Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

As long as we hold onto Brunell I'll be happy.... :)

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

STOP THE MADNESS...The Skins need to stop overspending for mediocre free agents. London Fletcher was good 5 years ago. Dropping a ton of money on him is like signing his ex-teammate Adam Archuleta. DON'T DO IT. Clements would be a nice pickup but at what cost. At some point the Redskins need to get their finances in order and start acquiring young talent. That's done through the draft. Stop giving away draft picks like they are Christmas presents. Every off-season, the Skins make a big deal of over-spending on these so-called big named free agents and getting the Skins fans excited. And every year its been the same result - DISAPPOINTMENT.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

there are 5-6 teams that refuse to deal with the postons i believe. and as was noted early, one i fighting a suspension, the other is still able to conduct business as usual.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=hesscl34;277348]As long as we hold onto Brunell I'll be happy.... :)[/quote]


We holding on to Brunell? Sounds like you want to be holding on to Brunell to me:)

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Personally, I don't think Fletcher or Clements will be a big help.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic;277341]I am not saying he can't play. My point is we fielded the oldest defense in the NFL last year and we need some younger, quicker, more physical players. what kind of deal do you think he is going to want? do we really want to give this guy the money he wants when we need a lot of different areas upgraded. We drafted a guy last year(Rocky) who should be given a shot at playing, and if Fletcher is brought in to compete or add depth, fine. but at what cost? I just dont see the need to bring in a guy, on the down slope of his career for a year or two, then have to cut him and eat more cap money. We dont have the draft picks, i know that. but why not trade down, get a couple more picks and look at drafting a guy that could compete as well as he could. We gave up picks to move up to get Rocky, are we going to let him rott on the bench? He should be expected to start. to say someone isn't football smart because I dont believe in bringing guys in that are obviously on the downside of their career is crazy. Haven't we gone down that road enough of bringing in people towards the end of their career? There have to be other options out there more attractive than a 32 year old LB.[/QUOTE]

Well first off Rocky is an OLB and despite what many seem to think MLB and OLB are not just interchangeable. Especially in GW's system. In this system the MLB is the QB of the defense. He has to know what everyone is supposed to do so he can adjust when he diagrams what the other team is doing. For some reason I highly doubt anyone at Redskins park is willing to go into the next season with a guy who showed he can play the position average(Marshall) and a second year player who couldn't even crack the lineup at his natural position until mop up time. Rocky is not the answer.

As for trading down I agree it would be great to trade down and pick up several quality players but there are some problems with that too. First and foremost people make the statement 'trade down and pick up some more picks' just like they make the 'hire a GM statement'. Like it is some magical formula where you can go to the GM store or the Tradedown store and magically everything is fine. Well I have news for those people, trading takes two teams and if no one is willing to offer anything of value it won't happen. It is NOT a sound strategy to PLAN ON TRADING. You plan and prepare on NOT TRADING DOWN and if an opportuniy arises then you re-evaluate. The same for a GM. Just because we have a GM doesn't mean everything is fine. He would need to be a GOOD GM. There are plenty of teams who have traded down and ended up with scrap pieces because they traded away a shot at a difference maker and ended up with decent roll players. And there are plenty teams that never win championships with GMs.

That being said, you go into free agency looking to fix as many holes as possible so you dont have to rely on drafting to field 22 decent starters. Then the draft is used for depth. If we can bring a guy who knows the systems and can play why would his age be a problem? No one is expecting the guy to come in be the MLB for the next 8 years. We are talking about getting a good player to play for us while we build depth at the same position and others also.

I totally fail to see why his age is even a consideration other than for health reasons.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=12thMan;277353]Personally, I don't think Fletcher or Clements will be a big help.[/quote]

I don't either. It all starts with the front 4. We need a tackle and an end.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=dmek25;277301]plain and simple, fletcher is an upgrade at middle linebacker, but is probably too old. and clements would be a good fit, and i really don't give a rats ass what the redskins pay anyone. year after year, the skins masterfully move right around the salary cap. one of these years, after the skins have some success, someone is going to recognize how good of a job whomever it is that runs the skins cap[/quote]

if by masterful you mean leading the league in dead cap, not having enough money for decent depth and having to pay more each year for smaller returns. not to mention the fact that the skins overpay all their FA signings anyways.

it hasn't bitten them because of the new TV deals, BUT, right now the skins need to rework four thousand contracts to get an FA while other teams are 30mill+ under the cap. This team is already at a competitive disadvantage as far as cap resources, not to mention draft pick disparity, overpaying (very poor price/performance on very big contracts), and the current lack of depth.

I mean, there's always luck and the chance we'll get 2 HoF guys as UDFAs, but right now next year ain't looking so hot. maybe if no one gets hurt and those 2 signings put the D back in the top 10 we got a shot...

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Nate will cost us money. We need to draft a MLB prospect for the future. Marshall isn't that bad if the d-line does an adequate job of keeping bodies off of him.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277356]There are plenty of teams who have traded down and ended up with scrap pieces because they traded away a shot at a difference maker and ended up with decent roll players. And there are plenty teams that never win championships with GMs.

I totally fail to see why his age is even a consideration other than for health reasons.[/quote]


ditto and ditto. well said.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=hail_2_da_skins;277349]STOP THE MADNESS...The Skins need to stop overspending for mediocre free agents. London Fletcher was good 5 years ago.[/QUOTE]

Respectfully, you are clueless.

Year Team G Total Tkl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def
1998 St. Louis Rams 16 28 25.0 3 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0
1999 St. Louis Rams 16 90 66.0 24 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2000 St. Louis Rams 16 132 105.0 27 5.5 4 33 8.2 12 0 4
2001 St. Louis Rams 16 116 89.0 27 4.5 2 18 9.0 18 0 3
2002 Buffalo Bills 16 147 97.0 50 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2003 Buffalo Bills 16 133 96.0 37 2 0 0 0.0 0 0 4
2004 Buffalo Bills 16 142 92.0 50 3.5 0 0 0.0 0 0 3
2005 Buffalo Bills 16 157 104.0 53 4 1 20 20.0 20 0 2
2006 Buffalo Bills 16 146 104.0 42 2 4 30 7.5 17 1 7


Fletcher had arguably his best season of his career last year.

He was probably the best MLB in the league last year.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

While I'm against the FA spending sprees I think London Fletcher and Nate Clements would be great additions.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

the leaders in tackles this year were zach thomas (REAL f'ing old), demeco ryans (real f'ing young) and london fletcher (somewhat in between). he's been consistent, so as long as it's not a insane 7 year deal, he could really help us.

i think some people are way to hung up on age. 32 != (does not equal) total crap. I mean, peyton's going to be 32 in march, so obviously the colts should dump him as soon as possible, cause we all know no one can possible be any good after 32.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=TAFKAS;277328]I thought the Postons were suspended anyway. So who's representing Lavar these days? Is it #56fanatic?[/quote]

I wish, I could use the percentage of his last contract.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Redskinconfucian wisdom say

If you can get em for the right price.. take em .... If you can't don't

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277361]Respectfully, you are clueless.

Year Team G Total Tkl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def
1998 St. Louis Rams 16 28 25.0 3 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0
1999 St. Louis Rams 16 90 66.0 24 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2000 St. Louis Rams 16 132 105.0 27 5.5 4 33 8.2 12 0 4
2001 St. Louis Rams 16 116 89.0 27 4.5 2 18 9.0 18 0 3
2002 Buffalo Bills 16 147 97.0 50 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2003 Buffalo Bills 16 133 96.0 37 2 0 0 0.0 0 0 4
2004 Buffalo Bills 16 142 92.0 50 3.5 0 0 0.0 0 0 3
2005 Buffalo Bills 16 157 104.0 53 4 1 20 20.0 20 0 2
2006 Buffalo Bills 16 146 104.0 42 2 4 30 7.5 17 1 7


Fletcher had arguably his best season of his career last year.

He was probably the best MLB in the league last year.[/quote]

Buff has a better defense. I would say Buff's d-line is a little more sturdy than ours. He could really struggle on our defense if we don't improve the line. But since we don't have draft picks than this is the option.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

wasn't there a guy from NY who had awesome numbers before he got here at MLB and didn't play a snap for us in a skins uniform... always hurt

MIKE BARROW

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=That Guy;277367]the leaders in tackles this year were zach thomas (REAL f'ing old), demeco ryans (real f'ing young) and london fletcher (somewhat in between). he's been consistent, so as long as it's not a insane 7 year deal, he could really help us.

i think some people are way to hung up on age. 32 != (does not equal) total crap. I mean, peyton's going to be 32 in march, so obviously the colts should dump him as soon as possible, cause we all know no one can possible be any good after 32.[/quote]

C'mon. Playing QB is ALOT less demanding than playing MLB. Since when does Peyton have to take on 250lb fullbacks?

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=That Guy;277367]i think some people are way to hung up on age. 32 != (does not equal) total crap. I mean, peyton's going to be 32 in march, so obviously the colts should dump him as soon as possible, cause we all know no one can possible be any good after 32.[/QUOTE]

I agree. He clearly isn't the long term solution. A nice contract where it is really a 2 or 3 year deal and we don't break the bank is in order I think. I am not advocating we go out and spend a boat load on him but give him market value and plug a hole. Then get us a corner and draft a lineman. Someone who either eats up the middle or can rush the passer. Either way someone who dominates. A lineup that includes Clements, Branch and Fletcher is better than a lineup of Rogers, Golston and Marshall on any planet. Then next year grab a prospect MLB and groom him for two years to replace fletcher. Seems reasonable to me.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=That Guy;277367]the leaders in tackles this year were zach thomas (REAL f'ing old), demeco ryans (real f'ing young) and london fletcher (somewhat in between). he's been consistent, so as long as it's not a insane 7 year deal, he could really help us.

i think some people are way to hung up on age. 32 != (does not equal) total crap. I mean, peyton's going to be 32 in march, so obviously the colts should dump him as soon as possible, cause we all know no one can possible be any good after 32.[/quote]


that isn't even comparable, a QB to a MLB. totally different positions. MLB takes suck a beating game in and game out. at 32 QB's are still on top of their game. MLB's for the most part are on the way down.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=diehardskin2982;277371]wasn't there a guy from NY who had awesome numbers before he got here at MLB and didn't play a snap for us in a skins uniform... always hurt[/QUOTE]

Yeah and all I think about when I think of Fletcher is Barrow. But Barrow was not a typical situation. That went as bad as it could have gone by any standard. I mean the guy went from not missing a snap in 8 7 seaosns to out of the league due to injury in 2. No one saw that coming and I don't think that one instance of anecdotal evidence is enough to wash our hands of experienced MLBs. If fletcher comes in and gets hurt day one and never plays again then we are cursed.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277356]Well first off Rocky is an OLB and despite what many seem to think MLB and OLB are not just interchangeable. Especially in GW's system. In this system the MLB is the QB of the defense. He has to know what everyone is supposed to do so he can adjust when he diagrams what the other team is doing. For some reason I highly doubt anyone at Redskins park is willing to go into the next season with a guy who showed he can play the position average(Marshall) and a second year player who couldn't even crack the lineup at his natural position until mop up time. Rocky is not the answer.

As for trading down I agree it would be great to trade down and pick up several quality players but there are some problems with that too. First and foremost people make the statement 'trade down and pick up some more picks' just like they make the 'hire a GM statement'. Like it is some magical formula where you can go to the GM store or the Tradedown store and magically everything is fine. Well I have news for those people, trading takes two teams and if no one is willing to offer anything of value it won't happen. It is NOT a sound strategy to PLAN ON TRADING. You plan and prepare on NOT TRADING DOWN and if an opportuniy arises then you re-evaluate. The same for a GM. Just because we have a GM doesn't mean everything is fine. He would need to be a GOOD GM. There are plenty of teams who have traded down and ended up with scrap pieces because they traded away a shot at a difference maker and ended up with decent roll players. And there are plenty teams that never win championships with GMs.

That being said, you go into free agency looking to fix as many holes as possible so you dont have to rely on drafting to field 22 decent starters. Then the draft is used for depth. If we can bring a guy who knows the systems and can play why would his age be a problem? No one is expecting the guy to come in be the MLB for the next 8 years. We are talking about getting a good player to play for us while we build depth at the same position and others also.

I totally fail to see why his age is even a consideration other than for health reasons.[/quote]

Isn't Floyd Reece unemployed right now? I think he has a proven record. Why isn't he here? If Danny Boi were serious about winning then he would be here and he should not care who's feelings he hurts.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=skinsfan69;277376]Isn't Floyd Reece unemployed right now? I think he has a proven record. Why isn't he here? If Danny Boi were serious about winning then he would be here and he should not care who's feelings he hurts.[/QUOTE]

Yeah because Snyder isn't serious about winning.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Hey guys I just want to add that I agree with the Clements hire, but I think we are getting ahead of ourselves. Can we really afford this guy? Also I would like to add that Adams from Clemson is not that good. I watched him through college and I am not very impressed. We need to draft Branch.

Also London would be a good guy in the middle till we get some draft picks next year. This team really needs to learn to draft and not trade everything away.

I know that this past off seaon was one of the worst we had for aquiring talent and giving away picks, but that is not the only reason I feel this way about our teams front office. We have had some great draft picks in here the last few years but we need to get more out our drafts. I'd really like to see us draft in every round one year or at least in all rounds on day one.
Successfull teams in this league build with the draft and our model for aquiring players is not working.

Anyway bring in some more guys this year and dont trade our draft away.

HTTR

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=artmonkforhallofamein07;277378]Hey guys I just want to add that I agree with the Clements hire, but I think we are getting ahead of ourselves. Can we really afford this guy? Also I would like to add that Adams from Clemson is not that good. I watched him through college and I am not very impressed. We need to draft Branch.

Also London would be a good guy in the middle till we get some draft picks next year. This team really needs to learn to draft and not trade everything away.

I know that this past off seaon was one of the worst we had for aquiring talent and giving away picks, but that is not the only reason I feel this way about our teams front office. We have had some great draft picks in here the last few years but we need to get more out our drafts. I'd really like to see us draft in every round one year or at least in all rounds on day one.
Successfull teams in this league build with the draft and our model for aquiring players is not working.

Anyway bring in some more guys this year and dont trade our draft away.

HTTR[/quote]

I watched him in a couple of games. I didn't see anything special. He looks undersized. Alan Branch seems like the safe pick.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277356]Well first off Rocky is an OLB and despite what many seem to think MLB and OLB are not just interchangeable. Especially in GW's system. In this system the MLB is the QB of the defense. He has to know what everyone is supposed to do so he can adjust when he diagrams what the other team is doing. For some reason I highly doubt anyone at Redskins park is willing to go into the next season with a guy who showed he can play the position average(Marshall) and a second year player who couldn't even crack the lineup at his natural position until mop up time. Rocky is not the answer.

As for trading down I agree it would be great to trade down and pick up several quality players but there are some problems with that too. First and foremost people make the statement 'trade down and pick up some more picks' just like they make the 'hire a GM statement'. Like it is some magical formula where you can go to the GM store or the Tradedown store and magically everything is fine. Well I have news for those people, trading takes two teams and if no one is willing to offer anything of value it won't happen. It is NOT a sound strategy to PLAN ON TRADING. You plan and prepare on NOT TRADING DOWN and if an opportuniy arises then you re-evaluate. The same for a GM. Just because we have a GM doesn't mean everything is fine. He would need to be a GOOD GM. There are plenty of teams who have traded down and ended up with scrap pieces because they traded away a shot at a difference maker and ended up with decent roll players. And there are plenty teams that never win championships with GMs.

That being said, you go into free agency looking to fix as many holes as possible so you dont have to rely on drafting to field 22 decent starters. Then the draft is used for depth. If we can bring a guy who knows the systems and can play why would his age be a problem? No one is expecting the guy to come in be the MLB for the next 8 years. We are talking about getting a good player to play for us while we build depth at the same position and others also.

I totally fail to see why his age is even a consideration other than for health reasons.[/quote]

we could go back and forth on this all day. we can agree to disagree. We all have our OPINIONS on how to run the team, and probably to the Redskins benefit, neither of us ever will. If Rocky is not the answer, then there we go again throwing draft picks away and letting people ride the pine until we send them off. Rocky HAS to be a contributor, this season and not just on special teams. A second round LB should be cracking the starting line up. Or our scouts are just crappy and our personel decisions come under fire again. Marshall is out of position at MLB. I agree that Fletcher is probably an upgrade in that area.

In regards to the draft, drafting a guy in the 1st or 2nd round is just as much a crap shoot as drafting a guy in the 6th or 7th. No one is a sure thing, which puts more pressure on the personel dept to have more picks to work with and make QUALITY picks and have good player evaluations. It is remained to be seen if our personel can pick quality players to provide the depth needed. Free Agency (again, in my opinion) should be used to fill A whole or add a player that puts our team over the top, not fill multiple holes.

the GM thing...come on. We do not have the right people making the football decisions that need to be made. Everyone in that building is win now at any cost. We all have had the GM discusion. A GM will make the decisions based on a long term build for multiple years of success, not just flashes in the pan. Has our way of building a team panned out for us over the last 10 years? NO! We go to playoffs, then stink the next year because players are shown the door, then its rebuild again, retool again, bring in player A,B & C. I would argue that most of us Redskin die hards feel we need a better front office structure with a GM.

Matty - you appreciate the paragraphs dont you!
Look, I am not trying to argue or say you are wrong or I am right. We are both right in a lot of the points brought up. we just differ in the way we feel regarding a certain player. I think youth is better served, using the draft and not signing old (trust me, 32 to me is not old!!) but in football terms for a MLB its not young. We shall see what happens. I am not going to hate the guy if he is brought in. I hope he kicks ass!! I would just do it differently.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

I like Branch and Anderson. I am a little wary of Adams.
I think
Branch = safe stud pick
Anderson = potential dominate type guy but might require a little seasoning
Adams = a little over hyped and maybe just a decent player not worthy of a top 10

I'd look at upside and go either Anderson or Branch. I hope we don't have a shot at Adams because I don't want to get suckered.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277361]Respectfully, you are clueless.

Year Team G Total Tkl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def
1998 St. Louis Rams 16 28 25.0 3 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0
1999 St. Louis Rams 16 90 66.0 24 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2000 St. Louis Rams 16 132 105.0 27 5.5 4 33 8.2 12 0 4
2001 St. Louis Rams 16 116 89.0 27 4.5 2 18 9.0 18 0 3
2002 Buffalo Bills 16 147 97.0 50 3 0 0 0.0 0 0 2
2003 Buffalo Bills 16 133 96.0 37 2 0 0 0.0 0 0 4
2004 Buffalo Bills 16 142 92.0 50 3.5 0 0 0.0 0 0 3
2005 Buffalo Bills 16 157 104.0 53 4 1 20 20.0 20 0 2
2006 Buffalo Bills 16 146 104.0 42 2 4 30 7.5 17 1 7


Fletcher had arguably his best season of his career last year.

He was probably the best MLB in the league last year.[/quote]

CLUELESS here!

I live in St Louis and I've seen a lot of London Fletcher. He is a solid linebacker but is near the end of his career. My statement about mediocre free agent signings has to do with the Redskins past signings, not Fletcher's worth. Fletcher is a quality guy but what is it going to cost, that's my point. If you read and comprehended my post, that's what I said. The Redskins need to stop this pattern of going after free agents year after year. I don't see the payoff.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=FRPLG;277384]I like Branch and Anderson. I am a little wary of Adams.
I think
Branch = safe stud pick
Anderson = potential dominate type guy but might require a little seasoning
Adams = a little over hyped and maybe just a decent player not worthy of a top 10

I'd look at upside and go either Anderson or Branch. I hope we don't have a shot at Adams because I don't want to get suckered.[/QUOTE]

Couldn't have said it better myself

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

I think we will go after Jamaal Anderson since Renaldo Wynn is almost a definte cut and Phillip Daniels could also get cut. We just took 2 dt's last year in the draft and i think if we get a dt, it should be a cheap veteran big fat run stuffer. I think I remember hearing somewhere that we would look to get a veteran dt and have golston as the 3rd dt interchanging. The pick of a dt in free agency is also a good idea cuz there are 2 de's in the draft atleast worthy of a #6 pick in Jamaal Anderson and Gaines Adams. Atleast if ones not there we can go with the other. If we get a de in free agency then we have to pick a dt in the draft, and if Alan Branch gets snagged by someone else then we are screwed. We might then look at Amobi Okoye but that is a definite reach and is not really the big fat run stuffer i think we need, he is more of a tommie harris or warren sapp type quick pass rusher from the inside. I also think he is a bit of a project and probably wouldn't help us much his rookie year or maybe 2nd year especially with G Will's unwillingness to play rookies. I think its a lot safer to say that we go run stuffing dt in free agency and then we look at a de in the draft.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=#56fanatic;277374]that isn't even comparable, a QB to a MLB. totally different positions. MLB takes suck a beating game in and game out. at 32 QB's are still on top of their game. MLB's for the most part are on the way down.[/quote]

great, tell that to zach thomas or donnie edwards. last i checked they had damn fine seasons too.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277375]Yeah and all I think about when I think of Fletcher is Barrow. But Barrow was not a typical situation. That went as bad as it could have gone by any standard. I mean the guy went from not missing a snap in 8 7 seaosns to out of the league due to injury in 2. No one saw that coming and I don't think that one instance of anecdotal evidence is enough to wash our hands of experienced MLBs. If fletcher comes in and gets hurt day one and never plays again then we are cursed.[/quote]

barrow was a known injury risk and given a contract in accordance to that. fiore (OL) got the same type of deal. it wasn't a monster deal.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

How was Barrow a known injury risk? The guy was a rock his entire career.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=#56fanatic;277383]
In regards to the draft, drafting a guy in the 1st or 2nd round is just as much a crap shoot as drafting a guy in the 6th or 7th.[/quote]

uh, actually, that's not true. not even close. how many starting QBs were 1st round picks? how many were 3rd-4th and how many were 6th or 7th rounders? i mean, you may think grossman sucks, but the low round QBs on that roster are even worse, and that's probably why they weren't taken earlier.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=Mattyk72;277402]How was Barrow a known injury risk? The guy was a rock his entire career.[/quote]

unless i'm remembering incorrectly, that's why the giants let him go, and that's why he didn't get a huge deal from someone else.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

This article states it was a cap move

[url=http://www.giants.com/news/eisen/story.asp?story_id=650]Michael Eisen - Story - 3/10 Giants Release LB Mike Barrow - Giants.com[/url]

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=That Guy;277404]unless i'm remembering incorrectly, that's why the giants let him go, and that's why he didn't get a huge deal from someone else.[/QUOTE]

I think you are "mis-remembering". He hadn't missed a game in either 6 or 7 years and that team sucked so he had little incentive other than money to stay there We offered more and he hurt his knee like first day of practice or something and the rest was history. I think the big thing about him when he was signed was that he never got hurt.

Edit: Ok so they cut him for cap reasons.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=That Guy;277399]great, tell that to zach thomas or donnie edwards. last i checked they had damn fine seasons too.[/quote]

there are always exceptions to the rule. didn't you learn that in english class. For every 32+ year old player having fine seasons, there are just as many or probably more riding the bench, playing sparingly, or injured all the time. I think people are misunderstanding what I am saying. I am not saying the guy can't play!! I am just saying I would prefer us to go in a different direction in regards to signing players that old. I would imagine there is someone younger just as good. He has had a very solid career, I know that and yes last season he had a pretty damn good one. But why is it players of that age play their ass off in a contract year, especially at that age, then crap out. I am not saying he would or will. just my stance on signing new players at that age.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277356]Well first off Rocky is an OLB and despite what many seem to think MLB and OLB are not just interchangeable. Especially in GW's system. In this system the MLB is the QB of the defense. He has to know what everyone is supposed to do so he can adjust when he diagrams what the other team is doing. For some reason I highly doubt anyone at Redskins park is willing to go into the next season with a guy who showed he can play the position average(Marshall) and a second year player who couldn't even crack the lineup at his natural position until mop up time. Rocky is not the answer.

As for trading down I agree it would be great to trade down and pick up several quality players but there are some problems with that too. First and foremost people make the statement 'trade down and pick up some more picks' just like they make the 'hire a GM statement'. Like it is some magical formula where you can go to the GM store or the Tradedown store and magically everything is fine. Well I have news for those people, trading takes two teams and if no one is willing to offer anything of value it won't happen. It is NOT a sound strategy to PLAN ON TRADING. You plan and prepare on NOT TRADING DOWN and if an opportuniy arises then you re-evaluate. The same for a GM. Just because we have a GM doesn't mean everything is fine. He would need to be a GOOD GM. There are plenty of teams who have traded down and ended up with scrap pieces because they traded away a shot at a difference maker and ended up with decent roll players. And there are plenty teams that never win championships with GMs.

That being said, you go into free agency looking to fix as many holes as possible so you dont have to rely on drafting to field 22 decent starters. Then the draft is used for depth. If we can bring a guy who knows the systems and can play why would his age be a problem? No one is expecting the guy to come in be the MLB for the next 8 years. We are talking about getting a good player to play for us while we build depth at the same position and others also.

I totally fail to see why his age is even a consideration other than for health reasons.[/quote]

Thank you for some providing some sanity to the board. Trading down at this point is NOT the smart option. We need a difference maker on the D-line and we're likely to get one with this pick. Secondly, announcing that you would like to trade down immediately diminishes the value of your pick. I personally would like to see a solid d-line starter come out of this draft as opposed to a couple of "project" players. If a team comes along and really want our slot and is willing to give greater value on the Jimmy Johnson draft points system, then I would consider, but until then, go with the pick.

Also, when evaluating a player, I wish more people would ask the questions in an order relevant to "field value". For example:

1 tie) Can this guy play in my system
1 tie) Does he have the physical talent to improve my team
3) Is he injury prone
4) Is he a quality character person or a PITA
5) Will his numbers fit my cap plans

Age doesn't come up unless it's relevant to #3 IMHO.

3)

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=#56fanatic;277417]there are always exceptions to the rule. didn't you learn that in english class. For every 32+ year old player having fine seasons, there are just as many or probably more riding the bench, playing sparingly, or injured all the time. I think people are misunderstanding what I am saying. I am not saying the guy can't play!! I am just saying I would prefer us to go in a different direction in regards to signing players that old. I would imagine there is someone younger just as good. He has had a very solid career, I know that and yes last season he had a pretty damn good one. But why is it players of that age play their ass off in a contract year, especially at that age, then crap out. I am not saying he would or will. just my stance on signing new players at that age.[/quote]

So you'd rather bring back a banged up Arrington and put him out of position at MLB?

Have you even checked the market for MLB's this year?? It's painfully thin, Fletcher like it or not is easily the best option out there especially considering he's had success playing in this defense before.