DeSean Jackson meeting with the Redskins on Monday

[Evilgrin]

I voted yes, but I don't see us being his highest offer. He would be a great addition, but not a price that kills our cap space.

[Evilgrin]

I think they mostly brought him so he can give them a nice detailed scouting report on the eagles offensive. I'm also guessing he was only to happy to come in and give it.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Evilgrin

I think they mostly brought him so he can give them a nice detailed scouting report on the eagles offensive. I'm also guessing he was only to happy to come in and give it.

Guess again. They want him.

[Gary84Clark]

Originally Posted by Evilgrin

I think they mostly brought him so he can give them a nice detailed scouting report on the eagles offensive. I'm also guessing he was only to happy to come in and give it.

This alone is reason enough to pay that man.

[Chico23231]

Ed Werder on Twitter is reporting 2 team with big interest with D Jax are in deep negotiations with him and his team. These 2 teams havent been made public. Anybody want to guess?

My guess is Pats and 49ers...neither have spoken publically about interest.

[Lotus]

I get it - he's 27 and coming off a career year.

I still don't get why we want to bust our cap to sign a headcase when we can just draft the next DJax at pick #34. This option is WAY cheaper and offers the possibility of not having a me-first cancer in the locker room.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I get it - he's 27 and coming off a career year.

I still don't get why we want to bust our cap to sign a headcase when we can just draft the next DJax at pick #34. This option is WAY cheaper and offers the possibility of not having a me-first cancer in the locker room.

Because at 34 we could also pick:
a) 3yr project like Hankerson
b) failures like DT and MK
c) a possible starting FS
d) a possible starting RT


and, we would have PR and our top 4 receivers set (Garcon, DJax, Roberts, Moss).

your way may be way cheaper, but DJax will produce for the next 3 years. You give him a contract that lets him out in 3 years with minimal cap hit, and makes him happy this year and next. You figure the money, plus vendetta against the Eagles will keep him content at least 2 years. By then maybe his maturity catches up with his talent, maybe not. But DHall certainly shows it can happen.

[EARTHQUAKE2689]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Because at 34 we could also pick:
a) 3yr project like Hankerson
b) failures like DT and MK
c) a possible starting FS
d) a possible starting RT


and, we would have PR and our top 4 receivers set (Garcon, DJax, Roberts, Moss).

your way may be way cheaper, but DJax will produce for the next 3 years. You give him a contract that lets him out in 3 years with minimal cap hit, and makes him happy this year and next. You figure the money, plus vendetta against the Eagles will keep him content at least 2 years. By then maybe his maturity catches up with his talent, maybe not. But DHall certainly shows it can happen.

If or when we sign him, I think by season's end Robinson or Hank puts himself in as the 4th WR, (More Robinson than Hankerson)

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689

If or when we sign him, I think by season's end Robinson or Hank puts himself in as the 4th WR, (More Robinson than Hankerson)

I think Hank and Aldrick Robinson are gone if we sign DJax. We would pick up a WR like either of them in the 4th, 5th or 6th round, and hope we get a guy in a year or two that will step up when/if we have to let DJax go.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Because at 34 we could also pick:
a) 3yr project like Hankerson
b) failures like DT and MK
c) a possible starting FS
d) a possible starting RT


and, we would have PR and our top 4 receivers set (Garcon, DJax, Roberts, Moss).

your way may be way cheaper, but DJax will produce for the next 3 years. You give him a contract that lets him out in 3 years with minimal cap hit, and makes him happy this year and next. You figure the money, plus vendetta against the Eagles will keep him content at least 2 years. By then maybe his maturity catches up with his talent, maybe not. But DHall certainly shows it can happen.

The bold is where you and I differ. Some people mature, like DHall, some people don't. To me DJax has tattooed on his forehead, in big bright letters, "I'm NEVER gonna get it so my only contribution to the locker room is being destructive of morale."

Don't we want a locker room full of team players? If so, we don't want DJax.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Lotus

The bold is where you and I differ. Some people mature, like DHall, some people don't. To me DJax has tattooed on his forehead, in big bright letters, "I'm NEVER gonna get it so my only contribution to the locker room is being destructive of morale."

Don't we want a locker room full of team players? If so, we don't want DJax.

Remember DHall after his 2nd year here, man was griping fussing causing penalties left and right. (probably a bit of exaggeration) Now he has matured. Maybe Djax does, maybe he doesn't, I agree you never know for sure, but DHall is the right kind of guy who's been there done that, and can make a difference for Djax, if anybody can.

I think Shanahan brought in a ton of top character guys, and I commend him for that, and if the team decides it doesn't want to risk the lockerroom over a guy like DJax I am ok with that decision. But I think that our locker room (Griffin, DHall, Roberts) would all encourage him to a positive direction.

[ICantGoAnother20yrsOfCrap]

Handicapping the race for DeSean Jackson - ESPN

Good break down by Keim. Of the three teams interested in him, Tampa has mild interest, Oakland and Buffalo have more money than us but we have more personnel pro's, including QB, than them. Plus he would get 2 chances /yr to stick it to Kelly with us. As long as we're not too off on price, I think we get him.

[diehardskin2982]

10 people voted for the vet min lmao

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by diehardskin2982

10 people voted for the vet min lmao

there is no option like "if the FO vets him properly and he accepts a reasonable contract".

credskinsrule did a good post a few pages back ... if the FO does their job the right way and the money is acceptable, then yes i would be for it at this point.

[CRedskinsRule]

I think everyone should vote yes, simply because GiantOne voted No.
Smartass: check
Petty: check

The fear in our division rivals eyes: priceless