The 2026 Free Agency Thread

[Anselmheifer]

Do you see a world where Bobby Wagner is brought back for 2026 (yeah perhaps at a reduced rate)?

I am having a harder time seeing it. I'd love for them to draft one a few LB's at 71 but I am doubting that occurs. Jacob Rodriguez sticks out as a comparison but there are about 5 guys I do like.

No need to hit the positional value button, We all have hit it at nauseam with the discussion at pick 7 and we know it is a deep Edge, S and WR class....

EDIT - I just wanted to add that at 71 there are a number of players at the other positions I'd really like as well

I think a lot depends on the draft. I’d bet that if we take Styles, that Wagner isn’t back. And also, that if we don’t take Tate, that we may circle back to Jennings. If we draft Love, I’d love to sign Jennings, for his run blocking. We could really lean into the running game.

 

[ES1974]

With all due respect to the guy, it has to be a no to Bobby Wagner at this stage.

 

[DWinzit]

I think a lot depends on the draft. I’d bet that if we take Styles, that Wagner isn’t back. And also, that if we don’t take Tate, that we may circle back to Jennings. If we draft Love, I’d love to sign Jennings, for his run blocking. We could really lean into the running game.

Point taken with the run game for sure.

I still find it hard to believe that we are changing our offensive approach and the only difference between last year and this years OL is we cut the starting C and replaced him with his backup who never seemed that great at G or C, just ok.

 

[Anselmheifer]

Point taken with the run game for sure.

I still find it hard to believe that we are changing our offensive approach and the only difference between last year and this years OL is we cut the starting C and replaced him with his backup who never seemed that great at G or C, just ok.

Can you expound about what you mean by this?

 

[HTTR]

There’s just no way to make sense of the Biadasz thing, based on what we know. Not just cutting him for no apparent reason, but the strange timing of it. Tells me that there has to be information we are not privy to. Most likely has to do with his knee injury from the end of last year. AP probably didn’t want to mention it and hurt his chances of catching on elsewhere. Would explain why he seemingly made no attempt to trade him… didn’t want to burn a bridge with another GM by trading damaged goods. I guess we’ll see. If the Chargers didn’t do their due diligence before signing him it’s on them and I wonder if they did given the short time frame.

 

[Bulldog]

Well, for one thing it doesn't make much sense moneywise. We are now carrying an $8.1M dead cap hit for a 29 year old player who was in the final year of his contract and for whom the team didn't have a proven replacement on the club to turn to.

I don't consider 2 games for Nick Allegretti in garbage time last year in games 16-17 and his comment that he 'loves playing center' as reasons to get excited about him

Peters takes some odd gambles. I don't know cutting a fairly productive veteran whose contract was not outsized can be considered a good move as usually you want an UPGRADE candidate already on hand or to be signed in free agency. Washington most certainly is NOT going to use the #7 pick or the #71 pick on a center.

Ask yourself if this is a move that Schneider or Roseman makes given the current roster?

No, I don't think so. It's creating another hole when you already have enough to fill.

 

[ES1974]

Well, for one thing it doesn't make much sense moneywise. We are now carrying an $8.1M dead cap hit for a 29 year old player who was in the final year of his contract and for whom the team didn't have a proven replacement on the club to turn to.

I don't consider 2 games for Nick Allegretti in garbage time last year in games 16-17 and his comment that he 'loves playing center' as reasons to get excited about him

Peters takes some odd gambles. I don't know cutting a fairly productive veteran whose contract was not outsized can be considered a good move as usually you want an UPGRADE candidate already on hand or to be signed in free agency. Washington most certainly is NOT going to use the #7 pick or the #71 pick on a center.

Ask yourself if this is a move that Schneider or Roseman makes given the current roster?

No, I don't think so. It's creating another hole when you already have enough to fill.

I think AP wrongly assumed we were going to land Linderbaum.

 

[Bulldog]

If that were true and Peters was going to give Alec Pierce $30M plus and then turn around and give a CENTER that kind of contract, we wouldn't have been able to upgrade the defense the way we did.

One thing I keep going back to is why the Ravens would let Linderbaum go without tagging him or why Seattle gave up Kenneth Walker after he was the Super Bowl MVP.

The answer Schneider himself provided - 'we feel running back is a position where we can find guys in the draft who can make an impact'.

I would imagine the Ravens would say the same thing.

You look around the NFL and good starting centers after often found in Rounds 3-5.

It's not a position where really good GMs tend to spend their highest contracts.

As you will note it was the Raiders that gave him the biggest offer.

And that's not surprising because the Raiders have been a hot mess for 25 years.

 

[HTTR]

If that were true and Peters was going to give Alec Pierce $30M plus and then turn around and give a CENTER that kind of contract, we wouldn't have been able to upgrade the defense the way we did.

One thing I keep going back to is why the Ravens would let Linderbaum go without tagging him or why Seattle gave up Kenneth Walker after he was the Super Bowl MVP.

The answer Schneider himself provided - 'we feel running back is a position where we can find guys in the draft who can make an impact'.

I would imagine the Ravens would say the same thing.

You look around the NFL and good starting centers after often found in Rounds 3-5.

It's not a position where really good GMs tend to spend their highest contracts.

As you will note it was the Raiders that gave him the biggest offer.

And that's not surprising because the Raiders have been a hot mess for 25 years.

The Ravens paid up for a RB in Henry. The Eagles paid up for a FA RB as well, and then gave him a big extension. They also gave Jürrgens a four year 68 mill contract to replace Kelce at C.

I think AP wrongly assumed we were going to land Linderbaum.

Its possible, but still doesn’t explain why he didn’t hold on to bad ass a little longer just in case. I’m pretty confident there’s information we don’t know about behind the Badass move, and as much as I’d like to know what that is, I say good on AP before keeping it quiet.

 

[Bulldog]

The Ravens paid up for a RB in Henry. The Eagles paid up for a FA RB as well, and then gave him a big extension. They also gave Jürrgens a four year 68 mill contract to replace Kelce at C.


Its possible, but still doesn’t explain why he didn’t hold on to bad ass a little longer just in case. I’m pretty confident there’s information we don’t know about behind the Badass move, and as much as I’d like to know what that is, I say good on AP before keeping it quiet.

And those teams also had clubs that they felt were Super Bowl ready at the time of those transactions. These guys were to be the 'final' pieces put in place.

Roseman didn't go out and get Barkley when he was building off a 5-12 team that had enough holes to sink an aircraft carrier.

That said I like the idea of Love coming in and getting his PRIME years with Daniels on a lower cost contract and then SEEING if the player holds up for a second contract.

I definitely like Love or Tate over Styles. You are never 100% sure on prospects, but I have confidence that 3-4 years from now you will see both Love and Tate starting on teams in the NFL and be very productive players.

At the same time I could see Styles find a place and role that he excels at the next level, but my confidence level on that is perhaps 25% lower than on the other two.

My guess is after the criticism coming out of the 2024 draft Peters is going to be very careful NOT to roll the dice on a high ceiling but low floor player at #7.

He gambled on a falling knife in Johnny Newton, took a TE in Sinnott that others had rated much lower than Round 2 and then took a receiver in McCaffrey that was transitioning to new position.

He won't do that again.

 

[HTTR]

And those teams also had clubs that they felt were Super Bowl ready at the time of those transactions. These guys were to be the 'final' pieces put in place.

Roseman didn't go out and get Barkley when he was building off a 5-12 team that had enough holes to sink an aircraft carrier.

That said I like the idea of Love coming in and getting his PRIME years with Daniels on a lower cost contract and then SEEING if the player holds up for a second contract.

I definitely like Love or Tate over Styles. You are never 100% sure on prospects, but I have confidence that 3-4 years from now you will see both Love and Tate starting on teams in the NFL and be very productive players.

At the same time I could see Styles find a place and role that he excels at the next level, but my confidence level on that is perhaps 25% lower than on the other two.

My guess is after the criticism coming out of the 2024 draft Peters is going to be very careful NOT to roll the dice on a high ceiling but low floor player at #7.

He gambled on a falling knife in Johnny Newton, took a TE in Sinnott that others had rated much lower than Round 2 and then took a receiver in McCaffrey that was transitioning to new position.

He won't do that again.

Well, I at least agree with you about Love and Tate over styles… Although I think a lot more highly of styles than you do. That’s for the draft thread though.

 

[heisenberg]

Its possible, but still doesn’t explain why he didn’t hold on to bad ass a little longer just in case. I’m pretty confident there’s information we don’t know about behind the Badass move, and as much as I’d like to know what that is, I say good on AP before keeping it quiet.

This is how I feel too, if peters felt biadasz was a solid competent center and the only reason he released him was because he felt linderbaum was in the bag that wouldn't be a mistake that would gross incompetence and although I know peters is capable of making mistakes as we all are I dont believe hes incompetent.

There has to be something we dont know that they dont want us knowing because the move makes zero sense from every known angle.

 

[method man]

There’s just no way to make sense of the Biadasz thing, based on what we know. Not just cutting him for no apparent reason, but the strange timing of it. Tells me that there has to be information we are not privy to. Most likely has to do with his knee injury from the end of last year. AP probably didn’t want to mention it and hurt his chances of catching on elsewhere. Would explain why he seemingly made no attempt to trade him… didn’t want to burn a bridge with another GM by trading damaged goods. I guess we’ll see. If the Chargers didn’t do their due diligence before signing him it’s on them and I wonder if they did given the short time frame.

Keim knows and hinted at it. More than his play, it was how he called protections

 

[gbear2]

I thought i heard biadasz called blocking schemes that left him less likely to give up a sack but not necessarily the best ones to maximize opportunities for the offense. If one always call schemes to cover their own weaknesses, it may be at the expense of one's linemates left 1 on 1 more often, or allowing the defenses to more easily diagnose plays or clog running lanes.

 

[KDawg]

I thought i heard biadasz called blocking schemes that left him less likely to give up a sack but not necessarily the best ones to maximize opportunities for the offense. If one always call schemes to cover their own weaknesses, it may be at the expense of one's linemates left 1 on 1 more often, or allowing the defenses to more easily diagnose plays or clog running lanes.

I very much doubt this.

 

[SkinsFTW]

Keim knows and hinted at it. More than his play, it was how he called protections

But for some reason he still was starting every game unless he was injured.

 

[heisenberg]

But for some reason he still was starting every game unless he was injured.

Thats a good point.
If that theory were true then they have no excuse for why they didn't bench him for allegretti last year if that is the plan this year.

None of it makes any sense.

 

[Dlts20]

I very much doubt this.

I think he got that from the clip of Logan speculating on different possibilities but maybe the speculation came from something he's heard. I posted the Logan clip on here

 

[burgold]

But for some reason he still was starting every game unless he was injured.

They seemed very reluctant on offense to sit any starters (that weren't out with injury.) Probably the only one that got benched was Bill.

 

[Hailer]

All the offensive show runners from last year are gone - KK, Oline coach, and pass game coordinator, Brian Johnson. Lynn no longer retains the run game coordinator title if I recall correctly.

New dudes in each of those scheme defining roles. Only thing I can think is the new crew believed Biadasz wasn’t a fit for the presnap duties in this new vision. Allegreti a step up on that front.

Otherwise it makes zero sense. I’ll defer to the brain trust on this. Will see how it plays out.