Rolle Signed?

BossHog · 03-03-2005, 02:45 PM

We all agree that big dollars shouldn't be invested in an aging CB. We did sign Springs (an aging, ailing CB) last year for a $10 signing bonus. I believe the same, if not more, is due for Rolle. Remember, Bailey said no to the same offer we had on the table that Springs eventually signed. We cannot afford to let Smoot dictate what we'll spend on a player at this position. Not this year. Too many guys have to be 'taken care of'. He should know this organization isn't one to put a team together with salary cap dollars to spare. If he seeks a team who invests more into thier CBs, adios. We're strapped for cash right now because we needed to secure contracts for guys that made Smoot seem to play better. Something has to give.

BigSKINBauer · 03-03-2005, 03:22 PM

i don't know how much smoot really wants to be here. i mean we ended up offering 11.5 and then he asked for 13.5. I think he is the type of player who will play with the same intensity at what ever club he is with. i am sure he doesn't not want to be here but in other threads people said that if he were offered about 1-2 million more from another team he would stay with us. I think he would take them dollars and again play with that intensity and same amount of leadership. Just because we hear his voice a lot does not mean that he is devoted to stay here.

BigSKINBauer · 03-03-2005, 03:29 PM

i know rolle is better and it hard to argue that he is not. he knows our system which is the most important thing for continuity on defense. i think everyone uses the term continuity to much too i mean we used to use it because of changing defensive cordinators, i mean 6 in 6 years is obviously not continuity. if we get smoot or rolle it will be because our coaching staff feels that they are more worth it. We aren't dumb to get a worse player for more money. Greg williams says he wants rolle and plain and simple that is b/c he is better and Williams knows he is. If we get rolle it will be because of GW and him wanting him. if GW feels that smoot is better he would get him for less money and i guess we will see who GW feels is more worthy to play in this elite "leeeeeet" system

VishsSkins · 03-03-2005, 03:36 PM

I really dont understand why so mny of you are disappointed that we could have possibly signed Rolle. The argument that keeps coming up is that he is too old or we will not have continuity. First of all Rolle, is only 2-3 yrs older than Smoot which is not a big deal even for football players. He could still have a good 5-7 years left in the pros, meaning that we will have him for a long enough time. Smoot cannot be truly considered a loyal Redskin because it seems that he will sign with the team that offers the most money. If he really wanted to be here, he would have taken the $11.5 million, become one of the highest paid cornerbacks, and stayed with our team. Secondly, if you are talking about continuity, Smoot has only been in this defense for a year whereas Rolle has been under Williams for 3. There will be no need for a time to adapt in this system. By sitting around and waiting for Smoot to re-sign, we would definitely loose out on Rolle, possibly being left with nothing if Smoot decides to sign elsewhere. The bottom line is that Rolle is a better player whos presence will greatly increase our strength on defense since we would have 2 #1 CBs. Why pay Rolle more when we could offer the same amount to Smoot? Rolle is better, Williams wants him more, and a corner with the status of Smoot should not get a contract that would potentially put him among the top 5 richest CBs when,frankly, he is not one of the top 5 in the league.

TheMalcolmConnection · 03-03-2005, 03:42 PM

I hate that we had to love having Smoot on the team so much. :p

BigSKINBauer · 03-03-2005, 04:03 PM

cbs sportsline put up there top 50 FAs and said they looked at playing ability and age as factors. Rolle was number 1 and smoot 3 and pierce 5 and trotter 40 by the way. not much difference in the rank of smoot and rolle so y not just trust GW in who ever he wants, if they get smoot it will be b/c they want smoot more and if they pay more money to rolle it will DEFINATLY be because he wants Rolle more because he is on a different team and he more costly and is older as everyone feels that is a huge deal i mean randy moss has 7 years in the league i guess he sucks too.

TheMalcolmConnection · 03-03-2005, 04:06 PM

Longest run-on EVER.

BigSKINBauer · 03-03-2005, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Longest run-on EVER.

yeah i noticed that AND i was going to change it but said o well AND i went up and got some food AND came back down AND saw that you said i had good points AND i was happy

TheMalcolmConnection · 03-03-2005, 04:06 PM

Good points though...

TheMalcolmConnection · 03-03-2005, 04:13 PM

Glad I could make someone's day... LOL

SKINSnCANES · 03-03-2005, 04:19 PM

anyone else notice the other thing on that link, it said the vikings signed pat williams. I cant find that anywhere else either. And its a huge surprise becuase arent the Vikings very deep at that position?

Didnt we say as a general rule of thumb last off season to never trust PRW?

SmootSmack · 03-03-2005, 04:23 PM

I've seen the Pat Williams news other places, Fox Sports, San Francisco Chronicle.

BigSKINBauer · 03-03-2005, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smootsmack

I've seen the Pat Williams news other places, Fox Sports, San Francisco Chronicle.

good!

offiss · 03-03-2005, 04:52 PM

If the Rolle signing is true than it's a good signing, he is not a little better than Smoot he's a lot better, and I have alway's liked Smoot, but if we are going to shell out relativly the same money for either I have to go with Rolle hand's down, he has a minimum of 4 to 5 peak year's left, with the loss of Pierce that free's up some extra money to get a player like Rolle, so long as his charactor issues check out ok this is a great signing, it's not like Smoot hasen't been given a [IMO] a very generous offer from us, he say's it's up to us if he comes back but he's not willing to except 10mil plus for a signing bonus? Smoot is looking for every last nickle he can get, turnabout is fair play we can then look for the best player for the buck and that's Rolle.

BigSKINBauer · 03-03-2005, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by offiss

If the Rolle signing is true than it's a good signing, he is not a little better than Smoot he's a lot better, and I have alway's liked Smoot, but if we are going to shell out relativly the same money for either I have to go with Rolle hand's down, he has a minimum of 4 to 5 peak year's left, with the loss of Pierce that free's up some extra money to get a player like Rolle, so long as his charactor issues check out ok this is a great signing, it's not like Smoot hasen't been given a [IMO] a very generous offer from us, he say's it's up to us if he comes back but he's not willing to except 10mil plus for a signing bonus? Smoot is looking for every last nickle he can get, turnabout is fair play we can then look for the best player for the buck and that's Rolle.

Nice post as true as it gets

03-03-2005, 03:22 PM	#2
BigSKINBauer Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Washington, DC Age: 38 Posts: 5,688	Re: Rolle Signed? i don't know how much smoot really wants to be here. i mean we ended up offering 11.5 and then he asked for 13.5. I think he is the type of player who will play with the same intensity at what ever club he is with. i am sure he doesn't not want to be here but in other threads people said that if he were offered about 1-2 million more from another team he would stay with us. I think he would take them dollars and again play with that intensity and same amount of leadership. Just because we hear his voice a lot does not mean that he is devoted to stay here.

03-03-2005, 03:29 PM	#3
BigSKINBauer Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Washington, DC Age: 38 Posts: 5,688	Re: Rolle Signed? i know rolle is better and it hard to argue that he is not. he knows our system which is the most important thing for continuity on defense. i think everyone uses the term continuity to much too i mean we used to use it because of changing defensive cordinators, i mean 6 in 6 years is obviously not continuity. if we get smoot or rolle it will be because our coaching staff feels that they are more worth it. We aren't dumb to get a worse player for more money. Greg williams says he wants rolle and plain and simple that is b/c he is better and Williams knows he is. If we get rolle it will be because of GW and him wanting him. if GW feels that smoot is better he would get him for less money and i guess we will see who GW feels is more worthy to play in this elite "leeeeeet" system

03-03-2005, 03:36 PM	#4
VishsSkins Special Teams Join Date: Feb 2005 Age: 37 Posts: 173	Re: Rolle Signed? I really dont understand why so mny of you are disappointed that we could have possibly signed Rolle. The argument that keeps coming up is that he is too old or we will not have continuity. First of all Rolle, is only 2-3 yrs older than Smoot which is not a big deal even for football players. He could still have a good 5-7 years left in the pros, meaning that we will have him for a long enough time. Smoot cannot be truly considered a loyal Redskin because it seems that he will sign with the team that offers the most money. If he really wanted to be here, he would have taken the $11.5 million, become one of the highest paid cornerbacks, and stayed with our team. Secondly, if you are talking about continuity, Smoot has only been in this defense for a year whereas Rolle has been under Williams for 3. There will be no need for a time to adapt in this system. By sitting around and waiting for Smoot to re-sign, we would definitely loose out on Rolle, possibly being left with nothing if Smoot decides to sign elsewhere. The bottom line is that Rolle is a better player whos presence will greatly increase our strength on defense since we would have 2 #1 CBs. Why pay Rolle more when we could offer the same amount to Smoot? Rolle is better, Williams wants him more, and a corner with the status of Smoot should not get a contract that would potentially put him among the top 5 richest CBs when,frankly, he is not one of the top 5 in the league.

03-03-2005, 03:42 PM	#5
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 44 Posts: 19,264	Re: Rolle Signed? I hate that we had to love having Smoot on the team so much. :p __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

03-03-2005, 04:03 PM	#6
BigSKINBauer Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Washington, DC Age: 38 Posts: 5,688	Re: Rolle Signed? cbs sportsline put up there top 50 FAs and said they looked at playing ability and age as factors. Rolle was number 1 and smoot 3 and pierce 5 and trotter 40 by the way. not much difference in the rank of smoot and rolle so y not just trust GW in who ever he wants, if they get smoot it will be b/c they want smoot more and if they pay more money to rolle it will DEFINATLY be because he wants Rolle more because he is on a different team and he more costly and is older as everyone feels that is a huge deal i mean randy moss has 7 years in the league i guess he sucks too.

03-03-2005, 02:45 PM	#1
BossHog Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Norfolk, Va Posts: 665	Re: Rolle Signed? We all agree that big dollars shouldn't be invested in an aging CB. We did sign Springs (an aging, ailing CB) last year for a $10 signing bonus. I believe the same, if not more, is due for Rolle. Remember, Bailey said no to the same offer we had on the table that Springs eventually signed. We cannot afford to let Smoot dictate what we'll spend on a player at this position. Not this year. Too many guys have to be 'taken care of'. He should know this organization isn't one to put a team together with salary cap dollars to spare. If he seeks a team who invests more into thier CBs, adios. We're strapped for cash right now because we needed to secure contracts for guys that made Smoot seem to play better. Something has to give.

03-03-2005, 04:06 PM	#7
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 44 Posts: 19,264	Re: Rolle Signed? Longest run-on EVER. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

03-03-2005, 04:06 PM	#9
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 44 Posts: 19,264	Re: Rolle Signed? Good points though... __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

03-03-2005, 04:13 PM	#10
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Charlottesville, Virginia Age: 44 Posts: 19,264	Re: Rolle Signed? Glad I could make someone's day... LOL __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

03-03-2005, 04:19 PM	#11
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 44 Posts: 5,455	Re: Rolle Signed? anyone else notice the other thing on that link, it said the vikings signed pat williams. I cant find that anywhere else either. And its a huge surprise becuase arent the Vikings very deep at that position? Didnt we say as a general rule of thumb last off season to never trust PRW? __________________ "I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis

03-03-2005, 04:23 PM	#12
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	Re: Rolle Signed? I've seen the Pat Williams news other places, Fox Sports, San Francisco Chronicle. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

03-03-2005, 04:52 PM	#14
offiss Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ] Age: 62 Posts: 3,097	Re: Rolle Signed? If the Rolle signing is true than it's a good signing, he is not a little better than Smoot he's a lot better, and I have alway's liked Smoot, but if we are going to shell out relativly the same money for either I have to go with Rolle hand's down, he has a minimum of 4 to 5 peak year's left, with the loss of Pierce that free's up some extra money to get a player like Rolle, so long as his charactor issues check out ok this is a great signing, it's not like Smoot hasen't been given a [IMO] a very generous offer from us, he say's it's up to us if he comes back but he's not willing to except 10mil plus for a signing bonus? Smoot is looking for every last nickle he can get, turnabout is fair play we can then look for the best player for the buck and that's Rolle.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Rolle Signed?

Locker Room Main Forum