Dockery a Free Agent- Who replaces him?

[gibbs!we!trust!]

Should we go after Leonard Davis to sure up our O-line depth after we resign Dockery?

[joethefan]

Should we go after Leonard Davis to sure up our O-line depth after we resign Dockery?


not sure...Imma bit scared about that. Think about the shell shock mentality. He may not be coachable based on the poor oline play the cards had....ie Ramsay turned out to be nothing after leaving washington being shell shocked.

remember..."We knew who they were"....

But it depends on what kinda money he wants.....if he was released why was he released....if he ws productive why did they get rid of him...?

[csquared]

He isnt depth. He wants to be a starter and will be a starter somewhere.

[GolfFreak]

Yeah, I don't think this dude is at a point where he wasn't to be brought in for depth. He's a young talented linemen that will start somewhere.

[Red Bear]

But it depends on what kinda money he wants.....if he was released why was he released....if he ws productive why did they get rid of him...?

he is gonna want an extra million for every pound he is overweight

[LATrueRedskin]

WASHINGTON - The Washington Redskins are in danger of losing their top impending free agent, left guard Derrick Dockery, who will hit the open market next week unless he and the team can agree on a new contract.


"At this late stage, it doesn't look like a deal is going to get done," Dockery's agent, Todd France, told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

If Dockery leaves, it would continue a recent trend for the Redskins, who have been heavily criticized for letting their own players leave while overspending on new ones. They are still reeling from the decision last year not to re-sign safety Ryan Clark while pursuing Adam Archuleta, who wound up on the bench for much of the season despite signing the richest contract ever for his position.

Dockery, a fourth-year player from Texas, has started 61 straight games and would generate significant demand as a free agent. He was part of a line that allowed only 19 sacks last season while helping the team rank fourth in yards rushing - one of the few bright spots in a 5-11 season.

France said negotiations are ongoing, so there is still a chance of an agreement. Free agency begins March 2.

"We've been in constant communication. They have an interest in Derrick, but it's got to make sense for both parties," France said. "And right now it looks like we're going to be testing the market."

Dockery's salary in 2006 was $1.57 million.

Redskins vice president for football operations Vinny Cerrato declined to comment.

http://www.examiner.com/a-577825~With_no_sign_of_deal__Redskins_G_Dockery_se t_to_become_free_agent.html

[akhhorus]

Good. As. Gone. Especially with some really stupid GMs with too much money to spend. He's worth 20-25 million over 5-6 years. I wouldn't be shocked if he gets near 40 mil.

[redskin_rich]

Guess we'll be going after Steinbach...

[Cowboys Suck]

I know at the end of the day players have to look out for themsleves, but whatever happened to team loyalty and the foresight of the FO to prevent scenarios like this from happening? Vinny must have some pretty scandalous dirt on Danny........

[Fathead]

Dock knows the market is going to pay him a ton, the Skins know what he's worth.

[Dept_of_Defense]

Oh God please make it stop. Here we go again. Signing Dockery is a must......and that's the bottom line.

[Fathead]

Oh God please make it stop. Here we go again. Signing Dockery is a must......and that's the bottom line.



At what price? If dock is asking for 40 mil, is he still a "must" sign?

[whistleandthumb]

No one should be surprised if our offense suffers next year because this team couldn't figure out a way to keep Dock... including any players who didn't restructure to keep him here.

Though, I know Samuels restructured, and I think other players did as well, so there's no reason the team shouldn't be doing EVERYTHING in its power to keep Dock.

[akhhorus]

No one should be surprised if our offense suffers next year because this team couldn't figure out a way to keep Dock... including any players who didn't restructure to keep him here.

Though, I know Samuels restructured, and I think other players did as well, so there's no reason the team shouldn't be doing EVERYTHING in its power to keep Dock.

I think the offense will suffer if we don't replace him in FA or the draft adequately, but I don't think he's the keystone to our offense or offensive line. If we can snag Steinbach or hit on a draftee, then I think we'll be fine.

[WinnpegSkinsFan]

I'm saddened but not suprised. I would pay Dockery a contract what he is worth but if he is wanting $40M, that is too much. AKH is right - this FA market will mean there will be a at least a few players being massively overpaid.

However, I'm still irked by our current cap situation. the article does have some truth - we seem to overpay for other team's players and not keep our own.

[bigcmr]

Re signing Dock is a must. I dont know what hes asking. But the O-line was run blocking great the last 6 week of last season. I would hate to see that get broken up. I sure hope a deal is reached soon.

[shally]

Good. As. Gone. Especially with some really stupid GMs with too much money to spend. He's worth 20-25 million over 5-6 years. I wouldn't be shocked if he gets near 40 mil.

i am with you.. let sanity prevail.. he is no better than the 4th best lineman on the o line. let him walk and dial up dielman or steinbach.. the line will be just fine next year..

the only thing that burns me is that we do not have ndukwe to plug into his spot.. we let one get away

[shally]

Re signing Dock is a must. I dont know what hes asking. But the O-line was run blocking great the last 6 week of last season. I would hate to see that get broken up. I sure hope a deal is reached soon.

relax.. he was in danger of being benched for bone headed penalties not that long ago.. an all pro he aint..

[BurgundyNGold]

Duck.

Duck.

Duck.

Duck.

Duck.

.

.

.

If anybody seriously expecting to see "Goose" from this FO?

[greatest2]

NO NO NO

man this sucks if it is true. Hopefully Jansen, Chris and other OL guys are talking to him, and try to get him to take a lower price and stay here, then what he would get in FA.

i hate that our FO doesn't try to resign people until they have 1 year left, or free agency is around the corner. Where is the foresight that has been aforementioned.
i guess i can understand with betts, who we were waiting to see what hes got, and he was always hurt. But we knew what Dock was, and that we wanted to keep him here, and that he is young. I don't understand, but i sure hope he stays, i think our OL and moral will suffer the whole year if he isn't resigned

[whitskins]

It's not the end of the world if they lose him, but I want him to return.


If he goes though, I just hope they have a backup plan. And a good one.

[shally]

It's not the end of the world if they lose him, but I want him to return.


If he goes though, I just hope they have a backup plan. And a good one.

dont sweat it... it's called Redskin 1...

[hogs86]

Just a sick feeling.He will sign with the Giants.:cry:

[shally]

Just a sick feeling.He will sign with the Giants.:cry:
if he does, we know to go after him on pass plays and know that eli will never be able to use a hard count.. what ? they need to replace luke petitgout ( iguess they do).. and how well did lavar work out for them ?

[LadyNRedskinsfan]

It's not the end of the world if they lose him, but I want him to return.


If he goes though, I just hope they have a backup plan. And a good one.
same here. i want him back because the OL went on a tear towards the latter part of the season, but if he has to go and someone overpays him, so be it. we just better get another good guard who can fit right into the line next to chris and casey.

[VegasSkinsFan]

I want Dock back, but not at any price. What about Wade....does he play both guard and tackle?

[joethefan]

I have confidence in the FO that they already have a plan....and one that will work...I believe in Gibbs...i;m starting the new fiscal year with a new mentality...if they won't sign dock...there is a reason...if he wants too much then let him go...we just better have a good replacement......I think we will

[Santheb]

This really sucks. The Skins have watched Dock grow into a real good player, and won't up the ante when it comes to resigning him. I'm just repeating what others are saying, but this is really annoying, and it kind of worries me for the future. What about Cooley and ST? Are we going to do the same thing?

[daEz0r]

this sucks.

[joethefan]

I want Dock back, but not at any price. What about Wade....does he play both guard and tackle?

that may be the reason why we're letting him go as well....

[LadyNRedskinsfan]

remember there is no guarantee that he is leaving. once he hits the FA market and sees what the league thinks hes worth, the skins could base a proposal off of that.

[greatest2]

This really sucks. The Skins have watched Dock grow into a real good player, and won't up the ante when it comes to resigning him. I'm just repeating what others are saying, but this is really annoying, and it kind of worries me for the future. What about Cooley and ST? Are we going to do the same thing?

great point, that would be horriable. I would HOPE that we resign them before the final year of there contract comes up, but seeing how Dock has gone, makes you think right?

what about campbell? rogers if he turns the corner? the DL or whatever we draft this year? rocky?

[joethefan]

This really sucks. The Skins have watched Dock grow into a real good player, and won't up the ante when it comes to resigning him. I'm just repeating what others are saying, but this is really annoying, and it kind of worries me for the future. What about Cooley and ST? Are we going to do the same thing?

You can best believe that they are not that stupid.....IMO cooley and Taylor mean more to the team than Dock does IMO..they will resign both....Taylor just has to have a better year ...but i think he's good till at least 2010 and cooley till 09...I think....

[skinsfan36]

he is our 5th best olineman and i like continuity but it sounds like he wants a million dollars for every false start he has like 30 million. maybe samuels and thomas will talk to him and tell him to stay. i would guess we would try to plug in pucillo if we resign him and dock walks as one of the backup plans. but i mean less money to be on a promising offensive team or more money to go to arizona or oakland,who will suck again.

[shally]

I want Dock back, but not at any price. What about Wade....does he play both guard and tackle?
see canfora's article posted here.

wade wants to play right tackle.. that is where the money is for him. probalem is we are committed to jansen there.. he wont move inside unless he gets no offers to start at tackle.. it is that simple.

[shally]

he is our 5th best olineman and i like continuity but it sounds like he wants a million dollars for every false start he has like 30 million. maybe samuels and thomas will talk to him and tell him to stay. i would guess we would try to plug in pucillo if we resign him and dock walks as one of the backup plans. but i mean less money to be on a promising offensive team or more money to go to arizona or oakland,who will suck again.

he will take the money and run.. and you are correct, that he is the 4th or 5th best lineman on the o line and should be paid as such..

not sure that pucillo has the chops to start, but the front office does seem to like him. who knows, bostic grew into a fine player and maybe pucillo can as well

[BIGSEF3]

uhhhh am i the only one that takes this article with a grain of salt? the only person quoted in the article is docks agent. and of course no agent EVER went to the media and said the team wasnt making a fair offer and his client was going to become a free agent. thats UNHEARD of....

lets not get ahead of ourselves here. theres plenty of time left and this is all just a negotiating tactic. dock will probably test the market, but why wouldnt he? most players in his situation would want to find out what theyre worth. he has no bad blood with ths team and im sure he'll allow the skins to make a counter offer before doing anything. this is all very ordinary and im not any more concerned after reading this article than i was before. in fact, its a good sign to know the communication lines are open.

[Skaggsrules]

get him back here....He might not but worth what he wants, but Pierce wasn't either, and he's done well....Clark wasn't either and look what happened, get him back here, he'll get big bonuses here

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Okay, stop with the Steinbach talk please. He is going to command more money than Dock is in FA. If you're not paying Dock, why pay Steinbach? That makes no sense.

I agree Dock is replaceable, but the perception of not taking care of your own players obviously is not going to go away based on this move. I don't know if you have noticed, because clearly our FO has not, the trend in the NFL is to keep your own young players. That strategy turns out to be cheaper in the long run, because when you lock up a guy like Dock to a 5 year deal even if you have to pay him a little more than you want to, two years from now, he will be playing at a below market contract as compared to the FA guards of that year.

I completely believe this article. It is February 22. If he doesn't sign by before March 2, kiss him good bye. Someone will give him a good amount of money in FA. Many teams have an unprecedented amount of cap room this year.

I get this move may be necessary because of our past sins and the amount of holes we have to fix on D, but it sucks nonetheless.

[X-Factor13]

this makes me really sad. as a fan of the redskins the offseason is always an exciting time, but if we can't keep the players who I root for it takes away all the excitement!

[shally]

uhhhh am i the only one that takes this article with a grain of salt? the only person quoted in the article is docks agent. and of course no agent EVER went to the media and said the team wasnt making a fair offer and his client was going to become a free agent. thats UNHEARD of....

lets not get ahead of ourselves here. theres plenty of time left and this is all just a negotiating tactic. dock will probably test the market, but why wouldnt he? most players in his situation would want to find out what theyre worth. he has no bad blood with ths team and im sure he'll allow the skins to make a counter offer before doing anything. this is all very ordinary and im not any more concerned after reading this article than i was before. in fact, its a good sign to know the communication lines are open.

if he tests the market he WILL be gone.. can you think of any redskin free agent who signed after testing the market ?

it is one thing to say he can be replaced. he can.. it is another to say he will re sign after testing the market.. he won't

[X-Factor13]

uhhhh am i the only one that takes this article with a grain of salt? the only person quoted in the article is docks agent. and of course no agent EVER went to the media and said the team wasnt making a fair offer and his client was going to become a free agent. thats UNHEARD of....

lets not get ahead of ourselves here. theres plenty of time left and this is all just a negotiating tactic. dock will probably test the market, but why wouldnt he? most players in his situation would want to find out what theyre worth. he has no bad blood with ths team and im sure he'll allow the skins to make a counter offer before doing anything. this is all very ordinary and im not any more concerned after reading this article than i was before. in fact, its a good sign to know the communication lines are open.



That's true. But the thing to worry about here is that the cap is so high that teams can afford to overbid for him. What about teams like the cards and the browns, who are in desperate need of players like dock? Can we afford to outbid them?

[shally]

this makes me really sad. as a fan of the redskins the offseason is always an exciting time, but if we can't keep the players who I root for it takes away all the excitement!

other teams cannot keep some of theirs. look how many players the pats have allowed to walk ?

it is a fact of life in the era of free agency and the cap

[shally]

That's true. But the thing to worry about here is that the cap is so high that teams can afford to overbid for him. What about teams like the cards and the browns, who are in desperate need of players like dock? Can we afford to outbid them?

we should not, and will not get into a bidding war with anyone for dock's services.. he is the 4th best lineman on the o line. he can be replaced


and since when are teams like zona and the browns teams to model after ?

[BIGSEF3]

if he tests the market he WILL be gone.. can you think of any redskin free agent who signed after testing the market ?

it is one thing to say he can be replaced. he can.. it is another to say he will re sign after testing the market.. he won't
and every redskin free agent gave our team an opportunity to keep them by ofering someething comparable. if i remember, we lost smoot and pierce for differences of less than 2 million garauneed. we let clark go and then gave archuletta 3 times what we could have paid clark. we lost those players because joe gibbs and vinny are sorry ''GMs.'' i am confident they have learned from their mistakes.

as to dock getting an outrageous offer, dont count on it. we say hes one of our worst starting lineman and think hes goinmg to be offerd 40 million? thats ludicrous. he wont get offered more than 32. well offer 30 and hell stay.

also you forget that som teams may have alot of cap room but those same teams are ''cheap.'' teams like the browns and vikings are small market teams and will never come close to using all their ap room because they cant afford to. even the patriots will have tons of cap space but theyll let superstars walk because they draft so well. the skins will be able to match any offer dock receives. if they dont its because they want to sign some less talented player from another team to a bigger contract but we will NOT be ''outbid'' by anyone.

[whistleandthumb]

I think the offense will suffer if we don't replace him in FA or the draft adequately, but I don't think he's the keystone to our offense or offensive line. If we can snag Steinbach or hit on a draftee, then I think we'll be fine.
Sounds a lot like what I heard people say about letting Ryan Clark and Antonio Pierce go. And how'd that work out for us?

You keep your core guys. That's the rule for success in the NFL.

[whistleandthumb]

dont sweat it... it's called Redskin 1...
Is this the same Redskin 1 that picked up Adam Archuleta and Brandon Lloyd last year?

Or maybe it was the same one that picked up Jeremiah Trotter and Deion Sanders?

[Fathead]

Sounds a lot like what I heard people say about letting Ryan Clark and Antonio Pierce go. And how'd that work out for us?

You keep your core guys. That's the rule for success in the NFL.



You don't keep your "core" guys when they are at best the 4th best offensive lineman and they demand a contract bigger than they are worth.

[lakeskin]

My guess is the Skins want to spend all the money this offseason on upgrading their defense. I think they feel that they can draft or plug in Dock's replacement from the current roster. They will not be spending a significant amount of money at that position.

Its like after they let Lavar go you figured they would go balls out to sign his replacement; but they used the freed up money to address other areas of need. And used the draft and the dilapidated Warrick Holdman as his replacement. I think they'll use a similar tactic here. After all, they have one of the greatest offensive line coaches in histroy. So, those of you expecting Steinbach dont hold your collective breaths. We'll most liekly trade a high pick from next year's draft to move up into the second round or hopefully we can parlay the sixth pick into multiple picks(highly unlikely).

[The Game]

hmmmmm? Can he play LG??

[betterczechyourself]

This isn't looking good. If Dock hits free agency, someone in dire need of OL help will pry him away from us. we need to keep our line together, especially with dockery still being young. i hope this isn't another case of the skins letting good players walk and bringing in players that can't compare. Dockery may not be elite, but he is a good player. We don't have anyone that can step in and replace him at all. Pucillo might have been a nice find for a backup but he is small and not suited to starting duty. do we really want to let our most powerful run blocker go in favor of a guy that, in a pinch, can play blocking TE? we'd better get on this... the clock is ticking.

[shally]

This isn't looking good. If Dock hits free agency, someone in dire need of OL help will pry him away from us. we need to keep our line together, especially with dockery still being young. i hope this isn't another case of the skins letting good players walk and bringing in players that can't compare. Dockery may not be elite, but he is a good player. We don't have anyone that can step in and replace him at all. Pucillo might have been a nice find for a backup but he is small and not suited to starting duty. do we really want to let our most powerful run blocker go in favor of a guy that, in a pinch, can play blocking TE? we'd better get on this... the clock is ticking.

re read your own post.. what you say about dock is true.. he is NOT elite and his main value is in keeping continuity of the o line.

that simply does not justify grossly over paying for him.. we have had enough players that we overpayed for not work out.. let someone else play the fool.

smoot ? overpayed. might be ours again for a song
clark ? overpayed.. not even likely to start for pitts next year
royal ? overpayed. not exactly doing much for buff
lavar ? overpayed. might be out of football next year

other than pierce who have we passed on that lit things up elsewhere ?

i agree in principle that we should keep our team together. not at blowing it on our 4th best lineman..

[betterczechyourself]

re read your own post.. what you say about dock is true.. he is NOT elite and his main value is in keeping continuity of the o line.

that simply does not justify grossly over paying for him.. we have had enough players that we overpayed for not work out.. let someone else play the fool.

smoot ? overpayed. might be ours again for a song
clark ? overpayed.. not even likely to start for pitts next year
royal ? overpayed. not exactly doing much for buff
lavar ? overpayed. might be out of football next year

other than pierce who have we passed on that lit things up elsewhere ?

i agree in principle that we should keep our team together. not at blowing it on our 4th best lineman..

I realize that he is not elite. I said so myself. That being said, his value is high because he is entering his prime. I agree about smoot, royal, and lavar. and, in retrospect, maybe even clark, but Dock isn't going command elite money yet, unless he hits FA and desperate teams throw money at him. we re-signed betts to a reasonable deal. who's to say that we couldn't do the same with Dock? when pierce was approaching FA, we could've had him for less than after he hit FA and the asking price went up. maybe dock isn't as valuable to the team as pierce was, but why play russian roulette with arguably our strongest unit, our OL, and just hope that something will come along. I want to make this very clear i am NOT saying we should grossly overpay for him, but, if you could go back and "grossly overpay" Pierce, wouldn't you? At least we'd be "overpaying" one of our own and sending a good message to our locker room. I don't buy the "let our players walk" mentality. It didn't do much for us in the late 90's when the eagles were pilfering our underappreciated players and perennially making the playoffs with them. It didn't do much for us when the giants signed pierce and gained knowledge of our entire defensive playbook and philosophy. Besides, what seems like overpaying now might seem like a bargain with pucillo penciled in as the starter. There are times to let players walk and there are times to re-sign them. Dockery is not lavar, he's not some malcontent who bad mouths the team and can't stay healthy. He is a solid player who doesn't demand alot of attention for his work. God forbid we should reward a player for consistency. If we had the depth to let him walk, things might be different. but for a team painfully short on depth, letting a player like dock walk seems like a mistake.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

1)If he walks (and I think it's very probable at this point), it's gonna be very very interesting to see how much we sign his replacement for.
2)This is why it's a very bad idea to trade away the vast majority of our draft picks.

[betterczechyourself]

1)If he walks (and I think it's very probable at this point), it's gonna be very very interesting to see how much we sign his replacement for.
2)This is why it's a very bad idea to trade away the vast majority of our draft picks.

agreed.

[akhhorus]

Sounds a lot like what I heard people say about letting Ryan Clark and Antonio Pierce go. And how'd that work out for us?

You keep your core guys. That's the rule for success in the NFL.

We were fine in 05 without Pierce because Marshall was as good as Pierce was(then fell apart in 06) and Clark's absence wasn't to blame for Rogers' regression, Springs' fraility and Kenny Wright's redefinition of the term "I suck". That was the real problem with the secondary in 06.

As for Core guys, the 4th or 5th best OLman isn't a core guy and isn't worth paying 2 bucks on the dollar for.

[warpaint]

is there still a transition tag we could place on him where as we could match the offer he receives ?? also since he was drafted in the second round if he signs with another team would we receive a late round draft pick for him.

[redwolf1218]

"I love being a Redskin," said Dockery, the top prospective free agent guard after Cincinnati's Eric Steinbach. "I want to be here. I'm going to tell my agent to do what we have to do for that to happen."

anyone remember that quote?

http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20061228-121826-8233r.htm

[TerpSkins]

re read your own post.. what you say about dock is true.. he is NOT elite and his main value is in keeping continuity of the o line.

that simply does not justify grossly over paying for him.. we have had enough players that we overpayed for not work out.. let someone else play the fool.

smoot ? overpayed. might be ours again for a song
clark ? overpayed.. not even likely to start for pitts next year
royal ? overpayed. not exactly doing much for buff
lavar ? overpayed. might be out of football next year

other than pierce who have we passed on that lit things up elsewhere ?

i agree in principle that we should keep our team together. not at blowing it on our 4th best lineman..


So quick to forget the ominous ghost of Walt Harris.:banghead: Lol, although I agree Dock isn't worth nearly 40 mill, if we don't lock him up...he's gone.

[CNYSkinFan]

Once again this front office refuses to learn from it's own mistakes. Pierce, Smoot, Dockery....ONce we let a player play out his entire contract they are going to test free agency and we do not have the cap room to play at that level.

I would not be surprised that if we do not extend Cooley THIS off season that we lose him as well.

[hail2skins]

re read your own post.. what you say about dock is true.. he is NOT elite and his main value is in keeping continuity of the o line.

that simply does not justify grossly over paying for him.. we have had enough players that we overpayed for not work out.. let someone else play the fool.

smoot ? overpayed. might be ours again for a song
clark ? overpayed.. not even likely to start for pitts next year
royal ? overpayed. not exactly doing much for buff
lavar ? overpayed. might be out of football next year

other than pierce who have we passed on that lit things up elsewhere ?

i agree in principle that we should keep our team together. not at blowing it on our 4th best lineman..A lot folks wish Ryan was still here instead of Arch. A lot of the people we overpay are from other teams. We have all been screaming for continuity on this team and sometimes it cost you. The line has played together for awhile and know each other. Now you're going to bring someone else in for them to get used to. Also, this person has to learn the system. Just about all of the linemen came out in support of keeping Dock around because they believe they can do something special. What happens here will go a long way with them and to upcoming free agents like Cooley and Taylor.

[smoak]

No one should be surprised if our offense suffers next year because this team couldn't figure out a way to keep Dock... including any players who didn't restructure to keep him here.

Though, I know Samuels restructured, and I think other players did as well, so there's no reason the team shouldn't be doing EVERYTHING in its power to keep Dock.

I'm fully in this camp. Obviously I don't want to overpay for Dock, but we need to keep continuity on the O-Line. This is horrible news, but not unexpected... The team should have locked him up to a deal two years ago like the Iggles do with their young players.

[CNYSkinFan]

I'm fully in this camp. Obviously I don't want to overpay for Dock, but we need to keep continuity on the O-Line. This is horrible news, but not unexpected... The team should have locked him up to a deal two years ago like the Iggles do with their young players.
Could not agree more, when DFock voided the last year of his dealm to test Free agency last year we had an opportunity to extend him then but we decided to only offer a one year tender. It was a mistake not to do what they could do to extend him.

Maybe Dock wants the world and there is no negotiating, but after seeing some tf the big contracts to bad players DC gives out I can't blame him for wanting to maximize his potential earnings.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

1)If he walks (and I think it's very probable at this point), it's gonna be very very interesting to see how much we sign his replacement for.
2)This is why it's a very bad idea to trade away the vast majority of our draft picks.
It will also be interesting to see what Dock gets. If he wants $40M as has been reported and then signs for something more, then we could have had him for below market. We'll see how this gamble pays off.

[redskin_rich]

Could not agree more, when DFock voided the last year of his dealm to test Free agency last year we had an opportunity to extend him then but we decided to only offer a one year tender. It was a mistake not to do what they could do to extend him.

Maybe Dock wants the world and there is no negotiating, but after seeing some tf the big contracts to bad players DC gives out I can't blame him for wanting to maximize his potential earnings.
Last year, most of us, you included, agreed that Dock hadn't proved he was worthy of an extension at the time.

[BurgundyNGold]

"I love being a Redskin," said Dockery, the top prospective free agent guard after Cincinnati's Eric Steinbach. "I want to be here. I'm going to tell my agent to do what we have to do for that to happen."

anyone remember that quote?

http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20061228-121826-8233r.htm
Yeah, I remember it. It's called "Smoot's Song". That was the day I knew he was as good as gone.

[hail2skins]

"I love being a Redskin," said Dockery, the top prospective free agent guard after Cincinnati's Eric Steinbach. "I want to be here. I'm going to tell my agent to do what we have to do for that to happen."

anyone remember that quote?

http://www.washtimes.com/sports/20061228-121826-8233r.htm

and how many times have you seen or heard "he is a core Redskin" but yet the player is gone.

[CNYSkinFan]

Last year, most of us, you included, agreed that Dock hadn't proved he was worthy of an extension at the time.
I dont believe I ever said he was not worthy of an extension, just not a big payday contract. After Dock tested FA and got no real offers the FO should have swooped in and got an extension done, they didn't.

I have never been a big fan of Dock I will admit. I do think he is adequate though. I hat seeing what nfew young guys we draft go other places though.

[smoak]

Last year, most of us, you included, agreed that Dock hadn't proved he was worthy of an extension at the time.

Yeah, but I think that is when you can get players on the cheap. I remember the Iggles locked up Darwin Walker at one point to a seven year deal that never paid him diddly.

Dock didn't deserve $40MM two years ago, but my guess is we could have gotten him a heck of a lot cheaper then. All that said, I am going to hope for the best until I hear he signs elsewhere.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Yeah, but I think that is when you can get players on the cheap. I remember the Iggles locked up Darwin Walker at one point to a seven year deal that never paid him diddly.

Dock didn't deserve $40MM two years ago, but my guess is we could have gotten him a heck of a lot cheaper then. All that said, I am going to hope for the best until I hear he signs elsewhere.
This is undeniably a great strategy to lock up young players before they get to the final year of the deal. The problem is we do so much massaging of the cap, there is no way we could afford to do that. Our system favors plugging in new parts rather than continuity and favors stars over depth.

We're like the dutch kid sticking our finger in the dam. Every time we plug up a hole a new one opens.

[CNYSkinFan]

This is undeniably a great strategy to lock up young players before they get to the final year of the deal. The problem is we do so much massaging of the cap, there is no way we could afford to do that. Our system favors plugging in new parts rather than continuity and favors stars over depth.

We're like the dutch kid sticking our finger in the dam. Every time we plug up a hole a new one opens.
Its actually a little more complicated.

Our free agent deals are actually back weighted so heavily it is actually impossible to keep a player (like Springs for example) when they reach the last few years of their contract without restructuring. It actually forces the redskins to make choices early on.

Because of the cap hits those choices result in it almost makes it impossible, or not likely, to extend rookie contracts or renegotiate them. Many other teams sign a draft pick to a small rookie contract and when they prove to be a starter renegotiate down the line. We do the fisrst part without doing the latter hoping we can get the guy to take a hometown deal to stay.

Problem is when you are not winning few players can justify taking that hometown deal, espescially when they see free agents coming in getting the world. This year is even worse because SO many teams are so far under the inflated cap that it could be a big year for so many guys.

[redskin_rich]

I dont believe I ever said he was not worthy of an extension, just not a big payday contract. After Dock tested FA and got no real offers the FO should have swooped in and got an extension done, they didn't.

I have never been a big fan of Dock I will admit. I do think he is adequate though. I hat seeing what nfew young guys we draft go other places though.
We tendered Dock, so he really never did test the free agent waters. We all knew no one was willing to give up a 3rd rounder for him last year. We are the only team that does things like that.
Last year was a show us what you got year for Dock and I don't think he has proved himself worth big money any more than he had before. It's nice to keep your own homegrown talent but at what price? You made a comment about this having a bearing on Cooley and Taylor in the future and I think that is ridiculous. Cooley and Taylor have both proved the ability to be among the top5 in the league at their positions, so every effort should be made to keep them. Dock is nowhere close to that.

[BIGSEF3]

I dont see why everyone is so opposed to overpaying for dock, especially if we backload the contract. we are the washington redskins. we are going to overpay for SOMEBODY, so it might as well be one of our own. I'd much rather overpay for dock than Nate Clements or Partick Kerney or some overage middle linebacker looking for his final payday.

[BurgundyNGold]

Yeah, but I think that is when you can get players on the cheap. I remember the Iggles locked up Darwin Walker at one point to a seven year deal that never paid him diddly.

Dock didn't deserve $40MM two years ago, but my guess is we could have gotten him a heck of a lot cheaper then. All that said, I am going to hope for the best until I hear he signs elsewhere.
Exactly. I hate to keep playing the same tune, but Danny and Vinny do not know football well enough combined to be an effective GM. I hope we resign Doc but if we don't, I wouldn't be surprised. The current FO structure always claims to have a plan but they never actually seem to plan beyond next season, personnel-wise. And when has any of their "plans" actually paid dividends in the end? The proof of the pudding is in the eating and after another sub .500 season, I don't have much of an appetite.

[/rant]

[SpicyMcHaggis]

I dont see why everyone is so opposed to overpaying for dock, especially if we backload the contract. we are the washington redskins. we are going to overpay for SOMEBODY, so it might as well be one of our own. I'd much rather overpay for dock than Nate Clements or Partick Kerney or some overage middle linebacker looking for his final payday.
Dock is nowhere near the player that Clements is..

[BurgundyNGold]

Dock is nowhere near the player that Clements is..
And OGs are easier to find than CBs.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Its actually a little more complicated.

Our free agent deals are actually back weighted so heavily it is actually impossible to keep a player (like Springs for example) when they reach the last few years of their contract without restructuring. It actually forces the redskins to make choices early on.

Because of the cap hits those choices result in it almost makes it impossible, or not likely, to extend rookie contracts or renegotiate them. Many other teams sign a draft pick to a small rookie contract and when they prove to be a starter renegotiate down the line. We do the fisrst part without doing the latter hoping we can get the guy to take a hometown deal to stay.

Problem is when you are not winning few players can justify taking that hometown deal, espescially when they see free agents coming in getting the world. This year is even worse because SO many teams are so far under the inflated cap that it could be a big year for so many guys.
I disagree on a few points.

We are foced to make choices early on to restructure or cut a player. But those are usually the FA that have signed big deals.

The guys who we draft that have worked out, Cooley, Dock, Taylor, etc., we could sign (I know I'm preaching to the choir here as I have read your earlier posts) before they even come close to FA. Your not signing these players to a "hometown discount", you're actually signing them to a market deal at the time, which ultimately becomes a below market deal over the course of the contact because the player gets better increasing his value and the market in general increases. In order to do this, you need two things. First, you have to trust that the guys you drafted are the players you thought they were when you drafted them (requires good scouting and a little faith - not our strong suite), and second you need cap room to sign extensions. We never have cap room. We are always against the cap while teams like Phil. always seem to have cap room.

Because of that we never have cap room for adequate depth or the ability to lock up young players years before they hit the open market, and that IMO is how you build a franchise.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Exactly. I hate to keep playing the same tune, but Danny and Vinny do not know football well enough combined to be an effective GM. I hope we resign Doc but if we don't, I wouldn't be surprised. The current FO structure always claims to have a plan but they never actually seem to plan beyond next season, personnel-wise. And when has any of their "plans" actually paid dividends in the end? The proof of the pudding is in the eating and after another sub .500 season, I don't have much of an appetite.

[/rant]
This is a very good point. Frankly I have trouble understanding what kind of long-term plan we have in place personnel-wise, except for a couple of spots on the roster (Campbell for example).

[SpicyMcHaggis]

And OGs are easier to find than CBs.
Yeah..

[BurgundyNGold]

We tendered Dock, so he really never did test the free agent waters. We all knew no one was willing to give up a 3rd rounder for him last year. We are the only team that does things like that.
Last year was a show us what you got year for Dock and I don't think he has proved himself worth big money any more than he had before. It's nice to keep your own homegrown talent but at what price? You made a comment about this having a bearing on Cooley and Taylor in the future and I think that is ridiculous. Cooley and Taylor have both proved the ability to be among the top5 in the league at their positions, so every effort should be made to keep them. Dock is nowhere close to that.
And neither is Betts but that didn't stop us from resigning him early. And they resign Jansen when he might well be on the downside of his career? There just does not seem to be much logic to what's happening. I'm also very concerned that this pattern of letting homegrown talent walk is going to find it's way to Cooley and Taylor because they only see the dollars and cents for the local guys and the grass is always greener on the other side, so to speak.

Dock's contract offer could be worht $60M, but that doesn't mean it's guaranteed. Just give Dock a nice guaranteed bonus that lets you cut him or trade him after 2 or 3 years -- just like we do all of the other FA's we sign that have NOT been in our locker room for 4 years. How hard is that?

[redskin_rich]

And neither is Betts but that didn't stop us from resigning him early. And they resign Jansen when he might well be on the downside of his career? There just does not seem to be much logic to what's happening. I'm also very concerned that this pattern of letting homegrown talent walk is going to find it's way to Cooley and Taylor because they only see the dollars and cents for the local guys and the grass is always greener on the other side, so to speak.

Dock's contract offer could be worht $60M, but that doesn't mean it's guaranteed. Just give Dock a nice guaranteed bonus that lets you cut him or trade him after 2 or 3 years -- just like we do all of the other FA's we sign that have NOT been in our locker room for 4 years. How hard is that?
Betts was relatively cheap and his bonus is already off the books, as I believe it was counted on last year's cap.
Jansen's deal was a good faith gesture for playing ball with them last year. Evidently, Jansen risked some money he had coming to help the Skins last year and now they have rewarded him for doing so. Both Jansen (twice) and Betts have signed extensions during the season and foregone testing the free agent waters. Dock has done nothing of the sort, so he should not be compared to them in any way.

[smoak]

Exactly. I hate to keep playing the same tune, but Danny and Vinny do not know football well enough combined to be an effective GM. I hope we resign Doc but if we don't, I wouldn't be surprised. The current FO structure always claims to have a plan but they never actually seem to plan beyond next season, personnel-wise. And when has any of their "plans" actually paid dividends in the end? The proof of the pudding is in the eating and after another sub .500 season, I don't have much of an appetite.

[/rant]

To be fair, you blame the front office for everything from the spread of bird flu and the failure in Iraq. While I wish the stratgey had been to take care of this some time ago, but I do not see Dock as blameless in this failure. For two years he has been doing everything he can to become a FA from what I can tell... All the while singing the praises of being a Redskins and saying how great it is here. :rolleyes: I'd have a lot more respect for these players if they were more honest and just said "I want to be a free agent and get paid".

[BIGSEF3]

Dock is nowhere near the player that Clements is..

i agree. but dock is excellent at what he does and the rest of our line wants to keep him.

my problem with clements is his asking price. we could sign dock to whatever he wants and get the 2nd best corner available on the market for less than what it would cost to get clements. letting dock go, so that we have room to make clements the highest paid corner in nfl history is not worth it, but thats exactly what our triad "GM" would do. the grass is always greener to them.

[BIGSEF3]

To be fair, you blame the front office for everything from the spread of bird flu and the failure in Iraq. While I wish the stratgey had been to take care of this some time ago, but I do not see Dock as blameless in this failure. For two years he has been doing everything he can to become a FA from what I can tell... All the while singing the praises of being a Redskins and saying how great it is here. :rolleyes: I'd have a lot more respect for these players if they were more honest and just said "I want to be a free agent and get paid".

so what if thats docks attitude? every FA have brought here probably did the same thing with their old teams. most players will do that, especially given the skyrocketing salary cap. im sure docks preference is to remain a skin. but there is no loyalty with teams towards players, so why should players have any loyalty to a team? if the deals are comparable, most players would stay with their old teams. but the deals have to be comparable. if the deals arent, then dock is only doing what anyone else would do in his situation.

[JsMaViSd]

Todd Wade for Left Guard Position :flower1:

[CNYSkinFan]

To be fair, you blame the front office for everything from the spread of bird flu and the failure in Iraq. While I wish the stratgey had been to take care of this some time ago, but I do not see Dock as blameless in this failure. For two years he has been doing everything he can to become a FA from what I can tell... All the while singing the praises of being a Redskins and saying how great it is here. :rolleyes: I'd have a lot more respect for these players if they were more honest and just said "I want to be a free agent and get paid".
That is a fair point....and if the Dock thing happened in a bubble then perhaps it would be the commanding point in the argument. However with Pierce, Smoot, Clark, Dock the pattern seems to be the same. The FO has not done enough to keep the player and/or decided to get other players that were not as good to replace them.

I am still hopeful we match whatever Dock gets in FA and bring him back. The line is one of the areas where I would overpay a player for continuity's sake alone.

[CNYSkinFan]

Todd Wade for Left Guard Position :flower1:
Interesting but I don't think he has the quickness to play guard. Wade does want to start somewhere.

I am not ruling out Pucillo at guard either, espescially if he resigns and we do not go after any big name. He showed flashes when he was the third TE of good solid blocking ability and started in the league before.

[Redskin4Life]

I saw this in the Post article today:

"We've exchanged a lot of ideas, but we haven't reached a point where we're close to getting something done," France said. He has said it would take a lucrative offer to keep Dockery from testing the market
Bye Dock. I officially have washed my hands of you. You said you wanted to be part of this team and now it's sounding like you just want to get paid. We'll find someone else...

How about signing Wade to play TACKLE and moving Jansen now to guard?

[CNYSkinFan]

I saw this in the Post article today:


Bye Dock. I officially have washed my hands of you. You said you wanted to be part of this team and now it's sounding like you just want to get paid. We'll find someone else...

How about signing Wade to play TACKLE and moving Jansen now to guard?
The only one of our tackles who could play guard conceivably is Samuels, and NO way he would move from LT to play guard since LT is where the dollars are.

[JsMaViSd]

I saw this in the Post article today:


Bye Dock. I officially have washed my hands of you. You said you wanted to be part of this team and now it's sounding like you just want to get paid. We'll find someone else...

How about signing Wade to play TACKLE and moving Jansen now to guard?

exactly my thoughts. Jansen has said he wouldnt mind moving to Guard. And wade is a cheap sign

[Skins7ny]

is there still a transition tag we could place on him where as we could match the offer he receives ?? also since he was drafted in the second round if he signs with another team would we receive a late round draft pick for him.

You don't get compensation when you lose a free agent on whom you have placed the transition tag. When a player is restricted, like Dock was last year, you can get compensation for him depending on the type of offer sheet you tender him. BTW, Dock was selected on the 3rd round, and as RedskinsRich mentioned, no one was willing to give us a 3rd rounder to sign him away from us last year.

I would hate to see him go, I would love for us to re-sign him, but I am not ready to blame the FO on this one. First, we might still re-sign him-it is relatively early in the game, and the deal might get done right before the deadline. Second (and more likely) Dock and his agent may be sniffing a huge payday because of the # of teams in need of OL help that have huge cap room. Third, I don't blame the FO for not signing him to an extension before this year-he didn't really show that he was worthy of one until this year.

I don't see us going after Steinbach or Deilman. Steinbach might try to switch to left tackle to get left tackle money, and I think that we would pay Dockery before we pay Deilman (even though the latter is a better player).

Left guards are not all that hard to find or develop, so it is not a disaster if Dock walks. Also, I think Bugel will have someone ready to take the spot over. I don't think Todd Wade re-signs with us-someone will promise him a starting RT spot after the way he played for us last year.

[dj_stouty]

Dock is good, not great. For consistancy purposes, he is worth a little bit more to the Skins...but still not what he believes he is worth.

However, we can't break the bank for the guy, especially when the defense is the side of the ball with the majority of the holes.

But lets get one thing straight...if the offense falters next year, please refrain from pointing fingers at the FO's inability to resign Dock as the reason why. He isn't even the 2nd or 3rd best player on the O-line!

[redskin_rich]

But lets get one thing straight...if the offense falters next year, please refrain from pointing fingers at the FO's inability to resign Dock as the reason why. He isn't even the 2nd or 3rd best player on the O-line!
A-fricken-men!

[CNYSkinFan]

Dock is good, not great. For consistancy purposes, he is worth a little bit more to the Skins...but still not what he believes he is worth.

However, we can't break the bank for the guy, especially when the defense is the side of the ball with the majority of the holes.

But lets get one thing straight...if the offense falters next year, please refrain from pointing fingers at the FO's inability to resign Dock as the reason why. He isn't even the 2nd or 3rd best player on the O-line!
True but the last thing a new qb needs is a line adjusting to a new guy as well.

If the offense falters next year I am pointing at Saunders, not the FO, but not resigning Dock gets them a sad face in their report card.

[hail2skins]

Dock is good, not great. For consistancy purposes, he is worth a little bit more to the Skins...but still not what he believes he is worth.

However, we can't break the bank for the guy, especially when the defense is the side of the ball with the majority of the holes.

But lets get one thing straight...if the offense falters next year, please refrain from pointing fingers at the FO's inability to resign Dock as the reason why. He isn't even the 2nd or 3rd best player on the O-line!True but it is creating a need that wasn't there before.

[smittyskin]

That is a fair point....and if the Dock thing happened in a bubble then perhaps it would be the commanding point in the argument. However with Pierce, Smoot, Clark, Dock the pattern seems to be the same. The FO has not done enough to keep the player and/or decided to get other players that were not as good to replace them.

I am still hopeful we match whatever Dock gets in FA and bring him back. The line is one of the areas where I would overpay a player for continuity's sake alone.


Not to mention that Dock is still fairly young and has the potential to get even better.

The thing that worries me the most is a drop-off in Chris Samuels play if he has to tutor a new guard all season.

[PennSkinsFan]

I don't like what the Skins are doing here. Again, if Dock leaves, this is another home grown, drafted here, guy that has fit in and played pretty well. He has developed chemistry with Sanmuels, Samuels has been his biggest advocate and by leaving him go it is more of the same and shows me this franchise is not about to turn in a new direction. Again we will plug someone else in that has no gurantee and will have to work with Samuels for a while to develop that chemistry that already exist. Yeah we extended Betts and jansen, but for every guy like that, which we grew and raised here, we have three leaving. I would not be surprised to see the Skins leave him go, is part of the mentality that has caused a losign Gibbs record.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Also I want to make one more positive point for Dock, other than the last couple of posts.

He may be the fourth best lineman, but that is on a line that when we run the ball is arguably one of the top three in the league. Samuels is a perennial pro-bowler. Jansen, who I'm not convinced had a better year than Dock, has been a standout RT for almost a decade, and Thomas has been so robbed when it comes to pro bowl balloting, its not even worth discussion.

The point is, he is 4th best in an excellent group. Plus he is young and could conceivably play at a high level for the next half of a decade at least.

[Redskinfan28]

Do we know what kind of money Dock is demanding or what we offered? Until that point, we have no idea who is being unreasonable.

[SpicyMcHaggis]

Also I want to make one more positive point for Dock, other than the last couple of posts.

He may be the fourth best lineman, but that is on a line that when we run the ball is arguably one of the top three in the league. Samuels is a perennial pro-bowler. Jansen, who I'm not convinced had a better year than Dock, has been a standout RT for almost a decade, and Thomas has been so robbed when it comes to pro bowl balloting, its not even worth discussion.

The point is, he is 4th best in an excellent group. Plus he is young and could conceivably play at a high level for the next half of a decade at least.
This is a good point. Outside of Dock, our linemen are going to be (at the beginning of next season) 30, 30, 31, and 31. So either we replace Dock with a young guy (who will probably either be not very cheap or not very good) or we are looking at a pretty old line there..

[smoak]

That is a fair point....and if the Dock thing happened in a bubble then perhaps it would be the commanding point in the argument. However with Pierce, Smoot, Clark, Dock the pattern seems to be the same. The FO has not done enough to keep the player and/or decided to get other players that were not as good to replace them.

I am still hopeful we match whatever Dock gets in FA and bring him back. The line is one of the areas where I would overpay a player for continuity's sake alone.

Sorry, but Smoot and Pierce each left reasonable offers on the table for marginally more money. Clark is the only blunder I pin squarely on the FO. I think you can be critical of not re-signing guys, but I refuse to wear woll over my eyes and think that these players are not partially to blame.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Sorry, but Smoot and Pierce each left reasonable offers on the table for marginally more money. Clark is the only blunder I pin squarely on the FO. I think you can be critical of not re-signing guys, but I refuse to wear woll over my eyes and think that these players are not partially to blame.
I agree, but with this caveat. We have the ability to never let it get to the point, which is exactly what you like about Phila.

Think about this from a human nature standpoint. If you have two years left on your deal, you've played good with the chances you have gotten, but you are by no means a star, and your employer comes to you and says I want to reward you with a raise and job security for another 5 years. That sounds very tempting. You get job security and a nice raise and all you have to leave behind is the possibility that you may get more 2 years from now if you (a) improve, (b) get more chances to show what you can do and (c) stay healthy.

Now, think about that same situation but the team comes to you the year before you hit FA or a few weeks before you hit FA. Human nature would dictate now that you have made it this far, and you have achieved a,b, and c above, why not test the waters and see what's out there. I could get a better raise, more opportunity, a chance to win, a change of scenery, more job security, etc. Its only human nature, and its exactly what any of us would do in the same situation.

[wewantdallas]

Do we know what kind of money Dock is demanding or what we offered? Until that point, we have no idea who is being unreasonable.

EXACTLY!

There comes a point when you simply CAN'T AFFORD to keep a player. It happens to every team. Yes, it would be great to keep Dockery, and we SHOULD do everything possible to make it happen.

But if he's asking something that we cannot possibly give, then whose fault is it? No one's. Dockery gotta eat (a lot), and the Redskins have to stay financially responsible.

It's like when Stephen Davis left. There was no way we could've afforded to keep him even if Spurrier had wanted him here. It's no one's fault when that kind of thing happens. It's just the nature of the cap, and yes, believe it or not, the Redskins DO have to yield to the power of the cap once in awhile. This might be one of those times. We'll have to wait and see how it plays out and what Doc wants. I sure hope we can make it happen.

[shally]

too much "sky is falling" talk here.. let's see how this plays out.

i think we will be fine inthe o line this coming year with or without dock

[shally]

EXACTLY!

There comes a point when you simply CAN'T AFFORD to keep a player. It happens to every team. Yes, it would be great to keep Dockery, and we SHOULD do everything possible to make it happen.

But if he's asking something that we cannot possibly give, then whose fault is it? No one's. Dockery gotta eat (a lot), and the Redskins have to stay financially responsible.

It's like when Stephen Davis left. There was no way we could've afforded to keep him even if Spurrier had wanted him here. It's no one's fault when that kind of thing happens. It's just the nature of the cap, and yes, believe it or not, the Redskins DO have to yield to the power of the cap once in awhile. This might be one of those times. We'll have to wait and see how it plays out and what Doc wants. I sure hope we can make it happen.

amen.. and good point about davis..

he had one fine year for carolina.. but that is about it..

[SkinsfaninNJ]

too much "sky is falling" talk here.. let's see how this plays out.

i think we will be fine inthe o line this coming year with or without dock
I bet that's what a lot of us said last year about our secondary when Ryan C. left.

[Redskin4Life]

Sorry, but Smoot and Pierce each left reasonable offers on the table for marginally more money. Clark is the only blunder I pin squarely on the FO. I think you can be critical of not re-signing guys, but I refuse to wear woll over my eyes and think that these players are not partially to blame.
I'm not so sure you can pin the FO with the Clark blunder either... the money was the same but Clark wanted assurances that he was going to be the starter. That's why he left... in fact, I think we offered more than what he got from the Steelers.

[shally]

I bet that's what a lot of us said last year about our secondary when Ryan C. left.


it wasnt just clark.. it was springs injuries.. it was poor coaching by jackson.. it was PP's injury.. it was wright's failure to play the way we thought he would..it was the total regression of the d line.. it was awful play by the linebackers
a total defesive flame out.. not just the loss of 1 player.. clark did not even start all year for pitts

[redskin_rich]

I bet that's what a lot of us said last year about our secondary when Ryan C. left.
Do you really think Clark was the lynchpin to our defense?

I am of the firm opinion our defense wouldn't have been much if any better with Clark last year.

[smoak]

I'm not so sure you can pin the FO with the Clark blunder either... the money was the same but Clark wanted assurances that he was going to be the starter. That's why he left... in fact, I think we offered more than what he got from the Steelers.

I don't disagree, and I actually blame the coaching more than the FO. I think they could have done a better job showing Clark the vision rather than courting AA and ignoring the in house guy. By the time it came around for the FO to move, the bridge was burned....

But either way, we could and should have kept Clark.

[Redskin4Life]

I don't disagree, and I actually blame the coaching more than the FO. I think they could have done a better job showing Clark the vision rather than courting AA and ignoring the in house guy. By the time it came around for the FO to move, the bridge was burned....

But either way, we could and should have kept Clark.
True... I mean when PP went down, Clark could have been used the way PP and Arch are expected to be used (I think -- who really knows what was intended for AA). Especially knowing that Clark got signed for 4 yrs at 7M?!?!? He should have been here for sure...

Who knows... this might be the year that we make up the mistakes from the years' past (Clark and Smoot may come available).

[smoak]

Do you really think Clark was the lynchpin to our defense?

I am of the firm opinion our defense wouldn't have been much if any better with Clark last year.

I could NOT agree more. People act like Clark was the reason the D stunk, but that is not the case. Clark is a marginally talented player who fit in with our team very well. I just wish we could have kept him and NOT spent the $$$ on Arch. Its that whole 20/20 hindsight that I have.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Do you really think Clark was the lynchpin to our defense?

I am of the firm opinion our defense wouldn't have been much if any better with Clark last year.
No of course not. But failure to keep continuity hurts us every year more than I think most of us want to admit and letting Clark go is an example of it. I'm afraid Dock is going to be another example.

[RedskinRyan]

if we dont resign him, then half the members will turn and say he wasnt that good anyways and had all these glaring weaknesses. i like dock, i like the idea of continuity on the line, but everyday he isnt resigned is just another day closer to losing him.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

if we dont resign him, then half the members will turn and say he wasnt that good anyways and had all these glaring weaknesses. i like dock, i like the idea of continuity on the line, but everyday he isnt resigned is just another day closer to losing him.
Yes. Yes. Yes.

Let the bad mouthing begin. Oh yeah, and if our line fails next year, all of those same members will say it has nothing to do with losing Dock. "Look he plays in Arizona and they can't run the ball so how good can he be."

[akhhorus]

I dont see why everyone is so opposed to overpaying for dock, especially if we backload the contract. we are the washington redskins. we are going to overpay for SOMEBODY, so it might as well be one of our own. I'd much rather overpay for dock than Nate Clements or Partick Kerney or some overage middle linebacker looking for his final payday.

Overpaying for your 4th best olineman is worse than overpaying for someone else's players. I want dock to stay, but ill be madder if we pay him a massive deal(30+ million) when he clearly hasn't earned it than if we let him walk.

[akhhorus]

if we dont resign him, then half the members will turn and say he wasnt that good anyways and had all these glaring weaknesses. i like dock, i like the idea of continuity on the line, but everyday he isnt resigned is just another day closer to losing him.

I know a lot of people here who have been criticizing dock's play for 2-3 years now.

[RedskinRyan]

I know a lot of people here who have been criticizing dock's play for 2-3 years now.

hey, ive criticized him before. but the more he plays, the better he's gotten. santana moss hadnt proved to be worth the extension we gave him, but we're getting a nice little return on that, arent we? its not just about paying what they are worth, but paying what they could be worth.

[shally]

I know a lot of people here who have been criticizing dock's play for 2-3 years now.

amen.. it wasnt so long ago that people were saying he was one of the main problems in the o line..

i would worry that he might take the money and regress.. this may be a classic case of contract year effort...

[bergiemoore]

other teams cannot keep some of theirs. look how many players the pats have allowed to walk ?

it is a fact of life in the era of free agency and the cap

Thank you for pointing this out.

NOBODY "takes care of" their players. Not since these same players have had the option of walking for more money. And since it is these players that see fit to leave, in some cases for only slightly greater amounts, i.e. Pierce, we can't really fault the FO.

It is the FO's job to make sure that these valueable players never make it to their FA year, and you have to admit that until last season, Dock was not worth the effort. It's the same situation as with Betts. The only difference between the two is that Betts decided it would be in his best interest to remain with a team that will likely be much improved, and in an offense where he will be used extensively, even if he's not the "starter". Dock feels otherwise. I don't want this guy to go, but if Arizona or another one of these teams with ridiculous amounts of cap space and no talent decide to shell out the big bucks, it's on Dock, not the FO.

[shally]

I could NOT agree more. People act like Clark was the reason the D stunk, but that is not the case. Clark is a marginally talented player who fit in with our team very well. I just wish we could have kept him and NOT spent the $$$ on Arch. Its that whole 20/20 hindsight that I have.

amen.. great point.. he sure was marginal as a starter for the steelers

[bergiemoore]

No of course not. But failure to keep continuity hurts us every year more than I think most of us want to admit and letting Clark go is an example of it. I'm afraid Dock is going to be another example.

I don't know. I think our "continuity" on the D was part of the problem. We picked up Carter to provide some sort of pass-rush, and AA to upgrade at SS. The problem was, the LBs and DTs all got one year older, slower, and more injury prone. We had no pass rush and couldn't defend against the run. I definitely didn't help that Springs went down and we had amateur hour at CB, and AA was a colossal bust, but I don't think that the lack of continuity is what is to blame for the defense.

There was far greater turn-over on offense, and a new scheme to boot. That squad, while definitely not stellar, was ranked much higher than the D.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Thank you for pointing this out.

NOBODY "takes care of" their players. Not since these same players have had the option of walking for more money. And since it is these players that see fit to leave, in some cases for only slightly greater amounts, i.e. Pierce, we can't really fault the FO.

It is the FO's job to make sure that these valueable players never make it to their FA year, and you have to admit that until last season, Dock was not worth the effort. It's the same situation as with Betts. The only difference between the two is that Betts decided it would be in his best interest to remain with a team that will likely be much improved, and in an offense where he will be used extensively, even if he's not the "starter". Dock feels otherwise. I don't want this guy to go, but if Arizona or another one of these teams with ridiculous amounts of cap space and no talent decide to shell out the big bucks, it's on Dock, not the FO.
I disagree. I think Dock has shown a steady upswing on his progress for two years now. Where is the foresight by the FO? Why can't they see the guys that will be monsters and reward them before them become monsters?

[SkinsfaninNJ]

I don't know. I think our "continuity" on the D was part of the problem. We picked up Carter to provide some sort of pass-rush, and AA to upgrade at SS. The problem was, the LBs and DTs all got one year older, slower, and more injury prone. We had no pass rush and couldn't defend against the run. I definitely didn't help that Springs went down and we had amateur hour at CB, and AA was a colossal bust, but I don't think that the lack of continuity is what is to blame for the defense.

There was far greater turn-over on offense, and a new scheme to boot. That squad, while definitely not stellar, was ranked much higher than the D.
You may not think so, but that's what the players are saying. More than a few players have made comments about how important guys like Clark, Pierce and Royal were to this club.

Maybe it was just easy excuses by the players for failing this year, but these are guys on the inside who are saying it, so its not coming from nowhere.

[whistleandthumb]

You don't keep your "core" guys when they are at best the 4th best offensive lineman and they demand a contract bigger than they are worth.
And we expect players to have loyalty to us when this is our attitude towards them? Hilarious.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

amen.. great point.. he sure was marginal as a starter for the steelers
I don't get this argument. What does it matter what he did for the Steelers? The point is what could he have done here?

There are too many variables that go into a players success (the coaches, the schemes, the team, etc.) to say he would be the same player here as he was there.

This is my point about Dock above. When he leaves for Arizona or whereever. At the end of next year, this same argument will be used against Dock if our line stinks. People will say but look Arizona couldn't run the ball or protect the QB, so its not like Dock would have helped here. The argument has too many holes to be valid.

[wide_awake]

Unfortunately the player has to want to stay for a reason other than being offered the largest salary.

I can't understand how a slightly higher contract would lure a player out of a consistent environment, unless players just get bored and feel a need for change. That's basically what free agency is. The other team offers just a tad more...It's as though the players just want to leave.

[NCskinsfanatic]

I'm pretty sure we've offered a vey fair contract he should call Smoot and Clark and ask 'em if the extra money was worth it.

[bergiemoore]

You may not think so, but that's what the players are saying. More than a few players have made comments about how important guys like Clark, Pierce and Royal were to this club.

Maybe it was just easy excuses by the players for failing this year, but these are guys on the inside who are saying it, so its not coming from nowhere.

Hey, maybe. I don't know. It sucks to see friends leave my workplace as well, but that doesn't make my work suffer. The NFL is like any other professional occupation. The players make decisions to stay or go based on their perceived value of themselves' and what someone will pay them.

I'm all for continuity, but I don't think that we should break the bank to keep players whose most important contribution is making the other guys happy in the locker room. That is a secondary trait, one that is nice to have, but definitely not a characteristic that would overrule the player's talent.

I think that these players understand what free agency does. It's silly to expect that teams are going to stay together unchanged for years at a time. Maybe in the 70's and 80's, but definitely not now.

[whistleandthumb]

We were fine in 05 without Pierce because Marshall was as good as Pierce was(then fell apart in 06) and Clark's absence wasn't to blame for Rogers' regression, Springs' fraility and Kenny Wright's redefinition of the term "I suck". That was the real problem with the secondary in 06.

As for Core guys, the 4th or 5th best OLman isn't a core guy and isn't worth paying 2 bucks on the dollar for.
If the guy's that lousy, then why is their an 8+ page thread about him? If he's so trivial and unimportant to the team that we shouldn't be doing everything in our power to make sure we keep him, then how can you possibly explain so much heated and passionate discussion over him? Players who don't deserve to be kept on our team and considered a "core" player don't illicit this type of response from the fans.

[shally]

I disagree. I think Dock has shown a steady upswing on his progress for two years now. Where is the foresight by the FO? Why can't they see the guys that will be monsters and reward them before them become monsters?

not sure that dock will ever deserve the appellation.. "monster".. there is still way too much finesse in his game

[shally]

If the guy's that lousy, then why is their an 8+ page thread about him? If he's so trivial and unimportant to the team that we shouldn't be doing everything in our power to make sure we keep him, then how can you possibly explain so much heated and passionate discussion over him? Players who don't deserve to be kept on our team and considered a "core" player don't illicit this type of response from the fans.

nah... us guys will chew on anything for days.. it is our nature to obsess over this stuff...

[whistleandthumb]

But lets get one thing straight...if the offense falters next year, please refrain from pointing fingers at the FO's inability to resign Dock as the reason why. He isn't even the 2nd or 3rd best player on the O-line!

And at the same time we're NOT pointing fingers at the FO for their inability to keep Dock, let's also NOT point fingers at the FO for the lack of consistency on this team.

If we're all so willing to let these players go, then we forfeit the right to argue that this team needs consistency should we have another poor season.

[Redskin4Life]

If the guy's that lousy, then why is their an 8+ page thread about him? If he's so trivial and unimportant to the team that we shouldn't be doing everything in our power to make sure we keep him, then how can you possibly explain so much heated and passionate discussion over him? Players who don't deserve to be kept on our team and considered a "core" player don't illicit this type of response from the fans.
What else do we have to talk about???

Potential Free Agent Signees???

The potential restructuring of Brunell or Springs???

The 2007 season??

This is all we got right now as far as "news".... this year's been more quiet than usual.

[bergiemoore]

If the guy's that lousy, then why is their an 8+ page thread about him?

It's a REALLY boring week. I think the thread about the mythical trade for Vilma went on for 16+ pages...,..

[SkinsfaninNJ]

not sure that dock will ever deserve the appellation.. "monster".. there is still way too much finesse in his game
Maybe not, but Cooley is coming up real soon. If we don't tie him down and give him a reason to not hit FA, you can kiss him good bye too. My thinking is you have to give a guy a reason to forgo FA, and it doesn't have to be only money because, if you can lock up a guy before you have fully tapped his potential it will cost less in the long run.

Once these guys hit FA, why should they stay and why should we criticize them for going elsewhere?

[redskin_rich]

What else do we have to talk about???

Potential Free Agent Signees???

The potential restructuring of Brunell or Springs???

The 2007 season??

This is all we got right now as far as "news".... this year's been more quiet than usual.
QFT.
You only need to go slightly down the page and there are threads that haven't been posted in for almost 3 days. This has been the dullest early offeason in recent memory and this Dock news brings about the first lively discussion we have had here in the Cherokee for weeks.

[shally]

I'm pretty sure we've offered a vey fair contract he should call Smoot and Clark and ask 'em if the extra money was worth it.


exactly..

[shally]

Maybe not, but Cooley is coming up real soon. If we don't tie him down and give him a reason to not hit FA, you can kiss him good bye too. My thinking is you have to give a guy a reason to forgo FA, and it doesn't have to be only money because, if you can lock up a guy before you have fully tapped his potential it will cost less in the long run.

Once these guys hit FA, why should they stay and why should we criticize them for going elsewhere?

i do not criticize anyone. people have to do what is right for their own situation
it is the nature of the business.. new england loses a ton of players and they are competitve every year. we are not. it says something about our JUDGMENT.. not the process

[bergiemoore]

Maybe not, but Cooley is coming up real soon. If we don't tie him down and give him a reason to not hit FA, you can kiss him good bye too. My thinking is you have to give a guy a reason to forgo FA, and it doesn't have to be only money because, if you can lock up a guy before you have fully tapped his potential it will cost less in the long run.

Once these guys hit FA, why should they stay and why should we criticize them for going elsewhere?

There is no question that as soon as the draft is over, and we have made our FA acquisitions for 2007, the very next thing that the three headed monster (Vinny/Danny/Gibbsy) needs to do is address how they are going to sign Taylor and Cooley.

I just don't think that at this point last year, Dock had established himself as being a wealth of untapped potential.

Should we try and resign a guy just because he might have a break-out year the year the season before his contract is up?

[Meatsnack]

The thing I haven't seen mentioned in all of this is Joe Bugel. If Dock is the best o-lineman on the market for our OG needs, where is Bugel banging the drum for Dock, 2-seasons ago or last season? Buges isn't exactly reticent, if it was important to him to keep Dockery, he'd go to Joe Gibbs and tell him to keep him.

For the record, Dock said he wanted to be here and would "do what it takes" to stay. We will/have offer him a fair or better than fair deal for his talents. If he chooses to leave anyway, then he's a liar and he's gone just like AP and Smoot. If he chooses to stay I will welcome him back but he is still the guy who hasn't strung a complete season together as a lineman.

Dockery never came into his own as a run blocker until we started running the zone stretch plays to allow him to cut block. (Why a 320 pound man needs to do this is a puzzle.) He finally (in his contract year) lost his excess weight and became more mobile and could pull. He played very well the last half of the year - just like the previous year.

If we overspend for Dockery in our cap condition it is being foolish for the sake of a principle (keeping our own). If we had to have a Texas O-lineman who hasn't lived up to expectations I'd rather have Leonard Davis anyway.

[shally]

The thing I haven't seen mentioned in all of this is Joe Bugel. If Dock is the best o-lineman on the market for our OG needs, where is Bugel banging the drum for Dock, 2-seasons ago or last season? Buges isn't exactly reticent, if it was important to him to keep Dockery, he'd go to Joe Gibbs and tell him to keep him.

For the record, Dock said he wanted to be here and would "do what it takes" to stay. We will/have offer him a fair or better than fair deal for his talents. If he chooses to leave anyway, then he's a liar and he's gone just like AP and Smoot. If he chooses to stay I will welcome him back but he is still the guy who hasn't strung a complete season together as a lineman.

Dockery never came into his own as a run blocker until we started running the zone stretch plays to allow him to cut block. (Why a 320 pound man needs to do this is a puzzle.) He finally (in his contract year) lost his excess weight and became more mobile and could pull. He played very well the last half of the year - just like the previous year.

If we overspend for Dockery in our cap condition it is being foolish for the sake of a principle (keeping our own). If we had to have a Texas O-lineman who hasn't lived up to expectations I'd rather have Leonard Davis anyway.

davis = ( dockery - joe bugel's coaching)

[Meatsnack]

davis = ( dockery - joe bugel's coaching)
Dockery when he leaves = Dockery - Joe Bugel's coaching

Davis > Dockery

Davis + Joe Bugel = the guy drafted #2 overall in the draft

Meatsnack = done :)

[SkinsfaninNJ]

There is no question that as soon as the draft is over, and we have made our FA acquisitions for 2007, the very next thing that the three headed monster (Vinny/Danny/Gibbsy) needs to do is address how they are going to sign Taylor and Cooley.

I just don't think that at this point last year, Dock had established himself as being a wealth of untapped potential.

Should we try and resign a guy just because he might have a break-out year the year the season before his contract is up?
Not necessarily, but I think a competent FO could take most of the "might" out of it having been around a long time evaluating talent and knowing when a guy has the goods and will or probably will (not might) break out.

These are the chance Phila. seems to take with both of their lines, which is why they choose to lock-up some guys while letting others go.

Now, maybe Dock is a guy that they should let go. The team has done a good job of locking up Samuels and Jansen from draft through the better part of a decade, which should not be forgotten in the FO evaluation.

In the team's defense, you haven't heard (at least I don't think) the talk from Gibbs about how Dock is a core guy that must be locked up. I know that talk didn't mean much when it came to Pierce and Smoot who were "core guys" but it may be telling if there is not huge talk about Dock being a core guy.

[dj_stouty]

And at the same time we're NOT pointing fingers at the FO for their inability to keep Dock, let's also NOT point fingers at the FO for the lack of consistency on this team.

If we're all so willing to let these players go, then we forfeit the right to argue that this team needs consistency should we have another poor season.

I don't think anyone wants to see Dock go "willingly". He was one of the best value 3rd rounders we have drafted in some time. But if the FO gives him a fair offer and he wants to test free agency, then there is not much blame we can give to our FO.

There is a difference between simply letting a home grown talent walk...and letting a home grown talent walk after making him a fair offer.

What do you suggest; paying him over his value for the sake of consistency? If we had done that with Smoot and Pierce, who is to say we could have afforded Santana, ARE or Carter? It all trickles down...and quite frankly, if you overpay for your O-line's 4th best player, then you are then opening the door for the rest of the team to demand higher pay. If I recall, when it came to Smoot, the FO basically told him they couldn't offer him more money than Springs; who was the better player. Same with Pierce, as they said they couldn't pay him higher than Marcus, who in their eyes was their premiere LB at the time. I do give credit to the FO for not allowing their 2nd or 3rd tier players to get more money than they are worth.

And by the way...I'm guessing that just about every fanbase complains about their team's consistency. Its the nature of the beast these days.

[esmith1790]

i please need some clarification, wasnt there a time a few years ago when Samuels was having a down year? Was that the same time Dock was starting next to him. It seems that a good bond has formed between the two esp like when the defense runs stunts and blitzes. I was watching the Senior-Bowl recap of 2on2 DL vs OL and they were saying the DL has an advantage because the OL is experienced is communicating of stunts and switches and can get beat when you pass your man to the player next to you. So if Dock leaves and another G is signed do you think this will hurt Samuels on the field production and also from the comments on the threads about CS and DD getting along would it hurt CS off the field too?

[silverspring]

I don't think the world will end if we lose dockery but it would really be unfortunate. I just hope the front office is weighing the cost of replacing him properly. And that cost doesn't just include finding a player of talent it also includes training them up to our schemes and of course creating chemistry which is especially vital on the line.

What will really PISS me off is if we let go of dockery and then go spend oogles of money in the free agent market. If we have money to spend lets overpay our own people.

Otherwise if everyone is so confident that he will be a hot commodity on the fa market maybe we should consider tagging him.

[redskin_rich]

I don't think the world will end if we lose dockery but it would really be unfortunate. I just hope the front office is weighing the cost of replacing him properly. And that cost doesn't just include finding a player of talent it also includes training them up to our schemes and of course creating chemistry which is especially vital on the line.

What will really PISS me off is if we let go of dockery and then go spend oogles of money in the free agent market. If we have money to spend lets overpay our own people.

Otherwise if everyone is so confident that he will be a hot commodity on the fa market maybe we should consider tagging him.
Tagging him with either a franchise or transition tag is not an option. We don't have the cap space and even if we did, it wouldn't be a good move. For one thing, it would make Dock the highest paid player on the team this year, should he choose to sign the franchise or transition tender. Secondly, any team could have tried to sign Dock for a 3rd round pick last year, why would they be willing to give up more for him now?

[The Iceman]

Leonard Davis to left guard. yippie

[whistleandthumb]

I don't think anyone wants to see Dock go "willingly". He was one of the best value 3rd rounders we have drafted in some time. But if the FO gives him a fair offer and he wants to test free agency, then there is not much blame we can give to our FO.

There is a difference between simply letting a home grown talent walk...and letting a home grown talent walk after making him a fair offer.

What do you suggest; paying him over his value for the sake of consistency? If we had done that with Smoot and Pierce, who is to say we could have afforded Santana, ARE or Carter? It all trickles down...and quite frankly, if you overpay for your O-line's 4th best player, then you are then opening the door for the rest of the team to demand higher pay. If I recall, when it came to Smoot, the FO basically told him they couldn't offer him more money than Springs; who was the better player. Same with Pierce, as they said they couldn't pay him higher than Marcus, who in their eyes was their premiere LB at the time. I do give credit to the FO for not allowing their 2nd or 3rd tier players to get more money than they are worth.

And by the way...I'm guessing that just about every fanbase complains about their team's consistency. Its the nature of the beast these days.
What have the Redskins offered Dock? Specifically, what was the most recent offer given to him?

[Fathead]

I don't think anyone but the FO and Dock's people know that for sure.

[shally]

What have the Redskins offered Dock? Specifically, what was the most recent offer given to him?


nobody is talking..except to say they arent close.. the recriminations will begin as soon as he signs elsewhere..

[akhhorus]

If the guy's that lousy, then why is their an 8+ page thread about him? If he's so trivial and unimportant to the team that we shouldn't be doing everything in our power to make sure we keep him, then how can you possibly explain so much heated and passionate discussion over him? Players who don't deserve to be kept on our team and considered a "core" player don't illicit this type of response from the fans.

I never said he was lousy. He's at times very good, at times average. But he's still the 4th best Olineman on this team. Should we keep dock? Yes. Should we pay him way over value just to keep him? No. Samuels, Jansen and Randy are the core of the oline, and while losing dock might sting, he is very replaceable. And as for the 'fans' reaction about losing him, so what? Do you remember the weeping over Ramsey leaving last year? Does that mean we should have kept him and kept him as the starter? And there was far more threads and posts about him leaving than Dock.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Tagging him with either a franchise or transition tag is not an option. We don't have the cap space and even if we did, it wouldn't be a good move. For one thing, it would make Dock the highest paid player on the team this year, should he choose to sign the franchise or transition tender. Secondly, any team could have tried to sign Dock for a 3rd round pick last year, why would they be willing to give up more for him now?
The current system makes it almost impossible to franchise a guard because he gets the average of the top 5 paid lineman (including tackles who are paid significantly more) which would make a guard's salary way over market.

[dj_stouty]

What have the Redskins offered Dock? Specifically, what was the most recent offer given to him?

I have no idea. They offered more than fair deals to Smoot and Pierce so I would guess they will do the same for Dock.

Dock's agent said they have been in constant communication with the Skins but their offer was not close enough, which to me means; "It isn't as high as I think I'm worth." But I guess we will find out soon enough...

[wewantdallas]

I agree, but with this caveat. We have the ability to never let it get to the point, which is exactly what you like about Phila.


That's actually a very good point. It would be nice if FO staff could look at some of these guys as they're developing and sign them to longer, more cap-friendly deals BEFORE they get to the point where they are commanding huge dollars in FA.

However, there are certainly risks involved there, too.

[dj_stouty]

That's actually a very good point. It would be nice if FO staff could look at some of these guys as they're developing and sign them to longer, more cap-friendly deals BEFORE they get to the point where they are commanding huge dollars in FA.

However, there are certainly risks involved there, too.

Guys like.........Chris Cooley? ;) They better lock him up before the end of the season or we will definitely go through this again next season. The guy is one of the least paid starting TEs in the league.

[CNYSkinFan]

Guys like.........Chris Cooley? ;) They better lock him up before the end of the season or we will definitely go through this again next season. The guy is one of the least paid starting TEs in the league.
My earlier thoughts as well...same with Taylkor the year after. Go ahead and get the signings done now.

[smoak]

Guys like.........Chris Cooley? ;) They better lock him up before the end of the season or we will definitely go through this again next season. The guy is one of the least paid starting TEs in the league.

Cooley needs to have a big year and earn the payday. I love the guy, but he makes more than his share of mistakes and is not worthy of elite TE money at this point.

Hopefully he takes a step forward this season with JC at the helm and we tie him up to a 7 year deal.

[whistleandthumb]

I have no idea. They offered more than fair deals to Smoot and Pierce so I would guess they will do the same for Dock.

Dock's agent said they have been in constant communication with the Skins but their offer was not close enough, which to me means; "It isn't as high as I think I'm worth." But I guess we will find out soon enough...
I only ask because if we don't know what the offer is, then it's tough to criticize either side.

Smoot's camp said a couple years ago that the Redskins weren't willing to match what they thought Smoot was worth, so he skidaddled. As it turned out, we were only about a million short of the offer from the Vikes.

Now, obviously, that turned out to be the right decision for us, but in the case of Pierce, which I think was also pretty close in terms of difference in salaries, it was NOT the right choice.

It just seems that this FO has a history of letting players that we developed go to other teams for an amount of money that doesn't make sense. If Dock leaves, and it turns out we could have kept him for another million or two, it's going to be just another player in an increasingly long list of talent we've let go. Frustrating.

[BIGSEF3]

Guys like.........Chris Cooley? ;) They better lock him up before the end of the season or we will definitely go through this again next season. The guy is one of the least paid starting TEs in the league.

Yeah, but you cant really compare rookie contracts to veteran contracts. Cooley hasnt grumbled about his contract and I think we will HAVE to take care of him. I even see keeping cooley as a priority over Taylor if it came down to it and we could only pick one.

[CNYSkinFan]

Yeah, but you cant really compare rookie contracts to veteran contracts. Cooley hasnt grumbled about his contract and I think we will HAVE to take care of him. I even see keeping cooley as a priority over Taylor if it came down to it and we could only pick one.
Dockery is on his rookie contract too....


Cooley and Taylor are noting this I am sure of it. If Dock gets a big pay day and the redskins dont try and match then they are going to wonder why they would bioother extending here when they can get their pay day somewhere else.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

Dockery is on his rookie contract too....


Cooley and Taylor are noting this I am sure of it. If Dock gets a big pay day and the redskins dont try and match then they are going to wonder why they would bioother extending here when they can get their pay day somewhere else.
To an extent I agree. As I said earlier, it may be that the Skins do not feel Dock is worthy; whereas, they may break the bank for a guy like Cooley or Taylor.

I know Smoak is not the hugest Cooley fan, but I think this guy brings a few things that can't be measured. Specifically, I think he is a masterful route runner. Not the routes called, but actually bailing out the QB. Remember, he was a QB for a long period. I know his hands have failed him in some important times, but I think he sees the game like a QB and that can't be understated for a receiver.

[silverspring]

Tagging him with either a franchise or transition tag is not an option. We don't have the cap space and even if we did, it wouldn't be a good move. For one thing, it would make Dock the highest paid player on the team this year, should he choose to sign the franchise or transition tender. Secondly, any team could have tried to sign Dock for a 3rd round pick last year, why would they be willing to give up more for him now?

I am not a capalogist but i thought the value we would owe him was based on the market rate. There are a lot of teams that need oline help out there. Just a thought.

I just hope they don't let him go because of cost and then somehow find room to sign fletcher and clements.

[NCskinsfanatic]

I only ask because if we don't know what the offer is, then it's tough to criticize either side.

Smoot's camp said a couple years ago that the Redskins weren't willing to match what they thought Smoot was worth, so he skidaddled. As it turned out, we were only about a million short of the offer from the Vikes.

Now, obviously, that turned out to be the right decision for us, but in the case of Pierce, which I think was also pretty close in terms of difference in salaries, it was NOT the right choice.

It just seems that this FO has a history of letting players that we developed go to other teams for an amount of money that doesn't make sense. If Dock leaves, and it turns out we could have kept him for another million or two, it's going to be just another player in an increasingly long list of talent we've let go. Frustrating.
If Dock leaves it's because someone will give him atarting left tackle money, which is both absurd and too high of a price to pay just to say well we kept one of our own, they have to be willing to understand what the FO is trying to do. Which more likely than not is to offer a fair conttract while still allowing u to fill holes on D through FA.

[shally]

That's actually a very good point. It would be nice if FO staff could look at some of these guys as they're developing and sign them to longer, more cap-friendly deals BEFORE they get to the point where they are commanding huge dollars in FA.

However, there are certainly risks involved there, too.

philly is getting pretty close to the cap compared to years past.. wonder if they are having second thoughts about contracts to guys ike rayburn, walker and patterson.. not to mention kearse.

they let hollis thomas and burgess go and both those guys are arguably much more productive than the players who replaced them- especially burgess

[akhhorus]

I only ask because if we don't know what the offer is, then it's tough to criticize either side.

Smoot's camp said a couple years ago that the Redskins weren't willing to match what they thought Smoot was worth, so he skidaddled. As it turned out, we were only about a million short of the offer from the Vikes.

Now, obviously, that turned out to be the right decision for us, but in the case of Pierce, which I think was also pretty close in terms of difference in salaries, it was NOT the right choice.

It just seems that this FO has a history of letting players that we developed go to other teams for an amount of money that doesn't make sense. If Dock leaves, and it turns out we could have kept him for another million or two, it's going to be just another player in an increasingly long list of talent we've let go. Frustrating.

Pierce signed an unusual contract with the giants where he got a small signing bonus and tiered roster bonuses every year I believe. We offer him close to the same amount of money, with a bigger signing bonus, but the giants put more money up front with the roster bonuses. And like Smoot, Pierce and his agent said they would stay if it was close, it was and he walked anyways.

[BIGSEF3]

Pierce signed an unusual contract with the giants where he got a small signing bonus and tiered roster bonuses every year I believe. We offer him close to the same amount of money, with a bigger signing bonus, but the giants put more money up front with the roster bonuses. And like Smoot, Pierce and his agent said they would stay if it was close, it was and he walked anyways.

I know better than to question you on any factual information, but i swear the vikings gave smoot some rediculous offer that was really front-loaded and thats why we couldnt match. we backload all our contracts and then cut or restructure the players before we ever have to actually pay them.

The deal for Pierce and Smoot may have been "theoretically" close, but what about practically? Just like Mark Brunell's contract may have been something like 43 million, but in reality he would never get even half that.

[hail2skins]

Cooley needs to have a big year and earn the payday. I love the guy, but he makes more than his share of mistakes and is not worthy of elite TE money at this point.

Hopefully he takes a step forward this season with JC at the helm and we tie him up to a 7 year deal.Are you serious? The guy has dropped some balls but has proved his worthiness to this team.

[Skins7ny]

wewantdallas

That's actually a very good point. It would be nice if FO staff could look at some of these guys as they're developing and sign them to longer, more cap-friendly deals BEFORE they get to the point where they are commanding huge dollars in FA.
However, there are certainly risks involved there, too.

That is exactly what we did with Betts. Got him at a pretty good price as well, IMO. Did same thing last year with Lemar Marshall, got him for 3 years at very reasonable price.

Isn't Sean Taylor still working off his rookie contract? It was 7 years and $18million (up to $40M with incentives)-has he restructured since then for fewer years??Pierce signed an unusual contract with the giants where he got a small signing bonus and tiered roster bonuses every year I believe. We offer him close to the same amount of money, with a bigger signing bonus, but the giants put more money up front with the roster bonuses. And like Smoot, Pierce and his agent said they would stay if it was close, it was and he walked anyways.

Pierce got more money in his contract because he is also serving as the general manager over there on defense for the last two years. :)

[bergiemoore]

Pierce got more money in his contract because he is also serving as the general manager over there on defense for the last two years. :)
:lol1:

[akhhorus]

I know better than to question you on any factual information, but i swear the vikings gave smoot some rediculous offer that was really front-loaded and thats why we couldnt match. we backload all our contracts and then cut or restructure the players before we ever have to actually pay them.

That was true when it came to smoot. We offered him about 1 million less in total, but they front loaded about 5-6 million more in the first three years I believe. We "backload" our deals, but we make up for that with more bonus money. Practically(and this isn't with the numbers in front of me, this is just off of memory), Smoot would have made about 4-6 million less with our offer over the life of the contract before the balloon payment.

The deal for Pierce and Smoot may have been "theoretically" close, but what about practically? Just like Mark Brunell's contract may have been something like 43 million, but in reality he would never get even half that.

Practically, Pierce would have made almost the same with our bigger signing bonus I believe. Smoot would have made a bit less with our deal. Brunell's deal is a bad exemplar since it is so backloaded its obscene. We really haven't made any other offers or signings with backloading like that with the exception of Arch from the best of my knowledge.

[akhhorus]

Pierce got more money in his contract because he is also serving as the general manager over there on defense for the last two years. :)

Then he should be fired as their GM lol. Lavar Love Hewitt played like Jennifer Love Hewitt and Lance Briggs ain't going to NYC. They would be better off with Cerrato at MLB/GM.

[BIGSEF3]

Dockery is on his rookie contract too....


Cooley and Taylor are noting this I am sure of it. If Dock gets a big pay day and the redskins dont try and match then they are going to wonder why they would bioother extending here when they can get their pay day somewhere else.

Good point, but there is a flipside to this. If the Redskins "overpay" to keep Dockery, Cooley and Taylor will expect us to "overpay" for them. The more I think about it, I think between the three of them, we will only be able to keep 2, and that only if we are lucky. Maybe I am over-valuing cooley, but in alot of ways he's a vital cog in our offense.

[whitskins]

That is exactly what we did with Betts. Got him at a pretty good price as well, IMO. Did same thing last year with Lemar Marshall, got him for 3 years at very reasonable price.



What is telling is that to even sign Betts at his marginal contract, we had to restructure like two or three guys.

The reason we don't/can't resign these young guys during the season is because we never leave any cap room during the season to negotiate new deals. The Eagles on the other hand leave about 10 mil under the cap every year, so they have tons of room to sign young guys to long term deals before they get too close to free agency.

We should look into adopting that strategy because it is working for Philly and we're struggling to shift around money so we can squeeze in a guy like Betts.

[BIGSEF3]

That was true when it came to smoot. We offered him about 1 million less in total, but they front loaded about 5-6 million more in the first three years I believe. We "backload" our deals, but we make up for that with more bonus money. Practically(and this isn't with the numbers in front of me, this is just off of memory), Smoot would have made about 4-6 million less with our offer over the life of the contract before the balloon payment.



Practically, Pierce would have made almost the same with our bigger signing bonus I believe. Smoot would have made a bit less with our deal. Brunell's deal is a bad exemplar since it is so backloaded its obscene. We really haven't made any other offers or signings with backloading like that with the exception of Arch from the best of my knowledge.


Thanks for the info, as always. That really irks me about Pierces contract though. of all the players we have let go in recent memory, he is the one that seemed to really WANT to stay. Statements he made after the fact make me think he even regrets not staying. So knowing that the contract Pierce got was almost the same is utterly disgusting. He acted like it wasnt even close and was an insult to him, more than anything else.

[shally]

That is exactly what we did with Betts. Got him at a pretty good price as well, IMO. Did same thing last year with Lemar Marshall, got him for 3 years at very reasonable price.

Isn't Sean Taylor still working off his rookie contract? It was 7 years and $18million (up to $40M with incentives)-has he restructured since then for fewer years??

Pierce got more money in his contract because he is also serving as the general manager over there on defense for the last two years. :)

yeh, well his last "recruit" lavar didnt turn out so well for the giants..

[BIGSEF3]

What is telling is that to even sign Betts at his marginal contract, we had to restructure like two or three guys.

The reason we don't/can't resign these young guys during the season is because we never leave any cap room during the season to negotiate new deals. The Eagles on the other hand leave about 10 mil under the cap every year, so they have tons of room to sign young guys to long term deals before they get too close to free agency.

We should look into adopting that strategy because it is working for Philly and we're struggling to shift around money so we can squeeze in a guy like Betts.

I definately agree with that strategy, however the dilema is: how do we even start? The only way I can see us doing that is simply letting our veterans go, filling our roster with crap players for a couple years until we actually have several consecutive seasons with a full arsenal of draft picks. oh, and we'd need a real GM too. And Gibbs would probably have to retire and Vinny would have to mysteriously disappear off the face of the earth.

It seems to me like we've dug ourselves into such a hole with our whole attitude towards free agency and the draft that the only way we get out of it is by accepting SEVERAL years of "rebuilding." I don't ever see that happening. We've made our bed and now we have to lay in it. We can make small, gradual changes, but that will take time too. The only chance this team has of winning a superbowl in the next 5 years is if we "stay the course."

[MoeRedskins]

I am upset that we aren't going to be able to retain Dock and it makes financal sense to not overpay. But once I would like this team so show a little bit of financail looseness with one of their own free agents as opposed to another teams. Especailly when that player is the youngest player on your teams strongest unit.

[jtovb2005]

I am not sure there is much to do if a player is set on heading to FA. It would be nice to resign him but I am not convinced it is a disaster if we can't. All teams loose someone that is an important piece of the puzzle. The secret is to find someone to replace him big money FA (should not do that for this posit) or young new guy.

I do think we are still paying the price in cap flexability for big money signings of the past though. We might have more money to sign to fill our holes and resign "budding" stars when they hit the end of their first contract and head out on the market. Not the end of the world.

What would be big trouble is if we are unable to upgrade at DL, LB and DB? By upgrade I mean sustained performance through next season not just some name guy getting signed. To twll you the truth names mean nothing to me (unless they made that name as a Redskin :) ), do it out on the field.

[Lavar703]

In my honest opinion, i dont think Dock ever had any intentions of re-signing with the Redskins, I think his agent got in his ear and that killed everything. Hes gone, i know it, hes had one good year and that happened to be in his contract year, i say we should just let him go if he could cost us better players like Cooley and Taylor leaving in the future. I think we need to work out Cooleys new contract now and start working out something with Taylor also, the only problem i see is that we basically need FA to improve with our poor draft lot, honestly we really need to start cutting dead weight like Brunnell and Patten.

[Red Bear]

for those thinking we should go after someone like dielman to replace dockery, adam schefter just said on nfl total access that dielman will probably get a contract similar to steve hutchinsons if not more. who knows what steinbach will be looking for, but could be something similar as well

[skinsorbust]

the question is this.now if dock leaves and we go out and get two top free agents like fletcher and clemens,will remaining teamates get frustrated with that kind of system?i cant believe the front office cant see theres really something wrong with how they do things.dock was a second round pick, we stuck though all the growing pains and now that hes blossomed into this really solid player were going to let him walk.THATS CRAP!even if hes not the best at his position i would still keep him on just the simple fact of stability across the front five.i love the redskins but if they cant get this done and then go and sign more players, that would be just another example why everyother team in the nfl builds a team exactly different.heres one last comment to mr.snyder if he cruises the forum ITS ABOUT TIME TO GROW SOME BA--- AND SEND VINNY ON HIS WAY.

[akhhorus]

the question is this.now if dock leaves and we go out and get two top free agents like fletcher and clemens,will remaining teamates get frustrated with that kind of system?i cant believe the front office cant see theres really something wrong with how they do things.dock was a second round pick, we stuck though all the growing pains and now that hes blossomed into this really solid player were going to let him walk.THATS CRAP!even if hes not the best at his position i would still keep him on just the simple fact of stability across the front five.i love the redskins but if they cant get this done and then go and sign more players, that would be just another example why everyother team in the nfl builds a team exactly different.heres one last comment to mr.snyder if he cruises the forum ITS ABOUT TIME TO GROW SOME BA--- AND SEND VINNY ON HIS WAY.

Dock was a 3rd rounder actually. And while he has played better, he plays sometimes like a top 7 guard in the NFL and sometimes like he's still a rookie. I would love to keep him, but I would love it even more if the skins didn't pay him twice what he's worth and keep us from making any upgrades to the defense besides our draft pick.

[skinsorbust]

Dock was a 3rd rounder actually. And while he has played better, he plays sometimes like a top 7 guard in the NFL and sometimes like he's still a rookie. I would love to keep him, but I would love it even more if the skins didn't pay him twice what he's worth and keep us from making any upgrades to the defense besides our draft pick.


i agree dont pay him twice as much as hes worth but then again dont let him go and then go out and pay someone else twice as much as thier worth either.i just think signing dock sends a message to fans and the players that were going to sign our home guys and not let them walk.i understand if hes asking top 3 guard money then we let him walk, i just hope its not the redskins F.O.seeing some other player they covet and rather spend the money in that direction.

[akhhorus]

i agree dont pay him twice as much as hes worth but then again dont let him go and then go out and pay someone else twice as much as thier worth either.i just think signing dock sends a message to fans and the players that were going to sign our home guys and not let them walk.i understand if hes asking top 3 guard money then we let him walk, i just hope its not the redskins F.O.seeing some other player they covet and rather spend the money in that direction.

From all the comments over the months, it is clear that the skins are making a major push to sign him, but obviously differ on money. If Samuels is willing(and might have) restructured to afford bringing back Dock, and Dock still won't sign the offer, that said volumes about what he is demanding.

[BurgundyNGold]

To be fair, you blame the front office for everything from the spread of bird flu and the failure in Iraq. While I wish the stratgey had been to take care of this some time ago, but I do not see Dock as blameless in this failure. For two years he has been doing everything he can to become a FA from what I can tell... All the while singing the praises of being a Redskins and saying how great it is here. :rolleyes: I'd have a lot more respect for these players if they were more honest and just said "I want to be a free agent and get paid".
Will you make your mind up already? Last post -- the one I responded to -- you were upset because the Iggles seem to lock players up like Darwin Walker two years before their contracts are up. I agree, I'd like to see us do that. Now in this post Dock is at fault if we don't sign him? Look, the guy isn't worth $40M but, as you said, if we had the foresight to lock him up two years ago we wouldn't be having this discussion. Alas, two years ago, Danny and Vinny were too blinded by the prospect of some FA rock having fallen in the carpet, lol.

[akhhorus]

Will you make your mind up already? Last post -- the one I responded to -- you were upset because the Iggles seem to lock players up like Darwin Walker two years before their contracts are up. I agree, I'd like to see us do that. Now in this post Dock is at fault if we don't sign him? Look, the guy isn't worth $40M but, as you said, if we had the foresight to lock him up two years ago we wouldn't be having this discussion. Alas, two years ago, Danny and Vinny were too blinded by the prospect of some FA rock having fallen in the carpet, lol.

I believe they were making him long term offers last year when he was up for restricted free agency(I'm 98% sure of that)--and probably before then, but he consistently refused to discuss anything long term.

[BurgundyNGold]

Betts was relatively cheap and his bonus is already off the books, as I believe it was counted on last year's cap.
Jansen's deal was a good faith gesture for playing ball with them last year. Evidently, Jansen risked some money he had coming to help the Skins last year and now they have rewarded him for doing so. Both Jansen (twice) and Betts have signed extensions during the season and foregone testing the free agent waters. Dock has done nothing of the sort, so he should not be compared to them in any way.
More reason to sign your young guys a year or two early, no? Oh, that's right. We're up against the cap every year so we can't afford to do that. Too bad, that.

And I don't have anything against Jansen. He's a good guy and a team player. But paying an older guy on the down slope while letting a young guy go who is entering his prime is, well, the kind of thing a perpetually bad team does. It truly hurts me to say that.

[BurgundyNGold]

I believe they were making him long term offers last year when he was up for restricted free agency(I'm 98% sure of that)--and probably before then, but he consistently refused to discuss anything long term.
I must be missing where that was reported. I'm up here pretty often and have yet to read a thread about "Dockery Turns Down Offer".

[akhhorus]

More reason to sign your young guys a year or two early, no? Oh, that's right. We're up against the cap every year so we can't afford to do that. Too bad, that.

And I don't have anything against Jansen. He's a good guy and a team player. But paying an older guy on the down slope while letting a young guy go who is entering his prime is, well, the kind of thing a perpetually bad team does. It truly hurts me to say that.

Except that Jansen's new deal frees up money to try and resign that young guy who is entering his prime. If Jansen got a raise, despite him getting up there in years and prevents us from even making a decent offer to Dock, thats what a perpetually bad team does.

[akhhorus]

I must be missing where that was reported. I'm up here pretty often and have yet to read a thread about "Dockery Turns Down Offer".

They were discussing deals last offseason when he was an RFA and have been discussing deals since the last quarter of last season. Either Dock seems bound and determined to test FA, or doesn't like what the skins are offering. I think its the former because of all the cap room available this year.

[BurgundyNGold]

Except that Jansen's new deal frees up money to try and resign that young guy who is entering his prime. If Jansen got a raise, despite him getting up there in years and prevents us from even making a decent offer to Dock, thats what a perpetually bad team does.
I understand the loyalty thing with Jansen. I like it. I understand also that he'll never see most of the money on the back end of that deal. But he's old and has not been the same player the last couple of seasons. Granted, an archilles injury takes time to come back from so maybe this year he regains form. Or, maybe the trend continues and he teeters on the edge of serviceable from here on out. Who knows. I just think that Dock is a better re-sign at this point than paying (probably more) for Steinbach or getting some scrub to try and step in.

[redskin_rich]

More reason to sign your young guys a year or two early, no? Oh, that's right. We're up against the cap every year so we can't afford to do that. Too bad, that.

And I don't have anything against Jansen. He's a good guy and a team player. But paying an older guy on the down slope while letting a young guy go who is entering his prime is, well, the kind of thing a perpetually bad team does. It truly hurts me to say that.
You make it sound as if the Skins purposely didn't try to sign Dock to an extension over the last two years. Betts and Jansen were open to negotiation and re-signed before hitting free agency, Dock hasn't. There are two sides to every negotiation.

[FanFromArizona]

I understand the loyalty thing with Jansen. I like it. I understand also that he'll never see most of the money on the back end of that deal. But he's old and has not been the same player the last couple of seasons. Granted, an archilles injury takes time to come back from so maybe this year he regains form. Or, maybe the trend continues and he teeters on the edge of serviceable from here on out. Who knows. I just think that Dock is a better re-sign at this point than paying (probably more) for Steinbach or getting some scrub to try and step in.

This is ALL about jockeying for money. His agent said they are looking for a lucrative contract, and with the available cap space of teams like Arizona, DD has probably played his last game as a Redskin.

On the topic of paying more, who said that was going to be the case?
We can still be smart about our signings and just not cave in to large salary demands. I on the other hand hope we have a handful of low-signing, low-profile, highly-productive signings that will fill roles that are needed by the team-signings just like we had with Casey Rabach a few years back. It is the ONLY way I see us being able to compete, signing 5-6 Class B to B+ free agents, anything else we just won't be able to fit into our current cap space.

[BurgundyNGold]

You make it sound as if the Skins purposely didn't try to sign Dock to an extension over the last two years. Betts and Jansen were open to negotiation and re-signed before hitting free agency, Dock hasn't. There are two sides to every negotiation.
That's true. When it doesn't get done, I blame both sides. When a pattern emerges of letting our young guys walk more often than not, I blame the FO more than I blame the player.

[BurgundyNGold]

This is ALL about jockeying for money. His agent said they are looking for a lucrative contract, and with the available cap space of teams like Arizona, DD has probably played his last game as a Redskin.

On the topic of paying more, who said that was going to be the case?
We can still be smart about our signings and just not cave in to large salary demands. I on the other hand hope we have a handful of low-signing, low-profile, highly-productive signings that will fill roles that are needed by the team-signings just like we had with Casey Rabach a few years back. It is the ONLY way I see us being able to compete, signing 5-6 Class B to B+ free agents, anything else we just won't be able to fit into our current cap space.
I'd like that too but it ain't going to happen. The problem is that with all the cap space this year, even the B to B+ guys are getting paid A+ coin. And the drop off from top OG (Steinbach and Dockery) to the next level is somewhat steep.

[shally]

I'd like that too but it ain't going to happen. The problem is that with all the cap space this year, even the B to B+ guys are getting paid A+ coin. And the drop off from top OG (Steinbach and Dockery) to the next level is somewhat steep.

on paper that would appear to be the case. but there are guys we could plug in besides dock and steinabch who would do a fine job.. we just need the front office to dig one up..

[OCSkinzFan]

I haven't read this whole thread, but it seems to me that Doc is not going to be a Skin next year.

Do you think that there is any thought to Wade playing Guard? He's too tall but ...

I dunno, just a thought...

[shally]

I haven't read this whole thread, but it seems to me that Doc is not going to be a Skin next year.

Do you think that there is any thought to Wade playing Guard? He's too tall but ...

I dunno, just a thought...

wade will not be a redskin next year because...

he is healthy and wants to play right tackle

the skins already have a right tackle

the pay for right tackle is far better than that for guard in most cases

there are teams who will give him the chance to start for them at right tackle

[OCSkinzFan]

Pucillo then?

[BurgundyNGold]

on paper that would appear to be the case. but there are guys we could plug in besides dock and steinabch who would do a fine job.. we just need the front office to dig one up..
... because that's their specialty, lol. :rolleyes:

[skinsfan36]

well if dock walks i think we will resign pucillo and make a play for someone like steinbach and dielman but more realisticly we may go after a guy like sean mahan from the bucs

[shally]

well if dock walks i think we will resign pucillo and make a play for someone like steinbach and dielman but more realisticly we may go after a guy like sean mahan from the bucs

better mahan i think, than leonard davis or fonoti or reuben brown..

[Aurej]

You look at the players we let walk to those we sign, the only really good signing in my opinion we've made recently is Washington, we let Clark, and Pierce walk and we've made some moronic moves a 2nd rounder for Brunell who was about to be a FA, the most expensive contract ever for a safety, loaded contracts for Randle EL, and a 3rd rounder for LLoyd when will the FO realize home grown talent is the way to go not FA.

[joethefan]

You look at the players we let walk to those we sign, the only really good signing in my opinion we've made recently is Washington, we let Clark, and Pierce walk and we've made some moronic moves a 2nd rounder for Brunell who was about to be a FA, the most expensive contract ever for a safety, loaded contracts for Randle EL, and a 3rd rounder for LLoyd when will the FO realize home grown talent is the way to go not FA.

how many proven years did dock ever play?...how many false starts did he have...he may be home gown talen but good lord he only played well IMO when his behind was on the line....now he wants a monsterous contract....cmon...this offense IMO can function well without him...we just need the right player

[akhhorus]

That's true. When it doesn't get done, I blame both sides. When a pattern emerges of letting our young guys walk more often than not, I blame the FO more than I blame the player.

Like who? Pierce, Smoot, Clark? The first two we fought very hard to keep, and they re-neged on their word. The third we tried to negotiate with, but he wanted to test FA. I'm sure I can find a few teams who let more(and of as the same quality) young players walk without becoming the Raiders(proverbially).

I understand the loyalty thing with Jansen. I like it. I understand also that he'll never see most of the money on the back end of that deal. But he's old and has not been the same player the last couple of seasons. Granted, an archilles injury takes time to come back from so maybe this year he regains form. Or, maybe the trend continues and he teeters on the edge of serviceable from here on out. Who knows. I just think that Dock is a better re-sign at this point than paying (probably more) for Steinbach or getting some scrub to try and step in.

I think Jansen might be the answer at Guard(and that will definitely extend his career 2-3 years), but thats just me thinking out loud here.

[smoak]

Are you serious? The guy has dropped some balls but has proved his worthiness to this team.

Agreed. But if he or Dock or any of these guys are holding out to be paid like the best in the league at their position, I'd let them walk. I'm not saying Cooley or Dock aren't great... They just shouldn't be paid at an elite level at their position. Heck, Cooley isn't even the best TE in the NFC East.

But, the problem with these young players is that they see the deals the Redskins have handed to players like Arch and Lloyd so I can't blame them for asking/thinking "What about me".

[smoak]

Will you make your mind up already? Last post -- the one I responded to -- you were upset because the Iggles seem to lock players up like Darwin Walker two years before their contracts are up. I agree, I'd like to see us do that. Now in this post Dock is at fault if we don't sign him? Look, the guy isn't worth $40M but, as you said, if we had the foresight to lock him up two years ago we wouldn't be having this discussion. Alas, two years ago, Danny and Vinny were too blinded by the prospect of some FA rock having fallen in the carpet, lol.

I'm merely pointing out that I think there is culpability on both sides of the fence. It doesn't 100% fall on the front office or the player... By all accounts, the Redskins have been trying to get Dock done for a couple years. Unfortunately without being at the negotiating table I can not say to what extent their effort was genuine and reasonable...

[Red Bear]

well if dock walks i think we will resign pucillo and make a play for someone like steinbach and dielman but more realisticly we may go after a guy like sean mahan from the bucs

adam schefter of NFL Network said yesterday Dielman will probably get a contract similar to steve hutchinsons. If were guards are demanding that much money then we will probably have to get a cheap vet or trade down in the draft for more picks and get a young guard to replace dockery.

I mentioned in another thread that the vikings screwed up the market with their ridiculous contract to steve hutchinson last year. and people say we overpay, but 7 million a year avg for a guard is just dumb.

[BurgundyNGold]

Like who? Pierce, Smoot, Clark? The first two we fought very hard to keep, and they re-neged on their word. The third we tried to negotiate with, but he wanted to test FA. I'm sure I can find a few teams who let more(and of as the same quality) young players walk without becoming the Raiders(proverbially).
And yet, as much as I hate to say it, the Iggles seem to lock up their young guys early -- without breaking the bank -- before the player gets within whiffing distance of FA. That's more my point, not who left and when. I'm concerned about or lack of urgency before the 11th hour in most cases, by which point it seems that the agent and player are both exaspirated with the process and ready to test FA waters.

Say what you want about Clark, but I remembe that situation differently. The way I remember it, FA started without us offering Clark anything legitimate. The we fired up ol' Redskins One and brought back Adam Archuleta, who we all know is the complete safety. We then proceeded to pay him at or near the most ever for a safety at the time -- which even a moron knows will have an effect on Sean Taylor today, tomorrow and when his contract is up. Around the same time, Ryan Clark signed with Pittsburgh for a very reasonable $7M over 3 years. That situation was typical of the kind of thing this FO does, which, sadly, is a great deal of the reason we can't seem to get over the hump, IMO.

I think Jansen might be the answer at Guard(and that will definitely extend his career 2-3 years), but thats just me thinking out loud here.
I don't think Jansen is fleet of foot enough to run the counter or the trap. I think they're thinking Pucillo or just firing up ol' Redskin One.

[BurgundyNGold]

I'm merely pointing out that I think there is culpability on both sides of the fence. It doesn't 100% fall on the front office or the player... By all accounts, the Redskins have been trying to get Dock done for a couple years. Unfortunately without being at the negotiating table I can not say to what extent their effort was genuine and reasonable...
Astronomers can't see black holes either, but they know they're there because they can see their effects. ;)

I'm sure the player or, perhaps more accurately, the agent have their share to do with this. It doesn't change the fact that the good teams keep their young players because they appreciate the value of continuity. How do they do that? Why don't we? Perhaps because Jeff Laurie is notoriously cheap and the Iggles are perennial contenders, agents feel they might as well get the best they can from him. We, of course, are on the opposite end of that spectrum, waving fists full of cash at anything that passes by in a dress and smells nice like a sailor on shore leave.

Since we don't get many cheap, young players, it's undermines any sense of team, family, "real Redskin" or whatever Joe is trying to build here when the FO does not retain the younger players we do have. Before Dan Snyder, it meant something to be a Redskin. I'm not so sure that it means anything but a paycheck to a lot of them anymore.

One way works and one doesn't. I'll let everyone decide which is which.

[BurgundyNGold]

adam schefter of NFL Network said yesterday Dielman will probably get a contract similar to steve hutchinsons. If were guards are demanding that much money then we will probably have to get a cheap vet or trade down in the draft for more picks and get a young guard to replace dockery.

I mentioned in another thread that the vikings screwed up the market with their ridiculous contract to steve hutchinson last year. and people say we overpay, but 7 million a year avg for a guard is just dumb.
While I agree with you, Chester Taylor might argue that point. Hutch instantly made that line noticeably better.

[ChiefPowhatan17]

Oh well there goes the chemistry of the line... But, also the false start penalty, one per game this season.

[Redskin4Life]

well if dock walks i think we will resign pucillo and make a play for someone like steinbach and dielman but more realisticly we may go after a guy like sean mahan from the bucs
I think we'll resign Pucillo regardless of Dock. He played well as a third TE, blocking TE for us near the goalline. With Pucillo, you get a guy that's a TE/C/G.... and if he can catch, WATCH OUT.

[dj_stouty]

Agreed. But if he or Dock or any of these guys are holding out to be paid like the best in the league at their position, I'd let them walk. I'm not saying Cooley or Dock aren't great... They just shouldn't be paid at an elite level at their position. Heck, Cooley isn't even the best TE in the NFC East..

LOL. The NFC East has the best collective talent at the TE position in the league, so not being the best isn't a bad thing.

I agree that Cooley needs to start holding onto the ball more often...but the guy has been a top tier TE for the Redskins. Only Gates and Shockey have more TDs than Cooley over the past three seasons, and he has just as many TDs as Crumpler. That is "top tier" company to be compared to.

So I think it is very safe to say he is in the top 5 or 6 in TEs in this league...and his rookie contract has been so low over the past 3 years, he has been an absolute steal compared to his production. And to think...the majority of Redskins Nation boo'ed Gibbs for trading up for him.

I said it a year ago and I'll say it now. We need to lock Cooley into a manageable deal NOW before he gets into the same situation Dock is in. In fact, I could argue that Cooley is ranked higher amongst his TE peers than Dock is ranked compared to his OG peers. Wouldn't you rather pay him like a top 10 TE now, instead of a top 3 TE a year from now?

Trust me...if we want consistency and more home grown players on this squad in the future, then they need to be locked up a year before their existing contract is over.

[SkinsfaninNJ]

LOL. The NFC East has the best collective talent at the TE position in the league, so not being the best isn't a bad thing.

I agree that Cooley needs to start holding onto the ball more often...but the guy has been a top tier TE for the Redskins. Only Gates and Shockey have more TDs than Cooley over the past three seasons, and he has just as many TDs as Crumpler. That is "top tier" company to be compared to.

So I think it is very safe to say he is in the top 5 or 6 in TEs in this league...and his rookie contract has been so low over the past 3 years, he has been an absolute steal compared to his production. And to think...the majority of Redskins Nation boo'ed Gibbs for trading up for him.

I said it a year ago and I'll say it now. We need to lock Cooley into a manageable deal NOW before he gets into the same situation Dock is in. In fact, I could argue that Cooley is ranked higher amongst his TE peers than Dock is ranked compared to his OG peers. Wouldn't you rather pay him like a top 10 TE now, instead of a top 3 TE a year from now?

Trust me...if we want consistency and more home grown players on this squad in the future, then they need to be locked up a year before their existing contract is over.
I agree about Cooley. I may romanticizing things a bit because he is my current favorite player, but I think he means more to our O than any other player including CP or Moss. I just think that position in this offense demands a smart player, and that's what he is.

[smoak]

LOL. The NFC East has the best collective talent at the TE position in the league, so not being the best isn't a bad thing.

I agree that Cooley needs to start holding onto the ball more often...but the guy has been a top tier TE for the Redskins. Only Gates and Shockey have more TDs than Cooley over the past three seasons, and he has just as many TDs as Crumpler. That is "top tier" company to be compared to.

So I think it is very safe to say he is in the top 5 or 6 in TEs in this league...and his rookie contract has been so low over the past 3 years, he has been an absolute steal compared to his production. And to think...the majority of Redskins Nation boo'ed Gibbs for trading up for him.

I said it a year ago and I'll say it now. We need to lock Cooley into a manageable deal NOW before he gets into the same situation Dock is in. In fact, I could argue that Cooley is ranked higher amongst his TE peers than Dock is ranked compared to his OG peers. Wouldn't you rather pay him like a top 10 TE now, instead of a top 3 TE a year from now?

Trust me...if we want consistency and more home grown players on this squad in the future, then they need to be locked up a year before their existing contract is over.

I won't split hairs and argue where Cooley belongs in terms of rankings, but just like Dock, I personally wouldn't pay him top 3 money at his position. I couldn't agree more about locking these guys up early though... I think Cooley could average 70-80 catches a year in this system so I would lock him up long term. I just wouldn't make him the highest paid player at his position.

I wonder how the fan base will react if we lose Cooley next year? I know I'd be bummed.

[BIGSEF3]

i think we have a problem resigning our own players because we have developed a pattern of overpaying for other teams's players. we give players like lloyd, ARE, AA and Carter rediculous contracts for their level of skill to come play for us. Players on our team see that, and when its their turn, they expect to be overpaid to.

However, they see that WE dont pay alot to keep our own players, and they envy the free agents who signed with us. They start to think - "someone will overpay for me if i go somewhere else." In the end, they PREFER to go somewhere else.

This team will never retain its own players as long as we continue to overspend for free agents. Whether we are able to keep dock now or not, we need to TRY VERY HARD. Whether we do or not, we need to get Cooley and Taylor signed to extensions now, so we arent dealing with this same dilema next year.

Sure, it would give us less cap room to play with this year, but we need to stop the madness. For every hole we fill, we end up creating two more because we lose guys. We are always going to have HUGE holes to fill on our team every year unless we start signing players to long-term extensions before their contracts expire.

[redskin_rich]

I won't split hairs and argue where Cooley belongs in terms of rankings, but just like Dock, I personally wouldn't pay him top 3 money at his position. I couldn't agree more about locking these guys up early though... I think Cooley could average 70-80 catches a year in this system so I would lock him up long term. I just wouldn't make him the highest paid player at his position.

I wonder how the fan base will react if we lose Cooley next year? I know I'd be bummed.
TE is almost the cheapest position full time position in the league, only special teamers make less. To franchise Cooley, it would only cost $4 Mil for the season.
I would have no problem with Cooley getting the deal that Lloyd, Arch, ARE and Carter got last year, even if it made Cooley the highest paid TE in the league.

[dj_stouty]

I won't split hairs and argue where Cooley belongs in terms of rankings, but just like Dock, I personally wouldn't pay him top 3 money at his position. I couldn't agree more about locking these guys up early though... I think Cooley could average 70-80 catches a year in this system so I would lock him up long term. I just wouldn't make him the highest paid player at his position.

I wonder how the fan base will react if we lose Cooley next year? I know I'd be bummed.

I'm curious...

What "ranking" would you give Cooley in terms of TEs...and what "ranking" would you give Dock in terms of OGs?

(example: Cooley is xth ranked TE and Dock is xth ranked OG)

[smoak]

I'm curious...

What "ranking" would you give Cooley in terms of TEs...and what "ranking" would you give Dock in terms of OGs?

(example: Cooley is xth ranked TE and Dock is xth ranked OG)

OGs is difficult b/c I don't see all teams play. I could do it, but I'll need to look through all the Gs and put a little thought into it. There will be guys I forget if I don't.

For Cooley, I'd rank him in the top 10, but with a asterisk that says I think he has a ton of upside and that I wouldn't swap him for any player at his position. Off the top of my head and in terms of right now, I'd put Gates, Shockey, Tony G, Crumpler, Heap, and Witten ahead him. Winslow is better if he could stay healthy (he can't). McMichael belongs in the discussion. Vernon Davis and Scheffler will push for top 10 next season....

So I guess if I had to put a # to it I'd put Cooley around #6-7 with potential to be top 5 as early as next year. My point is just that I would not make him the highest paid player in the league at his position.

I feel like I am forgetting someone else though?

[dj_stouty]

OGs is difficult b/c I don't see all teams play. I could do it, but I'll need to look through all the Gs and put a little thought into it. There will be guys I forget if I don't.

For Cooley, I'd rank him in the top 10, but with a asterisk that says I think he has a ton of upside and that I wouldn't swap him for any player at his position. Off the top of my head and in terms of right now, I'd put Gates, Shockey, Tony G, Crumpler, Heap, and Witten ahead him. Winslow is better if he could stay healthy (he can't). McMichael belongs in the discussion. Vernon Davis and Scheffler will push for top 10 next season....

So I guess if I had to put a # to it I'd put Cooley around #6-7 with potential to be top 5 as early as next year. My point is just that I would not make him the highest paid player in the league at his position.

I feel like I am forgetting someone else though?

I think 6th or 7th is fair for him...and everyone knows Cooley would never command the money Antonio Gates got. (6 years, 24 million) But paying him like a top 5 TE now is much better than waiting a year and him asking to be paid like the Gonzo or Gates.

You are right...it is tough to rank OGs...but I'm inclined to say Dock isn't even in the top 20 in the league. Yet, he is probably asking for top 5/10 money, making his request much more riduculous than anything Cooley could ask for.

[smoak]

I think 6th or 7th is fair for him...and everyone knows Cooley would never command the money Antonio Gates got. (6 years, 24 million) But paying him like a top 5 TE now is much better than waiting a year and him asking to be paid like the Gonzo or Gates.

You are right...it is tough to rank OGs...but I'm inclined to say Dock isn't even in the top 20 in the league. Yet, he is probably asking for top 5/10 money, making his request much more riduculous than anything Cooley could ask for.

We're on exactly the same page. I'm not anti-Cooley at all.... but for whatever reason I could see him asking to be the highest paid TE in the league.... Especially after he leads the team in receptions and TD while getting his first Pro Bowl nod in '07. ;)

Lock him up now!!!

[Emmanouel8]

i think we have a problem resigning our own players because we have developed a pattern of overpaying for other teams's players. we give players like lloyd, ARE, AA and Carter rediculous contracts for their level of skill to come play for us. Players on our team see that, and when its their turn, they expect to be overpaid to.

However, they see that WE dont pay alot to keep our own players, and they envy the free agents who signed with us. They start to think - "someone will overpay for me if i go somewhere else." In the end, they PREFER to go somewhere else.

This team will never retain its own players as long as we continue to overspend for free agents. Whether we are able to keep dock now or not, we need to TRY VERY HARD. Whether we do or not, we need to get Cooley and Taylor signed to extensions now, so we arent dealing with this same dilema next year.

Sure, it would give us less cap room to play with this year, but we need to stop the madness. For every hole we fill, we end up creating two more because we lose guys. We are always going to have HUGE holes to fill on our team every year unless we start signing players to long-term extensions before their contracts expire.


This is very true. FO is not operating very well.

They IMO should be targeting players they want to keep and resigning them with a year or two left under contract. The FO constantly follows it's same 'miser policy;' taking every advantage of the salary cap space good players at a modest price provide, so they can make a big splash, and produce another offseason Super bowl trophy.

They need to have more vision and patience. Things will never be different as long as these clowns think we're always a few big names away from the dance. Pffffft.

[dj_stouty]

Check this out...

http://cache.denverbroncos.com/resources/custom/Team/gardener_mug.jpghttp://www.redskins.com/uploads/photos/perm/main/PNHFHHIACGJH/Dockery_Derrick.jpg

Shave out some of Dock's hairline and he looks a lot like our old Friend, Darryl Gardener, who also bolted for greener pastures.

[akhhorus]

And yet, as much as I hate to say it, the Iggles seem to lock up their young guys early -- without breaking the bank -- before the player gets within whiffing distance of FA. That's more my point, not who left and when. I'm concerned about or lack of urgency before the 11th hour in most cases, by which point it seems that the agent and player are both exaspirated with the process and ready to test FA waters.

Actually, they've let more players walk than we ever have, and are about to let at least another young pro bowler of theirs(Lewis) walk without a fight. They do lock up some players, but they also let a lot walk. The difference is that they have concepts that work(mostly) on offense and defense and a legit A star(s) on each side of the ball to build around, which means they can drop and plug in system players and be fine with it. The best example of this was the 06 season when they lost McNabb and Kearse, and didn't miss much of a beat at either position.

Say what you want about Clark, but I remembe that situation differently. The way I remember it, FA started without us offering Clark anything legitimate. The we fired up ol' Redskins One and brought back Adam Archuleta, who we all know is the complete safety. We then proceeded to pay him at or near the most ever for a safety at the time -- which even a moron knows will have an effect on Sean Taylor today, tomorrow and when his contract is up. Around the same time, Ryan Clark signed with Pittsburgh for a very reasonable $7M over 3 years. That situation was typical of the kind of thing this FO does, which, sadly, is a great deal of the reason we can't seem to get over the hump, IMO.

Even if you're right about all that, thats still only 1 we didn't fight for at all. I remember us making him offers, but he wanted to test FA. FA started, we went after Arch and Clark was sol.

I don't think Jansen is fleet of foot enough to run the counter or the trap. I think they're thinking Pucillo or just firing up ol' Redskin One.

If he's fleet of foot enough to play RT, he's certainly fast enough to pull and trap.

[BurgundyNGold]

Check this out...

http://www.redskins.com/uploads/photos/perm/main/PNHFHHIACGJH/Dockery_Derrick.jpg

Shave out some of Dock's hairline and he looks a lot like our old Friend, Darryl Gardener, who also bolted for greener pastures.

http://www.prato.linux.it/~lmasetti/antiwarsongs/img/upl/klingon.jpg

It's like I've got double vision, lol.

[BurgundyNGold]

Actually, they've let more players walk than we ever have, and are about to let at least another young pro bowler of theirs(Lewis) walk without a fight. They do lock up some players, but they also let a lot walk. The difference is that they have concepts that work(mostly) on offense and defense and a legit A star(s) on each side of the ball to build around, which means they can drop and plug in system players and be fine with it. The best example of this was the 06 season when they lost McNabb and Kearse, and didn't miss much of a beat at either position.
Most of the guys they let walk are, as you say, system players. Or they're older. I don't think it's a mistake that an overrated Trotter left, failed, returned and is overrated yet again. Maybe they've figured something out up in Philly. They sure do have a lot of pro bowlers. It's the system, not the highlight reel FAs.

Even if you're right about all that, thats still only 1 we didn't fight for at all. I remember us making him offers, but he wanted to test FA. FA started, we went after Arch and Clark was sol.
The players have openly griped about the perceived policy to let homegrown players walk. I think ours is a failed personnel policy that slaughters morale before the season even gets started and even Joe Gibbs can't change that.

If he's fleet of foot enough to play RT, he's certainly fast enough to pull and trap.
I don't think he's that fleet of foot, to be honest with you. Not since the injury at least.

[cmdlost29]

I agree 100%. We need to reward the players that come in here and perform, dump the players that perform subpar, and quit looking outside the team walls for solutions. If we are going to over pay for players it should be for our own players rather then someone elses. When we get players from other teams we only see them on the field, we don't see the mental issues they might have (Lloyd) and do not see the reasons why they were expendable (Arch, Carter, etc) until we have them signed up to big contracts. If these playmakers were really that good to begin with why were they let go? We are fighting a losing battle in FA. The main source of our problems is our inability to evaluate players. Why else would the guys who have left here performed better at cheaper prices then the premadonnas we brought in to replace them? If our FO is silly enough to think we are going to get better value from some other team out there to replace Dockery they are fooling themselves. Sure Dockery has some mental breakdowns with false starts but that is correctable. When we get his replacement if we get him cheaply there will be reasons why. The league knows you come to the Skins to get paid well, our FO has ruined our ability to negotiate these days.


i think we have a problem resigning our own players because we have developed a pattern of overpaying for other teams's players. we give players like lloyd, ARE, AA and Carter rediculous contracts for their level of skill to come play for us. Players on our team see that, and when its their turn, they expect to be overpaid to.

However, they see that WE dont pay alot to keep our own players, and they envy the free agents who signed with us. They start to think - "someone will overpay for me if i go somewhere else." In the end, they PREFER to go somewhere else.

This team will never retain its own players as long as we continue to overspend for free agents. Whether we are able to keep dock now or not, we need to TRY VERY HARD. Whether we do or not, we need to get Cooley and Taylor signed to extensions now, so we arent dealing with this same dilema next year.

Sure, it would give us less cap room to play with this year, but we need to stop the madness. For every hole we fill, we end up creating two more because we lose guys. We are always going to have HUGE holes to fill on our team every year unless we start signing players to long-term extensions before their contracts expire.

[Skins7ny]

What is telling is that to even sign Betts at his marginal contract, we had to restructure like two or three guys.

The reason we don't/can't resign these young guys during the season is because we never leave any cap room during the season to negotiate new deals. The Eagles on the other hand leave about 10 mil under the cap every year, so they have tons of room to sign young guys to long term deals before they get too close to free agency.

We should look into adopting that strategy because it is working for Philly and we're struggling to shift around money so we can squeeze in a guy like Betts.

There is no question that we overpay for every free agent we sign. We seem to always propose marraige on the first date, we show up with a huge rock and our private jet. We offer people like Deion and ARE much more money than they would have gotten elsewhere, by all accounts. It is like we have an inferiority complex and feel we have to overpay to get the player to sign with us. (Just my $0.02 psychoanalysis). That seems to hamper us from overpaying our own guys and preventing them from testing the market. Our players see us overpaying for players from other teams, they are going to want us to overpay them, too. That said, I can't blame a guy like Dockery for trying to get what he can-careers in football are too short, and an injury can terminate his earning power on one play. Just ask LeCharls Bentley!

[akhhorus]

Most of the guys they let walk are, as you say, system players. Or they're older. I don't think it's a mistake that an overrated Trotter left, failed, returned and is overrated yet again. Maybe they've figured something out up in Philly. They sure do have a lot of pro bowlers. It's the system, not the highlight reel FAs.

But letting Taylor and Vincent walk for two rookie/second year players was a leap of faith(that did pay off). Even if you look at their super bowl team from 2004, they don't have: 3 lbs(starters and key players) in Adams, Ike Reese and Simoneau--their whole Dline (plus hugh douglas) besides Kearse(who might be cut or dealt), 2-3 Olinemen and 4 of their top 6 receivers(TO, Pinkston, Chad Lewis and Freddie Mitchell). Thats amazing that they've been able to dump more talent than we have and not miss a beat. Even more, look at New England's 2004 team and how many they've lost from that squad. Losing talent and letting it walk isn't the reason a team fails(and isn't the reason the skins have failed).

The players have openly griped about the perceived policy to let homegrown players walk. I think ours is a failed personnel policy that slaughters morale before the season even gets started and even Joe Gibbs can't change that.

We've-to the best of my knowledge-have heard Portis complain about that. But I think thats symptomatic of why you see complaining here about it. Its convenient to point at what superficially has changed between 05 and 06 and blame that for the failures of 2006--but by that logic, the loss of Chris Clemons and Lavar Love Hewitt is to blame for the failed pass rush. Which we know is ridiculous.

I don't think he's that fleet of foot, to be honest with you. Not since the injury at least.

For a tackle, perhaps. But for a guard, I think he'd be great.

[akhhorus]

There is no question that we overpay for every free agent we sign. We seem to always propose marraige on the first date, we show up with a huge rock and our private jet. We offer people like Deion and ARE much more money than they would have gotten elsewhere, by all accounts. It is like we have an inferiority complex and feel we have to overpay to get the player to sign with us. (Just my $0.02 psychoanalysis). That seems to hamper us from overpaying our own guys and preventing them from testing the market. Our players see us overpaying for players from other teams, they are going to want us to overpay them, too. That said, I can't blame a guy like Dockery for trying to get what he can-careers in football are too short, and an injury can terminate his earning power on one play. Just ask LeCharls Bentley!

Except we got guys like Griff, Washington, Rabach, ARE and Randy Thomas to sign the skins' offers which weren't the biggest offers(yearly average and overall value) they received. Marcus Washington got bigger offers from the Steelers and Colts I believe, Griff got a bigger offer from Falcons I believe, Thomas was offered a bigger yearly average by the Jets, etc etc etc.

[Meatsnack]

I may be fading into my dotage and misremembering but I don’t seem to recall that Randy Thomas was on everyone’s lips as the best guard you could buy back when we went on our Jetskins acquisition spree. And yet, most would agree he has been our best or at least most consistent lineman since his arrival. Even if Dockery walks, I will have faith that Bugel has a contingency plan in place until evidence shows otherwise. It isn’t like he has no idea of what Dockery is capable of and how hard it would be to replace him.

[skinsfan36]

it will be interesting to see how much contract talks pick up on monday with dock as gibbs said in an interview today

[Skins7ny]

Except we got guys like Griff, Washington, Rabach, ARE and Randy Thomas to sign the skins' offers which weren't the biggest offers(yearly average and overall value) they received. Marcus Washington got bigger offers from the Steelers and Colts I believe, Griff got a bigger offer from Falcons I believe, Thomas was offered a bigger yearly average by the Jets, etc etc etc.
You may have a better memory than me about this, but I don't remember MW getting a better offer from the Steelers, I seem to remember he cancelled his visit with them after visiting Redskins Park, as a lot of FAs do. I also don't remember hearing anything about Griffin getting a bigger offer from the Falcons, or Thomas getting a bigger offer from the Jets. The word around the league was that no one was offering Deion more than a $5M signing bonus, and we offered him $8M, and that the only other serious suitor for ARE was Chicago, and their offer was much, much less than ours. Maybe we felt we had to blow Chicago's offer away since ARE is from there, that is possible, but most people around the league felt that ARE is a role player who is not worth anywhere near what we paid him, and he has done nothing in his career to contradict that notion. Also, an $8M signing bonus for Mark Brunell at that point in his career was totally unnecessary. Ditto Brandon Lloyd for $10M. The Broncos were competing heavily for Andre Carter, so I understand the need to make a huge offer. It just seems like everyone gets the Danny Special (5 or 6 years, $30M total value, $10M SB). Even if the numbers are fake b/c they are backloaded, it forces us to accelerate the signing bonuses 3 years after the contract when the big annual salaries kick in. That is why we have no cap room.

None of which really would be a problem, admittedly, if we were winning.

[akhhorus]

You may have a better memory than me about this, but I don't remember MW getting a better offer from the Steelers, I seem to remember he cancelled his visit with them after visiting Redskins Park, as a lot of FAs do. I also don't remember hearing anything about Griffin getting a bigger offer from the Falcons, or Thomas getting a bigger offer from the Jets.

The Marcus Washington thing was widely reported(especially with Polian still whining about it as late as last offseason). The Griff and Thomas things came out after they were here awhile. I remember THomas saying it several times on the radio.

The word around the league was that no one was offering Deion more than a $5M signing bonus, and we offered him $8M, and that the only other serious suitor for ARE was Chicago, and their offer was much, much less than ours.

Jeez, Jethro Tull, a lot has changed since the Deion Debacle and you're still whining about that? And 3 million more in a signing bonus isn't that much frankly. And I recall that Chicago made ARE an offer at least as good as we made him. From what I recall, they offered him 18 million plus a 5-7 million bonus.

Maybe we felt we had to blow Chicago's offer away since ARE is from there, that is possible, but most people around the league felt that ARE is a role player who is not worth anywhere near what we paid him, and he has done nothing in his career to contradict that notion. Also, an $8M signing bonus for Mark Brunell at that point in his career was totally unnecessary.

Considering his base salaries were low, and he got us to the playoffs, 8 million is fairly cheap. Including his S-Bonus, Brunell got 12 million for 3 years from us if he's cut this offseason. Thats fairly cheap.

Ditto Brandon Lloyd for $10M.

Lloyd got 5 million and 5 million in roster bonuses.

The Broncos were competing heavily for Andre Carter, so I understand the need to make a huge offer. It just seems like everyone gets the Danny Special (5 or 6 years, $30M total value, $10M SB). Even if the numbers are fake b/c they are backloaded, it forces us to accelerate the signing bonuses 3 years after the contract when the big annual salaries kick in. That is why we have no cap room.

5 million signing bonus and 5 million in roster bonuses, and no, these deals aren't why we have no room. We have little room this year because Portis, Washington, Griffin, Springs and a few others' base salaries jump up significantly.

None of which really would be a problem, admittedly, if we were winning.

Ah...so if we were winning none of this would matter. So..if we were drafting quality players, keeping our young/drafted players and keeping the cap situation low, but losing, what would you whine about then? Maybe you would be happier if you rooted for another team that ran their franchise they way you wanted them to?

[skinfanjon]

I may be fading into my dotage and misremembering but I don’t seem to recall that Randy Thomas was on everyone’s lips as the best guard you could buy back when we went on our Jetskins acquisition spree. And yet, most would agree he has been our best or at least most consistent lineman since his arrival. Even if Dockery walks, I will have faith that Bugel has a contingency plan in place until evidence shows otherwise. It isn’t like he has no idea of what Dockery is capable of and how hard it would be to replace him.

This is the category I fall into in this situation. I realize our coaching staff is not infallable, as evidenced by GW's poor judgement in the past, but Buges has yet to let me down. If he were to come out and make some statements about how necessary it is too keep him, or in a more likely scenario, Gibbs echoed Buges thoughts openly, I would be far more uncomfortable with the prospect of losing Dock. However, even in the absence of serious vocal support from either, it does bother me to let an early round draft pick that has actually panned out to get away for nothing, especially with the looming expiring contracts of Sean Taylor and Chris Cooley.

I would love to keep Dock, both to preserve continuity of the offensive line and because he is still improving as a player. I think overall it may be more cost productive to slightly overpay Dock and lock up the position long term than to spend the time, money and draft picks to replace him. But if we let him get away, I'm sure Buges has endorsed it to at least some extent, and that make me feel somewhat better about it. If only we hadn't used up cap room and draft picks on Lloyd, this problem would be much easier to solve.

[Red Bear]

This is the category I fall into in this situation. I realize our coaching staff is not infallable, as evidenced by GW's poor judgement in the past, but Buges has yet to let me down. If he were to come out and make some statements about how necessary it is too keep him, or in a more likely scenario, Gibbs echoed Buges thoughts openly, I would be far more uncomfortable with the prospect of losing Dock. However, even in the absence of serious vocal support from either, it does bother me to let an early round draft pick that has actually panned out to get away for nothing, especially with the looming expiring contracts of Sean Taylor and Chris Cooley.

I would love to keep Dock, both to preserve continuity of the offensive line and because he is still improving as a player. I think overall it may be more cost productive to slightly overpay Dock and lock up the position long term than to spend the time, money and draft picks to replace him. But if we let him get away, I'm sure Buges has endorsed it to at least some extent, and that make me feel somewhat better about it. If only we hadn't used up cap room and draft picks on Lloyd, this problem would be much easier to solve.

the redskins have stated several times openly to the media keeping dockery is a priority. i dont think gibbs or bugel would endorse letting dock get away. also, sean taylors contract is nowhere near expiring for another 3-4 years. as for lloyd, you cant go back in time, he is a redskin and you cant blame one contract on any cap related issues we may have.

[shally]

the redskins have stated several times openly to the media keeping dockery is a priority. i dont think gibbs or bugel would endorse letting dock get away. also, sean taylors contract is nowhere near expiring for another 3-4 years. as for lloyd, you cant go back in time, he is a redskin and you cant blame one contract on any cap related issues we may have.

let's see what lloyd does this year, maybe second year inthe system makes a difference ?? at least i hope so

as for dockery, it will still come down to what your #4 o lineman is worth to the team.. that is the harsh reality of life under the cap

[Skins7ny]

The Marcus Washington thing was widely reported(especially with Polian still whining about it as late as last offseason). The Griff and Thomas things came out after they were here awhile. I remember THomas saying it several times on the radio.



Jeez, Jethro Tull, a lot has changed since the Deion Debacle and you're still whining about that? And 3 million more in a signing bonus isn't that much frankly. And I recall that Chicago made ARE an offer at least as good as we made him. From what I recall, they offered him 18 million plus a 5-7 million bonus.
Considering his base salaries were low, and he got us to the playoffs, 8 million is fairly cheap. Including his S-Bonus, Brunell got 12 million for 3 years from us if he's cut this offseason. Thats fairly cheap.



Lloyd got 5 million and 5 million in roster bonuses.



5 million signing bonus and 5 million in roster bonuses, and no, these deals aren't why we have no room. We have little room this year because Portis, Washington, Griffin, Springs and a few others' base salaries jump up significantly.



Ah...so if we were winning none of this would matter. So..if we were drafting quality players, keeping our young/drafted players and keeping the cap situation low, but losing, what would you whine about then? Maybe you would be happier if you rooted for another team that ran their franchise they way you wanted them to?

(1) Jethro Tull? I have never been called that before, but I guess there is a first for everything! Actually, not a lot has changed since the Deion debacle. Our FO still chases after big names for big money with no regard for whether they can still play, fit in our system (Archuleta), or are just using us to score a big payday or extricate themselves from a bad situation (Lloyd).
(2) Our offer to ARE was 7 years-$31M, with a $10M SB. That is considerably better than $18M and a $7M SB, or are you math-impaired? Why do you think he took our offer over his hometown Bears? Because he likes crab cakes more than keilbasa?
(3) Mark Brunell got us to the playoffs last year? Did you actually watch those games? You've got to be kidding me!! To use another music reference, that is like saying that Andrew Ridgley went to #1 in the 80's-technically true, but we succeeded despite him, not because of him on that 6-0 run at the end of the year. In the end, we couldn't overcome his ineptitude and it cost us in the playoffs. Your continued defense of Brunell is predictable and tiresome.
(4) No, because if we were winning, that would mean that the FO was bringing in and overpaying for players who produced. 5-11 means that they are bringing in players that are NOT producing, and that I have a real problem with. If you are really a Redskins fan, you should too. I, and other Redskins fans, just want to win, preferably with some class and dignity if at all possible. As usual, your counter-argument is based on a false choice that you ascribe to me. Your debating skills really stink. If we were drafting quality players and keeping them, we probably wouldn't be losing, but if we were, I would be unhappy. I don't like losing, period. And yes, I really dislike how the FO has gone about trying to win since Dan Snyder took over. You can change the argument all you want, and put words in my mouth all you want, and maintain your lousy snarky condescending attitude all you want, but you can't run away from two playoff appearances in 7 years. Maybe YOU would be happier rooting for another team that year in and year out doesn't have such high expectations: then you wouldn't have to suffer people like me complaining about losing.

[akhhorus]

(1) Jethro Tull? I have never been called that before, but I guess there is a first for everything! Actually, not a lot has changed since the Deion debacle. Our FO still chases after big names for big money with no regard for whether they can still play, fit in our system (Archuleta), or are just using us to score a big payday or extricate themselves from a bad situation (Lloyd).

No, the Skins are nothing like the skins from 2000. If you really don't see any difference, then discussing football is pointless with you.

(2) Our offer to ARE was 7 years-$31M, with a $10M SB. That is considerably better than $18M and a $7M SB, or are you math-impaired? Why do you think he took our offer over his hometown Bears? Because he likes crab cakes more than keilbasa?

Is it too much to ask that you get your facts right once? We gave ARE a 8 million dollar signing bonus, and 27 million over 6 years--not 7/31 with a 10 million bonus. Our offer was about the same as the Bears'(I don't know how they loaded their offer).

(3) Mark Brunell got us to the playoffs last year? Did you actually watch those games? You've got to be kidding me!! To use another music reference, that is like saying that Andrew Ridgley went to #1 in the 80's-technically true, but we succeeded despite him, not because of him on that 6-0 run at the end of the year. In the end, we couldn't overcome his ineptitude and it cost us in the playoffs. Your continued defense of Brunell is predictable and tiresome.

Yeah, I actually did watch him play. I watched him throw for over 3000 yards and have 20+ tds versus about 12 INTs. Heaven forbid we should have a QB play so "poorly". And 12 million for the last 3 seasons of Brunell is rather cheap.

(4) No, because if we were winning, that would mean that the FO was bringing in and overpaying for players who produced. 5-11 means that they are bringing in players that are NOT producing, and that I have a real problem with. If you are really a Redskins fan, you should too. I, and other Redskins fans, just want to win, preferably with some class and dignity if at all possible. As usual, your counter-argument is based on a false choice that you ascribe to me. Your debating skills really stink. If we were drafting quality players and keeping them, we probably wouldn't be losing, but if we were, I would be unhappy. I don't like losing, period. And yes, I really dislike how the FO has gone about trying to win since Dan Snyder took over. You can change the argument all you want, and put words in my mouth all you want, and maintain your lousy snarky condescending attitude all you want, but you can't run away from two playoff appearances in 7 years. Maybe YOU would be happier rooting for another team that year in and year out doesn't have such high expectations: then you wouldn't have to suffer people like me complaining about losing.

LOL, this is from High Chief Superiority Complex here? You do nothing but whine here about the skins and their moves. Nothing. And when anyone calls you out on it, you get defensive and start claiming you're being personally attacked or accusing them of exactly what you do. You were an annoying troll, but now you're just comically ridiculous. One of the best side effects of the skins getting back to winning will be the deafening silence coming from you because you won't be able to bitch and moan like you love to do. Honestly, you really should do everyone a favor and find another team to root for. Nothing the skins will do will ever please you. They could dump Snyder and Cerrato and you'll whine about who replaces them. They could do everything you whine they should do, and you'll still find something to complain about. Frankly, you're not a happy person, and I'm about 99.9% sure you're like this about everything in your life.

[BurgundyNGold]

But letting Taylor and Vincent walk for two rookie/second year players was a leap of faith(that did pay off). Even if you look at their super bowl team from 2004, they don't have: 3 lbs(starters and key players) in Adams, Ike Reese and Simoneau--their whole Dline (plus hugh douglas) besides Kearse(who might be cut or dealt), 2-3 Olinemen and 4 of their top 6 receivers(TO, Pinkston, Chad Lewis and Freddie Mitchell). Thats amazing that they've been able to dump more talent than we have and not miss a beat. Even more, look at New England's 2004 team and how many they've lost from that squad. Losing talent and letting it walk isn't the reason a team fails(and isn't the reason the skins have failed).
Yet, they maintain the "core Iggles" and "core Pats", whoever they are. The continuity is seemingly unaffected and the system keeps chugging along. We have not put a premium on that, I think. We say one thing and do another. There was no honesty before Gibbs got here and he's the only honest thing in the process now.

We've-to the best of my knowledge-have heard Portis complain about that. But I think thats symptomatic of why you see complaining here about it. Its convenient to point at what superficially has changed between 05 and 06 and blame that for the failures of 2006--but by that logic, the loss of Chris Clemons and Lavar Love Hewitt is to blame for the failed pass rush. Which we know is ridiculous.
Our loyaloty and continuity breakdowns go back 7 years since Snyder took over. Before that, it was ownership turmoil and ineptitude. Until proven otherwise and given the Snyder era of 2000-2006, logic dictates that 2005 was the anomoly, not 2006. I have faith that isn't the case, but I'm sure I'm in the minority if we polled fans of all 32 teams and asked them what they though about our "Shop and Awwww" FA policy.

For a tackle, perhaps. But for a guard, I think he'd be great.Guards are generally smaller and quicker than tackles for a reason -- so they can pull and trap. If a RT had especially good feet or quickness, he'd likely be a LT. I just don't see Jansen playing OG in the kind of line that Saunders has been known to employ.

[Emmanouel8]

Guards are generally smaller and quicker than tackles for a reason -- so they can pull and trap. If a RT had especially good feet or quickness, he'd likely be a LT. I just don't see Jansen playing OG in the kind of line that Saunders has been known to employ.

I don't know how Jensen would work out as a guard but I always felt Tackles were the one's with the quick feet to keep DE from blowing by them, and Guards were the beefy guys to slow down DT?!

*Generally Speaking*

[shally]

Yet, they maintain the "core Iggles" and "core Pats", whoever they are. The continuity is seemingly unaffected and the system keeps chugging along. We have not put a premium on that, I think. We say one thing and do another. There was no honesty before Gibbs got here and he's the only honest thing in the process now.


Our loyaloty and continuity breakdowns go back 7 years since Snyder took over. Before that, it was ownership turmoil and ineptitude. Until proven otherwise and given the Snyder era of 2000-2006, logic dictates that 2005 was the anomoly, not 2006. I have faith that isn't the case, but I'm sure I'm in the minority if we polled fans of all 32 teams and asked them what they though about our "Shop and Awwww" FA policy.

Guards are generally smaller and quicker than tackles for a reason -- so they can pull and trap. If a RT had especially good feet or quickness, he'd likely be a LT. I just don't see Jansen playing OG in the kind of line that Saunders has been known to employ.

i have said this more than once.. one of the reasons that jansen does not play LT is that he needs to play the right side of the line.. some players just cannot transition from right to left and vice versa, as some people are more right handed than others..... this is over and above the issues of watching the qb's blind side and being able to play without the help of the tight end against speed rushers..

assuming that the skins wanted jansen to move to guard, he would have to play right guard and that means that randy thomas would potentially have to move (if he could).. this kind of domino effect would serve to weaken the line exponentially with every player shifted.

so it is not just the concept of jansen moving inside that is at issue

[shally]

I don't know how Jensen would work out as a guard but I always felt Tackles were the one's with the quick feet to keep DE from blowing by them, and Guards were the beefy guys to slow down DT?!

*Generally Speaking*

depends upon the scheme.. denver has always looked for linemen who were light on their feet, regardless of what position they play

[BurgundyNGold]

I don't know how Jensen would work out as a guard but I always felt Tackles were the one's with the quick feet to keep DE from blowing by them, and Guards were the beefy guys to slow down DT?!
Guards have gotten heavier in recent years, but they still have to be fleet of foot. Guards are all over the place in pass coverage, as they may have to turn left or right to help out the OT or C. Or they might swing wide if the DT runs a stunt or if someone comes free off of the corner. For OT, the first step in pass coverage is the more important, as is leverage. Quick shuffling of the feet keeps the man in front of you, but that's different than the kind of strides that an OG has to make.

In most run packages, the OT doesn't pull. Some teams (Seattle, Green Bay and the Redskins, for example) pull their OTs but most don't do much of it. OTs rarely, if ever, trap and in zone schemes they either slide or step and seal. The OG (along with the TE or FB) is the guy who does most of the pulling and trapping in run blocking. IMO, your OG players can make or break your OL.

[shally]

Guards have gotten heavier in recent years, but they still have to be fleet of foot. Guards are all over the place in pass coverage, as they may have to turn left or right to help out the OT or C. Or they might swing wide if the DT runs a stunt or if someone comes free off of the corner. For OT, the first step in pass coverage is the more important, as is leverage. Quick shuffling of the feet keeps the man in front of you, but that's different than the kind of strides that an OG has to make.

In most run packages, the OT doesn't pull. Some teams (Seattle, Green Bay and the Redskins, for example) pull their OTs but most don't do much of it. OTs rarely, if ever, trap and in zone schemes they either slide or step and seal. The OG (along with the TE or FB) is the guy who does most of the pulling and trapping in run blocking. IMO, your OG players can make or break your OL.

a few teams even have centers that can pull.. bentley used to be able to do it..

pulling is definitely one of dock's strengths.. for his size he is surprisingly poor at straight ahead mashing.. i think it has to do with his poor leverage because he is so tall and cannot bend his hips enough

[BurgundyNGold]

a few teams even have centers that can pull.. bentley used to be able to do it..

pulling is definitely one of dock's strengths.. for his size he is surprisingly poor at straight ahead mashing.. i think it has to do with his poor leverage because he is so tall and cannot bend his hips enough
Seattle and Green Bay have packages where both guards pull. We used it in 2005 with great effect after we saw Seattle do it to us in Week 2. Thomas and Dock pulling and coming at you? Yikes. I'd hate to see that more that Samuels as Dockery. Samuels is late over too often and misses too many blocks when pulling. He did have a great pull last year though where he got two blocks on a counter, so props to him for that.

[shally]

Seattle and Green Bay have packages where both guards pull. We used it in 2005 with great effect after we saw Seattle do it to us in Week 2. Thomas and Dock pulling and coming at you? Yikes. I'd hate to see that more that Samuels as Dockery. Samuels is late over too often and misses too many blocks when pulling. He did have a great pull last year though where he got two blocks on a counter, so props to him for that.

both seattle and green bay have had very good guard play for quite a few years.. but losing guys like rivera and wahle screwed up green bay.. seattle generally was hung over and injured this year.. i expect they will rebound next year and should be dangerous if they do not lose too many more players to FA's and can keep hasselbeck and alexander healthy-- that is what killed them most of this year