Mediocre market has allowed role players to cash in

[HarveyWallbangers]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=sando_mike&id=3287448&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab3pos1


A few years ago, the typical free-agency analysis rewarded high activity levels. The most active teams generated the most excitement and the most positive coverage. That remains true to an extent, particularly for teams that seem to build on strong seasons by making frequent moves.

The Cleveland Browns are the latest example.

The Browns, having traded away their top three picks in this year's draft, appear better on paper for the players they landed in return. But teams overspend in free agency. And they often overspend when they rework the contracts of players acquired through trades -- players who were deemed expendable by their previous employers.

The Browns would be wise to remember the adage about teams not picking up where they left off the previous season. Schedules change. Locker room dynamics change. Luck changes.

The Washington Redskins chose a good year to sit out free agency. Chicago, the Green Bay Packers, the Dallas Cowboys, the Indianapolis Colts and the San Diego Chargers also refrained from signing a single UFA from another team during the first 11 days of the signing period. Those teams might rank among the true "winners" of this free-agent season, simply by avoiding costly mistakes.

Did Washington finally learn their lesson? Did Chicago learn from Green Bay? Four of the six teams to sit out FA are Green Bay, Dallas, Indianapolis, and San Diego.

[twoseven]

I still think if we wait until the draft to look for a backup QB (and a number three for that matter) we are not helping ourselves. I am fine with not picking anyone else up if that is how it ends up (though I thought Jake Scott was a great pickup at 26 years old for 5 mil a year).

I wouldn't be upset if the SS LB Chillar picked us (I assume we made him an offer) and IMO it would be one less position in the draft that we would have to worry about, but I would bet he might be headed to AZ with their suddenly refreshed cap after re-working Fitz' deal.

[Bretsky]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=sando_mike&id=3287448&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab3pos1


A few years ago, the typical free-agency analysis rewarded high activity levels. The most active teams generated the most excitement and the most positive coverage. That remains true to an extent, particularly for teams that seem to build on strong seasons by making frequent moves.

The Cleveland Browns are the latest example.

The Browns, having traded away their top three picks in this year's draft, appear better on paper for the players they landed in return. But teams overspend in free agency. And they often overspend when they rework the contracts of players acquired through trades -- players who were deemed expendable by their previous employers.

The Browns would be wise to remember the adage about teams not picking up where they left off the previous season. Schedules change. Locker room dynamics change. Luck changes.

The Washington Redskins chose a good year to sit out free agency. Chicago, the Green Bay Packers, the Dallas Cowboys, the Indianapolis Colts and the San Diego Chargers also refrained from signing a single UFA from another team during the first 11 days of the signing period. Those teams might rank among the true "winners" of this free-agent season, simply by avoiding costly mistakes.

Did Washington finally learn their lesson? Did Chicago learn from Green Bay? Four of the six teams to sit out FA are Green Bay, Dallas, Indianapolis, and San Diego.

WHAT ABOUT

WILLIE JOE TOLEDO ???

Best FA TT singned since Charles Woodsen :lol:

[RashanGary]

I am fine with not picking anyone else up if that is how it ends up (though I thought Jake Scott was a great pickup at 26 years old for 5 mil a year).


I havn't had the chance to really focus in on his play the last couple years. How good is he? What have you seen of him?

[Bretsky]

I am fine with not picking anyone else up if that is how it ends up (though I thought Jake Scott was a great pickup at 26 years old for 5 mil a year).


I havn't had the chance to really focus in on his play the last couple years. How good is he? What have you seen of him?

He's a very solid and reliable starter. He's not Wahle in his prime but is well above Spitz, Colledge, Coston etc........

And he's entering his prime.

I don't think he'll ever be a star; but you get stable reliability from him.

Most rated Bell from the Titans better and I think he signed for around 5MIL per year; Scott seems like the best OG left so it would not surprise me if he gets close to that.

A team with a healthy cap would be wise to frontload his deal and lock him up for 4-5 years IMO.

[twoseven]

"Titans agreed to terms with OG Jake Scott, formerly of the Colts, on a four-year contract that will average just under $5 million annually.

We're usually wary of signing ex-Colts, but it's always nice to take a quality player from a division rival and put him on your team. Scott has similar tools to the man he'll replace at left guard, Jacob Bell. He's also younger, way cheaper, and hasn't missed a start since his rookie season (2004)."

[Bretsky]

"Titans agreed to terms with OG Jake Scott, formerly of the Colts, on a four-year contract that will average just under $5 million annually.

We're usually wary of signing ex-Colts, but it's always nice to take a quality player from a division rival and put him on your team. Scott has similar tools to the man he'll replace at left guard, Jacob Bell. He's also younger, way cheaper, and hasn't missed a start since his rookie season (2004)."



NO SURPRISE HERE