Snyder vs. Spurrier on the Ramsey trade

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Piecing the details together, it looks like it was Spurrier pushing for a trade of Ramsey to the Bears -- only to be undercut by Snyder, who held out for a #1 pick that was never offered.

We've previously posted stories indicating that it was Snyder who nixed the deal when he couldn't get a #1 pick in return. Now, the Washington Times checks in with this:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/sports/20020808-32817336.htm

Spurrier, who largely stayed out of personnel matters in early months with the team, was given the final say over Ramsey, NFL sources said. The coach, though, would not confirm he was interested in a trade, saying, "I want to do what's best for the Redskins. That's always my answer. Whatever's best for the Redskins is what I'm for."

"Final say" my a$$.

Hey Snyder, we love you, but you hired Spurrier for $25M for a reason: the guy understands quarterbacks and the passing game. A lot better than you.

If Spurrier wants to trade Ramsey, trade him. Don't say you'll trade him, get everybody worked up, then back out at the last minute and drop this steaming pile back on Spurrier's plate.

If you keep this up, Ballcoach might just take his football and go home a lot sooner than anyone would like.

Listen to your coach, Snyder.

[redman]

You might be right about this. If so, I don't really regard this as a tragedy, but rather as the fruit of growing pains/learning curve with a new coach and owner learning to work together.

However, I'm not convinced you're right. After all, Spurrier himself was concerned enough about Sage and Danny to be wooing Shane to come over here even before we drafted Ramsey. And remember, we weren't successful in picking up Shane until after the draft. Recall also that Wuerffel looked bad and out of shape at the first mini-camp. As a result, by all appearances, Spurrier too was concerned at draft time about having adequate talent at the QB position.

The real beef Spurrier seems to have with Ramsey would appear to be related more to the holdout than to having him on the roster at all.

[joe]

I think the guy who wanted Ramsey in the first place and held out for a first round pick was Joe Mendes. We will know I'm right if Ramsey does not work out and Mendes is let go.

[Guest Trevor]

Joe is right it was Mendes who didn't want to make the deal. That was said in an article about the whole fiasco, just can't remember which one.

[Murilo Bustamante]

You're making an assumption about why the trade fell through...and I don't think you are correct.

I think the reason the trade was not made was that Chicago was not offering very much in return. The Skins wanted a #1 and Gandy. Chicago was offering a #3 or 4 and Gandy. Chicago later said that they *might* have been willing to go to #2, and the press turned this into Chicago was offering #2. But all indicators are that they only ever actually offered a #3.

If you are being offered a #3 pick and a back-up guard for your #1 pick, that would be more than enough reason to turn down the deal.

[NVskinsfan]

Originally posted by Murilo Bustamante

You're making an assumption about why the trade fell through...and I don't think you are correct.

I think the reason the trade was not made was that Chicago was not offering very much in return. The Skins wanted a #1 and Gandy. Chicago was offering a #3 or 4 and Gandy. Chicago later said that they *might* have been willing to go to #2, and the press turned this into Chicago was offering #2. But all indicators are that they only ever actually offered a #3.

If you are being offered a #3 pick and a back-up guard for your #1 pick, that would be more than enough reason to turn down the deal.

Absolutely correct in this rergard!

Not a good deal!

[70Chip]

Agreed -- the deal wasn't good enough. Plus, didn't Spurrier say once that personnel was something the team had "other folks" to do? I can't see him being hugely ticked off about this.