Jason Campbell: Mike Shanahan Hints at His Future With The Washington Redskins
Shanahan confirmed the Redskins would make a tender offer to Campbell. Basically, that means Campbell would either stick around for one more year with a contract of approximately $3.2 million, or another team would have to give up a first and third round pick to the Skins to sign him.
What can we read from this move?
Most importantly, it is probably a sign that Campbell does not figure into the long-term plans of the Redskins. If Shanahan had confidence in Campbell, he would have already moved to negotiate a multi-year contract.
Since the one-year tender will be made, Shanahan will more than likely draft a quarterback in April. Will it be in the first round? Nobody knows for certain until it happens.
Preliminary indications are that Shanahan would like to have Campbell around for another year to give plenty of time for a rookie quarterback to develop. He may not consider any trade offers for Campbell unless they are substantial, and if there is another solid veteran available for a one-year gig.
If there aren't any other good veteran prospects available, Shanahan would probably be wise to keep Campbell as an insurance policy.
There are some analysts who believe Sam Bradford, rumored to be the target of the Redskins, may be taken by the Rams with the number one pick. If the Rams did take Bradford, and Shanahan wasn't comfortable with taking another quarterback like Jimmy Clausen at number four, then he would still have Jason Campbell around for another year.
Someone else who may come into play in this situation is Jason Campbell's agent, Joel Segal. In response to the one-year tender, he may advise Campbell to be uncooperative with the Redskins and try to force a trade.
No matter which scenario actually happens, Jason Campbell now knows that he will be in Washington for one more year, at most. Mike Shanahan's comments at the Combine made that clear (well, semi-clear).
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?