2010 Free Agents

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by celts32

I guess money decides these things in a lot of cases but he doesn't seem like the kind of guy who would want to play in a town like Green Bay.

That's what I was thinking. Bush is already injury-prone, playing college in Southern Cal and the NFL in N'awlins, he'll be pulling hamstrings weekly in Wisconsin.

I don't want him anyways, he's the most overrated player in the NFL. He's almost out of the running game in NO with Thomas and Bell taking most of his carries, he's basically a flanker and part-time player with a huge contract. He doesn't even return kicks anymore, his best role out of college.

I'd prefer a REAL backup or timeshare back or even a do-it-all type of player like Sproles.

[CRedskinsRule]

Here is a good breakdown of the Final 8 restrictions in an uncapped year, granted it is from PFT but it's still a pretty good analysis, even if there is no way I am rooting for Dallas this weekend!

Cowboys victory means win for 'Skins | ProFootballTalk.com

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Here is a good breakdown of the Final 8 restrictions in an uncapped year, granted it is from PFT but it's still a pretty good analysis, even if there is no way I am rooting for Dallas this weekend!

Cowboys victory means win for 'Skins | ProFootballTalk.com

Dallas hosts the Super Bowl in 2011. How great would it be for their fans to have to see us there in the Super Bowl while the Cowgirls sat at home?

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by 53Fan

Dallas hosts the Super Bowl in 2011. How great would it be for their fans to have to see us there in the Super Bowl while the Cowgirls sat at home?

I agree, that would be glorious. i am a bit confused from reading the article, though. Florios 2nd to last paragraph attributed the 4th item on his list as the reason skins fans should root for the cowboys to win this weekend.

Fourth, the Final Eight teams may sign one unrestricted free agent at a first-year salary of $4.925 million (plus the annual percentage increases in total football revenue since 2006), and an unlimited number unrestricted free agents at a first-year salary of $3.275 million (plus the percentage increases of total football revenue since 2006), with limitations on future growth of the deal.

The teams that win this weekend will be further limited, with the fourth option explained above disappearing.

So, basically, Redskins fans should be rooting for the Cowboys to win this weekend, and then to be "blowed out" in the NFC title game.

I'm not sure why this is the case, since they are already one of the top 8 teams so all the free agent restrictions should apply. Florios list mentions no restrictions for the final four teams, which is what the cowboys would be if they win this weekend. I imagine its some sort of typo. Can anyone provide clarification?

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Here is a good breakdown of the Final 8 restrictions in an uncapped year, granted it is from PFT but it's still a pretty good analysis, even if there is no way I am rooting for Dallas this weekend!

Cowboys victory means win for 'Skins | ProFootballTalk.com

Jesus that's complicated.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I just want the Cowboys to lose so I can enjoy the playoffs and Super Bowl.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

I just want the Cowboys to lose so I can enjoy the playoffs and Super Bowl.

Ditto. I'm glad New England was sent home.

[hail_2_da_skins]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

I just want the Cowboys to lose so I can enjoy the playoffs and Super Bowl.

I'm with you. I can't stomach seeing the Cowboys advance. My wife asked me, "Who do you want to win the Superbowl"? I told her, I like the Ravens in the AFC but I don't like any of the teams in the NFC. All I know, I don't want to see the Cowboys. I will turn the TV off.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by hail_2_da_skins

I'm with you. I can't stomach seeing the Cowboys advance. My wife asked me, "Who do you want to win the Superbowl"? I told her, I like the Ravens in the AFC but I don't like any of the teams in the NFC. All I know, I don't want to see the Cowboys. I will turn the TV off.

If you lived in or around B-more yo uwould be cheering for the Ravens to lose. Other then last weekends playoff game the Ravens have been spurting along. the Colts are much better then the Pats this year.

Ravens go down next week. Cowboys are looking like they are head to the NFC championship.

[hail_2_da_skins]

Originally Posted by mredskins

If you lived in or around B-more yo uwould be cheering for the Ravens to lose. Other then last weekends playoff game the Ravens have been spurting along. the Colts are much better then the Pats this year.

Ravens go down next week. Cowboys are looking like they are head to the NFC championship.

That would make me sick. In that case I would not be watching much football. Thank God the college basketball season is in full swing.

[hail_2_da_skins]

Why are we looking at a free agent list? I thought the Redskins had changed their ways. Going after high priced free agents is not the way to go. Develop from within, build through the draft. That should be the new mantra!

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by hail_2_da_skins

Why are we looking at a free agent list? I thought the Redskins had changed their ways. Going after high priced free agents is not the way to go. Develop from within, build through the draft. That should be the new mantra!

bruce allen has always preferred veteran players. in tampa bay, he was limited in his ability to sign "high priced" free agents because the ownership was very frugal. Allen has already gone on record saying the #1 reason he feels he will have success here (where others like Gibbs and Shottenheimer have failed) is the uncapped year. We have every reason to expect a very large number of aging veterans to make up our 2010 roster.

While this is certainly not a way to build long-term success, it shouldnt "kill" us the way snyders spending sprees did in the past for atleast 2 reasons i can think of: 1) Bruce Allen, while having a thoroughly unimpressive draft history, is known for keeping his draft picks. he won't trade draft picks for old players. rather, he'll sign the best of the free agent class. 2) since 2010 will be uncapped, any contracts signed can be "front-loaded" to ensure the skins have plenty of room if/when a salary cap is reinstated.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

bruce allen has always preferred veteran players. in tampa bay, he was limited in his ability to sign "high priced" free agents because the ownership was very frugal. Allen has already gone on record saying the #1 reason he feels he will have success here (where others like Gibbs and Shottenheimer have failed) is the uncapped year. We have every reason to expect a very large number of aging veterans to make up our 2010 roster.

While this is certainly not a way to build long-term success, it shouldnt "kill" us the way snyders spending sprees did in the past for atleast 2 reasons i can think of: 1) Bruce Allen, while having a thoroughly unimpressive draft history, is known for keeping his draft picks. he won't trade draft picks for old players. rather, he'll sign the best of the free agent class. 2) since 2010 will be uncapped, any contracts signed can be "front-loaded" to ensure the skins have plenty of room if/when a salary cap is reinstated.

If that's the case then I hope that we do it the NE way with the older vets.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by hail_2_da_skins

Why are we looking at a free agent list? I thought the Redskins had changed their ways. Going after high priced free agents is not the way to go. Develop from within, build through the draft. That should be the new mantra!

What fails is bad utilization of available resources. Though I hate referencing other teams, I will do it now for examples only.

When Randy Moss signed with New England, they signed him to a reasonable contract, and no ridiculous trade value = Win for the Patriots

When Oakland signed Wilfork, they gave up future picks, and took on a heavy contract = loss for the Raiders (win for Pats longterm by gaining valuable picks)

When Asante Samuels left the Pats, the Eagles took him on to fill a specific need at a reasonable cost = win for the Eagles.

those are the types of wins we want to see in FA, if they are out there, and the type of losses we want to avoid going forward. Building a successful NFL team does not mean ignoring ANY potential player, but evaluating and getting solid team players at an acceptable cost. And I would note that acceptable cost is different for each team, we should have an acceptable upfront cash(not longterm cash) cost that is higher than most teams which gives us an advantage in the FA market, but we also should have a lower acceptable trade cost than many teams -meaning we should be stingier than most teams in trading away picks because our team, specifically the OL needs a lot of young blood to build longterm- so we should not be looking at restricted FA's very much.

Bottomline:
in FA market we should be moderate buyers this year,
in the RFA market we should be heavy sellers, seeking draft picks for compensation.
and in the Draft, we should be open trade partners, seeking best possible positioning, either by trading down or up in the later rounds to get the young players for the OL, and if a qb is there that MS/BA wants.

one side note outside of this, I would get Josh Cribbs if he comes available, and give serious consideration to whatever the trade terms are.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

When Randy Moss signed with New England, they signed him to a reasonable contract, and no ridiculous trade value = Win for the Patriots

When Oakland signed Wilfork, they gave up future picks, and took on a heavy contract = loss for the Raiders (win for Pats longterm by gaining valuable picks)

When Asante Samuels left the Pats, the Eagles took him on to fill a specific need at a reasonable cost = win for the Eagles.

Do you mean Seymour? LOL. In the short term, I think New England lost a lot by getting rid of Seymour. The lost their pass rush and one of the defensive leaders on the team. With Seymour, they could have found themselves in a better place this season and would probably still be alive in the playoffs.

On a related note, I think ppl need to chill the F out with the "no free agency". A good team is built through both the draft and free agency. Just because our incompetent front office has made terrible deals for free agents, doesn't mean that we shouldn't get any free agents now that we have what appears to be a competent FO.