Re: Rolle Signed?
 

i know rolle is better and it hard to argue that he is not. he knows our system which is the most important thing for continuity on defense. i think everyone uses the term continuity to much too i mean we used to use it because of changing defensive cordinators, i mean 6 in 6 years is obviously not continuity. if we get smoot or rolle it will be because our coaching staff feels that they are more worth it. We aren't dumb to get a worse player for more money. Greg williams says he wants rolle and plain and simple that is b/c he is better and Williams knows he is. If we get rolle it will be because of GW and him wanting him. if GW feels that smoot is better he would get him for less money and i guess we will see who GW feels is more worthy to play in this elite "leeeeeet" system

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

I really dont understand why so mny of you are disappointed that we could have possibly signed Rolle. The argument that keeps coming up is that he is too old or we will not have continuity. First of all Rolle, is only 2-3 yrs older than Smoot which is not a big deal even for football players. He could still have a good 5-7 years left in the pros, meaning that we will have him for a long enough time. Smoot cannot be truly considered a loyal Redskin because it seems that he will sign with the team that offers the most money. If he really wanted to be here, he would have taken the $11.5 million, become one of the highest paid cornerbacks, and stayed with our team. Secondly, if you are talking about continuity, Smoot has only been in this defense for a year whereas Rolle has been under Williams for 3. There will be no need for a time to adapt in this system. By sitting around and waiting for Smoot to re-sign, we would definitely loose out on Rolle, possibly being left with nothing if Smoot decides to sign elsewhere. The bottom line is that Rolle is a better player whos presence will greatly increase our strength on defense since we would have 2 #1 CBs. Why pay Rolle more when we could offer the same amount to Smoot? Rolle is better, Williams wants him more, and a corner with the status of Smoot should not get a contract that would potentially put him among the top 5 richest CBs when,frankly, he is not one of the top 5 in the league.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

I hate that we had to love having Smoot on the team so much. :p

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

cbs sportsline put up there top 50 FAs and said they looked at playing ability and age as factors. Rolle was number 1 and smoot 3 and pierce 5 and trotter 40 by the way. not much difference in the rank of smoot and rolle so y not just trust GW in who ever he wants, if they get smoot it will be b/c they want smoot more and if they pay more money to rolle it will DEFINATLY be because he wants Rolle more because he is on a different team and he more costly and is older as everyone feels that is a huge deal i mean randy moss has 7 years in the league i guess he sucks too.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Longest run-on EVER. :)

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Good points though...

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]Longest run-on EVER. :)[/QUOTE]

yeah i noticed that AND i was going to change it but said o well AND i went up and got some food AND came back down AND saw that you said i had good points AND i was happy :)

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Glad I could make someone's day... LOL

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

anyone else notice the other thing on that link, it said the vikings signed pat williams. I cant find that anywhere else either. And its a huge surprise becuase arent the Vikings very deep at that position?

Didnt we say as a general rule of thumb last off season to never trust PRW?

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

I've seen the Pat Williams news other places, Fox Sports, San Francisco Chronicle.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

the rumor central thing on espn football site says that "Rolle, Trotter on Chiefs' list"
but i am to poor to be "IN" and can't view the page:(

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=smootsmack]I've seen the Pat Williams news other places, Fox Sports, San Francisco Chronicle.[/QUOTE]
good!

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

I think Pierce is gone for good. Gibbs says we cant afford to offer more than the Giants and that he is pretty much gone. Maybe we should take money out of Rolle and give it to him. Whos our MLB?!?!?!

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=VishsSkins]I think Pierce is gone for good. Gibbs says we cant afford to offer more than the Giants and that he is pretty much gone. Maybe we should take money out of Rolle and give it to him. Whos our MLB?!?!?![/QUOTE]


Michael Barrow.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

Will he honestly be healthy enough to last the whole season

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

NO barrow will not be healthy, yes we should take the money out of rolle to give to pierce. like i said before we got a chance w/o a CB but w/o pierce we have no back ups so this is why i am pissed at smoot if he would take 10 million and shut the F*$^ up its getting old i don't care that he wants more, if he were a team player we would be bringing back the same defense next year and we would get better w/o injuries. GEEEEZ

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

If the Rolle signing is true than it's a good signing, he is not a little better than Smoot he's a lot better, and I have alway's liked Smoot, but if we are going to shell out relativly the same money for either I have to go with Rolle hand's down, he has a minimum of 4 to 5 peak year's left, with the loss of Pierce that free's up some extra money to get a player like Rolle, so long as his charactor issues check out ok this is a great signing, it's not like Smoot hasen't been given a [IMO] a very generous offer from us, he say's it's up to us if he comes back but he's not willing to except 10mil plus for a signing bonus? Smoot is looking for every last nickle he can get, turnabout is fair play we can then look for the best player for the buck and that's Rolle.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=offiss]If the Rolle signing is true than it's a good signing, he is not a little better than Smoot he's a lot better, and I have alway's liked Smoot, but if we are going to shell out relativly the same money for either I have to go with Rolle hand's down, he has a minimum of 4 to 5 peak year's left, with the loss of Pierce that free's up some extra money to get a player like Rolle, so long as his charactor issues check out ok this is a great signing, it's not like Smoot hasen't been given a [IMO] a very generous offer from us, he say's it's up to us if he comes back but he's not willing to except 10mil plus for a signing bonus? Smoot is looking for every last nickle he can get, turnabout is fair play we can then look for the best player for the buck and that's Rolle.[/QUOTE]

Nice post as true as it gets

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=BigSKINBauer]Nice post as true as it gets[/QUOTE]


We friend's again? :biggthump

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

were we not friends before?

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

o yeah that lavar stuff, we can agree to disagree until he proves the world wrong next year..... we good

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=BigSKINBauer]were we not friends before?[/QUOTE]


I knew you were going to say that when I wrote it. :laughing2

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

did u guys see that other post where it says we lost Barrow too? I really dont believe that.

Re: Rolle Signed?
 

[QUOTE=VishsSkins]did u guys see that other post where it says we lost Barrow too? I really dont believe that.[/QUOTE]

seems like rumor material right now