bubba9497 Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Redskins vs. LaVar in July By David Elfin THE WASHINGTON TIMES http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20050616-125002-8823r Linebacker LaVar Arrington's long-standing grievance against the Washington Redskins should be heard July 18, attorney Dan Nash confirmed yesterday. Nash, of the Washington law firm of Akin Gump, will represent the Redskins at the hearing in Washington along with an attorney from the NFL's Management Council. Arrington will be represented by Jeffrey Kessler of the New York law firm of Dewey Ballantine, presumably along with NFL Players Association general counsel Richard Berthelsen. Arbitrator Shyam Das will hear the grievance. Arrington says the Redskins owe him $6.5 million in bonus from the eight-year, $68 million contract extension he signed in December 2003 to give the team salary cap relief that year. Agent Carl Poston, who like Arrington, couldn't be reached for comment, has admitted he didn't read the final draft of the extension he negotiated with Redskins salary cap manager Eric Schaffer because the contract had to be rushed to the NFL before the end of the season. That has led most observers to believe Das likely will rule in favor of the Redskins. The team, which doesn't have the $4 million-plus it needs to sign its six draft picks, can ill afford to take another huge cap hit if it loses the case. The hearing, first set for September 2004, was moved to July and then to November before being scrubbed because of attorneys' scheduling conflicts. Note -- Sixth-round linebacker Jared Newberry became the first of Washington's six draft picks to agree to terms. Newberry played mostly outside at Stanford but has been shifted inside as one of a host of possible replacements for Antonio Pierce, who signed with the New York Giants as a free agent. ... Billy Kilmer, who led the Redskins to their first Super Bowl after the 1972 season, will be inducted into the National Quarterback Club Hall of Fame on June 29. Kilmer will be presented by Hall of Famer Sonny Jurgensen, with whom he shared the Redskins' job from 1971 to 1974. ... Safety Sean Taylor's arraignment on two counts of aggravated assault with a firearm, a third-degree felony, and one count of simple battery, a first-degree felony, is still set for June 24 in Miami. Taylor would face a minimum of three years if convicted. ... Minicamp practices will be held tomorrow, Saturday and Sunday at Redskin Park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McMetal Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Originally posted by bubba9497 Redskins vs. LaVar in July By David Elfin THE WASHINGTON TIMES http://www.washtimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20050616-125002-8823r Agent Carl Poston, who like Arrington, couldn't be reached for comment, has admitted he didn't read the final draft of the extension... Case closed! Thank you for wasting all the time and $$$...now kindly get back to work, Lavar. This is going to be some sweet vindication, I predict. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Originally posted by McMetal Case closed! Thank you for wasting all the time and $$$...now kindly get back to work, Lavar. This is proof of just how dumb these athletes can be. Athletes don't negotiate with the FO, which is why they have agents. All they know is what the agents tell them. I do believe that LaVar is dumb enough to think that his agents believe that bonus is part of the negotiations. I also believe the reality is that the agents mistakenly told LaVar there was another bonus, and are now playing CYA and insisting that it's supposed to be there. I mean, think about it... the concept of that second bonus just makes no sense at all. Basically, they don't want LaVar to think they made a mistake, but not reading the contract prooves it. They have no case and I'll be really, really disappointed if this doesn't go the way of the team. Since the transaction has taken place in the Commonwealth of Virginia, the burden lies on the Postons to prove it and they have no proof. It's not in the contract. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Am I the only one that is concerned about the distraction this will provide the team going into training camp? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Lavar can join the other jacka$$ mentioned in the article getting ready to be arraigned on the 24th. Could do without both of em!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Originally posted by bird_1972 Am I the only one that is concerned about the distraction this will provide the team going into training camp? They played most of last year without him and he didn't do any work with the team during the OTA's. I'd say they pretty well bonded without him over that time. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Originally posted by ntotoro They played most of last year without him and he didn't do any work with the team during the OTA's. I'd say they pretty well bonded without him over that time. Nick If it wasn't for the upside potential and the negative cap ramifications, it almost makes you wonder if we'd be better off without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Originally posted by bird_1972 If it wasn't for the upside potential and the negative cap ramifications, it almost makes you wonder if we'd be better off without him. That has been the whole deal with LaVar... the possible upside because of his athletic potential. He even got paid based on potential as well as a few highlight reels. The problem has been his consistency & lack-of-discipline and we didn't really get to see him enough last season to determine whether he has improved. There are so many questions about him that it really makes it tough to have a definitive answer, know what I mean? Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
halter91 Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Lavar should sue Poston for not doing his job and reading the contract. Damn Idiot!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Originally posted by ntotoro That has been the whole deal with LaVar... the possible upside because of his athletic potential. He even got paid based on potential as well as a few highlight reels. The problem has been his consistency & lack-of-discipline and we didn't really get to see him enough last season to determine whether he has improved. There are so many questions about him that it really makes it tough to have a definitive answer, know what I mean? Nick Totally. I think from an irrational fans perspective, I love the idea of having a bada$$ like LaVar on the team, but when you "break down the numbers" and look at what he's actually produced, it calls into question the lucrative contract and now the legal troubles he carries with him. We are locked in based on the contract - but things could get interesting in the off chance that the arbitrator declares the current contract null and void. Then, do you release the guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Originally posted by bird_1972 We are locked in based on the contract - but things could get interesting in the off chance that the arbitrator declares the current contract null and void. Then, do you release the guy? The next question, then, is what is the status of his old contract? I can't remember how much time was remaining, but how would voiding this current deal affect the books? Would it be the remainder of this current contract that gets voided? What's the deal, you know? How does it change things? If his contract does get voided, there no way we can re-sign him. He'd want even more money. I'd have to say cut our losses and let him go elsewhere. It would be best to be rid of him and his agents if it played out that way. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goaldeje Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Originally posted by ntotoro The next question, then, is what is the status of his old contract? I can't remember how much time was remaining, but how would voiding this current deal affect the books? Would it be the remainder of this current contract that gets voided? What's the deal, you know? How does it change things? If his contract does get voided, there no way we can re-sign him. He'd want even more money. I'd have to say cut our losses and let him go elsewhere. It would be best to be rid of him and his agents if it played out that way. Nick I would love to disagree with you, but find I can not. We just signed Holdman who can step in a not provide the spectacular plays, but who may also not provide the spectaculr misses as well. This is an interesting issue. Someone earlier asked if this would be a distraction. I think this is good that we get this out of the way in July. I know training camp is the end of the month, but maybe this will wrap up before that, and we can all move on. Hopefully, if Lavar does return, he focus on the job at hand. If the contract is voided, :ciao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunPortisRun Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Can they declare the contract void if he played under that contract for a year already? If he thought the contract was a problem, why play under it? Good job Gibbs for rushing Lavar back on the field to get him to play under that contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.