Players Who May Be On Move

One of many experimental iterations ...

Bulldog

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
15,399
Reaction score
352
Points
363
Location
Bethesda Md



My list:

Guys that Don’t Fit the Systems (but can play elsewhere in the NFL):

McNabb
Carter
Hicks
Dockery
Haynesworth
McIntosh (?)
Golston
Beck

Guys That Are Done Either Due to Age/Injuries:

Portis
Daniels
Kemoeatu
Brown
Bidwell (IR)
Kelly (IR)

Guys That Can’t Play Consistently at an NFL Caliber Level:

Heyer
Moore
Gano
R. Williams
Horton
Bryant

Free Agents That May Not Be Resigned:

Rogers (?)
Buchanon
Moss
 

Goaldeje

The Legend
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
18,376
Reaction score
41
Points
328
Location
Waynesboro, VA

James Madison

I agree for the most part. Just out of curiosity, what kind of draft picks do you think we could get for the eight players up top? I don't see how we will get anything better than a third, and that high only if we are exceptionally lucky. Rocky is young enough and has shown enough that we might able to get a third. After this season, i don't see McNabb or Fat Al fetching anything higher than a fifth. The rest of the guys on that list are 6th-7 rounders at best, IMO.

I would like to resign Carlos, if it won't be crazy expensive. We may need Moss for another year or two unless we make a serious move in FA.
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 

Bulldog

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
15,399
Reaction score
352
Points
363
Location
Bethesda Md


I don't see any reason to bring Portis back at 30. He simply can't stay healthy for more than 3-4 game stretches and has left the team in the lurch in each of the past 3 seasons.

To me there is no way that Kemoeatu comes back. Honestly, I don't think he will be in the NFL much longer. He simply doesn't get any push whatsoever inside at the NT position and even projecting him back to a 4-3 with another team appears slow without much lateral quickness.

Carlos Rogers SHOULD be back but only on a deal that makes sense. There is no way you can pay a guy that can cover but can't convert turnovers a top 10 salary and if that's what Rogers is looking for we need to let him walk.

My preference at WR is simply to start over.

I think we can use our resources to entice a major free agent WR to come in and work with a young qb we draft.

And I think we can also use a draft pick on a receiver and then see what we get in the offseason camps from Armstrong and Austin.
 

Rymanofthenorth

BGObsessed
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
71
Points
128
Location
I live in the warmest city in the coldest provinc

UTEP

Portis is still our best running back when healthy and on a cap friendly deal he would be a good rotation back.

Kemo is coming off an achilles tear, we rushed him back and put too much stock in how easily he was beating rabach but with another year to get healthy we would know by the pre season if hes gonna get better or if hes done, right now is too early to say.

I completely agree about Rogers, the problem is I think he will want elite money and some desperate team will give it to him.

We have put a lot of time into kelly and he will be heading into this year knowing he needs to make his mark, I think again if he can stay healthy he is an upgrade, but also like I said, if he even gets a bruise he goes byby.
 

China

The Team Captain
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
2,658
Reaction score
12
Points
68
Location
Falls Church, VA

Michigan State

That's 23 players. That's nearly half the roster. A lot of holes to fill in one offseason, especially when they only have 7 draft picks:

1st Rounder
2nd Rounder
5th Rounder
5th Rounder (from NO)
6th Rounder
7th Rounder
7th Rounder (from Indy from Justin Tryon trade)

Assuming we can get picks for McNabb and Haynesworth that makes 9. Minus those players drafted that won't pan out (with 2 5th and 2 7th rounders you figure a couple of those won't stick).

That means the remaining holes (close to 15) have to be filled with free agents. As good as the free agent market may be the Redskins will have to look in everywhere and anywhere for players. That makes Ryman's thread about the scouting department needing to look in places like the UFL and CFL all the more on point.

I can only hope, having no reason to believe they will find diamonds in the rough in these places (based on the historical lack of doing so).

The only positive is, if there is such a drastic changeover, maybe we'll start to see something out of this team. However, as Henry and others have pointed out, they should have started this process last year. The other worry is that with so many holes to fill, we will continue to see aging retreads pass through the doors to Redskins Park. I'm left here hoping for a youth (and speed) movement instead.

I notice I've used "hope" a couple of times in this post already. That's about all I've got left.
 

Rymanofthenorth

BGObsessed
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
71
Points
128
Location
I live in the warmest city in the coldest provinc

UTEP

China, my biggest worry about this team is that with all the holes in starting positions we havent even really looked at depth. If we don't get creative in finding talent this isnt going to be a 1-2 rebuild process it will be a minimum of 3 seasons more likely 4.

Im glad that other people are not only noticing that we have way more holes than draft picks but that they understand that we CANNOT expect to fill all these holes in one offseason. I have been trying to find ANY team that had such massive turnover 2 seasons in a row and the results of my search were extremely disturbing. the only team that I could find stats on were the 72 and then 73 Oilers who had massive turnover both years and yet finished with identical 1-13 records. the following season they made it to .500 but were back to 5-9 two seasons later.

Im hoping one of our stats obsessed members will find if any team has ever replaced 11 starters in one offseason and if so, how did they do? because in order for us to be decent, thats what we need to do.

as I have said its not so much that we will be turning over our roster, its that we will be not only getting new players but almost all of them will be needed to perform in a starters role, we have almost nothing in the way of young guys who can step up and that does not bode well. worse yet almost none of the guys we have currently on the roster on defence have shown anything playing in a 3-4.

I think if we can sign quality free agents at any positions, we will have to, to even be somewhat competitive, I can already hear people getting angry about that,but if we dont start showing some ability to find talent, this is going to be another long decade for skins fans.
 

China

The Team Captain
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
2,658
Reaction score
12
Points
68
Location
Falls Church, VA

Michigan State

Ryman, I found this post about player turnover from last year:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/18906/where-every-nfl-team-ranks-in-turnover

Interestingly, the Redskins had the 4th highest player turnover last year. Not surprising I guess with a new coach. However, the quality of the players coming in as well as the quality of depth (as you mentioned) is a huge factor in why the Eagles have done well with almost as much player turnover as the Redskins, and why the Redskins have fared poorly. If we have another high turnover year, we'll need to do a better job of picking players.
 

Rymanofthenorth

BGObsessed
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
5,635
Reaction score
71
Points
128
Location
I live in the warmest city in the coldest provinc

UTEP

Cool, Thanks, I may have to learn more about search parameters. this past season we had large turnover but as you said the players we brought in were not serious upgrades over the ones we got rid of. now next year we will be getting rid of several starters and frankly im not holding out a lot of hope that many of those replacements will be very big upgrades. I guess now we have to try to be patient and see if this new FO can live up to that.

For the really scary thought, The seahags retained 17 of their starters and were the lowest in retention the Panthers brought back 15 starters. now obviously a team has 22 starters. so both of those were considered to be massive overhauls, we brought back 18 starters. Next season we have already figured out that this team will return probably only 5-6 starters on offence (possibly even 4) in cooley, williams, Hicks, moss, lichentseiger (sp) and armstrong (everyone else seems to be replaceable)and probably only 4 on defence with carriker, Fletch, landry and Hall being the only "safe" looking players on defence. best case scenario thats10 out of 22 starters retained which I think will be the most massive roster makeover in the history of the game (non expansion).

It could be very interesting and I think if we invest massive amounts into our scouting dept we could in fact turn this around very quickly with the right signings.

People wanted a new culture here, they will be getting it by default.
 

Ax

The Ugly American
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
15,000
Reaction score
257
Points
363

Interestingly, the Redskins had the 4th highest player turnover last year. Not surprising I guess with a new coach. However, the quality of the players coming in as well as the quality of depth (as you mentioned) is a huge factor in why the Eagles have done well with almost as much player turnover as the Redskins, and why the Redskins have fared poorly. If we have another high turnover year, we'll need to do a better job of picking players.
It is much easier to integrate large numbers of players onto a team that has systems that have been in place for many years, without suffering significant setbacks. So, stopping the coaching/new system carousel needs to come 1st.

Yes, I know, and agree, Ryman, we should have stuck with the 4-3, but that ship has sailed. I think the 3-4 is here to stay.

You all have to wait for my Super-Duper, Uber-Smoother, Off Season Analysis & Fix-It Program, coming this off season, but I will share this mind blowing little tidbit.

Fix the lines first. Shocking, isn't it?

On offense, we can make due with the skill players we have, as long as the RB's have holes, and the QB's have time.

On defense, upgrade as much of the starting front 5, (Fletch & Rak are set) as you can. Preferably, at least a true, dominant, NT, and we're right back in the middle of the pack, or better.

Very doable. With room to add...(coming soon)
 

Sarge

The Owner's Favorite
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
6,463
Reaction score
68
Points
128
Location
CTU

Air Force

That means the remaining holes (close to 15) have to be filled with free agents. As good as the free agent market may be the Redskins will have to look in everywhere and anywhere for players. That makes Ryman's thread about the scouting department needing to look in places like the UFL and CFL all the more on point.
Hey, Randy Moss and Terrell Owens are availible :paranoid:
 

riggins44

The Franchise Player
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
4,181
Reaction score
56
Points
78
Location
Yorktown, VA


Right now I find it hard to predict turnover this year with the potential of a lockout. Last offseason we mostly signed role players.

You didn't see the big names move much last year. Don't know if we didn't go after big names due to change in philosophy or what. The NFL Players Assocation feels the owners planned this manuever.

Read where this could be one of the best FA classes ever. Once we get a CBA and new salary cap structure will be interesting to see what direction we take.

I have a feeling McNabb will be back. Know I am in the minority, but just feel there is more going on behind the scenes than we know. A buddy of mine made an interesting point.

What if McNabb has some injury or is nicked, which would point to poor play lately. His theory was McNabb was benched to show him how offense could be run. Grossman knows the system and when to check down, cause he knows where everyone should be and trusts the offense. McNabb, like Peyton Manning, has spent his whole career in one offense. There had to be growing pains for McNabb as well. Just think the next 3 weeks is so he can see the offense from a different perspective.
 

Henry

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,820
Reaction score
151
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


My list:

Everyone not named:

Trent Williams
Laron Landry
Brian Orakpo
Brandon Banks
Lorenzo Alexander
 

Canadian Hog

2019 BGO Ballers Champ
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
1,266
Reaction score
64
Points
48
Location
Ontario, Canada


I think we're looking at a serious three year project to get this team up and running, if in fact the decision makers at Redskins Park decide that a true rebuild is the direction they will take this offseason.

Keeping the timing of the rebuild in mind becomes especially important when deciding on which free agents to retain. To me, keeping Carlos Rogers around while going through the beginning stages of a rebuild is a lost cause. Ditto for Santana Moss. You'll likely have to pay Rogers a hefty amount of money for what? To help us win 4 to possibly 7 games a year in that time frame. By my count, Rogers has spent 6 seasons here. By the time this team is ready to realistically compete for playoff positions (if we handle the rebuild properly), Carlos will be entering his 9th year or so, and potentially be on the downside of his career. Sure, you can argue that teams can progress ahead of schedule; however, the reality remains that the cupboards are largely bare in Washington and it's going to take time to restock.

Anybody we keep around now needs to be able to be part of a core that will realistically be able to contribute at a high level once the team is ready to compete for division titles and championships. I'm not quite sure if Rogers fits in this category. I'm also not quite sure where a guy like Cooley fits into this line of thinking either? Here's a guy who has spent 7 years now in Washington. Where will he be when we are ready to compete? Year 10 of his career possibly. Personally, while I love how Chris has represented himself as a player and person in the burgundy and gold, I wouldn't think twice about trading him and seeing what I could get in terms picks for him.
 

Ax

The Ugly American
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
15,000
Reaction score
257
Points
363

I'm with you, R44, in thinking McNabb will be back.

And Henry, I doubt the team will EVER be blown up to your liking.

15-20 new players is most likely, with 25 being max, don't you think? New meaning, not from IR, or the practice squad.
 

Sarge

The Owner's Favorite
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
6,463
Reaction score
68
Points
128
Location
CTU

Air Force

No takers for Randy Moss? C'mon now:laugh:

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmJcUlrkMNg[/media]
 

Henry

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,820
Reaction score
151
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


I'm with you, R44, in thinking McNabb will be back.

And Henry, I doubt the team will EVER be blown up to your liking.

15-20 new players is most likely, with 25 being max, don't you think? New meaning, not from IR, or the practice squad.
I'm not saying I want to replace 48 players. :)

I'm just saying those 5 are the only players I wouldn't consider moving. Canadian Hog explained it well.
 

Ax

The Ugly American
Joe Gibbs Club Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
15,000
Reaction score
257
Points
363

I'm not saying I want to replace 48 players. :)

I'm just saying those 5 are the only players I wouldn't consider moving. Canadian Hog explained it well.
But, since you know we're gonna have to keep most of the others, why not list, and not consider moving, who you feel are the best of the rest?
 

Henry

Coaching Staff
Staff member
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,820
Reaction score
151
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


Because the few other players of quality we do have, such as Cooley, could be decent trade bait. Very very few jobs should be safe this offseason.
 

Bulldog

The All-Time Great
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
15,399
Reaction score
352
Points
363
Location
Bethesda Md


McNabb won't be back.

There is no way that Mike Shanahan could bring McNabb back after what has transpired the past 10 days here.

If McNabb was going to return he wouldn't have been benched for the last 3 games. He definitely wouldn't be made the #3 for the final two games.

As Boswell said in today's post article, McNabb's skills are wasted on a Shanahan and Son combo that stress the importance of having a 'system' quarterback in place.

McNabb is or at least WAS an improvisational quarterback, more effective than Vince Young and a bit less successful than the 2010 Michael Vick that we are seeing.

But that was in his prime at age 28 or 29.

McNabb is 34 and there are legitimate questions about whether like Portis he can remain healthy for a 16 game campaign anymore.

He only did so a couple of times in Philly.

No, I think Rex is auditioning for a return as the spot starter and then primary backup to a quarterback chosen in Round 1 of the draft.

Washington likely will not be picking higher in the future than it will this April and this is the chance to draft a franchise passer to set the table for the next 8-10 years here.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Private conversations
Help Users
    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Chat 0
    Top