Redskins place franchise tag on Orakpo

[KI Skins Fan]

I voted yes. I don't think the Skins would have done it if doing so would have thrown a monkey wrench into their offseason plans. I think they'll negotiate a long-term deal that works for both sides.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by diehardskin2982

The cost for Orakpo's contract can be balanced out when we cut Sav Rocca, Chris Chester, Stephen Bowen, and Adam Carriker.

I hope that we draft Christian Jones as the Coverage ILB to cover, freeing Rak and Kerrigan to rush.

I agree all around.

[Lotus]

Above must be the least objective poll that I have ever seen.

It's like, "Who would you rather have babysit your kids?
A) your BFF
B) Jeffrey Dahmer"

I happily voted yes BTW

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Above must be the least objective poll that I have ever seen.

It's like, "Who would you rather have babysit your kids?
A) your BFF
B) Jeffrey Dahmer"

I happily voted yes BTW

That's a trick question because Dahmer is dead.

[skinsfanthru&thru]

Since there wasn't an option for those of us not angry nor happy I felt the bed intruder reference needed my vote.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Coaches don't give a shit about the salary cap. They'll blow it all right now and fuck the future if it means winning now. (which they have to do) You don't think Haz is trying to save his ass by wanting Orakpo back? He knows his ass is on the line and he doesn't care about the cap ramifications for the future.

Also, maybe they didn't have a problem evaluating talent, but a problem with coaches listening to evaluators? That seems to be the common thing here. Vinny didn't listen. Mike didn't listen. Apparently this coaching staff isn't listening.

I mean, what's the most harmful contract they can give Orakpo? Something like 5 years/$75 million, $35 mil guaranteed. That's maybe more than his agent can get on the market, but it's not exactly a backbreaker. It's just a little over what the market would pay.

And I think that contract is less troublesome in the long run than not tagging him and letting him sign elsewhere.

There's a problem if they are arguing if his true value is $10 mil a year or $12. The market determines the players value. Letting a $10 mil player walk for $12 is pretty awful decision making. The reason to let Orakpo walk is if you didn't think he was a contributor to the team's pass rush, run defense, or pass coverage. If he's just a guy out there, you let him test the market.

But they seem to all agree he's one of the better defenders (if not the best) on the roster. And bickering over market value vs your idea of what he should be worth in an ideal world is pointless.

I'm sure some in the front office think they can do better than Orakpo, and that's a legit football evaluation, but even they have to admit that any alternative for Orakpo is going to be incredibly costly. To trade up and get Dee Ford, you're probably trading next year's first and this year's second. And you aren't even getting a consensus elite pass rusher.

[Kindoy]

Voted yes, we have enough needs - good on us not creating another and keeping one of our few strengths intact.

[HailGreen28]

I voted "No. We are doomed forever now. Hide your wife and kids". If Snyder is still making decisions over his personnel people, we're doomed regardless of whether we keep Rak or not.

[takethecake]

I don't like a lot of what I'm hearing about this situation - that there were almost no negotiations between Orakpo's camp and the skins before they just slapped him with the tag, and that there's speculation he might hold out. The only move to make is to sign him to a reasonable long-term deal this offseason in a timely fashion.

I'm sure the ravens weren't crazy about signing Joe Flacco to his insanely monstrous contract, but it was the only move they could make. Although there are numerous differences, I think we're in a similar situation here.

[MTK]

I'm tired of watching our guys walk outta here and get paid elsewhere, meanwhile we fall all over ourselves bringing in guys that usually don't end up being worth the $$. I think the tag was a smart move. Plus investing in your own guys sends a good message to the team.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I'm tired of watching our guys walk outta here and get paid elsewhere, meanwhile we fall all over ourselves bringing in guys that usually don't end up being worth the $$. I think the tag was a smart move. Plus investing in your own guys sends a good message to the team.

Yeah, at least we know Rak fits the system. Big advantage over bringing in another team's FA.

I just question whether we're overpaying Rak: Not in market value, but whether the team would be better off going with Rob Jackson and spreading the money over multiple positions.

[MTK]

^ My question is how much more cap room do we need? We can probably clear another $10M fairly easily with cuts/restructures, bringing our overall room back closer to $30M.

And assuming a long term deal gets done with Rak that will lower his number for this year significantly.

Most everyone seems to be against spending big, so why do we need a huge amount of cap space?? Something in the range of $20-$30 is plenty to fill a bunch of holes providing you spend wisely.

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Yeah, at least we know Rak fits the system. Big advantage over bringing in another team's FA.

I just question whether we're overpaying Rak: Not in market value, but whether the team would be better off going with Rob Jackson and spreading the money over multiple positions.

We're we better off letting Carlos Rogers go? We're we better of letting Antonio Pierce go? We're we better of letting Fred Smoot go? We're we better off letting...

I think a change of pace is refreshing and hopefully things will improv on the field as a result. If your gonna take a gamble on a guy might as well be one of your own, not someone another team is willing to let go.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by mlmdub130

We're we better off letting Carlos Rogers go? We're we better of letting Antonio Pierce go? We're we better of letting Fred Smoot go? We're we better off letting...

I think a change of pace is refreshing and hopefully things will improv on the field as a result. If your gonna take a gamble on a guy might as well be one of your own, not someone another team is willing to let go.

None of those situations is comparable to Rak, IMO. All this is just what I read: Rogers walked because he wanted big money nobody would give him, and was so unwilling to work with the team he was even refusing coaches suggestions to get his eyes checked. Pierce signed with the Giants for just a little more money, not a big contract, we should have matched and kept him. The Vikings overpaid for Smoot, gotta let a guy walk when that happens and move on.

[SmootSmack]

I'm more interested in what the long term deal might be. And I hope it doesn't handcuff our ability to keep other, arguably more important, homegrown talent.

I still would have let Rak test the market though.