Est.1974 Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 I wonder how badly the Bears want out of Mack’s contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bakedtater1 Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 Trent Williams is an elite left tackle and will get all pro by the second season of his new team. The skins are losing out on a top 3 tackle..I guarantee by 2017 trent was mentally checking out...watching brucifer butchering the Kirk situation thinking get me the **** outta here...who can blame him? 1 minute ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said: I wonder how badly the Bears want out of Mack’s contract? Oh god...him and chase here?...good night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anselmheifer Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 28 minutes ago, bakedtater1 said: Oh god...him and chase here?...good night. No thanks. I'd way rather have Montez Sweat on a rookie contract with Chase Young. What did Mack post last year, 8.5 sacks? He's 29 and is on a 100 million dollar contract that already looks steep and is going to be a catastrophe in the future. I honestly hope that Trent gets out there, sees that nobody is going to offer him a billion dollars and that calmer heads prevail and he stays. I still think that's possible, especially because a new CBA is likely to make it much harder to hold out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 1 hour ago, Burgundy Yoda said: Since you did some weird quote format where you literally went in and edited my post I'll just respond to this blank post. Who objectively deserved an All-Pro? Champ Bailey. He had 5 great seasons with the Redskins and then gets traded to Denver, goes on to have a mediocre season compared to the ones he had in Washington and gets 1st team All-Pro in his first year. I guarantee you if he had that year in Washington he would NOT have made the All-Pro team. This isn't debatable in my opinion, there's a bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-9- Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 1 hour ago, kingdaddy said: I think you could make an argument that both Trent and London Fletcher could've been named all pro players as Redskins over the past 10 years. Didn't Fletch lead the lead in tackles at least once? He has HOF numbers if you look him up and compare him to other MLB's who are in the Hall. of course arguments could be made. but Trent wasn't chosen. so he can't be called an All-Pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 43 minutes ago, Anselmheifer said: No thanks. I'd way rather have Montez Sweat on a rookie contract with Chase Young. What did Mack post last year, 8.5 sacks? He's 29 and is on a 100 million dollar contract that already looks steep and is going to be a catastrophe in the future. without checking totally, a team can essentially inherit Mack on a 3 year 50mil deal with an easy get out after the 2022 season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, 09 said: of course arguments could be made. but Trent wasn't chosen. so he can't be called an All-Pro. Gerald McCoy disagrees with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Consigliere Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 18 minutes ago, 09 said: of course arguments could be made. but Trent wasn't chosen. so he can't be called an All-Pro. This is where you say agree to disagree, and I get that you think you're 1000% right and that he's 1000% wrong. So be it. move on, the conversation is about potential comp and beyond, not about minutiae related to what journo's and players and what not think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJ Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 12 minutes ago, clskinsfan said: Gerald McCoy disagrees with you. This post was 3 years ago almost in 2017. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-9- Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, The Consigliere said: This is where you say agree to disagree ... Fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, RWJ said: This post was 3 years ago almost in 2017. OK? What does that have to do with anything. Trent is 31 years old, the healthiest he has been since the 2017 season and is hungry to play. People are acting like he is 38 and washed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RWJ Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 9 minutes ago, clskinsfan said: OK? What does that have to do with anything. Trent is 31 years old, the healthiest he has been since the 2017 season and is hungry to play. People are acting like he is 38 and washed up. You can answer that question and you already know the answer. Nuff said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 Trent probably makes All Pro in 2016 if he doesn't get busted for weed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdaddy Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 I saw a proposed trade where the Rams send WR Brandon Cooks to the Skins straight up for Trent...Cooks is under contract for 4 years. I'm not sold on this but Cooks would be a nice weapon for DH. Anyone like this deal? The Rams are trying to shed payroll and could use Trent big time, especially vs the Niners twice a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoover-ball Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 21 minutes ago, kingdaddy said: I saw a proposed trade where the Rams send WR Brandon Cooks to the Skins straight up for Trent...Cooks is under contract for 4 years. I'm not sold on this but Cooks would be a nice weapon for DH. Anyone like this deal? The Rams are trying to shed payroll and could use Trent big time, especially vs the Niners twice a year. How does taking on Trent mean shedding payroll? I assume anyone trading for him would need to extend him. I would not be happy with this deal. But I am one of the fools that is holding out for us to get a first for him. Or I would take TW finding out his market is not 20 a year and we extend him for 15 a year and keep him for the next 4 years with Haskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 It makes sense that the Browns would be in on tackle Trent Williams. I’m told ex-GM John Dorsey checked in on a weekly basis to try to pry Williams, and got a flat no on each occasion from the Redskins brass. In fact, it never even got to the point where compensation was discussed. Additionally, Baker Mayfield and Williams, both Oklahoma guys, were in contact, and Williams reinforced the point that the Skins weren’t dealing him. The Cleveland staff has turned over, of course, but the opening at that position remains. And with the draft’s top tackles showing out in Indy like they did, Cleveland’s not guaranteed the one they like makes it to the 10th pick. https://www.si.com/nfl/2020/03/09/tom-brady-ryan-tannehill-tennessee-titans-cba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoover-ball Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 Isn't it clear to everyone by now that the reason the Skins did not trade TW or even talk trade is because he could not play (or wear a helmet)? I do not get people acting like the skins should have traded him before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesMadisonSkins Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 38 minutes ago, kingdaddy said: I saw a proposed trade where the Rams send WR Brandon Cooks to the Skins straight up for Trent...Cooks is under contract for 4 years. I'm not sold on this but Cooks would be a nice weapon for DH. Anyone like this deal? The Rams are trying to shed payroll and could use Trent big time, especially vs the Niners twice a year. On the surface I like it. But don’t forget Cooks has a really bad concussion history. The next one could be his last one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportjunkie07 Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 28 minutes ago, Hoover-ball said: Isn't it clear to everyone by now that the reason the Skins did not trade TW or even talk trade is because he could not play (or wear a helmet)? I do not get people acting like the skins should have traded him before. I'm not buying that. Trent vowed not to play for the redskins. This and the timing of it made the skins look bad and put us in a bad position. Bruce's ego was damaged and he wasn't going to lose a contract year for trent playing a few meaningless games at the end of the year. Additionally, he wasn't going to cave in to trent's demands and let him come out on top. Additionally there is the threat of a lawsuit if trent plays and the area of surgery has a complication. There was no good reason for either of them to work together; the "helmet doesn't fit" was a good excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoover-ball Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, sportjunkie07 said: There was no good reason for either of them to work together; the "helmet doesn't fit" was a good excuse. In your scenario there is no reason for TW to not wear a helmet. TW would have wanted push the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sportjunkie07 Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 Just now, Hoover-ball said: In your scenario there is no reason for TW to not wear a helmet. TW would have wanted push the issue. He couldve tried but there wasn't really an issue with wearing the helmet. Nor was there with the medical staff. That's why nothing ever came of it. He successfully slandered the redskins franchise in an attempt to get out of here and get paid more money. He has put his body through a lot for a pertually bad team. A misunderstanding was had between him and the medical staff which set him off. It was a catalyst. I can't blame the guy but it is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, Hoover-ball said: In your scenario there is no reason for TW to not wear a helmet. TW would have wanted push the issue. I like to try and be tactful in most responses. However, in this case you're just flat wrong. The reason the 'Skins didn't trade Trent is because Bruce is a short sighted, manipulative, malicious ass hat who wanted to "win" rather than take the best long term approach. If there was an issue with Trent's health and inability to pass a physical, that would have been front and center through the trade negotiations. However, the reporting was, and the GM of the Browns was on the record, that Bruce wasn't even picking up the phone. Then right at the end, when it looked like Trent was going to go through with his promise, Bruce tried to move him, and he got the cold shoulder. No, this was organization malpractice at he highest order. There's no other story, and at this point, it's irrefutable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoover-ball Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 20 minutes ago, sportjunkie07 said: He couldve tried but there wasn't really an issue with wearing the helmet. Nor was there with the medical staff. That's why nothing ever came of it. So TW says he couldn't wear the helmet and the Redskins say he couldn't wear a helmet but that doesn't fit your narrative so you know there was no issue with wearing a helmet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drowland Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 1 hour ago, Hoover-ball said: Isn't it clear to everyone by now that the reason the Skins did not trade TW or even talk trade is because he could not play (or wear a helmet)? I do not get people acting like the skins should have traded him before. The helmet thing wasn't known until he reported, which was after the trade deadline passed. He probably knew, but it doesn't sound like the Skins were aware until he he showed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoover-ball Posted March 9, 2020 Share Posted March 9, 2020 1 minute ago, Voice_of_Reason said: I like to try and be tactful in most responses. However, in this case you're just flat wrong. The reason the 'Skins didn't trade Trent is because Bruce is a short sighted, manipulative, malicious ass hat who wanted to "win" rather than take the best long term approach. If there was an issue with Trent's health and inability to pass a physical, that would have been front and center through the trade negotiations. However, the reporting was, and the GM of the Browns was on the record, that Bruce wasn't even picking up the phone. Then right at the end, when it looked like Trent was going to go through with his promise, Bruce tried to move him, and he got the cold shoulder. No, this was organization malpractice at he highest order. There's no other story, and at this point, it's irrefutable. Bruce messed a lot of things up and I have no doubt he didnt answer the phone and handled things poorly. You are not being un tactful to say something I agree with. Doesn't change the fact that Trent could not play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.