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

[HardcoreZorn]

Anyone else find it a little ironic that fans complain about short sighted moves when they are demanding wholesale changes at the top and stop showing at games?

 

Again, for the record, I’m in favor of trading Trent and looking to the future.

[TheShredder]

56 minutes ago, carex said:

Penn was in the Pro bowl two years ago and last year was hurt and movong to a new position. So why can't he be okay this year. He doesn't exactly have a streak of declining play

yeah but...he didn't play next to Flowers. 

#micdrop

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

47 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

Anyone else find it a little ironic that fans complain about short sighted moves when they are demanding wholesale changes at the top and stop showing at games?

I’m not finding the irony in that.  Short sighted moves are part of the reason we’d like wholesale changes at the top.  Short sighted moves appear to be made to avoid wholesale changes at the top.  I think most every logical fans dream is to acquire future draft capital in hopes a legit GM could utilize them.

[HardcoreZorn]

25 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I’m not finding the irony in that.  Short sighted moves are part of the reason we’d like wholesale changes at the top.  Short sighted moves appear to be made to avoid wholesale changes at the top.  I think most every logical fans dream is to acquire future draft capital in hopes a legit GM could utilize them.

 

You cant see how fan apathy and having fire Bruce Allen trend on Twitter all season long doesn’t shorten the current regimes leash and have them operate with the near term more in mind? 

[Malapropismic Depository]

1 hour ago, TheShredder said:

yeah but...he didn't play next to Flowers. 

#micdrop

 

Every offensive line has a weak link

[Veryoldschool]

I know Trent has had a good career but after age/injuries have limited him to be able to play 2/3 of the season in recent season and then there is risk of another suspension over pot-smoking, I believe he loses a season next time, I don't expect another franchise to back up a Brinks truck full of draft picks for Trent.  The Skins would be smart to take a second-round pick for him.  A first-round pick would be a huge win for the Skins. bla-bla bla-bla nuts let's take a break from this tedious thread and go to Funky Town......   

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FKA-Y_g-2I

[drowland]

8 hours ago, redskinss said:

Not to sidetrack this thread but this seems to me like something the nfl shouldn't allow. 

Releasing a player with a wink ,wink agreement in place so that they can get another player onto the i.r. and not be subjected to waivers just doesn't seem like something that should be allowed. 

 

Maybe it's just me but seems shady at best, like their violating the "spirit" of the rule or something. 

Maybe mara should step in.

 

The Patriots do it all the time.  They just did it with Deymaris Thomas.  They re-signed him today after they got N'Keal Harry on IR.  I guess once final cuts are turned in at 4pm Saturday, you can't move non-vested players to IR until Monday unless they go through waivers first. Is it dirty?  Not sure.   Teams still get the dead cap hit when they do it.  Which is why they choose guys on 1 year deals with low dead money which is just their signing bonus if they got one.  

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

30 minutes ago, HardcoreZorn said:

 

You cant see how fan apathy and having fire Bruce Allen trend on Twitter all season long doesn’t shorten the current regimes leash and have them operate with the near term more in mind? 

#FireBruceAllen and empty seats wouldn’t exist if not for Bruce Allen.  Not for a second are his issues the fan’s problem.  Dan basically told those fans to kiss his ass anyways, by giving Bruce even more power.  I actually don’t believe Bruce is doing what Bruce does because he’s worried about being fired.  There is absolutely no indication whatsoever that his job is in jeopardy.

[Skinsinparadise]

I think the irony for Dan's issues with fans, etc not showing up, etc was in my view the easiest way he could have fixed it for this season is replacing Bruce and putting a Dorsey type in charge.   Again, I don't think its a coincidence that the last PR buzz Dan got was the Scot hire because it felt to many like "Dan welcome to the 21st century of the NFL" -- "it took you a long time but you finally arrived. " " We thought you were a lost cause but it looks like you are finally catching up." 

 

Scot had to go, I understand that part.  But Dan blew his chance to maintain the momentum by going back to the GM being more about the buddy system than real pedigree.   So it was arguably an even crueler way for it to play out PR wise where to many it moved from him finally reforming to him going right back to square one.   

 

So Dan dealt himself this hand.  He has to live with that.  If it's all for the new stadium and suffering fan angst until that happens is the collateral damage  -- OK, I guess i can understand that albeit I doubt in reality its Bruce or bust on the stadium front.  But it seems plausible that Dan believes that.  And some who cover the team say that's the operative point.   Now if Bruce is really on a short leash and Jay, too.  If us dummies with our keyboards can understand that its as obvious as it gets that Bruce/Jay will take the short view if they have a short leash -- you'd figure Dan has enough of a brain to piece together the simple logic.

 

I suspect Dan gets that point.  But I think Dan is likely part of the problem.  Dan has never really been much of a long view guy by nature.  I recall one article that came out at the time of the Scot hire included a behind the scenes account of some things which included Bruce telling Dan something like -- Dan this might take time, can you be patient?

 

My point is if Jay-Bruce are in short term mode -- I think they likely have a natural brother in arms with Dan because with him it always seems like the future is now.  People will tout that at least he relies more on the draft now.  That part is true.  But IMO you got to go further than that.   And the Trent issue IMO is a great test of that.  This team is traditionally a buyer not a seller of veterans when it comes to high draft picks.  That point hasn't changed whether we are talking the Vinny era or Bruce era.     I don't think Dan has the stomach to do what the Browns recently did and the Dolphins are doing now -- and what the Patriots often do.  

[Peregrine]

8 hours ago, desertbeagle85 said:

 

Who was it reported by. There have been a lot of reports about Trent the last month. There have also been a lot of reports that say those reports aren't true. That's why I said a creditable source. 

NBC Sports, the Houston Chronicle, CBS sports, in fact by the very guy who broke the news the Texans were looking to trade Clowney, and said hed be very surprised if he wasnt.  In other words, the one guy who proved he was most in the know.

[desertbeagle85]

2 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

NBC Sports, the Houston Chronicle, CBS sports, in fact by the very guy who broke the news the Texans were looking to trade Clowney, and said hed be very surprised if he wasnt.  In other words, the one guy who proved he was most in the know.

 

Links?

[Peregrine]

8 minutes ago, desertbeagle85 said:

 

Links?

https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/redskins/redskins-reportedly-no-go-possible-jadeveon-clowney-trade-despite-conversations

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/texans/article/Texans-Clowney-trade-Dolphins-Seahawks-Eagles-Jets-14396505.php

 

[desertbeagle85]

5 minutes ago, Peregrine said:

https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/redskins/redskins-reportedly-no-go-possible-jadeveon-clowney-trade-despite-conversations

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/texans/article/Texans-Clowney-trade-Dolphins-Seahawks-Eagles-Jets-14396505.php

 

 

What does this have anything to do with. You sent me links connecting the Skins and Texans to a Clowny trade. This has nothing to do with the Tunsil to the Texans for two 1st rd picks. There is nothing in the links saying the Skins were offered what the Dolphins were offered for Trent. 

[Malapropismic Depository]

I was reading another team's message board where they had a thread about possibly trading for Trent, and one poster claimed to know the brother of a Redskin, and that he talked to the guy recently. According to the brother, (who the guy talked directly to) of the Redskin (who talked directly to Trent), the idea that Trent is resolute about never again playing for the Skins, is very much what Trent keeps saying.

fwiw...and even though it may not be earth-shattering news...but me personally, I previously had a ray of hope Trent may change his mind. But after reading his posts through his connection, which I felt was legit, I became convinced Trent is never coming back.

[dyst]

Everyone knows someone smh

[lavar1156]

This situation is so stupid. Just a dick measuring contest. Screw everyone involved. I hate Bruce Allen but Trent can go F himself too. 

[Commander -JB-]

6 hours ago, Idaho fan said:

Agree with the first part, disagree with the second.

 

If Trent won't play here (or doesn't want to play here) a future draft pick(s) (especially high ones) are very valuable to a team that is rebuilding with a new GM and probably a new coaching staff.  Having him sit and not play doesn't help us now or in the future - picks do.  

Skins would get fleeced in a deal.  Nobody is going to offer a first rounder or even a second rounder.  Not caving to his demands shows that players can’t just demand trades or sit out and force your hand.  Stand pat and stand your ground.  The worst that can happen is that he sits out an entire season.  The best thing is that he isn’t getting paid.

[FrFan]

“I have no expectation whatsoever anymore,” Gruden said, via ESPN.com. “I’m kind of numb to the fact, so I’m going to coach the guys we have. That’s all we can do right now and . . . to your answer, no, I don’t have any feeling whatsoever.”

Quite contradictory to what he said, feeling optimistic about his return after camp no show, and then feeling very optimistic Trent will return eventhough he couldn't explain why ! He better stop talking about Trent because he clearly doesn't have any influence nor saying in the matter imo.

Focus on the season to come, and tell the medias to ask questions to BA.

[DJHJR86]

3 hours ago, FrFan said:

“I have no expectation whatsoever anymore,” Gruden said, via ESPN.com. “I’m kind of numb to the fact, so I’m going to coach the guys we have. That’s all we can do right now and . . . to your answer, no, I don’t have any feeling whatsoever.”

 

Gruden is truly one of us now.  This team has broken him.  

[Skinsinparadise]

Sheehan blasting Bruce this morning in the context of if he had the Texans interested in a dealing with them and Bruce rebuffed them (because Schefter among others are right and Bruce is telling people he's not open for business relating to Trent) then it was a mistake.  And he hopes they can still find another suitor. I am in the same boat.  But I am not pessimistic they can find another suitor.  I think it's possible.  But my worry is the same as Sheehan's worry which is that Bruce is stubborn when he's pushed and it would fit his personality to have a stand off as opposed to give in.   Right now am thinking 50-50 traded or not traded.   

 

I gather some will rationalize any outcome here including a stand off as a win.  But I am with Sheehan that's crazy.  There is no upside to a stand off with Trent.  That's a lose lose.  I simply don't think Bruce-Dan have built a winning FO culture from the stand point of doing the right thing and operating with class where I can rationalize them building something on that front where this would supposedly add to their culture driven accomplishments -- even if they are justified on the Trent issue.

[goskins10]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Sheehan blasting Bruce this morning in the context of if he had the Texans interested in a dealing with them and Bruce rebuffed them (because Schefter among others are right and Bruce is telling people he's not open for business relating to Trent) then it was a mistake.  And he hopes they can still find another suitor. I am in the same boat.  But I am not pessimistic they can find another suitor.  I think it's possible.  But my worry is the same as Sheehan's worry which is that Bruce is stubborn when he's pushed and it would fit his personality to have a stand off as opposed to give in.   Right now am thinking 50-50 traded or not traded.   

 

I gather some will rationalize any outcome here including a stand off as a win.  But I am with Sheehan that's crazy.  There is no upside to a stand off with Trent.  That's a lose lose.  I simply don't think Bruce-Dan have built a winning FO culture from the stand point of doing the right thing and operating with class where I can rationalize them building something on that front where this would supposedly add to their culture driven accomplishments -- even if they are justified on the Trent issue.

 

I wrote something similar to this yesterday and it's my main concern. Bruce seems to define a value and that's it. There is no negotiation. He thinks he is right or has leverage or both and he will not budge no matter what. It's one thing to be a tough negotiator but it's another thing to just be stubborn and unwilling to compromise at all. 

 

Sometimes it's just not worth being right. There are more important long term goals that can be had. But that would require you have a long term vision. That is just not something I think Bruce Dan/Bruce have. Hence the constant - "We are really close!" garbage every year.  

[Burgold]

I wonder if the Redskins could put Trent Williams on Injured Reserve due to hurt feelings?

 

I just wrote the above because I think it's funny and not because I believe it's true. I think Bruce, as seems to be the case whenever the situation deals with human beings, botched it. Allen seems to understand money, but not personalities or what drives people (other than cash). As to the nontrade, I think Bruce slamming doors shut is stupid. You always listen. Even if the answer is going to be "no" you listen.

 

As bad as Scott McCloughan was, I think he related to the players. They liked him and felt he liked them. I have no idea what the players think of Bruce, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was a very cold, professional, and corporate relationship. There's nothing wrong with that really, but when things go wrong it does make it a bit harder... especially since Bruce seems not to want to do the cold corporate thing (which is to be to trade the asset which isn't generating profit).

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

9 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I gather some will rationalize any outcome here including a stand off as a win.  But I am with Sheehan that's crazy.  There is no upside to a stand off with Trent.  That's a lose lose. 

The only folks I've really seen or heard, be that here, social media, radio or media, that are all for a standoff are just folks who would get behind whatever it is the org does anyways.  There is nothing logical about it.  The whole "for the culture" argument is pretty much nonsense.  In the modern day NFL, players want to get paid whatever it is they can get paid, nobody is really taking hometown discounts or playing nice with management and shorting themselves in the process.  Whether they trade Trent or not isn't going to swing what happens with future players here.  A standoff with Trent is merely a dick measuring contest and I'm certain those that are finding reasons to get behind it, are doing so more to have something to argue about on the internet than they are actually believing it is a legitimate strategy.

[TheShredder]

Amazing how Snyder can sit back and allow Allen to destroy this franchise.  Fans hate him and won't come to the games.  Last remaining idiots are us...waiting for Allen to throw a clot so we can have a brighter future. 

[Skinsinparadise]

If all the reporters covering this story, Craig Hoffman thus far looked to be the most correct.  He predicts way back that the thought it likely extends to the season.   So his source whomever that is might be on the money as to the thinking there.  So running with him.  It's something like that:

 

Plan A:

Win a standoff with Trent.  They expected Trent to test their resolve into the season and they think he blinks first.  The #1 desire by a mile is to keep him and not trade him.

 

Plan B

As the standoff ensues if a team blows them away with an offer, then they'd deal him.  But they'd be surprised that a standoff ensues that long.  Hoffman hasn't elaborated on this part but I get the impression that they'd play hard to get with a trading partner and that team really has to chase them as opposed to them acting interested in dealing him.

 

Now if a stand off proceeds deeper into the season that approach might change.  Again now they don't want to trade Trent and genuinely feel he ends up playing with the Redskins.   As Hoffman said after watching the Bruce interview with NBC 4 -- that Bruce genuinely feels exactly what he said there and that is Trent ends up playing with the Redskins. 

 

I am not saying Hoffman is right but he's looking thus far the most accurate among the locals.  Some of the nationals have converged with a similar point but without getting into the level of detail that Hoffman did.