Home Non Cigar Related

Wooohooo ... How 'bout them Redskins!

madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭
Albert Haynesworth and DeAngelo Hall. Hall was our best playmaker on defense last year, sad considered he wasn't with us the beginning of the season. And Haynesworth, I just had a feeling we'd go after him! Glad to see Shawn Springs get cut as well. Anyone else here happy about FA so far?
«1

Comments

  • dutyjedutyje Posts: 2,263
    I've kept my ears open.. I'm actually hoping the Panthers don't do anything with the FA period this year, except maybe pick up some D-Line help. If we could dish Peppers for a 1st-rounder, I'd be happy.
  • LukoLuko Posts: 2,004
    Just hit 'pause' on the DVD remote to take a break from watching my Steelers Super Bowl champs video. We might lose a few players, i.e. Bryant McFadden, but not enough to really do damage. The Steelers need help on the D- and O-line, and hopefully we can develop a few players through the draft. We've never made the splash play to go after the bigtime FA and I'm just fine with the Rooney Family approach.
  • madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭
    6 Super Bowls later, you should be.
  • gmill880gmill880 Posts: 5,947
    The only splash the Colts ever make in free agency is the sound of their free agents splashing down in the free agent pool ....we never sign anyone....In Polian We Trust
  • LukoLuko Posts: 2,004
    Hey you got Jeff Saturday...that's a big splash.
  • gmill880gmill880 Posts: 5,947

    Luko:
    Hey you got Jeff Saturday...that's a big splash.

    Yea but thats all we ever do is re-sign our own but hey it works

  • dutyjedutyje Posts: 2,263
    I saw an article yesterday that compared the performance of teams that made huge free agent plays against those who didn't.... let's just say it did not look favorable for the Redskins. They really need a new owner.
  • gmill880gmill880 Posts: 5,947

    dutyje:
    I saw an article yesterday that compared the performance of teams that made huge free agent plays against those who didn't.... let's just say it did not look favorable for the Redskins. They really need a new owner.

    You can't argue with the success the Colts have had signing their own guys and using the draft

  • urbinourbino Posts: 4,517
    gmill880:
    The only splash the Colts ever make in free agency is the sound of their free agents splashing down in the free agent pool
    Like Marvin Harrison. Wow. That was a shock.
  • gmill880gmill880 Posts: 5,947

    urbino:
    gmill880:
    The only splash the Colts ever make in free agency is the sound of their free agents splashing down in the free agent pool
    Like Marvin Harrison. Wow. That was a shock.

    If you follow the Colts it really wasn't that big a shock. Everyone (coaches,players) were saying how they wanted him back and he had not lost a step yadda yadda yadda. But everyone knows its a business....they were all playing nice in case he decided to take the pay cut he was offered and stay. In reality, he did not seem in sync with Manning at all last year,maybe due to Manning missing training camp maybe not. Truth is ( and I am a huge Harrison fan) you can't afford that kind of money for a number 2 receiver and thats what he was on the Colts...Manning had moved on to Reggie Wayne as his go-to guy. I hate to see him in another uniform but I would have hated to see that kinda money with the salary cap and all spent on Marvin (sorry Marv) the results just did not justify it. He is a Hall of Famer no doubt...We Colts fans will miss ya Marv...thanks for the memories ....It sucks but its a business...getting old in any sports takes a toll even on a physical beast like Marv ...

  • urbinourbino Posts: 4,517
    Yeah, I'd certainly noticed he wasn't what he used to be. I guess I was just surprised the Colts so abruptly dumped him, not having followed the negotiations like you have. It's sorta like the Bucs dumping Derrick Brooks. You understand it as a football-business matter, but it's just weird.
  • urbinourbino Posts: 4,517
    Hey, maddy, you think Haynesworth will be worth what you guys paid him?
  • gmill880gmill880 Posts: 5,947

    urbino:
    Yeah, I'd certainly noticed he wasn't what he used to be. I guess I was just surprised the Colts so abruptly dumped him, not having followed the negotiations like you have. It's sorta like the Bucs dumping Derrick Brooks. You understand it as a football-business matter, but it's just weird.

    It will be weird not seeing him out there. "Bino you guys looking at anybody on FA ?

  • urbinourbino Posts: 4,517
    Nothing flashy. We picked up Gibril Wilson, who'll get us younger in the secondary, give us a safety who's more of an interception threat, and along with Yeremiah Bell, give us 2 very hard-hitting safeties. We signed Joe Berger from the Cowboys. He's not great, but he'll probably compete for the starting center job; we're a bit undersized there. There's some talk we'll sign Laveranues Coles. The Jets cut him, and he and Pennington are great friends and like playing together.

    Other than that, we re-signed a couple of our own guys. That's it. We were interested in Jason Brown, but when the Rams offered him waaaaaaay too much money, we took a pass (and signed Berger).
  • gmill880gmill880 Posts: 5,947

    urbino:
    Nothing flashy. We picked up Gibril Wilson, who'll get us younger in the secondary, give us a safety who's more of an interception threat, and along with Yeremiah Bell, give us 2 very hard-hitting safeties. We signed Joe Berger from the Cowboys. He's not great, but he'll probably compete for the starting center job; we're a bit undersized there. There's some talk we'll sign Laveranues Coles. The Jets cut him, and he and Pennington are great friends and like playing together.

    Other than that, we re-signed a couple of our own guys. That's it. We were interested in Jason Brown, but when the Rams offered him waaaaaaay too much money, we took a pass (and signed Berger).

    Sounds like their on the move...should be fun to watch this season

  • urbinourbino Posts: 4,517
    Yeah, I think, finally, for the first time in 15-20 years, they're going about things the right way. Get good value in your draft, top to bottom, and use free agency to sign some key role-players. Building a team that way requires patience, but when you're done, you've really got something.

    For many years, the Dolphins went for the quick fix every off-season. It worked just well enough to get them a winning season most years, but they were never actually good, and they never really got any better. Drove me nuckin' futs. I'm tickled to death to see them finally go back to doing it the right way -- the way that made them a powerhouse throughout the '70s and well into the '80s.
  • urbinourbino Posts: 4,517
    Oh, I forgot about Cameron Wake, who was a hot commodity out of the CFL. Had a ton of sacks the last few years. He's been our one big-money signing.
  • gmill880gmill880 Posts: 5,947
    One good thing about free agency for the Colts... we don't have to face/double team Fat Albert anymore woohoo
  • urbinourbino Posts: 4,517
    Heh. Very true. And I don't have to hear about his misbehavior on the local news.
  • madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭
    dutyje:
    I saw an article yesterday that compared the performance of teams that made huge free agent plays against those who didn't.... let's just say it did not look favorable for the Redskins. They really need a new owner.
    No doubt we need a new owner. I think the difference this year as compared to other years we've made big splashes is that both of these guys are young and proven. Typically we've gone after guys in the twilight of their careers or guys that were overrated (Archuletta) or potentially great(Lloyd). These guys are just starting to peak.

    Is Haynesworth worth it? IDK, if he plays like he did in Tennessee then he's worth every penny. There are VERY few dominant DT's like him and we needed one bad. My only concern is the only two years the Haynesworth was trully dominant was when he was playing for a contract. Prior to that he was a trouble maker and just barely above average.

    De Angelo Hall is odd to me, I'm not a huge fan of his as I don't think he is great but he was definetly an upgrade over 36 year old Springs who was scheduled to make more money than Hall will under his new contract.
  • urbinourbino Posts: 4,517
    madurofan:
    My only concern is the only two years the Haynesworth was trully dominant was when he was playing for a contract. Prior to that he was a trouble maker and just barely above average.
    Yeah, that's what I was getting at. It struck me as a high-risk play, offering him that long a contract, worth that much money, and so much of it guaranteed. You might end up with an unmotivated, underperforming salary cap anchor. Plus, he hardly ever plays a full season, anyway, due to injury.
  • LukoLuko Posts: 2,004
    urbino:
    madurofan:
    My only concern is the only two years the Haynesworth was trully dominant was when he was playing for a contract. Prior to that he was a trouble maker and just barely above average.
    Yeah, that's what I was getting at. It struck me as a high-risk play, offering him that long a contract, worth that much money, and so much of it guaranteed. You might end up with an unmotivated, underperforming salary cap anchor. Plus, he hardly ever plays a full season, anyway, due to injury.
    You're right Urbi...I don't think Haynesworth is "worth" the trouble. He hasn't played a full season (I think he averages about 12 games a seasaon). According to Peter King, he's never played more than 65 percent of his team's defensive snaps in a season. Plus, he's way over 3 bills and 28 years old.

    So he may be a great d-lineman, but they just gave him franchise qb money. Them there's different things.
  • madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭
    Luko:
    urbino:
    madurofan:
    My only concern is the only two years the Haynesworth was trully dominant was when he was playing for a contract. Prior to that he was a trouble maker and just barely above average.
    Yeah, that's what I was getting at. It struck me as a high-risk play, offering him that long a contract, worth that much money, and so much of it guaranteed. You might end up with an unmotivated, underperforming salary cap anchor. Plus, he hardly ever plays a full season, anyway, due to injury.
    You're right Urbi...I don't think Haynesworth is "worth" the trouble. He hasn't played a full season (I think he averages about 12 games a seasaon). According to Peter King, he's never played more than 65 percent of his team's defensive snaps in a season. Plus, he's way over 3 bills and 28 years old.

    So he may be a great d-lineman, but they just gave him franchise qb money. Them there's different things.
    First off Peter King is an idiot. I listen to the moron a couple times every week on Sirius NFL channel. This is the same moron that still believes Art Monk shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame.

    No big man plays more than 70% of the time. In the modern NFL DTs are rotated in and out. The Titans did this less than most teams and caused the big guys to wear out quicker. THe Skins are much deeper at DT than the Titans and Haynesworth will be spelled more here than he was there. You also have to take into that 12 game average he was once suspended for 5 games. I'm not saying he's not a risk but I think his talent is worth the risk. I'm good with the Skins moves so far.

    Signing Dockery back was one helluva deal too. He's a big upgrade over Pete Kendall particularly in age.
  • LukoLuko Posts: 2,004
    madurofan:
    Luko:
    urbino:
    madurofan:
    My only concern is the only two years the Haynesworth was trully dominant was when he was playing for a contract. Prior to that he was a trouble maker and just barely above average.
    Yeah, that's what I was getting at. It struck me as a high-risk play, offering him that long a contract, worth that much money, and so much of it guaranteed. You might end up with an unmotivated, underperforming salary cap anchor. Plus, he hardly ever plays a full season, anyway, due to injury.
    You're right Urbi...I don't think Haynesworth is "worth" the trouble. He hasn't played a full season (I think he averages about 12 games a seasaon). According to Peter King, he's never played more than 65 percent of his team's defensive snaps in a season. Plus, he's way over 3 bills and 28 years old.

    So he may be a great d-lineman, but they just gave him franchise qb money. Them there's different things.
    First off Peter King is an idiot. I listen to the moron a couple times every week on Sirius NFL channel. This is the same moron that still believes Art Monk shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame.

    No big man plays more than 70% of the time. In the modern NFL DTs are rotated in and out. The Titans did this less than most teams and caused the big guys to wear out quicker. THe Skins are much deeper at DT than the Titans and Haynesworth will be spelled more here than he was there. You also have to take into that 12 game average he was once suspended for 5 games. I'm not saying he's not a risk but I think his talent is worth the risk. I'm good with the Skins moves so far.

    Signing Dockery back was one helluva deal too. He's a big upgrade over Pete Kendall particularly in age.
    I guess my point was that DTs are not worth that money, especially when you factor in that he's injury prone, appears to have a lack of dedication and is getting up in age and size given the rigors of the position.

    Peter King ain't that bad. He usually knows what the dealio is.
  • gmill880gmill880 Posts: 5,947
    Mr Da 'Bino Pro Football Talk links former Colt wr Harrison as a fit for the Phins who are supposedly looking for a possesion receiver !?!? Unfortunatly I don't belive at this stage of his career he fits that description. Too much catch and go down on 5 yard routes for Parcells I would think. I absolutely believe 2 years ago his catch and subsequent fumble on a crossing route deep in San Diego territory cost us that playoff game.....just my slanted view.
  • urbinourbino Posts: 4,517
    I don't find King all that bad, though I don't agree with him on Monk.

    And I agree with you, Luko, about the franchise money. Even assuming Fat Albert is available for every down of the season (even if he doesn't play every down), that's an awful lot of money to tie up in a DT. Especially with so much of it guaranteed. That's gonna be biting you guys on the salary cap for years to come.

    Maybe it'll work out great and he'll be worth every penny. But your franchise is gonna have that contract tied around its neck for an awfully long time.
  • urbinourbino Posts: 4,517
    I've seen those rumors, too, gm. The talk out of Miami, though, is they're not interested in him -- or Coles. They don't see either of them as what they're looking for in a WR right now.
  • LukoLuko Posts: 2,004
    urbino:
    I've seen those rumors, too, gm. The talk out of Miami, though, is they're not interested in him -- or Coles. They don't see either of them as what they're looking for in a WR right now.
    So how's Guinn gonna work out...is he a real talent, or just a college phenom who can't make it in the pros. I always thought he could be more than a return guy and last year, he seemed to mesh well with Pennington, right?
  • madurofanmadurofan Posts: 6,219 ✭✭✭
    King is that bad. He's a moron and has quite a rep for stealing stories, his "scoops" are usually him claiming that he's breaking a story that some local reporter has already broke. Palantonio is bad about that as well.

    It is a ton of money but one thing the Redskins never seem to have is salary cap issues. Our cap guy is AMAZING.

    P.S. the deal is really only a 4 year 48 million dollar deal, the other 3 years and 52 mill are fluff.
  • gmill880gmill880 Posts: 5,947

    madurofan:
    King is that bad. He's a moron and has quite a rep for stealing stories, his "scoops" are usually him claiming that he's breaking a story that some local reporter has already broke. Palantonio is bad about that as well.

    It is a ton of money but one thing the Redskins never seem to have is salary cap issues. Our cap guy is AMAZING.

    P.S. the deal is really only a 4 year 48 million dollar deal, the other 3 years and 52 mill are fluff.

    Well damn, I would hate it Maddy, but jeezzz , GUESS 48 million over 4 years would be ok , I mean what with a recession and all I guess I could sacrafice ....lol

Sign In or Register to comment.