Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=That Guy;277403]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.[/quote]


uh..what are you trying to say? how is drafting a 1st, 2nd, 3rd an exact science. there is no guarantee that a 1st rounder is going to be a hall of famer, or a bust, or at least servicable. I am just saying, the more picks you have in the draft, year in and year out, you are more likely to find a player whether its a star player or a contributing player. If we consistantly have 1st rounder and a couple of 5th through 7th the likely hood of filling roster spots with contributing players or star player diminishes drastically. Thats why we have no depth. Thats why when springs goes down, we have no one to fill in. unless Mike Rumph, Kenny wright, Ide Jimoh is quality depth. Ide Jimoh is an outstanding special teamer, there is a reason he doesn't play on a regular basis on D. filling spots on the team with aging over paid free agents is the reason we dont have depth. not having picks in the draft is why we dont have depth. the signing people off the street, generally old, or overrated players is the reason our D struggled for the most part. No depth, no true or halfway decent talent if a starter goes down. Holdman sucks,Marshall is out of position,Salvae is not a starter, out safety situation last season was a joke! Our corner situation last year when springs was hurt was a joke too! this all goes back to how the team is run. Look at the pro bowl, Baily, Harris(big surprise) pierce. you dont think our team would have been better with at least one of those guys.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

I like London Fletcher, I think he could be a solid at most 2 year solution for us at MLB, but his age really concerns me, and I can't but help to think that he would be another veteran fa redskins bust. I would much rather see us get Kawika Mitchell or Napoleon Harris at MLB, both are younger and won't command the contract that Fletcher will.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=Mattyk72;277420]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.[/quote]

no, not a banged up Arrington. I said I would welcome him back if he is 100%. which is probably a long shot given his history over the last few years. Anyone can get hurt. someone mentioned Barrow, he was a picture of health before he came here, now he's out of football. that is a risk you take any time you step on the field. nature of the beast.
if Arrington was healthy, he is 28, and I would sign him before a 32 year old guy. but that is not happening so even worth concidering.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=Mattyk72;277420]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.[/quote]

again, I am not saying he isn't a good player or maybe the best option there right now. I am stating my opinion on why I would not sign him. I would exhaust all other resources before doing so.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=#56fanatic;277424]no, not a banged up Arrington. I said I would welcome him back if he is 100%. which is probably a long shot given his history over the last few years. Anyone can get hurt. someone mentioned Barrow, he was a picture of health before he came here, now he's out of football. that is a risk you take any time you step on the field. nature of the beast.
if Arrington was healthy, he is 28, and I would sign him before a 32 year old guy. but that is not happening so even worth concidering.[/quote]

Arrington would be painfully out of position at MLB in this defense, you do realize that don't you?

You would rather do that than put in a guy in Fletcher who knows this defense and knows the position, just because of age?

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=#56fanatic;277425]again, I am not saying he isn't a good player or maybe the best option there right now. I am stating my opinion on why I would not sign him. I would exhaust all other resources before doing so.[/quote]

What other resources?

The available MLB's are pretty thin, and we have other more crucial areas to address in the draft... so what specifically would you recommend if Fletcher is not on your list?

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=Mattyk72;277427]What other resources?

The available MLB's are pretty thin, and we have other more crucial areas to address in the draft... so what specifically would you recommend if Fletcher is not on your list?[/quote]

isnt' the draft for addressing the areas on the team. I would trade down, get a 1st, 2nd and 4th. the 6th pick should be a prized pick and we should be able to get multiple picks for it. take a Dline man, and LB with the 1st two picks. not saying they will be immediate impact players, but picking a LB in the 1st, they should be able to play right away. but you never know. I think they are addressing the CB situating in FA. If we have to sign Fletcher, then we have to, but I would imagine there is a stud that can be had in the 1st or 2nd.
again, my opinion. I am getting the feeling you guys think I am crapping the idea of Fletcher, or I think he isn't a player. Like I have said multiple times, if he is signed, great I hope it does great, which I am sure he will. I just would be hisitant on it, that is all.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

3 picks for the 6th overall??

LOL good luck with that one.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=skinsfan69;277265]Sorry but bringing in Fletcher makes no sense to me. None what so ever. How about bringing in a MLB that is young and will perhaps have a chance to be with the team for several years. This is a total band aid approach.[/quote]We could do that...if we had any picks. If he can man the middle for just 2 seasons, we can draft a MLB next year in the first two rounds next season and cut Fletcher after 2008.

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. 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.[/quote]We certainly have to stop giving up the picks, but we can't just stop signing players to fill holes. The key with a deal to Fletcher is that it has to be cheap to get out of after the 2nd or 3rd year of it. Reasonable signing bonus, no massive roster bonuses before then, keep the base salaries low for the first 2-3 years.

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

MIKE BARROW[/quote]I think Fletcher is a much better player than Mike Barrow.

Plus if it turns out that we sign the next Antonio Pierce off the scrap heap this year, I don't think anyone would be bitter about the Fletcher signing.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

IF the Giants are dumb enough to let Pierce go I will PERSONALLY buy a thank you card and send it to Jerry Reese !

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=Mattyk72;277431]3 picks for the 6th overall??

LOL good luck with that one.[/quote]


you definately can get a late 1st and 2nd. you could work in another pick, like 5th through 7th.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic;277444]you definately can get a late 1st and 2nd. you could work in another pick, like 5th through 7th.[/QUOTE]

Seriously. I think everyone of us would be happy to get a 1,2,4 or 1,2,5 but your idea is way too simplistic and short-sided. SOMEONE HAS TO OFEER US those picks. I hear it all the time around here that we should do this or that when in reality this or that is not easy to do. Or even remotely likely. You have to ask yourself. What are the chances we can make a trade to get those picks? Let's be generous and say 50%. So based on your idea we eschew finding a suitable solution at MLB in free agency and go heading into draft season with more holes than picks and the 50% likely to happen hope that we can swing a deal to get more picks we can use to fill all of those holes. Nevermind that at that point in time the market could be totally dead for trades, or that our obvious holes give leverage to other teams to offer us less, or that even in a perfect world you'd then be relying on a rookie to run the defense. No forget all that and let's take a monumental risk on maybe being able to trade the 6th for 3 decent picks that can fill our holes. I am looking at what the best option is and the best option is to fill a hole when you can fill it. If you can get a guy at a reasonable price to fill a hole then you do it unless you think he can't do the job. The only reason anyone is giving to not get Fletcher is his age and that alone is not a good reason.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277451]Seriously. I think everyone of us would be happy to get a 1,2,4 or 1,2,5 but your idea is way too simplistic and short-sided. SOMEONE HAS TO OFEER US those picks. I hear it all the time around here that we should do this or that when in reality this or that is not easy to do. Or even remotely likely. You have to ask yourself. What are the chances we can make a trade to get those picks? Let's be generous and say 50%. So based on your idea we eschew finidng a suitable solution at MLB in free agency and go heading into draft season with more holes than picks and the 50% likely hope that we can swing a deal to get another pick we can use to fill all of those holes. Nevermind that at that point in time the market could be totally dead for trades, or that our obvious holes give leverage to other teams to offer us less, or that even in a perfect world you'd then be relying on a rookie to run the defense. No forget all that and let's take a chance on maybe being able to trade the 6th for 3 decent picks that can fill our holes. I am looking at what the best option is and the best option is to fill a hole when you can fill it. If you can get a guy at a reasonable price to fill a hole then you do it unless you think he can't do the job. The only reason anyone is giving to not get Fletcher is his age and that alone is not a good reason.[/quote]


I don't think it's that hard. You find a team that's interested then they have charts they use that translate the relative value of a pick as it relates to other picks and they negotiate from there. A 6th overall might be worth the other team's lower 1st round pick and a 3rd and a 5th (as an example). Then the haggling starts. In that situation the pressure is on the team that wants to move up, IMO.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;277454]I don't think it's that hard. You find a team that's interested then they have charts they use that translate the relative value of a pick as it relates to other picks and they negotiate from there. A 6th overall might be worth the other team's lower 1st round pick and a 3rd and a 5th (as an example). Then the haggling starts. In that situation the pressure is on the team that wants to move up, IMO.[/QUOTE]

Oh so you just take out like a personal ad in the NFL weekly and wait for all the offers to come in huh? I am sure it is that simple.

Ever noticed how move up trades only happen on the day of the draft? That's because no one trades their picks until they have already gone through free agency since free agency changes the entire landscape including what holes you have and what holes other teams have thereby determining what chance you will have to fill your holes in the draft. Again it is way too simplistic and in this case naive to think we can just make a trade like it is no big deal.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=FRPLG;277456]Oh so you just take out like a personal ad in the NFL weekly and wait for all the offers to come in huh? I am sure it is that simple.

Ever noticed how move up trades only happen on the day of the draft? That's because no one trades their picks until they have already gone through free agency since free agency changes the entire landscape including what holes you have and what holes other teams have thereby determining what chance you will have to fill your holes in the draft. Again it is way too simplistic and in this case naive to think we can just make a trade like it is no big deal.[/quote]

I didn't say it was no big deal and I surely didn't suggest taking out any ads. Yes FA comes first. And yes these deals happen very late but they are not that uncommon. Remember when we fleeced Mike Ditka for his whole draft and we still got Champ? Also, I don't ever remeber a draft where Beathard didn't make some trade. Those deals were essential to his approach.

I think it is far more naive, based on this team's recent history to think that we will fill holes through FA or that our scout's are not perfectly capable of drafting a bust with the 6th overall. At least with more picks, their chances of (accidentally and in spite of themselves) choosing a decent player improve somewhat.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=70Chip;277454]I don't think it's that hard. You find a team that's interested then they have charts they use that translate the relative value of a pick as it relates to other picks and they negotiate from there. A 6th overall might be worth the other team's lower 1st round pick and a 3rd and a 5th (as an example). Then the haggling starts. In that situation the pressure is on the team that wants to move up, IMO.[/quote]

Agreed. Sure you don't show everyone your hand. There will be a major impact player available at #6. Think of it this way, there will be a #1 at most positions on the field available. Maybe MLB, Safety, Dline, etc. Some teams fall in love w/ certain players and think this player will put them over the hump. So we most likely can get good value for the 6th, but if not...

No biggie- we've got a great pick. It just all depends on the FA's, how much cap room we have & how much we rate the players coming out. Do we have enough cap room to sign the 6th pick, a starting mlb (fletcher) and (clements)? W/out looking i would think it might be difficult w/ out some serious restructuring - cuts. Point is we do have some major holes to fill and the FO has to be smart about this.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

we seem to be able to swing trades on draft day just fine. Campbell, Rocky the last couple of drafts. There may or may not be teams looking to trade. There are teams every year that have high picks looking for trades to move down, or teams looking to move up to pick that one guy they need. You make it sound like trades on draft day never happen. I am not saying this is what is going to happen. I was asked what scenario I would like to happen, and that is what I would like to see. We need more picks, and trading a very high 1st round pick will definately get us more picks later in the draft. Like I said over and over and over... if we sign Fletcher good, if we dont and draft a guy good. I gave an opinion on what I would do, or would like to see. If we sign fletcher am I going to jump off the roof and quit rooting for my Skins? NO. damn people, you are acting like Vinny just handed over the reigns to me or something. I am going on past records of signing over paid, aging stars, that dont pan out. If we have signed some in the past that actually worked out maybe some of us, ME specifically, would not be so skepticle. Name a aging star we have signed recently that actually worked out.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

the lions allowed dre bly to seek a trade (espn). he is from virginia, we should see what they want for him

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

too much money, thats want he wants

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

I would be fine with either or both if they were a DE & DT respectively, that's the area of this defense that needa the most help. I like both players, and mainly because they have both proved to be durable, playing in 16 games each season since they've been in the league. However, a few months ago we all seemed to be in agreement that the time has come for us to turn our offseason attention to something other than high priced FA's. I don't want to go drunk on that concept again. I agree with 56fanatic, this team needs to get younger, and PLAY the youing players we get and not relegate them to the bench and ST's.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

wow, #56, i'm sure glad you'll never run anything related to football.

look at the success rate of 1st round picks to 6th round picks. If you're so dense as to not see the difference in success as a whole, I can't help you, and there won't be many that can.

as for exception, guess what? he WAS NUMBER THREE IN THE LEAGUE in tackles, so he's probably more likely to be good than bad. what's you alternative? sign back lavar and move him to MLB? yeah, that's f'ing hilarious, good luck with that.

YOU DO NOT count on trade downs. yeah the skins seem to be able to swing trades on draft day just fine, but unless you're blind, you'd notice that they tend to be the ones getting ripped off and trading UP, not down.

seriously, which NFL are you watching?

you need to judge players individually, you can't just say, "well they signed bruce smith and he was old and didn't work out, so we should never sign an old guy ever again". that's retarded. at the time those old guys were signed, plenty of people knew they weren't going to be so hot, AND, btw, remember last offseason? you know, when we signed all those YOUNG guys? yeah, how'd that work out?

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Throwing millions at a veteran free agent that is just a temporary fix is just plain dumb. sure flectcher might come in here and light things up or maybe just be trottier all over again. I think we should have learned about how screwy signing free agents can be. Most players who are in the last year of a contract allways seem to play a hair better so they can command that big pay day. at 32 i would have to suspect that Fletcher is looking for that one last big huge payday and where else would one go get that??????? Look no further than dan snyder.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

When did 32 become the definitive cut-off point for assessing physical ability for all football players? Darrell Green, Monte Coleman, Ray Brown, [SIZE=1][I](Deion Sanders[/I][/SIZE])...etc didn't seem to suck too bad once they passed 32. You have to take a look at an individual's workout program. If he keeps himself in great shape all year long, chances are he'll play well past 32. Barring a major injury, of course.

This line of thought makes me (age 32) feel like I'm nearing the end. I guess even though last year I ran my fastest mile time and broke my benchpress mark that I can expect that to all come crashing down anyday now. Excuse me while I go checkup on my healthcare plan.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[quote=That Guy;277573]wow, #56, i'm sure glad you'll never run anything related to football.

look at the success rate of 1st round picks to 6th round picks. If you're so dense as to not see the difference in success as a whole, I can't help you, and there won't be many that can.

as for exception, guess what? he WAS NUMBER THREE IN THE LEAGUE in tackles, so he's probably more likely to be good than bad. what's you alternative? sign back lavar and move him to MLB? yeah, that's f'ing hilarious, good luck with that.

YOU DO NOT count on trade downs. yeah the skins seem to be able to swing trades on draft day just fine, but unless you're blind, you'd notice that they tend to be the ones getting ripped off and trading UP, not down.

seriously, which NFL are you watching?

you need to judge players individually, you can't just say, "well they signed bruce smith and he was old and didn't work out, so we should never sign an old guy ever again". that's retarded. at the time those old guys were signed, plenty of people knew they weren't going to be so hot, AND, btw, remember last offseason? you know, when we signed all those YOUNG guys? yeah, how'd that work out?[/quote]


that is real mature calling someone dense. I never questioned the success rate of a 1st round player vs a 6th round player. Obviously 1st rounders,2nd rounders are "predicted" to have better careers, 6th and 7th rounders are lucky to make the roster. My point was, they guys have never played in the NFL and nothing is 100% definate, that this player is going to be a stud. grow up and stop insulting people because they dont agree with you. AGAIN..and AGAIN..and AGAIN... LET ME SAY THIS ONE MORE TIME....I WILL TYPE IT BIG SO MAYBE YOU CAN SEE IT BETTER. I NEVER HAVE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT FLETCHER BEING A BAD PLAYER. IN FACT I HAVE SAID HE IS A GOOD PLAYER. IF WE SIGN HIM GOOD, IF WE DONT GOOD! I AM NOT HATING ON THE GUY. IF THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE, SIGN HIM. I HAVE NEVER SAID NOT TO. I SAID EXHAUST ALL OTHER RESOURCES, IF THERE ARE NONE, THEN SIGN HIM. HELL I WILL BUY HIS JERSEY IF IT WILL MAKE YOU HAPPY. 2ND, NO I WOULD NOT SIGN LAVAR BACK AND PLAY HIM IN THE MIDDLE. NO I WOULD NOT SIGN LAVAR BACK AT ALL PROBABLY. HE IS NOT GOING TO BE HEALTHY, SO DONT WASTE THE MONEY.

Now, of the old players that have seemed to not work out. Bruce, Sanders, Carrier, George, wright. I am sure there may be a few here and there over the last 8 years I have left off, but again my point : we have not had much luck with signing aging veterans. Hell, not much luck at signing anyone lately. Which, goes back to keeping our picks and develping young players.

OUT!
Dude, seriously. grow up and stop insulting people. it is people like you that make these threads not that enjoyable. people enjoy debating their opinions and philosophies. When people start the name calling and how stupid blah blah blah, it really takes the fun out of it. right or wrong, its an opinion. the mods should take notice of people insulting other and put them on notice or something. it is really not needed here. If any of us here had any capability of running a team, we would be there. so dont put more weight on your ideas than any one elses. Your ideas go as far in the organization as anyone elses.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Ok Nate Celments Makes Sense For The Skins. Londer Fletcher Knows The System Yes But He Is 32 Maybe For A Year Or 2 But No 7 Year 40 Million Dollar Deal No More Mark Brunell Fiascos. And What's Wrong With Signing Lance Briggs Or Adailus Thomas And Moving Them To Mlb And Moving Marshall To Weak Side Linebacker I Mean Look At What The Rams Did For Will Witherspoon And That Turned Out. Ok But London Fletcher No Man And What Clemson Games Are Everyone Else Talking About When They Say That Gaines Adams Isn't Good I Saw All The Clemson Games And The Guy Is A Jason Taylor Clone Jamaal Anderson Had One Good Season He Only Had 3 Sacks The Year Before This And Just Seems To Much Like A One Season Wonder To Me And Alan Branch Would Be A Great Pick To Me It Is Between Gaines Adams And Alan Branch.

Jamaal Anderson Seems Too Much Like A One Season Wonder For Me

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Guys, once and for all it's not an easy thing to switch an OLB to MLB. They are not interchangeable positions. Sure we have seen guys make the transition, but don't be fooled into thinking it's an easy thing to do and all linebackers can make the switch successfully.

If I had to pick between Fletcher or moving a guy out of position, I'd take Fletcher 100% of the time.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

not to critize what he said but as i recall adalius thomas rotated at every position on the ravens defense this season and i know that is not an easy thing to do

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Yes, Thomas can play MLB.

He's a very versatile player that will attact alot of attention in free agency.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

So Instead Of Flecther Why Not Go After Thomas He Is Faster Stronger And Bigger 270 Pounds To Be Exact And On Top Of That He Can Rush The Passer Drop Into Coverage And He Is Way Taller Than London Fletcher

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

The problem is Thomas is going to command alot more money than Fletcher.

Thomas is in his prime and will be looking for a payday, Fletcher while still very productive is past his prime and will come cheaper.

Perhaps the most important part of the equation is Fletcher knows this defense having played for Williams in Buffalo.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

while that is true i am getting that feeling i got when we drafted carlos rogers over shawn merriman

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

I've been advocating the pursuit of London Fletcher since the middle of last season (the first Giants game) when I realized that Marshall is garbage. I think that Flet would come relatively cheap and flourish in Williams' system. He's also a great leader and I think he understands he'd be a stopgap for the Skins. That could free up the team to go out and make a late round pick (if they ever scout a decent one) at MLB and let Fletcher tutor him so that he can eventually take over.

That said, I'd love to see Adalius Thomas end up here, I just think that's a pipe dream. I don't know that the Skins have a shot at him, but stranger things always happen in the offseason in Washington.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

i understand that london fletcher knows the system BUT ONCE AGAIN i am feeling the mike barrow thing all over again

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

Unless you have a crystal ball there was nothing to indicate that Barrow was going to get hurt the way he did. He was an absolute rock prior to coming here.

Injuries happen, it was shit luck with Barrow. That doesn't mean the same thing is going to happen with Fletcher.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

[QUOTE=EARTHQUAKE2689;277719]i understand that london fletcher knows the system BUT ONCE AGAIN i am feeling the mike barrow thing all over again[/QUOTE]

I understand why people would be opposed to picking up Fletcher (namely, he's old). But, there is a big difference between Barrow and Fletcher - Fletcher is NOT coming off of a devastating knee injury. So, other than the fact that both Barrow and Fletcher are old and play MLB, I don't see the similarity or any reason to expect that Fletcher's career is over.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

i am not saying that his career is over i just have a feeling that the redskins are going to overpay him like they do other free agents example: adam archuleta made him the richest safety in nfl history and andre carter 6 years 30 million and only 6 sacks i dont have a real problem with fletcher i just said that i am getting the feeling of barrow cause the redskins luck is just like that

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

If it's about the money A. Thomas is going to be much more expensive than Fletcher, and he's only a couple of years younger.

Re: WP: Redskins Targeting London Fletcher, Nate Clements
 

you do have a point there i just dont want a mark brunell tpye contract going to fletcher