Would Dunta Robinson & Darren Sproles be 'business as usual'?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Not to pick on anyone in particular, but why do people think that we can trade someone WE don't want (even though I really DO want Carlos) for someone that another team REALLY wants?

Just doesn't make sense to me.

I hear you. I've been trying to trade you to ES for a while now but they won't even give me a ham sandwich in return. They offered tuna, but I'm holding out for that elusive ham.

[Lotus]

Everyone tries to improve their team with free agent signings. The "business as usual" Redskins approach, though, is to pay way too much for free agents, thus creating locker room resentments. In terms of the theme of this thread, to me the question is not who we sign but how much we pay.

I would not mind signing Robinson, Sproles, or especially Dansby, as long as we do not overpay. Then we will not be doing "business as usual."

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I hear you. I've been trying to trade you to ES for a while now but they won't even give me a ham sandwich in return. They offered tuna, but I'm holding out for that elusive ham.

Vet minimum plus incentives?

[Pocket$ $traight]

I would like Sproles. Any explosive player that we acquire on offense is a positive. I wouldn't even object to renting T.O. for a year. He was pretty much a perfect soldier in Buffalo and showed that he can still produce. As for Robinson, I don't really care. I think they are fine with the corners that they have. Tender Rogers and let Barnes and Tryon get better. I would rather see a big time linebacker signed than another corner on defense.

Still, the O-line has to be priority number one and I think you could argue that they need 4 starters brought in (through FA or draft). I will feel better when Dockery is th weak link, not the strength...

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by celts32

No, nothing they do would be business as usual to me. If Allen/Shanni sign a high priced free agent I will believe that it's because they think it is in the best long term interest of the Redskins. We have to give them a clean slate...they can not be expected to make decisions just to be different then what Snyderatto would have done.

I agree. I have a ton more confidence in who the new regime signs compared to what we had going on before. I don't see us signing "stars" as much as players who can really help the team. I think signing Robinson and Dansby would certainly help the defense and anything that would help us focus on offense during the draft I'm all for. If the coaches feel we need Robinson, I'm all for it. I would think their thoughts on Carlos, Barnes, and Tryon would come into play here. Personally I think CR can play, he just can't catch. CR has 6 INT's in 5 years, DR has 13 in 6. In an uncapped year would having both be overkill? Smoot, Rogers and Springs wasn't too bad.

[joethiesmanfan]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Not to pick on anyone in particular, but why do people think that we can trade someone WE don't want (even though I really DO want Carlos) for someone that another team REALLY wants?

Just doesn't make sense to me.

I am glad you said that. All these crazy trade scenarios that make no sense. Like the Panthers trying to trade Peppers for 2 firsts. If he is worth two first round picks then he is worth signing for the amount he was asking YOUR TEAM for. Point blank.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I hear you. I've been trying to trade you to ES for a while now but they won't even give me a ham sandwich in return. They offered tuna, but I'm holding out for that elusive ham.

I feel I'm worth Pastrami but you'd never get that much for me.



Back to topic, I'd LOVE to get Sproles here. He could stay in the same role as in SD...return kicks (bye ARE) and spell an aging RB to try to keep him healthy.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by ethat001

San Diego might have a hard time if they lose both Sproles and LT in the same offseason. They might become just like the 2009 Colts team -- pass every down..

Norv won't let that happen. He's always made an effort to establish a ground game. It's just that this year he didn't seem to have the backs to do it. That or the line became so use to pass blocking that they lost they're rhythm in the running game. I think the same thing happened to the 2007 Patriots. They just became so use to passing that they just didn't feel a need to focus very much on the running game.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

I am glad you said that. All these crazy trade scenarios that make no sense. Like the Panthers trying to trade Peppers for 2 firsts. If he is worth two first round picks then he is worth signing for the amount he was asking YOUR TEAM for. Point blank.

You lost me. What do you mean?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Everyone tries to improve their team with free agent signings. The "business as usual" Redskins approach, though, is to pay way too much for free agents, thus creating locker room resentments. In terms of the theme of this thread, to me the question is not who we sign but how much we pay.

I would not mind signing Robinson, Sproles, or especially Dansby, as long as we do not overpay. Then we will not be doing "business as usual."

Well put.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

Norv won't let that happen. He's always made an effort to establish a ground game. It's just that this year he didn't seem to have the backs to do it. That or the line became so use to pass blocking that they lost they're rhythm in the running game. I think the same thing happened to the 2007 Patriots. They just became so use to passing that they just didn't feel a need to focus very much on the running game.

I don't think the head coach(es) have much sway in SD. The management/ownership makes a lot of questionable, but big decisions. If you can go 14-2 and get fired, or be a top QB replaced because of injury (Brees)...it's a dictatorship.

[joethiesmanfan]

If a player is worth 2 first round picks then he must be great!!!
If the said palyer is so great as in worth 2 first round picks..
Then the said player is worth 20 million dollars a year. So pay him already.
OR get that stupid offer off the table. If he is not worth 20 million to you then why is he worth 20 million to me? Stupid trade scenario. You might as well ask another team to spot you a draft pick.

[SmootSmack]

I don't think it's so cut and dry like that. What if one team is looking to rebuild and the other is one player away? What if one team is switching to a 3-4 defense and the player is a 4-3 MLB?

[joethiesmanfan]

Y would I give 2 first rounders for Peppers. If you listen to the Panthers he takes plays off etc. etc. etc. That's like selling a used car and then telling about how it over heats, then asking for top dollar for it. Does not make sense. You want to trade me something you don't want and then ask me for everything I got. Come on maaaaaan.

[CultBrennan59]

Originally Posted by skinsfaninok

Maybe we can trade Carlos to new Orleans for Jamal brown? Then Id be happy to bring in Robinson. Sproles doesn't do anything for me, he's explosive but can't get alot of carries so I think we look elsewhere. Heck John Clayton said we may be in the tomlinson field.

I don't think NO would trade a pro bowl LT for an average corner especially when they have good depth at that position, Landry on the other hand is a little more likely, Safety is a lighter position of theres and who knows if Sharper comes back there or not.