Hall In, Taylor Out??

Bench him for missing voluntary workouts?? I think the NFLPA would probably have something to say about that.

Actually the NFLPA wouldn't have anything to say about it. As long as the Skins are paying his contract, there isn't a single thing the NFLPA could do about the Skins' decisions regarding who to start and who to sit. Can you imagine the precident that would set? Then every second stringer could go crying to the NFLPA every time they don't get to start and simply claim that it's because of a personal issue with the coach.

Trust me on this one, as a legal matter, as long as ST gets his paycheck, the NFLPA has no say in who the Skins start and who they sit, for any reason or for no reason at all.

I'm not so sure about that, I don't think a team can discipline a player for missing voluntary workouts.

They would probably have to say it's for another reason, but if they bench him and say it's for skipping the OTAs, I would think the league wouldn't be kosher with that.

I'm not so sure about that, I don't think a team can discipline a player for missing voluntary workouts.

They would probably have to say it's for another reason, but if they bench him and say it's for skipping the OTAs, I would think the league wouldn't be kosher with that.
In theory:
Joe Gibbs - We've decided to start Hall this game. We just feel he has a better handle on the playbook and what we are trying to accomplish.

Who's going to make a stink about that?

In theory:
Joe Gibbs - We've decided to start Hall this game. We just feel he has a better handle on the playbook and what we are trying to accomplish.

Who's going to make a stink about that?

That's my point, but if they say we're starting Hall because Taylor is a punk and skipped the OTAs, the league isn't going to go for that.

This has got to stop. The only way Sean Taylor will not be on the feild for the Washington Redskins come September 11th, is if there is a saftey who can do the job better than he can. If Taylor holds out of training camp, thats a real possibility, because he wont have a full grasp on the playbook. If he is in camp, which the rumor is that he will be, he will be on the feild on 9/11/05. Period. The fact that we signed this guy, who may be decent but nothing spectacular, dosent make me think for a second that Taylor is going anywhere.

Not only is it for depth, but it IS an insurance policy, JUST in case. I mean that one year deal is a good way of watching your ass.

Once ST reports to camp and begins working with the team and coaches, all this will be like a fart in the wind. The only thing I don't understand is the "not returning the coaches call" thing. I think at least he could do that. But we don't really have all the inside scoop about that either. Most of what we are reading and talking about is heresay anyway. OTA's? Did they even exist ten years ago? ST isn't pulling an "Iverson". When the chips are down and we take the field Monday night in Dallas, who do you want starting at safety for the Washington Redskins? Hall or Taylor? Its kind of a no brainer. If he's in training camp and shows up in shape and hitting like a beast, I've got no beef with this. He's a bit of a kook. So was Riggo, Manley, Theismann, Sonny J., Brian Mitchell, Pat Fischer, Billy Kilmer etc. just to name a few. They all did ok.. Not everyone has to be like Darrell and Art.

Tahoe Skin, I was just over on the Hogs.net and I read your exact same post over there. Don't you think we have talked about Sean Taylor enough? There have been numerous threads about this guy since he began making headlines, don't you think it's about time to let dead dogs lye.

I'm not so sure about that, I don't think a team can discipline a player for missing voluntary workouts.

They would probably have to say it's for another reason, but if they bench him and say it's for skipping the OTAs, I would think the league wouldn't be kosher with that.

First, if I were to sit him, it'd be more for not calling Gibbs back than anything.

Second, you have to understand that the NFLPA is nothing more, and nothing less than a labor union. Anything that is not in the collective bargaining agreement is simply untouchable by the union. They can piss and moan about how their player is being treated, but they have no legal power to do anything that is not forbidden by the collective bargaining agreeement. Without a doubt, I am sure that certain forms of "discipline" are covered, including fines, suspensions, extra calisthenics at practices, and probably even certain forms of verbal or physical reprimand. But there is no way the union can have any say over whether a team labels a guy as "starter" or "second string" because the implimentation of those restrictions would be completely unworkable. There are simply too many outs for a team to justify their lineup for the NFLPA to have any say over how a team sets its lineup, and, therefore, any clause related to grievances for playing time or string designation would be too vague and ambiguous to be enforceable. As such, it is inconceivable that such a clause would even be included in the collective bargaining agreement. There is simply no "right to be first string" for the NFLPA to enforce.

That said, I see that I am in the serious minority of people who would sit ST for a couple series to teach him a lesson about respect, so I will just accept that and move on. Here's to hoping that ST learned everything he needs to know about being an NFL safety in his rookie year so that learning defensive sets and techniques at the OTAs proves to be a more pointless exercise to him than hacking away on the playstation in Miami.

1. I doubt that the Skins will trade Sean Taylor because I don't think they could get sufficient value in return to take the chance that this guy actually realizes his physical potential as a football player. Imagine if they cut him loose and in anotehr year or so Taylor grows up and becomes a latter-day Ronnie Lott. Once again the Skins' organization will look like bumbling fools. They won't take that risk...

2. I know we haven't heard Taylor say he wants a new contract - because we haven't heard him say anything at all including that he does NOT want a new contract - but here's the fly in the ointment. Why did he hire Drew Rosenhaus - currently the King of Contract Renegotiation in the NFL? Maybe Taylor just hired him because he thinks Rosenhaus is a nice guy - - or maybe ...

3. I have no idea if "all Taylor wants to do is play football" because I can't read his mind. If he wants to play football so much, I'd expect him to be at the "voluntary" team events - - but that's just me. I'll defer to the mind-reading experts here as to what he REALLY wants to do.

4. I don't know if he is a bad guy or a good guy either. I do know that he is not a very reliable guy; I know he does not plan ahead in his life very well; I know that he doesn't always think that rules apply to him. I know those things because of his behaviors and not because I can read his mind.

5. I think the KEY question for the coaching staff to evaluate here is whether ot not Taylor's behavior in not returning phone calls and missing voluntary workouts will spill over to other players on the team. IF they conclude that it will - or it has - then they need to do something to punish Taylor - and others - for such behaviors. IF they conclude it will not, then they need to decide whether or not a punishment for Sean Taylor will get him to behave the way they would want him to behave or if it will make him a bigger MEATHEAD. That is the current Joe Gibbs Challenge!