Arrington: 'I could have handled things a bit better'

[funandgunner]

Originally Posted by That Guy

well, we said at the time once lavar starts playing all the new flood of lavar56 names would magically go away, so no big shock there

the big point was we were wrong on brunell, and unlike gibbs, GW turned in a #3 D last year, so its kinda hard not to trust his competence... or ask for him to be fired? I mean really...

Hopefully, the redskins players fans have finally been converted into redskins team fans. There are still some Ramsey fans out there that are still rebelling against the team concept.

[Paintrain]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Wow, turns out the coaches knew a thing or two.

Go figure.

Gosh, who woulda thunk it?

Maybe it's a conspiracy. Maybe Gibbs and GW have something against Warrick Holdman now. Maybe Dan Snyder is behind it. Maybe that WASN'T Lavar who was speaking to the media. I think we should keep second guessing.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Gosh, who woulda thunk it?

Maybe it's a conspiracy. Maybe Gibbs and GW have something against Warrick Holdman now. Maybe Dan Snyder is behind it. Maybe that WASN'T Lavar who was speaking to the media. I think we should keep second guessing.

Maybe it's him...

[PSUSkinsFan21]

Look, I think we need to be a little careful here. If you all want to say "I told you so" to the people who thought up crazy conspiracy theories about Williams and Gibbs, I have no problem with that. But let's not go down this path of "you're not a real Redskins fan if you questioned the coaches' decisions" or "you're not a fan of the team if you thought Arrington should have been in there all along."

I've always maintained that if Arrington was healthy, I believed he should be playing, and I think he showed why in the San Fran game. That doesn't make me any less of a fan than any of the rest of you just because I questioned the coaches' decision. This is a forum where we are supposed to be free to discuss our opinions, and if my opinion is that I disagree with the coaches, then so be it. That has nothing to do with my loyalty to the Redskins.

Again, I can't speak for everyone because I'd like to distance myself from some people who said some pretty crazy (in my opinion) things about the coaches and Arrington, but let's not start this "you're a fan of the player, not the team" crap. Hindsight is always 20/20 and some of you jumping on the "I told you so" bandwagon now were some of the first people to take exception to the "I told you so's" coming from those supporting the decision to play Arrington after the San Fran game.

I'm just trying to head this off now before it gets out of control again. We are ALL entitled to our opinions. Period.

Now let's focus our collective energies on the Eagles.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by PSUSkinsFan21

Look, I think we need to be a little careful here. If you all want to say "I told you so" to the people who thought up crazy conspiracy theories about Williams and Gibbs, I have no problem with that. But let's not go down this path of "you're not a real Redskins fan if you questioned the coaches' decisions" or "you're not a fan of the team if you thought Arrington should have been in there all along."

I've always maintained that if Arrington was healthy, I believed he should be playing, and I think he showed why in the San Fran game. That doesn't make me any less of a fan than any of the rest of you just because I questioned the coaches' decision. This is a forum where we are supposed to be free to discuss our opinions, and if my opinion is that I disagree with the coaches, then so be it. That has nothing to do with my loyalty to the Redskins.

Again, I can't speak for everyone because I'd like to distance myself from some people who said some pretty crazy (in my opinion) things about the coaches and Arrington, but let's not start this "you're a fan of the player, not the team" crap. Hindsight is always 20/20 and some of you jumping on the "I told you so" bandwagon now were some of the first people to take exception to the "I told you so's" coming from those supporting the decision to play Arrington after the San Fran game.

I'm just trying to head this off now before it gets out of control again. We are ALL entitled to our opinions. Period.

Now let's focus our collective energies on the Eagles.

Agreeden!
I know my issue isn't with the people who thought he should be playing. My issue is with people who thought he should be playing simply because they liked him basically and wouldn't admit that they couldn't evaluate the situation without emotion. Those are the ones who seemingly cared more about one player than the entire team. They may be "real" fans but they're not real good fans. The kind that most sports organizations can live without if they want a truely rabid fan contingent. I don't remember you being one of this group. So while i might say "I told you so" I won't question your fandom. Others aren't so lucky.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by PSUSkinsFan21

Look, I think we need to be a little careful here. If you all want to say "I told you so" to the people who thought up crazy conspiracy theories about Williams and Gibbs, I have no problem with that. But let's not go down this path of "you're not a real Redskins fan if you questioned the coaches' decisions" or "you're not a fan of the team if you thought Arrington should have been in there all along."

I think the conspiracy theorists and the sudden Williams haters are what we're mainly talking about.

I have no problem with people rationally questioning a decision, but some of the far out theories that were tossed around were ridiculous.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Where are all the newbies with 56 in their username since he started playing a lot? Weren't they the ones leading the charge against the team and GW in favor of one guy? One guy who has admitted that he was mostly wrong at the time and that those of us who said maybe he just wasn't 100% ready to go seem to have been right. I don't see them around much. Weaklings they are.

I haven't been on the site in a week due to travel. But I saw your quote and you know I had to respond. I dont care what was said in the beginning, the fact is and always will be LaVar is better than Holdman and should have been playing. LaVar will say the "right" things right now since the staff HAS to put him in. We all saw how bad Holdman was, and GW couldn't go on any longer trying to fool himself as well as us. Now Holdman has stopped talking to the press. Man these guys get bitter after getting benched. Did he actually think he was going to continue playing ahead of LaVar?

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

I haven't been on the site in a week due to travel. But I saw your quote and you know I had to respond. I dont care what was said in the beginning, the fact is and always will be LaVar is better than Holdman and should have been playing. LaVar will say the "right" things right now since the staff HAS to put him in. We all saw how bad Holdman was, and GW couldn't go on any longer trying to fool himself as well as us. Now Holdman has stopped talking to the press. Man these guys get bitter after getting benched. Did he actually think he was going to continue playing ahead of LaVar?

in holdman's interviews in before the season even started he said he knew lavar was going to take his starting spot. GW said it had to do with him not having his confidence/speed and missing so much work in the offseason and last year that kept him out of the lineup. You're still implying that GW is purposely (and pointlessly) malicious for no reason (except some unfounded, unexplainable personal hatred for lavar).

[MTK]

Originally Posted by That Guy

in holdman's interviews in before the season even started he said he knew lavar was going to take his starting spot. GW said it had to do with him not having his confidence/speed and missing so much work in the offseason and last year that kept him out of the lineup. You're still implying that GW is purposely (and pointlessly) malicious for no reason (except some unfounded, unexplainable personal hatred for lavar).

So what we have is a conspiracy theory to explain a conspiracy theory... interesting.

[FirstandTen]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

I haven't been on the site in a week due to travel. But I saw your quote and you know I had to respond. I dont care what was said in the beginning, the fact is and always will be LaVar is better than Holdman and should have been playing. LaVar will say the "right" things right now since the staff HAS to put him in. We all saw how bad Holdman was, and GW couldn't go on any longer trying to fool himself as well as us. Now Holdman has stopped talking to the press. Man these guys get bitter after getting benched. Did he actually think he was going to continue playing ahead of LaVar?

You really are a 56 Fanatic..... Stop with the theories this situation is settled just relax and root for the team.

[funandgunner]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

I haven't been on the site in a week due to travel. But I saw your quote and you know I had to respond. I dont care what was said in the beginning, the fact is and always will be LaVar is better than Holdman and should have been playing. LaVar will say the "right" things right now since the staff HAS to put him in. We all saw how bad Holdman was, and GW couldn't go on any longer trying to fool himself as well as us. Now Holdman has stopped talking to the press. Man these guys get bitter after getting benched. Did he actually think he was going to continue playing ahead of LaVar?

I don't understand : (1)Lavar will say the right things now because they have to play him ? .... or (2)he will say the right things now because or else - they will bench him ?

I added the rhetorical #2 question. I think we all need to get something straight - no player is above the team. If that player thinks he is above the team then it is time for that player to have an MRI on his ego or have it surgically removed, cause that sucker must be getting too big. One player doesn't make a team (ask Michael Jordan when he was playing for the Wizards) and this is a totally different issue then T.O. and whoever has a contract dispute. As fans, questioning the coaches for their personnel decisions is absurd - you don't even know what the hell is going on except what the media and the team leaks to you. Whether the reasons are an attitude adjustment, motivational issues, or player performance, you as a fan are getting a filtered and skewed image of these reasons. No one is above being benched - No One, if that is what is needed to improve them and the team.

Not saying this is the reason, but would you bench someone if you think that player is not playing to his full potential and benching him would allow him to reach it ?

And as for questioning the hall of fame, triple superbowl-winning coach - do you really think that your football and personal knowledge of the situation is greater than Gibbs ? And to me, gibbs is the team - I'd rather have it his team than having it Lavar's team. So to me personally, you either back up gibbs and the redskins or Lavar, the player - and not both. Pick one to keep or kick off: gibbs or lavar ?

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by FirstandTen

You really are a 56 Fanatic..... Stop with the theories this situation is settled just relax and root for the team.

you people dont know me from me Joe, so to say I am not a true fan of the Redskins is totally wrong. I have been a die hard fan since I was born. Because I have a feeling that one player is better than the other and should be playing doesn't discount my loyalty as well as anyone elses. didn't everyone think benching Brunell was in the best interest of the team? That Ramsey was the better QB. Isn't that the same situation here. Just because I have 56 in logname doesn't make me a LaVar fan, and not a Redskins fan. I have been a fan before LaVar got here and will be a fan when he leaves. All this crap is getting old, you have one side saying I told you so and the other going off about the comments made by LaVar the last couple of days. I have no theories about this team or why he wasnt playing. I was only stating what I heard from programs on TV or columnists in the paper. I have no idea what goes on in the organization as much as you do. I dont know why you and the other people who continuously bash what I say. I thought this was an opinion site. So if Green Bay decided to sit Brett and play Aaron Rogers, you dont think some green bay fans would question the coaches decision. If you think they wouldn't you are crazy. Same thing w/ Vick and all the other superstar players. (and before you start bashing me with this one, In no way am I saying LaVar is a superstar) dont forget we are comparing a LB in his prime to a veteran(who is servicable) but not that good. I would be making the same comments if it were Marcus Washington getting benched infavor of Holdman. Regardless of the player, if anyone feels one player is better than the one in front of him, there are going to be questions, and opinions on why there aren't playing. Cant you just leave it alone.

[cpayne5]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

you people dont know me from me Joe,

I know Joe, and you my friend, are no Joe.

[onsidekick]

I'm new to this but I think what everyone's looking for is something along the lines of Lavar's 'I could have handled things a little bit better' comment

[cpayne5]

Originally Posted by onsidekick

I'm new to this but I think what everyone's looking for is something along the lines of Lavar's 'I could have handled things a little bit better' comment

Welcome to the site.

You're walking into the midst of a firestorm.