southernskinfan Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 If we take Coles For Santana Moss strait up (or anything less than Moss and a number one pick) even considering the cap money hits being on Jets side, don't we loose because... 1. We could have drafted S. Moss to begin with but took Gardner instead. 2. We loose a #1 pick from the year we got Coles. 3. We loose the patience we took in Coles playing with a bad toe and probubly will be better next year = greater production. 4. We loose the time investment Coles and Ramsey spent getting comfortable with each other. 5. We lose a number one reciever for a number #2 reciever with very few options for a #1 for us this year (Rookies don't make good # 1's right away). I say we force Coles to play or sit. We have enough character in our locker room to handle it. One guy does not make a team. Any thoughts :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Gibbs has built and staked a lot on his personal credibility and integrity. 22 guys played their a$$es off for him last year, in spite of the record. The reason? Gibbs. To get into a petty power trip / ego war with Coles will do nothing except deconstruct that which Gibbs has worked so hard to build. Coles wants out? Let him go. Anyone else want out? You know where the door is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernskinfan Posted March 5, 2005 Author Share Posted March 5, 2005 But does keeping him and Force him to play for his pay or letting him sit and rot send a message as well ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVAbrendan Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Originally posted by zoony Coles wants out? Let him go. Anyone else want out? You know where the door is. :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry wilburn Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 As I said in another thread, I'd rather have Santana Moss on a contract w/ 6-7 million in guaranteed money than Coles, his absurd contract, bad toe, and negative attitude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Originally posted by barry wilburn As I said in another thread, I'd rather have Santana Moss on a contract w/ 6-7 million in guaranteed money than Coles, his absurd contract, bad toe, and negative attitude. what he said:yes: He doesn't deserve to be here. Keeping him here distrupts the mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spanishomelette Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 I agree with keeping him. I think all the bad would blow over...even for Coles. Having written that I'd say at this point he's returning to NY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSilverMaC Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 keep him this year, trade him for a 1st rounder next year, try to draft KIWI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thinker Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Originally posted by southernskinfan If we take Coles For Santana Moss strait up (or anything less than Moss and a number one pick) even considering the cap money hits being on Jets side, don't we loose because... 1. We could have drafted S. Moss to begin with but took Gardner instead. 2. We loose a #1 pick from the year we got Coles. 3. We loose the patience we took in Coles playing with a bad toe and probubly will be better next year = greater production. 4. We loose the time investment Coles and Ramsey spent getting comfortable with each other. 5. We lose a number one reciever for a number #2 reciever with very few options for a #1 for us this year (Rookies don't make good # 1's right away). I say we force Coles to play or sit. We have enough character in our locker room to handle it. One guy does not make a team. Any thoughts :logo: This argument uses faulty logic. This is exactly the same as investing in a stock. It looked great when you bought it, you could have bought something else, it went way down, now you don't want to sell it because you'll "lose" your money. Sorry we already lost most of the things you list above. You have to look at it like a stock: forget what you paid for it; what is it worth TODAY? If you had that money in cash would you buy the same stock back or would you buy something else? At this point our options our limited because realistically coles has a somewhat limited value. He can probably sc*ew any deal we try to make if he doesn't want to go there. The Jets are probably one of the few teams that want him that badly and one of the few teams he would really like to go to if he didn't have much choice. Clearly it's not a trade for comparable value but the Skins and Jets are not in the same situation - the Jets really don't have to do this trade as much as we do. So they don't have to pay as much. I love the idea of shoving coles' contract in his face and telling him to shut up and play, but would that help the REDSKINS in the long or short term? I honestly don't think so. I think we have to get the guy out of here and we have to take what we can get if we can work it out. We just don't need that type of dissention and distraction next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paydirt Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 I keep thinking we need a big #1 receiver, and then I consider the Pats who have a bunch of small receivers and look at their success. Then, I think about the Eagles and how TO helped them a great deal last year. Then, I think, this is all too much to think about. How about I just let Joe Gibbs lay awake at night on his office couch and figure these things out. Then I think, if the Skins get good enough, Joe Gibbs can make a lot of recievers look really good. And, though I'm not yet sold on Ramsey being the answer, I think Joe could make him look really good too. He's got the tools, and so do their receivers. It's gonna be fun watching a master builder construct a mansion out of the tools he's given. I'm gettin ready for some football!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Originally posted by southernskinfan If we take Coles For Santana Moss strait up (or anything less than Moss and a number one pick) even considering the cap money hits being on Jets side, don't we loose because... 1. We could have drafted S. Moss to begin with but took Gardner instead. 2. We loose a #1 pick from the year we got Coles. 3. We loose the patience we took in Coles playing with a bad toe and probubly will be better next year = greater production. 4. We loose the time investment Coles and Ramsey spent getting comfortable with each other. 5. We lose a number one reciever for a number #2 reciever with very few options for a #1 for us this year (Rookies don't make good # 1's right away). I say we force Coles to play or sit. We have enough character in our locker room to handle it. One guy does not make a team. Any thoughts :logo: I made the below post on another thread, but I think it is also applicable to your thread. So I'm posting it again. Many of your points above are now hindsight and there is no point dwelling on missed opportunities after the fact. I'm afraid it doesn't work that way in the NFL. Once a player gets a reputation of being disgruntled, teams don't retain their disgruntled players just so they can spite the player and other teams. They just about always have to get rid of them below value at discounted prices at a fire sale. Numerous examples around to see. All pro David Boston dumped by San Diego last year to Miami for a song. Minnesota's trading of Randy Moss in which they didn't get value for the top receiver in football. A #1 pick, a #7 pick and Napoleon Harris. :puke: The Patriots cutting all-pro, big mouth, Ty Law, and getting NOTHING in return. All pro Terrell Owens to Philadelphia for only a 3rd round pick and an injured player who eventually got cut. We'll be doing good if we get a young, quality receiver-return man in Moss who has even more potential, for a disgruntled, possibly "damaged goods" Coles, who may not return to his previous form. The Redskins will never in a million years, get two 1st round draft picks for Coles or a 1st round pick and a player or even a 1st round pick. Yeah there are a few teams out there willing to trade for Coles -- but they won't give you anything in return except a 6th or 7th round pick. The Jets are the only team offering anything of quality in Moss. We have to move on. Personally I'll be glad if we get Moss, considering the examples I gave you above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC_Native,NC_Fan Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Originally posted by southernskinfan If we take Coles For Santana Moss strait up (or anything less than Moss and a number one pick) even considering the cap money hits being on Jets side, don't we loose because... 1. We could have drafted S. Moss to begin with but took Gardner instead. 2. We loose a #1 pick from the year we got Coles. 3. We loose the patience we took in Coles playing with a bad toe and probubly will be better next year = greater production. 4. We loose the time investment Coles and Ramsey spent getting comfortable with each other. 5. We lose a number one reciever for a number #2 reciever with very few options for a #1 for us this year (Rookies don't make good # 1's right away). I say we force Coles to play or sit. We have enough character in our locker room to handle it. One guy does not make a team. Any thoughts :logo: OK, last time people. "loose" means the opposite of tight. "lose" means the opposite of win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#1skinsfanever Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Originally posted by MrSilverMaC keep him this year, trade him for a 1st rounder next year, try to draft KIWI Who is KIWI:rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Vet Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Originally posted by DC_Native,NC_Fan OK, last time people. "loose" means the opposite of tight. "lose" means the opposite of win. You opened the door - while we are at it..... resigns means quit, give up or relinquish a position re-signs means to sign again You guys are killing me w/ the smoot resigns.....I keep reading it as he quits. ....and on this topic - I think my stance is clear - trade him, cut him....get what we can - just surgically remove him from this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.