Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign

oh I bet the Gmen are talking the same. The difference is he really wanted to be a Redskins. And you're right it's a hindsight 20/20

but it reminds me of how important this offseason will be as far as how we evaluate our players. Example: Hopefully Hall and Rogers will not automatically be made into a choice between the two of them, but possibly seen as a compliment to each other.

Hall has also stated he would like to remain a Redskins. I would like to see that as well.

Entertaining the idea of losing Moss is disturbing. I think ARE if utilized correctly would be a great asset.

Hoping there is some flexability and forsight in the FO this year
Just some things that came to mind after reading this article.

I'd rather lose Moss one year too early than one year too late.

I'd rather lose Moss one year too early than one year too late.

What do you mean by that Smoot?

Allegedly, we let Dockery go because he was asking for an unreasonable amount of money and we didnt have the cap space to compete with other offers he was getting. Thats understandable. (Even though i think Dockery wasnt asking us for nearly as much as he got from buffalo. If management here had any forsight at all, they would have given dockery a new contract and then cut Randy Thomas when his contract became to expensive. Instead, they decided to put their money in a guy who was already over 30 at the time, instead of one who was barely 26... but i digress)

Dockery was asking for a shitload of money, if I recall correctly it was around a $17 million signing bonus. Interesting point about Thomas.

When we let Clark go, he was a very good starting safety asking for a very reasonable amount of money. we had the cap space, but we let him go to sign Archuletta to a deal where his garaunteed money was more than the total contract money it would have cost to keep Clark.

Who'd have known Archuleta would have been so terrible. But Williams insisted, I thought Arch was overrated but my gosh he was terrible. Even Gibbs, who could find good in just about everyone, thought he was a waste

If we had kept Clark, not only would we have not drafted Archuletta, but we also wouldnt have needed to draft Landry either. So thats not one, but TWO huge contracts we had to sign because we didnt pay Clark his worth. Those two contracts (and draft pick in the case of Landry) could have been used to upgrade other areas of our team. At the time, DL was a very pressing need and it still is now.

If we had kept Clark, we could have signed one of the many DT/DEs available in place of Archuletta) and drafted another in 2007 place of Landry. Taking it a step further, with our DL situation pretty much set, we wouldnt have traded next years 2nd rounder and 2010s 6th rounder to Miami last year for Jason Taylor when Phillip Daniels got hurt. We also wouldnt have traded a 7th to the Vikings for James.

Entering this years draft, our DL would be set and we would have picks in rounds 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7.

Some can try to overlook snubbing ryan clark as being just one small mistake, but the way I see it, the trickle down effect was huge. Even if we chose to address different areas in free agency and the draft, our team would be stronger today.

This team has shown over the past decade that it overvalues other teams' free agents and our own old, decling veterans, while undervaluing our homegrown young guys. This team would be much younger, stronger, and in better salary cap shape right now if we had decided to pay guys like Antonio Pierce, Dockery, and Clark to stick around. All of them were the definition of "core skins" at the time and were offering us a hometown discount to stay. instead, we let them go and replaced them by signing older FA Vets, trading picks away for older vets (Kendall to replace Dockery), and spending high draft picks to replace them.

Fair point

It's not just letting Ryan Clark go. Those mistakes happen from time to time w/ every team, well most teams.

It's then replacing him w/ AA. That's the kick in the a**. I said it before, but whoever made that decision should be fired immediately. VC made that decision by the way per VC.

am i the only one that thinks jason taylor is bad luck

@ the dolphins 1-15

redskinz he got hurt, and only 3.5 sacks even though the previous year he had over 15...
and we were 8-8 after a 6-2 start with a rookie coach.. if we get him back i hope he gets 3x as much sacks!

I think Ryan Clark has improved considerably since leaving the redskins. That's not the same hard-hitting player in Pittsburgh that was playing in Washington.

I am wondering how did he improved so much. Remember the game with the chargers back in 2005, one of Clark's last games as a redskins.. Ryan Clark - UPI.com (http://www.upi.com/topic/Ryan_Clark/20/)

I think this was fresh in the redskins coaches' and fo's minds when they let him go. Who'd have known he would get this much better.

am i the only one that thinks jason taylor is bad luck

@ the dolphins 1-15

redskinz he got hurt, and only 3.5 sacks even though the previous year he had over 15...
and we were 8-8 after a 6-2 start with a rookie coach.. if we get him back i hope he gets 3x as much sacks!

if taylor comes back he will have atleast 10 sacks next year. there is no way he has another fluke injury like he did this year. taylor played well late in the year when he was healthy and used to playing in the 4-3 d.

I'm tired of seeing other teams win with guys we drafted or let go. It's just sad.

Dockery was asking for a shitload of money, if I recall correctly it was around a $17 million signing bonus. Interesting point about Thomas.



Who'd have known Archuleta would have been so terrible. But Williams insisted, I thought Arch was overrated but my gosh he was terrible. Even Gibbs, who could find good in just about everyone, thought he was a waste



Fair point

I was excited about AA at the time, but evidently people who know more about football than me thought it was a horrible move and that he was a bad fit for our system. That point aside, everyone who had half a brain realized that we were giving him waaaaaay to big of a contract. his potential as a SS aside, he was just coming off a back injury and his own team didnt want him. He only got sniffs from a couple other teams and we give him the biggest contract ever for a safety?... we can blame Williams for wanting AA in the first place, but i'm pretty sure Williams had nothing to do with the obscene 30M/10Mgaraunteed we gave AA to sign. I place that squarely on our FO.

As far as Dockery goes, I seem to remember the skins and dockery were both squabbling over a difference in garaunteed money, but Dock wasnt even asking for more than 12M or so, which was entirely reasonable at the the time.... but once Dock hit free agency (where there were very few free agent guards available and the cap had just risen enormously), he ended up getting well more than he had ever dreamed - over 18M garaunteed if i remember correctly. If the skins had judged the market correctly, i am positive they would have locked up dockery when they had the chance.

My point is unless we're dealing with someone who is clearly being unreasonable, we should work to extend our own young guys when we can - if theyre good, of course.

For example, I think we should give Hall his 16M garaunteed before he has the opportunity to taste the market. He will make over 20 if he hits the open market. Is that alot? - yes. But he'll be the #2corner available and anyone who doesnt want to give that oakland dude 30M+ garaunteed would gladly pay Hall 20-22.

I think if ryan clark was still with the redskins - he wouldn't be the player he is now. Just a feeling. What does this say (about the redskins)?... I don't exactly know.