Redskins aren’t making a play for Eric Winston

AP

The Redskins have a potential opening at right tackle and offensive coordinator Kyle Shanahan was in Houston at the same time as Eric Winston, but there doesn’t appear to be anything happening in terms of bringing Winston to Washington.

Mark Maske of the Washington Post reports that the Redskins “don’t appear to be serious suitors” for Winston, who became a free agent last week when the Chiefs released him after one year with the team. There has been “little to no contact” between the team and Winston’s representatives at this point.

If not Winston, the Redskins will be looking for a new right tackle if they don’t bring Tyler Polumbus back before or after the start of free agency. Jammal Brown, who missed all of 2012 with a hip injury, had his contract void last month and his chronic injury issues make him an unlikely choice to return to Washington on a different deal.

As with any other questions regarding Washington’s activity this offseason, one imagines that their ongoing fight with the league over the cap penalties handed down last year is coloring the team’s decisions. Their feelings about Winston may have nothing to do with that issue, but there’s little doubt that the lost cap space and attempt to get it back will dictate much of what the Redskins can do this offseason.

21 responses to “Redskins aren’t making a play for Eric Winston

  1. They didn’t get a cap penalty. They just had to charge the Haynesworth contract against the cap … like every other team would have had to do. It’s not a penalty. They paid him the money.

  2. Its too bad they got screwed, with that 18 million (which they would actually use), they would be wiping the floor with the rest of the division.

  3. Why is every situation an all or nothing? Why isn’t there any mediation between the Redskins and the league? It’s either eat this sandwich or go Al Davis.

    Is there any possible way the Redskins can just spread out the 18 mil cap hit so the impact isn’t all in one year? Why not try to negotiate that with the league? “yeah we did it, so it was wrong in principle, but you guys are also in the wrong so let’s just give us more years to repay this amount?”

  4. If you play your franchise QB while he’s badly hurt, you shouldn’t worry much about having a RT anyway. Just run him to the left.

  5. How annoying are Skin fans comments. Remember this is a team with no playoff wins in two decades. God forbid this joke of a franchise actually wins something they could actually brag about.

  6. I’d love to have him in GB. He’s a great guy and damn good RT but we have a very good right tackle in Bulaga. We need a left tackle. Arizona makes sense if he wants to play for a rebuilding team but I think he wants a team in the hunt.
    Redskins make sense for him if they want him. Otherwise RT is a tough sell this year for FA.

  7. fuglyflorio says: Mar 10, 2013 2:20 PM

    They didn’t get a cap penalty. They just had to charge the Haynesworth contract against the cap … like every other team would have had to do. It’s not a penalty. They paid him the money.
    _________
    Considering that 16 teams overspent the “imaginary” 123m cap, and 15 dumped salary into the uncapped year: Dallas and Washington being singled out and penalized more than the amount they dumped into 2010 for Haynesworth, Hall, Austin, and Ware, it kind of sounds like a penalty to me.

  8. Just letting the screener know, your board is a sham. If my posts are being deleted, then I know others are also. They are not profane, just have some intellect attached and may not be so supportive of the main idea of some of these ridiculous takes of articles posted. That explains why the board is so league friendly on every issue.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!