Skip to content

Redskins’ focus in free agency needs to be on their own players

Feb 24, 2015, 9:11 AM EDT


Two weeks from today, the Redskins and the rest of the NFL will start free agency. We are running a series on taking a position-by-position look at which players the Redskins might be interested in signing. It started yesterday with the safety position.

Even though new GM Scot McCloughan is committed to building through the draft, the organization will need to sign some free agents from other teams; there are simply too many holes to fill with draft picks.

But the Redskins should spend a minimal amount of their cap space, which currently stands at around $16.1 million but could grow to well over $20 million with some contract terminations and renegotiations, on free agents from other teams.

Instead, the focus should be on signing their own players, the ones they drafted and developed. If you want to know why the Redskins have struggled for so long, get ready for a sobering fact.

Since 1984, a span of 31 drafts, the Redskins have taken 20 players in the first round. Only two of them, 2000 first-round picks LaVar Arrington and Chris Samuels, have signed second contracts with the Redskins. Some, like Brian Orakpo, have stayed on the franchise tag. Carlos Rogers, the team’s top pick in 2005, was kept around another year as a restricted free agent. But for the most part the Redskins’ first rounders have moved on when their rookie contracts were up if not sooner.

How can a team sustain any sort of success if it can’t hold on to its top talent? Or, in some cases, when their first-round picks just aren’t worth keeping?

The team has four first-round picks up for new contracts in the next calendar year. Orakpo will be a free agent on March 10. There is a legitimate case to be made for letting him walk, although the Redskins should at least ask for a chance to examine the best offer that Orakpo gets on the open market before making a final decision.

Next year, Trent Williams, Ryan Kerrigan, and Robert Griffin III all are set to be free agents. The team should work with Williams’ and Kerrigan’s agents to get them locked up for the long term before the 2015 season starts. The little-used term “Redskin for life” needs to be applied to both of them.

Griffin is a different case. The team can decide to activate an option clause in Griffin’s contract that would lock him up for 2016 for a salary of about $16 million. That does not seem likely to happen. The best course of action would be for the Redskins and Griffin’s camp to hammer out a two- or three-year deal with some guaranteed mone and some incentives. Such a deal would give the player some degree of security while giving the team some options to move on if Griffin continues to struggle.

The Redskins’ draft pick retention problem extends beyond the first round. The last second-rounder to sign a second contract was Fred Davis, who came back on a one-year deal after being franchise tagged after his rookie deal ran out. You have to go back to the second-round pick in 2002, backup running back Ladell Betts, to find a second rounder who signed a multi-year extension. The last second-round starter to sign a multi-year extension was 1999 second-round pick Jon Jansen.

How about the third round? Chris Cooley, picked in 2004, is the only player drafted in that round to sign an extension during the free agency era.

Next year is a big year when it comes to free agents. In addition to Williams, Griffin, and Kerrigan, other players slated to be unrestricted free agents are Keenan Robinson, Alfred Morris, and Darrel Young. Instead of shopping for stars from other teams as they have done for so many years, the Redskins need to hone in on targets closer to home.

At some point, a team has to start taking care of its own. For far, far too long the Redskins have either failed to do that or have drafted players that just weren’t worth hanging on to. Both issues need to be corrected if the team is ever going to move forward.

  1. bk70 - Feb 24, 2015 at 9:40 AM

    I’m ready to move forward and clean house now.
    Improve cap space and remove Bowen, Chester, Cofield, Golston, and Porter. Orakpo will be better off with some other team.

    Say good-bye to Hankerson, Moss, Paul, Polumbus, I’m on the bubble for Compton and Helu.
    Defense, we can say goodbye to FA Biggers, Jenkins, Merriweather, and Neild. Not sure about the future
    for Ihenacho, Trenton Robinson and Justin Rogers.

    Let the GM have some space and work his magic with the coaches. Those remaining and those coming in should be considered for long term solutions. We must have at lest 4 new starters in place by August 2015.

    • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 10:08 AM

      If YOU cleaned house you would get rid of 3 d-lineman including one starter, a starting right guard, and your 3rd corner. This would clear nearly $17M of cap room and give you an additional $8M in dead money. (Actual figures: $16,994,375 and $7,995,000.) I’m assuming none of the cap cuts are designated after June 1st due to the number of ‘core’ players due for resigning in 2016. Can you replace those five guys for $17M?

      You also mentioned eight other guys that would need to be replaced on the roster because you didn’t resign them. This included two more D-linemen and a starting safety. You now have to replace 14 or 15 guys on your team including four starters (2 DL, SS, RG). Can you do it with your $33M, seven draft picks, and what’s left on the roster? Heck, I haven’t even mentioned Orakpos replacement assuming Murphy is the started be he isn’t the pass rusher.

      Sounds to me as if you end up with more holes than you started with little resources after you sign 15 guys to the roster.

      • bk70 - Feb 24, 2015 at 10:52 AM

        With all the departures above, we still field a team with over 60 players under contract today. Whatever $ result should be used on the draft and the few free agents that will be brought in.

        Still 4 DE, 4 DT, 3 S, 7 CB, 14 LB on roster.
        On Offense 4 TE, 9 WR, 6 OT, 4 OG, 2 C, 5-6 RB and 2-3 QB (assuming McCoy is retained).
        And 3 ST assuming Forbath is retained.

        I reiterate – 60+ players under contract. The holes are already there. Devote $ to enhancements across the board.

        • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:12 AM

          You can have 90 on the roster now and the rule of 51 applies. Most of the guys you mention have never played a snap. They aren’t starting and they aren’t even depth at this point. Nine WRs? Not sure where you get that but I’m sure once it’s March 1st Hankerson and Moss won’t be included. Also, are you suggesting that Jerry Rice, Jr.; Braylon Bell, Collin Lockett, and Rashad Ross have any chance of making the final 53? The answers to your holes are NOT on the roster.

    • rcjur - Feb 24, 2015 at 12:26 PM

      I agree with everything you said which is on point and will be a great step towards getting rid of the waste that’s a big part of why this team has sucked for years. However I do think Compton and Helu should remain on the team in their roles. Merriweather should be brought back only for one year and as a backup and veteran presence. We don’t have much on the dline so Jenkins can stay as a backup. Ihenacho to me should be considered the SS starter or at least compete and if he loses still on team. I like Duke. Everyone else not mention……….PLEASE SAY GOODBYE, GOODBYE!!!! Show them the door and replace them in draft, FA and UFA players. No more excuses, get rid of the waste.

  2. bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 9:43 AM

    Solid post!

  3. sidepull - Feb 24, 2015 at 9:48 AM

    It will be interesting to see how this all pans out. Taking care of your own. The epitome of the Redskins not doing so was letting Ryan Clarke go in favor of Adam Archuletta and giving him a huge amount of money. Redskins are famous for dumb stuff like that. You can see why they wind up in last place year after year. Players probably resent the implication that the front office has not valued them. In a way I think they do not develop players well and let them go to other clubs who get max out of Redskins throwaways. trent Greene, Stan Humphries, .etc.

  4. troylok - Feb 24, 2015 at 10:04 AM

    I’m not sure why Orakpo never morphed into a the beast of a pass rusher everyone thought he would be. Is this a case of Haslett’s scheme or poor play on the defensive line that led to Orakpo being limited to what he could accomplish? I can’t answer that but when the team drafted Trent Murphy last year, it seemed like they were willing to move on. Times, however, have changed. I think the new coaches and GM need to look long and hard at the tape on Orakpo. Maybe Barry can do something with him that Haslett couldn’t. Maybe McGloughan knows he can put a better defensive end on Orakpo’s side that will “free the beast” to make those sacks. Orakpo is not going to get a huge contract this year no matter where he goes. I say they make him a reasonable offer with no guaranteed money and one chock full of performance bonuses.

    • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 10:12 AM

      Somewhere they’re going to give him guaranteed money. A 7th rounder receives guaranteed money for signing his name. Orakpo should not sign any deal that doesn’t guarantee him at least $2M per year.

      • goback2rfk - Feb 24, 2015 at 10:25 AM

        Orakpo will be released. He is way too injury prone and has had the same injury multiple times now. He is high risk for reinjury just like RG’s Knees and ankle are.
        Some guys just can not stay healthy like Orakpo, Vick, etc. Some guys like London Fletcher would never get hurt.. I like the guys that stay on the field

        • kenlinkins - Feb 24, 2015 at 10:37 AM

          Agreed, Release him and allow the market (i.e. other teams) to set his value. I think he would like to stay in DC but would be a fool to take much less than the top offer from other teams to stay here. I think he is about to get a shock when he sees all the One Year offers in the $3.5 million range!

        • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:04 AM

          He’s a free agent. I’m not saying the ‘skins should sign him. I just saying that despite his injuries he will get guaranteed money in any contract offered him. I’m sure whatever team signs him will do it’s due diligence. The only money that matters is guaranteed money since players can get cut anytime. Orakpo got his $11.455M guaranteed last year due to the franchise tag. $2M guaranteed per year may be high but I’m sure he’ll try to get as much guaranteed as possible and nobody is going to get his services free of some guarantee.

    • murphsman - Feb 24, 2015 at 2:06 PM

      It was because of his health, plain and simple. 2 torn pecs in 3 years can do that to you. Look at how he did in 2012 when he was healthy

    • nomaan78 - Feb 24, 2015 at 6:22 PM

      Maybe the new conditioning coach can keep him from ripping his chest muscles. Signing a Dan Williams and a few good DL will help Orakpo alot.

  5. deepball1 - Feb 24, 2015 at 10:29 AM

    Niles Paul and Jenkins MUST be resigned. Those 2 players have contributed and are solid role players. NO…you just don’t let everybody go because you are frustrated. Mainly because it is impossible to replace 20 players per year and still expect to retain continuity.

    • teammudville - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:30 AM

      Wrong. Niles Paul and Jarvis Jenkins have been marginal players for the Skins and are Average NFL players at best. You have already determined their upside. When there time is up, resign them IF and ONLY IF you can agree to a contract that is equivalent to their value, which is not that much. And continuity? Really? You are going to screw up their continuity? The Redskins even have continuity? Since when?

      • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 12:02 PM

        Both are up and both either need to be resigned or replaced. Which is the best for the team? Can you replace them at equal dollars with better production? Both will be looking for raises and both were previous cap bargains since they were on their rookie deals. Helu $1,548,563 and Paul $690,413. Chris Thompson could conceivably replace Helu at $585,000. Then again Helu could still get a raise and have a lower cap number. He likely wants a chance at a bigger role and may have to find that somewhere else.

    • ET - Feb 24, 2015 at 12:52 PM

      Jenkins is worth it at a bargain price for depth / rotational purposes. Paul is worth it, IMO. He played well as a tight end last year, he’s solid on special teams, he’s more durable than Jordan Reed. He’s also a rare example of someone the Skins nurtured and developed. He’ll never be a star, but that doesn’t mean he’s not a good role player.

  6. kenlinkins - Feb 24, 2015 at 10:30 AM

    Rich: I have gone back and forth on the T. Williams contract. On one hand he sometimes plays like a Pro Bowler but is often not playing 100% due to injury. He is tied for 4th highest paying LT contract for 2015 (is he the 4th best?). He still seems to get into dumb fights and is one “lighter flick” away from having to sit out a year. He is the last Redskins on an old CBA high pick contract which benefits him much more than the team. The old rookie contracts for first round picks which allows a great first contract plus gets to double dip with FA deal in 2016 if not resigned. I can not blame him for the timing of his being drafted, but ALL old CBA contracts should be targets of GM’s trying to right size the Cap Numbers. At only 26, he should have many more years if he can stay healthy. I am still trying to figure out how the new CBA will effect the value of Free Agents like Williams in 2016 (if any). What would a new long term contract for T. Williams look like? (i.e. what is his value today vs. the risks).

    • Rich Tandler - Feb 24, 2015 at 10:59 AM

      I have looking into a new Trent contract on my list, although I think he’ll wait until next year because he really has no incentive to sign an extension right now (not that they shouldn’t try).

      The only affect the CBA will have is that it will keep the cap moving up, making contracts more costly. His old deal has nothing to do with his new deal. What Trent eventually gets paid will be based on his market value, not on the 2010 CBA.

      > > >

      • kenlinkins - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:29 AM

        I disagree a little bit about the CBA effect. The NFL is in year 5 of the new CBA and many high priced players are coming off a old CBA (much higher paying) contracts. This will cause a transition as more than normal will become Cap Cuts due to the higher cost vs. cost of first round picks in 2012 – 2014. More players on the market should lower the cost of Free Agents. Cap Cuts plus the first class of Free Agents under the new CBA (looking for that big contract they missed as rookies due to the new CBA) should flood the market in 2015 and 2016 (due to old CBA contracts being 5 / 6 years, new CBA being 4 /5 years.) Supply and demand should lower the over all cost range should it not?

        • ravenrich - Feb 24, 2015 at 2:27 PM

          No. The market today, is what the market is today. The old CBA has noneffect on any contract offer for any free agent. No flooding of the market, more than normal #’s of FA’s is going to happen. “What players want”, because they got less on their rookie contracts than the previous CBA rookies did, has nothing to do with anything. They’ll get what they are offered and they’ll take what they can get. But, overall, the cap goes up every year and the salaries for nearly every position go up every year. The market being flooded or weak will not change the fact that the best OT’s and pass rushers, for instance, are going to make 9-11, maybe 12 million per. Doesn’t matter if there are 25 or 75 free agents at a position. The price paid for the top tier, sets the price paid for the next tier.

      • kenlinkins - Feb 24, 2015 at 4:33 PM

        Well, I will admit that I do not like my odds of disagreeing with a man who has made his living for the past 35 years on the subject, but I still think the new CBA vs. the old CBA will have some kind of impact on Free Agent market. Just call me hard headed! (or wrong if that turns out to be the case).

        • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 4:47 PM

          You’re hard-headed and probably wrong. ;)

  7. teammudville - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:10 AM

    Looking at the entire picture from a macro perspective, it is hard to justify Rich’s suggestion to focus on resigning our own when our own have not been able to compete at even an average NFL level for a long, long time. Sure we may have an outlier like 2012 when everything fell together, but in totality, the Skins have been terrible for the past 20 years. This mess is not as simple as focusing on “signing our own”. And we have to stop trying to patch work every year hoping that luck strikes us and everything lines up again. It is going to take several years of sticking to a well conceived plan of financially prudent talent building. I, for one, would be perfectly fine with a few more 3 or 4 win seasons in a row if I felt the Skins were building to be a consistently competitive team in the future. If you keep doing the same thing every year (spending to patch the roster), this leads to having to do the same thing the following year, then the year after that, etc. The Skins have to bite the bullet, stop pushing contract money forward and get out from under the resulting the dead money hits. Clean up their contractual balance sheet. Stop mortgaging the future.

    Rich pulls some stats about us not resigning our early round picks. That’s great and all, but to be honest, our early round picks have generally not been good or impactful enough to resign. No shocker there. You can build around the talent and desire of Kerrigan and Williams. Resign them. The rest, don’t sign them just because they are current Redskins. Sign them if you can agree to a contract that is equivalent to their desire and performance – and most of their desire and performance just has not been good enough. And why do we keep holding out hope for Orakpo? Because he has this “untapped potential” that no one can find a way to release?? He looks like a beast in shorts and a tee?? He sure has not played like one. He has had 6 years here to show his potential and he has underwhelmed on almost every occasion. It was idiotic to franchise him last year based on his tenure – which financially has set the Skins back a few more years. That money could have gone to younger players WITH upside potential. Buy upside potential cheap and build on them (draft is a great place to do this). Will you hit every time? Nope. But you will hit and misses don’t hurt. These hits become your core. Don’t pay huge money for players at their zenith. All they have to go is down and you have to mortgage your future some more. It will be a long road to clean this roster up, but well worth it in the end. I’m not really excited about the same ‘ol method of business, which will lead to another 20 years like these past 20. Ugh.

    • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:24 AM

      $1,055,199 that is the TOTAL dead money Washington has as of now for 2015.

      Orakpo’s $11.5M is off the books. Who would have you signed instead of him? Would you have been able to get them on 1-year contracts?

      • teammudville - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:47 AM

        The problem Bang is that you are stuck in the past and now. Yes, RIGHT NOW it is $1.055M. You, and the Skins, have to look towards the long term future. Every year, the Skins have reworked contracts in the winter/early spring that have made that number balloon astronomically. They are doing it right now with DeAngelo Hall (not shown in your number, but his dead money hit could be up to $2.4M) and there will be several others to come. They do this to pay for the sins of their past and patchwork their consistently below par roster they have built because of this practice. The basis of my post was to change this policy and to follow financially prudent talent building. Do you disagree with this?

        And Orakpo? You were for franchising him last year? Come on. The Skins didn’t even need to sign anyone else. Take the bullet, use that money to eliminate much of the need to rework those contracts back in 2014 (mortgaging the future). If they even did that, we would be much better off that where we are right now – which is another pitiful season and more to come if they don’t change their overall strategy.

        • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 12:22 PM

          Tell me where currently the future is mortgaged? I totally get the problem of signing free agents how it affects the cap and how it stymies team building through the draft. (I.E. you’re not going to play the 2nd year guy when you signed some dude who makes six times as much.) As for Orakpo, hindsight is 20/20 and I genuinely wanted to know what your practical suggestion would have been. Start Murphy from the beginning? Easier to say now but not so easy in 2014.

        • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 1:08 PM

          DeAngelo Hall signed a four year contract extension with the Washington Redskins worth $17 million on February 19, 2014. Hall received a $3.25 million signing bonus and his $5.4 million in guarantees. $1.15 million of his 2014 salary is fully guaranteed while he will earn $1.25 million in guaranteed salary in 2015 if he is on the roster on the 14th day of the 2015 League Year. Hall agreed to waive the $1.25M 2015 guarantee out of his contract in February.

      • alextwrs - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:53 AM

        Alex Mack

        • alextwrs - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:53 AM

          Pro bowler D’qwell Jackson

        • ravenrich - Feb 24, 2015 at 2:31 PM

          Alex Mack? Clevelabd was never letting him go anywhere and they didn’t.

        • ravenrich - Feb 24, 2015 at 2:32 PM

          D’qwell Jackson. Now THAT would have been a forseeable epic waste of $.

    • pdxskin - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:43 AM

      @teammudville – fantastic post, could not have said it any better!

  8. bk70 - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:23 AM

    There’s the problem. We have too many on the roster that there is no chance of ever becoming starters.
    For years a patch work and hope for the best to get to the next year.

    I’m not frustrated, I just want to see a better team called the Washington Redskins for years to come.

    • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:39 AM


      You could cut Cofield next year and save $6M and have only $877,500 in dead cap space. The other four you mentioned are in their final years so you can cut them all and you’d get: a cap savings of $12,871,875, an additional $4,440,000 in dead money for this year, and still have one potential starter on the d-line.

      • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:44 AM

        That would make the total amount of dead money at $5,495,199 for 2015 which is still less than the Cowboys ($12,869,715) and about the same as the Giants ($5,592,893) before roster moves.

        • teammudville - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:59 AM

          Oh God…. Same ‘ol method of business. How about we try something different than what has led us to these past 20 years of futility? Can we just stop piling up dead money and patch working every year? Often the right decisions are the most difficult ones. I implore the Skins to stop taking the easy way out and to make some hard choices. Internal financial choices that will allow us to build a quality team for the future, not one with a hope and a prayer for the coming year. Please….

        • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 12:14 PM

          So you think it’s prudent to keep Bowen, Porter, Chester, and Golston? I hear you about dead money but every team does it because in order to sign the free agent in the 1st place you have to load the back of the contract to account for bonuses and give the agent something to sell to other clients. At the end of those contracts the player knows that a cut or a restructuring is coming. Some past restructures were horrible for the team – like Clinton Portis contracts – in the future but not all. Some restructures are players taking actual pay cuts not just cap cuts. I don’t know enough about Hall’s deal but what I hear is that it is more beneficial to the team. I’ll have to wait and see.

          Hear me. I’m trying to clear books not extend deals or sign high cost free agents. I think we’re closer than you think in agreement

        • teammudville - Feb 24, 2015 at 1:16 PM

          We probably are closer to agreement. Anyway, think about this (said in the long term macro sense): If all the other teams do the same thing with dead money, why should we continue to do it too? Come on now, we almost invented the practice when we were “so much smarter than everyone else and figured out the salary cap, etc.” – when we signed Deion Sanders, Bruce Smith, etc in 2000 – and the Haynesworths, Archuletas etc. after that. How about for the next couple of years, we did our best to suspend this practice? Stopped doing the salary cap roulette? i.e. cutting a guy because his cap number versus his dead money cost hits some kind of threshold? Obviously, the way contracts are written, you could not eliminate dead money entirely if someone doesn’t perform to their contract value, but get as close as you can. This would put us in a financial advantage against all the other teams that continue the practice. Next step is, with your financial advantage, make financially prudent decisions to attain volumes of the best up-and-coming talent you can muster. Again, will you hit on all of them? Nope. You can’t expect to. But don’t chase the big names and contracts. The draft is cheap talent. Focus there as well. You then have the financial flexibility that other teams do not have. We could identify and secure the players on the top of our lists because of this flexibility. THEN, once you have established our young core, we could focus on resigning our own. Not now. Not sifting through the lack luster talent we currently have, which was assembled using the old patchwork tactics.

          So, I say, bite the bullet and clean everything up now. Forget the salary cap roulette routine. Create financial flexibility and put the Skins in an advantageous position compared to the other teams. Focus on acquiring young up-and-coming talent. THEN contain from within and set yourself up for continued success. Is this too much to ask for?

        • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 1:36 PM


          It make sense to me. All I’m saying is that by cutting Bowen and Porter. You add resources and no dead money for 2016 for guys you don’t figure to contribute much in 2015 that eat up space in your cap. Plus, you will have to account for 15 contributing players whose contracts are up and/or cost too much to keep. I agree that you try to get young affordable talent for all of our holes. There are likely 5 new starters on defense and they all can’t come from the draft. But the cap problems of this team are in the recent past – not current. Other than Hatcher, this team has recently stayed away from future dead money. As for Hall, he won’t be dead money if he heals. He waived the guaranteed money this month in order to keep him from ending up a cap casualty – for now. Even then we are talking about dead money that still comes with cap savings. None of the ‘skins dead money is similar to the Cowboys still having to pay for contracts to Miles Austin and Kyle Orton.

        • teammudville - Feb 24, 2015 at 2:06 PM

          Bang, we’re just looking at the same thing, you from what to do now perspective, me from a long term perspective. Regarding Bowen and Porter, or any specific player on the roster right now, I really don’t care all that much. There is not much talent on this roster outside of a few guys that are really worth resigning anyhow. Any average NFL caliber replacement would probably do for those guys – the cheaper the better. And we probably have some of those guys on our roster right now who just need the opportunity. But it sure would be great if we didn’t have to decide every year if we had to cut players that we perceived had value to us for their price. This happens because we don’t have the financial flexibility we should have and we don’t plan beyond the coming season. We just keep stretching them out year after year. Who cares about comparing ourselves to Dallas’ number? All we should be worried about is putting ourselves in an advantageous position compared to all the other teams out there. Not just he Cowboys because they are the ones topping out in dead money this year. The higher their number (and all other teams number) the better.

          And Dan Snyder needs to think beyond marketing the team for the coming year and focus on making decisions that influence the marketing the team for the long term. He will be much richer for it.

          Also, these knuckleheads on the radio talking about signing Adrian Peterson? Really? Shoot me now. Or more appropriately, shoot themselves in the foot again for the next 5 years. Yeah. Go ahead. Sigh….

  9. bk70 - Feb 24, 2015 at 11:29 AM

    GM words via Rich in January

    Having the right DNA, however, only narrows down the field. Tape is not the final determiner for McCloughan.
    “I guarantee you every time we make a pick, one through seven rounds, there will be a player on that board that ends up being a good NFL football player from the standpoint of a starter, a quality backup, or a dangerous special teams player,” McCloughan said. “You can identify that, and a lot of that comes from sitting around here and getting to know these guys.”

  10. wildbill1952 - Feb 24, 2015 at 12:25 PM

    Players want to play for winners. It’s the only chance they have to make pro-bowls and it’s the only chance for a lucrative career beyond football. When you don’t like your employer, you move on. The only ones that are staying are those that can’t go anywhere else.

    Dan is not exactly the employer you would want for your son. The players want to go anywhere where else where it looks like ownership has a clue of what an NFL team needs to be successful. It’s not money and it’s not marketing. Some of it is personality. But on the personality front, Snyder and the FO are never going to keep their top players.

  11. gurnblanstonreturns - Feb 24, 2015 at 1:08 PM

    You can’t be serious that the Skins should extend Griffin. There is no way that Griffin or his camp will accept anything but elite money – which he has not earned by any measure. Plus, a contract year in which he is not guaranteed anything at all for next year might just be what Griffin needs to grow up and learn how to be an NFL quarterback. If he plays lights out, the Skins can resign him or tag him. If he plays like he has been or gets hurt, the Skins can move on with the resources to find a QB and some building blocks in place from this offseason. Let Griffin prove his worth in the 2015 starting job that Snyder and Allen have presented to him as a gift.

    • Rich Tandler - Feb 24, 2015 at 2:18 PM

      Griffin knows reality and for sure his agent does.

    • murphsman - Feb 24, 2015 at 2:19 PM

      Who said they were extending him? Rich said they shouldn’t, and they probably won’t. No one suggested they should.

  12. murphsman - Feb 24, 2015 at 2:22 PM

    I didn’t realize we were that bad at retention, though I’m not surprised, seeing how our two best players the past ten years weren’t originally ours.(Hall and Moss)

  13. mr.moneylover - Feb 24, 2015 at 3:03 PM


    • teammudville - Feb 24, 2015 at 3:11 PM

      This was mentioned above. If it happens, I suggest everyone must finally take into consideration that little voice inside of you has been echoing over and over again. You know the one… The one that keeps saying “just give up and start rooting for a real franchise. You really do want to follow a winner. You know you do…” Just give in to it and finally quit on this awful team. After being a fan since the early 70s, that’s what I’d finally do if this happens. Seriously idiotic thinking Moneylover.

      • ajbus1 - Feb 25, 2015 at 9:01 PM

        Blasphemy. Don’t know what little voice you’re talking about.

  14. ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© - Feb 24, 2015 at 3:09 PM

    Your post makes me sad, RIch. All those years of rooting for a team that became mediocre about two decades ago, and has been embarrassingly pathetic for almost all of the current owner’s tenure.

  15. abanig - Feb 24, 2015 at 3:52 PM

    This is the biggest reason the Redskins have sucked for 20 years. They don’t develop their own and they don’t re-sign their own.

    • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 4:45 PM

      The fans don’t want our players re-signed either. Laron Landry, Brian Orakpo, Carlos Rogers, and Jason Campbell all performed below our expectations and each were not developed. Griffin will likely be in the same category with Landry and Orakpo where injuries contributed to lack of development. Some are even hesitant on Trent Williams as if left tackles grow on trees. We still haven’t replaced Landry and who know how long it will take to replace Orakpo. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

      • skinsgame - Feb 25, 2015 at 7:21 AM

        Very true. However, each of those players moved on and proved to be average or worse. The argument about Trent Williams tends to be on his inconsistencies and huge salary. Ask the Patriots if left tackles grow on trees. They’ve rebuilt their offensive line 2 or 3 times under Belicheck. Their roster is constantly changing. Good players are abundant, they just need to be identified and coached well.

        • bangkokben - Feb 25, 2015 at 7:57 AM

          As soon as we have a Hall of Fame quarterback – Brady, P Manning, Rogers, Brees, Roethesberger – then we can plug in a guy at left tackle. Until then, you have to do like everyone else draft in 1st round and pay top dollar. At least our guy is recognized for his play – pro bowls. Look at how much money your saving on QB salary. This notion that Trent Williams isn’t worth his paycheck is asinine.

  16. goback2rfk - Feb 24, 2015 at 5:30 PM

    In other news, Jameis Winston is being compared to Peyton Manning when it comes to intelligence. Just the other day some guy names like Joe Greene or something was calling Jameis an idiot an jail break Winston. Turns out Jameis has like ivy league intelligence playa.

    • bangkokben - Feb 24, 2015 at 6:21 PM

      His ‘intelligence’ is not academic, nor is it common sense, nor is it street smarts. He was compared to Manning in his football intelligence. (Probably by his agent.) And before you get all wet, he’ll be gone before he gets to us or he’s dropping like Randy Moss for that otha stuff, playa.

  17. timwillhidetimwillhide - Feb 25, 2015 at 12:41 AM

    I think allot of the reason we arent resigning first round picks is because of all the bad picks we made due to a bad GM ( Vinny ) or a bad scouting department which hasnt change much in decades. Who would want to resign Rod Gardner, Laron Landry,Schrader, and numerous others that were so insignificant I cant recall their names right now. Or the year we traded down into the second round to get Kelly, Thomas, Davis where are they now? The GM is upgraded The Scouting Department needs to be next.

  18. tonywhitehead67 - Feb 25, 2015 at 5:47 AM

    The Redskins should give picks like Long, Moses, Thomas, Compton a chance to be on the roster. Although the salary cap situation is under control and not bad, Bowen, Cofield, Chester have to go unless they are willing to renegotiate like D-Hall did. I doubt if they feel confident in taking the risk that D-Hall did.

    • skinsgame - Feb 25, 2015 at 7:23 AM

      Chester should leave immediately. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Get. Out. Now.

  19. Agent Smith - Mar 2, 2015 at 5:46 PM

    Redskins absolutely must resign Helu. That’s a seriously terrific player right there. Granted his pass blocking needs a lot of work, but he’s a bonafide third-down pass threat, and a shifty runner. Skins need him badly. Archives

Follow Us On Twitter