Fred Smoot might get cut?

MEZZSKIN · Post by **MEZZSKIN** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:59 am

Looks like Smoot could be looking for a job this off season. Wonder what you guys think if he does. Signing Adalius Thomas and then signing Smoot (if available ) might save us some money

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincitie ... 503488.htm

cleg · Post by **cleg** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 10:15 am

MEZZSKIN wrote:Looks like Smoot could be looking for a job this off season. Wonder what you guys think if he does. Signing Adalius Thomas and then signing Smoot (if available ) might save us some money

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincitie ... 503488.htm

Yeah, but are there enough strip clubs and hookers in DC to satisfy Smoot's apetite?

BearSkins · Post by **BearSkins** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 10:36 am

I managed to see more than a few Vikes games this year and Smoot did not look good at all. Maybe it was just the scheme that didn't suit him but I would say let's look elsewhere for a CB.

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 10:50 am

My thought was to pick him up as a nickel corner. I had hoped that the years in Minny would have humbled him, but according to that interview I was wrong. He thinks that he is a quality starter that is getting paid, and deserving of $4.7 million. He isn't willing to be a third corner back or take a pay cut.

Listen, Fred! Teams don't cut quality cornerbacks! So if you get cut from the Vikings then you aren't worth a starting position or salary.

I say pass!

BearSkins · Post by **BearSkins** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 10:55 am

chaddukes wrote:I say pass!

Which is exactly what every oppostion team team did on him this year.

old-timer · Post by **old-timer** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 11:10 am

BearSkins wrote:
chaddukes wrote:I say pass!

Which is exactly what every oppostion team team did on him this year.

Considering how our secondary played last year, I don't think we can rule ANYBODY out. Smoot may have been the weak link in Minny, but our pass defense was worst in the league. My sister could have covered better than Kenny Wright and Mike Rumph. If we don't get massive help this off-season in the secondary and on the D-Line, we're in for another 5-11 season.

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 11:18 am

cleg wrote:
MEZZSKIN wrote:Looks like Smoot could be looking for a job this off season. Wonder what you guys think if he does. Signing Adalius Thomas and then signing Smoot (if available ) might save us some money

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincitie ... 503488.htm
Yeah, but are there enough strip clubs and hookers in DC to satisfy Smoot's apetite?

Yes. AND there's the Chesapeake Bay nearby.

UK Skins Fan · Post by **UK Skins Fan** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:35 pm

For the right money (which is unlikely), I certainly wouldn't rule him out.

But I don't think it's going to happen.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 2:42 pm

MEZZSKIN wrote:Looks like Smoot could be looking for a job ... Signing Adalius Thomas and then signing Smoot (if available ) might save us some money

I know very little about free agents but we have been told a number of times that most of the "good" ones are most likely going to be tagged. Do you have some inside info here that would indicate that Thomas is going to be available?

Actually I think the apparent lack of expensive FAs will be a benefit to us as we may try and find some less expensive talent that will both cost less and also might fit our schemes better. Of course that means our talent scouts have to locate these guys - that has been a bit of a problem lately.
If 1niksder can do it, what is wrong with the guys who are being paid "the big bucks" to locate the "talent" :lol:

I also think that by taking the "name" players off the availability list might mean that we will actually look at if the players available, suit us better than just signing a star player that does not fit the syatem or make the other players any better, when he gets here.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:03 pm

SkinsJock wrote:
MEZZSKIN wrote:Looks like Smoot could be looking for a job ... Signing Adalius Thomas and then signing Smoot (if available ) might save us some money

I know very little about free agents but we have been told a number of times that most of the "good" ones are most likely going to be tagged. Do you have some inside info here that would indicate that Thomas is going to be available?

Rumor has it that Thomas will be franchised and would cost draft compensation in addition to what it will cost to sign him. Same rumor has Brggs in Chi-town also being tagged.

SkinsJock wrote:Actually I think the apparent lack of expensive FAs will be a benefit to us as we may try and find some less expensive talent that will both cost less and also might fit our schemes better. Of course that means our talent scouts have to locate these guys - that has been a bit of a problem lately.

The fact that most teams are so far under the cap they'll be able to spend with "the Danny" this off-season, He'll still out spend them because he pays his players upfront in bonus money while others pay in big salaries.
The big names want the money up front because a lot of them are on their last deal. Looking at lower level free agents should bring in a longer term player and help the future cap situation.

SkinsJock wrote:If 1niksder can do it, what is wrong with the guys who are being paid "the big bucks" to locate the "talent"

We all do it because we are curious, they do it because they are paid. We do research, they ask others in the know. When those in the know talk about big names because that's who they know.

SkinsJock wrote:I also think that by taking the "name" players off the availability list might mean that we will actually look at if the players available, suit us better than just signing a star player that does not fit the syatem or make the other players any better, when he gets here.

Man I hope so

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 6:56 pm

1niksder wrote:The fact that most teams are so far under the cap they'll be able to spend with "the Danny" this off-season,

Which is exactly why the freeagent class this year will be weak. Its exactly why have only 1 pick above #125 is such a huge flaw for us and our aging defense.

Chad

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:10 pm

Smoot played with a lot of heart for us, but it wasn't a mistake to let him go (for all of that money that he wanted, anyway). Hard to tell whether he'd be a help or hurt coming back to this team. Could he re-focus and become a top 20 corner again?

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:20 pm

I really do not think he would be that good, but is that the requirement? I mean he might be good enough to be one of the top 5 on our team but I do not think he will be that effective to be that highly ranked again.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:23 pm

He liked the area and he'll need to put the Minny chapter behind him. Retracing his steps might be a good move for him. Bring him in as a nickle back and see what he brings.

I agree he wasn't worth the money he wanted but at a lower cost he'd be better than Wright

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 9:08 pm

1niksder wrote:He liked the area and he'll need to put the Minny chapter behind him. Retracing his steps might be a good move for him. Bring him in as a nickle back and see what he brings.

I agree he wasn't worth the money he wanted but at a lower cost he'd be better than Wright

I agree but if you believe what he said, then a nickelback isn't an option for him.

Skins2daGrave · Post by **Skins2daGrave** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 9:24 pm

why do you guys think if we bring back old players our old D will come back aswell? it doesnt matter what players we have since most teams have figured GW out

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 10:58 pm

1niksder wrote:He liked the area and he'll need to put the Minny chapter behind him. Retracing his steps might be a good move for him. Bring him in as a nickle back and see what he brings.

I agree he wasn't worth the money he wanted but at a lower cost he'd be better than Wright

And with the way that Wright was playing by the end of the season, I'd be happy to have him as a #4 behind Smoot as a nickel.

air_hog · Post by **air_hog** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 11:59 pm

Oh, if he's cut I say we definately should bring him in.

First off, he should be cheap. Second, he's knows the players and the scheme. And I'm sure the other guys love playing with him.

I would love to get Smoot back in the Burgandy and Gold.

Plus, I mean how much worse can it get?

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:54 am

I could care less if he's into strip clubs and party boats. Heck, he can bring all the strippers he wants on my boat.

But he will be cut for a reason. His ego is bigger than his game. I would not want him back. Could he be better in a different system? Who knows. Not sure how a system affects a cornerback. Their job is to cover a receiver and they always line up on one. I don't think it's the system.

MEZZSKIN · Post by **MEZZSKIN** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:01 am

If thomas and Briggs are franchised then we will have to look to upgrade in diffrent ways. All I was trying to say was Smoot might be a cheaper alternative instead of spending 65 gaziliion dollars on Clements ETC. If available maybe Freddie might get his game back on with us..Ala Jermiah Trotter when he left us for Philly.

SkinsFreak · Post by **SkinsFreak** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:20 am

MEZZSKIN wrote:If thomas and Briggs are franchised then we will have to look to upgrade in diffrent ways. All I was trying to say was Smoot might be a cheaper alternative instead of spending 65 gaziliion dollars on Clements ETC. If available maybe Freddie might get his game back on with us..Ala Jermiah Trotter when he left us for Philly.

Point well taken. But Smoot would need a SERIOUS attitude adjustment first and I'm not sure he's capable of that. Smoot does not exude or radiate the type of character Gibbs likes.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:53 am

Why not bring Smoot back? I tell you why not!

1. Its because most of the fans enjoy the high spending antics of this team. They feel that if they can't win the real superbowl, they can keep winning the off-season bowl.

2. His price will be too cheap. He has to want at least 20 billion dollars before we can even consider resigning.

3. It'll make too much sense. Who would want to bring a guy back that flourished in this system? I mean, we bring back Greggs old players but we can't do that with our own. No, thats out of the question.

4. High and Mighty! Smoot is not a good enough person to play for this team. Our roster is full of law abiding players that attend Church 4 times a week and pay their tithes consistently. He can't come here and distract this teams mission to end world hunger. The only way he can be forgiven is to repent to joe directly and maybe he'll have mercy on him. :roll:

5. This teams mission is to rake in AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE. Fred Smoots return would only garner a weeks worth of attention. Danny needs to thunder to roll until the season starts to make revenue.

6. Chemistry. Bringing back a player who fits within the team well is a no no. We must find the sqaure peg to fit into our round hole.

riggofan · Post by **riggofan** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:04 am

I can't remember. Did Smoot burn any bridges publicly that would keep this from happening? A lot of our FAs that got away recently seem like they have talked smack afterwards.

I'd take him back btw. No guarantee it would work, but could be a great move and a popular move with the fans if it did.

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:07 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Why not bring Smoot back? I tell you why not!

1. Its because most of the fans enjoy the high spending antics of this team. They feel that if they can't win the real superbowl, they can keep winning the off-season bowl.

2. His price will be too cheap. He has to want at least 20 billion dollars before we can even consider resigning.

3. It'll make too much sense. Who would want to bring a guy back that flourished in this system? I mean, we bring back Greggs old players but we can't do that with our own. No, thats out of the question.

4. High and Mighty! Smoot is not a good enough person to play for this team. Our roster is full of law abiding players that attend Church 4 times a week and pay their tithes consistently. He can't come here and distract this teams mission to end world hunger. The only way he can be forgiven is to repent to joe directly and maybe he'll have mercy on him.

5. This teams mission is to rake in AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE. Fred Smoots return would only garner a weeks worth of attention. Danny needs to thunder to roll until the season starts to make revenue.

6. Chemistry. Bringing back a player who fits within the team well is a no no. We must find the sqaure peg to fit into our round hole.

Yes, we won't sign a player without overpaying them, good point.

That's why we didn't outbid Minnesota for Smoot, and Minnesota is cutting him for not being worth what they paid.

I thought they'd sneak this one past you, but you nailed them. Good job.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:11 am

KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:Why not bring Smoot back? I tell you why not!

1. Its because most of the fans enjoy the high spending antics of this team. They feel that if they can't win the real superbowl, they can keep winning the off-season bowl.

2. His price will be too cheap. He has to want at least 20 billion dollars before we can even consider resigning.

3. It'll make too much sense. Who would want to bring a guy back that flourished in this system? I mean, we bring back Greggs old players but we can't do that with our own. No, thats out of the question.

4. High and Mighty! Smoot is not a good enough person to play for this team. Our roster is full of law abiding players that attend Church 4 times a week and pay their tithes consistently. He can't come here and distract this teams mission to end world hunger. The only way he can be forgiven is to repent to joe directly and maybe he'll have mercy on him.

5. This teams mission is to rake in AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE. Fred Smoots return would only garner a weeks worth of attention. Danny needs to thunder to roll until the season starts to make revenue.

6. Chemistry. Bringing back a player who fits within the team well is a no no. We must find the sqaure peg to fit into our round hole.

Yes, we won't sign a player without overpaying them, good point.

That's why we didn't outbid Minnesota for Smoot, and Minnesota is cutting him for not being worth what they paid.

I thought they'd sneak this one past you, but you nailed them. Good job.

But he's cheap now. My post had nothing to do with the past. Right now, he's going to be cheap. He's shown he could play in this system and thrive. So WHY NOT bring him back? Your attempt at a witty comeback failed.

Its been said that he didn't flourish in Minny because its requires big DB's who can tackle well. Tackling has NEVER been Smootys trademark. Sure, he tries but he's not big like Springs. Smoot is a cover corner, he did it well in this system.

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Fred Smoot might get cut?

Fred Smoot might get cut?

Re: Fred Smoot might get cut?

Re: Fred Smoot might get cut?

Re: Fred Smoot might get cut?