Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

[url=http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Clark_s_Story_Worth_Remembering_31546.jsp]Clark's Story Worth Remembering[/url]

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

Its a good thing we let him go and made Adam Archuletta the highest paid safety in the league. That was a good move.

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

... don't get me started.

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

I wonder if the Giants' message boards talk about losing Ryan Clark as well?

We made a mistake, it happens. There are plenty of people we've let go of that have amounted to nothing as well.

Nice piece though, thanks for posting the link 44

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

[quote=44ever;523868][URL="http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles/Clark_s_Story_Worth_Remembering_31546.jsp"]Clark's Story Worth Remembering[/URL][/quote]

I do agree that it was blunderous to let a guy go who hits that hard and brings enthusiasm to the defense.

But being that he wound up on a Super Bowl bound team shouldn't make it worse. He isn't the best safety on their team and he is getting recognition becuase no other teams are playing right now.

Was it a mistake letting him go for Archuleta?...Hell yes...but it doesn't make it worse now that he's on a Super Bowl team. We let Dockery go, for good financial reason, and him being on the paltry bills doesn't seem to bother people.


Letting Clark go was a dumb player personnel decision but it shouldn't matter now just becuase he is playing in the Super Bowl...unless you just want to rub it in Snyderato's face...then I guess it would be notable.

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

I was at that Philly game where Clark sealed the game with an INT in the last minute. The thing that was especially stupid about letting Clark go was that he wasn't asking for much, [I]and he wanted to stay[/I]. Of the defensive players at that time, he was the only one who had a close relationship with Sean Taylor, when Taylor was still a "wild child". The Clark hits that the article describes (Welker and McGahee) were two of the hardest hits that I saw this entire season. They were very reminiscent of Taylor's, something that was sorely lacking this past season on our defense. Sad to say, but we haven't had a true enforcer in the secondary since Taylor died - I'm still waiting for Landry to become that intimidating presense.

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

[quote=SmootSmack;523874]I wonder if the Giants' message boards talk about losing Ryan Clark as well?

We made a mistake, it happens. There are plenty of people we've let go of that have amounted to nothing as well.

Nice piece though, thanks for posting the link 44[/quote]

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.

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

[QUOTE=SouperMeister;523881]I was at that Philly game where Clark sealed the game with an INT in the last minute. The thing that was especially stupid about letting Clark go was that he wasn't asking for much, [I]and he wanted to stay[/I]. Of the defensive players at that time, he was the only one who had a close relationship with Sean Taylor, when Taylor was still a "wild child". The Clark hits that the article describes (Welker and McGahee) were two of the hardest hits that I saw this entire season. They were very reminiscent of Taylor's, [B]something that was sorely lacking this past season on our defense. Sad to say, but we haven't had a true enforcer in the secondary since Taylor died - I'm still waiting for Landry to become that intimidating presense.[/[/B]QUOTE]

Ditto. Ditto. Ditto.

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

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)

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 [I]garaunteed [/I]money was more than the [I]total [/I]contract money it would have cost to keep Clark.

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.

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

Another dumb move by our wonderful front office but, losing Clark hasn't been much of a regression as we made out pretty good with Landry, whom I hope gets more physical and Horton.
Keeping Hall and Rogers should be the two Clowns top priority this off season, along with saying goodbye to Springs. If Spring stays and Rogers or Hall goes, the strongest part of our defense will become our weakest link.

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

[quote=44ever;523882]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.[/quote]

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

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

[quote=SmootSmack;523893]I'd rather lose Moss one year too early than one year too late.[/quote]

What do you mean by that Smoot?

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;523887]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)[/quote]

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

[quote]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 [I]garaunteed [/I]money was more than the [I]total [/I]contract money it would have cost to keep Clark. [/quote]

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

[quote]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.[/quote]

Fair point

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

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.

Re: Sometimes Its Who You Keep Not Who You Sign
 

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!