First, why hasn't he been playing in four years? (Hint: It's floating around in his latest pee cup, or you could just ask his ex about how she got those scars...) He seems about as sharp as a marble to me. Another almost Gordon. Good talent eclipsed by an IQ easily equaled by the room temperature. If he's not motivated at all to stay straight, how's he gonna be motivated enough to help us get to where we're going? We have enough problems with holes created by injuries we don't need any more created by stupid.

The roster is at 90 because it's full of place holders to run mindless drills for a few months and get released. There are usually 25 or 30 players of that 90 who really have very little shot at making the roster. With that in mind, I don't see how it would be a problem to bring in a guy with talent (however rusty he might be, at this point) for a look, at the expense of one player who was likely never going to get a serious chance in the first place.

I don't know why it's necessary to make such low risk, tryout-type deals seem like a game of Russian Roulette. We're not talking about drafting a guy, or signing him to a mega deal. I'd kick the tires for the vet minimum.

He apparantly doesn't want his tires kicked for vet minimum.

Daryl Washington wouldn't take pay cut to play for Cardinals

https://twitter.com/mikejurecki/stat...r-cardinals%2F

And you don't suppose that, after he has tested the free agent market, he will figure out that nobody wants to pay above the minimum for a guy that hasn't played in 3 years? Whoever signs him is not going to pay above that, if they have any clue about what they're doing. And if some team is that clueless, so be it. If, in fact, no one IS willing to pay him more than the minimum, then I'm saying why shouldn't the Saints give him a shot?

To me, it's a no brainer for the talent, at that price.

Forrest Hightower.

So, you are saying that if 31 other teams don't want him that the Saints should pick him up? That would make the Saints either smarter, or stupider, than all the other teams. I just don't see a player that is one mistake away from a lifetime ban as being worth even a vet minimum.

No.

I am saying that it's doubtful any team will pay him more than the minimum, due to his three year absence, and the reasons for that absence. That doesn't mean teams won't want him. But he's going to make his way around the league trying to gauge the interest teams have, and what they are willing to pay, and he will find that teams will be reluctant to take a big financial risk. But at the right price, most teams in need of linebackers will be more than happy to bring him to camp, I am certain.

And, as I eluded to earlier, once Washington comes to the realization that he's not the one with leverage in any negotiation, it becomes a matter of who he wants to play for among the teams that offer him. And why shouldn't the Saints make an offer? So what if he gets banned? I hope for his sake that he has straightened himself out, but as far as our team is concerned it's not a big deal if he doesn't work out. That's toilet paper money in the NFL, and we all know it.

The potential reward is greater than that of paying basically anonymous camp bodies to almost inevitably get cut. You're taking the same financial "risk" with those guys, not because they might get banned, but because they aren't likely to contribute.

So what if he gets banned? You would have gone through training camp and into the season expecting him to be part of the team. If he gets banned it is just like losing a player to injury. It creates a hole. We saw what effect that had on the Saints last season. It may not be worth the risk to many teams and I would expect the Saints to be one of those not wanting to take the risk.