Redskins: FA Since 2000

[Vote for Kalas]

Every off-season we hear the Redskins are extremely active in FA, go after the top talent available with the money spent no object and this is used as evidence they do everything they can to win.

We are hearing it again after them signing Haynesworth to one of the largest contracts in NFL history and Hall to a mega deal this off-season.

I found an article from the Redskins official site evaluating their FA activity since 2000.

http://www.redskins.com/gen/articles...ssive_5464.jsp

I am not sure the theory fully matches reality especially since the Redskins have had a total of 2 winning seasons during that time and made the playoffs twice. Have they been aggressive and spent alot of money? Sure that part is true. Do they always go after the top talent available? I would say no. Has it translated onto the field? Not really.

[sfphillyfan]

VFK - no one here doesn't think the Redskins don't suck. They are a laughing stock. It's not like we're all saying "wooo boy, i'd trade redskins roster for ours straight up!"

What we ENVY is an owner that is willing to spend the money. Lots of it. That is all. Imagine if you married SMART free agent acquisition with LOTS OF MONEY. Just imagine it.

Is that not the holy grail?

You make it sound like everyone is calling Danny Boy a genius. And, well, nobody does that. Nor do they call Al Davis or Jerry Jones a genius. We just look over the fence and say, "well, at least they're TRYING to win."

And before you start in with your "the Eagles FO isn't cheap!" spiel... fine. fine. whatever. Perhaps winning is #1 on Lurie's list. And it's debateable.

But what you can't debate is that winning is the #1 priority with the Redskins, Cowboys, and Raiders. They might not do it, but it's not from lack of trying. Money talks. Even if it's gibberish.

[Vet Turf]

VFK - no one here doesn't think the Redskins don't suck. They are a laughing stock. It's not like we're all saying "wooo boy, i'd trade redskins roster for ours straight up!"

What we ENVY is an owner that is willing to spend the money. Lots of it. That is all. Imagine if you married SMART free agent acquisition with LOTS OF MONEY. Just imagine it.

Is that not the holy grail?

You make it sound like everyone is calling Danny Boy a genius. And, well, nobody does that. Nor do they call Al Davis or Jerry Jones a genius. We just look over the fence and say, "well, at least they're TRYING to win."

And before you start in with your "the Eagles FO isn't cheap!" spiel... fine. fine. whatever. Perhaps winning is #1 on Lurie's list. And it's debateable.

But what you can't debate is that winning is the #1 priority with the Redskins, Cowboys, and Raiders. They might not do it, but it's not from lack of trying. Money talks. Even if it's gibberish.

I disagree. I just don't equate spending money to winning is the #1 priority. I think that a closer match to spending money like crazy as a compensation for weakness in other areas such as below the belt or crappy personnel evaluation

[Vote for Kalas]

Vin,

One, the Eagles have spent quite a bit of money over the years on FA, but they usually only target elite guys like Runyan, Kearse, Samuel et al.

Two, I agree with Vet Turf and disagree spending the most money = trying the hardest to win.

Third, they obviously do not win as their track record since 2000 is bad

I never said people said their owner was a genuis or that they would switch rosters.

If you envy Snyder and the stupid way he runs an organization, I guess we will disagree again

[sfphillyfan]

I'm not saying it's the best way to build a winning team Vet Turf. I'm just saying it's hard to look at those teams (or the Yankees) and say "nope, they're not trying to win."

[sfphillyfan]

If you envy Snyder and the stupid way he runs an organization, I guess we will disagree again

VFK - i've been very civil in my response to you lately but this is horseshit. You know that's not what I meant. So stop being an ass.

[Vote for Kalas]

I'm not saying it's the best way to build a winning team Vet Turf. I'm just saying it's hard to look at those teams (or the Yankees) and say "nope, they're not trying to win."

I understand the reaction, but do you not also see some of those practices KEEPS them from winning?

[Vote for Kalas]

VFK - i've been very civil in my response to you lately but this is horseshit. You know that's not what I meant. So stop being an ass.

Fair enough, it was snarky and I apologize

[MDFAN]

Hell spending to win doesn't work in baseball either. So no I'm not envious of the Danny Snyders approach, nor do I think it's the best way to win. See Pittsburgh and New England.

IMO, it's a childish and simplistic way of looking at it.

[Green With Envy]

Spending money on staff, scouts and GM's make sense. When you don't build an organization you react by going crazy in free agency. Snyder is the defacto GM and has no football background. Jerry Jones and Al Davis are GM/owners who have football backgrounds but should step down. The one common denominator on these three free spenders is that they're owner/GM's. That's a big difference than having to answer to an owner.

[leifdawg]

Imagine if you married SMART free agent acquisition with LOTS OF MONEY. Just imagine it.

Funny, that's pretty much how I would describe the Eagles. They target top FAs and give them premium money.

Hell spending to win doesn't work in baseball either. So no I'm not envious of the Danny Snyders approach, nor do I think it's the best way to win. See Pittsburgh and New England.

Exactly the way to win in the NFL is to build your team through the draft, and then if a difference maker becomes available you make a move for him in FA to supplement what you got in the draft.