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

[NickyJ]

1 hour ago, Unbias said:

On June 7th Bruce Allen met the media and when asked about the Williams holdout he said, "I know what the truth is".

 

Since then we signed Ereck Flowers on June 19th and now as training camp starts we are searching through the discount bin for a starting LT? 

 

Flowers is bad. A 36 year old player who's been hurt the past two years is also bad. These are all last minute reactive moves that gloss over the larger problems. We had info and time to be better prepared. We are not. Let's stop cheering over marginal, short sighted improvements and wonder why we are consistently put in these positions. 

Your timeline is a tad broken. On June 7th, Bruce Allen said "I know what the truth is." We signed Ereck Flowers on March 19th, before the draft and before any of this stuff with Trent came to light.

 

Donald Penn is a short term replacement, yes. So let's fix that. Who's your long term replacement that was available in June?

[desertbeagle85]

34 minutes ago, Bang said:

 

Yea, i can see how counting on a guy who is supposedly a 'leader' to hold it down so u can build other positions to help him win is the team's fault.

Stupid trust. Must be morons for expecting a guy to honor that.

 

~Bang

 

 

Trent could still show up. The point is even if he shows he's always hurt. So you still need good backups and if the draft picks they've spent on the line the last few years aren't working out. Well that's on the organization. 

2 minutes ago, NickyJ said:

Your timeline is a tad broken. On June 7th, Bruce Allen said "I know what the truth is." We signed Ereck Flowers on March 19th, before the draft and before any of this stuff with Trent came to light.

 

Donald Penn is a short term replacement, yes. So let's fix that. Who's your long term replacement that was available in June?

 

Exactly Flowers was released by the Giants last year and picked up by I think the Jags. He has been horrible at LT. So the Skins picked him up cheap to try him out and at LG. Now he's being forced to play tackle again, because Trent isn't there. 

 

Penn would give the Skins a chance to move Flowers back at LG where they wanted the try him out. 

[Malapropismic Depository]

3 minutes ago, desertbeagle85 said:

Penn would give the Skins a chance to move Flowers back at LG where they wanted the try him out. 

 

Flowers seems built more to play Guard than Tackle, anyway

[Bang]

Flowers is built to play baker.

 

or Bus driver

 

or janitorial technician.

 

 

11 minutes ago, desertbeagle85 said:

 

Trent could still show up. The point is even if he shows he's always hurt. So you still need good backups and if the draft picks they've spent on the line the last few years aren't working out. Well that's on the organization. 

 

 

So you spend a 3rd round pick on a guy and sign a low-cost veteran.

You don't pay backups starter money. Those days are gone. Nsehke is part of that reality. Blaming the team for that is blaming them for the economic management philosophy of the league, and that doesn't make sense.

 

~Bang

[Unbias]

18 minutes ago, JoggingGod said:

So if you were forced to eat a peach, and you had a rotten peach, but I offered you an overly ripe but edible peach, you wouldn’t take the latter? With no fresh ones available?

 

That’s our potential situation.

 

Obviously if I was hungry I'd pick the overly ripe peach, but I'd also wonder why I'm in this position where I'm stuck between 'rotten' and 'overly ripe' fruit. I'd think about what I could have done to avoid that situation and avoid it for future fruit situations where I have no better options. 

 

I find the Redskins are good at painting themselves into a corner, then bragging about how we choose the best way to walk through the fresh paint. Meanwhile trying to identify the systematic problem of getting ourselves in hard situations goes largely ignored. 

 

Internally the team has no accountability. I'm harping on Bruce, but it goes deeper than that. From the fan base we accept finding 'best alternative' in a crappy situation rather than avoiding the next one, which makes us susceptible to having the same thing happen repeatedly. 

 

I should add, other teams mess this up as well, so we are not alone. Maybe there's some bias because I follow the Redskins more than other teams, but it feels like we are the best at painting ourselves into that corner. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

@Unbias outside of a few very exceptional examples, how many teams are prepared to replace 31-year old Pro Bowlers who decide to hold?  

[Unbias]

1 hour ago, Bang said:

I got a dollar that says there are no cancer doctors on the Redskins training staff. "Medical staff", "training staff"... same thing. This  is not a hospital. it is a professional sports medical staff.. primarily  there to handle the injuries and ailments that come from playing football.

If you have a toothache and you go to an physical therapist, who's fault is it when your mouth decays?

 

 

Besides, for me it's a moot point. I think it's a stick up for money and anything else is

A/ media speculation, and

B/ smoke so we don't see the stick up.

 

~Bang

What are you blaming the team for? Timing a nice contract to expire right around the same time the usual career does?

Trent is seizing opportunity for Trent, period.

While in the business of Trent, Inc, there is nothing wrong with capitalizing on  a situation,  but exploiting the team you are supposedly a "leader" of..  again, how is this the team's fault? 

 

~Bang

 

RE: Medical/training staff - Totally agree with you. A diagnosis from a team's 'doctor' should be taken with a huge grain of salt. Here's what I think the process looks like - They ask the athlete to take some tests, look at the results of those tests, double check the person who gave them their last paycheck and ensure their recommendation aligns with their employer's end goal. The issue is this logic leads players to not trust the team. The best example of this is what happened to Kawhi Leonard in San Antonio. The team 'doctors' tell one story, but the player just disregards their diagnosis and does his own thing, which from a fan's perspective is very annoying. 

 

RE: Moot Point - We don't know if it's medical, financial or something else. All that means is we should be consistent. If you feel it's 'speculation' that he's holding out for medical reasons then try to be consistent an not 'speculate' it's about the money. With Trent's situation I find you can clearly see a posters agenda in the team vs. player based on what set of 'facts' they are operating off of. 

 

RE: Blaming team? - No one should be blamed. The team just cut Mason Foster and many regard it as 'fair' because he was a one dimensional player. It works the same way when a player over performs his contract. The issue is over and under performance is all relative. The team doesn't need to justify cutting a player the same way a player doesn't have to justify a hold out. 

 

RE: Trent is seizing the opportunity - This is speculation, but let's run with it. As an example, if my wife cheats on me it's easy to say she's 'wrong' for doing so. When you peel it back if I constantly talked down to her, never gave her any of my time, was not concerned about her needs and didn't care if she went to singles bars, then I sort of had it coming. She did the act that people will shake their finger, but I did nothing to avoid it from happening. Let's apply that to this scenario. We don't have tackle depth, we are somewhat rebuilding, we have limited cap space and there might be some medical issue that pisses off Trent. The team hasn't done a good job at preventing him from capitalizing on our self made position. I tend to feel he's looking at where this team is and is saying to trade him to a contender (where he'll get a raise) or pay him more. 

 

RE: supposed "leader' - I think this all boils down to culture and responsibility. The culture of a team is very important. Often the leaders are the ones that drive activities that add to culture. The important question is, who's the most responsible for culture? Is it the owner, GM or the players? Remember the owner/GM hire/draft the players. They also benefit the most from team success, so shouldn't they be heavily invested in having a positive culture? In short, I think we are blaming the employees for structural problems that were hear long before they came.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

3 minutes ago, Unbias said:

RE: Trent is seizing the opportunity - This is speculation, but let's run with it. As an example, if my wife cheats on me it's easy to say she's 'wrong' for doing so. When you peel it back if I constantly talked down to her, never gave her any of my time, was not concerned about her needs and didn't care if she went to singles bars, then I sort of had it coming. She did the act that people will shake their finger, but I did nothing to avoid it from happening. Let's apply that to this scenario. We don't have tackle depth, we are somewhat rebuilding, we have limited cap space and there might be some medical issue that pisses off Trent. The team hasn't done a good job at preventing him from capitalizing on our self made position. I tend to feel he's looking at where this team is and is saying to trade him to a contender (where he'll get a raise) or pay him more. 

 

Are there still "singles bars" anymore? Like the Regal Beagle? 

[Malapropismic Depository]

36 minutes ago, Bang said:

Flowers is built to play baker.

 

 

If he played Chris Baker, I think he'd lose that battle too.

[TMK9973]

I know current discussion is about his replacement and such - IF he doesn't return. 

Here is my prediction - Trent is done playing football.  

He has made 94m over his life-time already.  He gets hurt a lot. We know he is a lots of pain during the season. He is upset with the skins over "medical" issues (Which means he is thinking a lot about the medical issues).  We also know he is a big supporter of Pot for pain management and he cant use it while in the NFL.

 

We keep thinking "No way he gives up 22m and sits out next 2 years" but why not?  He wouldnt be the 1st to walk away. What if his attitude is more "Im done with football. If they want to trade me, i'll listen.  but mostly -i'll sit here and whatever happens happens"

Whats worse case for him?  He doesn't play for next 2 years, MAYBE has to pay back some signing bonus, and after 2 years he can prob take a lower paid contract to play if he misses it, or stay retired and enjoy his money while feeling pain free.  

 

I think he has basically retired.  

[ntotoro]

How long does it take for the sticky icky to leave your system? 

 

That could be when the teams sees Trent back.

[redskinss]

3 minutes ago, ntotoro said:

How long does it take for the sticky icky to leave your system? 

 

That could be when the teams sees Trent back.

That's not how the nfl drug testing works.

[Malapropismic Depository]

4 minutes ago, ntotoro said:

How long does it take for the sticky icky to leave your system? 

 

That could be when the teams sees Trent back.

 

Could he be taking something "out of bounds" for the pain from his surgery recovery, which is actually lingering because they say he actually needs more surgery ?

 

Let's also not forget that aspect. It was stated Trent may have another medical procedure done, and not be medically cleared to play for a while.

 

2 minutes ago, redskinss said:

That's not how the nfl drug testing works.

 

That would be almost too convenient, wouldn't it ?

[Unbias]

Just now, TD_washingtonredskins said:

@Unbias outside of a few very exceptional examples, how many teams are prepared to replace 31-year old Pro Bowlers who decide to hold?  

 

Great question and I don't have any examples off the top of my head. One item to note is that we are speculating it's about the money. Could be, but also could be something else. Here's a list of the current hold outs: 

 

RB Duke Johnson in Cle (26 yrs old) - He's reporting, but had little to no leverage. He's got 2 years left on a team friendly deal and RBs typically have little in your tank past the 20's. Could be a comparable situation. 

DT/DE Chris Jones in KC (25 yrs old) - He's coming off of a 15.5 sack season. The team also cut OLB Justin Houston (9 sacks) and traded away Dee Ford (13 sacks). He's reporting to camp, but at his age, performance and team need I would imagine an extension is coming really soon. 

RB Melvin Gordon in SD (26 yrs old) - As mentioned with Duke Johnson,  he's got 2-4 high end years left in him, which is like Trent, but he's been on a rookie contract his entire NFL career. 

RB Ezekiel Elliott in Dal (24 yrs old) - His agent sees the Dak, Cooper and Byron Jones contracts expiring before Zeke and doesn't want to have 2 more 300+ touch seasons before he's a FA. He's probably seeing this as the only chance Zeke has to get a Todd Gurley type deal. 

OT Trent Williams in Was (31 yrs old) - He's got 2 years left on his deal with no guaranteed money. Currently he's the 7th highest paid LT in terms of $/year. The team has a new direction at QB and little depth behind Trent. 

WR Michael Thomas in NO (26 yrs old) - Wanting to get paid before Drew is gone. Makes sense. 

K Robbie Gould in SF (37 yrs old) - This has been settled and the team gave him more money, but he was holding out and asking for a trade. 

 

There are some comparable situations there when looking at term remaining and useful life of the player. 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

24 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

If he played Chris Baker, I think he'd lose that battle too.

 

I think he meant play Baker in "Redskins: The Movie"...

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Thanks for sharing that, but it's not really the point. 

 

You said we painted ourselves into this corner, basically by not having a viable alternative. Who usually does? We DID have a great alternative in Ty Nsheyke for a couple years until he demanded starter money. 

[Unbias]

24 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

Are there still "singles bars" anymore? Like the Regal Beagle? 

 

Fine. My 'old man not understanding the dating world' got the better of me. 

 

I would like to edit 'singles bars' with 'having a Plenty of Fish and Ashley Madison accounts'.

[Vanguard]

4 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

Thanks for sharing that, but it's not really the point. 

 

You said we painted ourselves into this corner, basically by not having a viable alternative. Who usually does? We DID have a great alternative in Ty Nsheyke for a couple years until he demanded starter money. 

 

And as much as I like Ty.  I’m not too sure he’s a starter.  An excellent second option though.  But I could be wrong, we’ll see.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

2 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

Thanks for sharing that, but it's not really the point. 

 

You said we painted ourselves into this corner, basically by not having a viable alternative. Who usually does? We DID have a great alternative in Ty Nsheyke for a couple years until he demanded starter money. 

 

Man, ask Cowboys fans about having a viable alternative for Tyron Smith a few years back lol...as you said, it is insanely rare for any team in the NFL to be prepared should they lose their Pro Bowl/All Pro LT for any length of time for any reason.  Just doesn't happen.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

6 minutes ago, Unbias said:

 

Fine. My 'old man not understanding the dating world' got the better of me. 

 

I would like to edit 'singles bars' with 'having a Plenty of Fish and Ashley Madison accounts'.

1 minute ago, Vanguard said:

 

And as much as I like Ty.  I’m not too sure he’s a starter.  An excellent second option though.  But I could be wrong, we’ll see.

 

I agree, which is why I'm glad we didn't give him $7-8M to stick around as depth. He was valuable here at his price point and in that swing tackle role. 

[Bang]

9 minutes ago, Unbias said:

 

RE: Medical/training staff - Totally agree with you. A diagnosis from a team's 'doctor' should be taken with a huge grain of salt. Here's what I think the process looks like - They ask the athlete to take some tests, look at the results of those tests, double check the person who gave them their last paycheck and ensure their recommendation aligns with their employer's end goal. The issue is this logic leads players to not trust the team. The best example of this is what happened to Kawhi Leonard in San Antonio. The team 'doctors' tell one story, but the player just disregards their diagnosis and does his own thing, which from a fan's perspective is very annoying. 

 

RE: Moot Point - We don't know if it's medical, financial or something else. All that means is we should be consistent. If you feel it's 'speculation' that he's holding out for medical reasons then try to be consistent an not 'speculate' it's about the money. With Trent's situation I find you can clearly see a posters agenda in the team vs. player based on what set of 'facts' they are operating off of. 

 

RE: Blaming team? - No one should be blamed. The team just cut Mason Foster and many regard it as 'fair' because he was a one dimensional player. It works the same way when a player over performs his contract. The issue is over and under performance is all relative. The team doesn't need to justify cutting a player the same way a player doesn't have to justify a hold out. 

 

RE: Trent is seizing the opportunity - This is speculation, but let's run with it. As an example, if my wife cheats on me it's easy to say she's 'wrong' for doing so. When you peel it back if I constantly talked down to her, never gave her any of my time, was not concerned about her needs and didn't care if she went to singles bars, then I sort of had it coming. She did the act that people will shake their finger, but I did nothing to avoid it from happening. Let's apply that to this scenario. We don't have tackle depth, we are somewhat rebuilding, we have limited cap space and there might be some medical issue that pisses off Trent. The team hasn't done a good job at preventing him from capitalizing on our self made position. I tend to feel he's looking at where this team is and is saying to trade him to a contender (where he'll get a raise) or pay him more. 

 

RE: supposed "leader' - I think this all boils down to culture and responsibility. The culture of a team is very important. Often the leaders are the ones that drive activities that add to culture. The important question is, who's the most responsible for culture? Is it the owner, GM or the players? Remember the owner/GM hire/draft the players. They also benefit the most from team success, so shouldn't they be heavily invested in having a positive culture? In short, I think we are blaming the employees for structural problems that were hear long before they came.

OK.. I'll play

1st point.

 sorry, when canc er is a possibility, you, me and anuyone else has to take responsibility to find out, not trust unqualified people giving unqualified opinions, regardless of whether it is based in their employer's wishes or not. Sports training staffs are to get a guy ready to play, period. 
If the player
a/ lets the team medical staff to be his only test for cancer, or

B/ distrusts them when they misdiagnose something they are not qualified or equipped to diagnose..

this is on the PLAYER. Personal Responsibility. It comes ahead of any mistrust of the staff.. since it is the player who listened to the team staff as they tried to diagnose a possible tumor. If my roof leaks and i get people who are not roofers to fix it, and it leaks, guess who's fault it is when it continues to leak?

 

2nd point
IF he IS holding out for "medical reasons" stemming from a diagnosis of a growth by team trainers, again, the fault is entirely his, he is completely misplacing blame, and I can't understand it, sympathize with it, or respect it.
So i will choose to recognize that Trent isn't that dumb, and that would be incredibly dumb. SO i fall back on what it turns out to be 95% of the time in these situations.
Money. He sees opportunity.. and that opportunity is undeniable. In between all of the lines of these discussion we have all said so,, the depth isn't there, and what depth they have is not up to snuff. Vulnerability is to be exploited i n business, and he is.

"Whenever they say it isn't about the money... it's about the money." - Deion Sanders.
I believe him. In terms of which option makes the most logical sense.. the money is the only one that holds water and does not ask anyone to believe Trent is so dumb as to entrust something that may be a malignant growth to only being diagnosed by a pro football team training staff.

 

3rd:
I really don't care about this. as i said, for Trent it makes financial sense. Vulnerability should be exploited, regardless of your teammates, friends, family, anybody. . The future of the other 52 guys should be used to parlay as much into himself as he can. The fact he is on the wrong side of 31, hasn't completed a season in 5 years and is one failed test away from a half-season at home shouldn't play into it.

In his language, leadership means **** you, buddy. 
As i said,, don't ask me to respect it.

Mason paved his own way out the door, and the same thing happened to plenty pf players this week. Our fan base acts like a Jerry Springer audience. This is and always has been the nature of the business, and every player knows it. 

 

4th point. 
This is silly. totally unrelated, completely ridiculous comparison. 

 

5th: Culture and leadership... i really do not know where you're going with this. 
So, simply put, if you are known as a team leader, if you were drafted as a team leader (4th overall),if you have been paid like a team leader, you be a team leader, and you use the leadership skills that you MUST learn to hold up your end of said culture.. What the "culture" is of other mistakes made by the FO is beside the point. PART of that culture shift is to be YOU, since you were expected to accept that leadership mzntle. 
AND, i might add,, players have zero to do with any front office culture. They players have nothing to do with of the politics of any of it.. the player's job is to play,and the decisions that are above them are not their concern.
"Culture" comes from winning, and no matter how much belly-aching our over-reacting fan base does, the FO tries to do that. They may not make the best movews, they may have had moves blow up in their faces, but it's not done to make the team into a loser intentionally. Gruden has been given ample time, and that is a decided change of the previous incarnations of the FO, which averaged about 2 years per coach for 15 years. 
Show me what they do that wrecks the culture that a player either can control, or should attempt to control? 
Folks rave about the Pats cu;tutre, and they've been accused (and proven to be) cheating time and again, their owner is involved with a whorehouse that practices human trafficking, the coach is rumored to have covered for a possible murderer (he told Hernandez to find a safe-house)..   and yet they have a great culture.
Winning = good team culture,, and as the gold standard team of the NFL proves, it has nothing to do with anything honorable, nice, or even ethical.  Winning is all it takes.

 

Now,, i have a dollar, and i bet that if they offered Trent the money, his complaints would dry up.

Anyone betting against it?

 

~Bang

[Unbias]

Just now, TD_washingtonredskins said:

Thanks for sharing that, but it's not really the point. 

 

You said we painted ourselves into this corner, basically by not having a viable alternative. Who usually does? We DID have a great alternative in Ty Nsheyke for a couple years until he demanded starter money. 

 

I don't know many other teams as well. Patriots always seem to loose a tackle every 2-3 years and don't miss a beat. Eagles drafted a tackle mid first with their tackles still in place. Saints are always good despite their LT Armstead always missing games. Not sure what the Steelers do, but that's a defensive division and they pass the ball a lot. The Cowboys always have this great OL. I hate them so much, but there's got to be something our team can take away in terms of depth/draft/contract management. 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

2 minutes ago, Unbias said:

 

I don't know many other teams as well. Patriots always seem to loose a tackle every 2-3 years and don't miss a beat. Eagles drafted a tackle mid first with their tackles still in place. Saints are always good despite their LT Armstead always missing games. Not sure what the Steelers do, but that's a defensive division and they pass the ball a lot. The Cowboys always have this great OL. I hate them so much, but there's got to be something our team can take away in terms of depth/draft/contract management. 

 

I think your examples are far too high-level. 

 

Through last year, you could have included us in this category. We lost Williams to injuries and suspensions and had our swing tackle step in and perform well. It also doesn't account for the original level of play of those teams. For example, the Patriots are tough to evaluate because Brady is so good. They don't necessarily need to have Pro Bowl LTs protecting him. The Steelers OL is horrendous and they rely on Big Ben taking hits or holding the ball as long as possible. 

 

Anyway, I think it's fair to say that, regardless of position, most teams can't replace the best player on their team with a similar guy. It's happened from time to time, but it's rare. 

[desertbeagle85]

1 hour ago, Bang said:

Flowers is built to play baker.

 

or Bus driver

 

or janitorial technician.

 

 

So you spend a 3rd round pick on a guy and sign a low-cost veteran.

You don't pay backups starter money. Those days are gone. Nsehke is part of that reality. Blaming the team for that is blaming them for the economic management philosophy of the league, and that doesn't make sense.

 

~Bang

 

Well when Haskins is getting ruined because we don't have a line. I'll blame the organization. Considering the organization has been garbage for almost 30 years now.

 

This economic management bs is exactly that bs. Shouldn't be handing out  a contract to SS like they did either. If you want to talk about economic management.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

3 minutes ago, Bang said:

OK.. I'll play

1st point.

 sorry, when canc er is a possibility, you, me and anuyone else has to take responsibility to find out, not trust unqualified people giving unqualified opinions, regardless of whether it is based in their employer's wishes or not. Sports training staffs are to get a guy ready to play, period. 
If the player
a/ lets the team medical staff to be his only test for cancer, or

B/ distrusts them when they misdiagnose something they are not qualified or equipped to diagnose..

this is on the PLAYER. Personal Responsibility. It comes ahead of any mistrust of the staff.. since it is the player who listened to the team staff as they tried to diagnose a possible tumor. If my roof leaks and i get people who are not roofers to fix it, and it leaks, guess who's fault it is when it continues to leak?

 

 

 

You know what I find wild?...That when S'ua Cravens had a medical issue he was concerned about, he had the wherewithal to immediately get a 2nd opinion from a doctor not associated with the team...but apparently according to some, Trent Williams just didn't feel he was able to do so lol...