Thread: Rolle Signed?
View Single Post
Old 03-03-2005, 02:22 PM   #32
celts32
Playmaker
 
celts32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Hackettstown NJ
Age: 54
Posts: 2,665
Re: Rolle Signed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by smootsmack
Yeah I had figured the plan was go with Harris (if not Smoot) in 2005 then maybe in 2006 you pass the position on to Wilds. Going with Rolle seems like a decision heavily influenced by Gregg Williams, considering their history. So far his decisions seem to have been dead on...but is he due for a letdown?
Exactly this is what I thought the plan was as well. Just becasue you lose an expensive player that doesn't mean you need to replace him with just as expensive a player. If they can afford Rolle than they can afford Smoot also, so what's the point? The Redskins need to replace a loss from within for once instead of heading out to the grocery store like they alwasy do! As mad as I will be if we lose Smoot I will be 10 times madder if they replace him with Rolle. Rolle will be 29 on opening day. That means we get one year of him before he turns 30. CB's start to lose their speed in their early 30's, and a slow CB is not worth a whole lot in the NFL. CB's & RB's are the worst positions to spend money when they hit 30. Signing Rolle is a mistake. CB's like Darrel Green that run fast deep into their 30's are a rare breed. I think this is a mistake.
celts32 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.21902 seconds with 10 queries