The Portis move in hindsight

skinsfan69 · 12-08-2006, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdlea

That was gonna be my reply exactly.

Of course not. But you don't give up two starters for one. If your going to make that trade then we are the ones who should have gotten the better end of the deal. If not then Gibbs should have sat Bailey down and told him things are gonna change. Or they should have just paid the man and not traded him at all. Some of it was over money. They pay everyone else so why not Bailey? You already know he can ball. So you go out and pay AA and AC but not the best corner in the league? C'mon.

jdlea · 12-08-2006, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Of course not. But you don't give up two starters for one. If your going to make that trade then we are the ones who should have gotten the better end of the deal. If not then Gibbs should have sat Bailey down and told him things are gonna change. Or they should have just paid the man and not traded him at all. Some of it was over money. They pay everyone else so why not Bailey? You already know he can ball. So you go out and pay AA and AC but not the best corner in the league? C'mon.

First of all, stop comparing now to 3 years ago. Second, he didn't wanna be here. He was tired of all of the coaching changes. I think he also saw what LaVar has said a lot, we just don't like to hear it. They also weren't in the business of paying their own guys and keeping them then. And, if you think Archuletta, Randle El, Carter, Lloyd, Portis, or anyone they gave big contracts to will see the end of them you're completely out of your mind. That's "the business side of football" that everyone thinks the Skins are so good at.

SmootSmack · 12-08-2006, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdlea

First of all, stop comparing now to 3 years ago. Second, he didn't wanna be here. He was tired of all of the coaching changes. I think he also saw what LaVar has said a lot, we just don't like to hear it. They also weren't in the business of paying their own guys and keeping them then. And, if you think Archuletta, Randle El, Carter, Lloyd, Portis, or anyone they gave big contracts to will see the end of them you're completely out of your mind. That's "the business side of football" that everyone thinks the Skins are so good at.

There were a lot of more personal issues behind Champ's leaving that had little, if nothing, to do with how the organization was run. I know because I was dealing with the Redskins on a near daily basis back in those days.

jdlea · 12-08-2006, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

There were a lot of more personal issues behind Champ's leaving that had little, if nothing, to do with how the organization was run. I know because I was dealing with the Redskins on a near daily basis back in those days.

I figured it was something like that, but I wasn't sure. I just know he didn't wanna come back and no amount of money was keeping him here.

djnemo65 · 12-08-2006, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

There were a lot of more personal issues behind Champ's leaving that had little, if nothing, to do with how the organization was run. I know because I was dealing with the Redskins on a near daily basis back in those days.

like what? tell me tell me tell me.

CrazyCanuck · 12-08-2006, 05:26 PM

Did The Ego really start this thread???? Well since it's out there...

I have no problem with the Bailey-Portis trade. We got a great RB and team leader. Did we need to throw in the 2nd rounder? That's a fair debate.

But I disagree with the "2 starters for 1" logic. Bailey wanted a lot of money and he got it in Denver. Bailey makes more than Portis plus they have to pay that 2nd rounder. So they got 2 starters, but we got 1 starter and cap space. And that cap space enabled us to get another starter.

And I don't think we'd do anything differently today. I think we need both these guys. Signing Betts will give us depth and take some of the load off Portis. We're no good with Portis out with injury every 2nd game. This should help.

12thMan · 12-08-2006, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyCanuck

Did The Ego really start this thread???? Well since it's out there...

I have no problem with the Bailey-Portis trade. We got a great RB and team leader. Did we need to throw in the 2nd rounder? That's a fair debate.

But I disagree with the "2 starters for 1" logic. Bailey wanted a lot of money and he got it in Denver. Bailey makes more than Portis plus they have to pay that 2nd rounder. So they got 2 starters, but we got 1 starter and cap space. And that cap space enabled us to get another starter.

And I don't think we'd do anything differently today. I think we need both these guys. Signing Betts will give us depth and take some of the load off Portis. We're no good with Portis out with injury every 2nd game. This should help.

Not to blow smoke up your ass, but I'v never heard the Portis v. Bailey deal put quite this way. Most people tend to focus on the two players for one part of it...but you really put the cost on Denver's end into perspective. Very good post, man.

Thanks.

CrazyCanuck · 12-09-2006, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Not to blow smoke up your ass, but I'v never heard the Portis v. Bailey deal put quite this way. Most people tend to focus on the two players for one part of it...but you really put the cost on Denver's end into perspective. Very good post, man.

Thanks.

Is blowing smoke up my ass a good thing? At first I thought you were gonna curse me out.

Thanks.

jdlea · 12-09-2006, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyCanuck

But I disagree with the "2 starters for 1" logic. Bailey wanted a lot of money and he got it in Denver. Bailey makes more than Portis plus they have to pay that 2nd rounder. So they got 2 starters, but we got 1 starter and cap space. And that cap space enabled us to get another starter.

That's a really good point. That's cap space that was used to bring in Springs.

skinsfan69 · 12-08-2006, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdlea

First of all, stop comparing now to 3 years ago. Second, he didn't wanna be here. He was tired of all of the coaching changes. I think he also saw what LaVar has said a lot, we just don't like to hear it. They also weren't in the business of paying their own guys and keeping them then. And, if you think Archuletta, Randle El, Carter, Lloyd, Portis, or anyone they gave big contracts to will see the end of them you're completely out of your mind. That's "the business side of football" that everyone thinks the Skins are so good at.

The problems of the past are why this team is not very good now.

jdlea · 12-08-2006, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

The problems of the past are why this team is not very good now.

It's hard to say why they're not very good right now. I mean, seriously, they went to the playoffs last season. Tell me what you would have done differently this offseason or come up with something that could have actually happened then. Keeping Champ was out of the question. We've shown you tons of reasons why Betts couldn't have been the #1. Come up with a real reason why the trade shouldn't have happened.

skinsfan69 · 12-08-2006, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdlea

It's hard to say why they're not very good right now. I mean, seriously, they went to the playoffs last season. Tell me what you would have done differently this offseason or come up with something that could have actually happened then. Keeping Champ was out of the question. We've shown you tons of reasons why Betts couldn't have been the #1. Come up with a real reason why the trade shouldn't have happened.

Well for one I would not have given a 3rd rounder for Brunell. Again that's a potential starter. Try and get Brunell after he was cut and save the draft pick, ( becasue he was going to be cut) then offer him more than anyone else. I also would not try and play AC as an everydown 4-3 end. He's not big enough to hold up against the run. As for Bailey? He wanted out. Fine. Get him outta here. But try your best to get the better of the deal. Wasn't Casserly down in Houston at the time? Cassery drafted him so try and make a deal with him? Anyone. Just make sure you get the better of the deal. Get multiple draft picks for him so you set yourself up for the future. Run it like NE does. Do you think NE would ever get rid of a guy and not get fair value? No. Look how they handled Deion Branch? Rocky M. Gave up a 2nd rounder just to move up and pick the guy? If you do that then make the guy the starter right away and deal with his mistakes. Meanwhile he's on the bench and the 2nd rounder is gone. Look, I could go on and on. But the bottom line is the lack of draft picks are killing the team now. All the money is invested in the front line players. In other words the team is too top heavy.

jdlea · 12-08-2006, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

Well for one I would not have given a 3rd rounder for Brunell. Again that's a potential starter. Try and get Brunell after he was cut and save the draft pick, ( becasue he was going to be cut) then offer him more than anyone else. I also would not try and play AC as an everydown 4-3 end. He's not big enough to hold up against the run. As for Bailey? He wanted out. Fine. Get him outta here. But try your best to get the better of the deal. Wasn't Casserly down in Houston at the time? Cassery drafted him so try and make a deal with him? Anyone. Just make sure you get the better of the deal. Get multiple draft picks for him so you set yourself up for the future. Run it like NE does. Do you think NE would ever get rid of a guy and not get fair value? No. Look how they handled Deion Branch? Rocky M. Gave up a 2nd rounder just to move up and pick the guy? If you do that then make the guy the starter right away and deal with his mistakes. Meanwhile he's on the bench and the 2nd rounder is gone. Look, I could go on and on. But the bottom line is the lack of draft picks are killing the team now. All the money is invested in the front line players. In other words the team is too top heavy.

That's a very good post. I actually agree with most of what you said. However, I think getting Portis for Champ and a 2 was a good deal. Champ wasn't coming back and that meant teams could hold out on the Skins and tell them "we'll wait till you get rid of him." The way the team was being run then, they wouldn't have let dead cap space get rid of a guy. I don't think they could have made a much better deal. I wouldn't have gotten Brunell at all, but that's up for discussion. Also, Carter had a good game last week, maybe he'll come around.

I agree that they need to keep some draft picks and stop signing so many front line guys.

12-08-2006, 05:26 PM	#6
CrazyCanuck Serenity Now Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,008	Re: The Portis move in hindsight Did The Ego really start this thread???? Well since it's out there... I have no problem with the Bailey-Portis trade. We got a great RB and team leader. Did we need to throw in the 2nd rounder? That's a fair debate. But I disagree with the "2 starters for 1" logic. Bailey wanted a lot of money and he got it in Denver. Bailey makes more than Portis plus they have to pay that 2nd rounder. So they got 2 starters, but we got 1 starter and cap space. And that cap space enabled us to get another starter. And I don't think we'd do anything differently today. I think we need both these guys. Signing Betts will give us depth and take some of the load off Portis. We're no good with Portis out with injury every 2nd game. This should help.

The Portis move in hindsight

Locker Room Main Forum