TheLongshot Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 Antonio was on Sirius today. Mostly, he talked about Giants stuff, but Schein and Riggins couldn't resist taking shots at the skins. Talked about the contract discussions and not getting resigned. Had nothing but good words to say about Williams, but was pretty diplomatic about the front office. Underneath, it sounded like he was frustrated that the home-grown product wasn't resigned, but guys like Santana Moss could cash in. Talked about Tim Hasslebeck being signed by the Giants. Riggo brought up Bugel's comments about liking Tim and thinking he could start, which Antonio ignored. Schein asks a loaded question about the Redskins front office being in disarray, which Antonio brushed off. Looks like despite his personal feelings about his contract, he isn't going to burn bridges. After the interview, Shein goes on about his own presence, that Snyder is still running the show, despite what everyone in the organization has said, and asks the question of why they can't find the checkbook for "core redskins", but they find it for Moss. (Apparently, Pat Kerwin called it, "One of the worst deals out there"). ________________________ Sorry, but I can't see Shein being much of a "fan" of the Skins. I think we should call him "Sally Jenkins". Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 why not call him lenny p? huh? huh? huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 Originally posted by TheLongshot Talked about the contract discussions and not getting resigned. Had nothing but good words to say about Williams, but was pretty diplomatic about the front office. Underneath, it sounded like he was frustrated that the home-grown product wasn't resigned, but guys like Santana Moss could cash in. Maybe it's because we have a zillion dollars tied into the OLB's and didn't want to give up a ton of change on an undersized MLB coming off one good year... ? He needed to think of that first. Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eparadox Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 I think it's disrespectful to a young talented GIANTS player on the show, and grill him on his former team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 you have to think the Redskins know something about these players. on the surface would I have made these moves if I were the GM? frankly no. I would have resigned Smoot at the $10.8M figure to keep continuity and reward a player that had played hurt for us in 2004. I probably would have passed on Pierce as we already have a lot of money invested in the linebacker position. I probably would have given Coles his release and used the cap savings from the Samuels restructuring to go out and sign a DE or backup OT. Even at backup running back to compete with Betts. But, again. These coaches watched film on Moss and decided he was a playmaker the team needed to acquire and pay accordingly. Can Moss be that? Yes. But he is far from a sure thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forbeskin Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Nothing is a sure thing, but I think Moss will work out great and it looks as if we have already found several replacements for Pierce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PapaDRoc Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Originally posted by Eparadox I think it's disrespectful to a young talented GIANTS player on the show, and grill him on his former team. One of the many disrespectful things that the media does.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 I think Pierce was a gem -- it's a shame the numbers didn't work out (the ridiculous contract we gave Lavar didn't help). He was the only guy we lost that I think we'll have a hard time replacing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjbrown Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 These guys get paid by the station, which pays according to ratings. If you really don't like what they have to say, do not listen. Then ratings will go down and they will change their tune. They like to start controversy, good for ratings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Originally posted by TheLongshot Apparently, Pat Kerwin called it, "One of the worst deals out there". Gee Pat, was it as bad as the deal with Samari Rolle that you REPORTED as all but done with the Redskins? You even included a bogus salary and signing bonus figure in your 'report' as i recall. How anyone can take any of these clowns seriously is beyond me. They pass so MUCH misinformation it's staggering. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted May 10, 2005 Author Share Posted May 10, 2005 Maybe it's because we have a zillion dollars tied into the OLB's and didn't want to give up a ton of change on an undersized MLB coming off one good year... ? He needed to think of that first. That was my main beef with Schein's argument. He's complaining because we didn't sign one guy who had one good year, but complains about Moss, because he only had one good year. Yeah, that makes sense. I'm pretty sure Gibbs knows his personel better than Schein does. These guys get paid by the station, which pays according to ratings. If you really don't like what they have to say, do not listen. Then ratings will go down and they will change their tune. I'm not sure how Sirius can measure ratings. They don't have two way communications. I guess they could poll their users... Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASkinsfan28 Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 I thought the reason we did not sign him is because he wanted more money the marcus washington? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckflhp Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 I thought before Pierce was a class act. Now I'm sure of it. By refusing to take the bait and join the bashing, once again show he's a good guy. And the guys who now are kind of dismissing Antonio's play last year, shame on you. Young man had an opportunity and he made the most of it. I can't blame him a bit. And the problem was the gints were willing to pay him more than we were currently paying Marcus. I also remember Coach Williams saying that Antonio's physical play, while it was outstanding, was outshined by his mental and leadership contributions. Said it was like having an assistant playing on the field. Also said he would look up to call the play and Pierce had already made the call and was getting the guys into position. All that being said, I do believe a healthy Michael Barrow is an upgrade from him. And it sure won't hurt to have Marshall and the rookies spend a year or two learning the nuances. Gotta agree with BANG, compared to these sports(nunyo, kerwin) reporters, my weatherman is dead on, all the time. And thank you, love the latest 'toon Hail :logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Pierce came out of nowhere to start and all Smoot could do was cover. Yes, they're we're redskins, yes they had good character, but they followed the money and can be replaced. Good luck, Godspeed, and we'll see ya when we see ya. Peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0mega Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 I am of the opinion that Antonio Pierce (as much as I like the guy) was a product of Greg Williams system. While I would have prefered to keep him on board, I think we could plug any one of X number of guys in the middle an they'd perform more than adequately. I wish him well, but I also look for his performance to fall off somewhat in NY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Originally posted by 0mega I am of the opinion that Antonio Pierce (as much as I like the guy) was a product of Greg Williams system. While I would have prefered to keep him on board, I think we could plug any one of X number of guys in the middle an they'd perform more than adequately. I wish him well, but I also look for his performance to fall off somewhat in NY. what led you to that conclusion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
36HAMMER Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 the contract he signed with ny is very close if not the same in numers to the one that the skins offered. the only difference was the the money was front loaded with ny contract. a trick i might add we used to pry thomas and coles away from the jets.that's why buges was saying so much for being a lifelong redskin.throw alittle money and they walk away. after peirce and smoot left.we were also very close on the smoot thing too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0mega Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Originally posted by Snyder Dan what led you to that conclusion? How many undrafted free agents came in a contributed last season? A lot of guys overachieved -- a sign that it had plenty to do with the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yomar Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 We had a bunch of unheralded guys step up as role players last year: Boschetti D. Evans R. Warner Marshall Clemons Clark Wilds But we only had one guy step up and play at a high level as a full time starter. Pierce had a Pro Bowl worthy season, I don't care how great a system is, when production is that type of level the player's abilities are a significant reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Originally posted by bulldog you have to think the Redskins know something about these players. on the surface would I have made these moves if I were the GM? frankly no. I would have resigned Smoot at the $10.8M figure to keep continuity and reward a player that had played hurt for us in 2004. Exactly. The Redskins weren't going to lose Smoot over less than a million dollar difference in offers unless they believed they could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drex Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 Originally posted by 0mega How many undrafted free agents came in a contributed last season? A lot of guys overachieved -- a sign that it had plenty to do with the system. My only problem with this logic is Pierce's contribution during his rookie season under Marty. With Marty's dismissal and Spurrier's hiring, Pierce was one of the guys who got lost in the shuffle as one of the old regime's guys. If Marty has stayed, Pierce's breakout season may have come before last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted May 10, 2005 Author Share Posted May 10, 2005 Originally posted by 0mega How many undrafted free agents came in a contributed last season? A lot of guys overachieved -- a sign that it had plenty to do with the system. As others have said, Antonio started under Marty, so he's a bit more than most RFA. That being said, I think he will be a fine player for the Giants, but in a couple years, probably will get rid of him when they realise he's overpriced. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Master Jay Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 I could have sworn I heard Coach Gibbs say he didn't want to pay Pierce more then Washington who was our only Pro Bowler last year. That's why Pierce didn't get paid and Moss did. Moss is a WR & kick returner. Pierce had one good year and if he wanted to stay so bad he could have taken a page from a SB winning QB. Pierce could have taken a little less to stay just as Smoot could this works 2 ways. The players have to want to stay they cant get the max then cry foul when they go to another team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nugget1616 Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 People have been saying that we've been headed towards "cap hell" for the last several years (idiots are still saying it . . . look at our books after this year). We avoided it, but were maybe in pergatory in that things were and are very tight salary cap wise this offseason. It made it so we had to set a limit with Smoot, and I was shocked that Snyder had the stones to resist caving in. Smoot was something the front office saw coming for at least the last two years - they're always looking ahead. If they could have seen AP coming, then maybe Miss Cleo is for real. Any front office that's overextended themselves in the recent past (and therefore is working on a slim margin) cannot even begin to think about taking care of an undrafted, career backup, undersized OLB who steps into the middle and damn near goes to the Pro Bowl when the team's newly signed, relatively pricey MLB gets hurt. This kind of thing happening is very rare - AP's story since this time last year is truly remarkable - and when it happens, you are not capable of being prepared for it, and unless he's an boy scout (or an idiot) and wants to resign for less than market value, HE WALKS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted May 10, 2005 Author Share Posted May 10, 2005 Originally posted by Nugget1616 If they could have seen AP coming, then maybe Miss Cleo is for real. Any front office that's overextended themselves in the recent past (and therefore is working on a slim margin) cannot even begin to think about taking care of an undrafted, career backup, undersized OLB who steps into the middle and damn near goes to the Pro Bowl when the team's newly signed, relatively pricey MLB gets hurt. This kind of thing happening is very rare - AP's story since this time last year is truly remarkable - and when it happens, you are not capable of being prepared for it, and unless he's an boy scout (or an idiot) and wants to resign for less than market value, HE WALKS. Which is what I've been saying for a while. Basically, this is Trent Green all over again. A guy who wasn't in the long-term picture at his position, goes out an blows it up. On one hand, it is nice to see, but on the other hand, it is very tough to keep such a guy, unless you have the room. It is why I'm not surprised that we didn't keep him. Antonio was going to get paid, and I don't blame him for going with the money. It is probably the only payday he's going to see. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.