McMetal Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Big dumb a-hole. As I predicted all along, there will be a steady stream of articles like this throughout the year. Noone will bother to talk about x's and o's when the Skins and Giants play, it'll all be about LaVar. This crap is bad for football. It's an ugly distraction from the vast number of positive angles that could be written about concerning these two teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arrowhead Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 I'm just shocked as all get out that Sally Jenkins and the Post got scooped on this one. Although, I guess the NY media is too busy tipping our hand on the war on terror efforts to cover such a super important story piece about yet another self-centered sports figure that's found his way into town. I wonder if she'll lose her priviledges to the corporate house in the Hamptons over this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Moss Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 How’s the old saying go? When the going gets tough, the tough get going? This means that when things get tough, those who aren't weak-willed work harder and never give up. So Lavar had a different d-coordinator every year. The same could be said for Jason Campbell. He’s had a different coordinator in each of his college and professional years playing football and Quarterback is a much harder position to master. Jason’s answer? Put in extra hours, work harder, and never give up. I think we have the right type of players here now. Thanks to Joe Gibbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsOrlando Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Can anybody honestly say their surprised by this? Two Words: **** Lavar. HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gimpy007 Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Big dumb a-hole.As I predicted all along, there will be a steady stream of articles like this throughout the year. Noone will bother to talk about x's and o's when the Skins and Giants play, it'll all be about LaVar. This crap is bad for football. It's an ugly distraction from the vast number of positive angles that could be written about concerning these two teams. True. Very true... It stayed out of the entire LA thing until now. I had no hard feelings towards him until now. :doh: Well, at least we will know that both games will be Nationally Televised now. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaSkinzBaby Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 He's obviously been talking to Pierce a lot judging by this particular hatred he's spewing, it's almost word for word Antonio's usual shtick. I hope every single last Lavar lover on this site that STILL stands by him and says things like "I'll root for him every game, just not against us! " reads this article a few times over. Lavar can reminisce all he wants about the Spurrier "glory days," the reality is we were a better team when he wasn't on the field producing much, and we'll certainly be better without him from now on. Well I am still an Arrington Fan and there are truths to BOTH SIDES. LaVar WAS the face of the Redskins and perhaps had Danny Boy Wonder not been so keen on allowing the inmates to run the asylum from day 1 then Danny wants to have Gibbs in charge and the habits (ALL BAD) were instilled. We all remember the stories about players going above coaching staff directly to Danny Boy, was it WRONG? HECK yes ON BOTH SIDES. Also remember Arrington was a pallbearer for Snyder's father so there was a close knit bond there at one time. Now in no way am I not saying LaVar was and is wrong about how he is carrying on, but the bottom line is Snyder helped turn him into the person he is now and the bottom line is LaVar already made Aikman retire, I tend to think WE ALL WILL HATE him being 100% healthy and not ON THIS TEAM, Washington #53 is a good LB but sorry no one on the team can even measure what a healthy LaVar brings to the table. I don't see any Offensive Coordinators worrying about #53, BUT MANY OF THEM WORRIED ABOUT #56. :notworthy So all the naysayers and people glad that LaVar is gone you have a right to your opinion, however I watch my Redskins for the players and not for Greg Williams and THAT IS WHO I BLAME FOR LaVAR not being here PERIOD, I would love to see LaVar take him out from the sideline!! :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxSpearheadxX Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 You don't see any Offensive Co. worrying about #53? Um... he is pretty much considered the best OLB in the NFC East.... The difference is that BOTH SIDES didn't give up and get fat and then run their mouth for 6 straight months... Did GW let Lavar get fat? Hahahhaa... I'm so sure GW didn't want Lavar in shape and playing up to his potential, as did the Penn State coaches. Lavar's college coach even said he wasn't the best LBer at Penn State when he was leaving for the NFL - it is nothing new he is a diva and I have been steadily dissapointed with Lavar for 3 years, now I get to watch him get knocked around and cheer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Drama queen. All about himself. Has had a problem with EVERY coach he's played for. Didn't do JACK for the Skins the past two years. Best years are behind him. Can't simply shut up and play -- ever. Good riddance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsForLife260 Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Is there a quote about sellers knocking his a#s down? If so thats tight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkforhall Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Well I am still an Arrington Fan and there are truths to BOTH SIDES. LaVar WAS the face of the Redskins and perhaps had Danny Boy Wonder not been so keen on allowing the inmates to run the asylum from day 1 then Danny wants to have Gibbs in charge and the habits (ALL BAD) were instilled. We all remember the stories about players going above coaching staff directly to Danny Boy, was it WRONG? HECK yes ON BOTH SIDES. Also remember Arrington was a pallbearer for Snyder's father so there was a close knit bond there at one time. Now in no way am I not saying LaVar was and is wrong about how he is carrying on, but the bottom line is Snyder helped turn him into the person he is now and the bottom line is LaVar already made Aikman retire, I tend to think WE ALL WILL HATE him being 100% healthy and not ON THIS TEAM, Washington #53 is a good LB but sorry no one on the team can even measure what a healthy LaVar brings to the table. I don't see any Offensive Coordinators worrying about #53, BUT MANY OF THEM WORRIED ABOUT #56. :notworthy So all the naysayers and people glad that LaVar is gone you have a right to your opinion, however I watch my Redskins for the players and not for Greg Williams and THAT IS WHO I BLAME FOR LaVAR not being here PERIOD, I would love to see LaVar take him out from the sideline!! :2cents: I happen to blame Dale Lindsey, and hope that Greg was just backing up his coach. What angered me was they were giving everyone all kinds of contradictory information as to why he wasn't playing. With the stands peppered in 56 jersey's all paying high prices to see our guy. I think we had a right to know exactly why he wasn't playing. I agree with you though it sucks to see him in blue. Sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XxSpearheadxX Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Is there a quote about sellers knocking his a#s down?If so thats tight. Yeah it was on Comcast Sportsnet I think, search they website they always have stuff. As far as Blaming Dale Lindsey, it is funny that you don't blame Lavar still. What, is he 4 years old? Did Dale Lindsey molest poor little Lavar and it fractured his ego? Come on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyfar Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 I've always felt that it would have taken wholesale changes to get the team that play Joe Gibbs style of football and I think getting rid of Lavar was that last step that we had to take. Good job, Lavar, I hope you play like you have your last two years here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Now now now... LaVar is making somewhat of a valid point when he says that we used to roll players and personnel in and out of Redskin Park without regard of winning.. I felt like Marty Schottenheimer deserved another shot after going .500 after one year. Steven Davis was shown the door prematurely as a result of Snyder's man love for Steve Spurrier. Ryan Clark wanted to stay but we chose to go after Archuleta who fit the system better, so he decided to leave for the money ( which any smart man would). Champ Bailey, Fred Smoot, Patrick Ramsey, and yes LaVar Arrington were all great players who were affected by the former mistakes of the administration we had in Washington for years. He's looking at it from a player's perspective so he's unable to view the WHOLE reality of situation. The personnel turnover is directly related to coaching turnover. Lavar defends Marty but Marty purged the roster doing the same thing that Norv did, the same thing that Spurrier did and the same thing that Gibbs did. Stephen Davis was pretty much the only skill position player that survived the Marty purge. Marty treated Darrell Green like he was a POS. We are basically down to players that were brought in by Gibbs or have bought into the program completely (Samuels, Jansen, Thomas & Wynn). Getting the most physically talented player on the field isn't always what it is about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Is there a quote about sellers knocking his a#s down?If so thats tight. If I remember correctly, it's on CSN's website. He said he would "knock LaVar on his ass, just like he did everyday in practice," or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isifhan Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 What angered me was they were giving everyone all kinds of contradictory information as to why he wasn't playing. With the stands peppered in 56 jersey's all paying high prices to see our guy. I think we had a right to know exactly why he wasn't playing. Uh, no. They weren't giving contradictory information, they weren't giving ANY information which is the way it should be. It was Lavar who was giving the contradictory information, insisting that he was healthy, then when reinjured insisting that they rushed him back, only later to say no the coaches were right and he was never fully healthy. The organization had to respond when Lavar made false statements to the media. The team line had always been he was never fully healthy. The contradiction came from Lavar my friend, not the organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB44 Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 "I was just happy to get out," he said. "I didn't have anybody on my radar other than guys that I had been close with in past years -- Marvin [Lewis in Cincinnati] and Coach [George] Edwards in Miami. I was focused on getting in contact with them. But I was so happy to get out of there, I didn't even care where I was going to end up." Oh Lavar. If only he could learn to keep his mouth shut. To call a Coach by his first name is disrespectful. To say you wanted to play for the worst DC we've had since Mike Nolan is just retarded. I guess he would call Edwards because he let Lavar do what ever he wanted. Good Luck Lavar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Uh, no. They weren't giving contradictory information, they weren't giving ANY information which is the way it should be. It was Lavar who was giving the contradictory information, insisting that he was healthy, then when reinjured insisting that they rushed him back, only later to say no the coaches were right and he was never fully healthy.The organization had to respond when Lavar made false statements to the media. The team line had always been he was never fully healthy. The contradiction came from Lavar my friend, not the organization. :applause: I believe the first salvo came after Lavar said that nobody had told him why he wasn't playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 To say you wanted to play for the worst DC we've had since Mike Nolan is just retarded. I guess he would call Edwards because he let Lavar do what ever he wanted. I think it's kind of funny that Edwards was the only one that let Lavar do what all the talking heads are saying is the best way to play him by letting him roam free. How'd that work out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkforhall Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 Yeah it was on Comcast Sportsnet I think, search they website they always have stuff.As far as Blaming Dale Lindsey, it is funny that you don't blame Lavar still. What, is he 4 years old? Did Dale Lindsey molest poor little Lavar and it fractured his ego? Come on... That has to be it. If Dale Lindsey would stop molesting our talent we wouldn't be talking about this. Yes lavar is a bit sensitive, one day a coach will come along and "reach" Lavar, and get him to play to his full potential. Which i don't think has been reached yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 :applause: I believe the first salvo came after Lavar said that nobody had told him why he wasn't playing. Yeah, that was exactly when it happend. LaVagina says no one tells him why he's benched, John Thompson rubs his nutsack a little and tells him it's ok, then Shawn Springs, Gregg Williams and Dale Lindsday all publicly say he knows exactly why he's not playing and has been told several times. The guy's delusional. There's no other explanation for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaron Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 So all the naysayers and people glad that LaVar is gone you have a right to your opinion, however I watch my Redskins for the players and not for Greg Williams and THAT IS WHO I BLAME FOR LaVAR not being here PERIOD, I would love to see LaVar take him out from the sideline!! :2cents: So you want to see Lavar, as a NY Giant, "take out" Gregg Williams, the def. coordinator for the REDSKINS? Unbelievable......... :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 all of this is gonna be great for the games. the more the fans rag arrington the more the gints team will rally around him. we're gonna see some nasty arse games this with bodies flying on both sides. who could want more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 The personnel turnover is directly related to coaching turnover. Lavar defends Marty but Marty purged the roster doing the same thing that Norv did, the same thing that Spurrier did and the same thing that Gibbs did. Stephen Davis was pretty much the only skill position player that survived the Marty purge. Marty treated Darrell Green like he was a POS. We are basically down to players that were brought in by Gibbs or have bought into the program completely (Samuels, Jansen, Thomas & Wynn). Getting the most physically talented player on the field isn't always what it is about. Excellent post - I was going to respond to his post with the same replies. - Snyder allowed his coaches to do their thing. - Everything that LAvar is crowing about the Redskins doing with getting rid of players, Tom Coughlin and the Giants have done the same thing in NY. - Uh Lavar, you're one of how many new starters on their defense in the last 2 years? - Sounds like turnover doesn't it? I don't understand the logic in thinking Marty would have done a better job if he stayed. - Dan Snyder wanted him to relinquish his GM duties and get a new offensive coordinator - HE refused to compromise, prompting his departure. - Then Marty went to San Diego and managed to take an 8-8 team and go 4-12. - When he was prompted to get a new offensive coordinator there, Cam Cameron, ka-blamo they go 12-4. Ironic. Our awesome 8-8 season with Marty started out 0-5, including being out-scored 112-16 in our first THREE games. - The 8 wins we had were an overtime win against a Carolina team that ended up going 1-15, wins against (at the time) weak Seattle and New Orleans teams, Cardinals twice, a win against Superbowl hung-over Giants, and 2 decent, but ugly wins against the Eagles and Broncos. - Yet we still couldn't beat the horrible 5-11 Dave Campo coached Cowboys. Believe it or not, I like Marty - but he's one of those coaches who needs a good GM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 :applause: I believe the first salvo came after Lavar said that nobody had told him why he wasn't playing. Yet Joe Gibbs response to this is he's never had more conversations with any one player in his coaching career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince62 Posted July 28, 2006 Share Posted July 28, 2006 "I think it's kind of funny that Edwards was the only one that let Lavar do what all the talking heads are saying is the best way to play him by letting him roam free. How'd that work out" yea...that's got to be it...the gints are gonna straight-jacket him also. crafty insight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.