Skip to content

Marshall to replace Pierce

Mar 4, 2005, 4:32 PM EDT

I negleted to mention that in Elfin’s times artile he says that Lemar Marshall is penciled in as the replacement for Pierce at MLB. Michael Barrow’s status remains in limbo.

Marshall played well in place of Lavar Arrington at weak-side LB last year after Arrington went down with an injury. He is some 15 lbs. lighter than Pierce so he may be asked to pack on a few pounds during the offseason. Pierce also moved inside in 2004 after having played exclusively OLB, so one would have to think that Gregg Williams can figure out a way to make it work.

One important factor is that Marshall just signed a three-year contract.

I guess that makes him a Redskin for Life.

  1. Anonymous - Mar 4, 2005 at 1:35 PM

    I see only one of two things happening from this point on in free agency:

    One, we make the Coles – Moss trade and lose Smoot. The cap hit we take will make it impossible to keep him, even if he agrees to a bonus in the 11 mil range, which he won’t.

    Two, we don’t make the trade and ante up for Smoot.

    Either way, we aren’t going to add any more players via free agency. Gibbs said as much during the Patten press conference. Exciting? No. But exciting has got us nowhere.

  2. Anonymous - Mar 4, 2005 at 1:35 PM

    I see only one of two things happening from this point on in free agency:

    One, we make the Coles – Moss trade and lose Smoot. The cap hit we take will make it impossible to keep him, even if he agrees to a bonus in the 11 mil range, which he won’t.

    Two, we don’t make the trade and ante up for Smoot.

    Either way, we aren’t going to add any more players via free agency. Gibbs said as much during the Patten press conference. Exciting? No. But exciting has got us nowhere.

  3. Anonymous - Mar 4, 2005 at 5:35 PM

    I see only one of two things happening from this point on in free agency:

    One, we make the Coles – Moss trade and lose Smoot. The cap hit we take will make it impossible to keep him, even if he agrees to a bonus in the 11 mil range, which he won’t.

    Two, we don’t make the trade and ante up for Smoot.

    Either way, we aren’t going to add any more players via free agency. Gibbs said as much during the Patten press conference. Exciting? No. But exciting has got us nowhere.

  4. Doug - Mar 4, 2005 at 2:24 PM

    Actually, I’m excited that we don’t need to do much in free agency. As Gibbs said, they’re comfortable with the players they have.

    I loved Buegel’s comment about what Rabach does best – “Block linebackers!” – a reference to A. Pierce, I’m sure.

    As I said before, I believe we’ll lose Smoot. I also think you’ll see something with regard to Coles and certainly with Gardener.

  5. Doug - Mar 4, 2005 at 2:24 PM

    Actually, I’m excited that we don’t need to do much in free agency. As Gibbs said, they’re comfortable with the players they have.

    I loved Buegel’s comment about what Rabach does best – “Block linebackers!” – a reference to A. Pierce, I’m sure.

    As I said before, I believe we’ll lose Smoot. I also think you’ll see something with regard to Coles and certainly with Gardener.

  6. Doug - Mar 4, 2005 at 6:24 PM

    Actually, I’m excited that we don’t need to do much in free agency. As Gibbs said, they’re comfortable with the players they have.

    I loved Buegel’s comment about what Rabach does best – “Block linebackers!” – a reference to A. Pierce, I’m sure.

    As I said before, I believe we’ll lose Smoot. I also think you’ll see something with regard to Coles and certainly with Gardener.

  7. Andrew - Mar 4, 2005 at 4:28 PM

    I’m not that worried about Smoot. After all we did make him, Baily, and Green didn’t we?

  8. Andrew - Mar 4, 2005 at 4:28 PM

    I’m not that worried about Smoot. After all we did make him, Baily, and Green didn’t we?

  9. Andrew - Mar 4, 2005 at 8:28 PM

    I’m not that worried about Smoot. After all we did make him, Baily, and Green didn’t we?

  10. Anonymous - Mar 4, 2005 at 4:34 PM

    Please. We didn’t “make” Green, Bailey, and Smoot. They were great players and would be anywhere. Hey, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe we’ll be “making” Ade Jimoh into a stud corner this season.

  11. Anonymous - Mar 4, 2005 at 4:34 PM

    Please. We didn’t “make” Green, Bailey, and Smoot. They were great players and would be anywhere. Hey, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe we’ll be “making” Ade Jimoh into a stud corner this season.

  12. Anonymous - Mar 4, 2005 at 8:34 PM

    Please. We didn’t “make” Green, Bailey, and Smoot. They were great players and would be anywhere. Hey, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe we’ll be “making” Ade Jimoh into a stud corner this season.

  13. Anon2 - Mar 4, 2005 at 7:10 PM

    Hmmm
    Perhaps Green made Bailey and Smoot.

  14. Anon2 - Mar 4, 2005 at 7:10 PM

    Hmmm
    Perhaps Green made Bailey and Smoot.

  15. Anon2 - Mar 4, 2005 at 11:10 PM

    Hmmm
    Perhaps Green made Bailey and Smoot.

  16. Anonymous - Mar 5, 2005 at 5:06 AM

    Let’s not forget about Michael Barrow. I was excited when he arrived in Washington, but we never got to see him play.

    He’s a smart guy who hits hard….sound familar?

    Anyway, I’d be more upset if Greg Williams left than any one of his players.

  17. Anonymous - Mar 5, 2005 at 5:06 AM

    Let’s not forget about Michael Barrow. I was excited when he arrived in Washington, but we never got to see him play.

    He’s a smart guy who hits hard….sound familar?

    Anyway, I’d be more upset if Greg Williams left than any one of his players.

  18. Anonymous - Mar 5, 2005 at 9:06 AM

    Let’s not forget about Michael Barrow. I was excited when he arrived in Washington, but we never got to see him play.

    He’s a smart guy who hits hard….sound familar?

    Anyway, I’d be more upset if Greg Williams left than any one of his players.

RealRedskins.com Archives

Follow Us On Twitter