Owls0325

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

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, skinzplay said:

He had private conversations with them. Didn't want them blabbing it. He acknowledged as much. But then again, we knew ol' Quick Draw at RT tends to get a head start on things. He won't be telling Hall much more of anything else, I can assure you of that.

 

He didn't want them "blabbing"...yet even after they blabbed Hall still went back and talked to him for info and Trent obliged and Hall "blabbed" again.

Edited by Califan007

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Califan007 said:

 

He didn't want them "blabbing"...yet even after they blabbed Hall still went back and talked to him for info and Trent obliged and Hall "blabbed" again.

 

Not how that went down at all. But if you know, I'll take your word for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, skinzplay said:

 

Not how that went down at all. But if you know, I'll take your word for it.

 

Really? So Hall only talked to Trent once, and after he "blabbed" Trent clammed up? Is that what you're saying?

 

Because if so, there's a lot of evidence to the contrary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

 

I didn't say that I'm fine (or not fine) with anything.  But it's Colt's choice to go public with his situation if he wants to, he obviously chose not to.  Well, that might come out later now that TW felt the need to name drop Colt in his interview by asking why the Redskins didn't investigate his situation.  Which is yet another candy ass move, imo of course.

 

And Colt shouldn't see the field, they brought in Case to be the starting QB and drafted Haskins.  Colt playing anything other than a 2nd/3rd string QB (depending on Case's health) takes away from Haskins getting reps/experience.  But because of Case's health and what happened last year (Alex and Colts season ending injuries), you absolutely keep him on the roster.  

 

I've only seen you assign some level of culpability to the player.  That's all your responses have been the last few pages.  And Colt doesn't have 1/100th the leverage Trent does in a situation like that.  His may be the most egregious recent example, but I'd be willing to bet that's the major reason Colt is still on the roster. 

 

Does there really need to be an investigation called into Colt's treatment to realize that you probably shouldn't perform an unnecessary medical procedure on a broken leg to have a guy available to play (if you make the playoffs), at the expense of his long term health?  Doesn't that go against the idea of the medical staff's first obligation being to treat the players?  Jay admitted that was exactly what happened when he spoke about 'rushing' Colt back.  

 

31 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

What was the misleading information that was leaked before Trent started talking?...NOT speculation, which was rampant. And it was rampant because there was so little info to go on. But leaked info that damaged Trent's rep?

 

"Minor procedure", "noncancerous", "about money".  Those were all things directly from the FO.  Why would Trent have downplayed the seriousness of the growth, if that's what he's most upset about?  

Edited by megared
meant 'noncancerous', not 'cancer scare'
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t see how Trent agreeing to the 3rd party review would benefit him in any capacity.

 

Whether he’s telling the whole truth, part of the truth or none of the truth.

 

If he had a legal leg to stand on, he would have been standing on it long before now.  
 

The only potential gain in this scenario is for the organization if in the event they did everything by the book.

 

So again, why should he agree to it?  How would it serve him?
 

Please spare me the “for all the other guys on the team” jazz.  Trent’s team has already figured out the Skins have no legal liability or they would have already went this route.  But just because they don’t have legal liability doesn’t mean the team is squeaky clean here.  Also, please spare me Trent’s personal accountability here too.  Obviously he could be more accountable for his own health, that’s a given.  But I think it requires a tin foil hat to subscribe to the belief that all of this is just one big money scheme gone wrong for Trent where the team and its medical staff are just poor victims.

Edited by BatteredFanSyndrome
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

 

Really? So Hall only talked to Trent once, and after he "blabbed" Trent clammed up? Is that what you're saying?

 

Because if so, there's a lot of evidence to the contrary.

 

Multiple current and former players checked in on Trent to see how he was doing. Nothing prohibits those guys from then talking to each other. To assume that their commentary is directly attributable to information Trent gave them would be incorrect. I'll leave it at that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Multiple current and former players checked in on Trent to see how he was doing. Nothing prohibits those guys from then talking to each other. To assume that their commentary is directly attributable to information Trent gave them would be incorrect. I'll leave it at that.

 

Hunh?!?

 

5be9e9a2bcfe24ccc60c69b92f5868b7--funny-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
13 minutes ago, megared said:

"Minor procedure", "noncancerous", "about money".  Those were all things directly from the FO.  Why would Trent have downplayed the seriousness of the growth, if that's what he's most upset about?  

 

The "minor procedure" was probably in reference to his 2nd surgery. I can't find any mention of the initial surgery being described as minor.

 

I did find this:

 

“I think where the frustration might lie is in the timing of a diagnosis; maybe he wished the diagnosis had come a little sooner,” Gruden said. “That’s my understanding.”

 

Gruden was responding to a CBS Sports report that said Williams has told teammates he was not happy about the way the team’s medical staff had handled “a recent medical situation” and “has demanded a trade or his release from the club” adding that Williams has “vowed not to play for them.”

 

Gruden confirmed that the medical issue involved the procedure done on Williams’ head. The team has not addressed the issue, saying only it was an operation done on his scalp. One person close to Williams, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said the surgery was “a scare for Williams.” Williams has said through social media posts that he does not have cancer."

 

***************

 

And again, saying it was about money--not sure how that's a black eye on Trent, plus Trent brought up the money himself during last week's interview and acknowledged that he also brought up guarantees (or an extension, one or the other) before his surgery took place.

10 minutes ago, skinzplay said:

 

Multiple current and former players checked in on Trent to see how he was doing. Nothing prohibits those guys from then talking to each other. To assume that their commentary is directly attributable to information Trent gave them would be incorrect. I'll leave it at that.

 

When asked if Hall has talked to Trent, he replied:

“I have talked to him. He’s in a good place mentally, and he’s prepared to figure this thing out”

 

Hall was also asked if this was a contract thing:

“It’s not a contract thing and that’s what I asked him. And I’m sure he won’t mind me saying this - (Hall asks)hey Trent, what’s the end game? And, It’s not about money. Will money help ease things a little bit; maybe so, but this is not strictly a financial situation.”

 

***************

 

I'm not assuming anything.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what those quotes prove or disprove there, @Califan007. Hall is free to say whatever he wants. It does not mean that what he's conveying is accurate. The "maybe so" bit is what many will (and did) take and make the situation to be about money. It's not and never has been.

Share this post


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

 

The "minor procedure" was probably in reference to his 2nd surgery. I can't find any mention of the initial surgery being described as minor.

 

I did find this:

 

“I think where the frustration might lie is in the timing of a diagnosis; maybe he wished the diagnosis had come a little sooner,” Gruden said. “That’s my understanding.”

 

Gruden was responding to a CBS Sports report that said Williams has told teammates he was not happy about the way the team’s medical staff had handled “a recent medical situation” and “has demanded a trade or his release from the club” adding that Williams has “vowed not to play for them.”

 

Gruden confirmed that the medical issue involved the procedure done on Williams’ head. The team has not addressed the issue, saying only it was an operation done on his scalp. One person close to Williams, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said the surgery was “a scare for Williams.” Williams has said through social media posts that he does not have cancer."

 

 

Bottom line is, they obscured his motives, and neatly folded them down to equal "wants a new deal" or "trade or new contract" with a 4 month headstart on shaping the narrative.  Since they haven't been shy about leaking anything at will when it benefits them, I wonder why, they never admitted that the growth was cancerous in those leaks?  Surely not because that would contradict earlier reports that this was all about a new contract?  Couldn't be...

 

 

 

 

 

From April 1st:

 

Quote

Washington Redskins star left tackle Trent Williams has spent the last several weeks dealing with a medical scare that at one time appeared to be very serious. Now, sources say, Williams should be ready for training camp.

Williams' health issue was related to growth or tumor on his head that had doctors worried it was malignant. Williams had the growth removed and at this point, should be unaffected once he recovers.

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001024935/article/redskins-trent-williams-should-be-fine-after-health-scare

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd bet dollars to donuts Trent showed the Redskins doctors the issue and they down played it saying it's just a mole. Trent is making it out to be brain surgery. Doctors had to cut his cranium open and remove said tumor. Somewhere in the middle the truth lies. I'd hedge my guess that it was skin cancer. Nothing major nothing drastic. Something he could have played football with but .... some outside doctor who is extremely passionate about being a dermatologist said.... "woooooooooow buddy, you got skin cancer. We got to remove that thing or you'll die." 

 

and here we are. Redskins doctors saying "what's the big deal?" Trent saying "I almost died. I can't trust them." 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

I've only seen you assign some level of culpability to the player.  That's all your responses have been the last few pages.  And Colt doesn't have 1/100th the leverage Trent does in a situation like that.  His may be the most egregious recent example, but I'd be willing to bet that's the major reason Colt is still on the roster. 

 

Does there really need to be an investigation called into Colt's treatment to realize that you probably shouldn't perform an unnecessary medical procedure on a broken leg to have a guy available to play (if you make the playoffs), at the expense of his long term health?  Doesn't that go against the idea of the medical staff's first obligation being to treat the players?  Jay admitted that was exactly what happened when he spoke about 'rushing' Colt back.  

 

In the beginning, I gave TW the benefit of the doubt, but still had speculation that there was more to the story than what was being reported.  Mainly based on the timing of this news coming out (right before training camp).  And we only had unnamed sources, friends that talked to TW, etc. to go by and form an opinion.  With it not being about the money, but the handling of the growth by the teams medical staff. 

 

Then he reports to the team and does an interview dragging the team through the mud on how they mishandled everything and we learned that it extremely serious and he might have lost his life.  Which is some real scary **** and thankfully it was caught and treated and he's hopefully going to live a long healthy life for many years to come.

 

But, back to his interviews/comments to the media, etc., he says that he did talk to Bruce about his contract situation and wanted guaranteed money, etc and was turned down.  That happened (if I'm wrong - correct me) prior to him holding out, which seems very suspect to me that "it's not about the money".  Cancer is a serious thing and I've lost loved ones to it over the years, but it appears to me that he was using his scare to hide behind wanting more money or a trade (so he could get a renegotiated contract elsewhere).  

 

He thought that would be something even the Redskins/Bruce would cave on as they legally couldn't reveal/dispute publicly any of his claims of wrong doing with how the medical staff handled his growth.  The Redskins didn't give in to his demands and when TW piled in on in interviews, they immediately requested an independent review of his medical records to clear their names of any wrong doing.

 

TW then asked the NFLPA to not do a review because he knew the Redskins would be cleared of any wrong doing.  I think using something as serious as cancer as a tool to get money or traded is ****ing pathetic.  And that is what it appears like TW did, and I lost all respect for him for that.  While I would have been fine with Bruce trading him earlier on and getting a good haul in draft picks, I also get him standing firm and not giving in after TW created this mess of a situation.

 

Because I can understand from the FO perspective that had they traded TW right after it started, it would be admitting wrong doing and setting a bad precedent for other players to do the same.  

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


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

 

To

 

Doing stellar at being an attractive landing spot for free agents.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, profusion said:

 

Doing stellar at being an attractive landing spot for free agents.

All 99% of free agents care about is who is going to pay the most money. PERIOD

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

To

 

Woot so we can expect the NFLPA to sue the team in a few days/weeks.

 

Winning off the field baby!

 

13 minutes ago, rumplestilskin said:

All 99% of free agents care about is who is going to pay the most money. PERIOD

 

100% Agents are doing what theirs players  told them to do..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

 

In the beginning, I gave TW the benefit of the doubt, but still had speculation that there was more to the story than what was being reported.  Mainly based on the timing of this news coming out (right before training camp).  And we only had unnamed sources, friends that talked to TW, etc. to go by and form an opinion.  With it not being about the money, but the handling of the growth by the teams medical staff. 

 

Then he reports to the team and does an interview dragging the team through the mud on how they mishandled everything and we learned that it extremely serious and he might have lost his life.  Which is some real scary **** and thankfully it was caught and treated and he's hopefully going to live a long healthy life for many years to come.

 

But, back to his interviews/comments to the media, etc., he says that he did talk to Bruce about his contract situation and wanted guaranteed money, etc and was turned down.  That happened (if I'm wrong - correct me) prior to him holding out, which seems very suspect to me that "it's not about the money".  Cancer is a serious thing and I've lost loved ones to it over the years, but it appears to me that he was using his scare to hide behind wanting more money or a trade (so he could get a renegotiated contract elsewhere).  

 

Agreed there.  The conversation with Bruce about his contract had to have occurred before June 4th, when his absence at mandatory mini camps became a major story.  

 

Don't agree on the 'dragging through the mud' part.  He said he lost trust in the organization, while crediting Dan.  I didn't see anything in there as egregious, or otherwise disrespectful.  

 

As far as the money goes, put yourself in their shoes:  would you rather be Earl Thomas on a stretcher in the last year of your contract (although he did get paid), or have the Alex Smith retirement package?  If anybody is deserving of the royal rehab treatment, it's probably him.  I don't see anyone here blaming Alex's greed for the fact that we're looking at paying him for 3 years of work, for 10 games.  

 

I don't think it's any one, or even two factors.  I think it's a confluence of everything he's been a part of while he's been here.  It's his agent's job to make sure he's not playing on an non-guaranteed contract.  Had he gone down in training camp, or preseason, they could've voided his contract with little to no heartache.  Maybe he didn't want to see himself get treated like that defensive captain we had last season (M. Foster).  

 

1 minute ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

 

He thought that would be something even the Redskins/Bruce would cave on as they legally couldn't reveal/dispute publicly any of his claims of wrong doing with how the medical staff handled his growth.  The Redskins didn't give in to his demands and when TW piled in on in interviews, they immediately requested an independent review of his medical records to clear their names of any wrong doing.

 

TW then asked the NFLPA to not do a review because he knew the Redskins would be cleared of any wrong doing.  I think using something as serious as cancer as a tool to get money or traded is ****ing pathetic.  And that is what it appears like TW did, and I lost all respect for him for that.  While I would have been fine with Bruce trading him earlier on and getting a good haul in draft picks, I also get him standing firm and not giving in after TW created this mess of a situation.

 

Said it a couple of times before, but of what benefit would an independent review be to Trent?  If he 'wins', Allen could come out and quadruple (are we at 4 yet?) down, refusing to trade him in the offseason, and drag this into next season.  Or it could further reduce his value to other teams, and give Bruce an out from trading him.  Or it could reduce the number of suitors he'd have for his services...or reduce his next contract's size, guarantees, etc.  

 

I don't think that you're realizing that a lot of games have been played by both sides.  The Redskins' FO certainly knew in June that Trent had a cancerous growth on his head removed, and they knew he needed more surgery to clean it up cosmetically (which he had done June 13th). 

 

Instead of saying that he's not well enough to practice (which he probably wasn't at that time) they turned it immediately into a power struggle over the contract.  They had time to negotiate a way out of this mess for a while, before the media and public would have even known an issue existed.  

 

1 minute ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

Because I can understand from the FO perspective that had they traded TW right after it started, it would be admitting wrong doing and setting a bad precedent for other players to do the same.  

 

There's no precedent to be set.  No other player on our roster has the credentials, current value, as well as probably money saved to be able to pull this off.   

 

The story is, Allen doesn't have a grasp on the value of the assets he deals with.  Third time, he's let a guy walk for little to nothing, for pride related purposes (Kirk, DJ).  The game's changing.  Like it or hate it, you have to be able to adapt in order to deliver value out of these situations.  

 

"Sending a message" is gonna be a hell of a consolation prize when we wonder why a largely talentless team is only capable of occasionally competing for the foreseeable future.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Williams will lose at least $13 million by not playing this season. He confirmed the Redskins will not pay him while he is on the Reserve/Non-Football Injury list and he does not plan to go after that money at this time. He understood that was possible when he decided not to report, which is why he’s not sure why so many people think the actions he’s taken are financially motivated.

 

“That’s what I don’t get. I don’t get how it could be about the money but at the end of the day those people are going to look for a way to say, no matter what evidence is in front of them…if you want to say ‘Trent is about the money’ then they’ll find a way to say it.

 

You’ll ignore the fact that I could’ve reported and I could’ve been on the roster since training camp and still not played a down, ya know? But I didn’t want to go that route. So, if it was about the money I would’ve secured the bag that way.

I mean of course, if I would’ve gone to a new situation there was going to be a new contract but I mean at the end of the day...no matter how rich I am or how much money I have, when the doctors told me in February that I didn’t have long to live, that **** didn’t matter. It wasn’t about money no more. I couldn’t buy a new brain. I couldn’t buy a new skull. You know what I’m saying? 

 

The money was obsolete at that point. It still is. It was a point to prove. It’s something more than that. It’s morals. It’s integrity. I had to. I couldn’t just sit there and let this go because it would have. If I had never spoken to you guys, you guys would have never known what happened. Right?

 

...And I was prepared to do so. If they would have traded me, I would have never said nothing. I would’ve just kept my respect and kept it where it was, but they forced my hand. They painted me out to be the bad guy so I had to speak up for myself.”

 

...Williams made it clear that he’s ready to close the Washington chapter of his career. In his opinion, the story has long reached a point where moving on is best for all involved.

 

“If it was a bash the Redskins deal man, as soon as I got off the surgery table I would have been on media outlets and flooded you guys with pictures and **** to let people know the severity of it but that wasn’t the case for me,” Williams said. While he has declined to share pictures publicly, he did show them to a small group of reporters last week and they are gruesome. The hole that was cut in Williams' head looked to be the size of a softball. He estimates 30 percent of his scalp was affected. After the surgery, doctors had to staple his head back closed. It looked exactly as bad as that sounds.

 

“I wasn’t looking for blood. I was just looking for a new beginning. To put this behind me and kinda find a new home and that’s what I wanted to do. But I think them allowing me a new start would’ve admitted guilt and I don’t think they were ready to do that.”

“I ain’t got a reason to lie. I’m not trying to get anything. I’m not trying to get no money from them. I don’t even want what they didn’t give me. I just want to go.”

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Thanks 4
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is  a lot in that Hoffman article, a lot of it I can't post because there is a share of expletives in it.  For those interested they will air that interview at 4 on 106.7

Edited by Skinsinparadise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

So the best outcome is..........fire Bruce Allen & then re-sign Trent?

 

Wasnt there a report that Allen told Trent that he would fire anyone Trent wanted him to?  It does seem like one firing could resolve the issue.

 

On a side note, I wonder how the medical/training staff feel about Bruce offering to fire them, while also maintaining they did nothing wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My take on hearing Trent's version is that none of this would have been an issue if the skins just gave him more money. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, its about to get real Redskiny here this week.

For all of you that see a guy who had a softball sized chunk taken out of his head and almost died, and STILL want to say hes just grabbing for money, you are absolutely disgusting and you deserve every ounce of Bruce and Dan.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 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.