Marshall tabbed to replace Pierce

[jrocx69]

pierce was 242lbs marshall is 228lbs.... and not known for being a heavy hitter... weeel see

pierce being undersized means marshall has alot to overcome

[BrudLee]

Originally Posted by jrocx69

pierce was 242lbs marshall is 228lbs.... and not known for being a heavy hitter... weeel see

pierce being undersized means marshall has alot to overcome

Since Marshall handled himself well in place of Lavar (253 lbs.), we should give him a chance.

[joecrisp]

Shane makes some excellent points. Gibbs is showing he has a much better understanding of the salary cap this offseason, and he is protecting the team's long-term interests in regard to the salary cap projections for the next 3 years or so.

Apparently, the Skins' offer to Pierce was very close to what the Giants offered him, with the primary difference being that the Redskins' offer contained smaller salary numbers over the first two years of the contract. Obviously, those first two years are critical, in that the Skins need cap room for this offseason to sign other players and possibly move Coles, while also needing to minimize the cap impact in 2006, which is slated to be a harsh cap year for the Skins.

The Giants had the edge in that they were willing to give Pierce just enough money in the first two years to make it hard for the Skins to match. Gibbs made the tough decision, but it was the right decision. Pierce will be missed, but not so much that it would have been worth exacerbating the team's tenuous salary cap situation over the next two years to keep him.

The same principle holds true for Smoot, and any other player that wants more money than the team can reasonably afford to pay within the parameters of their salary cap projections.

Give Gibbs some credit for finally bringing some sensibility to this team's free agency strategy.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by joecrisp

Give Gibbs some credit for finally bringing some sensibility to this team's free agency strategy.

This team was built to win now! But basically we're going into rebuild mode by letting the quality players leave. We are going to have LESS TALENT next year returning from a team that was 6-10! Does this sound like a good plan? It is not unless we admit they're simply going to start to jetison anyone who cost any money. This is so frustrating. We had two guys who WERE ANCHORS on our defense which basically won us 6 games last year. We have lost one because we decided we couldn't afford him and now we'll lose another because we are too stubborn to simply pay him what he is worth.