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

[RandyHolt]

3 hours ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

No way...the NFL churns through players, even great ones. The reason it's so popular is because it's not dependent on players as much as teams. If Trent Williams sat out his age 31 and 32 seasons, he'd be signed for a very small, show-me contract (almost the way we signed Gallette or AP) by someone. 

 

That would be two seasons of new LTs entering the league and existing LTs developing and improving. 

All true - good stuff. But I will add...

 

It's not just the NFL churning through players. I really feel the OL take the most abuse, RBs aside.  Every damn play, they are hunched over, hand it the dirt firing into their counterpart basically every play - no subs.  What position in sports has it worse than an OL... maybe a catcher?

 

We see old OL toiling around.... not sure how that is.  

[Skinsinparadise]

Hoffman on the radio a little while ago said Laconfora's report from what he gathered (that Trent wants out) was true at some juncture but isn't true anymore.  He's also on the same train of Trent is upset about both the medical stuff and his contract.  And he suspects more money would likely make Trent forget about the medical stuff.

 

I can see Trent wanting more guaranteed money if it's tied to his concern about his lack of guaranteed money in the remaining part of the contract and he wants to make sure the Redskins don't cut bait especially with health issues potentially looming.    I am less sympathetic if it's driven by the later part of the contract puts him behind the players who got recent contracts.  Heck that's FA and how it works.  If that bothers him then don't sign a long contract and do a short one per the point of the MMQ article below.

 

 

 

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

52 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I can see Trent wanting more guaranteed money if it's tied to his concern about his lack of guaranteed money in the remaining part of the contract and he wants to make sure the Redskins don't cut bait especially with health issues potentially looming.    I am less sympathetic if it's driven by the later part of the contract puts him behind the players who got recent contracts.  

 

Fair take and pretty much where I’m at.  I wouldn’t break any records extending him but to add guarantees I think is fair.

[hailmary]

7 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Fair take and pretty much where I’m at.  I wouldn’t break any records extending him but to add guarantees I think is fair.

like the front loaded record breaking contract he doesn't want to fulfill with 2 years left?

[Kelvin Bryant]

Play or retire. There is no restructure. /yoda

 

That probably should be "Restructure, there is not."

[LightningBuggs]

As others have written in this thread, Skins have lost with Trent, they can lose without him too. 

 

Either he plays on this contract that he signed or give him his wish and trade him. 

[PartyPosse]

21 minutes ago, hailmary said:

like the front loaded record breaking contract he doesn't want to fulfill with 2 years left?

Seriously, the whole point of front loaded contracts is so the player gets a bulk of their money early in the deal. Trent did. And now he's complaining about only getting 13 million for 2/3rds of a season

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

20 minutes ago, hailmary said:

like the front loaded record breaking contract he doesn't want to fulfill with 2 years left?

Yeah, just imagine if he would have tested free agency, how badly he would have shattered records.

 

This appears to bother you so much, I’m beginning to wonder if you write the checks.

[PartyPosse]

2 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Yeah, just imagine if he would have tested free agency, how badly he would have shattered records.

 

This appears to bother you so much, I’m beginning to wonder if you write the checks.

He literally broke the previous high for an LT by 2 million a year and his guarantee was miles ahead of any other OL. He already did shatter records. 

 

Pray tell why you think he would have made more on the open market?

[kingdaddy]

8 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Yeah, just imagine if he would have tested free agency, how badly he would have shattered records.

 

This appears to bother you so much, I’m beginning to wonder if you write the checks.

To both of your points, maybe doing front end loaded contracts isn't very good business? Teams need to expect that players are gonna look around and see what others are making and then want more, no matter how much they got up front....

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

12 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

He literally broke the previous high for an LT by 2 million a year and his guarantee was miles ahead of any other OL. He already did shatter records. 

 

Pray tell why you think he would have made more on the open market?

 

Typically players of Trent Williams caliber, at that point in his career, never hit the open market to find out. Because teams open their wallet to the extent it’s not worth testing.  The Skins did that.  But rest assured, there is more money on the open market than there is to stick around.  

 

Scherff, for example, who is merely a guard- not left tackle, is going to shatter the record for his position, either here or somewhere else.  But if it’s here, it will certainly be less than it will be elsewhere.  Not a ton less, but less.

[PartyPosse]

8 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

 

Typically players of Trent Williams caliber, at that point in his career, never hit the open market to find out. Because teams open their wallet to the extent it’s not worth testing.  The Skins did that.  But rest assured, there is more money on the open market than there is to stick around.  

 

Scherff, for example, who is merely a guard- not left tackle, is going to shatter the record for his position, either here or somewhere else.  But if it’s here, it will certainly be less than it will be elsewhere.  Not a ton less, but less.

I mean sure, you can say that about any player. I get it, but don't make it sound like he gave the team this massive hometown discount. He still shattered records and became the highest paid at his position. I'm not applauding his "team first" mentality because he stayed.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

14 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

I mean sure, you can say that about any player. I get it, but don't make it sound like he gave the team this massive hometown discount. He still shattered records and became the highest paid at his position. I'm not applauding his "team first" mentality because he stayed.

On that same token, I could say you are making it sound like he signed some mega contract that still stands the test of time.

 

I never said he took a massive hometown discount.  

 

I just dont find an elite caliber player, even on the downswing of his career, wanting more guarantees after they run out on what was once a record breaking deal to be surprising or greedy.  

[PartyPosse]

8 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

On that same token, I could say you are making it sound like he signed some mega contract that still stands the test of time.

 

I never said he took a massive hometown discount.  

 

I just dont find an elite caliber player, even on the downswing of his career, wanting more guarantees after they run out on what was once a record breaking deal to be surprising or greedy.  

And that's fine and a case where we have to agree to disagree. If I don't do my job well, I get fired. It's the nature of the beast. I can't decide to sit at home waiting for a higher salary. It's a business. And contracts exist all across the business world. Not doing your job despite being legally obligated to do so is a breach of contract. I don't find it surprising but I do find it greedy. Frankly I think the owners give the players too much leeway in terms of what they can do while still under contract. Players don't like it? Take it up with Maurice Smith and the NFLPA. Until the owners and players come to some sort of agreement where all contracts are guaranteed I refuse to side with any player under contract who refuses to play. 

 

I love Trent Williams and wish this wasn't a murky situation, but he chose to make it so and I'll be a fan of this team long after he's gone just like I was a fan long before he got there. If he wants out, my proposal is then he is allowed out of his contract providing he return a portion of the guarantee prorated to how long he was there vs how long he signed for. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

21 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

And that's fine and a case where we have to agree to disagree. If I don't do my job well, I get fired. It's the nature of the beast. I can't decide to sit at home waiting for a higher salary. It's a business. And contracts exist all across the business world. Not doing your job despite being legally obligated to do so is a breach of contract. I don't find it surprising but I do find it greedy. Frankly I think the owners give the players too much leeway in terms of what they can do while still under contract. Players don't like it? Take it up with Maurice Smith and the NFLPA. Until the owners and players come to some sort of agreement where all contracts are guaranteed I refuse to side with any player under contract who refuses to play. 

 

I love Trent Williams and wish this wasn't a murky situation, but he chose to make it so and I'll be a fan of this team long after he's gone just like I was a fan long before he got there. If he wants out, my proposal is then he is allowed out of his contract providing he return a portion of the guarantee prorated to how long he was there vs how long he signed for. 

The NFL isn’t the real world most of us work in though.  

 

There are parallels to everyday corporate America of course.  Like where the guys at the top keep getting rich no matter how poorly they perform and the workers have to pull stunts or outright leave to get more money.  So there’s that.

 

 

[NoCalMike]

Trent fighting for some guaranteed money, while Cousins is enjoying 100% guaranteed money.  Let that sink in.

 

On a more serious note though, the longer this story persists the more I think the initial reports overreacted or were just in a hurry to break a story.  For all we know both sides are in talks behind the scenes and it will end up with a new contract for Trent Williams.  In the mean time the media will just continue to speculate and makes mountains out of anything. 

[PartyPosse]

26 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

The NFL isn’t the real world most of us work in though.  

 

There are parallels to everyday corporate America of course.  Like where the guys at the top keep getting rich no matter how poorly they perform and the workers have to pull stunts or outright leave to get more money.  So there’s that.

 

 

If you want to argue the morals and fairness of corporate America, that’s one thing. But this is football. And contracts are contracts. No one is holding a gun to the heads of the players forcing them to make 57 million dollars.  No one was sympathetic to Latrell Sprewell when he turned down 21 million dollars because “he had to feed his family” or when AP compared the NFL to Modern Day Slavery all while signing a 100 million dollar deal.

 

i get the argument that careers aren’t long so get what you can when you can, but until something is put in place where players can’t be cut or they get all the money regardless of if they make the team then players are just being greedy and deflecting negativity by pointing at owners and complaining that the system isn’t fair. And even if there is such a clause then there needs to be one where the players need to play up to the standards of those contracts performance wise.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

8 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

 And even if there is such a clause then there needs to be one where the players need to play up to the standards of those contracts performance wise.

What would be the point of a GM, salary cap, etc. if every team could just cut players because they don’t play up to the standards of their contract?  Not to mention the moving parts and variables of a football team that impact individual performance.

 

I’ll also never be able to wrap my head around why fans are in players pockets so much, but see nothing wrong with ownership being trash and making money hand over fist.

[bowhunter]

3 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

This appears to bother you so much, I’m beginning to wonder if you write the checks.

I'm pretty sure that every Fan on this board writes the checks. We buy the tix, the jerseys, the season ticket TV package. $8 beers and are the backbone that record TV deals bank upon. So when something bothers the fanbase (with or without reason) it is indeed by the check writers,

-Please no one respond to me with facts, I'm digging my rant!! lol

[RandyHolt]

It will be interesting to learn of Scherff's contract demands.  If it's all guaranteed money I will blame Kurt taking a stand dump on Bruce.  Rest assured he and Trent both want significant GM.... this just seems all too much for Bruce to be able to handle without fumbling the bumpkin.

 

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

6 minutes ago, RandyHolt said:

It will be interesting to learn of Scherff's contract demands.

Definitely north of the 6/84/40gtd Zack Martin got.  Skins are in an incredibly tough spot.

[Rufus T Firefly]

2 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

On a more serious note though, the longer this story persists the more I think the initial reports overreacted or were just in a hurry to break a story.  For all we know both sides are in talks behind the scenes and it will end up with a new contract for Trent Williams.  In the mean time the media will just continue to speculate and makes mountains out of anything. 

That's what a dumb organization would do, so probably.

[Burgold]

9 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I’ll also never be able to wrap my head around why fans are in players pockets so much, but see nothing wrong with ownership being trash and making money hand over fist.

It's because of the salary cap. We want our team to succeed. If a guy is sucking up all our cap and can't produce (injuries) or plays far below their salary level then it hurts the team's prospects in a big way. Think Alex Smith. If Bruce Allen hadn't repeated the same exact mistake he had with McNabb then the Redskins would have been able to address other weaknesses easier, he would have had more flexibility to address the Trent Williams situation, etc.

 

A bad contract hurts fan experience.

 

There's also the fairness aspect. Many of us look at our professions or the professions that matter (soldier, paramedic, teacher, policeman) and there is the innate understanding that our value scale is tremendously out of whack. I think this plays a lesser role because most of us have come to grips with the money celebrity brings, but hell, even a third string qb who will never see the field once in his life likely makes more than 90% of the posters on this board.

[RandyHolt]

OK gloves are off fingers are on the keyboard who is ready to rumble!  I get Trent, you can have Colt.

 

Man oh man I really hope this gets resolved soon.  The annual dangling of a carrot to suck me back in was taking Haskins, of course. But without Trent, even I am very weary of getting him into games by week 4 or 6 or whatever. I wonder if Bruce is trying to play it cool but is feverishly scouring the street, or actively working to resolve this with Trent, with of course an eye on keeping Brandon happy as well.  Bruce is THE contract guy. This should be in his wheelhouse.  If he cannot get these 2 deals done he is worthless to us, possibly as is a shiny new QB. Get Trent's agent baked and hammer out a deal at Lansdowne otherwise we will all be raking leaves at 2pm on Sundays.

 

All I can say (yeah right) is that Jay better modify his playbook to include a **** ton of chips, max pro, rolling pockets, rollouts/boots to the right, quick passes, utilize our backs more dynamically, add more deception, and to even consider the unthinkable - hurry up - to gas the DL to slow them down. I would even propose shotgun so our QB won't have to sprint away from savage DLs on every single play all year long.  Letting fresh D sub all season long vs. a lame duck Trentless OL is going to be hard to watch. Teams are going to be licking their chops to tee off on us and pad their sack stats.

 

I wonder if Mo Elewonibi is in shape.

 

[NewCliche21]

9 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

Trent fighting for some guaranteed money, while Cousins is enjoying 100% guaranteed money.  Let that sink in.

 

The Kirk signing was just as bad for the market as the Osweiler signing that the Texans did.  Completely reset the market.  Now everything is going to be guaranteed.  I don't know why any player would accept less.

 

I'll at least get to tell my kids stories of when players didn't get tenure.