Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)

Earlier today, PFT posted a blog entry saying we are about to make a "Major Offer" to DeAngelo Hall.

ProFootballTalk.com - “MAJOR OFFER” COMING FOR DEANGELO? (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/01/26/major-offer-coming-for-deangelo/)

According to two independant and reputable sources on extremeskins [yes, i "slum it" there, on occasion, so sue me! :-) ], the hold up in the deal is that the skins have been offering Hall 12M garaunteed and he wants 16. If true, this really, really irks me, guys.

In only a few weeks the system, Hall became our best, most reliable corner last year. He will be only 25 when the season starts (for comparison carlos Rogers will be 28), so if we signed him to a 6 year deal, he would still only be 30 or 31 when it came time to renegotiate or extend him. Without a doubt, he is one of the top 10-15 corners in the league right now. Yes, he has had some "issues" in the past, but those issues never affected his play, and he seems to have matured anyways... So why the heck are we only offering him 12M garaunteed?!

is 16 garaunteed really that unreasonable for Hall?

Here are some other recent contracts for CBs:

-Nate Clements got 80M with 22M garaunteed
-Asante Samuel got 57.6M for 6 years with 20M garaunted
-Chris Gamble got 53 M for 6 years with 23M garaunteed

IMO, we are really low-balling Hall with the offer of 12M garaunteed. He is not as good a corner as Clements or Samuel, but i view him as deserving something in the same ballpark as Gamble. With his asking price of 16M, he really seems to be giving us something of a "hometown discount."

Considering how much cap room other teams have, the annual "inflation" for player salaries in the NFL, and the fact that hall is "only" asking for 16M garaunteed, and Rogers is becoming disgruntled, we should sign Hall to that deal ASAP. If he hits the open market, someone else will likely give him significantly more than that.

Personally, I think something along the lines of 52M for 6 years with 16M garaunteed is a very fair price for Halls services. What do you guys think?

For a guy who hasn't necessarily been known as a team guy, more of a me guy on Atlanta and Oakland I don't think he demands top 10 money. If we sign him, hopefully it will be on our terms. If not, see ya.

He's matured for about 2months prior trying to get a new contract.

For a guy who hasn't necessarily been known as a team guy, more of a me guy on Atlanta and Oakland I don't think he demands top 10 money. If we sign him, hopefully it will be on our terms. If not, see ya.

He's matured for about 2months prior trying to get a new contract.

Great point. It's pretty easy to say the right things when you're looking for your second $50+ million dollar contract in as many years.

You can't judge him on his play with the Raiders, I mean come on...the Raiders!
We need to sign him as I hope Springs is gone and if not, he's usually only good for 5 or 6 games so a solid CB is needed.
Signing Hall will only solidify our backfield (if Vinny can manage to keep Rogers) and with the acquisition of a stud defensive lineman, our defense could be lights out next season. With a solid defense, we can afford to have JC play yet again, another season of mediocre football while he still learns how to play the QB position.

Great point. It's pretty easy to say the right things when you're looking for your second $50+ million dollar contract in as many years.

agreed but. He backed it up with nice skills. Plus they're all saying the "right things" right now.

What do you think we should do with him GMScud?

What bugs me is when he wore the free Mike Vick shirt on that Monday night game right after the trial. Coach quit and he was traded... I was thinking that he would not fit "the mold" of the current players we have.

agreed but. He backed it up with nice skills. Plus they're all saying the "right things" right now.

What do you think we should do with him GMScud?

I don't know. I'm torn. I think he's a very good player, but not a great one. I think his brief time in Oakland was a debacle, and his only redemption was a few solid games for us.

It really is a game of inches, too - that INT he had against Dallas was thrown right to him by Romo, and I can't help but wondering how eager Skins fans would be to sign him if DeSean Jackson hadn't dropped that ball in the corner of the endzone when he had Hall beat.

The real issue IMO is our other corners, and I think that is ultimately how the decision should be made on Hall. We don't have the luxury of drafting a starting caliber corner this year, Springs is aging, injury prone, and has a huge cap number, Smoot is awful, and Carlos wants a contract or a trade. So we're in a pickle. We may not have much of a choice except to keep Hall, unless we want a big drop off in production from our secondary.

Whatever we think about Hall, the premise of this thread is just wierd. Why would anyone complain about Vinny trying to save money on players?

We do all understand that cap space = opportunity to sign other players, right? I don't need to launch into a giant salary cap lecture, do I?

Our corner situation could drop us from one of the best secondaries to a huge question mark. Meet him in the middle.

Whatever we think about Hall, the premise of this thread is just wierd. Why would anyone complain about Vinny trying to save money on players?

We do all understand that cap space = opportunity to sign other players, right? I don't need to launch into a giant salary cap lecture, do I?

We understand that, but sometimes you keep a productive player over signing a guy that might be able to come in and follow his assignments half of the time when someone's out for a few drives (of course that might be exaggerated, but there can still only be 53 guys on the roster)

Whatever we think about Hall, the premise of this thread is just wierd. Why would anyone complain about Vinny trying to save money on players?

We do all understand that cap space = opportunity to sign other players, right? I don't need to launch into a giant salary cap lecture, do I?

Hahaha, I was thinking the same thing. We always gripe about overpaying, now we're trying to be somewhat reasonable and it's a problem suddenly? Let's not forget BigHairedAristocrat seems to have a pretty negative view about most Skins-related stuff. I like how he puts the phrase "low-balling" in quotes, yet he was the one who said it in the first place.