2012 Redskins Free Agency Tracker

Why was Winston cut as opposed to traded? and why did the move happen so late

I have no idea, and a lot of people around the NFL don't know either.
But it seems as if you're suggesting that good players never get cut?
That is the premise of your rhetorical question right?
If Winston was 'so good' then why would Houston cut him right?
But c'mon we're a bit more football savvy then to believe that right?

Look it Winston is who he is, just do your own research.
The bottom line is this:

(a) our RT play blows therefore we need a RT (especially since we're going to be playing a rookie QB at some point this season)

(b) Winston was arguably the best RT on the market and his compensation was reasonable

(c) Carriker is merely a rotational player on our DL, no one is going to confuse Adam for one of the best DL in the NFL, but we paid him almost as much as Eric Winston

(d) Not being able to pull off the Eric Winston signing must be viewed as a mistake/missed opportunity especially in light of some of our other signings

Sounds like we were interested in Winston but he wasn't interested in us. If a player is not interested, I don't fault the team for not getting him, because you can't force someone to come here. And I guess you don't want to go overboard by overpaying too.

As a seller of his services, if Winston indeed wanted to play for a "winner", then that means loser teams who have to pay a substantial premium in order make up for his loss in "happiness" in playing for a loser. KC is only a couple years removed from their division title win, and they do have budding talent, so he indeed gave a "winner" discount for his services.

In short, Eric Winston was never in our marketplace to begin with.

As a seller of his services, if Winston indeed wanted to play for a "winner", then that means loser teams who have to pay a substantial premium in order make up for his loss in "happiness" in playing for a loser. KC is only a couple years removed from their division title win, and they do have budding talent, so he indeed gave a "winner" discount for his services.

In short, Eric Winston was never in our marketplace to begin with.

KC was so upset with their state of the franchise that they fired their head coach. No way are they a winner.

KC was so upset with their state of the franchise that they fired their head coach. No way are they a winner.

Does Eric Winston give two shits about that? It's HIS perception(heavily influenced by his agent) about a teams' potential to win games that matters. He's seeing Jamaal Charles, Brandon Flowers, the dude who had a great season in New England, Bowe, etc, and a team that once won the division a couple years back. Firing a head coach, ultimately, is mostly a symbolic gesture. Judging the "winningess" of team requires more weight to be put on the current talent on the team, "reputation", and recent history, etc.

I don't know where the Winston wants to play for a winner talk came from, I've never actually seen a quote from him saying that.
That claim just seems like agent talk for pay me more money.
If he really wanted to play for a winner he would restructure his contract for Houston.

We can all speculate on why they couldn't pull off the Winston signing.
But all we can know is that it didn't happen.

when i think of a winner, the kansas city chiefs immediately come to mind

The Chiefs were one win away from winning the AFC West and did win it in 2010.

Also, why am I hearing so much Ginn talk? Have we expressed interest in him?

The Chiefs were one win away from winning the AFC West and did win it in 2010.neat