Archive Update Notice

I'm going to be doing some work to restore some stories to the archive here. Most of them are from the 2007 season and the coaching search in January and February when I was posting them to another server. I can't go back in and retrieve them from there, so I have to post them manually.

What that means to you the reader is that if you get notified of new posts via RSS or through email, you will get a couple of dozen notifications over the next few days. I apologize, but there isn't any other way to do this.

Thanks for subscribing to this blog and I appreciate your understanding.

Introducing Real Redskins Mobile

As a part of trying to make Real Redskins your top source for Redskins news and analysis, I've launched a mobile version of this site. Although the current site works OK on my Blackberry and on some other mobile phones, this new site is very slimmed down to load quickly and help everyone with any kind of mobile browser get to what you want to know in a hurry.

The mobile URL is:

http://realredskins.mobi

There's a box in the sidebar where you can enter your mobile number and get a text message that will send the link to your phone. Then you can go straight to it an bookmark it.

One note: On the mobile version there is no option to read or leave comments. However, there is an option to go to the full HTML version at the bottom of each page so, if you can't wait to get home to read or write a comment and your phone can manage it, you can get to comments that way.

Training camp to open on July 20

According to my friend David Elfin at the Washington Times, the Redskins will report to training camp on Sunday, July 20. The team's initial full-squad practice under Jim Zorn will be on Tuesday, the 22^nd.

The first practice of what would prove to be Joe Gibbs' final training camp last year took place on July 27.

The earlier reporting date this year is due to the Redskins' participation in the Hall of Fame Game against the Colts on August 3. That gives the team 13 days of practice before the game

The team's initial preseason game last year came on August 11, so the team had 16 days to get ready for that one.

The full training camp schedule will be released sometime in June.

Flashback Friday—Manley’s “sneeze” helps Skins win

Redskins 27, Saints 24
November 6, 1988
RFK Stadium

The second Flashback Friday brings you a game against the second opponent the Redskins will face in 2008 (hey, I might be on to a pattern here).

With the mention of Dexter Manley here earlier this week, I remembered this very Dexter moment from 1988.

RFK Stadium--Chip Lohmiller's 23-yard field goal with 47 seconds left gave the Redskins the lead, but they couldn't rest easily until the Saints' Morten Anderson missed a 49-yard attempt with four seconds on the clock as they hung on to beat New Orleans.

The key and most memorable moment of this contest, however, was not a placekick, not even a pass or a run. It was provided by Dexter Manley and, well, here's the story.

The Saints had broken on top 24-17 after having been tied at halftime. Early in the fourth quarter, they were in position to make it a very difficult uphill struggle for the Redskins to pull this one out with possession at the Washington 20. After a third down incompletion, it appeared that Anderson would come in to attempt a near-automatic 37-yard field goal. New Orleans tackle Jim Dombrowski changed all of that, though, when he took a swing at Manley. Dexter did not retaliate and the dead ball foul made Anderson's attempt a 52-yarder, which was partially blocked.

As it turns out, Dombrowski was the one retaliating as, after the play, Manley had spit in the offensive player's face. "He suckered me and I bought into it," said Dombrowski.

"I think I might have sneezed on him," said a coy Manley.

Even after the expectoration situation, the Redskins still trailed by a touchdown and were backed up at their own six. The combination of Doug Williams to Ricky Sanders took care of that little problem. Sanders turned a little hitch pass into a 42-yard gain and later found a seam between a pair of defenders to catch Williams' eight-yard touchdown pass to tie the game with 6:35 to play.

Washington got the ball back less than a minute later on its own 31 and embarked on the winning drive. A pass to tight end Don Warren picked up 32 yards. Then Timmy Smith was called upon to pick up some yardage and burn off some clock as he handled the ball on the next seven plays, six of them runs. Art Monk scooted to the five on a reverse and then Lohmiller was called in. Anderson's attempt at the end was wide and short and the Redskins got away with the win.

The over under

The Las Vegas wins over/under line is out and the number for the Washington Redskins places them smack dab in the muddled middle of the NFL.

Depending on where you want to plunk down your money, you can bet that the Redskins win total for 2008 will be more or fewer than 7.5 or eight.

Of course, Vegas lines aren't necessarily designed to be accurate predictors of what will transpire in autumn. They are calculated to generate equal amounts of action on both sides. That way, no matter what the results of the season are, the house collects the vig of about 10%.

That being said, the line seems about right to me. With reasonable good fortune in the injury department, if Jason Campbell picks up Jim Zorn's version of the West Coast offense, if a couple of rookies can come through, and if they can catch a couple of good teams on bad days, nine or ten wins is possible.

On the other hand, if they are as banged up as they were last year, if Campbell can't shake his problem with late-game interceptions, if the offense takes a while to come together, if the schedule turns out to be tougher than it looks right now, and if a few bounces of the ball go against them, they could well end up with six or seven wins.

Looking at it right now, it seems that one mix of factors (the season is likely to bring a combination of positives and negatives) is as likely as the other. That makes the over/under number of eight a good, sporting proposition.

Sellers: Players were treated like “little kids”

While Jim Zorn may need to be careful and tiptoe around saying anything critical about Joe Gibbs' coaching, it's apparent that at least one Washington Redskins player doesn't feel so restrained.

Last week, when talking about the differences between how things are going this year as opposed to recent seasons, fullback Mike Sellers said, "We don't have people watching us constantly and telling us what to do like we're little kids. He (Zorn) puts it on ourselves. We're being treated like men."

It's hard to figure out where to start with this one.

There isn't any context given in the quote, which I found on the Pro Football Weekly website (there's no permalink to the one-paragraph blurb, so it may scroll down off of this page over time).

I'll look at it on the assumption that he's referring to on-field matters. I don't think that Gibbs had "people" watching players in the lounge at Redskins Park or following them home.

So, they had "people" watching them while they did their jobs? Uh, isn't that, you know, why coaches get paid? Are Zorn and his staff not watching and correcting mistakes and refining technique? I doubt it.

The part about being treated like "little kids" under Gibbs while Zorn treats them like "grown men" is the real slap in the face to Coach Joe. Didn't Gibbs take Mike Sellers off of the scrap heap after he'd been out of the NFL for two years when nobody wanted him after some substance abuse problems? Didn't Gibbs go to great lengths to give Sellers a bigger role in the offense the last couple of years even though he rarely came through?

All that being said, it would be a mistake to write off Sellers' comments as those of some kind of ingrate. If you don't parse the words and look at the general feeling, there seemed to be some frustration at the performance of the coaching staff in general and Gibbs in particular.

While there is universal respect for Gibbs the man, especially after the strength he gave everyone in the wake of the murder of Sean Taylor, there apparently isn't such reverence for how he handled the mechanics of coaching the team.

Even in their better seasons—2005 and 2007—Gibbs' Redskins were maddeningly inconsistent. Both playoff teams had good starts, extended midseason losing streaks, and then hot finishes to scrape into Wild Card spots.

I have heard that Gibbs often had trouble keeping his herd of 20 assistant coaches on the same page. In particular, as much as they tried to minimize it and sweep it under the rug, there was always some tension between Gibbs and Al Saunders. It's been rumored that Gibbs took over the play calling when the Skins got into the Red Zone. At the very least, Gibbs would overrule Saunders on occasion in such situations.

And such situations certainly create confusion on the part of the players. They need to know who's in charge and what to expect.

Now, does that equate to being treated like "little kids"? It wouldn't seem like it. Gibbs went out of his way to get high-character players on his team, the kind of men you don't constantly have to watch.

Mike Sellers is an emotional type of player who doesn't always have that filter between the brain and the mouth activated. He may have been thinking about a particular incident or issue when the spoke of little kids vs. grown men. Or he may have articulated his general frustration in an odd way.

Or, maybe he should be taken literally and he really does believe that Gibbs treated his players like children.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see if other players make similar comments. I believe that Gibbs retired at least partly because he didn't think he was 100% up to the job any more. If that was the case, the players would be the first ones to notice it and we will see if others choose to talk about it.

Again, the Sellers quote was out of context, so take that into consideration when you evaluate it. However, it's hard to imagine any context in which it wouldn't be, to some degree, a potshot at a Hall of Fame coach.

James’ deal has two years left

I made a mistake last night.

Without checking, I reported something about the Washington Redskins that came directly from the team's primary beat reporter for the largest paper in Washington. I should know better than that and I apologize to my readers for doing so.

Erasmus James has two years left on his rookie contract, not one as was state here yesterday. He will make $695,000 this year and $1 million the next.

That avoids the unpleasant potential scenario of James rehabbing with the Skins, reviving his career, and then cashing in on the free agent market in 2009.

Calendar helped Skins land James

The Memorial Day holiday came at a good time for the Washington Redskins.

The Minnesota Vikings announced on Friday that they were going to waive defensive end Erasmus James. However, due to the fact that it was the Memorial Day weekend, the league office was closed. The waivers could not be finalized until 4 PM Eastern time on Tuesday. That seemed to be a mere technicality.

According to John Clayton of ESPN.com, however, several teams contacted the Vikings and James' agent about making a possible waiver claim. The Redskins were one of those teams, but since priority for claims is given in reverse order of last year's won-loss record (just like the draft), 20 other teams would have a shot at James before the Skins be able to secure him. It was apparent that wasn't going to happen.

When the Redskins raised the possibility of giving the Vikings some conditional compensation for James, the Vikings were able to rescind the move.

Rookie free agent defensive end Dorian Smith was released to make room for James on the roster.

June 1 has come and gone

I know that many of you out there are hoping for help for your favorite National Football League team coming from a wave of talent hitting the free agency market after June 1.

I hate to tell you this, but you should look elsewhere. As far as the NFL is concerned, June 1, for the most part, has come and gone.

No, you do not need to adjust your calendar. It says it's late May. But the NFL's June 1 came over two months ago.

The whacky calendar is due to a change in the collective bargaining agreement. Prior to 2006, a team could release a player after June 1 and have most of the salary cap implications of the release come in the following year rather than accelerating immediately into the cap.

The players didn't necessarily mind being cut; it frequently gave them the opportunity to collect a little more signing bonus money.

However, they were hitting the market at a bad time, after most team's free agent budgets were shot. In addition, they frequently were in an awkward position. In many cases it was well known that a player would be a June 1 cap casualty, but he had to go to his current team's facility to work out and participate in minicamps and OTA's.

And the teams became increasingly concerned about the risk of a player getting injured while working out at the team facility. If that were to happen, the team would be liable for the player's entire salary for the upcoming season.

These issues were addressed in the '06 CBA extension. Teams now are allowed to release up to two players as soon as the league year begins (the start of free agency) and designate them as post-June 1 cuts. The players get their freedom immediately, so they can pursue employment while the market still is hot.

While the teams don't get any salary cap relief until June 2—the players' salary for the coming season still is counted against their cap number until then—they don't have to have dead men walking around their facilities and their exposure to issues due to workout injuries is greatly reduced.

Since the rule creates such a win-win situation, teams have taken advantage of it. Most, if not all, of the players who would have been released post-June 1 in the past already have received their pink slips.

There are a couple of reasons why a team might choose to wait to release a player it intends to cut under the June 1 cap rules. If they have three or more players to release, they would have to wait until the date actually passes to get the cap relief. This would be highly unusual as few teams would want to dump that much dead cap money into the following season. I don't have complete list, but I don't think that any team designated more than one player.

An organization also might want to hold on to a veteran to see if they can draft his replacement and see how the rookie performs in a minicamp or two before deciding whether or not to cut the vet.

Again, this would be an unusual situation and if you're at that point, you might as well let the battle for the position and the roster spot go all the way to training camp. You get the same cap benefits if the veteran is cut on September 1 as you do on June 1.

The bottom line is that the free agent pickings on the morning of June 2 will be just about as slim as they are today. If you're hoping that your team can pick up some help then, don't hold your breath. The time for doing that was back in March.

You can reach Rich Tandler by email at rich.tandler+bleachers@gmail.com. His Redskins blog archive is located here.

Blache coveted James in ‘05

About a week before the 2005 NFL Draft, I wrote the following in an article about the possibility of the Washington Redskins drafting Wisconsin defensive end Erasmus James:

Redskins' defensive coordinator Greg Blache has let it be known that he would love it if the Skins would add James to his unit. There's no question that James would be a good fit in virtually any NFL system, including that of Gregg Williams. He could have instant impact when it comes to the pass rush and would be all over the field on every play. With a rotation in place with James, Philip Daniels and Renaldo Wynn, James' durability questions would be less of an issue than they would be in a place where he was expected to play every snap.

It would be a terrific reach to take him with the #9 pick, however, if he falls to #25 that would likely mean that, players such as Marcus Spears, David Pollack and Dan Cody are gone. Would they take James, probably the most talented of the group or pass due to the health concerns? It depends on how much of a voice Greg Blache has in the draft room.

As it turned out, the Redskins did not have a shot at James in 2005. The Minnesota Vikings drafted him with the 18^th pick. After a mediocre rookie season, he suffered from injuries in 2006 and 2007.

The Vikings waived him last week but they rescinded the waivers and traded him to the Redskins for a conditional seventh-round pick.

So, Blache, now the true defensive coordinator after Williams' departure, gets his shot at seeing what he can do with James. There is even less tread on the 25-year-old's tires after a knee injury in 2006. He hadn't yet fully recovered last year and he played in just six games.

As mentioned in the excerpt from the 2005 article, there were health concerns about James during his years in Wisconsin. He missed all of the 2003 season with a hip injury and a portion of the '04 campaign with an ankle problem.

It's a no-risk move for the Redskins. If James can't get healthy or otherwise can't make the team, the Redskins keep the seventh rounder.

The Redskins anticipate that James will be ready to participate fully in training camp.

He is still working off of his rookie contract, which has one more year to run at $1 million.

Since the Redskins are at the 80-player roster limit (this excludes draft picks until they sign), the will have to cut a player to make room for James.

Redskins.com Puff

I don't expect what's written on Redskins.com to be hard-hitting or even mildly critical of the Washington Redskins. I haven't even heard the PR department refer to the site as "unfiltered" Redskins news lately. There is no pretense of objectivity. It's definitely "sunny side up" coverage of the team.

Generally, there isn't anything wrong with that. You see the brand, you see the label, and what you see is what you get. Don't expect to go on to the GOP website and read the dirt about John McCain. Don't visit Exxon-Mobile's site to find stories of consumer hardship caused by the price of gas.

Sometimes, though, positive spin can go too far. Such was the case in a story on Dexter Manley that appeared on Redskins.com a couple of days ago.

The article, written by Michael Richman, summarizes Manley's on-field accomplishments and speaks of his emotion and flair. It's a nice piece, as far as it goes. But where it doesn't go is the issue.

There is no mention of Manley's problems with substance abuse anywhere in the article. Not one word.

You just can't talk about the career of Dexter Manley without talking about his problems with drugs any more than you can reflect on the presidency of Richard Nixon without talking about Watergate. The scandal was the latter's downfall just like cocaine derailed Manley's chances of becoming one of the all-time greats.

His sack totals went up every year from 1982, when the NFL started officially counting sacks, through 1986. That last year he totaled 18.5 sacks and made his first Pro Bowl.

It proved to be his last appearance in Hawaii as well. A first positive test for banned substances resulted in a warning. In July of 1988 he served a 30-day suspension for a second positive test. After recording 8.5 sacks in the strike-abbreviated 1987 season, he got just nine in '88.

The end came not too long after that. Ten games into the 1989 season, at the age of 30, he played his last down for the Redskins. A third positive test landed him an indefinite ban from the NFL.

When he was reinstated after a year, Joe Gibbs and the Redskins wanted no part of him. He played a year in Phoenix and one more in Tampa Bay before a fourth positive test got him banned for life.

These are not trivial, salacious details about the career of Manley. They are a relevant part, even a major part of the story. The substance abuse issue answers questions such as, "If he was such a good player, why did the Redskins ever let him leave?"

But the skies are never cloudy at Redskins.com. Never is heard a discouraging word, even when the credibility of the articles is at stake.

Flashback Friday: Redskins 72, Giants 41 11.25.66

This week's flashback takes a look at the highest scoring game in NFL history.

What's amazing is that, after 42 years, the record still stands. The rules for this game were vastly different than they are today. Defenders could bump and run with receivers all the way down the field. Defensive linemen could head slap those attempting to block them. A penalty for offensive holding was 15 yards from the spot of the foul and the definition of holding was much tighter.

The combined 113 points are a record for any game and the Skins' 72 is the highest output for a regular season game.

The game account is from the pages of my book The Redskins From A to Z.

Brig Owens scored two TD's

DC Stadium—The Redskins scored on offense, on defense, on special teams, on the ground and through the air in racking up the highest single-game scoring total ever in a regular season NFL game. In a losing effort, the Giants scored 41, making the combined total of 113 points another league record.

It started off tamely enough when Brig Owens intercepted a pass by Giants quarterback Tom Kennedy, setting up a five-yard touchdown pass from Jurgensen to AD Whitfield. It was the start of a career day for Whitfield, a backup running back as he scored three touchdowns. His second one made it 13-0—Charlie Gogolak had missed the extra point after the first TD—going into the second quarter.

The Redskins racked up three more touchdowns before halftime. Hanburger barreled into Kennedy, forcing a fumble that Owens recovered and returned 62 yards into the end zone. Whitfield and the player he backed up, Joe Don Looney, scored the other two. The Giants added two scores of their own and it was 34-14 at halftime.

The third quarter was Taylor's time to shine. The receiver scored on Jurgensen touchdown passes of 32 and 74 yards. Jurgy's passing line on the day belies the high scoring nature of the contest—ten of 16 for 145 yards. For his part, Taylor was glad to get on the board, having dropped a sure TD pass earlier in the game.

The Giants matched Washington's scoring in the third period with Gary Wood throwing a pair of touchdown passes of his own. That made it 48-28 going into the fourth quarter. The Redskins defense was certainly capable of blowing such a lead.

But there were more points to be scored by the Redskins. Ricky Harris pushed the Redskins over the 50-point mark when he returned a punt 52 yards for a touchdown. Then Owens stepped in front of a pass from Wood and went all the way with a 60-yard interception return. That touchdown broke the team record for most points scored in a game, the 59 they had scored against the Boston Yanks in 1948. The Giants scored two more touchdowns pushing the total for both teams over 100 points. Just for fun, Otto Graham lined wide receiver Mitchell up at his old running back spot and Mitchell scooted 45 yards for the Redskins' tenth and final touchdown of the day. To recap, they scored a touchdown almost every way you can: four running, three passing and one each on a punt, fumble, and interception return. They also got nine extra points and----a field goal.

Oh, yes, the field goal, a very interesting sidebar to the game.

Either thinking it was third down or just wanting to get the heck off the field, Kennedy threw the ball out of bounds on fourth down with nine seconds left. Gogolak trotted onto the field and kicked a 29-yard field goal. After the game, Redskins coach Otto Graham said that he just wanted to give Gogolak some practice. Some accounts said that the players had pleaded with Graham to go for breaking 70 points. The best story, though, is that Sam Huff, still mad at the Giants for trading him two years earlier, yelled out "Field goal team, field goal team" himself in hopes that the unit would run on the field in the confusion and rub some salt in the Giants wounds. No matter why, the three points made the final 72-41.

Jason Taylor not on Skins' dance card

An aging but still effective star player becomes available. Add the player's Hollywood aspirations into the mix and you seem to have a match made in heaven.

Daniel Snyder, do you take Jason Taylor to be your lawfully contracted defensive end?

The answer, apparently, is no. Cancel the caterers and see if you can get your deposit back from the florist.

It appears that the union between Taylor and the Miami Dolphins, his team since the beginning of his NFL career in 1997, is over. According to the team's head coach Tony Sparano, Taylor won't be attending OTA's, minicamp, or training camp.

That Taylor and the Fins are on the outs isn't breaking news. It's well known that they shopped him hard during the draft, including an offer to deal him to the Washington Redskins. At the time, they turned down Miami's request for a second-round pick for Taylor.

Indications are that the Skins' interest in Taylor remains dormant. They don't want to give up the high draft pick that Miami is looking for as compensation and they don't want to pay Taylor some $16 million over the next two seasons.

It's not that Taylor, 34, is done as an effective player. He had 11 sacks on a horrid team last year, following up a 13.5-sack effort that earned him NFL Defensive Player of the Year honors in 2006.

But the age certainly is a factor. While he appears to be in excellent shape and he should be an effective player for several more years, his best years clearly are behind him.

And there are legitimate questions about whether or not Taylor will play beyond his current two-year contract. He enjoyed the Hollywood gig with the Dancing With the Stars thing and nobody would be surprised if he hung up his jersey with some good seasons as a player left in the tank in favor of an acting career.

The Redskins are trying to build through the draft. They aren't one player away from making the Super Bowl. It would be counterproductive for them to expend a high draft pick and a big chunk of cap space on an aging player.

The Redskins were saved from themselves in the week before the draft when the Bengals rejected their offer for Chad Johnson. They appear to be taking their fate into their own hands here by steadfastly resisting the temptation to go dancing with Jason Taylor.

Zorn in an awkward spot

Bob Molinaro, Washington Redskins reporter for the Virginian-Pilot in Tidewater, did a Q&A with Jim Zorn when the Skins were down in Virginia Beach for their annual Beach Blitz.

Certainly, nothing earth-shattering was revealed in the interview. I did, however, find one of Zorn's answers interesting because it pointed out a challenge that he faces that most other rookie coaches don't have to deal with.

Here is the exchange:

Will your system make Campbell a better quarterback?

I just cringe answering a question like that, because it might imply that the staff before me failed, and that's not it at all.

Usually, when a new coach takes over he doesn't have to tiptoe around making sure that he doesn't say anything that could be interpreted as a knock on his predecessor. Sure, you don't want to go around slamming the guy you replaced, but by the same token you don't have to be guarded in any implied criticism.

However, most new head coaches aren't replacing legends with busts in Canton, Ohio. In fact, Zorn is in a spot where few, if any, have been before.

He's replacing Joe Gibbs, who won three Super Bowls here in his first run. While his second run wasn't as successful, he helped get the Skins back on the right track. On top of all that, he's a better person than he is a football coach.

Now, many who followed the team through the glory years and the more recent so-so comeback—present company included—have had some critical things to say about the way Gibbs coached in his comeback.

But that would be vastly different from Jim Zorn coming in and going negative on Coach Joe. We have been here, watching every play of every game, following every event from week to week, month to month, year to year. We've earned the right to take issue with the Hall of Famer.

Zorn, on the other hand, has been hanging out on the Left Coast for most of the past few decades. He hasn't been here so he hasn't built the credibility to be critical of what Gibbs did and didn't do.

And, no doubt, behind closed doors, Zorn occasionally wonders, "What the hell was he thinking?" when watching film. Every once in a while he's talking to a player who was here last year and wants to say, "He wanted you do it that way?" And, behind closed doors, Zorn might let such comments pass through his lips.

That doesn't mean that Zorn thinks he's smarter than Gibbs or that he knows more than Gibbs. Different coaches have different ways of getting things done and it's natural that what one coach thinks makes perfect sense would have another coach rolling his eyes

But in public, talking to reporters, he has to be very careful not to let anything slip. For the next several months, well into the season, Zorn will continue to "cringe" every time he gets a question that involves an answer that could be phrased in a way that might be considered to be a knock at the way Joe Gibbs did things.

Zorn is just starting to live down the "maroon and black" gaffe. He doesn't need to make another verbal misstep. It's obvious that he's being consciously careful not to.

Davis’ mea culpa

Fred Davis returned to Redskins Park on Tuesday and apologized publicly for oversleeping and missing the third and final day of the team's minicamp earlier this month.

"I want to start by apologizing to [Redskins owner Dan] Snyder, Coach [Jim] Zorn, the players for making a minor mistake, just not waking up on time, something that was irresponsible of me," said Davis, whom the Redskins drafted in the second round out of USC. "I can't believe I did that. I overslept. I felt really bad. It's something that won't happen again ever."

I've said that I thought that too big a deal was made about this in the media—the incident was discussed and written about ad nauseum for the entire following week. He didn't drive drunk, he didn't make it rain, he overslept.

He also denied that he was out in downtown Washington that Saturday night as was rumored at the time.

"I didn't even go out," Davis said. "I was at the hotel the whole night. Just being on my own, it was probably a mistake on my part."

At the risk of being hypocritical by making something out of what Davis said about what I said was an overblown incident, something in his statements bothered me.

Oversleeping and missing an NFL minicamp practice is not "probably" a mistake, it's not a "minor mistake", it's a Class A, big-time, screw up. A high-school type mistake. A calling consecutive timeouts when you should know that doing so will result in a penalty kind of mistake.

Just because the media shouldn't go on about it for a week doesn't mean that Davis didn't commit a doozie. A biggie. Nothing probable or minor about it.

I don't necessarily expect Davis to come crawling on his hands and knees begging for mercy or anything like that. And, at this point, I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he knows that he messed up in a major, major way.

At least he didn't say something like, "I'm sorry that this happened" and distance himself from the responsibility for the happening.

As a star athlete in high school and at a high-profile university like USC, Davis wasn't asked to apologize for much of anything. I'll forgive him if his skills in doing so aren't very polished.

Still, his take is something to file away to see what happens if he should be called upon to apologize for something again.

Hopefully, that won't happen any time soon.

Some movement towards rookie scale?

There seems to be some movement that might lead to the inclusion of a rookie wage scale in the next collective bargaining agreement. Kevin Mawae, Tennesse center, was on The Herd on ESPN Radio today and he had the following to say on the subject:

"As a guy who has been in the league for 14 now going on 15 years and being around other veteran guys, for a young guy to get paid that kind of money and never steps foot on an NFL football field, it's a little disheartening to think of," Mawae said. "It makes it tough for a guy who's proven himself to say 'I want that kind of money' when the owners, all they're going to say is, 'Well, you weren't a first-round pick.' "And I know there is sentiment around the league amongst the players like, 'Let's do something to control these salaries and control these signing bonuses' and things like that, and I know that's something that the owners are talking about and I'm sure that's going to play in to this round of negotiations for this collective bargaining agreement," he said.

Mawae is no ordinary grunt popping off. He also happens to be the President of the NFL Players Association. That gives his words a bit more gravitas, if you will. When the subject came up in the weeks leading up to the draft, association head Gene Upshaw essentially said that any rookie wage scale proposal would be dead on arrival.

“Every year at this time, I hear it again,” Upshaw said. “They don’t like how the rookies are paid. ‘They need some kind of pay scale.’ Well, I’m not going to limit how the rookies are paid because it has a huge impact on veterans. I’m not going to agree to it.”

Upshaw hasn't addressed the issue lately. He's right that the huge paydays that the likes of Matt Ryan receive (6 years, $72 million, $34 million guaranteed) impact veterans. That's $72 million that is not available to Falcons veterans who have, you know, actually played a down in the NFL. In addition, the big paydays for rookies run counter to the notion that bad teams are supposed to be able to better themselves through the draft. A team getting a top pick has to pay so much money to the new player that its ability to retain its core players and/or attract new free agents is seriously hampered.

Hopefully, this is not something that will become an issue for the Washington Redskins any time soon. They've had enough top 10 picks in the past 15 years or so. Still, fair is fair and the current system clearly is not fair.

LaCanfora on Morocco Brown

On his Redskins Insider blog, Washington Post Redskins beat reporter Jason LaCanfora delivers nothing short of glowing praise for the Redskins hiring of Morocco Brown as their director of pro personnel.

You can read his whole, lengthy post on Brown on the WP website, but here is the nut of the article:

Based on everything I've heard - and my reporting always carries the day in terms on my analysis of anything on this blog - you've got to give Cerrato full marks for making what appears to be an inspired hire.

For anyone to use "Cerrato" and "inspired" in the same sentence is surprising. For LaCanfora to do it is downright shocking.

One could say, as a commenter in another post did, that Brown must be a great hire if even JLC thinks it's a good move.

But if you are one of those who has been skeptical of his notorious "league sources" when they come through with information that is negative in regards to the Redskins, be careful of embracing the positive reviews as well.

The CBA and the Redskins

As expected, the NFL owners voted to end the collective bargaining agreement between the league and the players association on Tuesday. The unanimous vote has no immediate impact but it does start the clock ticking towards an uncapped year in 2010.

That season with no salary cap has many Washington Redskins fans gleefully anticipating a Dan Snyder spending spree to end all spending sprees. It's a long way to go before getting there and it would not be the nirvana that many think it would be.

Let's forget just a minute about how players would have to be in the league for six years instead of the current four in order to be eligible for unrestricted free agency, resulting in an older, thinner group of free agents. And never mind that any potential free agents actually would have to be, you know, free agents for the Skins to be able to sign them. They couldn't throw the Washington Monument and White House at Peyton Manning because he's under contract.

The simple fact is that in the billionaire's club that is the NFL, Snyder isn't up there with the real big boys when it comes to personal wealth. To be sure, unlike Buffalo's Ralph Wilson and Wayne Weaver of the Jags, he sits at the grownups' table, but Seahawks owner Paul Allen could pull enough out of petty cash to buy and sell Snyder a few times over. Snyder made his money in advertising; Jerry Jones made his in oil. Jones' black gold fortune is substantially larger than what Snyder amassed in marketing.

So, even if the Redskins could find enough free agent players that filled their needs, there is no guarantee that they could win a bidding war for the services of those athletes.

It does appear, however, that the Redskins are better prepared for a potential labor standoff than they were the last time the CBA was being negotiated all of two years ago.

Going into the 2006 offseason, the Redskins were way over the cap, some $20 million over the $95 million limit. Some provisions that took effect in the last capped year before an uncapped year (2007 would have been uncapped had the current agreement not been hammered out) that made it impossible for the Skins to use some of their usual methods to restructure deals and lower their cap numbers.

The Skins were headed for cap hell. Not the kind that everyone keeps predicting for them, the kind that never comes. Real, true cap hell.

From an article in this blog entitled "Cap-tastrophe" from February 20, 2006:

One of the problems with cutting players is that with the contracts structured as they are and the fact that most of the contracts are pretty new, there isn't much money to be saved in releasing a lot of players with big camp numbers. For example, LaVar Arrington counts about $12 million towards the '06 cap, but releasing him would result in a slightly higher cap charge than that because of uncharged money already paid to him.

It's like being upside down on a car loan, when the car is worth less than the payoff amount. Cutting Arrington would the put Redskins further away from the goal of being able to get under the cap. The same is true of such players who might be considered expendable in a crisis such as Mark Brunell and David Patten.

Now, to be sure, there are players that the team could release that actually could save money. Some of these players are ones that the Redskins would rather not cut such as Marcus Washington, Ladell Betts, Jon Jansen and Joe Salave'a. However, the Redskins could cut those four plus Taylor Jacobs, Renaldo Wynn, Pierson Prioleau, Philip Daniels, James Thrash, Cory Raymer, John Hall, Patrick Ramsey, Walt Harris, and Matt Bowen and still be about $8 million shy of being able to make it under the cap.

To realize the maximum cap savings, which are obviously necessary, these players would have to be replaced with rookies earning the minimum salary. Thus the "15-20 rookies" alluded to by Prisco and Pasquerelli.

Many Redskins fans have blocked this from their memories since, after a few extensions of the deadline, an agreement was reached and a level of cap hell that no team ever has experienced was averted.

The Redskins appear to have learned from this brush with death. While the same restrictive provisions will be in place in 2009 if there is no agreement before the free agency period starts, the Skins aren't in danger of being decimated this time around.

They only are a few million over the projected 2009 cap and there are a few players who could be cut to save enough money to get them safely under the limit.

There is plenty of time to hash this over in the coming months. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Rich Tandler's Redskins blog archive is located here. You can reach him by email at rich.tandler+bleachers@gmail.com.

Morocco Brown

According to the Washington Post, the Washington Redskins have hired Morocco Brown to be their director of pro personnel.

I haven't posted much of anything about the moves in the Redskins' front office lately. It's important stuff, but I just wasn't sure about what the departure of Louis Riddick from the job that Brown will be taking meant to the future of the franchise.

And I'm not sure what the arrival of Brown means, either. He comes from the Bears where he was the assistant director of pro personnel.

The director of pro personnel is responsible for evaluating talent on other NFL teams as well as judging the value of the players currently on the team.

From what I can gather, Brown is fairly well regarded, a rising star in the business. He has ties to the Redskins; he was a scout in the late 90's.

Roster spot #80 filled

The Washington Redskins got up to the limit of 80 players under contract when they signed defensive back Steve Tate, an undrafted rookie out of Hofstra.

Tate played in 42 games in his four years at the university on Long Island, but he started only 12. According to the Hofstra Chronicle, that's because his versatility:

"Tate doesn't start for us, but he might be the best defensive back we have." Defensive Backs Coach Lyle Hemphill said. "He plays both Cornerback and Safety. We can line him up anywhere."

Hemphill explained. "He actually plays more snaps then anyone else in the secondary. He is always in giving someone a blow."

Tate is 5-11, 184. He tried out during minicamp and got the call to sign a contract.

It would seem that his best shot at making the team is at safety, where his main competition comes from late-round draft picks Kareem Moore and Chris Horton.

The move puts the Redskins at the preseason limit of 80 players under contract. Their 10 draft picks do not count against this total until they are signed.

Corner backup plan

I've been having an online discussion with some friends of mine about the Washington Redskins cornerback position and I thought it was worth bringing up here.

The Redskins have nine corners on their roster:

25	Eubanks, John
38	Holt, Cedrick
32	Jackson, Eddie
22	Rogers, Carlos
27	Smoot, Fred
24	Springs, Shawn
29	Torrence, Leigh
20	Tryon, Justin
34	Westbrook, Byron
40	Richardson, Matteral

Springs and Smoot should start the opener if Rogers isn't yet fully recovered from the knee injury he suffered on October 28 (more on that in a bit).

Jackson and Holt have bounced around the league for a few years; they're hoping to get enough good time on film in preseason games to be able to latch on as injury fill-ins either here or elsewhere. Richardson's highest realistic aspiration as an undrafted rookie free agent is to make the practice squad.

That's where Westbrook spent last year and he'd like to make the 53-man roster this year. The team likely will keep five corners so if Rogers starts the year on the active roster (again, more coming on that subject) that means there are two jobs for Westbrook, fourth-round pick Tryon, and Eubanks and Torrence, who finished up last year as the dime and nickel corners, respectively.

Some of my friends look at that and are scared witless. At a minimum, this line of thinking goes, the Redskins needed to expend one of their second-round draft picks on a corner. Perhaps they should have pursued a free agent corner such as Drayton Florence more aggressively.

Suppose Rogers is on the shelf until October and something happens to the "injury prone" Springs. That probably leaves Torrence as the starter and Eubanks as the nickel. That's a recipe for disaster, they say.

And it may well be. I do think, though, that such a scenario involves some worst-case speculation that isn't likely to take place.

The first factor here is Rogers. We don't know that he won't be ready for the start of the season or not. It's being taken as a given by many that he won't be, given the nature of his knee injury.

Ten years ago, even five years ago, his absence for the start of the season would have been a given. Advances in surgery and rehab, however, have been dramatic. We saw Carson Palmer go down with a devastating knee injury in the playoffs in January of 2006. It was thought for a while that his career could be over. He was back under center for the Bengals the next September.

Just because Palmer made it back doesn't mean that Rogers will. Injuries are different and different players have different healing powers. But it's possible that Rogers will be ready for at least nickel back duty for the start of the season.

If he's not ready, the team will have to make a choice. Assuming that he doesn't participate in training camp because he can't pass a physical, the Redskins could put Rogers on the Physically Unable to Perform list. If that happens, he wouldn't count against the 53-player limit and he would be sidelined for a minimum of six weeks. After that, the team would have a three-week window during which Rogers could be activated. If they don't activate him during that time, he would go on injured reserve for the rest of the year.

If Rogers does go on PUP, the Redskins could choose to fill his spot with one of the younger players and start the year with essentially the same group of corners that got them through the playoff run last year and bring Tryon along in spots.

Alternatively, they could try to pick up an experienced corner who was a late roster cut and go with that player in the nickel spot as a stopgap measure.

But what if something happens to Springs?

I'm not going to say that's not a legitimate concern, but I did put "injury-prone" in quotes above for a reason. Springs' fragility is overblown.

He's been in Washington for four years. In 2004, he played in 15 games. He played in the same number in '05. Last year, he appeared in 16 games. Only in 2006, when he had a sports hernia, a hamstring injury, and, finally, a broken scapula, did he miss significant time and even that year he was in the lineup for nine games.

Springs' track record doesn't exactly qualify him for iron man status or anything, but by the same token it's inaccurate to portray him as a china doll of some sort.

Still, he's 33 and increased issues with injuries often accompany advancing age. Counting on him to stay on the field does carry some risk, just not as much as some imagine.

And if Springs is sidelined for more than a game or two and Rogers is on the PUP list, the defense will struggle, no doubt about it. You can't name more than a few teams in the NFL that wouldn't have problems if two of their three top corners were out.

All that being said, I certainly would have voiced no objection had the Redskins expended one of those three second-round picks on a corner.

In addition to providing insurance this year, a high draftee could start developing to be a replacement for Springs in the near future.

In 2009 Springs will be a year older and he will be carrying a cap number just shy of $8.5 million.

Still, I don't see the cornerback position as one that's in extreme need. Should the Redskins suffer from some misfortune, some younger players will be called on to step up.

If they have to get by for a game or two with Torrence as the starter and Tryon playing nickel, so be it. Coaches get paid six-figure incomes to figure out how to do just that without getting torched.

/span>

Nine punts

From the Washington Redskins Inside Slant in USA Today.com:

QUOTE TO NOTE: "Our (special) teams are pretty good. We don't want to be average at anything. We punted nine times in (the wild-card playoff loss at) Seattle and we didn't have a 4.5 hang time on any of 'em. If you line-drive the ball, these premier returners will stick it right back down your throat." — Special teams coach Danny Smith explaining why incumbent punter Derrick Frost is being challenged by sixth-round draft choice Durant Brooks.

Certainly, the poor hang time points to the fact that the Redskins would benefit from an upgrade at the punter position. I've come out strongly in favor of the drafting of Brooks.

But that's not what struck me about this quote. It's the number of punts—nine. I went to NFL.com and looked at the Gamebook. The Redskins' first six possessions ended in punts. Their seventh ended on downs. Their next one ended when the first half expired.

You just can't go on the road and win a playoff game with an offensive performance like that. It points to the lack of offensive firepower that has been keeping this team from breaking out of the ranks of the mediocre this decade.

Roster still has one spot

The Washington Redskins still have one job opening.

I mistakenly said that the Redskins released Jerome Mathis yesterday to make room for rookie defensive end Jonathan Mapu. While Mathis was cut and Mapu was signed, the first event didn't have to happen to make the second one possible.

That's because the Redskins still have just 79 players on their roster and they are allowed to have 80. They could have signed Mapu, kept Mathis, and they would have been right at the limit.

Actually, the Redskins will have 89 players available for the second round of OTA's coming up in a few weeks. Their 10 draft selections do not count against the 80-man limit until they sign contracts. As each draftee signs, a player will have to be released.

The NFL is looking at increasing the roster limit for training camp. In effect, it's smaller than it has been in years past as players who participated in the now-defunct European league were given exemptions and did not count against the 80 allowed. That allowed most teams to have around 85 players available for camp.

The WR picture—Thrash on the bubble?

The Washington Redskins cut Jerome Mathis today, making the roster outlook for the team's wide receivers much more clear.

Here are the 10 WR's currently on the roster:

12	Kelly, Malcolm
80	Mann, Maurice
16	McMullen, Billy
19	Mix, Anthony
89	Moss, Santana
82	Randle El, Antwaan
11	Thomas, Devin
83	Thrash, James
18	Toler, Burl
84	Gant, Horace

Moss and Randle El will start while Thomas and Kelly will see action as the third and fourth receivers. Five receivers on the roster is the norm, so that leaves one spot up for grabs.

The best that Mann, Toler, and Gant can hope for is a spot on the practice squad. McMullen has bounced around during his four years in the league and he'll probably get bounced again.

That leaves Thrash and Mix to battle it out for one job. It will be a classic battle of youth vs. experience.

Thrash, 33, has contributed in a myriad of ways since returning to the Redskins in 2004. He is the hardest worker on a team full of blue-collar types.

Mix, 25, is 6-5 and has the physical tools needed to thrive in the West Coast offense. He also made some standout plays on special teams.

So, there you have it. Thrash has the track record, Mix has the potential.

Depending on how things unfold in training camp and in the preseason games, it may well appear that the Redskins will be better off in 2008 if they keep Thrash and better off in 2009 and beyond if they keep Mix around.

Thrash vs. Mix will be one of Jim Zorn's first big decisions and it will be a very telling one as well.

Mathis cut

The one player the Washington Redskins signed as a free agent this past offseason is no longer with the team.

The Skins cut wide receiver and kick returner Jerome Mathis today.

I don't think that the reasoning for this goes beyond the fact that they signed Mathis prior to drafting a pair of wide receivers in the second round of the draft. One of those receivers, Devin Thomas, is capable of giving Rock Cartwright a run for his money as the kickoff returner as is fourth-round selection Justin Tryon.

With only 80 roster spots the Redskins apparently decided that the one occupied by Mathis could be better utilized.

In the short term they utilized the spot to sign undrafted rookie defensive end J. Y. Mapu. The Tennessee product is on the old side for a rookie. He's 24, having spent a couple of years on a church mission in 2004-2005. Mapu was among those invited to try out for the team during minicamp and evidently Greg Blache liked what he saw.

Some roster changes still possible

The Washington Redskins' roster is about 96% complete.

Of the 53 players who will be on the team's opening-day roster, all but one or two of them currently are with the team.

Don't look for post-June 1 cuts to add that depth at cornerback or along the lines.

This just in—nearly all of the June 1 cuts already have take place.

How is that possible? It's only mid-May.

Don't worry, even a lot of guys who make a living writing about football aren't up to speed on this.

Under the NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement, each team can release two players in the spring and designate them as June 1 cuts. While the cap number for that player stays on the team's book until June 2, the player is free to pursue employment with other teams.

The team gets the benefit of having the accelerated cap hit for the release moved to the next season. In addition, they don't have to include a player who is essentially a dead man walking as far as that team is concerned still participating in minicamps and OTA's.

Brandon Lloyd, who was gone in early March, carried such a designation. The Redskins will eat the bulk of the guaranteed money that they foolishly doled out to Lloyd in 2009.

So, there may be a trickle of activity early next month, but it's highly unlikely that a potential starter or even someone who represents quality depth will be coming available on June 2.

That doesn't mean that there is no way for the Skins to bolster their roster. There still are a few of veteran free agents who have yet to find a home.

Floyd "Pork Chop" Womack is a 29-year-old guard who was a part-time starter for Jim Zorn's old team, the Seahawks. Of course, the fact that there has been no apparent move to get Womack might tell you all you need to know about him.

Defensive tackle Rod Coleman could provide some situational pass rush push up the middle. He posted double-digit sacks as recently as 2005, but he missed all but five games of the 2007 season.

Womack and Coleman, along with the other veterans still waiting for the phone to ring, are out of work for a reason. Usually that reason is that they want more money to play than anyone is willing to pay them. Their asking prices usually drop as training camp approaches.

The Redskins plucked linebacker Randall Godfrey from the ranks of the unemployed in July of last year and he proved to be a valuable contributor, starting when both Marcus Washington and Rocky McIntosh were out with injuries.

Another 2007 starter who wasn't on the roster at this time last year was guard Pete Kendall. In May of '07 he was a very unhappy New York Jet. The Redskins traded a 2009 draft pick for him when it became apparent that Todd Wade couldn't make the move from tackle to guard.

While there are plenty of disgruntled players out there, it doesn't appear that any of them are both on the trading block and in a position of need for the Redskins. That could change, though, so keep an eye out.

Davis—give it a rest!

After running a few errands on Thursday afternoon, I came home and, as I usually do when I'm puttering around the house, I turned on the John Riggins show. Among the topics of discussion—still—was Fred Davis.

It's been a while since the incident involving Davis took place, so allow me to refresh your memory. Last Sunday, he overslept and missed a 9:30 AM practice. That's it.

He wasn't out driving (or boating) drunk. He didn't get into a fight with another man or hit a woman. He wasn't making it rain, he wasn't failing a drug test. No ballistics tests were being done to determine if a weapon he owned had been involved in a shooting.

I found it to be somewhat surprising that they were still talking about it on Tuesday. I don't know if they were still beating the dead horse on Wednesday, but they were on Thursday. And I'm not talking about a few gags sprinkled throughout the show. It was an entire segment, teased beforehand.

The segment itself was amusingly annoying. Riggins, who played in the days before there was saturation media coverage, didn't understand why the Redskins let word of Davis' absence "get out".

Evidently it's been a while since Riggo has been to an NFL practice. Beat reporters go out to the field armed with a numerical roster. As they see each player, they check him off of the list. Absentees are noted and, if someone on the PR staff is available, that person is questioned about the missing player or players. After practice, the coaches are questioned about them.

In Davis' case, Jim Zorn could have made something up or he could have told the truth. At the end of Sunday's practice, they didn't know where Davis was. Since the truth has a way of coming out at some point regardless, the best thing for Zorn to do was say that Davis' whereabouts were unknown.

Of course, I'm perpetuating the topic by complaining about the perpetuation of the topic, so I'll end it here. Hopefully, Riggo and his crew and the rest of the media do the same.