Redskins get first crack at Russell

[PennSkinsFan]

From the Post

Defensive tackle Darrell Russell is eligible for unrestricted free agency in the offseason but said the Redskins will be given the first chance to sign him.

"Whether we get to free agency or not, the Redskins have the first crack," Russell said. "I wouldn't disrespect them like that. They gave me an opportunity, a chance. If I'm going to go anywhere, my first place is to go here, go to the [negotiating] table here and see how things go. However, in the same aspect, I haven't been playing that much. The d-tackles in front of me have been doing a great job. It's more or less, I guess, their decision more than mine."




Ummmm, Darrell, try giving us a reason first.

[Spence]

He will go to whatever team gives him the most money and the fewest incentive clauses. Russell will want to sign a contract with a fat signing bonus so he can take the next year or two off. I don't know if anyone will give Russell that contract, but if someone does, it better not be the Redskins.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

I'd like to see him play more, but I guess the simple fact that he's not says enough.

[RedskinsDave]

A man named Gardener said the same thing. Where's he?

[JoeDaSchmoe]

IHOP.

[PennSkinsFan]

Originally posted by JoeDaSchmoe
IHOP. :funpost: :lol1: :lol3:

[LavarLeap2003]

i hope he signs with us....i like him..i think he can go back to his old self

[jsarno]

SIGN HIM!
Lets not create MORE holes in the DL.

[RedskinsDave]

I'd rather he avoid being his old self, thank you.

BTW, I didn't know I lived in "A-town" but since I have lived in Arlington and Alexandria before, I guess I always have.

[Monk81]

yeah that is exactly what gardener said last year. but damn it didn't take him long to leave town

[Spence]

Russell does not care about anything but money. He'll go where the most of it is being offered. It is easy to say "sign him." At what price? Who wants to give that guy a big signing bonus?

[akhhorus]

frankly, I'd rather have Warren Sapp than Darrell Russell. And they'd cost about the same amount of money.

[RedskinsDave]

I forgot to comment on the title of thread. Please do not use the words "crack" and "Russell" in the same sentence please.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

Originally posted by akhhorus
frankly, I'd rather have Warren Sapp than Darrell Russell. And they'd cost about the same amount of money.


Yes, but Russell would have fines for every time he was caught with pot, while Sapp would only have fines every time he was caught with donuts.

[Spence]

Originally posted by RedskinsDave
I forgot to comment on the title of thread. Please do not use the words "crack" and "Russell" in the same sentence please. :D Best line of the day.

[jsarno]

Originally posted by akhhorus
frankly, I'd rather have Warren Sapp than Darrell Russell. And they'd cost about the same amount of money.

Youreally think so? I think Sapp will be 5 times as much.

[Spence]

Originally posted by jsarno
Youreally think so? I think Sapp will be 5 times as much. He will be. Sapp does not have more arrests than sacks in the last two years.

[Patrick]

I have been following Russells progress very carefully since we've signed him. I focus on him everytime he's in the lineup. From my observations, he is still getting himself into playing shape. (nothing none of you hadn’t figured out) BUT for the last couple of games there have been signs of his old playing self. The first play in last Sunday, he was double-teamed but still created pressure by the push he got (impressive for being doubled). On another play he was credit with an assist – once again creating problems behind the line of scrimmage. Each week he seems to progress a little further BUT no way will he be where he was two years ago by the end of this season – which brings me to my point. ………. I have a feeling about this kid. I’m thinking he’s gotten back on the right track (and it does happen). There are going to be offers for his service no doubt, but not as large as some are projecting. I say – take the gamble, sign him early and let him get into the off-season conditioning program. DR gets back into form, there’s no one coming out of college who’d be his equal (in their first year or two). …… AND I've heard a lot of refers to Gardener – I don’t care what anyone says - IF he’d accepted the contract offer the Skins had made him, his performance this season would have been totally different. …… But that just my two cents worth, NOW pass me another beer!

[LavarBabyDaddy]

I dont think Russell will be demanding a ton of money because he isnt playing that much, yet hes been doing ok when he has been playing. I think we should try to re-sign him if the money is right, hes a huge guy who can plug up the middle which is something we lack and have lacked for years...he does have the potential to produce as well (he hasnt played for 2 years). I just look at it this way, anything is better than Mr. Personal Foul himself Regan Upshaw, Bruce Smith, Big Fatty Wilkinson or "God told me I need $7 mil" Sean Gilbert. Keep Russell, get a solid pash rusher in free agency and spend two picks on D-line and we could have something going...

[GolfFreak]

How old is this guy? Sapp is over 30 - right? Anyone have a comparison on their stats?

Personally I'd like to have Russell back, but let's not over pay for him. What can we expect from Nobel next year – probably only for depth, not a starter. I say keep DR and try to find a big tackle in the draft or FA to put beside him.

[NamVet4]

Some of you point out that the downside to Russell is a character failure - grab the $'s and then quit. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Let him play out the season, go into the offseason conditioning program and offer him a reasonable incentive type contract.

"Ya knows what ya got, you don't knows what you're gonna git"

just my 2 cents

[Spence]

NamVet, I have no problem with giving Russell an incentive-laden contract. I just don't want the Skins waving a lot of signing bonus money at him. Daryl Gardener played well last year because he had incentives in his contract and he was playing for a new deal this year. The same will be true of Russell. Give these guys an incentive to perform and they will do so. Give them security and you've just bought yourself Dana Stubblefield, Part Two.

[rskinsfan10]

There is a distinct difference in what Russell is saying and what Gardener said. Russell is saying that he will give the Skins the first chance. Gardener all but assured the free world that he wasn't going anywhere. He even left his locker intact to show the world that he meant that he wasn't leaving town.

Having said that, I'm interested in seeing him get more time these last four games. I would even like to see him and Dalton start the last four games to see if they have the makings of a good tandem.

[LuvSkins17]

We should sign him.... I don't think he has shown anything to any other teams since being on the with us. We could end up getting him for cheap for another year or two. We don't need to pay a lot but I really don't think he will be able to demand a lot either.

17

[LavarLeap2003]

Dave, where in Annandale do u live at? and yeah i lived in Alexandria/Arlington also...but Annandale is known as A-town....but we need russell

[jsarno]

I think Russell is a must sign...at the moment he wants to be here. Let's not forget he was in affect "banished" from the game. A lot of teams wouldn't touch him with a 10 foot pole. But we did. He'll remember that. Of course money will help him forget, but it's not like he's kicked ass for us and will be a top free agent. Right now, he's playng average...since when does an average player require top pay?

I REALLY don't want to see Sapp here. As much as I feel he's a good player, he'll be way too much money for us, and not worth it.

[Spence]

There is something odd about these comments. I keep reading a variation of: "He has not done anything this year so we should be able to keep him."

Do we really want to keep a guy who has done nothing this year? I'm inclined to re-sign him if he gets a negligible signing bonus, but that's just something to think about. There seems to be an expectation that Darrell Russell will turn into a beast next year. Maybe he will, but the Redskins had better not plan on that. If they are smart, the Redskins will assume Russell gives us nothing next year, even if they re-sign him.

[jsarno]

But we could have a gem! He's AVERAGE this year, which is better than nothing considering what we do have.
Sure we will all hope he turns into a beast, and as long as we're not paying him "Sapp money" I'm fine with that. We can't keep this revolving door at DT any longer.
Russell will be in better shape come next season, and he will play better...how much better is the question.

[Patrick]

Originally posted by jsarno
But we could have a gem! He's AVERAGE this year, which is better than nothing considering what we do have.
Sure we will all hope he turns into a beast, and as long as we're not paying him "Sapp money" I'm fine with that. We can't keep this revolving door at DT any longer.
Russell will be in better shape come next season, and he will play better...how much better is the question.


Exactly and he's has a PROVEN quality. ..... There are no guarantees that the first couple of DL picked in this years draft are going to dominate, nor that Sapp would be productive anymore, or any other scenario you want to throw up there. So if I'm going to gamble and Russell keeps his nose clean, then I think he's worth a shot.

[JoeDaSchmoe]

Now that I think about it, my feelings on this rest in the coaching. If Spurrier's still around, forget it. Russell needs some discipline to stay in shape and in line, and Spurrier won't do it. If we have someone like, say, Cowher/Coughlin/Fassel, then, yes, go right ahead.