The 2026 Free Agency Thread

I think that type of dream is unrealistic. Because that's literally everybodies dream for every team.

Even fans/GM's/coaches/etc of Super Bowl winners wish for that, because those teams tend to get pilfered in Free Agency. Seahawks lost 4 starters in FA, each of them got $12-20million a year deals. (Edge, CB, Safety, and RB). Their first 3 draft picks were trying to fill those specific holes vacated in Free Agency. Will the rookies be able to bridge that gap immediately? Probably not ready yet.

Like look at the Eagles, favorite to win the division...but they've got real questions. The famous OL coach Stoutland is retired, they have a Guard and Center with major injury questions, and their RT is HoF-bound eventually but is basically ancient and missed a lot of last season. Their old WR2 is now their new WR1 (he might be able to do it), but the rest of the receiving talent features guys who like working over the middle of the field where Jalen Hurts hates throwing to.

So that's the past 2 Super Bowl winners, and they've got question marks about the roster.

I'd say the Eagles in 2024, 49ers for that run where they seemed to get to at least the divisional round every season, Lions (before all the injuries to their defense in 2024) all had rosters you could argue didn't have holes in them. I guess with the Eagles & Lions the argument is neither have an elite QB, but I think the modern era of the NFL is putting together a better case that if you build a juggernaut roster around a pretty good QB, it can get you a championship. Maybe not sustained winning, but if we are talking for all intents & purposes single seasons here I think some teams are thought of as going into seasons with no holes on the team, which also doesn't mean every starter is elite or even great, but they can all hold their own and carry their weight on the field.
 
I think that type of dream is unrealistic. Because that's literally everybodies dream for every team.

Even fans/GM's/coaches/etc of Super Bowl winners wish for that, because those teams tend to get pilfered in Free Agency. Seahawks lost 4 starters in FA, each of them got $12-20million a year deals. (Edge, CB, Safety, and RB). Their first 3 draft picks were trying to fill those specific holes vacated in Free Agency. Will the rookies be able to bridge that gap immediately? Probably not ready yet.

Like look at the Eagles, favorite to win the division...but they've got real questions. The famous OL coach Stoutland is retired, they have a Guard and Center with major injury questions, and their RT is HoF-bound eventually but is basically ancient and missed a lot of last season. Their old WR2 is now their new WR1 (he might be able to do it), but the rest of the receiving talent features guys who like working over the middle of the field where Jalen Hurts hates throwing to.

So that's the past 2 Super Bowl winners, and they've got question marks about the roster.

The teams that have those elite-great players. The George Kittles, Christian McCaffreys. Elite pass rushers. Elite Wrs. There are teams that feel stacked. It happens. The Rams have looked stacked for years,
 
The Rams last year got undone by their biggest off-season question mark, and it killed them when it mattered too so they traded for the Chiefs best corner.

They have more talent than us, but to say these teams have no worries about their roster is not accurate.
 
The Rams last year got undone by their biggest off-season question mark, and it killed them when it mattered too so they traded for the Chiefs best corner.

They have more talent than us, but to say these teams have no worries about their roster is not accurate.

I think you are taking the point too literally. There are teams that looked stacked. Agree no teams have no weaknesses.

But this team as many more ifs than the typical team, much less great players.
 
By typical team do you mean average team? Like the 16th ranked?

When you watch or read those Top 100 player rankings—whether they're voted on by players, put together by analysts, or done by whoever—Washington is almost always near the bottom. It's been that way for years.

At the same time, around here we can talk ourselves into a lot of upside, me included. Croskey-Merritt could become a star. Rachaad White could look like Ekeler in his prime. Chig could break out into a superstar.

Conerly had a mixed rookie season overall, but he improved as the year went along and could develop into a stud. Sainristil had a down year but should benefit from this scheme. Amos had a so-so rookie season, but he has the pedigree to emerge as a true No. 1 corner.

Every team has "ifs" and "maybes," but I think this roster has more than most. That's not meant to be some profound observation. If people disagree, that's perfectly fine.
 
Without delving deep…I think the ifs and maybes are very important by position so I am not inclined to group them similarly.

And I’m not thinking that this team, as currently constructed, is full of upside but I don’t view it as one of the worst rosters either.
 
For this team specifically, I don't think they have many proven elite or great players on paper. That's nothing new. Could some of these guys become elite? Absolutely. I was high on Croskey-Merritt before the draft. I wanted Chig before free agency. I like the upside of a lot of these players. But none of us know whether that potential turns into stardom. That's the same conversation we have every offseason. Last year, even Quinn was talking up Quan Martin as someone who could emerge as a star. The average team, has more great-elite players -- I don't think its way off when this team is barely represented in those top 100 players list. That can change someday and maybe this season, will see?

Overall, I'm actually optimistic about this team. I think they've built a good defense. I'm less enthusiastic about the offense, but I also think Jayden is good enough to elevate it regardless. Where I differ from I gather some people is in the standard I'm judging this roster by. Ironically, at least two people I've debated recently (who come off very high on Peters) have said they expect 8-9 or 9-8 type season. If that's the expectation, then sure, Peters has done a very good job. I'd honestly be surprised if this team finished worse than that.

My goal for this season is higher. So I want to see a front office with a go-for-the-kill mentality that's building to win a Super Bowl, not just field a respectable playoff contender. If the goal is simply to be solid, I think this front office has done a fine job.

I also disagree with the argument made by someone on this page that Peters has been just as bad as Rivera, or even close to it. For starters, Peters has been significantly better in free agency. The trades are more of a mixed bag, and while his drafting hasn't been spectacular, I don't think it's been bad either. I'd call it solid.

I don't think Peters deserves the almost unquestioned reverence some fans give him, but I also don't think he's anywhere near a failure. IMO he's somewhere in the middle.

What gives me optimism is that I think he's getting better. Rivera always struck me as a genuinely good person, but there were plenty of times he seemed stubborn or out of touch when it came to personnel evaluation. Peters, on the other hand, comes across as sharp, self-aware, and willing to learn. That makes me believe his best work as a GM is still ahead of him.
 
I don't give a lot of weight to rankings. I just think there's just too many variables and too much bias. Sure, you will get a Myles Garrett or a Ja'Marr Chase, but teams usually get little love. Popular teams get too much love even when they're bad. It makes sense. Players and analysts spend more time watching those teams. More specifically, three is a yo yo effect you see. At the start of 2025, Jayden Daniels was ranked 21 in that top 100 list somewhere within the top fifteen players if we look at all the rankings together. Want to bet that he's no longer in that conversation as one of the super elite NFL players?
 
Jayden, Tunsil, and maybe Terry are the only players who consistently profile as Top 100-caliber talent. Beyond that, I don't think it's some bizarre coincidence that, no matter who's putting together the rankings—players voting on players, draft analysts, PFF, or any other outlet—Washington rarely has many names on those lists. Which actually puts them ironically in better shape than the past. Having three is high for this team. But I wonder if Terry is considered top 100 right now.

If Top 100 rankings don't resonate with you, look at All-Pro voting instead. It's the same story. Washington is usually near the bottom of the league when it comes to players recognized as elite.

I don't think the football world is missing somehow on hidden superstars on this team. It tells me this team, while improved, still has relatively few players who are widely viewed as elite. Could some guys develop into that? Absolutely. But today, it's mostly projection rather than proven production.
 
For us, since he's such a player of contention recently, let me use Bill as an example.

Bill had 800 yards in a pass first offense and especially in the first half of the season looked impressive. Now, by midseason, defenses had pretty much figured out the running game or at least stacked the box so no one was effective. I still go back to the Super Bowl. The MVP running back got a hell of a lot of 2 yard rushes against stacked boxes. More important to me, I bet if Bill was running with a Shanahan or a Bill Roman as playcaller than he would have gotten 2-400 more yards. The unimaginative running plays, the fact that we were constantly behind and desperate to score, the injuries, and many other factors contributed to Bill not shining as well as he might under other circumstances.

Then again, maybe we did see Bill at his best. We will find out. We will find out if a more run-friendly, run-varied system benefits him. We will see if other factors limited him. Hell, we'll see if he improved from his weaknesses as a rookie.

Ultimately, I think we saw a good player with potential to be better, but I also think circumstances did not allow him to shine as much as he could have on other teams.
 
Jayden, Tunsil, and maybe Terry are the only players who consistently profile as Top 100-caliber talent. Beyond that, I don't think it's some bizarre coincidence that, no matter who's putting together the rankings—players voting on players, draft analysts, PFF, or any other outlet—Washington rarely has many names on those lists. Which actually puts them ironically in better shape than the past. Having three is high for this team. But I wonder if Terry is considered top 100 right now.

If Top 100 rankings don't resonate with you, look at All-Pro voting instead. It's the same story. Washington is usually near the bottom of the league when it comes to players recognized as elite.

I don't think the football world is missing somehow on hidden superstars on this team. It tells me this team, while improved, still has relatively few players who are widely viewed as elite. Could some guys develop into that? Absolutely. But today, it's mostly projection rather than proven production.
Oh, I think great talent is overlooked on every team, every year. Maybe that's less true in this analytics-driven time we live in, but I think that there are players who never maximize their potential because of their situation and so we don't know if they are great. That could be because of play calling, talent surrounding them, or other factors. I do think players are over and undervalued routinely.
 
For us, since he's such a player of contention recently, let me use Bill as an example.

Bill had 800 yards in a pass first offense and especially in the first half of the season looked impressive. Now, by midseason, defenses had pretty much figured out the running game or at least stacked the box so no one was effective. I still go back to the Super Bowl. The MVP running back got a hell of a lot of 2 yard rushes against stacked boxes. More important to me, I bet if Bill was running with a Shanahan or a Bill Roman as playcaller than he would have gotten 2-400 more yards. The unimaginative running plays, the fact that we were constantly behind and desperate to score, the injuries, and many other factors contributed to Bill not shining as well as he might under other circumstances.

Then again, maybe we did see Bill at his best. We will find out. We will find out if a more run-friendly, run-varied system benefits him. We will see if other factors limited him. Hell, we'll see if he improved from his weaknesses as a rookie.

Ultimately, I think we saw a good player with potential to be better, but I also think circumstances did not allow him to shine as much as he could have on other teams.

Maybe. But that's another "if." It's like Giants fans hyping Skattebo as the next John Riggins lite. Could it happen? Sure. But we have to see it happen first. My point isn't that none of these guys can become elite. They absolutely can. The point is that so much of the optimism around this roster is based on projection. It's always, "What if Chig becomes the next George Kittle?" instead of, "We already have George Kittle." And I think that's part of what makes this team more of a wildcard-unpredictable. The best wishes could come true or maybe they don't or maybe its somewhere in the middle?

It's actually funny for me to be throwing cold water on the Croskey-Merritt hype because I was one of his biggest supporters before the draft. I watched every New Mexico game I could find, kept pounding the table for him throughout Day 3, and was thrilled when Washington picked him. I still think he's a terrific value for a seventh-round pick. But do I expect him to become a great player? No. Could he? Absolutely. We'll see, and I hope he proves me wrong.

I still like Croskey-Merritt and think he'll be a solid NFL back, but I'd be surprised if he develops into a superstar. He's already 25, which isn't especially young for a running back. He's limited in the passing game as both a route runner and pass protector, and ball security has been an issue. On top of that, I pay attention to Keim's hints. He keeps cautioning people not to assume Croskey-Merritt will win the No. 1 job, and Quinn has publicly said he wants to see more improvement from him. That suggests the coaching staff still believes he has work to do. I think he'll be a useful player. Elite? I'd be very surprised.

If I had to pick one under-the-radar player on this roster with true star upside, it'd be Styles. The athletic traits are freakish, and so are the intangibles. He'd be my bet.

If I had to name the players I think some fans and even parts of the local media are getting a little carried away with, it'd be Chig and Croskey-Merritt. Ironically, those are two guys I wanted before they got here. I think both will be good players. I just don't see either as future superstars. And I also think some people have underrated what Zach Ertz brought to this offense while he was here.

As for Rachaad White, he's another player I wanted before free agency, and I'm generally in line with the optimism around him. Where I disagree is when people compare his explosiveness to TreVeyon Henderson or a younger Austin Ekeler. I don't think he's quite at that level, but he's only a notch below it, and that's still a really valuable player. Keim has subtly hinted that White has a legitimate chance to win the No. 1 job, although it will probably end up as a committee. Maybe I am reading too much into it, though. That said, I think it's difficult to judge running backs this early in camp, so I'm expecting that narrative to evolve.

If I had to name three newcomers I'm probably higher on than most fans, it'd be Nick Cross, Chaisson, and Antonio Williams. Do I think any of them become superstars? No. But I do think all three have a chance to be productive, impactful players.
 
Oh, I think great talent is overlooked on every team, every year. Maybe that's less true in this analytics-driven time we live in, but I think that there are players who never maximize their potential because of their situation and so we don't know if they are great. That could be because of play calling, talent surrounding them, or other factors. I do think players are over and undervalued routinely.

My point isn't that elite talent can never be overlooked. It absolutely can. But when virtually every measure points in the same direction—players voting on the Top 100, All-Pro selections, analytics sites, national media rankings, film evaluators—Washington consistently ends up near the bottom in terms of recognized elite talent.

Maybe it's all just one giant anti-Washington bias. I don't buy that. To me, the more reasonable explanation is that this roster simply hasn't had many players who are widely viewed as elite. That's been true for years.

Even some of the biggest Washington supporters, like Logan, have acknowledged that reality from time to time. So I don't think I'm making some bold or profound observation here. It's a pretty mainstream assessment: this is a good, improving roster, but it still doesn't have many players who are universally regarded as among the NFL's elite.
 
Jayden, Tunsil, and maybe Terry are the only players who consistently profile as Top 100-caliber talent. Beyond that, I don't think it's some bizarre coincidence that, no matter who's putting together the rankings—players voting on players, draft analysts, PFF, or any other outlet—Washington rarely has many names on those lists. Which actually puts them ironically in better shape than the past. Having three is high for this team. But I wonder if Terry is considered top 100 right now.

If Top 100 rankings don't resonate with you, look at All-Pro voting instead. It's the same story. Washington is usually near the bottom of the league when it comes to players recognized as elite.

I don't think the football world is missing somehow on hidden superstars on this team. It tells me this team, while improved, still has relatively few players who are widely viewed as elite. Could some guys develop into that? Absolutely. But today, it's mostly projection rather than proven production.

In a 32-team league, the average team would have 3 players in the top 100. To your point, we often don’t even have that. You mention Terry, Jayden, and Tunsil; who regularly appear on the list but probably do not deserve it based on last year. Daron Payne, Frankie Luvu, and Bobby Wagner have also been on there before but fallen off. Some of our young guys probably will in the future, Sonny Styles being the best bet. So we do have a handful of blue chip players, which is all you can realistically expect, but obviously we would rather be one of the great teams like the Rams, Philly, Detroit, San Fran, Baltimore, and Seattle who have 5 or more; but even they don’t have all-pros at every position.

In general, you seem to have very high expectations, which is impressive considering everything we’ve seen in the past thirty years, but maybe a little unrealistic. I’m trying not to get my hopes up that high.
 
Last edited:
I thought Conerly was pretty bad last year... and despite the team trying to say he improved towards the end of the year. I didnt see much of that. Can he take a huge leap this year... sure, i am hoping he does. Is that likely though... i doubt it. The team will give him every opportunity to improve.. because if he gets beat out by Coleman its another black eye for Peters drafting. Other than JD, his drafting is nearing Riverra level incompetence.

If JD continues to get hurt, then AP will have been a total failure IMO. I wanted Maye over the brittle JD and I'll be done with AP if it turns out that Maye was the better choice.
 
In a 32-team league, the average team would have 3 players in the top 100. To your point, we often don’t even have that. You mention Terry, Jayden, and Tunsil; who regularly appear on the list but probably do not deserve it based on last year. Daron Payne, Frankie Luvu, and Bobby Wagner have also been on there before but fallen off. Some of our young guys probably will in the future, Sonny Styles being the best bet. So we do have a handful of blue chip players, which is all you can realistically expect, but obviously we would rather be one of the great teams like the Rams, Philly, Detroit, San Fran, Baltimore, and Seattle who have 5 or more; but even they don’t have all-pros at every position.

In general, you seem to have very high expectations, which is impressive considering everything we’ve seen in the past thirty years, but maybe a little unrealistic. I’m trying not to get my hopes up that high.

Expectations are about two things

A. Jayden Daniels

B. I do think the defense should be good, not great but good.
 
In a 32-team league, the average team would have 3 players in the top 100. To your point, we often don’t even have that. You mention Terry, Jayden, and Tunsil; who regularly appear on the list but probably do not deserve it based on last year. Daron Payne, Frankie Luvu, and Bobby Wagner have also been on there before but fallen off. Some of our young guys probably will in the future, Sonny Styles being the best bet. So we do have a handful of blue chip players, which is all you can realistically expect, but obviously we would rather be one of the great teams like the Rams, Philly, Detroit, San Fran, Baltimore, and Seattle who have 5 or more; but even they don’t have all-pros at every position.

In general, you seem to have very high expectations, which is impressive considering everything we’ve seen in the past thirty years, but maybe a little unrealistic. I’m trying not to get my hopes up that high.

There’s no reason to expect an even spread of elite players across the league, the whole idea is to develop an advantage because the best teams are disproportionately represented by having more elite players (of course rankings, tiers, and things like the top-100 are only broadly representative of that idea and not gospel, but the idea stands)
 
And in the vein of “the top-100 is a vanity project voted on by ignorant players who don’t watch their own league”, Bobby Wagner was voted #81 😂 😂 legacy admission

(It’s still good to want to have more universally acknowledged elite players than not just the average teams, but the good teams, via elite roster-building)
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 19, Members: 1, Guests: 18)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top