How would you like to see Trent Murphy PRIMARILY utilized in 2014 ?

[Fear The Spear]

The 2 key words are "primarily" and "2014"
He most likely will be used multiple ways, hence the word primarily.
And he most likely will change roles next year, assuming Orakpo leaves (and maybe even Haslett ) so the focus of this poll is only on how you see him THIS year ONLY, to keep this simple.

 

[MikeSr619]

learning and contributing. I dont expect him to step out on the field and be a stud (hoping he does) but I want him to learn our schemes and hopefully by the end of the year have made such a good contribution that we can look at Rak and Kerrigan and not have to pay a max deal for either one.

and I damn straight dont want him to lose that awesome tip skill he has.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

I'd like to seem him primarily used as a guy who breaks the rookie sack record and runs away with DROY.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

 

[Win4us]

Other: With his helmet halfway up Romo's ass twice a year.

 

[Ax]

Blitzing

 

[Om]

I'd like to see him primarily as a wildcard ... a guy Haz can deploy anywhere, at any time, in special packages. On the edge with his hand on the ground, stunting into the middle from an ILB position, stacked behind Rak or Kerrigan on an occasional long passing downs, etc. A new look a week, maybe. By midseason I'd like to see him become a guy with on-film pass rush skills and relentless motor who opposing offensive coordinators have to be aware of.

I'd also like to see him establish himself, and the tenacious/vicious-ness we've heard he possesses, as a special teams force.

 

[fansince62]

I'd like to see him situations where Rak is not in the game - for obvious reasons. then we can start the process of objectively separating out real value.

 

[Miles Monroe]

I'd like to see him primarily as a wildcard ... a guy Haz can deploy anywhere, at any time, in special packages. On the edge with his hand on the ground, stunting into the middle from an ILB position, stacked behind Rak or Kerrigan on an occasional long passing downs, etc. A new look a week, maybe. By midseason I'd like to see him become a guy with on-film pass rush skills and relentless motor who opposing offensive coordinators have to be aware of.

I'd also like to see him establish himself, and the tenacious/vicious-ness we've heard he possesses, as a special teams force.

That's exactly where I'm at. Haz tried it a bit with Kerrigan, but it will really work with three guys able to rush, and a stronger inside with the addition of Hatcher. The real nice part is, he can put him at OLB, and move Kerrigan around too. If he plays it right, Haz can really screw with opposing OC's. Throw in a corner or safety blitz here and there, and it could make for a long day for most QB's.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Yeah, I agree.

Orakpo is basically auditioning for his next team.

I don't doubt that the FO believes Murphy will turn out to be a better player than Orakpo in the long run.

You could replace "Orakpo" with "Kerrigan" here and it would be equally valid. They could love Rak, and Murphy could be Ryan's replacement; we just don't know.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

 

[Elephant]

You could replace "Orakpo" with "Kerrigan" here and it would be equally valid. They could love Rak, and Murphy could be Ryan's replacement; we just don't know.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

While you "may" be correct...Ryan was just given a 5th year tender to lock him up for another year. Rak was not given a multi-year contract, but forced to prove he is worthy of that contract with a Franchise Tag.

Most looking at those 2 situations, combined with the Murphy draft choice, would conclude it is Orakpo whom should be concerned about his tenure here in Washington.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

While you "may" be correct...Ryan was just given a 5th year tender to lock him up for another year. Rak was not given a multi-year contract, but forced to prove he is worthy of that contract with a Franchise Tag.

Most looking at those 2 situations, combined with the Murphy draft choice, would conclude it is Orakpo whom should be concerned about his tenure here in Washington.

The 5th year was not a tender, it was a team option on his rookie deal, which is still very cap friendly. Pretty much a no-brainer.

Rak was at the end of his rookie deal, and wants a long term extension. The two situations are very different. I believe they can still negotiate with Rak, and from reports I think they have been. They had to franchise him or risk losing him in free agency. If they were not interested in him long term, why not let him test the free agency waters?

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

 

[Miles Monroe]

You could replace "Orakpo" with "Kerrigan" here and it would be equally valid. They could love Rak, and Murphy could be Ryan's replacement; we just don't know.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

You beating that horse again We know for a fact they want Kerrigan more then just this season, and we can't say the same for Rak. Granted, Kerrigan hasn't been in a situation to show greed or shitty attitude as Rak has, but he hasn't had availability issues as Rak has, so to say the statement is interchangeable isn't accurate IMO.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Kerrigan will retire a Redskin.

Orakpo? If you like a guy and see him in your long term future, the last thing you want to do is franchise him. I'm not saying he's gone in a year, but if his production stays about the same, I believe he's gone.

I happen to agree, but guys are franchised all the time and then signed to long term deals. If you don't want a guy in your long term future, you let him walk. Do you think the Saints don't want Jimmy Graham long term?

You beating that horse again We know for a fact they want Kerrigan more then just this season, and we can't say the same for Rak. Granted, Kerrigan hasn't been in a situation to show greed or shitty attitude as Rak has, but he hasn't had availability issues as Rak has, so to say the statement is interchangeable isn't accurate IMO.

Beating that horse? Look, I get that Kerrigan is a fan favorite and what not, but Rak is the better player. But I'm tired of that debate, so I'm going to table it.

All we know is that they wanted to lock Kerrigan into a cap friendly deal for one more season because they could. He's awesome; I love him, I own a Kerrigan jersey (I do not own a 98, for the record). Picking up the 5th year option was a no brainer either way.

You're right about Rak, we don't know if they want him for more than just this season. Except that both sides said they've were negotiating a long term contract. They have until July 15th to do so; if that deadline passes with no long term deal, then yes I'll agree with you that they're not overtly anxious to extend him. I just think that given the cap money franchising took, and all the other needs this team had, if Rak wasn't in the team's long term plans, it makes more sense to let him walk. You save $12M in cap room for a premiere safety or corner, draft his replacement (or go with the much cheaper Jackson), and move on. But they committed the cap space, which tells me they at least are interested in keeping him around.

Unless you think this team is good enough to make a championship run THIS season, a one year Rak rental makes little sense.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

 

[Bulldog]

Start him out in the third down/long yardage packages perhaps with all 3 OLB in together and then increase his workload as his play warrants.

I wonder if he could get snaps inside next to Riley too?

 

[Miles Monroe]

I happen to agree, but guys are franchised all the time and then signed to long term deals. If you don't want a guy in your long term future, you let him walk. Do you think the Saints don't want Jimmy Graham long term?



Beating that horse? Look, I get that Kerrigan is a fan favorite and what not, but Rak is the better player. But I'm tired of that debate, so I'm going to table it.

All we know is that they wanted to lock Kerrigan into a cap friendly deal for one more season because they could. He's awesome; I love him, I own a Kerrigan jersey (I do not own a 98, for the record). Picking up the 5th year option was a no brainer either way.

You're right about Rak, we don't know if they want him for more than just this season. Except that both sides said they've were negotiating a long term contract. They have until July 15th to do so; if that deadline passes with no long term deal, then yes I'll agree with you that they're not overtly anxious to extend him. I just think that given the cap money franchising took, and all the other needs this team had, if Rak wasn't in the team's long term plans, it makes more sense to let him walk. You save $12M in cap room for a premiere safety or corner, draft his replacement (or go with the much cheaper Jackson), and move on. But they committed the cap space, which tells me they at least are interested in keeping him around.

Unless you think this team is good enough to make a championship run THIS season, a one year Rak rental makes little sense.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

It's a huge wait and see deal. I really think the staff wants him to prove his worth this season, so even though it's been said the two sides are trying to work a deal, I think the team is just biding time. It's purely my opinion / gut feeling.

As for my beating the horse comment, anytime Rak comes up, we can count on you stating the interchangeable thing like a reflex action. It wasn't meant to offend.

I'll also table the subject, as I know better, and shouldn't take the thread so far off topic.

 

[Elephant]

The 5th year was not a tender, it was a team option on his rookie deal, which is still very cap friendly. Pretty much a no-brainer.

Rak was at the end of his rookie deal, and wants a long term extension. The two situations are very different. I believe they can still negotiate with Rak, and from reports I think they have been. They had to franchise him or risk losing him in free agency. If they were not interested in him long term, why not let him test the free agency waters?

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

Yup, I used the wrong term to explain that Kerrigan's future in Washington was extended, when they didn't have to assign the "option"...option/tender...doesn't matter. They made sure they locked him up as long as they could. Cap Friendly? That's about 7 million if I recall correctly, but I could be wrong about that number. You don't offer that money if you don't think the player is worth it...2 years in advance.

On the other hand, they locked Orakpo up for one year when they could have offered him a long term contract. Why didn't they?

Look, you are the only one...the only one who is making the claim that the same can be said of both. You are the only one who seems to ignore the writing on the wall for Orakpo. You are the only one who continues to claim Orakpo is more than the rest of us believe he is.

In other words, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck...chances are, you are wrong!

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Yup, I used the wrong term to explain that Kerrigan's future in Washington was extended, when they didn't have to assign the "option"...option/tender...doesn't matter. They made sure they locked him up as long as they could. Cap Friendly? That's about 7 million if I recall correctly, but I could be wrong about that number. You don't offer that money if you don't think the player is worth it...2 years in advance.

On the other hand, they locked Orakpo up for one year when they could have offered him a long term contract. Why didn't they?

What do you think would be higher, $7M or matching whatever Kerrigan got in free agency next year? If you think he'd get less than $7M, I've got some ocean front property in Nebraska to sell you! And of course Kerrigan is worth $7M, he's been very solid. I haven't argued that ever. He'll especially be worth $7M in 2015, when salaries and the cap go up once again, like they do almost every year.

From all reports, they were in long term negotiations with Rak up until the tag deadline, so they did presumably offer him one. Just because he didn't sign it doesn't mean they didn't offer, it means he thinks he is worth more than the team is willing to pay. If he came to them tonight and said he would accept whatever they'd been offering him, I bet they'd hand him twelve pens.

Look, you are the only one...the only one who is making the claim that the same can be said of both. You are the only one who seems to ignore the writing on the wall for Orakpo. You are the only one who continues to claim Orakpo is more than the rest of us believe he is.

In other words, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck...chances are, you are wrong!

Good to know you polled every Skins fan on earth about this! Since I'm the only one, the only one who thinks this!

Writing on the wall? You don't give a player you have no interest in re-signing $11M of your cap space in a rebuilding year. Bruce Allen has been very frugal with the cap so far, yet he gives that chunk of change to a guy they have no interest in? Sorry, that doesn't pass the smell test to me.

If Rak is as good as gone, why not let him walk? Why not go with Kerrigan, Jackson, Murphy and Jenkins? Why on earth rent him for one year in a season you'll more than likely not be that competitive?


Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

 

[Lanky Livingston]

They didn't know they'd get Murphy before a decision on Rak had to be made.

It's as simple as that.

I'm fairly certain they would have had several options at 34 if Murphy had somehow not been available.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

 

[Lanky Livingston]

That's my point. Franchising Orakpo was insurance had Murphy not been there.

You don't insure a Toyota at the value of a Mercedes. We're talking around a $10M difference!

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

 

[Bulldog]

By the numbers my gut instinct still says that Orakpo is the odd man out in 2015.

I can't see the Redskins giving him a $60M contract with $25-30M guaranteed or thereabouts. Not with his injury history and up/down play.

Would I be surprised to see Orakpo have a 14-15 sack year in a contract season? No.

But I wouldn't want to be the paying him based on that one season for the next 5 years either.