Skip to content

Gardner: Nothing Doing

Apr 3, 2005, 8:23 PM EST

It appears that a trade the Redskins have been seeking to complete almost since the day after the season ended, one to send Rod Gardner elsewhere, won’t happen before draft day, if ever. From an article in the Washington Post::

Gibbs initially was hopeful that a deal for Gardner would be completed by now, expressing optimism about the degree of interest in the former first-round pick, but the market for him has been relatively stale, league sources said.
. . .
“I haven’t seen any movement there,” said one NFL personnel executive, who said the most likely time for a deal could be at the April 23-24 draft.

In waiting until draft day, the Skins are hoping that a team looking to draft a receiver in the first two rounds will come up empty and deal away their third or fourth rounder for Gardner.

One of the hangups in a potential trade is Garnder’s contract situation. Any team dealing away more than a throwaway pick for him wants to have him signed beyond the one year he has left on the contract he signed as a first-round draft pick out of Clemson. Gardner, realizing that his value would not be very high if he were to negotiate a deal right now, wants to play out the last year of his contract and become a free agent.

It seems like Gardner is holding all of the cards here and in a way he is, but it’s not like he has a really strong hand. If he doesn’t agree to an extension to make a trade happen he faces getting cut by the Redskins (they are very unlikely to keep him after publicly throwing him under the bus by announcing that he wasn’t in their plans in 2005). If he faces being a free agent now, he’ll be trying to negotiate a deal based on his 2004 numbers of 51 catches for 650 yards and 5 TD’s, a performance quite similar to his ’03 performance. That’s not going to add up to a big contract. At least if he signs an extension to enable a deal with a new team he’ll be able to keep the $2.1 million he’s slated to make this year.

So, it’s in 50/50’s best interest to go ahead and grease the skids for his imminent departure from the Redskins. It’s likely that he will find the post-draft free agent market to be a cold and unprofitable place to be.

  1. mbarnes202 - Apr 3, 2005 at 9:50 PM

    Actually,
    I was wondering too why Gardner was unwilling to renegotiate a new contract with someone like the Seahawks or the Bucs.
    It’s a big risk on Gardner’s part to hope he either gets cut or has a productive season. Maybe he think’s next year’s crop of FA WRs is really poor? Or he’s certain we’ll cut him?
    But will we? He’s a good complement to our current corps of WR– (personally, I’d like to think McCants can fill in, but Gibbs, despite his comments to the contrary, does not appear to agree).
    Perhaps Gibbs will keep Gardner. I’d like to think he will. Gardner’s a good receiver. I think he’s worth AT LEAST a 3rd round pick.

  2. mbarnes202 - Apr 3, 2005 at 9:50 PM

    Actually,
    I was wondering too why Gardner was unwilling to renegotiate a new contract with someone like the Seahawks or the Bucs.
    It’s a big risk on Gardner’s part to hope he either gets cut or has a productive season. Maybe he think’s next year’s crop of FA WRs is really poor? Or he’s certain we’ll cut him?
    But will we? He’s a good complement to our current corps of WR– (personally, I’d like to think McCants can fill in, but Gibbs, despite his comments to the contrary, does not appear to agree).
    Perhaps Gibbs will keep Gardner. I’d like to think he will. Gardner’s a good receiver. I think he’s worth AT LEAST a 3rd round pick.

  3. mbarnes202 - Apr 4, 2005 at 1:50 AM

    Actually,
    I was wondering too why Gardner was unwilling to renegotiate a new contract with someone like the Seahawks or the Bucs.
    It’s a big risk on Gardner’s part to hope he either gets cut or has a productive season. Maybe he think’s next year’s crop of FA WRs is really poor? Or he’s certain we’ll cut him?
    But will we? He’s a good complement to our current corps of WR– (personally, I’d like to think McCants can fill in, but Gibbs, despite his comments to the contrary, does not appear to agree).
    Perhaps Gibbs will keep Gardner. I’d like to think he will. Gardner’s a good receiver. I think he’s worth AT LEAST a 3rd round pick.

  4. Anonymous - Apr 4, 2005 at 9:51 AM

    is it not possible for us to keep Gardner as a third receiver? i know he’s not in next year’s plan’s but I’m sure Sean Taylor will miss his mid week (and mid season) late night birthday bashes.

  5. Anonymous - Apr 4, 2005 at 9:51 AM

    is it not possible for us to keep Gardner as a third receiver? i know he’s not in next year’s plan’s but I’m sure Sean Taylor will miss his mid week (and mid season) late night birthday bashes.

  6. Anonymous - Apr 4, 2005 at 1:51 PM

    is it not possible for us to keep Gardner as a third receiver? i know he’s not in next year’s plan’s but I’m sure Sean Taylor will miss his mid week (and mid season) late night birthday bashes.

  7. Anonymous - Apr 5, 2005 at 11:51 AM

    Gardner is not fast enough to get open on the deep routes and he drops half the balls on the short and intermediate routes. I hate how when he catches a 6 yard pass for a first down he jumps up and makes that big 1st down gesture even though we’re behind by 30 points. Also, from what I have heard he was in Coles’ camp last year with regards to the bad attitude. To sum up, he’s an obnoxious, average receiver with a bad attitude. We shouldn’t have to pay 2 million for that and I don’t think anyone else will either. I say cut him, and good riddance.

  8. Anonymous - Apr 5, 2005 at 11:51 AM

    Gardner is not fast enough to get open on the deep routes and he drops half the balls on the short and intermediate routes. I hate how when he catches a 6 yard pass for a first down he jumps up and makes that big 1st down gesture even though we’re behind by 30 points. Also, from what I have heard he was in Coles’ camp last year with regards to the bad attitude. To sum up, he’s an obnoxious, average receiver with a bad attitude. We shouldn’t have to pay 2 million for that and I don’t think anyone else will either. I say cut him, and good riddance.

  9. Anonymous - Apr 5, 2005 at 3:51 PM

    Gardner is not fast enough to get open on the deep routes and he drops half the balls on the short and intermediate routes. I hate how when he catches a 6 yard pass for a first down he jumps up and makes that big 1st down gesture even though we’re behind by 30 points. Also, from what I have heard he was in Coles’ camp last year with regards to the bad attitude. To sum up, he’s an obnoxious, average receiver with a bad attitude. We shouldn’t have to pay 2 million for that and I don’t think anyone else will either. I say cut him, and good riddance.

  10. Anonymous - Apr 6, 2005 at 2:09 PM

    Take away Santana’s one good year and Rod is the most productive receiver on our roster. How scary is that?

  11. Anonymous - Apr 6, 2005 at 2:09 PM

    Take away Santana’s one good year and Rod is the most productive receiver on our roster. How scary is that?

  12. Anonymous - Apr 6, 2005 at 6:09 PM

    Take away Santana’s one good year and Rod is the most productive receiver on our roster. How scary is that?

  13. Anonymous - Apr 6, 2005 at 3:13 PM

    if rod gardner is so intent on not negotiating an extension, that only means that he intends to impress everyone in the league this year. Maybe with this added incentive, the skins can keep him this year, cross their fingers, and hope that he have a career year.

  14. Anonymous - Apr 6, 2005 at 3:13 PM

    if rod gardner is so intent on not negotiating an extension, that only means that he intends to impress everyone in the league this year. Maybe with this added incentive, the skins can keep him this year, cross their fingers, and hope that he have a career year.

  15. Anonymous - Apr 6, 2005 at 7:13 PM

    if rod gardner is so intent on not negotiating an extension, that only means that he intends to impress everyone in the league this year. Maybe with this added incentive, the skins can keep him this year, cross their fingers, and hope that he have a career year.

  16. Anonymous - Apr 7, 2005 at 11:18 AM

    Good point, but a scary scenario is this: he has a career year next year, Snyder then pays the guy huge money to resign him after which he immediately goes back to being the same old underachieving 50-50.

  17. Anonymous - Apr 7, 2005 at 11:18 AM

    Good point, but a scary scenario is this: he has a career year next year, Snyder then pays the guy huge money to resign him after which he immediately goes back to being the same old underachieving 50-50.

  18. Anonymous - Apr 7, 2005 at 3:18 PM

    Good point, but a scary scenario is this: he has a career year next year, Snyder then pays the guy huge money to resign him after which he immediately goes back to being the same old underachieving 50-50.

  19. Anonymous - Apr 8, 2005 at 6:31 PM

    Santana Moss was the Jets version of 50/50. Faster sure, but he also doesn’t go over the middle like 50/50 does and routinely runs out of bounds to avoid contact. And just like Rod, Moss often has trouble hanging onto the ball.

  20. Anonymous - Apr 8, 2005 at 6:31 PM

    Santana Moss was the Jets version of 50/50. Faster sure, but he also doesn’t go over the middle like 50/50 does and routinely runs out of bounds to avoid contact. And just like Rod, Moss often has trouble hanging onto the ball.

  21. Anonymous - Apr 8, 2005 at 10:31 PM

    Santana Moss was the Jets version of 50/50. Faster sure, but he also doesn’t go over the middle like 50/50 does and routinely runs out of bounds to avoid contact. And just like Rod, Moss often has trouble hanging onto the ball.

  22. Anonymous - Apr 12, 2005 at 10:52 AM

    Good points, and there are similarities, but Moss has one thing that Gardner has never had: game-breaking ability. We haven’t had a receiver who’s a threat to score each time he touches the ball in a long while.

  23. Anonymous - Apr 12, 2005 at 10:52 AM

    Good points, and there are similarities, but Moss has one thing that Gardner has never had: game-breaking ability. We haven’t had a receiver who’s a threat to score each time he touches the ball in a long while.

  24. Anonymous - Apr 12, 2005 at 2:52 PM

    Good points, and there are similarities, but Moss has one thing that Gardner has never had: game-breaking ability. We haven’t had a receiver who’s a threat to score each time he touches the ball in a long while.

RealRedskins.com Archives

Follow Us On Twitter