Full Blown Mutiny

Some good points in here.

I will disagree with the double-standard issue. These are the rules as set in the CBA. The CBA is an agreement made between the owners and the players' union, so the players understood the ramifications and agreed to it.

So I do disagree with Coles' decision and I don't really sympathize with him. When he signed his Skins deal he knew the following:

- He was signed for 7 years and expected to play every year unless the team cut or traded him.
- He knew his yearly salaries would never be guaranteed and he could always be cut by his employer.
- In exchange for this lack of security, the Skins agreed to pay Coles a $13M signing bonus up front. This gives Coles cash in his pocket in case he does get cut. Also with the cap rules, when there is a big signing bonus, it comes with its own "implied" security. We see that now with Coles. Even if the Skins want to cut him they can't really cuz of the deadcap.

He was fine with all this, but now he's changed his tune. If he was so worried about losing Spurrier he should have put a stipulation in his contract. Did he expect Spurrier to be here for a full 7 years? I doubt it. So I guess his attitude was - I'll take this deal (and the money) now, and if they ever change coaches on me I'll just whine and demand to be released.

I don't really sympathize with the "unhappy NFL player". They have as many rights as we regular workers do.
Is my salary guaranteed every year? No.
Can I be cut at any time? Yes.
Did I get a signing bonus? No.
If I tell my boss I'm unhappy and want to be transferred to another company (at a steep cost to him), do you think he'll oblige? No.

So cry me a river Lav. I think we should keep you and you can sit next to Brunell on the bench all year and count your money.

Crazy Canuck,

First, I didn't mean to sound off on a legal debate. What I've been talking about is one's word. Has Coles broken his word? No. Coles has supposedly said he'd play ball for the 'Skins if he wasn't released or traded; he's willing to play out his deal (at least for now). There has been NO talk (yet) of any holdout.

Does that mean he has to be 100% happy with his current situation? No. Gibbs supposedly told the players that anyone who would prefer to be elsewhere should tell him. Gardner and Coles approached Gibbs and said they'd prefer to be elsewhere. So, I don't see how Coles is being a punk for being honest.

Second, as you correctly point out, Coles was given a large signing bonus as security. But now, the team apparently wants back the signing bonus (or a portion thereof). I don't think on the one hand you can honestly say that he accepted the CBA and should be held to it, but he should ALSO give back the signing bonus (if you in fact believe that).

Third, you said he whined and demanded to be released. Thus far, I haven't heard a peep out of Coles (for better or worse). He might have whined to the coaching staff, but I don't have a problem with that. As for demanding a release, I haven't heard any such demand. He was asked if he wanted to leave and he said yes.

Third, I don't think your comparison of NFL players and the rest of us working folks is appropriate. I'm not an actor, singer, or ball player and I never will be (that is until Snyder and Gibbs come to their senses). But, if you choose to bring up that analogy, I think the following is a good illustration of Coles' situation.

I get hired by a law firm and am given a signing bonus to work for a firm for 6 years. The first year is pretty good - while we lost a lot of cases, I am well compensated, highly appreciated, make lots of great friends, get a lot of substantive and interesting work, and I love my boss.

The following year, the boss I loved quits, a new boss comes into the office who doesn't seem to appreciate me as much, is having me get his coffee instead of writing briefs for the US Supreme Court, I get demolished in a trial because my law firm is run so horribly, the employee roster resembles a revolving door, some of my best friends are leaving the firm, and although I have a contract to work for the firm for five more years, the managing partner tells me anyone who wants to leave can do so. So I raise my hand and say I want to leave. Am I a bastard for doing that? I don't think so.

i do'nt understand his problem either.he is the feature receiver in the redskins offense is'nt he?WTF is with all these rich ass professionals????????????????????????????????????? ?

I am a moderate republican. And while I am not an attorney, Im familiar with a different type of contract law than this completely. I conduct real estate settlements. I admit that i get frustrated when labor dictates to management. Do you feel that Lav is right in demanding that he not give any bonus back if he is traded?

I think there's reason to be frustrated with both labor and management at times - it all depends on the situation.

Unless Coles is demanding (as opposed to requesting) that he be traded or released, I don't see why he should have to give it back. If the team chooses not to release/trade him because of the accelerated signing bonus, he needs to realize that he can get his wish by giving the money back. Otherwise, he should play out his contract.

I'd only criticize Coles if he started bitching to the press, held out, or demanded a trade/release while simultaneously holding onto all of his signing bonus.

The only person who I disagree with, or right now am pissed off at; is Coles. That whole situation to me is bullcrap.

Perice, Smoot, have played out their contracts. They have every right in my mind to test the open market, they both are still on small salary deals (in NFL terms); so if they wanna test the market, I dont blame them.

Ramseyfan,

You make a lot of good points.

I definitely agree that Coles has handled this extremely well. The fact that everyone was shocked is a testament to Coles play on the field this year. He gave 100% and kept his mouth shut. He also offered to give back a significant amount of money which is a stand-up move. Lastly, he kept everything internal and didn't use the press to lobby his case.

So I'm not trying to judge the man's decision, even if I disagree with it. But I don't feel bad for Coles and I think the Skins must think of their own interests first, even if that means making Lav honor his contract. I'm still hoping htis whole thing can be worked out.

Some good points in here.

I don't really sympathize with the "unhappy NFL player". They have as many rights as we regular workers do.
Is my salary guaranteed every year? No.
Can I be cut at any time? Yes.
Did I get a signing bonus? No.
If I tell my boss I'm unhappy and want to be transferred to another company (at a steep cost to him), do you think he'll oblige? No.

So cry me a river Lav. I think we should keep you and you can sit next to Brunell on the bench all year and count your money.

I agree CrazyCanuck........I wonder how the players are going to feel when the leave the NFL and are working in the REAL WORLD. Perhaps I'm spoiled a bit, I'm a Spurs fan when you hear that David Robinson took a fraction of what he could've made in the open market, and re-signed at a reasonible salary to enable the team to sign other players to improve the team. Sean Elliott could've commanded a huge salary also, but like he said, 5 or 6 milliion is a heck of a lot of money, you don't really need more money, it just goes to taxes anyway. And then he gives $2 million back so the Spurs could build a new practice facility. Tim Duncan signed a reasonable salary to stay with the team, and when contract negoitations were getting tough with Point Guard Tony Parker and Spurs Management , Tim offered to pay the $2 milliion dififference that Tony Parker and Management were quibbling over, in order to re-sign "his" point guard. Bruce Bowen accepted a rather low contract as well just to be able to re-sign with a GREAT winning organization. Now, the NBA is different than the NFL, but I just absolutely LOVE the attitude of the former and current Spurs players, these are the REDSKIN KINDA GUYS Joe Gibbs is looking for to wear the Redskins uniform..............

From what I read Coles and Gibbs had 2 meetings...I wasn't there, but probably Coles asked about the running game and if Portis was going to be the main focus of the offense, Gibbs probably said YES, and Coles was probably envisioning a more vertical passing game.....BUT if you look at the Vikings game when Gibbs FINALLY did open it up and did throw longer passes, and that is what I was picturing the Redskin offense to look like next year.......The receivers were still a vital part of the offense in that Viking game.........I'm frustrated over Coles impatience he should at least give Gibbs more than a year, especially when Gibbs needed time to re-adjust to the "new" NFL himself. If Coles allowed time for Gibbs to pick up a few more pieces for the offense, ....(a healthy Jansen and a new receiver to replace Gardner, and a new center and guard) Coles may have been happy with the offense if he waited just another year to see what Gibbs did and see if the offense improved To me Coles is being a bit of a crybaby and one of the "IT'S ALL ABOUT ME" players. Coles can leave....other receivers can be found......but I'm angry that he just puts deeper into salary cap hell!!! The Steelers have always been a tad on the cheap side, but they manage to find replacements just as good.........Williams seems to have done that with the defense when players went down, others came in and performed admirably, perhaps we can get lucky with the offense.

Monk,

I completely agree that players who take pay cuts for the team are great, fantastic team players. I'd like to have a lot of those types of players.

However, money doesn't seem to be the real issue right now. It appears that Coles is more concerned about how he is being (mis)used.

I personally am very ambitious, eager to show what I can do, and want to work at a law firm that gives the opportunity to exploit and build upon my talents. So, I sympathize with Coles. I know he feels that he isn't be used properly - and I think many people agree with that assessment. He's a big-play, deep-threat wideout, but he was being used essentially as a possession receiver/extension of the running game. There are running backs catching balls in the flats who had better ypc than Coles.

So, while I'd prefer Coles to be happy even if he was sitting on the bench, I understand where he's coming from.

Monk,

I completely agree that players who take pay cuts for the team are great, fantastic team players. I'd like to have a lot of those types of players.

However, money doesn't seem to be the real issue right now. It appears that Coles is more concerned about how he is being (mis)used.

I personally am very ambitious, eager to show what I can do, and want to work at a law firm that gives the opportunity to exploit and build upon my talents. So, I sympathize with Coles. I know he feels that he isn't be used properly - and I think many people agree with that assessment. He's a big-play, deep-threat wideout, but he was being used essentially as a possession receiver/extension of the running game. There are running backs catching balls in the flats who had better ypc than Coles.

So, while I'd prefer Coles to be happy even if he was sitting on the bench, I understand where he's coming from.

But what I'm reading is Coles won't even restructure his salary to facilitate a trade. If I was working for a company that I hated, and wanted to go work for another company, I would do anything I could to make that deal happen knowing how miserable I was working for my present company. But Coles IS looking at the money thing. If he hated Gibbs system and said it was a mismatch, yet was willing to restructure to get a deal done, I'd respect that, but Coles wants to have his cake and eat it too!!! We are going to take a $9 million cap hit......please read the topic COLE WONT RESTRUCTURE....it's about the money...