FA Acquisitions for 2007

[gabe1984]

So, there's been a few rumors as to who the Redskins are going to acquire in free agency: Nate Clements, London Fletcher, Fred Smoot, possibly another tackle if we cannot get Dockery, and even Donte Stallworth. I strongyl believe that we should not acquire any of these guys except for possibly Smoot. Here is why......
1) Clements we probably just cannot get him because he will ask for too much money.
2) London Fletcher is 32! Not only is he 32, but in his NFL career, he has never missed a snap! Seriously, how much longer is this guy going to hold up?! I also have not lost faith in LeMar Marshall. The guy played well for us in 2005, and if comes in healthy and rehabs his shoulder in the offseason, and we add a solid defensive tackle from the draft, I believe he can have another good year, and would rather have him than spend money on Fletcher.
3) Donte Stallworth - Do we seriously need another fast big play guy?
4) Fred Smoot - This is the only guy I think we should acquire. I believe that our secondary will play better than last season even without Smoot, assuming that our front seven play better, but Smoot can step in and play if Carlos Rodgers really turns out to be a bumb, plus Springs is getting old.
5) A different offensive tackle - They better resign Dock, no matter what it takes, everyone knows that.

I think that we should use our draft pics to fill our needs because I do not want to pay for mediocre old players like Fletcher and guys who we already have similar talents to in Stallworth. These acquisitions just do not seem smart to me.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by gabe1984

So, there's been a few rumors as to who the Redskins are going to acquire in free agency: Nate Clements, London Fletcher, Fred Smoot, possibly another tackle if we cannot get Dockery, and even Donte Stallworth. I strongyl believe that we should not acquire any of these guys except for possibly Smoot. Here is why......
1) Clements we probably just cannot get him because he will ask for too much money.
2) London Fletcher is 32! Not only is he 32, but in his NFL career, he has never missed a snap! Seriously, how much longer is this guy going to hold up?! I also have not lost faith in LeMar Marshall. The guy played well for us in 2005, and if comes in healthy and rehabs his shoulder in the offseason, and we add a solid defensive tackle from the draft, I believe he can have another good year, and would rather have him than spend money on Fletcher.
3) Donte Stallworth - Do we seriously need another fast big play guy?
4) Fred Smoot - This is the only guy I think we should acquire. I believe that our secondary will play better than last season even without Smoot, assuming that our front seven play better, but Smoot can step in and play if Carlos Rodgers really turns out to be a bumb, plus Springs is getting old.
5) A different offensive tackle - They better resign Dock, no matter what it takes, everyone knows that.

I think that we should use our draft pics to fill our needs because I do not want to pay for mediocre old players like Fletcher and guys who we already have similar talents to in Stallworth. These acquisitions just do not seem smart to me.

Don't mean to nitpick, but Dockery is a Guard, not a tackle.

I do want Smoot. And I want Dockery back. We def don't need a WR like Stallworth, and I don't think you need to worry about Nate Clements. He's gone to SF according to rumors, plus we can't afford him.

If Fletcher can QB our defense though, that's a decent addition IMO. We haven't had a decent signal caller since A Pierce left.

[MTK]

Fletcher is actually 31.

He turns 32 on 5/19.

Just saying.

[artmonkforhallofamein07]

Fletcher is a great fit for us. I don't think he will get a crazy contract and I like the fact that he already knows the defense and can be a real leader on the field. He is an excellent linebacker as well. He's lead the bills in tackles the last few years and deserved a probowl bid this year. A great talent that can be utilized here.

Smoot enough said.

[Rajmahal33]

We don't need fletcher to be a workhorse. That's what Washington and McIntosh/holdman/marshall(if they put him there) will be for. We need Fletcher to be more of a ballhawk and an overseer of the defense that will hold up for the whole season. The veteran leadership that the defense lacks. The leaders that we do have are always injured Joe SalIva, Daniels, Springs, Wynn, even Griffin this year.

[gabe1984]

points taken

[dmek25]

i am going on the record( not that it means anything) that fletcher is too old, and i do not want him here. i think Marshall had a bad 2006, but was also playing hurt most of the year. i would rather use Marshall again, if fletcher is the alternative. no more gwilliams rejects

[MTK]

Some productive LBs as old or older than Fletcher

Zack Thomas (33)
Donnie Edwards (33)
Keith Brooking (31)
James Farrior (32)

Interestingly enough all these guys including Fletcher were in the top 15 in total tackles last year. Fletcher was 3rd. Thomas #1.

[Schneed10]

I don't understand the wear and tear argument against London Fletcher. He hasn't missed a game in what, his entire career or something, and people are arguing that means he's due to break down??

That makes no sense to me. My take is the guy must be tough as nails to make it through 9 seasons or whatever without missing a game due to injury. I love the durability.

Of course with any signing, I'm always curious to see what we have to pay, but it's a good signing for us in my opinion. He's one of those players that will make his teammates better by making pre-snap calls, adjustments, and will be effective getting guys lined up.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I don't understand the wear and tear argument against London Fletcher. He hasn't missed a game in what, his entire career or something, and people are arguing that means he's due to break down??

That makes no sense to me. My take is the guy must be tough as nails to make it through 9 seasons or whatever without missing a game due to injury. I love the durability.

Of course with any signing, I'm always curious to see what we have to pay, but it's a good signing for us in my opinion. He's one of those players that will make his teammates better by making pre-snap calls, adjustments, and will be effective getting guys lined up.

I guess some are afraid of this becoming Mike Barrow round II. But one has nothing to do with the other.

[Red Robert]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I guess some are afraid of this becoming Mike Barrow round II. But one has nothing to do with the other.

Dead on Matty!! That is the only concern we should have about this guy.

[Hog1]

It may not be a bad deal if he has no health issues at this time, and if he does not need a sack o' cash for his trouble. He may be able to do a good job for a couple of years, and provide needed skill, and leadership in the middle. Until other long term solutions can be found.

[sportscurmudgeon]

A friend whose job involves covering NFL stuff sent me a note with two Skins' related free agency items:


1. IF they do not resign Dockery, one of the rumored back-up plans for the Skins is to sign Leonard Davis (Arizona) and make him a guard.

My opinion: IF they don't keep Dockery, this is not the worst thing they could do, but it might be a step backward from what Dockery might develop into if he continues to keep his weight under control. BTW, Davis is another guy who has been known to have "weight issues"...


2. The Skins had an plan to sign Ernest Wilford (WR Jax) early in free agency season for a "comfortable cap number". Jax got wind of it and tendered him (he's RFA) a contract that would make a team signing him give up a 2nd round pick in this year's draft to get him. Since the Skins don't have one, they may not give Wilford an offer sheet.

My opinion: Wilford is a decent receiver and with a comfortable cap number, I'd rather have him than either Lloyd or Patten. Purely as a WR, he's also better to have than Randle-El, but Randle-El's contributions on special teams makes him the better all-around player.