Schefter: Commanders sign Fabini to 1yr contract

[theogt]

It's a real thread, not some Fuzzy Lumpkins vs. Everyone castoff.

Appeal to popularity.

 

[iceberg]

It had nothing to do with the coaches.

Fabini was signed and took Tuckers spot. Columbo took petitti's starting spot and They viewed mcquistan as a better developmental player.

2005 matt tarullo was on the roster as a developmental player along with peterman. Well this past year mcquistan was that guy and that is why petitti was released.

Petitti didnt have the upside that pat m has.

I dont know why everyone doesnt realize this. It has nothing to do with what mcquistan had done so far, just that he has a possible upside and we know what peititti was and it was not pretty.

He went to new orleans as a developmental player being inactive the whole year, we just didnt have room for two guys like that on the roster.

and what tool did you use to gauge mcq's upside? petitti started 16 games as a rookie, good or bad. this term "upside" for a player not even on draft boards cracks me up.

 

[iceberg]

Only because I like to keep lame discussion points going...
-----------

per shefter dated (March 2, 2006) --

BURIED TREASURE
Each year, teams hand out big dollars to little-known players. Here are three players guaranteed to cash in once free agency starts.

Lions guard Kyle Kosier -- At least eight teams will be interested in this guard, who also can play right tackle. And with so many teams needing help on the offensive line -- just about every one in the league -- Kosier is going to get money that shocks people.

http://www.nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/9279193

thanks wg - but "will be" and who was? we see all the time that the cowboys have interest in xyz player but we never bring them in to talk - it was media speculation.

interest - by a loose defination i can see where teams would be interested in all FA players out there, but enough to call them in? enough to offer $?

if that's the case, how many teams "were interested" in davis before he signed? we know who he talked to, but how many were interested but didn't follow up for whatever reason, like kosier?

how many teams did kosier physically go visit and talk to?

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

and what tool did you use to gauge mcq's upside? petitti started 16 games as a rookie, good or bad. this term "upside" for a player not even on draft boards cracks me up.

I would imagine the tool used is the idea that McQ is still here and Petitti is not?

Not being a wise guy here but I would think that would be obvious.

One other thing to consider. They only can speculate on the upside of McQ and Petitti but the difference is they have seen first hand Robs ability in a full seasons worth of games as a starter.

They have not seen that in McQ yet.

I guess they also have the ability to see practices and other areas that we, as fans, will never see.

Now do not confuse me with saying that McQ will be better and does in fact have more upside, I am just saying it would seem the tools that the TEAM and people in charge of the team used...is the idea that one is here and the other is not and that they had more of a chance to see one of those guys in live action over a season as a starter.

 

[Idgit]

thanks wg - but "will be" and who was? we see all the time that the cowboys have interest in xyz player but we never bring them in to talk - it was media speculation.

interest - by a loose defination i can see where teams would be interested in all FA players out there, but enough to call them in? enough to offer $?

if that's the case, how many teams "were interested" in davis before he signed? we know who he talked to, but how many were interested but didn't follow up for whatever reason, like kosier?

how many teams did kosier physically go visit and talk to?

Ice, baby. Unsolicited advice: concede this point and pick another battle. Kosier was an under-the-radar player teams were interested in, and he's been solid for us so far. Let's just hope he stays that way or improves from here now that our HoF HC is finally gone.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

thanks wg - but "will be" and who was? we see all the time that the cowboys have interest in xyz player but we never bring them in to talk - it was media speculation.

interest - by a loose defination i can see where teams would be interested in all FA players out there, but enough to call them in? enough to offer $?

if that's the case, how many teams "were interested" in davis before he signed? we know who he talked to, but how many were interested but didn't follow up for whatever reason, like kosier?

how many teams did kosier physically go visit and talk to?

You know I don't recall him going to visit any other teams off the top of my head , however I could be wrong, so you bring up a valid point there. We signed him pretty fast so I don't think he had a chance to go elsewhere.

You also bring up a valid point about WILL BE as opposed to are because that was an initial article before the actual start of FA last year if I remember correctly.

As to your other question.

I think we would have to ask the player, the players agent, possibly the cowboys FO or the FO of other teams before we could ever get the answer of what other teams were interested in him.

I have to think that the agent probably received some calls of teams that would be interested in him...but that is all speculation on my part and until we heard from one of those sources it would be speculation on all of our parts I guess.

UNLESS...there are other articles out there.

 

[iceberg]

and i've said kosier was an under the radar player - have i not?
i've said there's a reason we got him for what's considered a bargain, have i not?
i've said people are "overstating" *castoff* in what i said cause i say a lot of flippant things that in return, if i were that anal in their verbiage, they'd get just as adamant about their point regardless of a word that upset someone.

does it imply bad? sure it does and i've never denied that. i've said he is a good deal for what we got but he's not a TOP TIER FA like davis.

is any of this wrong so far?

i was told 8 teams were interested in kosier and when pressed, wg showed me a write up saying 8 teams *may* be interested. where i screwed up is bob said it, not superpunk and yes, i DID get those two confused while in the heat of a discussion and a busy day at work.

my apologies there.

now, how many teams did kosier visit?

is he considered to be on the same level of talent that l. davis is?

dunno, and no. in my opinion.

but i'm a hypocrite now cause i don't think kosier was a "legit effort" in the same light davis is.

davis got more attention, he was marketed by the NFL as a top FA on the line, and he got top $ to show for it.

kosier was listed as a sleeper and under the radar and signed accordingly.

to date my "crime" is the misuse of the word "cast off" that got some panties wadded up beyond belief.

but everything else here is true as far as i know.

 

[iceberg]

You know I don't recall him going to visit any other teams off the top of my head , however I could be wrong, so you bring up a valid point there. We signed him pretty fast so I don't think he had a chance to go elsewhere.

You also bring up a valid point about WILL BE as opposed to are because that was an initial article before the actual start of FA last year if I remember correctly.

As to your other question.

I think we would have to ask the player, the players agent, possibly the cowboys FO or the FO of other teams before we could ever get the answer of what other teams were interested in him.

I have to think that the agent probably received some calls of teams that would be interested in him...but that is all speculation on my part and until we heard from one of those sources it would be speculation on all of our parts I guess.

UNLESS...there are other articles out there.

i don't think we'll ever know and to be honest, i'd just as soon not get that anal about it. my main point was that kosier wasn't a top tier FA when we signed him.

davis was.

my use of "cast off" set some people off but it doesn't change my core point. did kosier do well for us last year? i think he did ok. that really wasn't my point either and if i'm guilty of anything "wrong" is using "cast off" to put my point to an extreme which isn't really where i wanted it. it was more "top tier FA in david, detroit sleeper in kosier".

i'm sure kozier got some calls. i wouldn't think 8 or he'd not have signed so quickly. otherwise, bad agent. if i have 8 people coming at me i'm not signing the 1st deal that comes along - i'll wait it out.

kosier - i think - got fair market value for where he is in his career.

davis may be overpaid, but the cap rise and previous contracts set that bar for us. however, he was still listed as a top FA in his FA year.

kosier never was.

legit shot at fixing the line
taking a shot in the dark and hoping

either can be argued, but i hope people at least understand (if not agree) where i'm coming from.

 

[WoodysGirl]

thanks wg - but "will be" and who was? we see all the time that the cowboys have interest in xyz player but we never bring them in to talk - it was media speculation.

the point is u asked whether there was a link to where it was reported that teams were interested in him. I can find another link by pastabelly that Kosier was considered a sleeper FA.

if that's the case, how many teams "were interested" in davis before he signed? we know who he talked to, but how many were interested but didn't follow up for whatever reason, like kosier?
how many teams did kosier physically go visit and talk to?

Maybe you should do a google search like I did to find that info. Cuz using other teams reported interest in a player to gauge whether a signing was solid just makes no sense to me.

I don't care enough to know who else wanted Kosier or Davis. I don't care enough to know whether he visited them before coming to the 'boys. And you should know by now that when the 'boys bring somebody in, it's rare they leave without a contract. And if the 'boys were his first stop, it's very possible that Kosier's agent canceled his other visits.

What I do know is that Kosier was a good signing for the 'boys last year. He came at a reasonable cost and performed at a reasonable level.

What I don't know is how Davis will perform this year. I know how his play is perceived and I know how much he cost the team. 2007 will tell the tale.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

and i've said kosier was an under the radar player - have i not?
i've said there's a reason we got him for what's considered a bargain, have i not?
i've said people are "overstating" *castoff* in what i said cause i say a lot of flippant things that in return, if i were that anal in their verbiage, they'd get just as adamant about their point regardless of a word that upset someone.

does it imply bad? sure it does and i've never denied that. i've said he is a good deal for what we got but he's not a TOP TIER FA like davis.

is any of this wrong so far?

i was told 8 teams were interested in kosier and when pressed, wg showed me a write up saying 8 teams *may* be interested. where i screwed up is bob said it, not superpunk and yes, i DID get those two confused while in the heat of a discussion and a busy day at work.

my apologies there.

now, how many teams did kosier visit?

is he considered to be on the same level of talent that l. davis is?

dunno, and no. in my opinion.

but i'm a hypocrite now cause i don't think kosier was a "legit effort" in the same light davis is.

davis got more attention, he was marketed by the NFL as a top FA on the line, and he got top $ to show for it.

kosier was listed as a sleeper and under the radar and signed accordingly.

to date my "crime" is the misuse of the word "cast off" that got some panties wadded up beyond belief.

but everything else here is true as far as i know.

Personally I don't see where the "legit effort" is much different.

The team got what they thought was the best fit in both situations.

One happened to be a journeymen type of player the other a former top 10 selection.

You admit to saying castoff in a bad way.

SP just turned that around and said L.Davis was a castoff as well. Many AZ fans, and others around the league, think he indeed was a castoff.

Seems to be more of an internet board pissing contest where every little word or semantic takes the proverbial mole hill to a mountain type of situation.

Meh...it is a slow time of the year and everyone gets bored so they argue and go crazy with stuff.

Part of the reason for my post...while I may rag on you or others I also ragged on myself in it.

We all get a little drama queenish when it is slow. The idle mind is the devils playground type of thing.

Plus let's make no mistake...we all like a good debate or argument ...you probably more than many and I know hos as well.

I have my spots but after some time I get bored with it.

So...No harm no foul. It's all in fun and internet peeing contests are usually over the silliest things.

 

[iceberg]

the point is u asked whether there was a link to where it was reported that teams were interested in him. I can find another link by pastabelly that Kosier was considered a sleeper FA.

Maybe you should do a google search like I did to find that info. Cuz using other teams reported interest in a player to gauge whether a signing was solid just makes no sense to me.

I don't care enough to know who else wanted Kosier or Davis. I don't care enough to know whether he visited them before coming to the 'boys. And you should know by now that when the 'boys bring somebody in, it's rare they leave without a contract. And if the 'boys were his first stop, it's very possible that Kosier's agent canceled his other visits.

What I do know is that Kosier was a good signing for the 'boys last year. He came at a reasonable cost and performed at a reasonable level.

What I don't know is how Davis will perform this year. I know how his play is perceived and I know how much he cost the team. 2007 will tell the tale.

well, i've already pointed to the reference of kosier being a sleeper. i read that also and have said it too.

i guess my main point is and was all along:
kosier was a sleeper
davis was considered a "top FA" in his FA year.

somehow i imagine even those 2 sentences will still rile some people up.

 

[WoodysGirl]

well, i've already pointed to the reference of kosier being a sleeper. i read that also and have said it too.

i guess my main point is and was all along:
kosier was a sleeper
davis was considered a "top FA" in his FA year.

somehow i imagine even those 2 sentences will still rile some people up.

Davis is a top tier FA and yet he's also considered underachieving. While Kosier was considered a sleeper FA on the rise. In any other offseason prior to this one, I don't know that Davis or any of the other guards would've gotten the contracts they got.

What makes Davis a top top tier FA in your opinion? Unless that's already been pointed out in this thread, I apologize.

 

[iceberg]

Personally I don't see where the "legit effort" is much different.

The team got what they thought was the best fit in both situations.

One happened to be a journeymen type of player the other a former top 10 selection.

You admit to saying castoff in a bad way.

SP just turned that around and said L.Davis was a castoff as well. Many AZ fans, and others around the league, think he indeed was a castoff.

Seems to be more of an internet board pissing contest where every little word or semantic takes the proverbial mole hill to a mountain type of situation.

Meh...it is a slow time of the year and everyone gets bored so they argue and go crazy with stuff.

Part of the reason for my post...while I may rag on you or others I also ragged on myself in it.

We all get a little drama queenish when it is slow. The idle mind is the devils playground type of thing.

Plus let's make no mistake...we all like a good debate or argument ...you probably more than many and I know hos as well.

I have my spots but after some time I get bored with it.

So...No harm no foul. It's all in fun and internet peeing contests are usually over the silliest things.

oh yea - i think we can all dramafy what we say and just get "cute" in our verbiage. while i don't think it discounted my overall point it did make it a fight where it didn't need to be.

i've just got 3-4 things going on right now and didn't think off-the-cuff comments would suddenly be the topic of rage today. then again, who knows what will set that stuff off?

 

[iceberg]

Davis is a top tier FA and yet he's also considered underachieving. While Kosier was considered a sleeper FA on the rise. In any other offseason prior to this one, I don't know that Davis or any of the other guards would've gotten the contracts they got.

What makes Davis a top top tier FA in your opinion? Unless that's already been pointed out in this thread, I apologize.

fair question. in this instance the skins and giants were both hot after him and that's documented. his former draft status (regardless of his play, which i'll agree isn't "up there" - but no FA OL played in the pro bowl in this years FA group, have they? but they all still got the $)

to me in most FA classes there are the ones you target who are at the top of the list and there are those down the list you may pick up at a better price and who knows, better performance in the end. i'm not debating that.

i guess to answer your questions is most literature i read had davis as a TOP FA and had kosier as a "sleeper".

will davis come alive in dallas? i can only hope or big $ spending was a mistake. maybe i'm also more happy to see us take a "big fancy name" on the OL because i don't think parcells ever did that. maybe in the end parcells was going about it the right way.

i want a legit stud out there and we don't have one w/larry allen gone. we may not have one in davis except in $ alone - next year we'll know more. in the end kosier may well be a better value for the $ but he was still perceived as a sleeper by most trade mags.

good question, wg.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

oh yea - i think we can all dramafy what we say and just get "cute" in our verbiage. while i don't think it discounted my overall point it did make it a fight where it didn't need to be.

i've just got 3-4 things going on right now and didn't think off-the-cuff comments would suddenly be the topic of rage today. then again, who knows what will set that stuff off?

It seems to always be the small trivial things or things to do with semantics.

I think we have been around long enough to have danced the dance enough times.

On a side note...I just don't trust people with long hair that wear sunglasses...plus a goatee/beard...so you have that going against you. :laugh2:

 

[WoodysGirl]

fair question. in this instance the skins and giants were both hot after him and that's documented. his former draft status (regardless of his play, which i'll agree isn't "up there" - but no FA OL played in the pro bowl in this years FA group, have they? but they all still got the $)

to me in most FA classes there are the ones you target who are at the top of the list and there are those down the list you may pick up at a better price and who knows, better performance in the end. i'm not debating that.

i guess to answer your questions is most literature i read had davis as a TOP FA and had kosier as a "sleeper".

will davis come alive in dallas? i can only hope or big $ spending was a mistake. maybe i'm also more happy to see us take a "big fancy name" on the OL because i don't think parcells ever did that. maybe in the end parcells was going about it the right way.

i want a legit stud out there and we don't have one w/larry allen gone. we may not have one in davis except in $ alone - next year we'll know more. in the end kosier may well be a better value for the $ but he was still perceived as a sleeper by most trade mags.

good question, wg.

Thanks for responding but the problem I see is that you got caught up in name-itis. Davis is a big name...Like Brain said, he's a former top 10 pick...and we got him, so yippee. But Davis is also a bigger risk to the organization. They've committed huge dollars in hopes that he's plays at a top level at a consistency to which he hasn't shown so far. So like you, I hope the value is there...that Davis lives up to every dollar committed to him in guarantees.

Only reason why Kosier was a sleeper is because he didn't have the name. It didn't mean his play wasn't equal to others who had the "name". Not saying he was at Steve Hutchinson level, but I think you get my point.

Ayodele was a solid FA, but he wasn't exactly a big name. And many on here didn't think he was any good, because they hadn't heard of him. He came out and played very well for the 'boys last year.

Every year, we want the name. We want the guy who seemingly has skins on the wall...and if the 'boys don't, then it's a scrub signing. It's about opening ones mind up to the possibility sometimes that the 'boys don't need the "name" to get good play.

 

[iceberg]

Every year, we want the name. We want the guy who seemingly has skins on the wall...and if the 'boys don't, then it's a scrub signing. It's about opening ones mind up to the possibility sometimes that the 'boys don't need the "name" to get good play.

maybe i am caught up in the "name" - but look around the forum - many people were caught up in the "bp" name as well.

if you look at $ for results, that would not be a good deal. make it coach weisenheimer and it's a failure.

is davis a bigger name than kosier? not in the amount of letters in the name no, but in notiriaty, yes. is he a bigger risk? sure, by $ alone. but i feel you need to take that risk with some players. does it always work out?

nothing *always* works out.

but that shouldn't preclude you from trying.

 

[iceberg]

It seems to always be the small trivial things or things to do with semantics.

I think we have been around long enough to have danced the dance enough times.

On a side note...I just don't trust people with long hair that wear sunglasses...plus a goatee/beard...so you have that going against you. :laugh2:

most valid point you've ever said. : )

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

most valid point you've ever said. : )

Darn hippies and their loud rock and roll music. :laugh2:

 

[WoodysGirl]

maybe i am caught up in the "name" - but look around the forum - many people were caught up in the "bp" name as well.

if you look at $ for results, that would not be a good deal. make it coach weisenheimer and it's a failure.

is davis a bigger name than kosier? not in the amount of letters in the name no, but in notiriaty, yes. is he a bigger risk? sure, by $ alone. but i feel you need to take that risk with some players. does it always work out?

nothing *always* works out.

but that shouldn't preclude you from trying.

I did say WE always want the big name. I'm not excluding myself in that comment. We always want the guys we've heard of vs the guys we don't, because then we might have to do a bit of research and only to find out, "oh this guy may not be so bad"

It's a risk every year you sign a FA...no matter the cost. But when you invest such large dollars into these "name" players, somehow that risk becomes even greater. How would you have felt if we'd signed Bentley to that large contract only to have him blow out his knee, get a staph infection that may cost him another year on IR? Ryan Hannam was one of our low cost FA signings last year and he messed up his knee and ended the season on IR. It doesn't matter who it happens to, but that's the kinda risk you take and you just hope it doesn't happen to one of your big-time guys.

As for BP, he was a credible hire, because the 'boys needed that at the time. The 'boys couldn't afford to take a chance on a guy like Lane Kiffin or Mike Tomlin and hope that either one of them could turn around the 'boys fortunes. He made some improvements and he failed at some things, but overall I still look back at his tenure and think he did a solid job. Wade doesn't make me think he's a next level coach, but in today's NFL, anything is possible.