Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"?

joethiesmanfan · 04-13-2005, 02:39 PM

What a strong tone Matty!!!. It's obvious you dont like Taylor, but Lavar is definitely gonna be gone real soon. He has always been a problem, he gets alot of personal fouls, he has bitched about his role with the team he wants to blitz he doesnt want to be ina 3 point point stance. But saying the Redskins cheated him out of 6 million dollars? how much sense does that make? This is a business thats why Fred Smoot and Pierce arent here. I wouldnt advise any one to play football before handling their business thats reality or youll be like Lavar looking stupid saying they owe you money. you want your players to show the ultimate committment to you then show the ultimate committment to your players. Dannyboy should be jumping on Redskins one and getting those contracts done. Gibbs should be driving down to Florida like he did for Brunnell if he wants them in camp on time. the contract part always seems to be a problem around here with exceptions like Brunnell and Deion Sanders and people like that. Anyway Lavar has not lived up to his name yet in this league those pro bowls i dont see how he has been doing it but he hasnt made a big play since that interception that turned the season around when Marty was the coach. Yall dont like Taylor but love Bowen for some odd reason. Taylor was a real presence on the field every play all eyes were on what was he gonna do next you never notice Lavar until he hits somebody outta bounds or something like that. yall just dont like Taylor but the Redskins would be stupid to get rid of him but I think Lavar is gone because of that 6 million dollars that we cant pay him but we can pay Brunnell for virtually nothing for some odd reason. thats the whole issue look at Brunnells contract and his contributions versus these players we lost and who are holding out, they see that and i dont blame them how you gonna give Brunnell what he wants and not Smoot if thats the case pay Brunnell according to his value but yall dont want to talk about that cause that would put responsibility on someone besides the spoiled players.

PSUSkinsFan21 · 04-13-2005, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

Gibbs should be driving down to Florida like he did for Brunnell if he wants them in camp on time.

Dear God I hope you're kidding. When's the last time any of our bosses drove to our houses in the morning just to make sure we got to work on time? They're getting paid to do a job, it's time they do it. I know Taylor needs some babysitting, but come on.

Daseal · 04-13-2005, 04:14 PM

Quote:

They're getting paid to do a job, it's time they do it.

Spurrier would agree.

Daseal · 04-13-2005, 04:22 PM

PSUFan - Well, I think it would be close seeing as how LaVar thinks hes better than every athelete in the NFL and deserves more money per jersey than they do.

LaVar himself says he doubts he'll ever see an athelete like Taylor again in his life time.

Am I excusing Taylor? Nope. If your coach calls - you call back. Simple as that. I was listening to the Junkies today (normally I turn them off the second I hear them) but they were talking about the skins so I decided to listen. They actually made decent points about both Arrington and Taylor, they said someone needed to be a team leader, step up, and tell these guys what to do. They said even the socks are disrespectful (which Im not sure if I agree with) They said LaVar certainly isn't a leader, but maybe someone like Jansen will step up and get people on the team page.

Do I think Taylor is in the right? No. However, the question is who's a bigger problem. I feel someone calling out the coaching staff through the media is a bigger problem. Taylor is weird, no doubt. He'll show up to the games and knock someones head off, and he won't insult the coaching staff and organization to the media.

Safety is one of the lowest paid positions in the league. However, we can't forget he was the 5th overall pick. That's a high pick and demands money. Especially shocked we signed him for so low considering it was after Winslow got his massive deal, was it not? If you have a difference maker at safety, which I feel we do, then we should reward him well. He can and will be covering people like Shockey, Antonio Gates, Moss (some), etc this year. He can cover, he can intercept, he can run it back, he can blitz. Sean Taylor, especially in the hands of Greg Williams, could be one of the most devastating players in the league simply because he's so versatile.

joethiesmanfan · 04-13-2005, 04:23 PM

what if somebody in your office who does nothing is getting paid more than they are worth and when you ask for a raise they say we'll look into it and nothing gets done. the point is the brunnell thing sets a bad example and is a cancer to team unity that is the real problem here. thats why guys are expecting more from the front office more than their value. dont ask them to sacrifice for the team and not ask brunnell to take a pay cut they want some of that moeny wasted on brunnell or they are gonna leave.

FRPLG · 04-13-2005, 04:25 PM

This discussion actually makes me ill...considering the way both guys seem to be heading makes me want to bury my head in the sand and simply avoid even thinking about it. Neither situation gives me much hope. I think my biggest issue isn't so much with the players as much as it is with the front office. I have said, and believe, that every team has stuff like this but it seems like it is the Skins' propensity to make a situation worse than it needs to be. Arrington was just spouting off in anger and frustration over the injury so I can excuse it but this thing with Taylor couls so easily be fixed. He has a legitimate reason to be pissed. Not at the Skins mind you but at his agent for getting him a deal that was below value. Of course if he hadn't jumped from agent to agent like it was hop-scotch then maybe he wouldn't have gotten himself into this mess so ultimately it is his fault. But aside from that, his deal is below market value. The Skins could make this real simple and bring up the contract to between the contracts for 4 and 6 from last year. it would cost very little in the end and probably make him happy. They would look like good guys and everything could be just fine and dandy. I understand that they have a contract and don't want to move from it but for the sake of ease just up the deal and move on. I mean it couldn't possibly cost tehm much. Get him in camp and start working on improving his attitude towards the team and game. He needs to mature and the best way for the Skins to have that happen is to keep him as close as possible so they can hopefully shape him into a guy who'd do anything to help the team out.

FRPLG · 04-13-2005, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

what if somebody in your office who does nothing is getting paid more than they are worth and when you ask for a raise they say we'll look into it and nothing gets done. the point is the brunnell thing sets a bad example and is a cancer to team unity that is the real problem here. thats why guys are expecting more from the front office more than their value. dont ask them to sacrifice for the team and not ask brunnell to take a pay cut they want some of that moeny wasted on brunnell or they are gonna leave.

That's not how sports works. You can't compare the two because they are in no way the same. In your example you could simply quit and be done with it. Of course then you'd need another job so maybe you wouldn't quit in the first place. Come to think of it I think it is awful petty to compare your salary with someone else's. What matters is whether you are being fairly compensated relative to the market...not just your own office. In sports there is not a free and open market like in the real marketplace. When you sign a professional sports contract you are signing for what you are worth exactly at the time you signed it. When Brunell signed his contract the Skins thought he was worth it(who the hell knows why but that it another matter). I doubt there are many players who look at Brunell's contract and say to themselves that the Skins must value him more since he is being paid more. They all understand the fact that guys sign big contracts and sometimes it doesn't work out. What they are doing is comparing themsleves to the market and evaluating whether they are being paid fair in the regard. And I gurantee you these players are not wanting Brunell to take a pay cut since that sets a precendent that they themselves could be on the wrong side of down the road. They want everyone getting money. The more everyone gets paid the more they end up getting paid. High salaries beget high salaries...not the other way around.

joethiesmanfan · 04-13-2005, 04:46 PM

there are players who take pay cuts in professional sports they renegotiate contracts so others can be signed Chris Samuels is one example. Why not ask Brunnell to do that? Patrick Ramsey renegotiated his deal and he is the starter. I see Brunnells contract as money that can be freed up with a renegotiation.

FRPLG · 04-13-2005, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

there are players who take pay cuts in professional sports they renegotiate contracts so others can be signed Chris Samuels is one example. Why not ask Brunnell to do that? Patrick Ramsey renegotiated his deal and he is the starter. I see Brunnells contract as money that can be freed up with a renegotiation.

When you restructure you are actually getting a raiase. Part of your unguranteed salary is guranteed in the form of a roster bonus so that it can be spread of the life of the deal.
Brunell already restructured this year.

joethiesmanfan · 04-13-2005, 05:30 PM

okay well i guess joe gibbs gotta figure something out cause brunnell is killing us for the life of his contract that singing bonus i mean lets take the hit next year and be done with it build from the draft and hope clinton portis can do it all.

joethiesmanfan · 04-13-2005, 05:33 PM

I just dont understand but it seem to me the last thing arrington , smoot , taylor , or pierce should be worrying about is a contract. it just dont seem right when brunnell got this huge deal, it just dont seem right.

BIGREDSKINFAN63 · 04-13-2005, 05:49 PM

i think it's taylor!he is quickly proving us to be right by being the pouting infant he has become!i love arrington,but i'm sick of all his temper tantrums.he needs to calm his young
millionaire ass down,and just play football.not whine,pout,or cry.JUST PLAY FOOTBALL!!!!!

BIGREDSKINFAN63 · 04-13-2005, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joethiesmanfan

I just dont understand but it seem to me the last thing arrington , smoot , taylor , or pierce should be worrying about is a contract. it just dont seem right when brunnell got this huge deal, it just dont seem right.

that does'nt have anything to do with the question does it?

joethiesmanfan · 04-13-2005, 05:55 PM

i just think the problems with arrington and taylopr come from the slow prgress on their contract grievances. thats all. if thats not related to who is the bigger problem then so be it.

SmootSmack · 04-13-2005, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FRPLG

That's not how sports works. You can't compare the two because they are in no way the same. In your example you could simply quit and be done with it. Of course then you'd need another job so maybe you wouldn't quit in the first place. Come to think of it I think it is awful petty to compare your salary with someone else's. What matters is whether you are being fairly compensated relative to the market...not just your own office. In sports there is not a free and open market like in the real marketplace. When you sign a professional sports contract you are signing for what you are worth exactly at the time you signed it. When Brunell signed his contract the Skins thought he was worth it(who the hell knows why but that it another matter). I doubt there are many players who look at Brunell's contract and say to themselves that the Skins must value him more since he is being paid more. They all understand the fact that guys sign big contracts and sometimes it doesn't work out. What they are doing is comparing themsleves to the market and evaluating whether they are being paid fair in the regard. And I gurantee you these players are not wanting Brunell to take a pay cut since that sets a precendent that they themselves could be on the wrong side of down the road. They want everyone getting money. The more everyone gets paid the more they end up getting paid. High salaries beget high salaries...not the other way around.

Great post! I wish more people understood it the way you do

View Poll Results: Who's the more problematic player?
Arrington	30	40.54%
Taylor	44	59.46%
Voters: 74. You may not vote on this poll

04-13-2005, 02:39 PM	#31
joethiesmanfan The Starter Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 1,163	Re: Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"? What a strong tone Matty!!!. It's obvious you dont like Taylor, but Lavar is definitely gonna be gone real soon. He has always been a problem, he gets alot of personal fouls, he has bitched about his role with the team he wants to blitz he doesnt want to be ina 3 point point stance. But saying the Redskins cheated him out of 6 million dollars? how much sense does that make? This is a business thats why Fred Smoot and Pierce arent here. I wouldnt advise any one to play football before handling their business thats reality or youll be like Lavar looking stupid saying they owe you money. you want your players to show the ultimate committment to you then show the ultimate committment to your players. Dannyboy should be jumping on Redskins one and getting those contracts done. Gibbs should be driving down to Florida like he did for Brunnell if he wants them in camp on time. the contract part always seems to be a problem around here with exceptions like Brunnell and Deion Sanders and people like that. Anyway Lavar has not lived up to his name yet in this league those pro bowls i dont see how he has been doing it but he hasnt made a big play since that interception that turned the season around when Marty was the coach. Yall dont like Taylor but love Bowen for some odd reason. Taylor was a real presence on the field every play all eyes were on what was he gonna do next you never notice Lavar until he hits somebody outta bounds or something like that. yall just dont like Taylor but the Redskins would be stupid to get rid of him but I think Lavar is gone because of that 6 million dollars that we cant pay him but we can pay Brunnell for virtually nothing for some odd reason. thats the whole issue look at Brunnells contract and his contributions versus these players we lost and who are holding out, they see that and i dont blame them how you gonna give Brunnell what he wants and not Smoot if thats the case pay Brunnell according to his value but yall dont want to talk about that cause that would put responsibility on someone besides the spoiled players.

04-13-2005, 04:22 PM	#34
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 41 Posts: 8,341	Re: Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"? PSUFan - Well, I think it would be close seeing as how LaVar thinks hes better than every athelete in the NFL and deserves more money per jersey than they do. LaVar himself says he doubts he'll ever see an athelete like Taylor again in his life time. Am I excusing Taylor? Nope. If your coach calls - you call back. Simple as that. I was listening to the Junkies today (normally I turn them off the second I hear them) but they were talking about the skins so I decided to listen. They actually made decent points about both Arrington and Taylor, they said someone needed to be a team leader, step up, and tell these guys what to do. They said even the socks are disrespectful (which Im not sure if I agree with) They said LaVar certainly isn't a leader, but maybe someone like Jansen will step up and get people on the team page. Do I think Taylor is in the right? No. However, the question is who's a bigger problem. I feel someone calling out the coaching staff through the media is a bigger problem. Taylor is weird, no doubt. He'll show up to the games and knock someones head off, and he won't insult the coaching staff and organization to the media. Safety is one of the lowest paid positions in the league. However, we can't forget he was the 5th overall pick. That's a high pick and demands money. Especially shocked we signed him for so low considering it was after Winslow got his massive deal, was it not? If you have a difference maker at safety, which I feel we do, then we should reward him well. He can and will be covering people like Shockey, Antonio Gates, Moss (some), etc this year. He can cover, he can intercept, he can run it back, he can blitz. Sean Taylor, especially in the hands of Greg Williams, could be one of the most devastating players in the league simply because he's so versatile. __________________ Best. Player. Available.

04-13-2005, 04:23 PM	#35
joethiesmanfan The Starter Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 1,163	Re: Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"? what if somebody in your office who does nothing is getting paid more than they are worth and when you ask for a raise they say we'll look into it and nothing gets done. the point is the brunnell thing sets a bad example and is a cancer to team unity that is the real problem here. thats why guys are expecting more from the front office more than their value. dont ask them to sacrifice for the team and not ask brunnell to take a pay cut they want some of that moeny wasted on brunnell or they are gonna leave.

04-13-2005, 04:25 PM	#36
FRPLG MVP Join Date: May 2004 Age: 46 Posts: 10,164	Re: Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"? This discussion actually makes me ill...considering the way both guys seem to be heading makes me want to bury my head in the sand and simply avoid even thinking about it. Neither situation gives me much hope. I think my biggest issue isn't so much with the players as much as it is with the front office. I have said, and believe, that every team has stuff like this but it seems like it is the Skins' propensity to make a situation worse than it needs to be. Arrington was just spouting off in anger and frustration over the injury so I can excuse it but this thing with Taylor couls so easily be fixed. He has a legitimate reason to be pissed. Not at the Skins mind you but at his agent for getting him a deal that was below value. Of course if he hadn't jumped from agent to agent like it was hop-scotch then maybe he wouldn't have gotten himself into this mess so ultimately it is his fault. But aside from that, his deal is below market value. The Skins could make this real simple and bring up the contract to between the contracts for 4 and 6 from last year. it would cost very little in the end and probably make him happy. They would look like good guys and everything could be just fine and dandy. I understand that they have a contract and don't want to move from it but for the sake of ease just up the deal and move on. I mean it couldn't possibly cost tehm much. Get him in camp and start working on improving his attitude towards the team and game. He needs to mature and the best way for the Skins to have that happen is to keep him as close as possible so they can hopefully shape him into a guy who'd do anything to help the team out.

04-13-2005, 04:46 PM	#38
joethiesmanfan The Starter Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 1,163	Re: Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"? there are players who take pay cuts in professional sports they renegotiate contracts so others can be signed Chris Samuels is one example. Why not ask Brunnell to do that? Patrick Ramsey renegotiated his deal and he is the starter. I see Brunnells contract as money that can be freed up with a renegotiation.

04-13-2005, 05:30 PM	#40
joethiesmanfan The Starter Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 1,163	Re: Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"? okay well i guess joe gibbs gotta figure something out cause brunnell is killing us for the life of his contract that singing bonus i mean lets take the hit next year and be done with it build from the draft and hope clinton portis can do it all.

04-13-2005, 05:33 PM	#41
joethiesmanfan The Starter Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 1,163	Re: Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"? I just dont understand but it seem to me the last thing arrington , smoot , taylor , or pierce should be worrying about is a contract. it just dont seem right when brunnell got this huge deal, it just dont seem right.

04-13-2005, 05:49 PM	#42
BIGREDSKINFAN63 Special Teams Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: bassett-va Age: 61 Posts: 289	Re: Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"? i think it's taylor!he is quickly proving us to be right by being the pouting infant he has become!i love arrington,but i'm sick of all his temper tantrums.he needs to calm his young millionaire ass down,and just play football.not whine,pout,or cry.JUST PLAY FOOTBALL!!!!! __________________ "7 days without the redskins, makes one weak!!!"

04-13-2005, 05:55 PM	#44
joethiesmanfan The Starter Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 1,163	Re: Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"? i just think the problems with arrington and taylopr come from the slow prgress on their contract grievances. thats all. if thats not related to who is the bigger problem then so be it.

Arrington vs. Taylor: Who's the bigger "problem"?

Locker Room Main Forum