Predator48 should get a bigger paycheck....

[CanesSkins26]

Let's see how Portis does without Sellers and then you HATERS Laughing will see how important and underrated he is.

I'm not disputing that he isn't a good blocker. However, a blocking fullback isn't all that hard to find. Sellers doesn't do anything outside of his blocking to justify a significant pay increase.

[yupchagee]

Sellers has actually earned it. I like Horton but he only had a few standout weeks. And if Sellers fails to get a raise, it will be because of ownership that doesn't reward it's own players, not because of his age or position.

Horton hasn't earned it yet - yes he started in his rookie year, but he was a liability in coverage. Hopefully he will be even better this year.

I don't think either Sellers or Horton will ever see another contract from Snyder. Since the arrington/samuels draft, the team has only resigned two players (betts, cooley) to contracts for more than the minimum. Unless something changes soon, numerous players will walk in the next few years.

I think Suisham, Montgomery & Golston signed for more than the minimum.

[Jake]

Let's see how Portis does without Sellers and then you HATERS will see how important and underrated he is.

I'm granting that. . .but a good blocking FB isn't worth $6 mil a year. . .

He's not asking for that much. He hasn't even given out a figure. He just wants more than the minimum. Can you blame him?

[SnyderSucks]

Since the arrington/samuels draft, the team has only resigned two players (betts, cooley) to contracts for more than the minimum. Unless something changes soon, numerous players will walk in the next few years.

What's your source on that? Jansen and Samuels re-worked their deals multiple times. For half of the years you are citing, the people drafted are still playing on the first contract they signed.

And who did we draft in those years and let go that you think we should have re-signed for more than the vet minimum?

I said since Samuels. Jansen was drafted before Samuels and Arrington.

My source is looking at the team and seeing who they resigned to a second contract out of all the picks and non big money free agents. Players not extended include Ryan Clark, Fred Smoot, Derrick Dockery, Antonio Pierce, Champ Bailey, and Rod Gardner, among others. You can argue that some didn't deserve extensions, or that others got more money than they deserved, but the fact is the team was unwilling to spend to retain starters, while giving big contracts to players from other teams who weren't as good as those they let go. Carlos Rogers and Campbell are both in the last year of their contracts and have not been extended. McIntosh has one year left. The did resign backups like Cartwright, Golston, and Montgomery but none got big money.

Teams that manage their roster well give extensions to players before their last season of a contract so they get a discount for giving guaranteed money a year early and avoid losing a player to a ridiculous offer from another team. Regardless of your opinion about Campbell, a team should not allow a starter, especially a QB, get to the last year of a contract unless they already have the replacement player on the team. In the case of Clark, Dockery, Pierce, Bailey, and Gardner the replacements that started the year after they left were not as good. In Smoots case Rogers has been better than Smoot. At least with Bailey they got Portis in return.

[Deadskins]

Let's see how Portis does without Sellers and then you HATERS will see how important and underrated he is.

I'm granting that. . .but a good blocking FB isn't worth $6 mil a year. . .

He's not asking for that much. He hasn't even given out a figure. He just wants more than the minimum. Can you blame him?

In the Sellers wants more money thread, someone said he wanted to be paid top 10 FB money. Like IB, I can see a few hundred grand raise, but top 10 money? I don't think he's worth that.

[CanesSkins26]

Let's see how Portis does without Sellers and then you HATERS will see how important and underrated he is.

I'm granting that. . .but a good blocking FB isn't worth $6 mil a year. . .

He's not asking for that much. He hasn't even given out a figure. He just wants more than the minimum. Can you blame him?

In the Sellers wants more money thread, someone said he wanted to be paid top 10 FB money. Like IB, I can see a few hundred grand raise, but top 10 money? I don't think he's worth that.

Agreed. Let's also not forget that Sellers is 34. Pretty soon it's going to be time to replace him.

[PulpExposure]

Let's see how Portis does without Sellers and then you HATERS will see how important and underrated he is.

I'm granting that. . .but a good blocking FB isn't worth $6 mil a year. . .

He's not asking for that much. He hasn't even given out a figure. He just wants more than the minimum. Can you blame him?

In the Sellers wants more money thread, someone said he wanted to be paid top 10 FB money. Like IB, I can see a few hundred grand raise, but top 10 money? I don't think he's worth that.

First, Jake, Sellars makes more than the minimum. The minimum for a guy with 9 years experience is $745,000 for 2009. In March 2007, Sellers signed a 3 year, $4 million contract. Although the base salary is the vet minimum, it also came with a 700k signing bonus. Overall, that's significantly more (basically the prorated amount of the signing bonus for this year means a 30% salary increase for him over the vet minimum). Basically, he's paid about a million for this season.

I was curious to see what other FBs are paid. The other Pro Bowl FB from last year was Le'Ron McClain; he's paid $460,000 this year. Of course, he's on his rookie contract, but he also can run with the ball, and he's young.

While McClain isn't a good comparison, the two probowl FBs from 2008 are; Tony Richardson and Lorenzo Neal. While both guys are older than Sellers, both are multiple probowlers, and both make their living blocking people. And, they both make less than Sellers.

Tony Richardson, a 3 time pro-bowler, signed a contract with the Jets this offseason for $876k, a little more than the vet minimum of $845,000 for a 10+ season player. Lorenzo Neal, a 4 time probowler, was paid $830,000 last year, which was the vet minimum for a 10+ season player that year.

Sellers is griping but he's unfortunately in an underappreciated position, blocking fullback, where the guys just don't make big money. They appear to make vet minimum...and Sellers got a bonus on top of that.

[SkinsFreak]

Teams that manage their roster well give extensions to players before their last season of a contract so they get a discount for giving guaranteed money a year early and avoid losing a player to a ridiculous offer from another team. Regardless of your opinion about Campbell, a team should not allow a starter, especially a QB, get to the last year of a contract unless they already have the replacement player on the team.

That's not always the case. The Chargers, for example, who are managed well, have not tendered contract extensions to almost half a dozen players who are all entering their "contract year.". That list includes all of their starting receivers, their franchise QB and their Pro Bowl LB. Phillip Rivers, Shawn Merriman, Vincent Jackson, Chris Chambers and Malcolm Floyd are entering their contract year and the Chargers have not yet offered them new deals.

I understand your overall point, but there's a new wrinkle added for the next two years and is playing a major role with players entering their contract year without new, long-term deals. That wrinkle is the lack of a new CBA, and a provision that will require players to need six years to become unrestricted free agents, verses the four years needed in the past. All teams are holding off right now, not just the Skins with Campbell and Rogers. The Steelers, Chargers, Dolphins, Ravens, Giants, among numerous other teams, all have players entering their contract year without new deals on the table.

[SnyderSucks]

Teams that manage their roster well give extensions to players before their last season of a contract so they get a discount for giving guaranteed money a year early and avoid losing a player to a ridiculous offer from another team. Regardless of your opinion about Campbell, a team should not allow a starter, especially a QB, get to the last year of a contract unless they already have the replacement player on the team.

That's not always the case. The Chargers, for example, who are managed well, have not tendered contract extensions to almost half a dozen players who are all entering their "contract year.". That list includes all of their starting receivers, their franchise QB and their Pro Bowl LB. Phillip Rivers, Shawn Merriman, Vincent Jackson, Chris Chambers and Malcolm Floyd are entering their contract year and the Chargers have not yet offered them new deals.

I understand your overall point, but there's a new wrinkle added for the next two years and is playing a major role with players entering their contract year without new, long-term deals. That wrinkle is the lack of a new CBA, and a provision that will require players to need six years to become unrestricted free agents, verses the four years needed in the past. All teams are holding off right now, not just the Skins with Campbell and Rogers. The Steelers, Chargers, Dolphins, Ravens, Giants, among numerous other teams, all have players entering their contract year without new deals on the table.

You make a good point about the CBA, but that's an unusual exception where teams are waiting to see the new terms. I think I read something from the Patriots where they said specifically they were waiting. Merriman would have gotten an extension already, but they want to see if his knee is okay first.

I knew about the restricted free agency for next season, but I don't think they should be counting on using that. If there is an extension before next season, that would go away. In addition, I don't think they would rely on that with Campbell. If he plays great, they will have to use the franchise tag, or another team could sign him to a restricted deal with a poison pill that Washington could not match. Something like a salary in the last year of $100 million that becomes guaranteed if he plays more than 2 games in RalJon. So I think it's either franchise or they let him walk.

Also, not sure if you would want to rely on it for Rogers either. If he plays the whole season like he started last season and makes some picks, do you really want to lose him for potentially a low first and low third. In Rogers case, they may actually already be planning ahead to let him walk and use the draft pick this season and tryon.

How ironic would it be if they make it to the final 8 this season and next year is uncapped but Snyder can't spend because of the restrictions on the final 8? I think his head might explode in frustration.

[tribeofjudah]

Horton will get paid. He's doing all the right things.

That's what I'm sayin'.... He will see a payday come sooner or later.

[SkinsJock]

Now let me get this straight - last year we were 8-8 and we had the 13th pick in the draft - I believe that means we were the 19th "ranked" team - I think we are a better team but I do not see this team being ranked in the top 10, let alone the top 8 - are you kidding me?

we certainly do not know what will happen between the owners and the players this year but we do know that the Washington Redskins will not be ranked as high as #8 at the end of the season - not even the 'president' of the lollipop club here would dare to predict that

[Deadskins]

:lol: Now let me get this straight - last year we were 8-8 and we had the 13th pick in the draft - I believe that means we were the 19th "ranked" team - I think we are a better team but I do not see this team being ranked in the top 10, let alone the top 8 - are you kidding me?

we certainly do not know what will happen between the owners and the players this year but we do know that the Washington Redskins will not be ranked as high as #8 at the end of the season - not even the 'president' of the lollipop club here would dare to predict that

Win one playoff game and you finish in the top 8. It's really not that big an improvement over last season. Had we one one more game we would have been a wild-card team. Once you are in the playoffs, anything can happen. Just ask the Cardinals.

[Irn-Bru]

My source is looking at the team and seeing who they resigned to a second contract out of all the picks and non big money free agents.

Oh, I thought when you said "draft picks" you meant "draft picks." I guess when you went to look up Ryan Clark and Antonio Pierce you discovered that you'd better include "free agents" in the definition of "draft picks."

Players not extended include Ryan Clark, Fred Smoot, Derrick Dockery, Antonio Pierce, Champ Bailey, and Rod Gardner, among others.

Clark and Pierce were mistakes, agreed. The rest, not so much: Fred Smoot wanted #1 CB money; we were smart to let him go find it. Bailey wanted out for personal reasons and wasn't going to come back, no matter the money. We would have been idiots to re-sign Gardner.

"Among others." Translation: "I was scraping the bottom of the barrel with Gardner, so I'd better cap it off with a 'among others' to make the list look more robust."

You can argue that some didn't deserve extensions, or that others got more money than they deserved, but the fact is the team was unwilling to spend to retain starters, while giving big contracts to players from other teams who weren't as good as those they let go.

I'll spot you Ryan Clark for this one. Please name one other player who was let go and replaced by a big-money free agent who was worse than the player we let go.

And let's get something clear: more than one of the players you cite were dubious starters at best before their contract year, and then played like all-pros in the one year it mattered. That was the story with Smoot; and his success was good enough to warrant a $13 million signing bonus with Minnesota. Dockery didn't look like he'd stick around on the team long-term until his contract year. He got lucky that it was a thin year for free-agent linemen, and Buffalo overpaid.

This isn't a Redskins phenomenon. This happens to all kinds of players on many different teams, all the time.

Looking to the future, you have a point: we may be putting ourselves in a tough spot with Campbell, Rogers, and McIntosh. I agree those are areas of concern.

[VetSkinsFan]

So how about about that Horton guy???

[SkinsFreak]

:lol: Now let me get this straight - last year we were 8-8 and we had the 13th pick in the draft - I believe that means we were the 19th "ranked" team - I think we are a better team but I do not see this team being ranked in the top 10, let alone the top 8 - are you kidding me?

we certainly do not know what will happen between the owners and the players this year but we do know that the Washington Redskins will not be ranked as high as #8 at the end of the season - not even the 'president' of the lollipop club here would dare to predict that

Win one playoff game and you finish in the top 8. It's really not that big an improvement over last season. Had we one one more game we would have been a wild-card team. Once you are in the playoffs, anything can happen. Just ask the Cardinals.

Exactly... and even the president of the "PMS Club" here would have to acknowledge that.

[TeeterSalad]

Horton should get paid a significant amount more if he does well this season. As far as Sellars is concerned, I have an idea, they should start him out with $5m a year and then take away $1m every time he fumbles, but he must carry the ball at least 25 times this season to be eligible (short yardage situations of course.)

[SnyderSucks]

My source is looking at the team and seeing who they resigned to a second contract out of all the picks and non big money free agents.

Oh, I thought when you said "draft picks" you meant "draft picks." I guess when you went to look up Ryan Clark and Antonio Pierce you discovered that you'd better include "free agents" in the definition of "draft picks."

Players not extended include Ryan Clark, Fred Smoot, Derrick Dockery, Antonio Pierce, Champ Bailey, and Rod Gardner, among others.

Clark and Pierce were mistakes, agreed. The rest, not so much: Fred Smoot wanted #1 CB money; we were smart to let him go find it. Bailey wanted out for personal reasons and wasn't going to come back, no matter the money. We would have been idiots to re-sign Gardner.

"Among others." Translation: "I was scraping the bottom of the barrel with Gardner, so I'd better cap it off with a 'among others' to make the list look more robust."

You can argue that some didn't deserve extensions, or that others got more money than they deserved, but the fact is the team was unwilling to spend to retain starters, while giving big contracts to players from other teams who weren't as good as those they let go.

I'll spot you Ryan Clark for this one. Please name one other player who was let go and replaced by a big-money free agent who was worse than the player we let go.

And let's get something clear: more than one of the players you cite were dubious starters at best before their contract year, and then played like all-pros in the one year it mattered. That was the story with Smoot; and his success was good enough to warrant a $13 million signing bonus with Minnesota. Dockery didn't look like he'd stick around on the team long-term until his contract year. He got lucky that it was a thin year for free-agent linemen, and Buffalo overpaid.

This isn't a Redskins phenomenon. This happens to all kinds of players on many different teams, all the time.

Looking to the future, you have a point: we may be putting ourselves in a tough spot with Campbell, Rogers, and McIntosh. I agree those are areas of concern.

I was including Clark and Pierce the first time, just forgot to say free agents. I've had this discussion before. Of the players listed, only smoot was replaced with a player as good or better. Pierce was replaced by a stopgap until Fletcher was signed. Dockery was supposed to be replaced by Wade and they had to make an emergency trade to get a player capable of playing the position. Clark was replaced by worse players, including Archuletta who got the biggest salary ever at his position until Landry was drafted. Gardner averaged over 50 catches until they let him go. Who replaced him? Taylor Jacobs? Nobody yet. Bailey could have been resigned but the team decided they weren't going to invest in both Arrington and Bailey. They made the wrong choice there, in hindsight. The "among others" includes others but I didn't feel like doing an exhaustive list, but it could include Thrash (which year did he leave?), Robert Royal (replaced very effectively by ey), Walt Harris who went to the pro bowl the next year, and Demetric Evans who was simply the best D-lineman on the team last year (not necessariliy saying much). This is a redskins phenomenon. Look at Philadelphia - they draft replacements for a player a year or two early, or sign them to extensions. Same thing in Pittsburgh. Good teams resign their own players, and when they don't resign their players they have an in house replacement. Washington has a track record of not doing it. Washington often doesn't draft a replacement for a player until a year or two after they leave. Ryan Clark is an example of that. So is Pierce. So is Dockery. So is Jansen.

I do think they may have learned their lesson in this regard, but time will tell. The drafting of the receivers last year, the drafting of Orakpo, Jarmon, Tryon, and the CB in the third round this year - those are all signs of planning for the future that will hopefully work out. It may be that last years and this years draft look really good at the end of this season. I'm hoping the plan is to spend multiple draft picks next season on the O-line, but that will get thrown out if they have to draft a replacement for Campbell.

[Deadskins]

Bailey could have been resigned but the team decided they weren't going to invest in both Arrington and Bailey.

No he couldn't. He was going to leave for personal reasons. We traded him for Portis, so we could recoup something, but he was out of here either way.

[Irn-Bru]

I was including Clark and Pierce the first time, just forgot to say free agents.

OK, but if you include free agents then your original argument doesn't stand. We've signed and re-signed plenty of players.

Of the players listed, only smoot was replaced with a player as good or better. Pierce was replaced by a stopgap until Fletcher was signed. Dockery was supposed to be replaced by Wade and they had to make an emergency trade to get a player capable of playing the position.

You said that "the team was unwilling to spend to retain starters, while giving big contracts to players from other teams who weren't as good as those they let go." That's a little different than saying that we didn't replace the players we let go with better ones.

Gardner averaged over 50 catches until they let him go. Who replaced him? Taylor Jacobs? Nobody yet.

Taylor Jacobs and Rod Gardner have been cut from more than one team for a reason. . .

(BTW, in case your question was serious: Gardner was replaced by Patten and then ARE the following year. We went from Coles-Gardner in 04 to to Moss-ARE in 06.)

Bailey could have been resigned but the team decided they weren't going to invest in both Arrington and Bailey.

No, he wouldn't. As I mentioned before, Bailey left as much for personal reasons as he did for $$$. He wasn't coming back to Washington.

The "among others" includes others but I didn't feel like doing an exhaustive list, but it could include Thrash (which year did he leave?),

Thrash is like Smoot. Our FO did a good job of not paying him #1 money, since he wasn't worth it, but also keeping an eye out for him and re-signing when he became available.

Robert Royal

Isn't a very good TE. We let him go on purpose.

Walt Harris

I'm assuming you didn't see him play for us. Are you saying you would have dished out millions to him based on his play here?

Demetric Evans

That was a smart move by our FO this offseason. You must read JLC a lot, because I don't know where else you'd get the idea that Evans was our best DL last year.

I'll defend this one any day. (By the way, Evans is yet another player that we re-signed after he showed promise. So he's actually an example against your main argument.)

[SnyderSucks]

I was including Clark and Pierce the first time, just forgot to say free agents.

OK, but if you include free agents then your original argument doesn't stand. We've signed and re-signed plenty of players.

Of the players listed, only smoot was replaced with a player as good or better. Pierce was replaced by a stopgap until Fletcher was signed. Dockery was supposed to be replaced by Wade and they had to make an emergency trade to get a player capable of playing the position.

You said that "the team was unwilling to spend to retain starters, while giving big contracts to players from other teams who weren't as good as those they let go." That's a little different than saying that we didn't replace the players we let go with better ones.

Gardner averaged over 50 catches until they let him go. Who replaced him? Taylor Jacobs? Nobody yet.

Taylor Jacobs and Rod Gardner have been cut from more than one team for a reason. . .

(BTW, in case your question was serious: Gardner was replaced by Patten and then ARE the following year. We went from Coles-Gardner in 04 to to Moss-ARE in 06.)

Bailey could have been resigned but the team decided they weren't going to invest in both Arrington and Bailey.

No, he wouldn't. As I mentioned before, Bailey left as much for personal reasons as he did for $$$. He wasn't coming back to Washington.

The "among others" includes others but I didn't feel like doing an exhaustive list, but it could include Thrash (which year did he leave?),

Thrash is like Smoot. Our FO did a good job of not paying him #1 money, since he wasn't worth it, but also keeping an eye out for him and re-signing when he became available.

Robert Royal

Isn't a very good TE. We let him go on purpose.

Walt Harris

I'm assuming you didn't see him play for us. Are you saying you would have dished out millions to him based on his play here?

Demetric Evans

That was a smart move by our FO this offseason. You must read JLC a lot, because I don't know where else you'd get the idea that Evans was our best DL last year.

I'll defend this one any day. (By the way, Evans is yet another player that we re-signed after he showed promise. So he's actually an example against your main argument.)

I included low priced free agents, not the big name stars that get big contracts. Re: Demetric Evans, I said people resigned for more than the minimum. Players like Evans, Montgomery, Alexander, etc. have signed for minimum type deals. Resigning backups for the minimum isn't what I was talking about. And if Evans wasn't the best D-lineman on the team last year, who was? Carter overall is better, and there are several players better on the team, but who was more productive last season? He should have at least gotten an offer.

Re: Bailey, I do not remember any acrimony with the team. They talked for close to a year about an extension. The problem was they offered him much less than they gave Arrington, and Bailey didn't want to accept that. They also offered much less than he eventually got from the Broncos. When it came down to it, the Redskins wouldn't pay they best player they've had on the team since the Super Bowl years.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football ... htm?csp=34

http://football.about.com/b/2003/08/20/ ... -offer.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football ... rade_x.htm

[Deadskins]

Re: Bailey, I do not remember any acrimony with the team. They talked for close to a year about an extension. The problem was they offered him much less than they gave Arrington, and Bailey didn't want to accept that. They also offered much less than he eventually got from the Broncos. When it came down to it, the Redskins wouldn't pay they best player they've had on the team since the Super Bowl years.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football ... htm?csp=34

http://football.about.com/b/2003/08/20/ ... -offer.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football ... rade_x.htm

The word was Bailey got a WP reporter pregnant, and his wife gave him an ultimatum that they left DC, or she left him. It wasn't about $.