What the Devil is Lavar thinking?

[AzSkinsFan63]

Ok I am totally baffled by this now becasue the more I think about it the more it don't make sense..

Lavar is saying that the skins said ok here's another 6.5 mil becasue we are totally sorry about the 666 fiasco????

Give me a break at this juncture I could see another 100,000 or at most 1 more million..but another 6.5 milllion dollars????

Snyder should have said ok we'll give $666,000 more to change the deal if you want..

Since you are the Debil!!!!

[LarryBrownsFan]

The number of sixes in the contract issue is superstition, not religeon. It's not like they were going to tatoo the numbers on his forehead.

What on earth was he paying his agent for? Was his agent too busy to sit down and read the contract? For as much money as the agents get, considering how little value they add to football, you'd think they could at least sit down and read the contract!!!

:2cents:

[jljorge]

I can respect what you just said DisplacedRedskinFan, and I agree with what you said. However, I don't see LaVar's contract dispute as a disruption to the team. If he was saying that he would hold out of training camp or that he would be demanding a trade if this is not righted, then yes, we should entertain the thought of moving him somewhere else. He is not saying that in the least, and he doesn't want this dispute to disrupt the team or the fans in any way. That is my point about LaVar. People can look at him (formerly) refusing to be in video games or have his jersey "legally" for sale, and say that he is selfish or have negative opinions of him, that is fine. But those issues have nothing to do with his performance on the field, and possibly even more importantly, the impact that he has inside the locker room. So maybe I was wrong for saying that you all could go post somewhere else if you're going to knock LaVar as a player, but you all really do need to pay closer attention to what exactly the Redskins would be giving up.

[Tom [Giants fan]]

You can have the Giants 2005 first round and third round draft picks plust this years fifth rounder for Arrington. Deal?

[qb18_200400]

Originally posted by TheDarb

Arrington's new number... [/quote

Good one guy:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: yeah, not really. your a dumb ass.

[TheDarb]

Originally posted by qb18_200400

Originally posted by TheDarb

Arrington's new number... [/quote

Good one guy:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: yeah, not really. your a dumb ass.

That would be "YOU'RE a dumb ass." I guess that makes two of us.

[Tarhog]

Originally posted by jljorge

I can respect what you just said DisplacedRedskinFan, and I agree with what you said. However, I don't see LaVar's contract dispute as a disruption to the team. If he was saying that he would hold out of training camp or that he would be demanding a trade if this is not righted, then yes, we should entertain the thought of moving him somewhere else. He is not saying that in the least, and he doesn't want this dispute to disrupt the team or the fans in any way. That is my point about LaVar. People can look at him (formerly) refusing to be in video games or have his jersey "legally" for sale, and say that he is selfish or have negative opinions of him, that is fine. But those issues have nothing to do with his performance on the field, and possibly even more importantly, the impact that he has inside the locker room. So maybe I was wrong for saying that you all could go post somewhere else if you're going to knock LaVar as a player, but you all really do need to pay closer attention to what exactly the Redskins would be giving up.

I've defended Lavar to this point. But he ought to take a good hard look at where Champ Bailey is right now. Bailey isn't just gone because he had an off year, or because he wanted too much money. It was his total lack of gratitude and lack of respect for the Redskins organization that helped him on his way. Arrington is a grown man. If he's not bright enough to realize that a contract needs to be examined under a microscope before its signed, and can't find a professional agent who at least understands that, he's beyond my help. Surely you can see that?

Thats not the front office 'ripping him off'. Thats just bush league immaturity and slackness in his own personal life. If I go to a car dealership and pay 25% markup, then let the dealer talk me into a lease deal where I end up paying for the vehicle 3 times before its mine, its not the nasty horrible dealerships fault. Its mine.

Lavar needs to shut his trap. He's filed his grievance. He'll get his day in court. And from everything I've seen, he doesn't have a leg to stand on nor a chance in hell of prevailing. On top of it all, he's starting to look pretty Champ Baileyish here to me airing his dirty laundry in public and making his employers look dishonest.

Lavar's a great player. I want him to be a longterm Redskin. But he's not the messiah any more than Champ Bailey was. He's yet to live up to his hype. I hope he sticks around long enough to live up to it. But this little bull$hit tantrum isn't going to serve him well. Get over it Lavar. If anyone screwed you over, it was your own loose handling of your 'business affairs'. I suggest in the future you actually READ the contract before you sign it.

[tchrpe1]

I agree with you totally Tarhog. Lavar should not be blaming the skins for this mess it fall squarely on the shoudlers of his agents and on his as well. Nor should be be running his mouth to the press. This should be handled in house. However if he continues to air the laundary to the press I can see Snyder making things difficult for Lavar.

[Samuels]

Can anyone please answer my question, why would LaVar sign a contract for 8 years that is a 800k raise from what he was already owed according to what i've read?

Is this true if so you no he was done wrong I can see him resigning for an extra 6.5 million but not 800k more then what was already owed thats absurd,we all know this is probably his last big payday.

Regardless they should have read OVER everything but its apparent thier was a deadline for the skins to get it turned in and LA or the agent did'nt. If Danny really done that knowingly he's a piece of sh*t straight up.

[Flowtrain]

Originally posted by Tarhog

If I go to a car dealership and pay 25% markup, then let the dealer talk me into a lease deal where I end up paying for the vehicle 3 times before its mine, its not the nasty horrible dealerships fault. Its mine.

Lavar needs to shut his trap. He's filed his grievance. He'll get his day in court. And from everything I've seen, he doesn't have a leg to stand on nor a chance in hell of prevailing. On top of it all, he's starting to look pretty Champ Baileyish here to me airing his dirty laundry in public and making his employers look dishonest.

Car dealerships and markups? I see a difference between a mark off the street who just purchased a 2004 Honda Civic and a player that was just made the centerpiece of his team for years to come. In the latter, there should be a degree of trust and mutual respect that a random purchaser of a shiny new Japanese automobile does not enjoy. Now, if you had also mentioned in your example that the duped purchaser of the Honda is also a long-time employee of the dealership, it would be more on point. On top of that, add the fact that he's also their highest seller and has substantial relationships with numerous customers who buy in bulk. Now we're talking. Then it becomes a bit more apparent that the black and white lines that seem pretty clear are shaded somewhat the issue of whether there's a moral obligation to correct another's honest mistake. Then we get a taste of the notion that it's in your own best interest to ensure the satisfaction of those upon whom your own success relies.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not suggesting that the Redskins did anything untoward here. And you're absolutely correct that in a court of law, Arrington doesn't have a leg to stand on. It's nearly impossible to prove that what you signed isn't what you meant, absent strong evidence of fraud. But we also know that Lavar's objective is to make himself whole - that's understandable. And given the lack of merit of his case (and virtual admission of such) his only chance to recover what he felt he lost is to try his case in the court of public opinion. So by you asking him to "shut his trap," you essentially ask him to forget about ever realizing the bargain to which he felt he initially agreed.

Whereas he legal case is attrocious, the appeal he outlined above is significantly stronger. Because here, he's already admitted that he made an honest (and terrible) mistake. Such mistakes are fatal in an attempt to nullify the binding nature of a contract, even ones that are hastily inked without incorporating all terms as understood by one party. However, the court of public opinion cares much less about such issues, relying much more on who meant well and who was harmed.

By pleading to fans, teammates, prospective FAs, the NFL, the NFLPA and anyone else within earshot, he may succeed in garnering enough attention and applying enough pressure to accomplish what his grievance will not. Even more, just as the jury usually wants to hear the defendant get on the witness stand and publicly declare his innonence, Lavar's public recount above probably also enhances his credibility. Lavar and the Postons are stupid enough to sign a contract without thoroughly reading it, but they're smart enough to know that speaking out is their only chance for redress.

On the flip side, the Skins shouldn't be held to terms to which they didn't agree either. But if it's true that Lavar's restructure didn't offer him much in the way of additional compensation, then this argument becomes less sympathetic. In the end, a settlement is probably the best way to go here. Even if the Skins are not legally obligated to do so, it would represent a show of goodwill that would offset the bad taste in Lavars mouth, restore doubts about fair dealing, and go a long way toward ensuring that this affair does not later fester and become a significant disruption.

[DeaconBlue]

Now come on guys. Even all of us regular folks know you should NEVER sign ANYTHING without reading it first. I mean isn't it Lavar's responsibility to make sure the contract contains what he believes should be in it BEFORE he signs it and isnt he paying big money to poston to catch anything he might miss? I just don't understand why Lavar should be entitled to a "do over" when the rest of us clearly wouldn't be in any comparable situation.

Secondly, Dan has shown himself in word and deed to be an owner that if nothing else is willing to pay whatever it takes to have a team that could win a superbowl. It would seem vastly out of character for him to have intentionally short-changed any of his players let alone a marque player like Lavar. It simply just does not jive.

Now if the contract as it stands really doesnt stand up to what was actually discussed then I would like the front office to pay him the difference with the understandind that they are doing HIM a favor and that he should pay much closer attention next time.

Lastly I cannot even begin to fathom why Lavar does't even seem to hold Poston even just a little bit responsible for missing this. I mean what does he think he is paying this guy for?

P.S. He can be mad about it all he wants. It's still his fault for not catching it or having it caught.

[TK]

I posted this earlier in the week, but I guess Art was to busy debating with TunaIsGood to notice it. After going through eight pages of this thread, I thought it might be worth a re-post.

Originally in this weeks WT

Redskins will let case go to arbitrator

By Jody Foldesy

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

"You can't simply testify, 'We previously agreed,' " Maggs said. "What you have to say is, 'When I signed, you told me, with the intent to deceive me, that the clause was in the contract. And I relied on what you said.' "

Originally posted by TK-IV II I

Did this conversation happen at Redskins Park, which is located in Asburn,VA. ? The reason I'm asking is because wouldn't that be an oral agreement? From what I understand, oral agreements are non-binding in the state of VA.

Art, isn't your wife an attorney? If so, what's her take on this?

Am I off base here on this, or may there be something to it?

Would an arbitrator be able to over rule that state law if I'm correct on oral agreements being non binding in VA?

Art,

Your thoughts?

[Nerm]

As a Cowboy fan I can say that I really would like to see Lavar playing for the Skins for a long time. The missed tackles, blown assignments, and 15 yard penalties are a good thing for the rest of the teams in the East.

Having said that, I think Lavar needs to come up with the objectionable 666 contract the Skins offered him. If Lavar can show that the team offered him more, then I think he has a case. No arbitrator is going to believe that the Skins offered him $6.5 mill more than what he signed for and that Lavar and his agent said "No we don't want that. We need $6.5 mill less or we we will refuse." If Lavar has proof of the higher offer I think he will win. We all know one of the knocks on him out of school was that he wasn't very bright. If the Skins took advantage of that and got him to sign something his agent didn't read, it will look bad for the organization. He does have to prove that the Skins offered more, and even then that may not be enough.

In the end, I think the Skins will win and Lavar will think he was cheated. If Lavar signed the contract he has to abide by it. He doesn't have to show up for "voluntary" practices or play 100% but he does have to show up.

[OrangeSkin]

I'm still stuck on the bizarre fact that LaVar refused to sign the contract because it contained the numbers "666". That makes him sound like a complete nut.

I thought he was just a down to earth cool cat, but now he's turning into Jerry freakin' Falwell? What is up with that?

Not even an uber-religious nutjob street preacher would refuse to sign a multi-millon dollar contract because of that.

Sounds like OCD to me. Crazy superstitions like that don't just come out of the blue. That is honestly the most bizarre quote I've ever heard coming out of Redskins Park.

[SlobberKnockinFootball]

If I was Dan Snyder I'd do this. You get rid of your agent and we can work something out. But I'm not working with this clown who is trying to publically smear this franchise. I'm sure at this point in the ballgame 6.5 million dollars is nothing to Snyder.

[Tarhog]

Originally posted by Flowtrain

Car dealerships and markups? I see a difference between a mark off the street who just purchased a 2004 Honda Civic and a player that was just made the centerpiece of his team for years to come. In the latter, there should be a degree of trust and mutual respect that a random purchaser of a shiny new Japanese automobile does not enjoy. Now, if you had also mentioned in your example that the duped purchaser of the Honda is also a long-time employee of the dealership, it would be more on point. On top of that, add the fact that he's also their highest seller and has substantial relationships with numerous customers who buy in bulk. Now we're talking. Then it becomes a bit more apparent that the black and white lines that seem pretty clear are shaded somewhat the issue of whether there's a moral obligation to correct another's honest mistake. Then we get a taste of the notion that it's in your own best interest to ensure the satisfaction of those upon whom your own success relies.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not suggesting that the Redskins did anything untoward here. And you're absolutely correct that in a court of law, Arrington doesn't have a leg to stand on. It's nearly impossible to prove that what you signed isn't what you meant, absent strong evidence of fraud. But we also know that Lavar's objective is to make himself whole - that's understandable. And given the lack of merit of his case (and virtual admission of such) his only chance to recover what he felt he lost is to try his case in the court of public opinion. So by you asking him to "shut his trap," you essentially ask him to forget about ever realizing the bargain to which he felt he initially agreed.

Whereas he legal case is attrocious, the appeal he outlined above is significantly stronger. Because here, he's already admitted that he made an honest (and terrible) mistake. Such mistakes are fatal in an attempt to nullify the binding nature of a contract, even ones that are hastily inked without incorporating all terms as understood by one party. However, the court of public opinion cares much less about such issues, relying much more on who meant well and who was harmed.

By pleading to fans, teammates, prospective FAs, the NFL, the NFLPA and anyone else within earshot, he may succeed in garnering enough attention and applying enough pressure to accomplish what his grievance will not. Even more, just as the jury usually wants to hear the defendant get on the witness stand and publicly declare his innonence, Lavar's public recount above probably also enhances his credibility. Lavar and the Postons are stupid enough to sign a contract without thoroughly reading it, but they're smart enough to know that speaking out is their only chance for redress.

On the flip side, the Skins shouldn't be held to terms to which they didn't agree either. But if it's true that Lavar's restructure didn't offer him much in the way of additional compensation, then this argument becomes less sympathetic. In the end, a settlement is probably the best way to go here. Even if the Skins are not legally obligated to do so, it would represent a show of goodwill that would offset the bad taste in Lavars mouth, restore doubts about fair dealing, and go a long way toward ensuring that this affair does not later fester and become a significant disruption.

No doubt I could have come up with a better analogy. But I disagree with your primary point, that Lavar's best chance to 'win' here is taking it to the public. Dan Snyder's not going to respond well to that, nor do I think any of us would. Because Lavar, instead of taking full responsibility (he pays lip service to that but nothing more) blames it on deviousness on the part of the Redskins front office. Essentially, he's calling them out as liars and cheats. Do you honestly think thats going to get him what he wants Flow? He should be campaigning with his employers, passionately if he wants. They DO want him happy. I think they've done an awful lot regarding Lavar in the past to demonstrate that.

I love Arrington. The 'shut his trap' remark is over the top. My bad. But I get SO sick of athletes, when its in their interest, saying 'its a business' but then when THEY screw it up its all of a sudden about their 'feelings', 'emotional needs' and feeling 'valued'.

I hate to say it, because he's probably my favorite player of the past 10 years, but Arrington is apparently as sloppy and undisciplined with his personal finances as he sometimes is on the field. I'm not damning him for that....I'm just saying theres no way you can possess those weaknesses, but attribute this kind of screw-up to the evilness of the Redskins organization.l

[Flowtrain]

That's fine Tarhog - we can disagree here. While it's certainly true that the implication that he was deceived by the FO won't help put him in their good graces, I'm not sure I see the risk inherent in his tactic. First, Lavar already implies unscrupulous dealing by the Skins by simply filing this grievance ripe with the damning accusations set forth therein. Second, the outcome of the grievance will not rely on whether or not the Skins feel insulted by Lavar's accusations - it will instead be dictated by the legal interpretation of an arbitrator. Third, the Skins have already vehemently denied wrongdoing, and once the arbitrator vindicates them by ruling in their favor, their natural inclination would be to sweep this ugliness under the rug and get on with the season. Lavar's silence only aids them in this endevour and could also be intrepreted as an admission on his part that even he feels that his carelessness is more important here than his initial understanding of the bargain.

We've already covered the benefits of Lavar speaking out in terms of garnering public sypathy and pressure and making it abundantly clear how much he's upset by these events and how he feels they reflect upon his perceived value to the team. On the flip side, the stance that you advocate seems to rely on Lavar coming to Snyder privately after losing his grievance and saying, "Dan - even I dragged the team's name through the mud by simply filing my case, and even though an arbitrator ruled squarely against me, do me a favor and hook a brother up with $6.5 since I never actually spoke out to the media." I'm just not seeing it.

[AzSkinsFan63]

Originally posted by Nerm

As a Cowboy fan I can say that I really would like to see Lavar playing for the Skins for a long time. The missed tackles, blown assignments, and 15 yard penalties are a good thing for the rest of the teams in the East.

Aikman would tell you otherwise.......

[Tarhog]

Originally posted by Flowtrain

That's fine Tarhog - we can disagree here. While it's certainly true that the implication that he was deceived by the FO won't help put him in their good graces, I'm not sure I see the risk inherent in his tactic. First, Lavar already implies unscrupulous dealing by the Skins by simply filing this grievance ripe with the damning accusations set forth therein. Second, the outcome of the grievance will not rely on whether or not the Skins feel insulted by Lavar's accusations - it will instead be dictated by the legal interpretation of an arbitrator. Third, the Skins have already vehemently denied wrongdoing, and once the arbitrator vindicates them by ruling in their favor, their natural inclination would be to sweep this ugliness under the rug and get on with the season. Lavar's silence only aids them in this endevour and could also be intrepreted as an admission on his part that even he feels that his carelessness is more important here than his initial understanding of the bargain.

We've already covered the benefits of Lavar speaking out in terms of garnering public sypathy and pressure and making it abundantly clear how much he's upset by these events and how he feels they reflect upon his perceived value to the team. On the flip side, the stance that you advocate seems to rely on Lavar coming to Snyder privately after losing his grievance and saying, "Dan - even I dragged the team's name through the mud by simply filing my case, and even though an arbitrator ruled squarely against me, do me a favor and hook a brother up with $6.5 since I never actually spoke out to the media." I'm just not seeing it.

True enough, but I'd have advocated he exhaust those conversations BEFORE goind the grievance/legal route. A 'meet me halfway' request....he may not have prevailed, and he still could've resorted to the formal grievance, but I don't see Snyder being tight with a nickel...he has a history of incredible generosity. Truth is ultimately that the ONLY chance Arrington has of getting a bump up is Snyder's generosity since the contract is apparently clear-cut and signed. I just don't see the logic of spitting in Snyder's face publicly. Maybe Lavar felt he DID exhaust these conversations, we're all speculating here, but I tend to believe athletes today are pretty quick to go running to the media to try their case. Its an ugly trend.

[ArmchairRedskin]

Originally posted by AzSkinsFan63

Aikman would tell you otherwise.......

[HailSkinz1]

LaVar didn't want his contract to have 666 in it. So, the Skins subtracted the $6.5 million signing bonus to meet his demands. LaVar and his moron agents are responsible for this.

What he should have done is asked for $6.49 million, but it sounds like they left it up to the Skins to decide the amount.

Fools and their money are soon parted.

H

[Highway66]

SNYDER took advantage of Lavars' pi$$ poor Agent.

[ummagumma]

Samuels - I'm not sure of the numbers you're referring to, but Lavar already has pocketed $20 Mill for signing the contract. He never has to play again and he gets to keep that money. Under the old contract he would have made roughly $20, but it wasn't guarenteed (thus suspensions or acts of God could cut into that, not to mention him potentially being cut before the third year, and, oh yeah, the present value of $20Mill vs getting it over the next 3 years). Under this new contract he also gets $6.5Mill in 2006 as a roster bonus...up front...before the season starts. Yes, you read that right. As I understand it he's already getting a $6.5 Mill bonus for 2006...thus it seems odd that he'd be getting another exact $6.5 bonus. I hope that helps

[Flowtrain]

Originally posted by Tarhog

True enough, but I'd have advocated he exhaust those conversations BEFORE goind the grievance/legal route.

I hear you. In that context, it's noteworthy that the CBA requires that if you have a grievance, you file it within 45 days of discovering your beef. As was pointed out elsewhere, it seems that as is, he came pretty close to having his claim time barred.

[AJWatson3]

this makes me sick to my stomach. if the FO did pull a fast one on him, on a "good-faith" agreement that is real shameful. he is my favorite 'Skin, and i loved the fact that he WANTED to be a Redskin, because he loves the team... now i am worried about him.