Per Schefter: Su'a Cravens Considering Retirement

[NewCliche21]

50 minutes ago, carex said:

 

a flier is a risk.  Cravens would not have been considered a risk.  In fact it would have been considered incredible value

 

Not considered a risk if he didn't go AWOL for three days and question his love for football earlier on.  I'd still use the second on him if those things weren't true for sure.  They are true, though.

This also seems to say, and correct me if I'm wrong because I don't want to put words in your mouth, that busts are still good choices because they weren't considered risks?

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 hour ago, -JB- said:

Yea, whatever happened to that?  Remember Joe Gibbs?  The lockout?  Everybody stand together?  It means something.  Maybe I’m just old school!

 

I remember Gibbs after the 2004 season basically saying to the players "If you don't want to be part of this team, tell me. Don't **** to teammates, don't poison the locker room with your disgruntled ass, don't start infecting your negativity on young players. Be a man and tell me. But you only have one day to do so. After that, if you don't tell me, then I expect every cell of your body to be one million percent about the team. No wishy-washy ****...you are either a ****ing Redskin or you're not." (yeah, I embellished lol)...I also remember Randy Thomas apparently berating some teammates in the locker room after the last game about their behavior and commitment to the team, something along those lines. Warmed my heart.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

15 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

That sounds like players snapping towels at each other after showering lol...

 

No, that's locker room tomfoolery. Obviously 

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

17 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

No, that's locker room tomfoolery. Obviously 

 

 

 

[megared]

I don't agree with this move.  You own the guy's rights for the next 3, possibly 4 years on a rookie contract.  For all of the 'locker room talk', how many of those guys are going to still be here in 3-4 years?  And I'm having a difficult time resolving professionals not doing their jobs because of their feelings towards their coworkers.  I'm not saying you declare the guy a starter, but you have time for him to redeem himself and earn playing time...on a defense that could probably use his athleticism. 

 

He was worth far more to the Redskins than anyone else, because we invested a 2nd round pick in him.  If he didn't show flashes his rookie year, fine...but now he can step onto another team and be a contributor and easily justify that contract.  Don't really care about the Twitter crap...apparently neither do the Broncos.  I have a feeling many of the heroes of yesterday would be perceived differently if they had an avenue to vent like athletes do today. 

 

Worst of all, we'll be screaming this coming offseason about HAVING to re-sign Swearinger because, well we have no other alternative...  

[Commander -JB-]

20 minutes ago, megared said:

I don't agree with this move.  You own the guy's rights for the next 3, possibly 4 years on a rookie contract.  For all of the 'locker room talk', how many of those guys are going to still be here in 3-4 years?  And I'm having a difficult time resolving professionals not doing their jobs because of their feelings towards their coworkers.  I'm not saying you declare the guy a starter, but you have time for him to redeem himself and earn playing time...on a defense that could probably use his athleticism. 

 

He was worth far more to the Redskins than anyone else, because we invested a 2nd round pick in him.  If he didn't show flashes his rookie year, fine...but now he can step onto another team and be a contributor and easily justify that contract.  Don't really care about the Twitter crap...apparently neither do the Broncos.  I have a feeling many of the heroes of yesterday would be perceived differently if they had an avenue to vent like athletes do today. 

 

Worst of all, we'll be screaming this coming offseason about HAVING to re-sign Swearinger because, well we have no other alternative...  

Ever heard of addition by subtraction? *shrugs*

[megared]

1 minute ago, -JB- said:

Ever heard of addition by subtraction? *shrugs*

 

The guy wasn't poisonous...just immature.  This isn't a Haynesworth situation.  

 

I swear, ya'll would've had #21 traded for a 7th round swap if he was on this team today....and call it 'winning'

[NickyJ]

1 minute ago, megared said:

 

The guy wasn't poisonous...just immature.  This isn't a Haynesworth situation.  

 

I swear, ya'll would've had #21 traded for a 7th round swap if he was on this team today....and call it 'winning'

#21 didn't decide to take a year long break from the team to decide whether he can tolerate playing football or not.

[megared]

In the age of Twitter, if he had ignored Gibbs phone calls, spit on another player, threatened some people with guns...there's no way he would've played 3 1/2 years here....

[Califan007 The Constipated]

9 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

#21 didn't decide to take a year long break from the team to decide whether he can tolerate playing football or not.

 

#21 also made more plays in his first preseason game than Cravens made his entire rookie season. And, #21 was always--always--encouraging his teammates to never give up, even when getting shelacked by the Patriots 52-10, he was out there encouraging the team to keep grinding. Cravens never would have done anything like that.

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, megared said:

In the age of Twitter, if he had ignored Gibbs phone calls, spit on another player, threatened some people with guns...there's no way he would've played 3 1/2 years here....

 

Were you on this board when those things happened?

[Commander -JB-]

14 minutes ago, megared said:

 

The guy wasn't poisonous...just immature.  This isn't a Haynesworth situation.  

 

I swear, ya'll would've had #21 traded for a 7th round swap if he was on this team today....and call it 'winning'

Excuse me?  When exactly did Sean Taylor ever quit on his team?  He was the definition of hard working humble ball player.  No comparison.

[megared]

2 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

#21 also made more plays in his first preseason game than Cravens made his entire rookie season. And, #21 was always--always--encouraging his teammates to never give up, even when getting shelacked by the Patriots 52-10, he was out there encouraging the team to keep grinding. Cravens never would have done anything like that.

 

 

 

 

Were you on this board when those things happened?

 

So what's your argument here?  Talent trumps character?  Isn't that the exact opposite of what Bruce did here?  Did you really look at our defense last season and think 'yea well, it's not like we could've used Cravens in any shape, form or fashion'?    

 

I wouldn't have even been upset if he'd been included as a part of the Alex Smith deal, but then again that would've taken foresight and strategy...

 

I was here.  I recall both sides of the argument.  My point is that with the oversaturation of the NFL reporting, it would've been ten times worse, when in retrospect, it really wasn't a big deal.  Just think if the Redskins wiped their hands clean of him after one of those incidents (oh I forgot to throw the DUI in there as well)...

 

[Burgold]

5 minutes ago, -JB- said:

Excuse me?  When exactly did Sean Taylor ever quit on his team?  He was the definition of hard working humble ball player.  No comparison.

Yeah, Taylor wasn't exactly cuddly, but he wasn't exactly a loafer. In fact, he was pretty darned intense. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

3 minutes ago, -JB- said:

Excuse me?  When exactly did Sean Taylor ever quit on his team?  He was the definition of hard working humble ball player.  No comparison.

 

Yep, Taylor was the exact opposite of a quitter. No way in hell he would have "retired" after one season. I remember a LOT of fans were pissed off about the gun/ATV episode and did not like his not returning calls to Gibbs (the spitting was worth an eyeroll at best lol). But he always came to work, always played ferociously, always gave everything he had to the team, teammates and fans. He could have given his coaches a call back, though lol...

 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

3 minutes ago, megared said:

 

So what's your argument here?  Talent trumps character?  Isn't that the exact opposite of what Bruce did here?  Did you really look at our defense last season and think 'yea well, it's not like we could've used Cravens in any shape, form or fashion'?    

 

I wouldn't have even been upset if he'd been included as a part of the Alex Smith deal, but then again that would've taken foresight and strategy...

 

I was here.  I recall both sides of the argument.  My point is that with the oversaturation of the NFL reporting, it would've been ten times worse, when in retrospect, it really wasn't a big deal.  Just think if the Redskins wiped their hands clean of him after one of those incidents (oh I forgot to throw the DUI in there as well)...

 

 

Craven's talent doesn't trump jack ****.

 

And you really think Reid would have wanted Cravens as part of the deal instead of Fuller? lol...that doesn't require "foresight and strategy", that requires looking out a window and daydreaming of a world where unicorns and puppies play in sunny fields all day. Plus I'm not even sure Cravens was available TO be traded at the time the Smith trade went down.

 

The real point is, football has a looooong history of extremely talented players with questionable character times, but who give one billion percent on the field and would go out there limping on one leg or playing with broken thumbs or dislocated shoulders because they didn't want to let their teammates down. These players fight back tears when retiring.

 

Cravens is the antithesis of all that.

[megared]

2 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

But he always came to work

 

 

The offseason he was ignoring Gibbs calls was because he was supposed to be in OTAs.  Ya'll can stop the Vince Lombardi/Field of Dreams motivational stuff with me...I don't care.  Cravens is a confused young adult that says some questionable stuff.  By all accounts he isn't doing anything to break the law.  Bruce's sensitivity to the situation caused us to lose value, which isn't something I'm going to say is okay.  

 

I want the Redskins to consistently put a winning product on the field.  To me, this does not move us closer in that direction.  The guy costs almost nothing for at least the next 3 years, and could've been developed.  My point with ST is that, if the FO and coaches gave up on him like some fans were clamoring for us to do, we would've missed watching a unique talent grow up.  

[Burgold]

Just now, megared said:

 

I want the Redskins to consistently put a winning product on the field.  To me, this does not move us closer in that direction.  The guy costs almost nothing for at least the next 3 years, and could've been developed. 

He does cost something if he half-asses it on the field or if he up and quits minutes before the big game and refuses to play. Cravens is a flight risk. Maybe that's immaturity, but how many second year players outright quit on their team and walk out the door?

 

The rosters are both big enough and way too small to take a risk on a player you can't count on. The question the Redskins had to ask themselves is what is the risk/reward to keeping Cravens. The secondary question you ask is how does his presence/attitude impact team morale? Clearly, the team thought the risk was way higher than the reward... even with a relatively cheap second round contract.

[NickyJ]

1 minute ago, megared said:

 

The offseason he was ignoring Gibbs calls was because he was supposed to be in OTAs.  Ya'll can stop the Vince Lombardi/Field of Dreams motivational stuff with me...I don't care.  Cravens is a confused young adult that says some questionable stuff.  By all accounts he isn't doing anything to break the law.  Bruce's sensitivity to the situation caused us to lose value, which isn't something I'm going to say is okay.  

 

I want the Redskins to consistently put a winning product on the field.  To me, this does not move us closer in that direction.  The guy costs almost nothing for at least the next 3 years, and could've been developed.  My point with ST is that, if the FO and coaches gave up on him like some fans were clamoring for us to do, we would've missed watching a unique talent grow up.  

OTAs are during the offseason. Nobody gives a **** about what happens in the offseason if that player shows up and does work during the actual football season. DeSean Jackson didn't turn up for optional practices at one point; aside from 1 week of fans whining, there was no harm done. You know why? Because he actually played during the season.

 

We don't care about whether Cravens broke the law. The law is the law, the team is the team. Cravens quit the team. He sat out an entire season. We have no reason to trust he won't do it again.

[megared]

3 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Craven's talent doesn't trump jack ****.

 

And you really think Reid would have wanted Cravens as part of the deal instead of Fuller? lol...that doesn't require "foresight and strategy", that requires looking out a window and daydreaming of a world where unicorns and puppies play in sunny fields all day. Plus I'm not even sure Cravens was available TO be traded at the time the Smith trade went down.

 

The real point is, football has a looooong history of extremely talented players with questionable character times, but who give one billion percent on the field and would go out there limping on one leg or playing with broken thumbs or dislocated shoulders because they didn't want to let their teammates down. These players fight back tears when retiring.

 

Cravens is the antithesis of all that.

 

Yea because the Chiefs not taking the deal and us having to negotiate with Smith against other teams would've been oh so catastrophic...but I digress.  Instead we gave up probably highest value (money vs performance) asset on the entire team.  

 

He's a young adult that is gonna hopefully grow up.  How would the ~23 year old version of you fare against the "best to do it" comparisons in your occupation field?  

 

 

3 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

OTAs are during the offseason. Nobody gives a **** about what happens in the offseason if that player shows up and does work during the actual football season. DeSean Jackson didn't turn up for optional practices at one point; aside from 1 week of fans whining, there was no harm done. You know why? Because he actually played during the season.

 

Except everybody did care.  There were discussions on this very board as to whether we should cut him...how dare he not pick up the phone for Gibbs!  How dare he work out in Miami versus being with the team!  It was pandemonium.

[Burgold]

1 minute ago, megared said:

 

He's a young adult that is gonna hopefully grow up.  How would the ~23 year old version of you fare against the "best to do it" comparisons in your occupation field?  

 

 

Pretty well, actually.

 

I remember when I first came to NPR. I had no training, no classes, no nothing, but a little bit of natural talent as a writer. My first aired pieces (some ole time ESers can probably attest to this) were good, but darn raw. I did comedy sounding like Walter Cronkite. My news voiceovers were a bit flat. My interviews and writing were immediately recognized and they kept giving me more and more opportunities often when a more established reporter was available.

 

I certainly did have my struggles, but I never quit. I kept my foot on the gas pedal, listened, learned, took advice, and got better.

 

The question with Cravens isn't about failure or whether he could compete with the best from the first snap... the question is what do you do with a guy who grabs his ball and runs home and refuses to play?

[NickyJ]

7 minutes ago, megared said:

Except everybody did care.  There were discussions on this very board as to whether we should cut him...how dare he not pick up the phone for Gibbs!  How dare he work out in Miami versus being with the team!  It was pandemonium.

He didn't get traded for it; it didn't matter.

 

Your overall point so far has been that we shouldn't have traded Sua Cravens because we didn't trade Sean Taylor. Sean Taylor never quit the team for a preseason or regular season game, let alone an entire season. Sua Cravens did, and that's what puts his problems on an entirely different level. The Redskins expect him to quit again. I agree with them.

[megared]

1 minute ago, NickyJ said:

He didn't get traded for it; it didn't matter.

 

Your overall point so far has been that we shouldn't have traded Sua Cravens because we didn't trade Sean Taylor. Sean Taylor never quit the team for a preseason or regular season game, let alone an entire season. Sua Cravens did, and that's what puts his problems on an entirely different level. The Redskins expect him to quit again. I agree with them.

 

No.  My point was the only loser in this deal are the Redskins.  The Broncos take a flyer on a guy that may/may not work for pennies on the dollar...Cravens gets a fresh start.  We are left with what is more than likely a special teamer at best, and the need to back fill the safety position.  

 

In the grand scheme of things Cravens didn't do anything egregious.  Coming off of a pretty bad concussion, he said he was retiring, the team shut him down for the year after he was inactive for however many weeks it was.  Rumors were he had family stuff going on as well.  Bottom line, we don't KNOW the full circumstances behind what happened.  But to call a 23 year old a quitter, and imply that's all he'll ever be, in my opinion is slightly harsh.

 

Bruce apparently had his feelings hurt and decided Cravens couldn't come back even if it means losing value (and hurts the team).  By the way, I for one refuse to believe that a professional football locker room is this bastion of feelings where everybody has to 'feel right' before doing their jobs.  And that each teammate must adore one another unconditionally and hang out 24/7.  

[Bang]

the Taylor comparison is utterly ridiculous. he had off field young person issues, but his commitment was much higher, and even if he didn't return calls, he did show up ready to go.

Su'a is a failure of the Redskins front office to not spot what are clearly commitment isues.

Crying over losing him is equally ridiculous given what we've seen. We managed to get something, so damage is mitigated somewhat. 

review: Su'a quits on his team after being given the high expectations and opportunities that come with it. With a text message. RIGHT before the season began.

It doesn't matter what anyone wants to think of what he can maybe do, that is what he DID.

He then showed up at a mall promoting himself as a Redskins player, playing all the role, doing NOTHING but wearing the color.

The team then gave him another chance. 

Within a few days, he tweets about how he now wants to be a COACH with his dawgs to teach the NEXT generation. Nevermind he isn't even a part of THIS generation.

He was handed a chance, given every opportunity to lock down a position and fulfill the faith of his draft position, and instantly put his head back in the clouds.
The team that gave him all those chances and showed the faith in him to begin with trades him, and he is SO HAPPY he SING.

Why? what did the Redskins EVER do to him to make him want to act as if he was just freed from prison? 

They believed in him.

He bit them on the hand.

They offered a second chance, and he indicated he hadn't changed.

SO they move him, and he acts like the notion of getting fired never occured to him.

 

Immature. Unrealistic. Non-realistic, actually. 

Fired. and correctly. We may miss him because he is supposed to be a high draft pick heading into his third year, secure in his position. But given everything seen and shown, there is no reason at all to expect you can count on him.

None.

the Redskins definitely lose, and it's unfathomable to me that they could not see this pre-draft.

They lose. They blew it on a player they expected to succeed.

The only win is we salvaged a little something, and maybe a few bucks on all the Tylenol that coaches will have to buy to help them with the headache he is.. i don't expect the Broncos to change him.

 

~Bang

[megared]

2 minutes ago, Bang said:

the Taylor comparison is utterly ridiculous.

 

I'm not comparing their talent or ability to impact games. 

 

My point in bringing up Taylor was that he was given the latitude to grow up, and eventually did.

 

[Bang]

5 minutes ago, megared said:

 

I'm not comparing their talent or ability to impact games. 

 

My point in bringing up Taylor was that he was given the latitude to grow up, and eventually did.

 

I follow you there..  i think the differences in the behavior is pretty stark.

Taylor's commitment to being a Redskin may have been an issue,,  but not his commitment to football.

His chance to grow up came because he had a LOT more talent, and regardless of his actions, he never just up and quit. 

 

If Su'a grows up and commits to football, he can probably be pretty good. I think he might be a little afraid, honestly. He got hurt in preseason and I think that and all the CTE talk has him shaky. It'll be interesting to see how he handles getting the crap knocked out of him the first time.

 

~Bang