View Full Version : Champ Baily for Portis?

02-23-2004, 11:24 PM
Denvers gotta be smokng some major crack..
ARE YOU KIDDING ME? thats not a deal its a heist!
no way in the world is portis worth just a 2nd rounder
and champ bailey..this is rediculous, washington is gonna land
according to ESPN & football news, this trade is going to happen!

First Brunell & 7 years? and Portis..WOW, gibbs has gorrilla balls
& the league is giving into this regime.
I cannot belive any team would give up a RB like Clinton
the 2nd fastest NFL player next to Mike Vick..
JEEZ, whats next for washington?
any thoughts?
Im blown away by denver just flat out giving Portis away so easily-

02-23-2004, 11:56 PM
champ's a damn good cb

and i guess denver feels anyone they pick at runningback will turn to gold

and those redskin fucks need a runningback but their defense will suck ass

maybe its a good trade, maybe not

time will tell

02-24-2004, 12:14 AM
Even without Bailey (I admit, I do have some misgivings about letting him go), Gibbs will find a way to plug the gap before opening kickoff. Gibbs has a cast-iron pair of nads. DON'T FUCK WITH MY BOY JOE.

02-24-2004, 12:30 AM
Now Shaun Alexander's name has come up in trade talks with the Skins also. Gibbs will have a solid workhorse back one way or another.

02-24-2004, 12:35 AM
Damn, where did you hear about Shaun Alexander being in the mix?

If the Skins can get either of them for Bailey it will be worth it.

Football season can't come fast enough for Skins fans!:)

02-24-2004, 02:31 AM
This where I read that rumor.


MIKE SANDO; The News Tribune

INDIANAPOLIS - Player-for-player trades are rare in the NFL, but this one makes too much sense to ignore. Both teams would benefit in big ways.

The Seattle Seahawks would receive a Pro Bowl cover cornerback to pair with youngster Marcus Trufant. The Washington Redskins would get the running back Joe Gibbs needs to make his offense take off, plus ample salary-cap relief to sign more players.

Champ Bailey for Shaun Alexander, straight up.

The notion sprang to life Saturday while Gibbs, in his second tenure as Redskins coach, brushed off questions about pursuing Cincinnati running back Corey Dillon.

"As to who we'd be interested in, right now that's something we want to keep to ourselves," Gibbs said during a break at the college scouting combine.

Bailey, 24, is on the trading block because Gibbs' team has salary-cap problems, too few draft choices and a glaring need at running back. He stands to collect $6.8 million as Washington's franchise player, a figure that would vanish from the payroll if Bailey were traded.

Alexander is entering the final year of his contract with Seattle. The odds of him returning in 2005 seem slim, so why not get the NFL's best cover corner in return?

The salary cap often makes such deals prohibitive, but trading Alexander would come at little cost to Seattle because so little of his contract remains on the books.

The team is already some $15 million beneath the revised cap of $80.5 million. That's more than enough wiggle room to sign Bailey to a long-term deal even if left tackle Walter Jones played for the franchise-player value of nearly $7.1 million.

Why trade a 26-year-old runner as talented as Alexander and with no history of injuries?

Let us count the reasons.

Alexander covets a stage bigger than Seattle currently offers. Never mind that Cortez Kennedy earned NFL Defensive Player of the Year honors on the 1992 Seattle team that finished 2-14. Alexander seems resigned to second-class status in Seattle.

What better place to shine than the nation's capital? Unable to crack 1,500 yards in any of his first four seasons, Alexander could conceivably eclipse 1,800 with Gibbs calling the plays.

"He doesn't get the credit he deserves because he's playing in the late game or at time when other games are going on with other featured backs," an NFC personnel director said late last season.

Alexander would understandably prefer an offense centered on his considerable running skills, not the pass-oriented attack coach Mike Holmgren has installed to great effect. Besides, scouts privately note that Alexander's obvious disdain for pass blocking could prove costly for quarterback Matt Hasselbeck.

Put Alexander in a run-oriented offense, hand him the ball 25 times a game and suddenly his blocking wouldn't matter so much. He might also become more amenable to polishing his game.

Meanwhile, the Redskins would be getting the most prolific prime-time runner in the game. Alexander's Sunday night résumé features a 266-yard game and a five-touchdown first half. In 2003, he topped 110 yards rushing four times in the final seven games as Seattle nailed down its second playoff berth in 15 years.

Only Kansas City's Priest Holmes (61) has more touchdowns than Alexander (50) since 2001.

"Everybody says, even myself, that I need 25 carries to be at my best," Alexander once said.

"Without tooting my horn or being arrogant about it, I've been blessed to make plays with less than 25 carries. But I still believe if I have 25 carries, it's going to be crazy."

Might Washington be willing to find out? On the surface, Alexander appears to be precisely the kind of marquee player Redskins owner Daniel Snyder can't resist.

Would the Seahawks explore such a trade? A chance to land Bailey would surely pique their interest, particularly because Alexander is probably gone in 2005 anyway.

The team would have to find another running back, a much simpler task than finding a shutdown corner.

Mama's Fool
02-24-2004, 07:12 AM
Running backs aren't too terribly hard to come by. Corners like Bailey are one and a million. He was only thrown to last year 17 times all season! He had two interceptions and a fumble recovery. He also had a pile of tackles, if I remember correctly 76.

However for some reason he doesn't want to be in Washington, might as well get a great young running back in return. Portis is only 22, so why not go for it. I just don't want to see them give up a 2nd round pick. They already gave away a 3rd rounder for Brunell.

This trade is a good one I guess, but the Brunell one baffles me. Now Ramsey (who will be a pro bowler in the very near future) wants out. They should have gone after another veteran. Hell Tim Hasselback didn't do bad when he played as Ramsey's backup. I just don't get the Brunell thing, I get this.

02-24-2004, 10:50 AM
The one hang up maybe the fact that Portis was already threatening the Broncos with a holdout because he is going into the third year of his rookie deal, which is for about $850,000 in the final 2 years, which is low for a star running back. I haven't heard what Portis is after, but this could be a stumbling block for a deal.

I'm from Michigan so we are still hoping that the Boss Factor will still play a role, and that we are still in the Champ sweepstakes.

02-24-2004, 10:59 AM
A little more on the Skins I just read I thought I would pass along.


by Profootballtalk editor Mike Florio

POSTED 6:45 a.m. EST, LAST UPDATED 8:57 a.m. EST, February 24, 2004


One of our moles at the scouting combine in Indianapolis tells us there are rumors swirling that the NFL is looking into whether the Redskins made under-the-table payments to linebacker LaVar Arrington and/or to his agents, the Poston brothers, in connection with Arrington's contract extension that was negotiated in December.

Though we're not saying that improper payments indeed were made, it's odd that these rumors are unfolding at the same time the Postons are alleging that the version of the contract sent by the Redskins to the NFLPA doesn't match the contract to which the Postons agreed. According to the Washington Times, the Postons believe that the 'Skins shortchanged Arrington by $6.5 million via an unprecedented bait-and-switch contract scam.

As we see it, there are three possible explanations.

First, the rumor mill possibly has distorted the story. Perhaps it started as scuttlebutt that the Postons were bitching about the deal being light and then got twisted into a claim that money was slipped to them in a briefcase. Though someone in the grapevine would have had to be goofy-ass drunk to screw that one up, our guess is that nearly a week in bucolic Indianapolis might prompt a few of the folks in attendance to get goofy-ass drunk.

Second, it's possible that the Postons have cooked up the charge of a doctored deal to throw the NFL off of the trail.

If, after all, the league were poking around about a briefcase full of small, unmarked bills being delivered to the Postons by the Redskins, what better way to respond to charges of such chicanery than to create a phony feud fueled by an allegation that the team didn't pay more than promised, but less?

Third, it's possible that both stories are true.

How so, you ask? Let's assume that the 'Skins made an under-the-table payment with the understanding that the money would come out of the official deal. Let's further assume that the Postons misunderstood that the secret payment was made in lieu of contract money -- or that they're intentionally misrepresenting the true nature of the transaction in an effort to stick-up the 'Skins, knowing that the only way out of the predicament is for the Redskins to admit that they violated league rules (not to mention the law) by paying wages without the requisite income tax withholdings.

Under either scenario, the Postons' claim that their client will get too little meshes with the rumor that their client got too much.

Per the Times, the Redskins have denied the Postons' claims, and the team surely would deny the flip-side charge that money was paid under the table. But it's not surprising. After all, they've denied every other claim made regarding potential rules violations over the past year -- including tampering charges involving Lawyer Milloy and Ted Washington.


Speaking of the 'Skins and the issue of tampering, we're hearing that some agents are citing the willingness of Dan Snyder to meet a player's contract demands as leverage in ongoing contract negotiations.

As a result, the phrase "if you don't give us what we want we're going to Washington" is becoming the unofficial mantra at the bargaining table in some circles, and teams are beginning to wonder whether it's merely puffery -- or whether unofficial discussions have been occurring between agents for players under contract and the Redskins.

Let's not be naive here. "Tampering" in its technical sense occurs all the time in the modern NFL. Agents need to gauge the market for their clients in order to determine whether a given player will meet his objectives in free agency, regardless of whether the player is set to become a free agent or he's being asked to take a pay cut under threat of termination. Agents gauge that market by talking to teams.

It happens. We know it, the agents know it, and the teams know it.

It's not out of the question, then, for one or more teams to become emboldened by this atmosphere of rampant tampering by being less discreet about their contacts with players who are still under contract.

And as we've recently explained, no one ever will be nailed on tampering charges as long as the player with whom the team allegedly was tampering (and his agent) will tell the truth. The problem, however, is that any player or agent who fesses up against a given team will be hurting his chances to take advantage of tampering by other teams in the future.

But if, as we see it, the Redskins have been tampering in a blatant manner, the other 31 teams eventually will want to see them get busted for it. Thus, at some point, taking a stand against such conduct might not only be the right thing to do -- it might also be the smart thing to do.

02-24-2004, 11:31 AM
Denver letting Clinton Portis go would be a major mistake..

02-24-2004, 12:02 PM
(jesus...i'm fucking mezmorized by RBW's avatar...am i the only one?)

you know, i don't think this is that bad a trade. champ's probably one of, if not the best cover Dback in the league right now.

now, his tackling is a little better than deion's (in that he tries, but it's always those fucking near-worthless dives at the feet, rather than the good old, darrell green wrap-up, textbook tackle) but his coverage is similar. he more or less takes away an opponent's best receiver for the games.

give him a defensive line that gives the QB a little more pressure than the anemic skins' 1000-mississippi rush last season, and he does even better.

he's an asset that i didn't want to lose. and that will definitely help denver's D.

however, gaining portis isn't all that bad for the skins, either.

but either way, i trust gibbs so far.

and i'm definitely itching for the start of the season. midway through last season, i had finally resigned myself to overcoming the homer-itis and assuming that we'd go 10-6 and playoffs each year. i'd finally realized that we pretty much sucked and didn't have many future prospects.

then we got gibbs. and it's on. maybe it's just the homer resurfacing in me, but "10-6" and a wildcard berth at least!!! bring on the cowgirls!!

02-24-2004, 01:40 PM
Looks like it may be a done deal. Here is the latest, I think:


Broncos | Bailey's Agent Working On Contract With Denver - from www.KFFL.com

Tue, 24 Feb 2004 08:31:08 -0800

Updating previous reports, the Denver Post reports the Washington Redskins and Denver Broncos have agreed upon compensation for a proposed trade swapping CB Champ Bailey and the Redskins' 2004 second-round pick for Broncos RB Clinton Portis, according to multiple sources involved in the discussions. The focus is on whether each team can come to terms with its potential new player, but most of the parties expect an agreement this week. As of Monday, Feb. 23, there were no signs of any hang-ups in the contract talks. Both agents were working out contracts for their proposed new teams.

Redskins | Portis' Agent Working On Contract With Washington - from www.KFFL.com

Tue, 24 Feb 2004 08:29:27 -0800

Updating previous reports, the Denver Post reports the Washington Redskins and Denver Broncos have agreed upon compensation for a proposed trade swapping CB Champ Bailey and the Redskins' 2004 second-round pick for Broncos RB Clinton Portis, according to multiple sources involved in the discussions. The focus is on whether each team can come to terms with its potential new player, but most of the parties expect an agreement this week. As of Monday, Feb. 23, there were no signs of any hang-ups in the contract talks. Both agents were working out contracts for their proposed new teams.

02-24-2004, 01:50 PM
Denver obviously doesn't value Portis much.

02-24-2004, 02:12 PM
They are already in the big salary cap pinch with other FA's on their team in need of signing. Portis threatened a holdout, I think that was the clincher for Shanahan. Mike Anderson just complained last week he wanted out, but that will probably now change and they must think they have a good young back in Quentin Griffin.

Good move for Washington in my opinion.

02-24-2004, 08:50 PM
gibbs is fucking everything up

he's obviously too old to be coaching

the game has passed him by and his pre-salary cap mindset will keep the skins out of the superbowl for another decade at least

Va Beach VH Fan
02-24-2004, 09:18 PM
The Broncos management is obviously delirious in it's mile high altitude....

Portis will be one of the top 3 RB's in the league for the next 10 years....

Those don't come around very often....