Owls0325

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

Recommended Posts

I’d like to add an important point vis a vis “team doctors” and such.  It’s fairly well understood that there has always been a conflict of interest between the aims of any sports teams medical staff and the personal health goals of any given athlete.  The team medical staff is charged with getting the player ready to play and perform to the level of his contract and the player, quite frequently, is more concerned with his long-term employment/wealth maximization and post-retirement well-being.  Disagreements arise and it’s been going on since forever.

 

Recently, we saw Kawhi Leonard shut it down for a year in San Antonio...over medical concerns.  Does anyone believe that the Spurs medical team is incompetent or that the Spurs were going to fire their medical staff at the behest of Kawhi Leonard?

 

Of course not.

 

Look, we live in an era where certain players on certain teams in certain sports have the cache/juice to kinda call their own shot with regards to their career trajectory...and they occasionally use the “team doctor” excuse to give themselves some PR cover...whether it has merit or not.

 

Anyhoo, the simplest explanation is usually pretty close to the truth and that’s probably that Trent feels like he deserves/can command additional guaranteed money and security for the blood, sweat and tears he’s left on the field for us.  And I’m inclined to agree with him.  In fact, he and the team are probably working for the best outcome by keeping this thing out of the press so far...a far better path the the dog & pony show Kirk put us through.

 

I predict this will wrap up with both parties reasonably happy and looking forward by late August.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

Trent saw (or will see) a fraction of that total $124M...and the last lockout ended precisely because way too many players did not prepare financially for it and pressured the union to end the stalemate. Not to mention, the idea that making millions somehow inoculates you financially pretty much ignores all of human nature and how the financial world works. I mean, ask Adrian Peterson and Clinton Portis--both who have made a ****-ton of millions during their careers--how secure that millions of dollars made them. Like Chris Rock said, "(being) rich is some **** you can lose with a crazy summer and a drug habit" lol...or bad investments or unscrupulous financial managers....

...

Maybe we can set up a GoFundMe account for Trent.

 

If he has burned through $100M income in 9 years, I doubt another few games is going to matter much to his nest egg. 

 

But I have no reason to believe that he's destitute.  If he is, I would advise him stop worrying about what might happen two years from now and concentrate on not missing any of his weekly $750K paydays right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, theTruthTeller said:

Maybe we can set up a GoFundMe account for Trent.

 

If he has burned through $100M income in 9 years, I doubt another few games is going to matter much to his nest egg. 

 

But I have no reason to believe that he's destitute.  If he is, I would advise him stop worrying about what might happen two years from now and concentrate on not missing any of his weekly $750K paydays right now.

It seems the point Cali was making passed you by.  Nowhere did it say anything about Trent having burned through his income.  For whatever reason, some of you guys can never accept how apples to oranges a professional athletes financial situation is compared to common folks.  Just because someone made a lot of money in a short period of time, doesn't mean they automatically think "oh well, that's enough $ for me, time to stop worrying about it.".  When you make the kind of money these guys do you are worried about setting yourself up and future generations of your family and would be stupid to leave any $ on the table in the very short time span you have to make it.

Share this post


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

I’d like to add an important point vis a vis “team doctors” and such.  It’s fairly well understood that there has always been a conflict of interest between the aims of any sports teams medical staff and the personal health goals of any given athlete.  The team medical staff is charged with getting the player ready to play and perform to the level of his contract and the player, quite frequently, is more concerned with his long-term employment/wealth maximization and post-retirement well-being.  Disagreements arise and it’s been going on since forever.

 

 

of course there comes a point, where there can't be any disagreement.  If your player potentially has something that could kill him for example. 

Share this post


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

^^I'm guessing Snyder knows everything there is to know already.

 

Which, to me anyway, means this really isn't about being unhappy with Bruce outside of how any contract negotiations are going.

 

With the CBA expiring in 2 years--along with his contract, I believe--I'm assuming Trent is wanting some money to cover things should another player lockout occur. Since the players union had already been warning players to start saving money in event of a lockout and Williams knows he's going to be 33 when/if that happens, it would make sense for him to be thinking ahead and wanting to do something to protect himself above and beyond the salary he's scheduled to make over the next two seasons. How much would that suck to become an unrestricted free agent for probably your last big payday and there end up being a lockout that same year?

 

Also would make sense for the Skins to not just say "OK, you got it"...I think it makes sense business-wise to not just capitulate to players--any players--who are under contract with a new CBA coming up. Sorry, but the reality is that owners and franchises can survive a lockout/player strike far better and far longer than the players themselves can. That's the leverage they have and much like the leverage Kirk had and Trent currently has, I don't blame any of them--including Bruce and Dan and other owners/executives around the NFL--for using it to benefit their sides. They're all doing the same thing in my eyes, and you prepare for this if you're even slightly knowledgeable and intelligent about how the business of sports works.

So you've randomly made up a reason for it which is actually opposite of everything we've heard from the parties involved, and has nothing to do with what they actually stated, just because?

Got it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, carex said:

 

of course there comes a point, where there can't be any disagreement.  If your player potentially has something that could kill him for example. 

 

If that’s the part of the pitch you choose to believe...which is really all JLC Twitter hot takes, be my guest.

29 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

So you've randomly made up a reason for it which is actually opposite of everything we've heard from the parties involved, and has nothing to do with what they actually stated, just because?

Got it.

 

Again, we haven’t actually heard ANYTHING on the record from either of the parties involved.

Edited by TryTheBeal!

Share this post


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

 

If that’s the part of the pitch you choose to believe...which is really all JLC Twitter hot takes, be my guest.

 

Again, we haven’t actually heard ANYTHING on the record from either of the parties involved.

 

I was making an observation about team doctors more than anything, there

Share this post


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

So you've randomly made up a reason for it which is actually opposite of everything we've heard from the parties involved, and has nothing to do with what they actually stated, just because?

Got it.

 

What have you heard from Trent or the Redskins on the situation? Because I have not seen or read anything really. Pretty much everyone is speculating or quoting unnamed 'sources' many of which are contradicting each other.

 

 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

It seems the point Cali was making passed you by.  Nowhere did it say anything about Trent having burned through his income.  For whatever reason, some of you guys can never accept how apples to oranges a professional athletes financial situation is compared to common folks.  Just because someone made a lot of money in a short period of time, doesn't mean they automatically think "oh well, that's enough $ for me, time to stop worrying about it.".  When you make the kind of money these guys do you are worried about setting yourself up and future generations of your family and would be stupid to leave any $ on the table in the very short time span you have to make it.

Califan's point was that the holdout was probably due to the upcoming possible strike after the 2020 season, and its effect on Trent getting a good last payday, and my point was that he should be in better position than almost anyone other than top quarterbacks, so I doubt that was the case.  And he very much insinuated that Trent could be out of money in both of his posts.  And he could be right.  It would explain Trent's behavior, but so would a lot of things.

 

If you look at my earlier posts, you'll see that I agree that Trent has a ton of leverage, especially with Haskin's health being dependent in large part upon his play, and he's using it.  But Trent is making $24M in the last two years of his contract.  Any increase is going to be marginal and would disappear if he held out of the regular season and lost weekly $750k checks.  I really don't have any opinion on whether he should or shouldn't get any more money.  He has the seventh richest contract among tackles and he's been missing a lot of games in recent seasons.  He's also the best player on the team. I could argue it either way.

 

I haven't suggested that he shouldn't try to make more money, but he is under contract, the most lucrative contract ever for an OL at the time he signed it.  He didn't exactly get conned into a bad contract.  There would be better ways to go about making additional money than the path he's chosen.  He isn't cleared for practice, so he isn't under any danger of getting a further injury at training camp.  He should be on the sidelines telling Bruce, "Haskins is looking great.  It would be a shame if he got a broken leg like the last three starting quarterbacks.  I'm sure Ereck will do a great job if I'm not physically ready to play at the beginning of the season."  What he's doing has definitely turned fans against him.  He shouldn't damage the brand.

 

On the other hand, I don't think he's doing this at all because of the possible strike after the 2020 season.  He'll be a free agent and it's highly likely that each team's cap space will increase rather than decrease.  He'll have decent value at 33 if he wants to put in more time.  I think he's really mad about something to do with management, probably multiple things, and really doesn't care much about the preseason.  He's inflicting pain on the FO without ever saying a word.   He'll be back week 1 with or without a new contract. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what about Santana Moss and D Hall both stating that they talked to Trent and he told them it is not about the money!!!  Then you have a report where it states his issue was the staff or whoever from the Redskins medical team told him to wait until the end of the season to have the growth removed and that's when he found out it was pre-cancerous!!!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Califan's point was that the holdout was probably due to the upcoming possible strike after the 2020 season, and its effect on Trent getting a good last payday, and my point was that he should be in better position than almost anyone other than top quarterbacks, so I doubt that was the case.  And he very much insinuated that Trent could be out of money in both of his posts.  And he could be right.  It would explain Trent's behavior, but so would a lot of things.

 

No evidence at all that Trent has money issues. This is pure speculation (not suggesting you are saying anything different - you state cali insinuated, so nto saying you are saying he IS out of money.) Many have speculated Dan Snyder has money problems - he just bought a massive yacht. Granted it could all be on credit, but either way, having the cash or the ability to get it is not much different in that area. 

 

If he does have money problems then this is one hell of a bluff. He is only owed about $3M in guaranteed money. They could just release him. Then he has to take the chance another team would pay him the same or more than the Redskins - if this were just before free agency, then sure he has a decent chance. Now? It's unlikely. Maybe some kind of low pay now but more later - but I would be shocked if there were not any playing qualifiers. 

 

40 minutes ago, theTruthTeller said:

 

If you look at my earlier posts, you'll see that I agree that Trent has a ton of leverage, especially with Haskin's health being dependent in large part upon his play, and he's using it.  But Trent is making $24M in the last two years of his contract.  Any increase is going to be marginal and would disappear if he held out of the regular season and lost weekly $750k checks.  I really don't have any opinion on whether he should or shouldn't get any more money.  He has the seventh richest contract among tackles and he's been missing a lot of games in recent seasons.  He's also the best player on the team. I could argue it either way.

 

Fair statements except I think the Haskins safety issue while valid to a certain extent is being way over blown. Unless he is some delicate piece of glass, he should be able absorb some pretty big hits and then hopefully learn how to avoid them. Also, this assumes we have no one that can play T. Not sure that is completely true. Will they be as good as him? Very unlikely. But can they play well enough to form a cohesive unit? I think so. 

 

40 minutes ago, theTruthTeller said:

 

I haven't suggested that he shouldn't try to make more money, but he is under contract, the most lucrative contract ever for an OL at the time he signed it.  He didn't exactly get conned into a bad contract.  There would be better ways to go about making additional money than the path he's chosen.  He isn't cleared for practice, so he isn't under any danger of getting a further injury at training camp.  He should be on the sidelines telling Bruce, "Haskins is looking great.  It would be a shame if he got a broken leg like the last three starting quarterbacks.  I'm sure Ereck will do a great job if I'm not physically ready to play at the beginning of the season."  What he's doing has definitely turned fans against him.  He shouldn't damage the brand.

 

This, like many with other fans, misses that contracts are renegotiated all the time. The idea that once a contract is signed that is it period is just not realistic. People attempt to renegotiate all the time as situations change. The team has no responsibility to renegotiate but there is no reason not to try if you think you truly deserve more. 

 

The bold statement while appears to be at least somewhat true, baffles me to no end. Why does this anger fans? How about understanding this a business and he is just negotiating the best way to take care of himself and his family? I have never understood fans taking these contract holdouts/negotiations personal. If anything, be pissed at the owners who routinely screw players and fans over - all the time!! Although, in these contract situations I honestly am not pissed at either. Both are looking out for their best interest. If they get it done and he starts the season this will all be much ado about nothing. 

 

40 minutes ago, theTruthTeller said:

 

On the other hand, I don't think he's doing this at all because of the possible strike after the 2020 season.  He'll be a free agent and it's highly likely that each team's cap space will increase rather than decrease.  He'll have decent value at 33 if he wants to put in more time.  I think he's really mad about something to do with management, probably multiple things, and really doesn't care much about the preseason.  He's inflicting pain on the FO without ever saying a word.   He'll be back week 1 with or without a new contract. 

 

This I agree with. While money may ultimately solve the issue, I believe there are multiple issues at play here. Will be interesting to see when it's finally all public. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, RandyHolt said:

He probably has a big ****ing scar on his head and is ****ing pissed.

 

Edit @DJHJR86 Great Minds! 🔥

 

As far as we know, the Redskins did not cause the growth, therefore, they did not cause the scar that he may, or may not, have.

 

Has anyone ever heard of any player holding out in order to get the team medical staff replaced?  Seriously. 

 

Does anyone really think that he's willing to forgo $16M to get the team doctors canned?

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Califan's point was that the holdout was probably due to the upcoming possible strike after the 2020 season, and its effect on Trent getting a good last payday, and my point was that he should be in better position than almost anyone other than top quarterbacks, so I doubt that was the case.  And he very much insinuated that Trent could be out of money in both of his posts.

It's more about maximizing his earnings while he still can.  Whether he has $1 or $50,000,000 saved doesn't really matter.  Cali's scenario was just another in a sea of hypotheticals but the timing of his contract, coupled with the potential strike, is certainly valid here.  He definitely won't be in a better position to make money then vs. now - no matter what the outcome of the next CBA is.  He'll be 2 years older and who knows where he'll be physically.

 

1 hour ago, theTruthTeller said:

What he's doing has definitely turned fans against him.  He shouldn't damage the brand.

The same fans that regularly believe all players should be kissing the feet of the owners for the opportunity to make a killing playing a kids game? Folks were up in here packing his bags for him when this came up during OTA's.  There is nothing he could say about this situation that's going to make those fans come back around.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JLC yesterday: “he’s made it known long ago he does not intend to play for them again” 

 

JLC today: i didnt say there’s no way he would ever play for them again

 

😂😂 what an idiot 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

IMHO medical comparisons to the NBA are somewhat futile. NFL remains a hotbed of revenue, and in the eyes of the marketing gurus that made the game the most popular sport entertainment avenue, it starts with the stars playing.  It's no secret that guys were patched up and sent back out, if they "can go".  What they don't realize is that if Trent can't go, we will still watch. Many teams games are sold out in advance.

 

If an NBA star cannot play, it would be painfully obvious.  There are only 5 guys on the tiny court, and they have a 100 games to play.  And then have to run ok jog up and down the floor 100+ times a game - talk about the life making 200M doing so heh.  But bruises braces etc physical injuries would also be fully visible wearing shorts and T shirts.

 

Football players are more apt to be able to play through.  They are in near full armor, and play for 6 seconds, and then get 35 seconds of rest.  Tons of commercials, change in possession, end of quarters and half time... aid in the injured being able to fool everyone.

 

Hockey and their 1 minute shifts are a much better comparison to football.

 

Edited by RandyHolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, sempre_victrix said:

 

As far as we know, the Redskins did not cause the growth, therefore, they did not cause the scar that he may, or may not, have.

 

Has anyone ever heard of any player holding out in order to get the team medical staff replaced?  Seriously. 

 

Does anyone really think that he's willing to forgo $16M to get the team doctors canned?

Point Counter Point

 

As far as we know, the Redskins did cause the growth (unkempt helmets?) by not addressing it quickly, therefore, they did cause the scar that he has had cosmetic surgery on. Surgeries, IIRC.

 

Has anyone ever heard of any player holding out in order to get the team medical staff replaced?  Yes. Trent "Trend Setter" Williams. But no one has said that is the sole reason for his holdout. As many have theorized, its likely multiple issues that added up over time. 

 

Does anyone really think that he's willing to forgo $16M to get the team doctors canned?  Yes - some things are bigger than money - principals.  I know it's hard to fathom here under the DC money tree raining money on contractors like capitalists candy out of a pinata. You think the team would be doing jumping jacks at saving 16M, if money is all anyone cared about.

Edited by RandyHolt

Share this post


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

Again, we haven’t actually heard ANYTHING on the record from either of the parties involved.

Well, except for from the people who have ACTUALLY talked to them, and have said its because Trent doesnt trust the FO and medical staff, and hes upset about how that all went down.  Until anyone who ACTUALLY talked to them says anything other than that, its a bit absurd to just pretend the issue is something else.  I mean, are we going to seriously pretend that neither side has seen the news and the ongoing narrative, and seen that its wrong, but both sides have decided not to correct it? 

 

How does that then lead its reasonable to say what noone has, that this is about Trent fearful about money and he just needs more money?

2 hours ago, MartinC said:

 

What have you heard from Trent or the Redskins on the situation? Because I have not seen or read anything really. Pretty much everyone is speculating or quoting unnamed 'sources' many of which are contradicting each other.

 

 

What contradiction?  I have not seen or ready any contradiction from people who have actually talked to Trent or Bruce.  What source has put out that said Trent is fearful about money, and so is looking for more money before the CBA expires?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

 

How does that then lead its reasonable to say what noone has, that this is about Trent fearful about money and he just needs more money?

What contradiction?  I have not seen or ready any contradiction from people who have actually talked to Trent or Bruce.  What source has put out that said Trent is fearful about money, and so is looking for more money before the CBA expires?

 

On the CBA specifically none I have seen. But I have read ‘sources’ that say while there are certainly wider issues money is part of what will solve this.

 

As for contradictions in the last two days I’ve seen reports the relationship is terminally broken and reports that is not the case.

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.