hatsOFF2gibbs wrote:Really? Even my new proposal? hahaha.....the other one was stupid but i think this one might be okay....
Smoot is not gonna be here anyway.....why not pick up Law?
This is the first time that I see the first post edited in a way that disconnects it from all the responses that follow.
Finally, you are -beginning- to outline a workable proposal.
Smoot for Ty Law. Yes, I would do that.
The other give aways that you mention above simply means that you want to stir the pot. Glad you are not the adviser of Vinny, or Are you?
Daniel Snyder has defined incompetence, failure and greed to true Washington Redskins fans for over a decade and a half. Stay away from football operations !!!
Well, first...wouldn't you have to have Smootie under contract to trade, or are you saying let him go, and try to woo Law ?
Secondly, while I've always liked his skills and tenacity...isn't Law an injury issue now ?
hatsOFF2gibbs wrote:Really? Even my new proposal? hahaha.....the other one was stupid but i think this one might be okay....
Smoot is not gonna be here anyway.....why not pick up Law?
This is the first time that I see the first post edited in a way that disconnects it from all the responses that follow.
Finally, you are -beginning- to outline a workable proposal.
Smoot for Ty Law. Yes, I would do that.
The other give aways that you mention above simply means that you want to stir the pot. Glad you are not the adviser of Vinny, or Are you?
Hey Redskin in Canada,
Yeah...just having some fun during the offseason. Just wanted to see how many people were going to burst at my first proposal. Hehehehe...
Anyway....the second one (Smoot and Law) that would be great for us! We have to somehow convince Smoot that we'll trade him to New England, get him signed, and then ship him off. YOu can't trade Smoot without signing him right?
Yeah.....but anyway....this was fun!
Nah....for all I care Vinny can be traded to the Pats too! hehe....
we can't trade smoot, because he has to be under contract for us to trade him. I also don't want Law. Law would be ok, if he didn't want to be the highest paid CB in the league. He's at the end of his career, and is definitely injury prone. If he came in for a bit less than what we offered Smoot, I'd say ok. He won't, so it isn't an issue...
tcwest10 wrote:Yeah, no...we're all done on Freddie. It's Smoot for Law now. What do you think about that one ?
Let Smoot test the free agent waters. When he is not even offered what we already did, sign him for less. If he does go somewhere else, take a corner in the draft. Forget Law, have'nt we learned our lesson about over paying players whose best years are behind them. Let's start focusing on getting good young players and managing our cap better, or we'll always be looking up from the bottom of the NFC East.
Sorry if this is a dumb question because I know it is a lot of sarcasam goin on but, when did Freddie said he wanted to play for the skins? Sorry again if it's a dumb question.
Why would New England trade arguably the best CB in football in Ty law, for two guys that aren't under contract and one that spent last year on IR and is a special teams player?
Freddie Mitchell is already where he belongs... he can stay there... though I doubt they want him.
Sean Taylor was one of a kind, may he rest in peace.
if we're going to overpay for something, let's get a WR or DE, something we really need...we don't need another high priced CB...Our defense is good as is...
I'd prefer to get a WR in FA as they normally take a few years after college to come around. DE's can help right away. Maybe we get a FA center too. There are a number of them available.
