It seems that signing Hall will be a fait accompli, and to my mind, a good thing. Rich Tandler is of the same opinion:
The first piece of the puzzle is cornerback DeAngelo Hall. After being picked up in midseason following an unceremonious dumping by the Raiders, Hall worked his way into the starting lineup and played well. There are signs that he may be growing up and that his "MeAngelo" days are behind him. He is an unrestricted free agent and if the Redskins can get it for something like the numbers being floated around—about $12 million guaranteed and $45 million over six years—it's a no-brainer to bring him back.Tandler writes of the Rogers issue:
What I don't understand is why Hall and Carlos Rogers are being presented as an either-or proposition. Rogers was playing at a Pro Bowl level for the first half of the season and he wasn't awful when he was demoted to nickel back when Hall moved in to the starting position. He has a year left on his contract. If there is no collective bargaining agreement by next year Rogers will be a restricted free agent, meaning that the Redskins can make him a qualifying offer and get a first-round pick if he signs elsewhere. In any case, there is a good chance that the Redskins will control his rights for the next two seasons.Tandler cites Springs cap hit ($8 mill) as a reason to let him go, and I agree. As savings of $6mill would allow, as Tandler states, the Skins to re-sign both Rogers and Hall.
PFW had an almost identical evaluation of Rogers' play over the first half of the season:
Through the first part of the season, Rogers was playing at a Pro Bowl level, but he fell off and eventually was demoted to playing nine defensive snaps in the loss to the Bengals. The club would like to work out a long-term deal with free-agent-to-be DeAngelo Hall, and not Rogers - whose deal has one year remaining - and could use him as trade bait. One estimated guess at Rogers' value: a second-round pick, which would offset the draft-pick shortage somewhat.TOBOTWR, citing PFW, thinks that Rogers was playing even better than PFW and Tandler give him credit, and echos thoughts I share:
I have mixed feelings on this one. I think Rogers had a terrific season, even after he supposedly "fell off". He may not be the best at, you know, catching the ball, but that's why he's not a wideout. His cover skills remained strong, and you can never have too many good cover guys. At the same time, if you can get great value for him, I can see the sense in doing it.But I keep coming back to the same thought: If you have a great performing unit, why muck with it? Why not concentrate on building the units that need drastic improvement which include just about every other area of the team? I understand if they want to let Springs go. He played half a year in 2008. Looking back on a long record of Springs in the NFL one can't realistically count on more than that from a player making $8mill a year -- He should go.
However, Rogers has shown that he is a consistently competent cover corner -- one of the best in the NFL at that skill, and with prototypical size and speed. So he can't catch the ball... That isn't his job description, which is keeping the OTHER guy from catching the ball. He is a good citizen and wants to play for the Redskins and won't break the bank to do so. What the hell more do the Skins' FO want?
This is the exact type of blunder that has lead to the linebacking unit's year by year degradation of talent. Will this be another Arrington for Holdman scenario? In that case a rogue LB coach, a nincompoop agent, and overdeveloped egos on the part pf the player and the owner conspired for a perfect storm in removing an all-pro calibre linebacker from the team. He has yet to be replaced, apologies to Rocky McIntosh. In this case the player likes the team, is a good citizen, and is willing to sign a reasonable contract... And he's trade bait?
What the hell is Vinny doing?
"Hi, my name is Steve and I'm a fan of the Redskins..."
Well, that's the first step.