The 2026 Free Agency Thread

[HOF44]

I still think Peters is dealing with a cash cap. It’s the only context in which some of his decisions make sense.

 

[skinsinparadise]

You keep saying this.

You realize Chris Moore was cut in the cutdown to 53, right? He was cut in the cutdown to 53, signed to the Practice Squad, and then elevated to the 53 on September 15th after Terry got hurt.

We didn't ride with him until we had to.

JGG and the center position is an entirely different mess where we didn't sign anybody to be a backup at all. Completely different catastrophe.

Keep saying what? What Tischler is saying which is why give Good-Jones the reps over Gulbin. It's news to me that I keep saying it.

Your WR-C argument that apparently goes against my point is confusing to me as to what you are saying there -- but I don't care enough to have it clarified. I am sure we'd be spinning our wheels anyway.

 

[Discobob]

I still think Peters is dealing with a cash cap. It’s the only context in which some of his decisions make sense.

That's certainly possible... it also seems like AP seems to wait on basically every decision longer than fans want him to. This could just be his basic negotiating strategy to get, what he considers to be, reasonable deals.

 

[prodigy]

The head scratcher move for me after 2024 was why they didn't sign Jeremy Chinn. He seemed to play well in the role he had. Fans were mad we didn't keep Curl, but Chinn was better.

He wouldn't have cost a lot to retain. He was one of the 1 year guys for 2024 which worked out really well, and I was really surprised when they moved off of him for Harris.

Then Harris got hurt (along with everybody else) and then got beat out by Reaves.

Not a good signing by Peters. Probably should have just stayed the course with Chinn. Don't have a problem moving on from Curl, and they did find somebody better. But the Chinn for Harris thing was odd.

maybe they didn't sign chinn because they didn't wanna deal with buddy baker twice in one off-season.

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

Keep saying what? What Tischler is saying which is why give Good-Jones the reps over Gulbin. It's news to me that I keep saying it.

Your WR-C argument that apparently goes against my point is confusing to me as to what you are saying there -- but I don't care enough to have it clarified. I am sure we'd be spinning our wheels anyway.

You keep saying we were riding with Chris Moore and that was part of our plan for WR last year.

It's just not true, but you keep using the argument about riding with backups and not doing enough at a variety of positions. Chris Moore wasn't supposed to be a backup. He wasn't even supposed to be on the team.

The JGG and Chris Moore comparison is apples to oranges. And, in fact, worse than you are making it out to be. JGG was actually probably expected to be the actual backup to Allegretti (after they wiffed on Lindy), and Quinn said that JGG and Allegretti were in competition for the starting job. That was always hogwash. But until JGG showed in camp he just can't play at all, he was actually a backup plan.

Chris Moore was never supposed to be anything. The fact they were forced into the Chris Moore business was a factor of injuries.

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

maybe they didn't sign chinn because they didn't wanna deal with buddy baker twice in one off-season.

If that's a reason that's a bad reason. But it might be a reason.

Chinn was really good for us in 2024, on an atrocious defense, he was a good find.

 

[prodigy]

If that's a reason that's a bad reason. But it might be a reason.

Chinn was really good for us in 2024, on an atrocious defense, he was a good find.

I was just making a lame joke lol. but yeah, I was surprised we let him walk.

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

I was just making a lame joke lol. but yeah, I was surprised we let him walk.

I'm not entirely sure it didn't play into the decision, at least partially. Because otherwise, it makes no sense at all.

 

[DWinzit]

Here's another one of those minor just before cuts trade. Player swaps would be better. Hoping to see us participate in one or two of these to try to improve depth

Patriots acquired RB Corey Kiner from the Cardinals in exchange for a seventh-round pick.​

Giants acquired DL C.J. Okoye from the Ravens in exchange for a seventh-round pick.​

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

Here's another one of those minor just before cuts trade. Player swaps would be better. Hoping to see us participate in one or two of these to try to improve depth

Patriots acquired RB Corey Kiner from the Cardinals in exchange for a seventh-round pick.​

Giants acquired DL C.J. Okoye from the Ravens in exchange for a seventh-round pick.​

You're speaking blasphemy trading picks for players.

I have no problem with this. Though it would be nice to have a full complement of picks for the next draft.

 

[skinsinparadise]

You keep saying we were riding with Chris Moore and that was part of our plan for WR last year.

It's just not true, but you keep using the argument about riding with backups and not doing enough at a variety of positions. Chris Moore wasn't supposed to be a backup. He wasn't even supposed to be on the team.

The JGG and Chris Moore comparison is apples to oranges. And, in fact, worse than you are making it out to be. JGG was actually probably expected to be the actual backup to Allegretti (after they wiffed on Lindy), and Quinn said that JGG and Allegretti were in competition for the starting job. That was always hogwash. But until JGG showed in camp he just can't play at all, he was actually a backup plan.

Chris Moore was never supposed to be anything. The fact they were forced into the Chris Moore business was a factor of injuries.

What I said about Noah Brown was pretty simple: he had been hurt for much of his career and was hurt again that offseason. So the odds of him making it through the season as your starting Z weren't exactly great. That meant there was a VERY good chance they'd eventually have to rely on their depth, and one of those guys would end up starting.

As Keim said repeatedly, they thought that among Chris Moore, K.J. Osborn and Michael Gallup, somebody would emerge. Nobody did.

Clearly Peters didn't expect Brown to miss basically the entire season. Of course he didn't. They brought him back and openly talked about him as their starting Z.

My argument was that Peters' calculation was too optimistic. That's the criticism.

Your counter seems to be I am focused on the wrong backup? Because on the initial 53, where they unusually kept only five WRs, with McCaffrey and Lane as the backups. Fair enough. Both are more natural slot types.

But that actually gets to the same larger issue. If Brown or Terry went down, somebody had to play outside. And the logical next man up was Chris Moore.

In fact, I remember one reporter asking someone with the team why Moore continued to play so much despite his struggles. I wrote about it at the time. The response was essentially that he was the only guy who really knew all the routes and responsibilities at the X.

And I don't think it's a coincidence that Quinn made a point before camp this year of saying they're going out of their way to have the WRs learn all the different spots. That sounds like something they recognized needed to be better.

So if your argument is: "I agree that relying on Noah Brown at Z was too much of a gamble, but you're identifying the wrong backup they were banking on — it was Luke rather than Moore," then okay. Maybe. I don't know.

But that's really separate from my larger point. It means nothing to my point. My point isn't about Chris Moore. it's about Noach Brown.

Whether the fallback was Moore, McCaffrey or somebody else doesn't change the criticism. They went into the season relying on an injury-prone Noah Brown as their starting Z without a credible Plan B behind him. I suspect it was Brown. Your thought is its Luke. OK, maybe?

Pick your poison as to which marginal backup was supposed to play outside WR.

 

[DWinzit]

You're speaking blasphemy trading picks for players.

I have no problem with this. Though it would be nice to have a full complement of picks for the next draft.

I did say - "player swaps would be better"

 

[ES1974]

I still think Peters is dealing with a cash cap. It’s the only context in which some of his decisions make sense.

Totally agree. Or maybe he’s just got his own boundaries/guidelines and he’s too stubborn to adjust.

 

[skinsinparadise]

You're right, the phrase Keim said over and over was they were "monitoring" the situation. And the way he said it and talked about it, it was a direct quote from somebody in the organization. Because he would then go on to say, "what does monitoring mean? It means they are talking to Digg's camp. You can't monitor without talking." Then he also said, "Diggs won't sign somewhere else without them knowing." Those are close to direct quotes from Keim. Then, of course, he ended it with his crutch phrase, "so there you go." Which he says like 46 times a podcast.

What he never said or reported until it happened was "it's going to happen." But the fact the sides were talking and were interested in each other was known for weeks before the actual signing. Basically as soon as the Aiyuk meltdown reached epic proportions and the team turned their Plan C from Aiyuk to Diggs. I think there's no question:

Plan A: Pierce
Plan B: Doubs
Plan C: Aiyuk

I don't think the Commanders thought in a million years Aiyuk wouldn't do what he needed to do to get released, so they could sign him for cheap whenever. Then he completely melted down. Then they had to figure out a Plan D. And Diggs wasn't really an option for a while because of his legal situations. Once those cleared up, and the timing coincided with Aiyuk's meltdown, the plan changed.

And then Keim started reporting it.

Agree on Aiyuk, and I said so at the time. I also agree that they eventually pivoted to Diggs.

As for the media part of this, nobody is going to tell you something is definitely happening unless typically you're basically minutes away from a signing.

And I know we've debated this before, so we're probably just spinning our wheels. You think you have the better read on how the media operates, and I think I do. Lol. We've already done the feisty version of that debate, and I'm not really in the mood to run it back today.

But I'll explain briefly where I'm coming from.

From my own dealings with reporters, which I do regularly through my job, I basically put them into three categories when it comes to scoops:

A. The Schefter types who want to break the story first and get credit for having it before everyone else.

B. The Keim types who deliberately don't burn their sources by breaking everything they know. That's part of how they maintain those relationships and continue getting information. They'll hint at what they know, tell you what they're hearing, or point you in a direction without necessarily putting the entire story out there.

I've talked about Keim specifically on this front a zillion times and given plenty of examples. He even explained this approach himself during a Zoom he once did with fans.

C. Reporters who are much looser with information and will basically do whatever they want with what they're told, even if it risks burning a source or violating some level of trust.

So when Keim says they're interested in somebody, I take that seriously.

That doesn't mean I interpret it as, "They're signing this guy for sure." Those are two completely different things.

It means I believe he's been given enough information from people he trusts to know that the interest is real. Keim's generally not throwing stuff against the wall for clicks, and being the first guy to break a transaction has never really been his thing.

I know from our previous exchange that you don't read Keim that way. That's cool. We're probably not going to convince each other on that one.

But I also know from other conversations here that some people understand what I'm talking about with how Keim operates. To each their own.

In this particular case, Keim said on a podcast that he hadn't checked on the team's interest yet because people were away on vacation, but that he'd check in once they were back.

I mentioned that here in real time.

Then Keim did exactly that — he checked with his sources once they were back.

And when he did, I posted the following here:

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

What I said about Noah Brown was pretty simple: he had been hurt for much of his career and was hurt again that offseason. So the odds of him making it through the season as your starting Z weren't exactly great. That meant there was a VERY good chance they'd eventually have to rely on their depth, and one of those guys would end up starting.

As Keim said repeatedly, they thought that among Chris Moore, K.J. Osborn and Michael Gallup, somebody would emerge. Nobody did.

Clearly Peters didn't expect Brown to miss basically the entire season. Of course he didn't. They brought him back and openly talked about him as their starting Z.

My argument was that Peters' calculation was too optimistic. That's the criticism.

Your counter seems to be I am focused on the wrong backup? Because on the initial 53, where they unusually kept only five WRs, with McCaffrey and Lane as the backups. Fair enough. Both are more natural slot types.

But that actually gets to the same larger issue. If Brown or Terry went down, somebody had to play outside. And the logical next man up was Chris Moore.

In fact, I remember one reporter asking someone with the team why Moore continued to play so much despite his struggles. I wrote about it at the time. The response was essentially that he was the only guy who really knew all the routes and responsibilities at the X.

And I don't think it's a coincidence that Quinn made a point before camp this year of saying they're going out of their way to have the WRs learn all the different spots. That sounds like something they recognized needed to be better.

So if your argument is: "I agree that relying on Noah Brown at Z was too much of a gamble, but you're identifying the wrong backup they were banking on — it was Luke rather than Moore," then okay. Maybe. I don't know.

But that's really separate from my larger point. It means nothing to my point. My point isn't about Chris Moore. it's about Noach Brown.

Whether the fallback was Moore, McCaffrey or somebody else doesn't change the criticism. They went into the season relying on an injury-prone Noah Brown as their starting Z without a credible Plan B behind him. I suspect it was Brown. Your thought is its Luke. OK, maybe?

Pick your poison as to which marginal backup was supposed to play outside WR.

But that's not what you said in the post I replied to. This was your post I replied to: (This is the whole post except for the tweet from Tischler.)

Good-Jones -- this years version of Chris Moore? We love our backups and we are riding with what we got until the bitter end.

You didn't say anything about Noah Brown. McCaffery. About depth. About Z receiver. About anything other than Chris Moore and the comparison to JGG.

Which isn't an apt comparison. Chris Moore was never supposed to be on the team, and for all the world, it looked like JGG was supposed to be the backup to Allegretti.

It's WORSE than your point.

But what I was reacting to is you, in probably hundreds of posts, always turn to Chris Moore as the backup WR we had faith in and didn't work out. The fact is they didn't have faith in him, he was cut, and then brought back when both Terry and Noah Brown were hurt. And the reason Moore continued to play is because at different points in the season, either 3 or 4 of the opening day WRs were inactive or on IR. I think the Dallas Game maybe Terry, Deebo, Noah Brown were all down, and McCaffery and Lane were the only 2 original 53 guys left on the roster. Even if we had a viable 6th and 7th WR at that point, would it have mattered that much?

Which is a different than having faith in somebody and riding with them.

My reply was strictly related to this post where you said is JGG this year's Chris Moore. "We love our backups and we're riding with what we got until the bitter end." And again, you ONLY mentioned Chris Moore in this post.

My response was Chris Moore wasn't even supposed to be a backup and we rode with him out of nothing other than necessity. Robby Chosen was also brought up from the PS multiple times due to injury, and a few other guys.

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

Agree on Aiyuk, and I said so at the time. I also agree that they eventually pivoted to Diggs.

As for the media part of this, nobody is going to tell you something is definitely happening unless typically you're basically minutes away from a signing.

And I know we've debated this before, so we're probably just spinning our wheels. You think you have the better read on how the media operates, and I think I do. Lol. We've already done the feisty version of that debate, and I'm not really in the mood to run it back today.

But I'll explain briefly where I'm coming from.

From my own dealings with reporters, which I do regularly through my job, I basically put them into three categories when it comes to scoops:

A. The Schefter types who want to break the story first and get credit for having it before everyone else.

B. The Keim types who deliberately don't burn their sources by breaking everything they know. That's part of how they maintain those relationships and continue getting information. They'll hint at what they know, tell you what they're hearing, or point you in a direction without necessarily putting the entire story out there.

I've talked about Keim specifically on this front a zillion times and given plenty of examples. He even explained this approach himself during a Zoom he once did with fans.

C. Reporters who are much looser with information and will basically do whatever they want with what they're told, even if it risks burning a source or violating some level of trust.

So when Keim says they're interested in somebody, I take that seriously.

That doesn't mean I interpret it as, "They're signing this guy for sure." Those are two completely different things.

It means I believe he's been given enough information from people he trusts to know that the interest is real. Keim's generally not throwing stuff against the wall for clicks, and being the first guy to break a transaction has never really been his thing.

I know from our previous exchange that you don't read Keim that way. That's cool. We're probably not going to convince each other on that one.

But I also know from other conversations here that some people understand what I'm talking about with how Keim operates. To each their own.

In this particular case, Keim said on a podcast that he hadn't checked on the team's interest yet because people were away on vacation, but that he'd check in once they were back.

I mentioned that here in real time.

Then Keim did exactly that — he checked with his sources once they were back.

And when he did, I posted the following here:

View attachment 15443

I really wasn't debating anything you said or what Keim said. I was agreeing with you that he got a quote, and reported it. I also took it seriously when Keim said they were talking. I actually don't think there's any disagreement here.

 

[skinsinparadise]

But that's not what you said in the post I replied to. This was your post I replied to: (This is the whole post except for the tweet from Tischler.)


You didn't say anything about Noah Brown. McCaffery. About depth. About Z receiver. About anything other than Chris Moore and the comparison to JGG.

Which isn't an apt comparison. Chris Moore was never supposed to be on the team, and for all the world, it looked like JGG was supposed to be the backup to Allegretti.

It's WORSE than your point.

But what I was reacting to is you, in probably hundreds of posts, always turn to Chris Moore as the backup WR we had faith in and didn't work out. The fact is they didn't have faith in him, he was cut, and then brought back when both Terry and Noah Brown were hurt. And the reason Moore continued to play is because at different points in the season, either 3 or 4 of the opening day WRs were inactive or on IR. I think the Dallas Game maybe Terry, Deebo, Noah Brown were all down, and McCaffery and Lane were the only 2 original 53 guys left on the roster. Even if we had a viable 6th and 7th WR at that point, would it have mattered that much?

Which is a different than having faith in somebody and riding with them.

My reply was strictly related to this post where you said is JGG this year's Chris Moore. "We love our backups and we're riding with what we got until the bitter end." And again, you ONLY mentioned Chris Moore in this post.

My response was Chris Moore wasn't even supposed to be a backup and we rode with him out of nothing other than necessity. Robby Chosen was also brought up from the PS multiple times due to injury, and a few other guys.

My thesis about why Peters mishandled the WR position isn't really centered on Chris Moore. And, for that matter, my criticism of how they handled center isn't centered on Good-Jones either.

There's a decent chance Good-Jones doesn't even make the team. But to me, that actually reinforces the larger point. We've watched them run the script with him throughout camp, just as they ran it with Moore, Osborn and Gallup last year. The fact that Moore ultimately didn't make the team — and Good-Jones may not either — doesn't really undermine my argument. If anything, it illustrates what I'm talking about: relying on a group of marginal options and hoping one of them emerges.

But look, I don't really care whether you agree with me on this. If you think I'm reading it wrong and you've got a better handle on the facts, that's perfectly fine. I'm not trying to win you over, and I know I'm probably not going to.

As I've said in other posts, we just see football differently. There are a couple of longtime ES posters who are here, I've disagreed with on football going way back, not always but enough and most I do see eye to eye on most things, and that's fine. Different perspectives are part of what makes the board interesting.

 

[skinsinparadise]

I really wasn't debating anything you said or what Keim said. I was agreeing with you that he got a quote, and reported it. I also took it seriously when Keim said they were talking. I actually don't think there's any disagreement here.

OK fair enough, I was hitting the point where you said Keim didn't say it was going to happen. So I explained he rarely is that explicit. But I posted a few times back then, it felt like it was going to happen based on Keim being Keim dropping strong hints.

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

My thesis about why Peters mishandled the WR position isn't really centered on Chris Moore. And, for that matter, my criticism of how they handled center isn't centered on Good-Jones either.

There's a decent chance Good-Jones doesn't even make the team. But to me, that actually reinforces the larger point. We've watched them run the script with him throughout camp, just as they ran it with Moore, Osborn and Gallup last year. The fact that Moore ultimately didn't make the team — and Good-Jones may not either — doesn't really undermine my argument. If anything, it illustrates what I'm talking about: relying on a group of marginal options and hoping one of them emerges.

But look, I don't really care whether you agree with me on this. If you think I'm reading it wrong and you've got a better handle on the facts, that's perfectly fine. I'm not trying to win you over, and I know I'm probably not going to.

As I've said in other posts, we just see football differently. There are a couple of longtime ES posters who are here, I've disagreed with on football going way back, not always but enough and most I do see eye to eye on most things, and that's fine. Different perspectives are part of what makes the board interesting.

Again, no real disagreement. But the post I responded to was ONLY about Chris Moore. I don't try and bring your entire posting history or thesis into every reply. You posted about Chris Moore. I replied about Chris Moore.

 

[Voice_of_Reason]

OK fair enough, I was hitting the point where you said Keim didn't say it was going to happen. So I explained he rarely is that explicit. But I posted a few times back then, it felt like it was going to happen based on Keim being Keim dropping strong hints.

Yeah, but he can't say "it's going to happen" because nobody would tell him that.

What he learned was they were in close contact, and that's enough to know it's a serious possibility. I think he more than hinted it was very likely when he said he was told directly "they are monitoring the situation" and then said something like "that means they are talking." He even said "what does, monitoring the situation mean? It means they are talking."

He didn't make the final leap of "why would they be talking if they weren't serious?" but he didn't have to. That final leap is pretty self evident.