The 2026 Free Agency Thread

[Faithful Fan]

There is a reason this has become a legitimate narrative. I don't expect everyone to agree, but the concern didn't come out of thin air. Instead of comparing Washington to the Colts offensive line from 10 years ago, let's look at what's happening around the league today.

I just watched the Luck documentary last night, and it crystallized a lot of my thoughts on this, but you raise a fair question: Compared to what?

The answer to that question might be a big part of our disconnect on this. You seem to be comparing what we did to what other teams like the Patriots and Bears did, whereas I’m comparing what we did to what we actually could have done.

You do not have to choose between building an offensive line and building a receiving corps. You can do both.

Sure, but you do have to choose how you spend each pick. For example, we could have spent our 2025 first and third on “weapons,” but we chose to spend them on offensive linemen instead. Or we could have reached for a WR instead of taking Sonny Styles. I think we did the right thing in both cases.

PFF is actually one of the most optimistic outlets on Washington's offensive line, ranking it 13th. Other analysts have it in the 20s. But let's give Peters the benefit of the doubt and say he has built a legitimately good offensive line.

I’m not sure how much stock to put in these rankings, but I’ll bet we’re higher than we were in 2023, which is the appropriate comparison.

2023 projected starters (ranked 27th by PFF):

LT Charles Leno Jr.
LG Nick Gates
C Ricky Stromberg
RG Samuel Cosmi
RT Andrew Wylie

2026 projected starters:

LT: Laremy Tunsil
LG: Chris Paul
C: Nick Allegretti
RG: Samuel Cosmi
RT: Conerly Jr.
Reserve: Brandon Coleman

Time will tell how this unit develops, but there is no question we’ve invested in and improved our line a lot.

Guess what other teams managed to do while they were building theirs?

According to PFF, Denver has the No. 1 offensive line. Chicago is No. 3. New England is also ranked ahead of Washington. Yet those teams still invested aggressively in pass catchers. They walked and chewed gum at the same time.

The same applies to the running back room. PFF ranked Washington's backs 30th. Warren Sharp ranked them dead last at 32nd. I actually like Washington's backs more than those rankings suggest, but it's not as if Peters passed on upgrading wide receiver because he spent premium draft capital on a Bijan Robinson or paid top dollar for a Kenneth Walker-type back. He has been just as conservative—if not more so—with resources at running back as he has at wide receiver.

If Washington had a dominant offensive line and an elite running back room while everyone else was sacrificing those areas to load up at receiver, then I'd understand the argument. But that's not reality.

The same teams with better receiving corps also have better offensive lines and, by most evaluations, better running back rooms. They didn't have to choose. They invested across the offense. That's why the criticism of Washington's pass-catching talent isn't just about wide receiver in isolation—it's about the organization falling behind its competition in multiple offensive areas at the same time.

NE's roster was as crappy if not more so than Washington in 2024. They didn't have Washington's draft capital. Look at them now compared to Washington? Not just on offense but defense, too.

Did we have the same opportunities and resources as those teams you like better?

I won’t go case by case here, but I’ll give a few examples: The Patriots have had 19 draft picks in the last two years, we’ve only had 11. The Bears spent their 2023 first round pick on a top-10 offensive lineman who was a second-team all-pro last year, we spent ours on Emmanuel Forbes. Romeo Doubs chose the Patriots over the Commanders (the only conceivable way we could have prevented that would have been to draft Drake Maye instead of Jayden Daniels in 2024, though even that would have probably failed because we didn’t start from the same place at the end of 2023, which is kind of my point).

I will grant we have some salary cap space to sign a guy like Diggs, but this seems like a lot of words if your whole point boils down to wanting to sign a particular free agent (the wisdom of which is debatable given he has been released by each of his last two teams after a single season, his age, and his off-the-field issues).

 

[skinsinparadise]

I just watched the Luck documentary last night, and it crystallized a lot of my thoughts on this, but you raise a fair question: Compared to what?

The answer to that question might be a big part of our disconnect on this. You seem to be comparing what we did to what other teams like the Patriots and Bears did, whereas I’m comparing what we did to what we actually could have done.



Sure, but you do have to choose how you spend each pick. For example, we could have spent our 2025 first and third on “weapons,” but we chose to spend them on offensive linemen instead. Or we could have reached for a WR instead of taking Sonny Styles. I think we did the right thing in both cases.



I’m not sure how much stock to put in these rankings, but I bet we’re higher than we were in 2023, which is the appropriate comparison.

2023 projected starters (ranked 27th by PFF):

LT Charles Leno Jr.
LG Nick Gates
C Ricky Stromberg
RG Samuel Cosmi
RT Andrew Wylie

2026 projected starters:

LT: Laremy Tunsil
LG: Chris Paul
C: Nick Allegretti
RG: Samuel Cosmi
RT: Conerly Jr.
Reserve: Brandon Coleman

Time will tell how this unit develops, but there is no question we’ve invested in and improved our line a lot.



Did we have the same opportunities and resources as those teams you like better?

I won’t go case by case here, but I’ll give a few examples: The Patriots have had 19 draft picks in the last two years, we’ve only had 11. The Bears spent their 2023 first round pick on a top 10 offensive lineman who was a second-team all-pro last year, we spent ours on Emmanuel Forbes. Romeo Doubs chose the Patriots over the Commanders (the only conceivable way we could have prevented that would have been to draft Drake Maye instead of Jayden Daniels in 2024, though even that would have probably failed because we didn’t start from the same place at the end of 2023, which is kind of my point).

I will grant we have some salary cap space to sign a guy like Diggs, but this seems like a lot of words if your whole point boils down to wanting to sign a particular free agent (the wisdom of which is debatable given he has been released by each of his last two teams after a single season, his age, and his off-the-field issues).

Too busy to do the research so I threw at at Chatgpt


f you're comparing the same time period (2024–2026), the Patriots have generally gone in the opposite direction from Washington—they've added draft capital while still making aggressive moves for veterans.


Here's the broad comparison:

Team	Approx. Significant Picks Traded Away	Approx. Significant Picks Acquired	Net
Washington (Adam Peters)	7	1	-6
New England (Eliot Wolf/Mike Vrabel)	About 5–6	About 11–13	+6 to +7

Some of New England's notable additions include:

• Acquiring multiple extra picks by trading veterans such as Matthew Judon and Joe Milton.
• Picking up future draft capital through additional trades.
• Trading down several times in the 2025 and 2026 drafts to increase their total number of selections. In 2026 alone, they entered with 11 picks and finished with 9 after packaging some to move up, but they had first accumulated that extra capital through previous trades.

By contrast, Washington has used draft capital to acquire established veterans:

• Laremy Tunsil
• Marshon Lattimore
• Deebo Samuel

Those deals cost Washington a second-round pick, multiple third- and fourth-round picks, and a fifth-round pick, with only one notable pick coming back (a fourth-rounder in the Tunsil trade).


So the philosophical difference is pretty stark:

• Washington: Convert draft picks into proven veterans, resulting in a net loss of future draft capital.
• New England: Accumulate extra draft capital through trades, then selectively spend some of it on veterans (such as Jaylen Waddle) or to move around the draft board, while still ending up with more picks overall.

That context is relevant if you're comparing how each front office has tried to support its young quarterback. New England has largely managed to add veteran talent without shrinking its overall draft resources, whereas Washington has been much more willing to spend future picks to acquire established players.

 

[Faithful Fan]

Too busy to do the research so I threw at at Chatgpt


f you're comparing the same time period (2024–2026), the Patriots have generally gone in the opposite direction from Washington—they've added draft capital while still making aggressive moves for veterans.


Here's the broad comparison:

Team	Approx. Significant Picks Traded Away	Approx. Significant Picks Acquired	Net
Washington (Adam Peters)	7	1	-6
New England (Eliot Wolf/Mike Vrabel)	About 5–6	About 11–13	+6 to +7

Some of New England's notable additions include:

• Acquiring multiple extra picks by trading veterans such as Matthew Judon and Joe Milton.
• Picking up future draft capital through additional trades.
• Trading down several times in the 2025 and 2026 drafts to increase their total number of selections. In 2026 alone, they entered with 11 picks and finished with 9 after packaging some to move up, but they had first accumulated that extra capital through previous trades.

By contrast, Washington has used draft capital to acquire established veterans:

• Laremy Tunsil
• Marshon Lattimore
• Deebo Samuel

Those deals cost Washington a second-round pick, multiple third- and fourth-round picks, and a fifth-round pick, with only one notable pick coming back (a fourth-rounder in the Tunsil trade).


So the philosophical difference is pretty stark:

• Washington: Convert draft picks into proven veterans, resulting in a net loss of future draft capital.
• New England: Accumulate extra draft capital through trades, then selectively spend some of it on veterans (such as Jaylen Waddle) or to move around the draft board, while still ending up with more picks overall.

That context is relevant if you're comparing how each front office has tried to support its young quarterback. New England has largely managed to add veteran talent without shrinking its overall draft resources, whereas Washington has been much more willing to spend future picks to acquire established players.

I don’t really care to argue with a clanker, but I do agree it would be better not to trade away draft picks, so that is a fair criticism of AP. This is especially true on Lattimore, who gave us nothing, and to a lesser extent Deebo, who only gave us one solid year. Tunsil is the exception I think, as per my original point regarding offensive line being the highest priority.

 

[SkinsLife]

Did we have the same opportunities and resources as those teams you like better?

I won’t go case by case here, but I’ll give a few examples: The Patriots have had 19 draft picks in the last two years, we’ve only had 11. The Bears spent their 2023 first round pick on a top 10 offensive lineman who was a second-team all-pro last year, we spent ours on Emmanuel Forbes. Romeo Doubs chose the Patriots over the Commanders (the only conceivable way we could have prevented that would have been to draft Drake Maye instead of Jayden Daniels in 2024, though even that would have probably failed because we didn’t start from the same place at the end of 2023, which is kind of my point).

I will grant we have some salary cap space to sign a guy like Diggs, but this seems like a lot of words if your whole point boils down to wanting to sign a particular free agent (the wisdom of which is debatable given he has been released by each of his last two teams after a single season, his age, and his off-the-field issues).

That sounds like excuses... Peters absolutely had the same opportunities as other GMs but chose differently (and mostly failed). Was giving up 4 high pics for Tunsil necessary? Our Oline still isnt very good at pass pro or run blocking. JD still got hurt. Coleman most likely would have been ok there (not Tusnil good) good but good enough.
This is one of the major issue i have with the job Peters has done.. it seems like he has a big ego, and usually no plan B
1. lets cut our starting center early, because i am willing to make Linderbaum the highest paid center... oh wait, oak paid more
2. lets put all our eggs on in the Pierce basket and pay whatever he wants.. oh i didnt realize he doesnt want to play here.
3. we're good, i can draft Tate.. hell be there at 7 - oh shit... anyone want to trade for our 7th no? ok, i guess we'll draft a LB (lowest value position in the nfl)
4. ok well at least we can get Doubs - oh he doesnt want to play here either.
5. Ben johnson is my guy! i'll wait for him and miss out on all other coaches. - oh .. he doesnt want to leave det yet? Mcdonald.. buddy how are you.. oh.. you pass. Quinn was our #1 guy all along!

 

[skinsinparadise]

I don’t really care to argue with a clanker, but I do agree it would be better not to trade away draft picks, so that is a fair criticism of AP. This is especially true on Lattimore, who gave us nothing, and to a lesser extent Deebo, who only gave us one solid year. Tunsil is the exception I think, as per my original point regarding offensive line being the highest priority.

I didn't feel like researching that deeply but I know Washington had 6 top 100 picks in 2024, NE had three.

Washington traded away a lot of picks. NE did the opposite.

I am ok with taking chances and losing on deals ala the Lattimore one -- but he also doesn't get extra brownie points-excuses for not having picks when he's the one trading them away.

Just look at NE-Chicago-Denver's rosters compared to Washington. They are in a different orbit. All three rosters were weak in 2024. Only team of those three with advantages over Washington as far as capital goes during that time was the Bears.

What really stood out to me was hearing Kevin Sheehan and Ben Standig today—two people who are generally fair to, and often defensive of, Adam Peters—essentially concede that the other teams with young franchise quarterbacks have done significantly more to support them than Washington has done for Jayden Daniels.

I don't think its that debatable.

 

[Faithful Fan]

Was giving up 4 high pics for Tunsil necessary?

We got a pick in exchange, so it was really 3 picks. Was it necessary? Pro Bowl LTs don’t come cheap (unless Ron Rivera is trading away Trent Williams that is).

Our Oline still isnt very good at pass pro or run blocking.

By what metric? We were 3rd in the NFL in rushing in 2024 and 4th in the NFL in 2025. We were 18th in the NFL in sacks allowed in 2024 but improved to 8th in the NFL in 2025.

1. lets cut our starting center early, because i am willing to make Linderbaum the highest paid center... oh wait, oak paid more

I agree that was a mistake.

2. lets put all our eggs on in the Pierce basket and pay whatever he wants.. oh i didnt realize he doesnt want to play here.
3. ok well at least we can get Doubs - oh he doesnt want to play here either.

Is there some way we could control free agents wanting to play elsewhere other than the one I already mentioned?

 

[burgold]

By what metric? We were 3rd in the NFL in rushing in 2024 and 4th in the NFL in 2025. We were 18the in the NFL in sacks allowed in 2024 but improved to 8th in the NFL in 2025.

Let me get this straight. We were fourth in rushing and 8th in allowing sacks, but we have the twenty somethinginth ranked o line and the worst running backs in the leaguer (this in a year where Daniels was injured all year.)

I call our O line ratings and running back ratings BS.

 

[Faithful Fan]

Let me get this straight. We were fourth in rushing and 8th in allowing sacks, but we have the twenty somethinginth ranked o line and the worst running backs in the leaguer (this in a year where Daniels was injured all year.)

I call our O line ratings and running back ratings BS.

Yes, our offensive line is a position of strength and should be rated higher. It’s mystery to me why the national media is low on them and a greater mystery why locals, who should know better, have gone along with that narrative.

A look at the numbers and the roster doesn’t really support the negativity about this unit. The rushing yards and sacks allowed stats we’ve covered. The roster includes a stud LT, a good young prospect at RT, good guards, and quality depth. C is a bit of a question, but I have confidence in Allegretti to do the job and look forward to seeing what the rookie has to offer.

 

[skinsinparadise]

Personally I don't think the RBs are the worst in the NFL. Maybe every team's #1 stacked against each other -- they'd be close to the bottom, we got no star power in that room. But I think this is one of the deeper groups. But more on point Jayden is the star runner.

I found a breakdown of the 2024 numbers showing Washington finished 3rd in the NFL in rushing with the quarterbacks included. When you strip out the quarterback rushing, though, the running back production falls to roughly league average.

I couldn't find the same breakdown for 2025—team rushing stats are easy to find, but QB-adjusted rushing rankings aren't commonly published. I was surprised to find though Mariota and Jayden combined ran for nearly 600 yards.

And that's also why I've said the "cheat code" for having a mediocre WR2 is Jayden's ability to create offense with his legs. Can that work? Absolutely. We saw it work in 2024.

My concern has never been whether it can work. My concern is whether that's the approach you want to rely on over the long haul. The more the offense depends on Jayden making plays as a runner, the more exposure you're asking your franchise quarterback to take. He stayed healthy in 2024, and that's great. But I'd rather build the offense so his legs are a devastating weapon—not a necessity.

 

[SkinsLife]

We got a pick in exchange, so it was really 3 picks. Was it necessary? Pro Bowl LTs don’t come cheap (unless Ron Rivera is trading away Trent Williams that is).



By what metric? We were 3rd in the NFL in rushing in 2024 and 4th in the NFL in 2025. We were 18th in the NFL in sacks allowed in 2024 but improved to 8th in the NFL in 2025.



I agree that was a mistake.



Is there some way we could control free agents wanting to play elsewhere other than the one I already mentioned?

The reason that the O line is ranked so poorly is because most of the rushing stats came on qb runs and scrambles. And the fact that we are ranked 8th in pass pro is due to JDs innate ability to avoid rushers and not take sacks and when he does get tackled he finds a way to gain a few yards, so it doesnt count as a sack. hence yes, the 25th ranking is appropriate. While 3rd in the nfl in rushing stat is misleading.
Its not about getting FAs to want to play here.. agreed thats out of the GMs control to some degree,.. its recognizing that your team is not the destination you perceive it to be and finding ways to acquire O talent to help out your QB in other ways.. like through trades. Waddle was available for a 3rd.

 

[Faithful Fan]

The reason that the O line is ranked so poorly is because most of the rushing stats came on qb runs and scrambles.

In 2025, our leading rusher was JCM with 805 yards. Chris Rodriguez was second with 500 yards. Our backs and receivers combined for 1,715 yards. So, our quarterbacks only contributed 575 of the team’s 2,290 rushing yards.

Now Jayden was our leading rusher in 2024, so maybe that’s what you’re remembering, but even then our backs and receivers contributed 1,613 of our 2,619 rushing yards.

So yes, quarterback runs are a big contributor with athletic quarterbacks like ours, especially in Kliff’s system, but no, they did not account for “most of the rushing stats,” especially not last year.

And the fact that we are ranked 8th in pass pro is due to JDs innate ability to avoid rushers and not take sacks and when he does get tackled he finds a way to gain a few yards, so it doesnt count as a sack.

Not taking away from Jayden’s ability to avoid rushers, but we were 8th fewest in sacks allowed in a season he only finished 4 games, and 18th in the season he only missed 1 game, so his ability to evade the rush can’t be the explanation.

 

[washington football]

I suspect Diggs does not want to be at first week of camp but will probably sign over the weekend.

 

[skinsinparadise]

 

[burgold]

In 2025, our leading rusher was JCM with 805 yards. Chris Rodriguez was second with 500 yards. Our backs and receivers combined for 1,715 yards. So, our quarterbacks only contributed 575 of the team’s 2,290 rushing yards.

Now Jayden was our leading rusher in 2024, so maybe that’s what you’re remembering, but even then our backs and receivers contributed 1,613 of our 2,619 rushing yards.

So yes, quarterback runs are a big contributor with athletic quarterbacks like ours, especially in Kliff’s system, but no, they did not account for “most of the rushing stats,” especially not last year.



Not taking away from Jayden’s ability to avoid rushers, but we were 8th fewest in sacks allowed in a season he only finished 4 games, and 18th in the season he only missed 1 game, so his ability to evade the rush can’t be the explanation.

It could also be argued that Jayden's running was a feature and not a bug. Kingsbury called a lot of running plays for Daniels especially on fourth downs in 2024. That means that the line had to do its job to allow Jayden to execute those runs. Even on the non-called runs, most of them weren't desperation scrambles after a jail break. They were decisions made because the receivers weren't open and the line occupied the rush well enough that Daniels figured he could make a positive run or they were one defender breaking free that Daniels figured he could out run and make a positive play.

So, even Daniels running might have been better evidence of good line play not bad. Daniels ran because his receivers weren't flashing open. Not because he had to escape the pass rush a good amount of the time.

 

[skinsinparadise]

 

[actorguy1]

 

[Skinfanjon]

Diggs would put everything in its natural order at WR. Terry 1A to an actual 1B, Williams an immediate contributor as the 3rd WR and understudy to a full-time role, Luke as a special teams ace and solid WR4 looking to earn more snaps, Dyami running fly routes and hitting a few, and whatever you do with Lane/Jefferson/Burks. Keep one or two, whatever. It even opens chances for next year in that all you have to hope is either one of Diggs or Terry are still viable and you spend the 1st round pick to pair with Williams.

Gotta happen, it makes way too much sense. Getting Diggs makes me feel like both the offensive and defensive starters are middle of the pack as an overall roster and with a smart scheme and health, Jayden could really cook with that.

 

[Boone]

Not getting Diggs signed would be a major fail. I try not to be too ridiculously critical of Adam Peters but Diggs is the best WR available by far, he’s said he would love to play in DC and we have the $$ to sign him.

It is the biggest no-brainer of the offseason and it needs to get done.

 

[skinsinparadise]

 

[skinsinparadise]

They hit the Diggs topic. Monson and Steve P worked for PFF for eons, they are now clowns. They go sometimes one player can make a massive impact if added and they feels Diggs would be that.