yes, a proven player deserves his money, especially if it keeps the O-line together....the most important factor in the redskins success......let's just give a rookie who hasnt played a snap 5 million a year instead.....i say screw fletcher, sign dockery, just an opinion, we'll cross our fingers with "i played one game and played well last year" todd wade
A proven player deserves to be paid... within reason.
Dockery is being paid like a top lineman, and he's not even close to that on the field.
You can't compare rookies to free agents because that's just apples and oranges.
The Zimmermans
08-07-2007, 12:30 PM
I'm comparing dollars to dollars
artmonkforhallofamein07
08-07-2007, 12:32 PM
Do you guys think that letting Collins go would be a liability if he was picked up by an NFC EAST team?
I'm comparing dollars to dollars
Still apples and oranges.
Rookies are paid based on where they were drafted, not much that a team can do about that.
The Zimmermans
08-07-2007, 12:33 PM
I agree, I thought they should sign both landry and dockery, and forget the free agent CRAP
So just sign no free agents at all?
What's the point of that? Free agency can be just as valuable as the draft when used correctly. When you compare what the Skins did in free agency this year to the rest of the league, I thought they were selective and smart for a change, and the deals they gave out were very reasonable.
Stacks42
08-07-2007, 12:36 PM
They could move collins over and make him a QB assistant coach, thats all he seems to be good for. Make Palmer #3,sit with Brunell at #2 and pray that Campbell doesnt go down. With Campbell in there, Ladell Betts profited from the fact that defenses finally feared the long ball, something they dont have to do with Brunell in there. He's been done for a couple years now.
The Zimmermans
08-07-2007, 12:42 PM
how were the redskins effective in free agency if they did not acquire any D-linemen? We went 5-11 with the D-line we had last year, with the worst defense in the league, the least sacks, and a horrible run D. I like the looks of the offense for the most part, but the D-line? are you serious?
SmootSmack
08-07-2007, 12:58 PM
First off ARE is only listed as the 2nd because that where he ended at last year which has been explained several times. Second you are basicaly saying that our coaching staff including Gibbs have no clue on how to coach a football team.
Not only that, but per NFL rules all teams must submit their depth charts to the league prior to the first preseason game (I'm pretty sure it's the first preseason game).
Why that's a rule, I don't really know. I think it's primarily for media purposes actually. But every team has to submit it. Just about everyone knows rankings are subject to change and, like you pointed out, it's often just the way the depth chart was at the end of the previous season. But it's required.
how were the redskins effective in free agency if they did not acquire any D-linemen? We went 5-11 with the D-line we had last year, with the worst defense in the league, the least sacks, and a horrible run D. I like the looks of the offense for the most part, but the D-line? are you serious?
They filled a glaring need at MLB and significantly boosted the CB depth.
As far as the d-line goes there must be some very logical reasons as to why the felt they could stand pat.
We'll see very soon what that thinking was.