Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruhskins
I respect your opinion and thanks for clarifying it. I feel that Hall was in two organizations (Atl and Oak) that were not known for having a good handle on its players. And yes, NE wins, but they also have a strong locker room and good veteran leadership. I don't think Oakland had that, and definitely Atlanta back then didn't have it. I think if Hall had not produced when we got him, then I would not agreed for this re-signing. But he produced, so we should give him a deal. I think given the Redskins attitude towards spending money, I feel that they will not go overboard with Hall. And I hope they are able to keep Rogers too. As I've repeatedly said, the success of both Hall and Rogers is tied to both of them being here in Washington.
Personally, if I were Rogers, I would stay, pad my number next year and hit free agency with the ability to sign for big money for another team. A CB tandem of Rogers and Hall for an entire season would be sick.
|
Hall did perform but only for about a half season and like I mentioned it was in an effort to get a big payday. I'd like to see him perform over a longer period of time before spending big $ on him. Since when do the Redskins not go overboard when spending $? When they want someone they always go overboard. Its the Skins M. O. If Wash is the only place where Hall & Rogers can succeed then its further proof to me that they should not be resigned.