Owls0325

!!!!0mgz!!!! Trent Williams finally showed up

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, Cooleyfan1993 said:

Now there‚Äôs a tweet that says this whole thing was a hoax and that the skins were already working on a deal or something before this whole thing got started....? I dont know what to believe anymore ūüėāūüėāūüėā

 

Who tweeted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, redskinss said:

That's true and something that should be done at the bargaining table not on an individual basis.

 

Its one of the reasons players are trying to tie contracts to the cap.

 

I don't get upset if a player without a contract tries to get more than he's worth that's something they should all try and I wont be pissed at the players if there's a work stoppage because that's what they need to do to fix these problems but I dont usually empathize with a players current contract because they knew (or at least should have) what they were signing..

 

Rookie contracts are a different story for me, they got screwed so bad in the new CBA that I do feel bad for some of those guys at times when they grossly outplay their contracts.

 

And that's fair. At the same time, there was really no option to demand a fully guaranteed contract as the teams just refused to do that. I guess he could have stood his ground then. But I think people are really missing the bump on his head issue. He clearly had a life altering experience - at least to him. You can argue about if he over-reacted or he could have done other things. But none of the really matters. To him, he got a major health scare that has made him reevaluate things. 

 

Totally agree on the CBA. They had horrible representation. It is headed for a massive divide. Both sides seem to be bracing for no football for at least a season. I hope not but it seems to be headed that way. No matter how it goes down, I hope for the players sake they retained better representation this time. They got fleeced in the last contract. 

 

This is not directed at you. Just working off this post: 

Let me add this - despite my defense of Trent - which is mostly from a we don't really know what he is asking for or what the exact issue is standpoint - I get not being happy about it. The timing sucks for the team in ways and we were all hoping for a drama free off-season for once. We ten to not be able to avoid these. I disagree but I get it.

 

Also, I do not hate the team for releasing players, or think they are being evil or anything. It's part of the process. It's a business. In the end both sides are doing what they think is best for them. Both should do exactly that so I have no problem with either. 

 

 

 

Edited by goskins10
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

Are we really gonna go with the ‚ÄúKirk took a stand‚ÄĚ angle?!?

 

My lord, folks are gullible...

 

Kirk pushed for and got ALL guaranteed money on a short contract - that is very rare.  You are right, maybe it was actually his agent who took the stand, but I doubt you can find another top tier player that has pulled off the contract he did, and spoke about it openly beforehand.  IIRC he spoke at Liberty at how a certain someone told him to do it, and he was doing it for the benefit of others.

 

I assume you think all the posturing about guaranteed money was a sham to get out of DC.  Since Minnesota's GM and I are apparently gullible, hook us up with the facts that disprove that Kirk took a stand against non guaranteed contracts.  Did you even know he got NO non-guaranteed years?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, redskinss said:

....

No way in hell at 33 years old after sitting out two years does trent Williams not only get a top level contract but also enough to offset the loss of 28 million in salary. 

....

 

True, but IF (a big fat if) he somehow uses the time off to heal up, that contract at age 33 in full health may be for more than it would be after limping through the next 2 years.

 

2 years of never giving his body enough time to heal from thumb knee head and rib injuries from last year, piled on top of whatever new injuries happen. Here is the kicker, new injuries overseen by what may be the worst medical team in the league.

 

Getting far far away from a shoddy doctor is not always a losing proposition. 

Edited by RandyHolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listened to Keim's podcast just now.  It was Keim, Tarik and Michael Phillips on it.   It gives a vibe that its about money and the medical staff. 

 

Tarik suggested the concerns Trent mentioned to the medical staff about that issue was brushed under the carpet for awhile.  Some of the tension is about that.  He's upset.  But he's less upset now than he was previously.  If they can bridge the gap they have on the contract that might assuage him.  He thinks they work it out.  He said players have complained about this medical staff.

 

Keim said the players like their workout guys but not in love with the medical staff.   Tarik kicked in that they don't love the training staff -- Larry Hess, etc some don't love.   I guess there are two different training staffs I presume?  Weight lifting training = good.  Other training staff = bad.  And the medical staff they don't love.   

 

They among others have suggested Eric Flowers is one of the worst players they've ever seen in training camp. 

 

Keim goes behind the scenes the FO likes to tout how talented this team is but also say they struggle to stay healthy.  He goes with that in mind he's surprised they don't go to town more on that front since they recognize health is such as issue.

 

I know they've spent more money in the last year on this, hired consultants, etc.  But heck even Cooley in a podcast indicated that the team isn't one of the state of the art types on the medical front, talked about how their nutritional program might be lacking among other things.

 

I guess what confuses me is I don't see a clear answer.  And I am far from an apologist for Dan or Bruce to say the least.  And I know Bruce has the rep of being cheap and the facilities aren't comparable to most teams.  Still, I think they are working on this or so it seems as to bringing improvements.

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

 

Kirk pushed for and got ALL guaranteed money on a short contract - that is very rare.  You are right, maybe it was actually his agent who took the stand, but I doubt you can find another top tier player that has pulled off the contract he did, and spoke about it openly beforehand.  IIRC he spoke at Liberty at how a certain someone told him to do it, and he was doing it for the benefit of others.

 

I assume you think all the posturing about guaranteed money was a sham to get out of DC.  Since Minnesota's GM and I are apparently gullible, hook us up with the facts that disprove that Kirk took a stand against non guaranteed contracts.  Did you even know he got NO non-guaranteed years?

 

 

There was no stand taken by Kirk against how the NFL operates with its contracts. It was a financial opportunity to be taken advantage of that fell into his lap. Nothing more.

 

In 2016 Kirk and his agent were willing to sell off his services for $19M per year without needing all of it guaranteed.

 

In 2017 Kirk and his agent realized that they would get a ****-ton more $$ if they forced their way into free agency. Trying to get 100% guaranteed contract was the icing, but if no team agreed to it no effin' way in hell does Kirk sit out the season until contracts are done better. THAT would have been taking a stand. Not this **** that he ended up doing.

 

Biding your time is not taking a stand.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

 

Kirk pushed for and got ALL guaranteed money on a short contract - that is very rare.  You are right, maybe it was actually his agent who took the stand, but I doubt you can find another top tier player that has pulled off the contract he did, and spoke about it openly beforehand.  IIRC he spoke at Liberty at how a certain someone told him to do it, and he was doing it for the benefit of others.

 

I assume you think all the posturing about guaranteed money was a sham to get out of DC.  Since Minnesota's GM and I are apparently gullible, hook us up with the facts that disprove that Kirk took a stand against non guaranteed contracts.  Did you even know he got NO non-guaranteed years?

 

 

How delicious is the kool-aid?

 

I mean...it must be pretty damn good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2019 at 2:07 AM, thesubmittedone said:

I think the confusion here lies in the difference of just how much importance you and I place on coaching at the pro level, where you put way more than I do. It’s really a philosophical discussion about Pro Football more than it is about Belichick’s abilities. 

This is probably very true. 

 

I put an enormous amount of emphasis on "coaching," because especially in today's NFL, with free agency and players moving around as much as they do, the one on the field element that can always be consistent, and is controllable, is coaching. And it's not all on the head coach, it's the entire coaching staff.  And when I say "coaching" it's kindof a top-to-bottom look at everything to do with how the team is prepared to play games.  This includes, but is not limited to: strength training/conditioning (and everything that goes into it, like nutrition, recovery, etc),  individual technique coaching, scheme, game plans, who to play, game day execution.  Everything.  That's not all on the HC.  It's on the organization to get right.  Except in New England, where I think it's all up to Bill Bellichick, because he's essentially the President, CEO, GM, HC and everything else.  In other organizations, it's somewhat spread amungst different people, which is fine.  

 

Here are a couple reasons why I think BB just operates at a different level.  The packers have had possibly 2 of the best QBs in the history of the NFL back-to-back for the past 27 years.  1992 - 2007 was Favre, and 2008-2018 is Rodgers.  They have translated that into exactly 2 SBs, one apiece for Favre and Rodgers.  And I ask myself, "self, if Bill Bellicheck was in Green Bay, could he have done better over the past 30 years with those 2 QBs than what they have put together?"  And my answer is "yes.  Yes he could have."

 

That's debatable, and there's no way of really knowing.  

 

I grant the extra cap money Brady gives to New England is a huge benefit.  I grant that Brady is better than both Favre and Rodgers.  But I also think BB is better than Holmgren, McCarthy, and all the GMs and other folks they've had up there. And if he had the opportunity to work with and develop and put a team/culture around Rodgers/Favre, I think they would have done better.

 

I also think to myself, "self, if Tom Brady had ended up in San Diego, would he have developed into Tom Brady? Or would he have developed into Philip Rivers? The comparison is apt because Rivers actually sat a year with Brees starting, then took over in year 2 for Marty.  I love Marty, but he can't win the playoffs.  What happens if Brady has a year starting under Marty, then is coached by Norv Turner?  What happens then?  

 

Same discussion with Big Ben in Pittsburgh.  Anybody who thinks BB couldn't have squeezed more out of one of the most talented teams in the entire NFL over the years is crazy.  Tomlin is a complete under-achiever.  Anybody could coach a team that talented to 10 or 11 wins.  But they consistently fall short when it matters most.  

 

I see it like this in general: good/great/exceptional "coaching" can have his team perform at a level above that of their combined talent, average coaching can get the team to perform to their level of talent, and bad coaching can undermine the collective talent of the team.  

 

That's not saying BB and his coaching staff etc. could make the Arizona Cardinals (worst team in football) of last year SB champs. Definitely not. However could they have squeezed more production out of the folks on the team?  Probably.

 

Anyway, we're way off topic (though it's June 9th, so probably not the worst sin.

 

Overall, I think the talent on the team is the most important thing to winning.  If you don't have talent, you can't win.  However, "coaching" is a close second, because every team needs preparation, leadership and direction.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

So where is the indignation when the team terminates a players contract with years left on it? It goes both ways. Teams signed the contracts they terminate early. And you are wasting all this energy being pissed off and you don't actually know what he wants. It's becoming clear that Trent told the team some time ago there was an issue. So regardless of when the fans found out, the team seems to have known already.

 

I am absolutely done here. How about we wait till we find out exactly what is going on before deciding the best player on the team is a total POS because he dared look out for himself and his family, something every single person here would do. 

You can be done ...NO one said otherwise :) Bottom line Trent signed HIS contract! As for teams cutting players before contract expires, maybe Trent should take that up with his players union? BTW....Trent has 98 million reasons why he & his family have been " looked out for" AND what like 14 more million this year?......That's just BS! For you to say I "DECIDED" he is a "POS" is inaccurate...I in FACT said he maybe hypocritical and gave facts to back that up. I can't help if people choose to ignore that :)

 

Edited by hailmary
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/5/2019 at 7:15 PM, Califan007 said:

Ok so basically nobody here really knows anything at all...nothing whatsoever...right?

 

Just checking lol...

 

 

This is still the case, right? lol...again, just checking. Haven't been following it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

There was no stand taken by Kirk against how the NFL operates with its contracts. It was a financial opportunity to be taken advantage of that fell into his lap. Nothing more.

 

In 2016 Kirk and his agent were willing to sell off his services for $19M per year without needing all of it guaranteed.

 

In 2017 Kirk and his agent realized that they would get a ****-ton more $$ if they forced their way into free agency. Trying to get 100% guaranteed contract was the icing, but if no team agreed to it no effin' way in hell does Kirk sit out the season until contracts are done better. THAT would have been taking a stand. Not this **** that he ended up doing.

 

Biding your time is not taking a stand.

Why haven't all players had dream contracts fall into their laps.

 

And I am not sure why you think taking a stand = not playing, but standing up for something comes in many flavors, including speaking out as he did on the subject.  Maybe I should have called it a stance, or a position. I think you are splitting hairs, implying that standing up for something requires the stance being taken to the extreme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those worried about the players getting cut who have made several million within a short window I would say that it goes both ways.  Look at the Alex Smith contract, who is helping our cap situation on that deal?

 

What about all these busts in the draft, the bust rates have been posted and the odds are against every team when they draft a player, owners throw millions down the well each year and they hit on a select few.

 

The players that are getting cut on the back end of their contracts are usually not playing to the level of the contract, like Josh Norman except we aren't cutting him so there's an example of a team not unloading a player when they could and probably should.

 

I'm all for a player getting paid and having security, especially when they are loyal like Trent has been. 

 

If teams can recoupe some cap relief in certain situations where big-time players bust or get injured I think the players can get the contracts they want or at least enough of a concession to feel good about a new CBA.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

How delicious is the kool-aid?

 

I mean...it must be pretty damn good.

 

Nice rebuttal pot, but you already know its damn good. 

 

You realize that you are guzzling the NFL koolaid evidenced by arguing on a message BORED in June, about what Kirk taking a stand means, right? 

 

Cheers!

 

 

Edited by RandyHolt
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

 

True, but IF (a big fat if) he somehow uses the time off to heal up, that contract at age 33 in full health may be for more than it would be after limping through the next 2 years.

 

2 years of never giving his body enough time to heal from thumb knee head and rib injuries from last year, piled on top of whatever new injuries happen. Here is the kicker, new injuries overseen by what may be the worst medical team in the league.

 

Getting far far away from a shoddy doctor is not always a losing proposition. 

 I don’t know, I don’t think you would find many teams signing a 33-year-old that has been out of the game for two years to a huge contract. Two years out of the game and he could be pretty much done, that’s a long layoff for a player at that age.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RandyHolt said:

 

I assume you think all the posturing about guaranteed money was a sham to get out of DC.  Since Minnesota's GM and I are apparently gullible, hook us up with the facts that disprove that Kirk took a stand against non guaranteed contracts.  Did you even know he got NO non-guaranteed years?

 

 

Kirk and his agent played the situation perfectly. But I guarantee that the Vikings GM would like a re do on that deal!

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

They among others have suggested Eric Flowers is one of the worst players they've ever seen in training camp. 

We've had a lot of bad players come through here so this is disturbing.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, hailmary said:

You can be done ...NO one said otherwise :) Bottom line Trent signed HIS contract! As for teams cutting players before contract expires, maybe Trent should take that up with his players union? BTW....Trent has 98 million reasons why he & his family have been " looked out for" AND what like 14 more million this year?......That's just BS! For you to say I "DECIDED" he is a "POS" is inaccurate...I in FACT said he maybe hypocritical and gave facts to back that up. I can't help if people choose to ignore that :)

 

 

I never said you said otherwise. Was just making a statement that I also have a right to change my mind about. And I was not saying you specifically called him a POS. It was a general reference. 

 

It's $24M more not $14M. More importantly, what he has made already makes no difference. If your employer owed you $40,000 but said, well the last 5 yrs we paid you $250,000 so you should be OK with that. We may or may not pay you the rest. Are you going to say, what the hell, it's all good? 

 

You keep talking about he signed a contract. So what? People sign contracts all the time and renegotiate. It's part of business. Situations change. Deals get made then renegotiated. 

 

There is nothing factual about saying he is being hypocritical. It's your opinion based on your own feelings about what is going on - which is pretty interesting since we actually do not know what he does or does not want. 

 

In fact it's being reported now that the team has known for some time Trent had some issues with the team and had been negotiating with him but it's just now surfacing to the public. Further that it is more than just about money. Again, he had a major health scare. Those tend to change your outlook.

 

My best friend found out he needed triple bypass surgery and then they found cancer while they were in there. He is fine now (bypass was flawless with full recovery, non-aggressive cancer he will more likely die with not because of, best prognosis possible), but it changed how he viewed everything. People dismissing that I believe are making a mistake. You can disagree about his reaction to what happened, but to him he discovered his mortality. It changes how you look at things and that $24M not being guaranteed likely became more of an issue. 

 

I of course am guessing just like everyone else. But I think to get so enraged at him, accusing him of being hypocritical or some of the other things people on here have called him is a bit premature to say the least. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

Why haven't all players had dream contracts fall into their laps.

 

 

Because all players haven't had a front office botch the proceedings a badly as the Redskins did.

 

Make no mistake...it was only incompetence of the Skins' FO being higher than the incompetence of Kirk and his agent that got him into a situation where he could take advantage of the financial opportunity. And that was what I said fell into their laps, not the Vikings' contract. The financial opportunity.

 

If the Skins had been smarter they would have snatched up Kirk's original asking price of the measly $19M per year. And thus no "stand" to take. Just cash the checks and go about playing football. That's all Kirk wanted to do. That's all Kirk would have done, if the Skins accepted his offer.  There was no grand strategy on his part or his agent's part.

 

And I am not sure why you think taking a stand = not playing, but standing up for something comes in many flavors, including speaking out as he did on the subject.  Maybe I should have called it a stance, or a position. I think you are splitting hairs, implying that standing up for something requires the stance being taken to the extreme.

 

I didn't say "taking a stand" meant not playing. That indicates that the only way for him to take a stand would be to sit out and not play until things changed.

 

I said not playing would have been taking a stand. That indicates that it would be ONE way...not the only way. Taking a stand usually involves either sacrifice or risk in the name of something bigger. Playing on franchise tags and earning a guaranteed $44M over two years until he can hit free agency involves neither. That's just leverage.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

I never said you said otherwise. Was just making a statement that I also have a right to change my mind about. And I was not saying you specifically called him a POS. It was a general reference. 

 

It's $24M more not $14M. More importantly, what he has made already makes no difference. If your employer owed you $40,000 but said, well the last 5 yrs we paid you $250,000 so you should be OK with that. We may or may not pay you the rest. Are you going to say, what the hell, it's all good? 

 

You keep talking about he signed a contract. So what? People sign contracts all the time and renegotiate. It's part of business. Situations change. Deals get made then renegotiated. 

 

There is nothing factual about saying he is being hypocritical. It's your opinion based on your own feelings about what is going on - which is pretty interesting since we actually do not know what he does or does not want. 

 

In fact it's being reported now that the team has known for some time Trent had some issues with the team and had been negotiating with him but it's just now surfacing to the public. Further that it is more than just about money. Again, he had a major health scare. Those tend to change your outlook.

 

My best friend found out he needed triple bypass surgery and then they found cancer while they were in there. He is fine now (bypass was flawless with full recovery, non-aggressive cancer he will more likely die with not because of, best prognosis possible), but it changed how he viewed everything. People dismissing that I believe are making a mistake. You can disagree about his reaction to what happened, but to him he discovered his mortality. It changes how you look at things and that $24M not being guaranteed likely became more of an issue. 

 

I of course am guessing just like everyone else. But I think to get so enraged at him, accusing him of being hypocritical or some of the other things people on here have called him is a bit premature to say the least. 

Maybe it's best for you to go back and read what i posted you can spin it any way you want it's in black & white my friend !! 

Edited by hailmary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Keim said the players like their workout guys but not in love with the medical staff.   Tarik kicked in that they don't love the training staff -- Larry Hess, etc some don't love.   I guess there are two different training staffs I presume?  Weight lifting training = good.  Other training staff = bad.  And the medical staff they don't love.   

 

 

 

 

The "weight-training" staff is called the Strength & Conditioning staff. The "Training Staff" refers to athletic trainers who deal with treatments. Medical staff is the team of doctors.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

 

The players that are getting cut on the back end of their contracts are usually not playing to the level of the contract, like Josh Norman except¬†we aren't cutting him so there's an exampleÔĽŅ of a team not unloading a player when they could and probably should.

 

I think this is an important point that needs to be emphasized more. Usually when players are cut essentially they’re not holding up their end of the deal in terms of performance. Of course there are cases like Gerald McCoy but for the most part when a player is cut it’s because their level of play doesn’t match the obscene amount of money they get. And this is usually after the player has already collected all the guaranteed money, signing bonus etc. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hailmary said:

Maybe it's best for you to go back and read what i posted you can spin it any way you want it's in black & white my friend !! 

 

Maybe it's best for you to take your own advice and actually read what people say instead of take a position before you read, then read it the way you want to. 

 

But no matter. I am truly moving this time. This is a waste of time.    

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@goskins10 Trent is being  hypocritical either way, IT'S NOT MY OPINION and here is how....IF it's about medical care HE has hidden injuries that ultimately caused games missed & surgery......IF it's about $$$$ or renegotiate contract HE did not show up for MANDATORY MINI CAMP :)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now