TXREDSKINS44 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 It's tempting but I would not do it!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrisbob74 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Trading Arrington adds $12M to the cap, when the media realise this perhaps we'll stop geting these stupid rumours generated. Because Arrington was injured for most of this past season, every media writer with a keyboard is typing a trade rumour invloving him, yet not once considering the cap implications! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matador36 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 give them brunnel not LA :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedDawg36 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Yeah, give 'em Brunell and move Culpepper to FB! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bat~man Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 sounds so tempting , but if gibbs/snyder want him then i want him and if snyder wants him im sure they will do what it takes it get him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLusby Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 I say give them Smoot, our #1, and our #5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chopper Dave Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Originally posted by Warhead36 Randy Moss gives his football to a guy in a wheelchair after he scores a TD. I think thats about all the character we'll need. Yeah the "I play when I want to play" thing was lame but if you do remember Moss went on an interview and explained that and it was, once again, the media twisting his words around. I'd take Moss if the cap hit wasn't substantial for Smoot plus our 1st round pick. We're losing Smoot anyway and I doubt our 1st pick will be anywhere near as good as Moss is. You make a great point. I remember either reading an article or seeing a segment on ESPN where they showed how charitable Moss is. He's supposedly a really good guy when it comes to stuff like that. Basically, he's ****y, and he's kinda crazy. So was Riggins. So was Manley. Like those two, and arguably even moreso, Moss has all-world talent. We can't pass him up if the price is relatively reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBeast36 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 why do we want moss? yea he is the disputed best WR in the game but do we not know who this is???? hes RANDY "I'm a dick" MOSS!!!! his contract would be mindboggling and why would we trade one of our "core" skins????? imagine our defense WITH Arrington! amazing! lets worry about reciever in the draft and leave moss and his antics for someone else to deal with! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matador36 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Moss won't have to worry about the only safety in the NFL that can cover him one on one.... (Mr. Taylor ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 I wouldn't want it to involve losing Lavar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeHateMe Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 I wouldnt give up LaVar, let alone LaVar and a high pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Town Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Snyder would do it but Gibbs would not. Enough said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mookie0720 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Originally posted by TLusby I say give them Smoot, our #1, and our #5. We can't give them Smoot without first signing him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
method man Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Originally posted by jakehunter Moss needs someone to throw the ball to him. Doesn't he? Ramsey is solid, but to use Moss in his full capacity you need a better QB. even jeff george and randall cunningham had career years with him. ramsey is 5x either of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotInOurHouse Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 no one has talked about if we get moss how much better our defense would be in practice against him...think of Sean T going against him everday and how much better he'll be...theyre wouldnt be no more patrick crayton incidents thats for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Originally posted by Chopper Dave You make a great point. I remember either reading an article or seeing a segment on ESPN where they showed how charitable Moss is. He's supposedly a really good guy when it comes to stuff like that. Basically, he's ****y, and he's kinda crazy. So was Riggins. So was Manley. Like those two, and arguably even moreso, Moss has all-world talent. We can't pass him up if the price is relatively reasonable. Woody Paige on ATH the other day mentioned all the charity work & money Moss gives quietly, that most people don't know about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 My first reaction is "NO! We don't need a guy that is not team oriented on this team." But I would like to see Moss ONLY if one thing could be determined: that Gibbs feels that he can transform Moss from a baby to a productive, mature adult. Everything Moss does isn't stupid, just a lot of it, and he chooses to do the stupid stuff at the wrong time. It's like he has a brain fart. But if Gibbs thinks he can make him into a man--and if anyone could it would be Gibbs--then he'd make a great Redskin. Outside of the cap hit, who remembers the BURNING FLAMES OF FIRE that I absored a month or two for even SUGGESTING that we trade Lavar? Well, maybe it's not too far fetched after all. (I like Laver, so don't take me wrong. But it's interesting that this guy saw what I saw: our D was real good w/out him.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle091 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 come on, you guys do not want that cancer on your team. The legacy of the vikings.....wtf is that. now the skins legacy, different story. you guys pride your self on it. its similar to the oriole way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walking Deadman Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 PLEASE,PLEASE Dan Snyder, DO NOT TRADE ARRINGTON FOR MOSS!!!!!!!!! LA should be here for a long time........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfbovey Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Everyone repeat after me... "If there is a salary cap hell, trading Lavar would put us there" That's pretty much where the unrealistic Randy Moss fantasies end, and reality begins. There is no way we can trade Lavar without mass trimming of the entire roster and a complete rebuild of the entire team. Who ever even brought up the notion of a trade involving Lavar, needs to do some serious fact checking before they print this garbage... seriously, any sports writer who utters this nonsense is a complete hack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Originally posted by bulldog the Vikings would be looking for the Redskins #9 pick. I don't see any way this deal comes off with Washington keeping its first pick. Arrington is untradeable and while we could deal a defensive player such as Sean Taylor that has a very good upside and fits the Vikings' needs, I don't see that happening. Thats exactly it. This has nothing to do with Arrington. What would have to happen is for Smoot to leave and/or tag and traded and Samuels contract redone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyandSam Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 This is truly the silliest rumor I've heard in years. Coach Joe would NEVER want a Moss on his team. He has said it over and over again. "Character" is the first thing he looks for in a "Redskin"; talent is not the only criteria. Moss has no character therefore he will never be a Redskin as long as Joe is coaching. Now if Spurrier, were still here, I could see Danny pulling the trigger but not trading Arrington. As others have pointed out, the salary cap hit is far too great. Silly, stupid rumor....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 http://redskins.scout.com/3/cutsavings.html Trading LaVar this year is impossible. Hasn't anyone considered that the Skins would incur a $17+ million dead money cap hit on top of the $7 million we already have on the books for 2005? This really would be cap hell. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlinginSammy HOF '63 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 I officially announce it here. If Arrington is traded my autographed Arrington authentic jersey is up for sale or auction. I spent too damn much money for that thing and then the sig later!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanders 83 Posted January 21, 2005 Share Posted January 21, 2005 Inmate according to your link, if we cut Barrow, Friedman, Raymer, Haley, Parker, trade Gardner, and restructure Samuels, we would have an extra 10.4 in cap room. So a total of 14, could be worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.