BigSKINBauer
03-03-2005, 04:29 PM
i know rolle is better and it hard to argue that he is not. he knows our system which is the most important thing for continuity on defense. i think everyone uses the term continuity to much too i mean we used to use it because of changing defensive cordinators, i mean 6 in 6 years is obviously not continuity. if we get smoot or rolle it will be because our coaching staff feels that they are more worth it. We aren't dumb to get a worse player for more money. Greg williams says he wants rolle and plain and simple that is b/c he is better and Williams knows he is. If we get rolle it will be because of GW and him wanting him. if GW feels that smoot is better he would get him for less money and i guess we will see who GW feels is more worthy to play in this elite "leeeeeet" system
VishsSkins
03-03-2005, 04:36 PM
I really dont understand why so mny of you are disappointed that we could have possibly signed Rolle. The argument that keeps coming up is that he is too old or we will not have continuity. First of all Rolle, is only 2-3 yrs older than Smoot which is not a big deal even for football players. He could still have a good 5-7 years left in the pros, meaning that we will have him for a long enough time. Smoot cannot be truly considered a loyal Redskin because it seems that he will sign with the team that offers the most money. If he really wanted to be here, he would have taken the $11.5 million, become one of the highest paid cornerbacks, and stayed with our team. Secondly, if you are talking about continuity, Smoot has only been in this defense for a year whereas Rolle has been under Williams for 3. There will be no need for a time to adapt in this system. By sitting around and waiting for Smoot to re-sign, we would definitely loose out on Rolle, possibly being left with nothing if Smoot decides to sign elsewhere. The bottom line is that Rolle is a better player whos presence will greatly increase our strength on defense since we would have 2 #1 CBs. Why pay Rolle more when we could offer the same amount to Smoot? Rolle is better, Williams wants him more, and a corner with the status of Smoot should not get a contract that would potentially put him among the top 5 richest CBs when,frankly, he is not one of the top 5 in the league.
TheMalcolmConnection
03-03-2005, 04:42 PM
I hate that we had to love having Smoot on the team so much. :p
BigSKINBauer
03-03-2005, 05:03 PM
cbs sportsline put up there top 50 FAs and said they looked at playing ability and age as factors. Rolle was number 1 and smoot 3 and pierce 5 and trotter 40 by the way. not much difference in the rank of smoot and rolle so y not just trust GW in who ever he wants, if they get smoot it will be b/c they want smoot more and if they pay more money to rolle it will DEFINATLY be because he wants Rolle more because he is on a different team and he more costly and is older as everyone feels that is a huge deal i mean randy moss has 7 years in the league i guess he sucks too.
BigSKINBauer
03-03-2005, 05:12 PM
Longest run-on EVER. :)
yeah i noticed that AND i was going to change it but said o well AND i went up and got some food AND came back down AND saw that you said i had good points AND i was happy :)
TheMalcolmConnection
03-03-2005, 05:13 PM
Glad I could make someone's day... LOL
SKINSnCANES
03-03-2005, 05:19 PM
anyone else notice the other thing on that link, it said the vikings signed pat williams. I cant find that anywhere else either. And its a huge surprise becuase arent the Vikings very deep at that position?
Didnt we say as a general rule of thumb last off season to never trust PRW?
SmootSmack
03-03-2005, 05:23 PM
I've seen the Pat Williams news other places, Fox Sports, San Francisco Chronicle.