Smoot's Status with the Redskins
 

I was a bit shocked when I read today's Post article on Smoot.

"That could have been my last game as a Redskin," seems like a far cry from the things he has been saying throughout the season.

Later, he is quoted as saying: "Like I was talking to Champ two or three weeks ago, and that's what he was saying. It ain't never really the player. . . . It's all about the front office and who they want to be here."

Two observations:

1. Invoking the spectre of Champ Bailey seems to be an interesting thing to do considering the negative manner in which he left the organization.

2. Saying "It's all about the front office and who they want to be here" is a ridiculously stupid thing to say. THE NFL IS A BUSINESS AND THE REDSKINS ARE A FRANCHISE!!! OF COURSE IT'S ALL ABOUT THE FRONT OFFICE AND WHO THEY WANT TO BE HERE!!!!!

Sorry, it just blows my mind that players, who continually want to be "shown the money" (with a few exceptions like Tom Brady), criticize the front office for doing what is best for the franchise.

Anyway, my point in bringing all this up is because I sincerely believe that Smoot's 180 with his messaging is obviously due to his agent.

I personally think its lame and I thought Smoot (after firing the Postons) was better than that.

His agent has developed this strategy - using the Post to begin positioning his client in preparation for negotiations - and has the full support of Fred Smoot.

What do other people think?

I think if I were Fred Smoot I would go where the money is and leave the Washington Redskins if they offer me less. He's not from here and I think he probably feels vulnerable because he saw his best friend leave the Skins last season because they wouldn't pony up the dough. Plenty of teams will have cap room and he could end up on a winning one.

I'm really not worried about the Redskins. They seem to make corners look better than they are. I think they'll be fine without Fred Smoot. How does that saying go? Oh, yeah. We finished in last with him, we can finish in last without him. I would like to see him stay and I wish the front office would keep him, but the Redskins don't make smart decisions. Whatever.

This defensive system we need great CBs. If we lose Smoot that's our #1 pick in the draft. Personally I hate this talk because I love Smoot. I hope they get the deal done.

It would be the biggest waste of a high draft pick since we've got Smoot here. With the number 5 pick, we'd spend more money on an unproven rookie when we have Smoot right here.

As for Smoot's comments, I don't find them inappropriate or dumb. As far as I am concerned, this comes down to whether Gibbs wants Smoot or not.

If we don't re-sign Smoot but draft a CB with our #5 pick, that would tell me this organization is the worst run franchise in football.

Its one thing to trash talk your opponets but your own team. Shut your trap Fred and don't carry out your business in the paper or on TV. Slap the Tag on him and shut him up. I personnaly would like to see him leave and we recieve 2 1st rounders.

i havn't read any posts on this sight saying anything about greg williams' feelings towards smoot staying or leaving. everyone is saying "if gibbs wants hims , he's staying, if gibbs doesn't want smoot, then he's leaving" now i know gibbs will have the final say when he gives his list of who he wants to stay and who he wants gone to mr. snyder but believe you me greg williams will have a lot of the decision making concerning the defense. if williams says to gibbs that he doesn't need smoot and on top of that smoot trys to hold out as long as possible for the big money , then gibbs will suggest to dan that smoot be gone. on the other hand if williams says he really needs smoot to stay , then i think gibbs tells dan to do what he can to keep smoot.

I already think it is the worst run in football.

Two first rounders for Fred Smoot? What the hell are you talking about? I seriously doubt we could get one.

We'd spend more on a top 5 pick then top 10 CB money? Doubt it, Ramseyfan!

[QUOTE=CRT3]Its one thing to trash talk your opponets but your own team. Shut your trap Fred and don't carry out your business in the paper or on TV. Slap the Tag on him and shut him up. I personnaly would like to see him leave and we recieve 2 1st rounders.[/QUOTE]
Nice fictionalization.

Fred said what he feels is going to take place in the offseason. Far from talking trash.

I really think they'll try to keep Smoot around. He's exactly the type of player Gibbs says he wants around. He's one of the team leaders and he's played hurt a good part of the last two seasons. I hope we keep him around.

Letting Smoot go would be terrible. You need to keep your draft picks. The ones that work out should be what you build your team around.

I thought it was terrible that we had to let Bailey go as a terriffic corner is much harder to come by then another 1,000 runner out of the Denver system. We paid a ridiculous amount for Portis and while he's had flashes he doesn't have the heart that Gibbs wants in his players. We needed a Jerome Bettis/L Tomlimson type runner, an punch you in the mouth guy on offense which we don't have. I still believe this wasn't really Gibbs doing but dumb and dumber in the front office.

We should keep Smoot and get rid of the salary cap albatross Samuels. Hasn't played like the pro-bowler the last 2 years and is it me or has he committed a lot of false starts?

Why not? Gibbs flawless record when it comes to playing GM? Or maybe the Brunell deal he pushed hard for?

[QUOTE=Daseal]Why not? Gibbs flawless record when it comes to playing GM? Or maybe the Brunell deal he pushed hard for?[/QUOTE]

Daseal, please include the original post that you're responding to. What are you saying "Why not" to?

This is from Pastabelly's column on the 24th. I wonder which coach he was talking about?

[I]Although there is at least one coach on the Washington staff who does not want Fred Smoot back in 2005, the Redskins may designate the standout cornerback a franchise player if a contract extension cannot be reached. ... [/I]

Smoot, I was referring to this comment:
[quote]We needed a Jerome Bettis/L Tomlimson type runner, an punch you in the mouth guy on offense which we don't have. I still believe this wasn't really Gibbs doing but dumb and dumber in the front office.
[/quote]

[QUOTE=Daseal]Smoot, I was referring to this comment:[/QUOTE]

Thanks Daseal

It does sicken me to hear Smoots comments like this . How many top line defensive players have been built up through good systems then to turn around and say they are ONLY interested in money.

No one player is irreplacable NO one player is bigger than the team. I am sick of these players at the begining of the season saying

"yes yes i want to be part of this organsation forever"

Yet when it gets to the crunch the turn it around and say

"Well its not me its the FO they don't want to pay me"

Smoot I hope is talking out of fustration becasue of the record, because of his injuries but he has to recognise he has been here 3 years he has played alongside some of the best CBs in the game and there are going to be questions of just how good he will be especially considering how Bailey hasn't really panned out with the Broncos.

Is he really worth Bailey/Spings money? How many pro bowls has he been to? How many years has he shown he can be relied on... he is a tough resliant player who sometimes gambles too much... he could be a cornerstone of a teams secondary but he will never live up to that potential if he just goes for the bigest pay check...

It is interesting he says he has been talking to Champ about all this but not to his teammate Springs who was in the same place last year as a FA he signed here because he saw the potential not becasue we offered the most money becasue other teams offered more... The question becomes realistically how much can you spend and how much does self respect cost these days?

I think Smoot is a good CB against opponent's #2 WR, but just an above-average CB against opponent's #1 receiver. (Remember what Torry Holt did to him during the pre-season game? And just last week "Meshawn" Johnson caught all passes thrown his way when Smoot was defending him). I would hate to see him go, but if he demands to be paid like a top-tier cornerbacks such as Bailey, McAllister, R Barber, I say let him walk.

[QUOTE=Drift Reality]I was a bit shocked when I read today's Post article on Smoot.

"That could have been my last game as a Redskin," seems like a far cry from the things he has been saying throughout the season.

Later, he is quoted as saying: "Like I was talking to Champ two or three weeks ago, and that's what he was saying. It ain't never really the player. . . . It's all about the front office and who they want to be here."

Two observations:

1. Invoking the spectre of Champ Bailey seems to be an interesting thing to do considering the negative manner in which he left the organization.

2. Saying "It's all about the front office and who they want to be here" is a ridiculously stupid thing to say. THE NFL IS A BUSINESS AND THE REDSKINS ARE A FRANCHISE!!! OF COURSE IT'S ALL ABOUT THE FRONT OFFICE AND WHO THEY WANT TO BE HERE!!!!!

Sorry, it just blows my mind that players, who continually want to be "shown the money" (with a few exceptions like Tom Brady), criticize the front office for doing what is best for the franchise.

Anyway, my point in bringing all this up is because I sincerely believe that Smoot's 180 with his messaging is obviously due to his agent.

I personally think its lame and I thought Smoot (after firing the Postons) was better than that.

His agent has developed this strategy - using the Post to begin positioning his client in preparation for negotiations - and has the full support of Fred Smoot.

What do other people think?[/QUOTE]


And you're shocked?! As I have been saying for a few months now, Smoot and his agent are going to play a little hard ball with contract negotiations. Quite frankly, the Redskins are going to write up a deal and sit it on the table. If he signs, he's a Redskin. If not, so long. If he believes a team need to have two CBs making 'top 10' salaries, he's lying to himself. As you can see, with G. Williams' defensive schemes, the secondary has many opportunities to force turnovers. Smoot hasn't always taken advantage of that. Kudos to the 'mouth of the south' for being tough and playing through injuries, but being at the end of a contract year will do that too. Believe me guys, there will be another corner available via free agency who break the heel off the small shoes Smoot leaves behind. I know you guys heard that Phillip Buchanon wants out of OAK. Got Trade (mustache pending)?

[quote]It is interesting he says he has been talking to Champ about all this but not to his teammate Springs who was in the same place last year as a FA he signed here because he saw the potential not becasue we offered the most money becasue other teams offered more... The question becomes realistically how much can you spend and how much does self respect cost these days?[/quote]

Well.. Champ WAS his best friend. So it's hard to criticize him for that. I hope Smoot will be back..

[QUOTE=Daseal]This defensive system we need great CBs. If we lose Smoot that's our #1 pick in the draft. ........[/QUOTE]

You are exactly right, our defense is built around our CB's being able to play one on one with the top WR's in this league.
Champ Bailey was the top DB in his draft.
Smoot was a Jim Thorpe Award finalist (given to the top defensive back in the country) and the top CB in his draft. So is Springs, but he is getting old and injury prone. If Smoot leaves we would be forced to pay big to replace him.

You guys all have very idealistic views about what the Washington Redskins are. This is NOT a winning team. This is NOT a loyal franchise. This is NOT a team, IMO, a team most players should want to play for. We hand out big contracts and within a few years we demand that that money get handed back or we'll cut the player. See: Stephen Davis or Chris Samuels or Bruce Smith. Somehow a lot of the fans seem to think that the loyal players will give the money back. The ones who are interested in being Redskins. However, if the FO were interested in them being Redskins throughout their contract, they wouldn't have made the damn thing suffocate them late in the cap.

All of you were pissed at Champ when he left, why? He didn't want to be here and, frankly, I don't blame him. The Skins wanted to make him one of the highest paid corners in the leage? No. They were backloading that contract just like they always do and they would have made him restructure or cut him towards the end of it. Champ went out and got a front loaded contract from the Broncos for about the same terms, why? So he can play the contract out. The Redskins disgust me with the way they do business and if I were a player, I wouldn't stay here either. So while all of you villify Smoot you need to take a look at the Front Office and the way they plan to structure the contract. The reason the Skins can sign so many people in the offseason with something like $10 mil in cap space is because most of the money in a contract comes at the end of the deal which is why players get cut. It's not just the Redskins by any means, but I think the Skins could be the worst offenders.

[QUOTE=jdlea]You guys all have very idealistic views about what the Washington Redskins are. This is NOT a winning team. This is NOT a loyal franchise. This is NOT a team, IMO, a team most players should want to play for. We hand out big contracts and within a few years we demand that that money get handed back or we'll cut the player. See: Stephen Davis or Chris Samuels or Bruce Smith. Somehow a lot of the fans seem to think that the loyal players will give the money back. The ones who are interested in being Redskins. However, if the FO were interested in them being Redskins throughout their contract, they wouldn't have made the damn thing suffocate them late in the cap.

All of you were pissed at Champ when he left, why? He didn't want to be here and, frankly, I don't blame him. The Skins wanted to make him one of the highest paid corners in the leage? No. They were backloading that contract just like they always do and they would have made him restructure or cut him towards the end of it. Champ went out and got a front loaded contract from the Broncos for about the same terms, why? So he can play the contract out. The Redskins disgust me with the way they do business and if I were a player, I wouldn't stay here either. So while all of you villify Smoot you need to take a look at the Front Office and the way they plan to structure the contract. The reason the Skins can sign so many people in the offseason with something like $10 mil in cap space is because most of the money in a contract comes at the end of the deal which is why players get cut. It's not just the Redskins by any means, but I think the Skins could be the worst offenders.[/QUOTE]


I agree that the Dan Snyder has not been Jack Kent Cooke. However the league also shares in creating this problem. The NFL created the F-ing Salary Cap in response to the free spending Jack Kent Cooke and the SB winning Redskins teams of the 80's and 90's. I think it was the 87 or 92 Redskins that had salaries adding up to nearly $80-$90 million, unheard of for those times. The other less wealthy team owners conspired to end Mr. Cooke's big spending and winning ways. Especially with unrestricted free agency coming, they were scared of JKC and his big money.
The first year of the salary cap the Skins started out something like $10 million over the cap and had to dismantle a veteran team.

Unproven rookies are coming into the league with huge conteracts while older proven veterans (fan favorites) are getting cut. The league created this shitty system not Snyder. Although, Snyder has played the ugliest under the new rules.
I think if there was no salary cap Snyder would act more like JKC.

[QUOTE=Kevikazi]I think Smoot is a good CB against opponent's #2 WR, but just an above-average CB against opponent's #1 receiver. (Remember what Torry Holt did to him during the pre-season game? And just last week "Meshawn" Johnson caught all passes thrown his way when Smoot was defending him). I would hate to see him go, but if he demands to be paid like a top-tier cornerbacks such as Bailey, McAllister, R Barber, I say let him walk.[/QUOTE]


End of story.

[QUOTE=Defensewins]I agree that the Dan Snyder has not been Jack Kent Cooke. However the league also shares in creating this problem. The NFL created the F-ing Salary Cap in response to the free spending Jack Kent Cooke and the SB winning Redskins teams of the 80's and 90's. I think it was the 87 or 92 Redskins that had salaries adding up to nearly $80-$90 million, unheard of for those times. The other less wealthy team owners conspired to end Mr. Cooke's big spending and winning ways. Especially with unrestricted free agency coming, they were scared of JKC and his big money.
The first year of the salary cap the Skins started out something like $10 million over the cap and had to dismantle a veteran team.

Unproven rookies are coming into the league with huge conteracts while older proven veterans (fan favorites) are getting cut. The league created this shitty system not Snyder. Although, Snyder has played the ugliest under the new rules.
I think if there was no salary cap Snyder would act more like JKC.[/QUOTE]

Well said man. Agreed.