Owls0325

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

Recommended Posts

Just now, wit33 said:


The same guys reporting on trades and what compensation was offered?

 

The same guys that told you that the Niners wanted to give up the #2 pick in the draft for the pleasure of making Kirk Cousins the highest paid player in NFL history.

 

Those same guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

If they are paying him close to $700K a week why would they NOT think he would practice? If he refuses to practice then he's still holding out and the team should leave him on the 'did not report' list or suspend him for 'conduct detrimental"  and let him and/or the NFLPA file a grievance.

 

finally I'm not the only one thinking Trent could be doing wrong

Share this post


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

 

So on to next season. I have yet to see any news sources say the Redskins can avoid Trent including this year on his contract. Until someone shows how it won't, we'll assume he has 1 year left next year. So let's say the team wants to trade him... Who is going to trade the farm for a 1 year older aging OT with a single year left on his contract and probably wanting a payday? Teams will want him, but demanding a 1st and a player will get the team laughed out of the league, harder than their 2 hour trade campaign this year.

It only takes one team...likely a team who has a franchise QB they need to keep upright to make a playoff run. You can look at TW as old or you can say he's fresh and coming off of a year to get healthy. As we know, linemen can play well into their 30's and pro bowl left tackles are hard to find. Even with 1st round picks there are no guarantees with how good they'll be. I'm playing devils advocate just to show that we can't rule out good/fair compensation for Trent. It will really all come down to how stubborn and unreasonable Bruce is. If he lets Trent's agent go out and find a trade with a contract extension I think we will get good compensation. I'd bet Bruce believes the market will re-set as well. 

Just imagine if KC, or Green Bay or Indy loses their left tackle for the season, they may be willing to do a trade for a plug n play pro bowl left tackle without blinking an eye....especially with a late first round pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, desertbeagle85 said:

YUP..GO FOR IT! After all, Danny loves to play in the court system! He wins there (Billionaires have more fun). Also, as was said the League wants this to stop..if not in the courts..then the new CBA

Share this post


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

It only takes one team...likely a team who has a franchise QB they need to keep upright to make a playoff run. You can look at TW as old or you can say he's fresh and coming off of a year to get healthy. As we know, linemen can play well into their 30's and pro bowl left tackles are hard to find. Even with 1st round picks there are no guarantees with how good they'll be. I'm playing devils advocate just to show that we can't rule out good/fair compensation for Trent. It will really all come down to how stubborn and unreasonable Bruce is. If he lets Trent's agent go out and find a trade with a contract extension I think we will get good compensation. I'd bet Bruce believes the market will re-set as well. 

Just imagine if KC, or Green Bay or Indy loses their left tackle for the season, they may be willing to do a trade for a plug n play pro bowl left tackle without blinking an eye....especially with a late first round pick.

That is a possibility, yes. But the problem with that is that it already happened THIS SEASON. The very best case scenario that can be come up with is that the FO have only delayed the rebuilding and renewal by one year. The worst is that they turned down a golden opportunity, and they won't get something that valuable again. What did they gain by waiting? What do they gain with the possibility (I'd say a very strong one) that Trent's value has dropped?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

You're dreaming if anyone gives up a 1st or even 2nd rounder for an aging player

 

I would be pretty confident we will get an offer of a 2nd for Williams sometime before the draft even if he is about to enter the final year of his deal. And he might well still have two years left if he continues to refuse to practice or play.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MartinC said:

 

I would be pretty confident we will get an offer of a 2nd for Williams sometime before the draft even if he is about to enter the final year of his deal. And he might well still have two years left if he continues to refuse to practice or play.


There is a solid argument that the off season will provide more teams the opportunity to plan financially to take on Trent’s contract and extend his deal and trade known assets. 
 

If all teams were offering was 2nd or 3rd compensation, I’m okay with them playing it out into the off-season. 

1 minute ago, Santana_89 said:

Expected Trent to practice, did they? 😂😂😂😂  If he said to "sources" he would never play again for this team why would he practice? 


The only thing certain, is know one knows what’s going on. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Santana_89 said:

Expected Trent to practice, did they? 😂😂😂😂  If he said to "sources" he would never play again for this team why would he practice? 

Wouldnt the guy have to practice to get his season accrual to count? Or can he just come piss on the building and count that as "reporting"?

Edited by CowboyKillerz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CowboyKillerz said:

Wouldnt the guy have to practice to get his season occural to count? Or can he just come piss on the building and count that as "reporting"?

 

he obviously thinks it does.  The question is, does anyone in positions of authority agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, desertbeagle85 said:

So literally a story all about how its medical, and one made up 4 months after all of the other reports by some random person 😂

And some of you must be so easy to manipulate, have your training staff lie to a guy for months, then when he finds out go run over there to try and mitigate the damage and you would be "Wow, hes such a swell guy!". Like anybody who wasnt about to be in major trouble wouldnt have done the same👍.

Edited by Peregrine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, carex said:

 

he obviously thinks it does.  The question is, does anyone in positions of authority agree?

Damn.. Hoped my spelling error got fixed before anyone quoted me...

Although, the FO might need an ocular for scanning the fine print i  his SIGNED contract to find a way to keep this season from counting. 

 

Man I wish i could skip half a week of work, then "report" and get paid just for playing playstation while "in the building" smmfh

Edited by CowboyKillerz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, carex said:

 

if he reports but refuses to plays is that really reporting?  Even one of the mods here, MartinC thinks that should result in him remaining on the Did Not Report list

 

https://es.redskins.com/topic/428387-0mgz-trent-williams-finally-showed-up/?page=318&tab=comments#comment-11629423

 

So, you're line of reasoning is the guy carefully decides to report just before his deadline where he might be in danger of not accruing a season, just so that he can then not accrue a season.  As if he hasnt had a sports lawyer carefully advising him on all of this.

3 hours ago, Andre The Giant said:


The Redskins don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt because they’ve gotten so many other things wrong in other areas. I get it.  That said, I think in this specific situation Trent’s holdout IS primarily about money.  He wants an extension and pay raise.  He’s betting he can make up the money he lost this year in an extension based on current LT market prices. He probably wishes he didn’t sign as long of an extension as he originally did as average prices per year at his position have gone up. 
 

Joe Banner advocates that premier players sign shorter extensions for this very reason. 
 

Do I think the medical scare could’ve played a role in Trent wanting his contract changed ... sure.  But to assume money has no role in his current position is probably naive. 

Anyone who has ever had a cancer scare would say anyone who thinks money really plays a part beyond that, is probably naive.  Especially to a guy with $90 million.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what if dan is being dan and told Trent that Bruce will no longer be around next year?!  If that dream is dead what are the redskins options now that he’s back and getting credit for this season even though unlikely to play?  What can they do aside from suspension and how does that help them?? 

Edited by Thirtyfive2seven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

So, you're line of reasoning is the guy carefully decides to report just before his deadline where he might be in danger of not accruing a season, just so that he can then not accrue a season.  As if he hasnt had a sports lawyer carefully advising him on all of this.

Anyone who has ever had a cancer scare would say anyone who thinks money really plays a part beyond that, is probably naive.  Especially to a guy with $90 million.

Lol...it’s assine, isn’t it?  Trent sounds like he is forcing the Skins hand.  2 week roster exemption.  Maybe The Redskins  make him inactive each week after that - secure his trade value offseason.  I’m sure Trent would be fine with that. But he is 1 year closer to moving on from the skins.

 

A high Trent is smarter than a sober Bruce.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

So, you're line of reasoning is the guy carefully decides to report just before his deadline where he might be in danger of not accruing a season, just so that he can then not accrue a season.  As if he hasnt had a sports lawyer carefully advising him on all of this.

Anyone who has ever had a cancer scare would say anyone who thinks money really plays a part beyond that, is probably naive.  Especially to a guy with $90 million.


I don’t know the terms of his contract, do you?  PFT is reporting that he needs to be on the roster for 8 games for his contract year to count, but they say the roster exemption may take a couple games away.  It seems like he’d breach his contract if he reported but didn’t participate. Who knows?  The media doesn’t seem to. 
 

I’m sure he’s getting legal advice. So are the Skins. Time will tell how it plays out. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Legal advice is great n all.. But this is uncharted waters. I doubt there is anything as egregious as this actually written in his contract. Goes with out saying- probably wont hold up in court... Luckily Roger Gotohell has god power and so it wont be in a court room save arbitration. Even then it will be up to how its "interpreted". 

At least we have something to look forward to this season. Smmfh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Santana_89 said:

Expected Trent to practice, did they? 😂😂😂😂  If he said to "sources" he would never play again for this team why would he practice? 

 

Because he wants this year to count against his eligibility for free agency and he needs to fulfil his contractual obligations for that to happen?

3 hours ago, carex said:

 

if he reports but refuses to plays is that really reporting?  Even one of the mods here, MartinC thinks that should result in him remaining on the Did Not Report list

 

https://es.redskins.com/topic/428387-0mgz-trent-williams-finally-showed-up/?page=318&tab=comments#comment-11629423

 

 

Just to be clear I don't know anything you guys don't know. I'm just spitting into the wind here like everyone else.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

So, you're line of reasoning is the guy carefully decides to report just before his deadline where he might be in danger of not accruing a season, just so that he can then not accrue a season.  As if he hasnt had a sports lawyer carefully advising him on all of this.

 

The ONLY precedent on this type of issue was Galloway. The arbiter ruled as 8 games player = accrual IN THAT CASE. There is no legal verbiage in the CBA that says 8 games. Trent is relying on a single finding as case law....Another arbitration hearing could go against HIM with these facts..who knows but that 8 game BS is a crap shoot from what I'm reading. Could go either way and Dan has better lawyers and a league that doesn't like this trend in player actions

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/11/sports/nfl-roundup-seattle-galloway-wins-but-may-be-traded.html

Edited by The Hangman- C_Hanburger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Hangman- C_Hanburger said:

The ONLY precedent on this type of issue was Galloway. The arbiter ruled as 8 games player = accrual IN THAT CASE. There is no legal verbiage in the CBA that says 8 games. Trent is relying on a single finding as case law....Another arbitration hearing could go against HIM with these facts..who knows but that 8 game BS is a crap shoot from what I'm reading. Could go either way and Dan has better lawyers and a league that doesn't like this trend in player actions

 

My thinking (and its just me I know NOTHING) is that Trent would likely win a case based on his reporting in week 8. BUT if he then refuses to practice and play I think the team would be within their rights to suspend him for breach of contract and contend he has therefore not reported - and in that case I would rather be arguing the teams case than Trents in front of the Commissioner or an arbiter. 

 

You would have to think Williams and his agent have taken legal advice. But advice is just that - it's not fact.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Lol...it’s assine, isn’t it?  Trent sounds like he is forcing the Skins hand.  2 week roster exemption.  Maybe The Redskins  make him inactive each week after that - secure his trade value offseason.  I’m sure Trent would be fine with that. But he is 1 year closer to moving on from the skins.

 

A high Trent is smarter than a sober Bruce.

 

inactive but on the roster still counts, I'm pretty sure.  if that's what happens his season does accrue

29 minutes ago, Andre The Giant said:


I don’t know the terms of his contract, do you?  PFT is reporting that he needs to be on the roster for 8 games for his contract year to count, but they say the roster exemption may take a couple games away.  It seems like he’d breach his contract if he reported but didn’t participate. Who knows?  The media doesn’t seem to. 
 

I’m sure he’s getting legal advice. So are the Skins. Time will tell how it plays out. 

 

it's six games for the season to count, but he had to show up before the deadline or it was the Skins responsibilty to ask the league to reinstate him from the DNR list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't really matter at this point.  Any team trading for him is going to rip up his contract.  He'd simply refuse to report to any team that wanted to try to squeeze two years out the current deal.  

  • Thanks 1

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.