take on it. We always need both youth and veterans, and we may just be in a position where we're not really looking for youth. Yeah, cause one problem that may come with youth is that you don't know how they're going to play on special teams. They can be great or they can be ghosts. This offseason we've signed a lot of veterans who are really good at special teams and that kinda secures that area. Thanks, I like that answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted May 25, 2005 Share Posted May 25, 2005 We have quite a few young guns on our team. You left out Garnel Wilds who I have advertising for quite sometime. He WILL be good. The vets we are getting arent all old, some just havent been given the oppritunity to break out yet. Dont count Darnarian McCants out either. he was tied for team lead in touchdowns two years ago with L.Coles I know a lot of you wont agree but he should be one of our three top recievers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.