ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'

still a load of crap. Did he really need Williams and Gibbs to sit down and hold his hand. They're the Redskins not the Archulettas...he's not special, you play like crap, you sit on the bench...I think it was pretty clear to everyone why he wasn't playing and when is Gibbs ever going to say "he sucks...he isn't playing well, blah blah blah." He's not going to do that ever, he tries to pump people up, so Arch needs to shut up...pack up his depends, and get out of town

How bitter can you be when you are getting paid about 10 million dollars for one season of work? I don't understand what his grounds for complaint are. Obviously if the team thought that he gave them a better chance to win he would be on the field. They don't, so he's not. He'll get to walk away from this one season with more money than your average safety makes in a career. If his complaint is that he's a better player than he is being given credit for, that would be on thing and we could debate that, but it sounds like he is more pissed that the team won't be honest with him about how much he sucks! I mean, is he seriously angry that Williams and Gibbs don't get up there and say, Adam is no good, he can't cover, and we made a huge mistake on him?! It seems like they are trying to do the diplomatic thing in not throwing him under the bus, thus protecting his value as a free agent this season. Look at a guy like TJ Duckett, who has gotten a much rawer deal in my opinion, if you want a model of how to act under difficult circumstances.

I was almost feeling sorry for AA until he came up with this one. I do not think that he was lied to at all and the honest assessment that he wanted came when they sat that azz on the bench for the remainder of the season.

Did he really want staff to say that he was playing sorry as hell to reporters when asked why he was sat down?...I think not

AA should've just sat down, accepted that he had a bad year and worked hard to improve his play in the offseason

the article was a really classless move on his part

I don't have any idea whether Archuleta has been lied to or not because I don't know what has/hasn't been said to him behind closed doors.

What I do know is that it was the Redskins, not Archuleta, who made him the highest paid safety in the history of football. In order for them to have done that, you've got to believe they gathered 'round a table and said "Look, whatever it takes to get this guy we've got to pony it up because we just can't risk letting him get away, he's going to be our difference maker- he's that good." And then- oops- he wasn't.

What's really new here? The Redskins have been paying top dollar for mediocre players on the open market for years now. No shock there. Now, they've got a pissed off player accusing the organization of lying to/misleading him. That's becoming a disturbingly common occurance as well.

It's time to stop shooting the messenger. Archuleta might have had a horrible season, but if he was drawing a journeyman's salary this wouldn't be a front page story and we'd all be shrugging it off as "we need another saftey."

I think you guys missed the point of his complaint which was that nobody in the coaching staff sat down with him (him, not reporters) and told him why he is on the bench and what he can do to improve game. It's a valid complaint though it is quite clear to everyone watching the Skins why he is on the bench. Of course that doesn't mean the coaching can just go about their business and not have a sit down with him. It's common courtesy to tell someone why they were demoted and how can get out of the dog house.

I don't have any idea whether Archuleta has been lied to or not because I don't know what has/hasn't been said to him behind closed doors.

What I do know is that it was the Redskins, not Archuleta, who made him the highest paid safety in the history of football. In order for them to have done that, you've got to believe they gathered 'round a table and said "Look, whatever it takes to get this guy we've got to pony it up because we just can't risk letting him get away, he's going to be our difference maker- he's that good." And then- oops- he wasn't.

What's really new here? The Redskins have been paying top dollar for mediocre players on the open market for years now. No shock there. Now, they've got a pissed off player accusing the organization of lying to/misleading him. That's becoming a disturbingly common occurance as well.

It's time to stop shooting the messenger. Archuleta might have had a horrible season, but if he was drawing a journeyman's salary this wouldn't be a front page story and we'd all be shrugging it off as "we need another saftey."

You are right the FO are some awful talent evaluators. AA was not supposed to say "hey look here I am not really that good of a cover guy, aren't the tackler that you think that I am and I am going to get burned constantly so I do not think hat you should pay me that much money" ...but BY GAWD!!!! after the fact you would think that he would have enough sense to not say jack about the team that he stuck it to

I think you guys missed the point of his complaint which was that nobody in the coaching staff sat down with him (him, not reporters) and told him why he is on the bench and what he can do to improve game. It's a valid complaint though it is quite clear to everyone watching the Skins why he is on the bench. Of course that doesn't mean the coaching can just go about their business and not have a sit down with him. It's common courtesy to tell someone why they were demoted and how can get out of the dog house.

I see where you are coming from but I can not see any professional, college nor high school team that goes over game films every Tuesday's or Wednesday's not pointing out to players what they did wrong if they had concerns. I really think that that was a bunch of hogwash...that is what these sessions are for

I can understand that he believed that he was being lied to. Him remaining in the doghouse while coaches constantly told him he was doing well would confuse him, but I cannot believe that he doesn't know why he's in the doghouse. He's had the same bum wrap since St. Louie, there's no way he can't know that he's terrible in coverage

During the process of negotiation with Archuleta and his agent, the team made clear the role they expected him to play. There was uncertaintity surrounding the status of Sean Taylor at the time, and they had made up their mind if Ryan Clark wanted more than they were willing to pay, they would let him walk because they wanted to up grade the position, and felt Archuleta would be a physical upgrade to Clark.

In reality ,there wasn't much in terms of negotiation, the Redskins made him an offer he couldn't refuse. They were well aware of his limited coverage skills, but they led him to believe he and Marcus Washington were going to be used in blitz packages, and that's what they were expecting from him. It was clear in September that Archuleta was not going to be the starter oposite Taylor. Pierson Prioleau was to be the starter, but when he got hurt on the opening kickoff, and Shawn Springs got injured, they could not play Archuleta the way they had intended to play him. When he speaks about being lied too, this is obviously what he is refering too. They contracted him to blitz, injuries foiled the plan, they had to use him, but in ways they were well aware he was not best suited. When we all witnessed he could not cover, he was left holding the bag with basically no place for him in the defense You really can't blame Archuleta for an experiment gone bad, the team should have taken more into consideration his limitations, and not been so willing to make such a huge financial commitment to a player that limited.

During the process of negotiation with Archuleta and his agent, the team made clear the role they expected him to play. There was uncertaintity surrounding the status of Sean Taylor at the time, and they had made up their mind if Ryan Clark wanted more than they were willing to pay, they would let him walk because they wanted to up grade the position, and felt Archuleta would be a physical upgrade to Clark.

In reality ,there wasn't much in terms of negotiation, the Redskins made him an offer he couldn't refuse. They were well aware of his limited coverage skills, but they led him to believe he and Marcus Washington were going to be used in blitz packages, and that's what they were expecting from him. It was clear in September that Archuleta was not going to be the starter oposite Taylor. Pierson Prioleau was to be the starter, but when he got hurt on the opening kickoff, and Shawn Springs got injured, they could not play Archuleta the way they had intended to play him. When he speaks about being lied too, this is obviously what he is refering too. They contracted him to blitz, injuries foiled the plan, they had to use him, but in ways they were well aware he was not best suited. When we all witnessed he could not cover, he was left holding the bag with basically no place for him in the defense You really can't blame Archuleta for an experiment gone bad, the team should have taken more into consideration his limitations, and not been so willing to make such a huge financial commitment to a player that limited.

I think it's crazy to think they brought Archuleta in to be essentially a third down blitz specialist. You don't give a guy a 10 million dollar sb to be a situational guy. Not at safety. I think what happened is, they had no idea how much Arch's coverage skills had deteriorated (which they would have if they had asked anybody else around the league). If they were fully aware of his coverage abilities and still gave him a 30 million dollar deal, then they are even dumber than we thought.