Redskins trade for Free Safety Dashon Goldson

Well, one difference between Clark and Goldson is that Goldson is 5 years younger. The difference between 30 and 35 in the NFL is huge.
I like this move if for no other reasons in supplies us with another option if other avenues do not pan out. Let's hope his struggles in Tampa were scheme related, throw him out there and let him compete.

yeah agree

2016 picks. We move back maybe 30 spots in the draft at the most, not a big deal.

Yeah I get that but we don't have that pick this year. And maybe that 6th rounder wouldn't have even made the team. Maybe it could have been another Alfred Morris type of player. That's my point. I'm going to take the chance that my talent evaluator can find someone in the 6th round, over a washed up Ryan Clark type of player that was getting cut from the worst team in football.

Seriously, tell me your plan at safety? Not what we should have done two years ago. Not who we should have drafted or signed last year. Tell me, given the current situation - the one Scot McC walked into - how you would have done better: Who you would have signed, for how much, and who you would draft.

And before you just once again assert that D.Hall is the better option at FS, you do realize he is a year older (31) than Goldson (30) and has never done more than spot duty at the position as opposed to Goldson who has played the position since entering the NFL. While there are similarities in the CB/S positions in that both are DBs, CB and Safety are NOT interchangeable and require different mind sets, different physical skill sets, and different recognition skills - you're big on past stats taken in isolation, find me D. Hall's stats in the FS position (only). How many pro-bowls has D.Hall been to as a FS? Goldson went to two - 2011, 2012. Alternatively, show me some solid analysis that D.Hall will have an easy transition to the free safety role such that he is more likely to be an improvement over last year's play than Goldson will.

Also, so DHall moves to FS, making Amerson the 3rd CB - that's a pretty gutsy call on your part given his play last year. What's your plan for depth in the defensive backfield? Seriously. What's your plan for depth at safety and cornerback if we don't make the trade for Goldson? If it involves rookies - tell me why you think counting on a rookie to step into any regular role in the backfield is better than counting on Hall or Breeland to be the depth guy.

As to SS, what rookie safety are you drafting that is an instant starter? When do you draft him? You realize that the consistent opinion of every reasonable draft analyst is that this year's safety class is pretty barren. Where are you finding this diamond in the rough SS that is less of a risk than J. Johnson is at the position? If not a rookie, what is your plan for SS? What UFA would you have signed given your constant whining about the cap?

All you have done is poor mouth every move that McC has made in the defensive backfield and whined about salary cap room. I have yet to see one well thought out idea from you as to how you would improve on the moves made so far this year. McC walked into crap and appears to have made solid moves to improve that situation both from a talent and salary cap perspective.

Tell me how you would have done better.

Fantastic observation! Your analysis strips away all the bs and sees the situation for what it is now, not what it could have been.

I'm with ya. SM is dealing in the now and using FA as it should be when in complete rebuild mode. He is making solid, yet economical signings.

This is a 1 year $4m deal that we are out of next season if it goes poorly. If Goldson is SM's type of player he may be here longer with a restructure.

Several posts have noted that Tampa did not use Goldson correctly or in the alternative, he did not fit their Tampa 2 system. I would love to read more discussion and debate on the nuts and bolts of his role with Tampa.

The safety spots have clearly been upgraded IMO. Getting a potential solid starter in Goldson for a swap of late round picks is a no brainer. McCloughan knows him well, that's all I need to know.

Yeah I get that but we don't have that pick this year. And maybe that 6th rounder wouldn't have even made the team. Maybe it could have been another Alfred Morris type of player. That's my point. I'm going to take the chance that my talent evaluator can find someone in the 6th round, over a washed up Ryan Clark type of player that was getting cut from the worst team in football.

and if he doesn't get someone that can start by september, we'll be complaining about blown coverages all season and why didn't we sign someone, blah blah blah.

not many 6th round picks start or play well in their first year and we don't have a starting FS (barring this move).

he's a better merriweather. no one's expecting a miracle, but he should be okay... and if we find someone better, they can be drafted/signed/brought in to try and take the spot.

if we draft a pass rusher the D should be good this year, and next year we can try to find a better option at FS and sign/find a NT and maybe another CB and we'll be set for 2016.

still need a QB that can play well though.

This is a process people...Rome will not be rebuilt in one off-season. Making solid low risk stop gap moves is sound.

The Redskins do not have a game until September, so the projected April starter is moot.

Not in any way responsive to the questions posed, but, okay.

Rosters are now about 90 players, so Free Safetys will be cut.

Again, not in any way responsive to the questions posed, but, yes, inevitably safeties will be cut. I would suggest - with a high degree of confidence - that neither Goldson nor Johnson will be among them for all the reasons previously cited.

Hall is a question mark at FS, he might be good.

So might Breeland or Goldson or a rookie. Why bet on Hall rather than these other options? You can't even parrot a blatantly clichéd basis in support of your assertion that Hall "might be good." He might suck. In fact, there is ample to reason to believe he might suck badly at FS. Given his lack of experience at the position, his past history of biting on double moves, and his willingness to take risks by going for all or nothing in coverage (oh, and his return from a season ending injury at age 31), there is a significant basis to believe he lacks the mindset to play a position requiring him to see the field and act as the last line of defense.

Again, other than wild-ass speculation, give some solid reason to believe that banking on the possibility Hall "might be good" is a sound basis for addressing the FS position in either the short term or the long term.

Goldson has been bad for a few years, expecting him to revert to high caliber play is a long shot.

"Bad for a few years"?! He had two bad years in Tampa after two pro bowl years in SF. In SF, he played a one-high safety position but, in TBay, he was playing as a cover two safety - different schemes emphasizing different abilities and skill sets. Two years removed from pro-bowl play, and after being removed a poor scheme fit, Why is it a "long shot" to expect that Goldson's play will improve enough to be better than any other option out there? or, at least, an upgrade over last year.

As to that, show me where ANYONE who is providing a positive review of this move based on an expectation that Goldson will "revert to high caliber play." The "expectation" that I have seen is that he will "revert" to "better than the sh** we had last year" play. For a guy two years removed from the pro-bowl and leaving a poor scheme fit, that doesn't seem like a "long shot" to me. It's not a guarantee, but I'm not seeing a better gamble out there.

Ultimately, taken in conjunction with your wild speculation that Hall "might be good" because we don't know he will suck, your reasoning is just painfully obtuse. The risk presented by Goldson being able to provide a short term upgrade at FS is a significantly smaller one than your "close my eyes and blindly hope the aging CB coming back from a season ending injury can switch to safety" plan.

Bring in as many veterans as you can, draft a FS or two, sign UDFAs, move CBs and SS to FS , and see who emerges. There is no Sean Taylor in the draft, but there are probably a few solid ones.

Move guys, sign guys, draft guys? Holy Crap! That's brilliant! Why didn't I think of that?? You're right! That is a much better plan than the one Scot McC seems to have been operating under!

Couple questions ...

Move guys? Who are we moving and, once moved, who are replacing them with?

Sign guys? What veterans should we sign and how much will they cost? How would any of the veterans available in this UFA period be a better option as an upgrade from last year than Goldson/Johnson/Culliver? What cheaper options were out there now? How is any one of these moves [Goldson/Johnson/Culliver] something to be criticized in light the available veteran options - and the salaries they have been signing for - and your amorphous assertion that we should "Bring in as many veterans as you can [and] sign UDFAs"?

Draft guys? So, in a year when the safety pool is bad, your plan is to draft two of them? Excellent planning - that's some real long term thinking right there man. Just a follow-up though ... Who are the solid ones that you think might be starter ready such that trading for Goldson and his $4M cap hit was in any way a bad move?

See who emerges? ummmm, okay. Isn't that what we are doing? Like you said, regardless of who's on the roster today, final cut down is in September. Are you suggesting that having an expectation when you sign certain players that they will be the guys who "emerge" is a bad thing? Rather, we should just randomly sign/draft players without any expectation that they will fill or address a particular role? Well, hey, it's a little out of the box but, if that's your method of long term planning who am I to argue with you Mr. Cerratto.

...

As I stated originally, you have bitched, moaned and poor-mouthed just about every move Scot McC has made so far. I asked a simple question: Specifically, how you would have done better than McC has done so far and you got nothing but bs platitudes and generalities.

Your name fits. Avoiding simple questions, falling back on speculation, cherry picked facts, and broad rhetorical platitudes makes you truly and absolutely irrefutable.

The safety spots have clearly been upgraded IMO. Getting a potential solid starter in Goldson for a swap of late round picks is a no brainer. McCloughan knows him well, that's all I need to know.

Thank you.

My question for everyone complaining that "he's too old" or "He's a 2-win cast off" is, what other option did we have?

With this move we keep our CB's where their at and have a safety who knows the GM and corner he'll be playing with. Sounds like a good move to me.

I know we're looking to get younger but a lot of us (including myself at times) are forgetting this is not a 1 year rebuild. I have no issues letting Goldson play safety over anybody else we would have had back there and who knows, maybe someone in camp will surprise and push him for the starting role.

It's always good to have more bodies in camp for competition, if nothing else.

Yeah I get that but we don't have that pick this year. And maybe that 6th rounder wouldn't have even made the team. Maybe it could have been another Alfred Morris type of player. That's my point. I'm going to take the chance that my talent evaluator can find someone in the 6th round, over a washed up Ryan Clark type of player that was getting cut from the worst team in football.

We do not lose ANY picks this year. We get Goldson and 2016 7th rounder for a 2016 6th rounder.

Hell, we win the SB and TBay ends up with the worst record in the NFL next year, we get a starting caliber FS for dropping one spot in the 2016 draft at the 6th/7th round turn (Yeah, I know it's unlikely - but people are critiquing the move based on BS logic, bad facts, and speculation; I think only fair I get to use the same in response).

I'd like to help clarify if possible......
Our safeties suck shit.....
This dude did not cost us shit.....
For a potential starter that does not suck shit..
In a safety draft year that sucks shit......
Pissed at this deal? No shit...