Barrell of Monkeys (Or Redskins)

[KDawg]

There has been an overwhelming feeling here the last few weeks. It seems the majority of us are concerned with the amount of signings we're making to our depth. And normally, for us, this is something that would envoke a fear in all of us.

For example, the latest signing of Vonnie Holliday. Last year, people around here would have been infuriated, probably due to the fact that we would have overpaid for a guy that played with Reggie White.

This year, we still seem to get that kind of reaction, but it looks like some of us are forgetting some key additions... Both by adding solid pieces in the front office and by subtracting others.

Vonnie Holliday was a cheap signing designed to help shore up our new three front defensive line. Depth is something we need along both of our lines. Not only for when injuries pile up, but specifically for the DL, it gives some of our guys a break.

Bruce Allen is not Vinny Cerrato, and I think that's a sentiment that needs to be repeated over and over again.

As for the question of, "Why are we signing another running back (insert any position here)?"? I can't blame people for being a little gunshy when it comes to that stuff, but let's take a step back and really listen to what Coach said early on when he first came to DC.

I believe he told us he was all about competition. And in my mind, competition breeds excellence. You can't take a play off, no matter who you are because no one will be handed anything. Everyone is constantly being evaluated.

And that brings up my last point. This year is different. We can sign tons of guys to contracts and bring them in to compete for positions without the limitation of the salary cap. We may only have one year to do that, so this is the year to find all of the right puzzle pieces for the beginning phase of building this new roster.

In future years we can swap players out, replace some more dead weight, etc. But this year? I think it's imperative that we find the right building blocks for this team.

We have a barrell of Redskins right now, but make no mistakes that barrell will be emptied until we have a team that Coach and Bruce Allen believes can compete.

[sideshow24]

Not really signing anyone for big money or long contracts so I'm all for it. Bring them in, see what you got. If nothing else it might motivate any lazy holdovers to work harder for their jobs.

[KDawg]

Not really signing anyone for big money or long contracts so I'm all for it. Bring them in, see what you got. If nothing else it might motivate any lazy holdovers to work harder for their jobs.

Bingo.

But that seems to be missed on alot of folks. Not because they don't get it, but because they're so used to seeing signing accompanied by a large price tag that they seem to forget that we can sign these guys for chump change.

And we can sign a bunch of them, cut them and sign more due to the fact that we don't have salary cap restrictions.

Sounds like a good deal to me.

[Hiro]

Just because they're old doesn't mean they can't play anymore either. I think I speak for us all in that we want to see our team get younger. But this won't happen in one year, especially in a year where our new administration was left with four measly draft picks (which they managed to turn into six).

I'm fully in support of the idea of bringing in as many players on the cheap as we can to find out who fits into this new system and vision for the team. When you're a team that goes 4-12, nobody should consider their jobs to be safe.

[KDawg]

Just because they're old doesn't mean they can't play anymore either.

This is a major point.

Sure, they very well may be washed up, but again, due to the lack of a cap... If we bring them in and they stink, cut 'em and sign someone else.

Furthermore, just because alot of these guys are old doesn't mean they aren't still building blocks. Will they be around in a few years, maybe not... But we do have some youth on this team that can benefit from sound leadership, even if it is only for a season or two. Especially if these golden oldies happen to be among our best options on the field as well.

Good post.

[The Tris]

But that seems to be missed on alot of folks. Not because they don't get it, but because they're so used to seeing signing accompanied by a large price tag that they seem to forget that we can sign these guys for chump change.

Most fans are used to having 8-12 very highly paid players, usually flashy FA signings, so that when we spread our money around for low cost depth, the conclusion is that cheap = bad. For too long the sum of our team has been a collection of borrowed superstars, with little depth behind the faces of the franchise.

We have been conditioned to expect to shoot for the best FA available, winning by overplaying everyone else. Clearly the strategy has not worked, so it boggles my mine why people are so upset that we are doing things differently this year.

We have given ourselves room for error this season - one DE blows? Great, cut him for no loss and get the next guy fighting for his football life in. One of the RBs is washed up? Great, we have other options.

For the first time in a long while, we have depth. While the ceilings of some of our units might not be as high, at least we aren't a team that is excellent at a handful of positions and woefully undermanned at a handful more.

Quantity breeds competion. I'm not sure how that is a bad thing.

[Jimbo]

For too long we've had either inexperienced or just plain crappy depth. Would you rather have a cagey vet who has seen most everything as a backup or a guy who is in WAY over his head. Even if he's not what he once was, I'll take the vet.

Even if the vet DOESN'T make the team, he'll sure as heck show the young guy a thing or two.....especially HOW to compete.

[MattFancy]

I don't mind bringing in veteran guys on the cheap. At worst, they end up being a solid depth guy and we all know we need depth at just about every position. I think that has been the biggest difference this offseason. We aren't overpaying for anyone, perfect example was Chad Clifton. In past years, we would've thrown tons of money at him in hopes of getting him. This year, we set a price and if they don't like it, Shanahan and Allen move on to the next guy.

Shanahan also said he wanted to have competition at every position, which is good because you know players will be working hard during training camp and in the preseason. This way we know that the best players will be the ones playing.

I don't think there have been any moves we've made this offseason that I didn't agree with. I feel like the FO has brought in a bunch of guys that can help win now and also build something for the future. This team is finally headed in the right direction and it will be fun to watch!

[kingdaddy]

One thing that can't be overlooked is that by bringing in quality, hard working veterans, you show everyone else what it takes to play in the NFL. This can only benefit the younger players and will motivate the holdovers who are still here. Allen and Shanahan have signed a lot of experienced players and none of them, outside of McNabb who was traded for, have been guaranteed a starting job. This is going to force every one of them to fight for playing time. This means we should get the most out of Larry Johnson, Willie Parker, Clinton Portis, all of the WR's, the d-line and most importantly the offensive line.

[Brandon Lloyd Christmas]

all the signings this offseason have been great. were giving out peanut contracts to guys that used to be very good, and were giving them a chance to redeem themselves. parker, johnson, holliday, galloway, etc: all guys that cost us nothing if they dont pan out.

hell if one of them returns to form for even a season its well worth it. theres no risk, and all reward if they hit.

[BurgundyBlog]

why on earth would anyone object to a slew of low-risk, no-commitment, medium-upside fliers? are people forgetting that we sucked last year? we can cheaply and easily make small upgrades at eight or ten starting positions just by looking at a hundred guys and seeing who's the best. this plan is ingenius.

[Johns Bass]

The current regime is really only on the hook for two guys right now and that is Trent & McNabb - everyone else is someone else's baggage, at least until the season gets rolling (like 4 months away). Nobody else has a job til then.

There is like 88 guy's on the roster today which means 27 will be gone (if you include 8 for the practice squad) by gameday. If a vet or unknown makes the team it is because they outperformed. What if there are a rash of injuries? Might be nice to know that you have a stash of guys someplace that at least knows were FedEx field is.

[LD0506]

Bruce Allen is not Vinny Cerrato, and I think that's a sentiment that needs to be repeated over and over again.



Excellent post KD, you simply cannot say this often enough. The fact that competent football professionals are making the assessments on any given player completely changes the equation. There is no possible comparison to the way things were a year ago.

[Kindred]

You would think that we could sign dozens of players left and right. My concern is that we might have too many players, with the net result equivalent to too many students in a classroom for a teacher to evaluate, educate, and provide time for.

[KDawg]

You would think that we could sign dozens of players left and right. My concern is that we might have too many players, with the net result equivalent to too many students in a classroom for a teacher to evaluate, educate, and provide time for.

You don't get to film a class and watch it... Over and over and over again.

[budski]

As someone else posted; all the signings put pressure on everyone else to perform, or find work elsewhere.

[MassSkinsFan]

It's a great point about signing loads of guys because of the uncapped year, and I think it's a sound strategy.

I was curious to see if we're the only team doing this so far, so I looked around for a summary of the 2010 FA signings. I saw that as of May 7th (date of article) only two other teams (AZ and CIN) had nearly the volume of signings we had (18 and 19 respectively to our 21). However, AZ split 50/50 between signing new guys and re-signing guys from last year, while CIN was heavily weighted toward signing guys from last year. By contrast, we signed 17 new guys, with 4 re-signings (5 if you count Rabach, who was included in the new signings per the report I read).

In terms of number of new faces, Skins led the league with 17, followed by Denver with 10, Arizona with 9 and Detroit and KC both with 8.

It looks like the Redskins are taking advantage of this situation, and a few other teams (KC, DET, DEN, SEA) are following a similar plan, concentrating on signing a good number of new guys, but only about half as many as the Skins.

[KDawg]

It's a great point about signing loads of guys because of the uncapped year, and I think it's a sound strategy.

....



Great post. Good research, too. It seems like we are attacking this offseason a lot differently than the other teams.

[Kindred]

You don't get to film a class and watch it... Over and over and over again.

add up all the time it takes to review each additional player, add up all the time it takes to coach/mentor each additional player, subtract from the time you could dedicate to reviewing/coaching/mentoring your core players.

[The Tris]

add up all the time it takes to review each additional player, add up all the time it takes to coach/mentor each additional player, subtract from the time you could dedicate to reviewing/coaching/mentoring your core players.

I don't think the time and reps are alotted equally across the board. These fringe and depth guys have a couple of shots each day to make an impact. If they don't, happy trails.

[Darth Tater]

The current regime is really only on the hook for two guys right now and that is Trent & McNabb - everyone else is someone else's baggage, at least until the season gets rolling (like 4 months away). Nobody else has a job til then.

There is like 88 guy's on the roster today which means 27 will be gone (if you include 8 for the practice squad) by gameday. If a vet or unknown makes the team it is because they outperformed. What if there are a rash of injuries? Might be nice to know that you have a stash of guys someplace that at least knows were FedEx field is.
I think right now people need to focus on the 80 we need to start training camp. We also need to consider some of the 88 cannot or will not fully participate until mid-June or later. Of the 80, 4 will likely be specialist and 4 will be QBs, if we go 3 deep at every remaining position, that leaves us with 9 more available slots on that roster which doesn't really need to be hashed out until TC starts. I would think you'd want to look at s many guys as you can.

BTW, a big advantage of a guy like Galloway is that even if we cut him before the season, he will likely still be available in the November/December time-frame if the injury bug is an issue. He will know the system and have some chemistry already and the thing you lose as you get older is the ability to perform consistently at a high-level, not the ability to perform at a high level.

[Pedro]

I don't see why people think it's all old vets. We've got young competition at most spots in the mix with the older guys we're also signing.

Camp is going to be fierce at times.

I really don't get people not liking cheap 1 year contracts to fill out our roster until the loaded FA class of next off season. Until then the younger guy wins a tie, have at it lads. I hope we are so competition focused a few years down the line, we seam focused like the America's Game teams tend to look :)

[Darth Tater]

You would think that we could sign dozens of players left and right. My concern is that we might have too many players, with the net result equivalent to too many students in a classroom for a teacher to evaluate, educate, and provide time for.

Too many? Lets take a look at the defensive line. As of today, we have 14 on the roster, 1 or 2 cannot fully participate while another has chosen not to participate. This means we have 11-12 currently participating on a regular basis. Given the FACT that we will take 9-12 to TC, we have about the right number at this time.

[jflow78]

Generally, with older players, the fear is that they won't make it through a whole season. This year, I don't think we're banking on any of the older players we've signed (other than Artis Hicks) to necessarily do more than provide competition. I don't see most of these guys even being here when the preseason is over, they're going to get guys motivated and worried about their jobs, which will make our players better all the way around. Not to mention, the contracts these guys are signing are one year deals with little else, so why not?

How could you possibly get upset with the FO signing a ton of competition and providing some motivation for the players. Lots of these veterans will play very well during TC and provide the fire lots of our guys need to reach the next level. I'm all for it.

[MassSkinsFan]

I don't see why people think it's all old vets. We've got young competition at most spots in the mix with the older guys we're also signing.

Yeah, I've been keeping a casual eye on signings, and have been suspicious that Bruce Allen is possibly taking after his old man in creating the Over the Hill Gang II here. Luckily, it seems that for every old guy we sign, we're getting a corresponding young guy (more or less).

[SnyderMustGo]

Bruce Allen is not Vinny Cerrato, and I think that's a sentiment that needs to be repeated over and over again.

He's not Scott Pioli either. Or Bill Parcells. Or some superb GM.

Vinny was garbage. That he is gone is a good thing. But Bruce Allen is not someone who should be seen as someone that it is foolish to question.

With Vinny, I was reasonably certain every decision was wrong. But Bruce is not the opposite. He's not a proven GM that is deserving of the sort of deference that is being suggested here--that we should not worry because Bruce is in charge.

What has he ever done to demand that kind of respect? (Other than being the son of who he is--a key factor in why he was hired)

I like drafting Trent Williams (I would have preferred Okung, but not upset with Trent). I like not over-paying for players. I like competition. I like that they got rid of Campbell and ARE. I do not like that they did not get rid of AH. I do not like the trade for McNabb. I do not like cutting Marko Mitchell and signing Bobby Wade. I do not like the failure to bring in every reasonably priced OL on the market.

Telling me to not worry about it because it is Allen making these decisions instead of Cerrato does not instill in me any confidence.



Edit - why is my avatar changed? I haven't violated any rules or done anything wrong. Why have I been given such an insulting avatar?

[Darth Tater]

Under George Allen, the old guys cost us draft choices (although GA's methods BUILT the foundation upon which Joe Gibbs built the house). In near past years, the old vets often had big contracts so unless the younger guy was clearly better, the nod would go to the vet. This year, old vets are relatively less expensive. Years of conditioning has caused us to fear these older vets but at least for this year, everything has changed.

[mossomo]

What has he ever done to demand that kind of respect?

He got us a HoF quarterback - ftw! hail.


Telling me to not worry...

Debbie Downer, there's a lot more positives to rally around than negatives.


Edit - why is my avatar changed?

Buwhahaha. The mods have earned my respect!

:logo:

[Burgold]

I guess the biggest negative about this strategy is no chance at compensatory picks next year. We certainly will have signed more than we lost. If we found some gems or guys who discover a rebirth it's totally worth it... if they're bums...

[Sanders 83]

Remember how everyone we signed, whether it was a big deal or not, the contract details would always come out within a day or two. Other than Larry Johnson and Fast Willie, we haven't seen any of the other contracts. Even Alexander, who supposedly got a new contract, his details haven't come out. No more is it look who signed and for how much and how long.

Good Post K-Dawg, I think MOST of us are on board with the direction we are going.

[HawaiianTime]

Has anyone had a chance to look over the signing of the vets to see who has 3-4 experience? I would imagine that signing on anyone with this experience will help the entire defense in the transition before cut time comes about. If this was the strategy, it would seem to be a very sound one.

[MassSkinsFan]

He's not Scott Pioli either. Or Bill Parcells. Or some superb GM.


What has he ever done to demand that kind of respect? (Other than being the son of who he is--a key factor in why he was hired)

Have Pioli or Parcells had 100% success with their moves? Is a person's performance frozen in time and always predictable?

My biggest beef with naysayers (not necessarily you SMG) who doubt both Allen and Shanahan is that they seem to assume that both guys can never improve their performance as personnel guys.

I think it's safe to say that one or both of them is able to look at past events, pinpoint problems, and adjust their plans to address the problems. If they can do that with a game plan or a team's culture, why can't they do that when it comes to personnel moves?

I'm not suggesting we prostrate ourselves before these great gods, just that it's tough to predict how these moves will play out, and that we ought to give our FO the benefit of the doubt before we dismiss them.

Again, this is not directed at you SMG - just something that I've been thinking about and that got triggered by your post. :)

[LD0506]

My biggest beef with naysayers (not necessarily you SMG) who doubt both Allen and Shanahan is that they seem to assume that both guys can never improve their performance as personnel guys.

Or that the two working together are incapable of complementing each other, that the combination might pool their resources and perspectives to yield better results.

But some people will be unhappy simply because it's what they do, it is their one trick and they will ride it to their grave.

[dcdiscokid]

And I would also think that they at least get a full season before we start second guessing each and every move... Hail!

[Skins-Canes-Mounties]

The difference between signing several guys this year as opposed to last year is the cap.

In years past, if you signed several guys, it would prohibit you from signing others because bonus money would be prorated and you simply may not have had the salary space to bring in depth. We overpaid for starters and had no money for quality depth to drive the starters. Players became too expensive not to play. The lineup was basically set by this time every year.

This year, the more people and competition that you bring in, the better. There are no cap restrictions. Underachieving vets and those players that can't grasp the new system can be cut with little consequence. The best man should win at every position.

[jflow78]

But some people will be unhappy simply because it's what they do, it is their one trick and they will ride it to their grave.

That's pretty much what I think, it's their schtick, and no matter what happens, that's all the character they have.

[Agent Three]

really?! panicking over depth signings when in previous years people were complaining about lack of depth?! just another day at ES.

[KDawg]

really?! panicking over depth signings when in previous years people were complaining about lack of depth?! just another day at ES.

Did you reply to the wrong thread?

[JaxJoe]

One thing that can't be overlooked is that by bringing in quality, hard working veterans...

Exactly. One thing that gets overlooked is having quality practices. You need loads of quality players to 'size-up' your projected starters. I find that many 'star' players don't practice that hard. It's that middle-of-the-pack blue collar player who sets the practice tempo. And a hungry veteran who's had loads of starting-caliber experience is the best substitute to game-speed ability.

I was concerned the past two years of hearing those Zorn post-practice pressers using words like "medium" and "owie" That passive attitude shouldn't be the basis of the practice attitude.

I'm a firm believer in quality practices in a game-like environment to prepare for the upcoming season. Utilizing experienced veterans who can still play the game is far better than the Goofy-like 'ah-shucks' behavior we've seen in the past.

[Old Bay]

He's not Scott Pioli either. Or Bill Parcells. Or some superb GM.

Conversely, it doesn't mean he's Matt Millen either. Whilst some may disagree with changes or moves done (or not) the front office still needs some time before the pitch forks come out.

[KDawg]

Conversely, it doesn't mean he's Matt Millen either. Whilst some may disagree with changes or moves done (or not) the front office still needs some time before the pitch forks come out.

What it means, quite simply, is that he's not Vinny Cerrato.

[MassSkinsFan]

What it means, quite simply, is that he's not Vinny Cerrato.

Amen and Thank God!!! (and stuff)

[Old Bay]

What it means, quite simply, is that he's not Vinny Cerrato.

Yeah, considering, you'd think that would be enough for Shanahan/Allen's first offseason.