[sportscurmudgeon]

Excuse me, but what Sally Jenkins wrote was that the Redskins' "strategy" in the offseason in the last five years has been to dump their players and go get expensive new ones. (Not much wrong with that thesis.)

Then she said that in contrast the Pats sign much less flashy free agents, keep roleplayers on the team and maintain more stability than the Redskins. (Can't find much wrong there.)

Then she observes that the Pats have won two Super Bowls in the last 3 years while the best record that the "wheelin-dealin' Redskins" have ever managed is 8-8. (Shouldn't try to argue with that one.)

She also says that the Redskins late round drafts have been miserable and asks someone to name a starter with significant impact in the later rounds. Darnarian McCants was the best she could come up with. (Are there significantly better ones she missed?)

She says the Skins need nine new starters next year if they hope to be any good. That's pretty close to what I think the right number is; maybe it's only eight but maybe it is a full eleven.

Now comes her take on the Bailey/Portis trade. She thinks giving up a top cornerback is not a good idea. OK, finally something you can argue with her about.

Here is the acid test. When the Skins go out to play the free agent game starting next week, how much will they pay to get a replacement for Bailey - or will they go with what is on the roster now? If they can find "comparable performance" from Bailey's replacement next year at a much lower salary figure, then they made a great deal. If not, then they made a bad deal.

Everything Sally Jenkins has said about the recent history of the Redskins is dead on. Some folks here don't agree with her on the Bailey/Portis deal. Remember what Mark Twain said. The difference between a cynic and a realist is whether or not you agree with him. You don't agree with Sally Jenkins, so you call her a cynic and say "here we go again." But what if she's right?

For those who say that Bailey does not want to play here and so he won't be any good, read the other article in today's Post about the salary negotitions. After he turned down the Redskins first offer because his signing bonus was "tiered" (not all at one time), Danny Boy presented a new offer that was close to the same total money but with a lower signing bonus. If your boss did this to you in your salary review, might you want to go looking for another employer?