Derrick Dockery signs with the Bills

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by GiantsSuck703

I really cant take it anymore, look at it like this, we had Dock last year and we were still a 5-11 team, why does anybody think Dock will single handidly change this, for christ sakes hes a guard, without a doubt the easiest position to replace on an NFL team. We need to spend the money on our defense, if we sign Dock back, then theres no Fletcher, no Smoot, and probably no Travis Fisher. That would leave us with no depth and no upgrades on defense, with that said, we would have one guard with a hell of a pay check and we would still have a horrible defense. Unless Dock can play DT or De or even MLB, well then i say good riddance

what he said.

[celts32]

No, is the only answer to this question. But that is not to say that the Redskins get a pass here...they should have acted sooner to lock him up. He would have signed for a more reasonable number months ago. Even Dock himself was floored at what Buffalo offered him.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by celts32

No, is the only answer to this question. But that is not to say that the Redskins get a pass here...they should have acted sooner to lock him up. He would have signed for a more reasonable number months ago. Even Dock himself was floored at what Buffalo offered him.

how reasonable? i heard they tried 4mill per and that wasn't enough for him... he WANTED to be a FA. unless the skins floored him 6 games into the season (when his track record was mainly that of being lazy), he was going to wait it out. It's kinda hard to blame the skins for not trying to overpay someone who made it clear he only cared about cashing out as far back as LAST offseason.

[vaoutlaws2006]

his deal was a bit of a strectch...what a signing bonus...but nate clements got INSANE MONEY!!!!

[celts32]

Originally Posted by That Guy

how reasonable? i heard they tried 4mill per and that wasn't enough for him... he WANTED to be a FA. unless the skins floored him 6 games into the season (when his track record was mainly that of being lazy), he was going to wait it out. It's kinda hard to blame the skins for not trying to overpay someone who made it clear he only cared about cashing out as far back as LAST offseason.

I think the standard Redskins Free agency deal of 10 mil gaurenteed and 5 or 7 years would have gotten it done mid way through last season. The problem the skins always have with reuping their own players before they become free agents is that they never have any cap room left during the season to do it. They always need to rescructure 2 other players before they can resign one. That's why alot of their top players end up going to free agency. When the skins resign one of their own players to an extension it usually ends up being when they have multiple years on the current deal and as a result the skins usually end up with cap relief in the short term.

[rvd420]

just shows you where docks heart is.THE MONEY.hes a traitor and a looser.GOOD RIDDANCE.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by rvd420

just shows you where docks heart is.THE MONEY.hes a traitor and a looser.GOOD RIDDANCE.

I disagree. If he chose to stay here for 4 million a year you could say he was loyal. I would say he was an idiot. You can't ever blame someone for leaving for that type of money.

You didn't hear him badmouthing the organization before he left like Lavar did and I know a lot of people would take Lavar back tomorrow.

I wish him the best of luck in Buffalo, he will need it.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by rvd420

just shows you where docks heart is.THE MONEY.hes a traitor and a looser.GOOD RIDDANCE.

What would you have done if you were in Dock's position? Not take the money?????????????? C'mon. I don't blame him one bit.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

What would you have done if you were in Dock's position? Not take the money?????????????? C'mon. I don't blame him one bit.

Dead on. He would arguably have been a "traitor" to his own best interests if he passed on that kind of cash to stay in Washington.

[rvd420]

i wouldnt have taken the money and stayed with the skins.its about the sport and the fans,not the money.

[LMsexyAO]

Originally Posted by rvd420

i wouldnt have taken the money and stayed with the skins.its about the sport and the fans,not the money.

it's about the sport and the fans but not the athletes?

[rvd420]

hell no if it wasnt for the fans the sport wouldnt exist.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by rvd420

i wouldnt have taken the money and stayed with the skins.its about the sport and the fans,not the money.

You must turn down 49 million dollar contracts all the time, huh?

[rvd420]

if i was a pro athlete hell yea i would,cause im loyal to my team.HAIL SKINS!!if i did get that much money the majority of it would go to charity.

[ArtMonkDrillz]

He's only a traitor if the Skins matched the Bill's offer and he still turned it down and left. I'm sure he has a family and a life outside of football that he wants to set up for the future. You can't blame him for that.
Plus, it's still a business. Players give their bodies up for teams, only to be cut when they get old and slow all the time. Would you blame the team for cutting a loyal guy if he was no longer useful? It works both ways.