Was it Personal or Was it Football?

roybus14 · Post by **roybus14** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 5:40 pm

I ask that question because it appears that there are some guys on the defense like Archuleta and Rogers that are not where they are supposed to be in this so-called "scheme", getting burnt and missing tackles. If the two of them continue to stink up the joint and don't get benched, then it was personal and had nothing to do with Football on the field with Lavar last year. It was retaliation for his off the field stuff.

If he was so undisciplined, then why is he a starter this year for a coach that is known for his discipline????

ATV · Post by **ATV** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:17 pm

Rogers got beat. It happens. He's still a good cornerback.

As for Archuleta, I thought he had a pretty good game. What did I miss?

jazzyjimmy · Post by **jazzyjimmy** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:43 pm

First of all, the Giants have a serious need at the linebacker spot and LA was pretty damned quiet in that first game. I seriously doubt Gibbs or Williams would be petty enough to trade LA solely for personal reasons.

aswas71788 · Post by **aswas71788** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 7:46 pm

Something you must keep in mind is that not all players thrive in the same environment. While LaVar thrived in his first years here, it was a different defensive system than Gibbs/Williams uses. There is no knock on LaVar or Gibbs/Williams. LaVar's style of play does not fit the defensive scheme now being used. That does not mean that LaVar is not the same or better than he was or that he will not thrive in a different defensive scheme. Personnally, I hope he does great, except when the Giants play the Redskins, because Arrington gave much to the Redskins and to the DC area while he was here.

theoneandonly#9 · Post by **theoneandonly#9** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 7:55 pm

LaVar wants to free-lance (just like LT did) That really doesn't happen in Greg Williams' scheme. He is a great player, but I love Marcus Washington in this defense. Before this season is over I am sure he will be high on the list of interceptions, and tackles.

hailskins666 · Post by **hailskins666** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:08 pm

i think you got it all wrong. lavar did nothing but "embarass the redskins" from the time gibbs arrived. that was one of the golden rules. rogers and archuleta may not have the raw talent of lavar, BUT, they haven't embarassed the skins off the field with "look at me rants". take that for what you will. team character means more than the TO type here.

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:07 pm

Getting beaten, and "not being where you are supposed to be" are two different things. Rogers was there, he just didn't make the play.

Archuletta was there, but I admit his coverage skills leave something to be desired.

It's tough to say that they were "not where they were supposed to be" when you haven't seen how the defense is drawn up.

The Hogster · Post by **The Hogster** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:09 pm

By the way, it doesn't appear personal to me anymore. I watched the "Manning Bowl" and Lavar didn't play on a lot of 3rd downs and Goal line for the Giants either.

Not to mention, he implied that the coaches were exaggerating his knee injury, yet he was listed as Questionable for the entire week of their game last week.

Truth comes to light.

ArizonaHOG · Post by **ArizonaHOG** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:44 pm

Archuleta was forced to play in passing "schemes" due to Prioleau's injury. We were missing our #1 corner, and Rogers is not quite ready for that role. It was time for Arrington to go. He just did not fit in anymore, especially at the price he was costing. Arrington was a fan favorite (including me) and it was tough to see him go. But the return on investment was not there anymore. Look at all the time he missed in camp/preseason this year due to a knee injury. It was probably a good time for us to let him go. Now that he is with the blue team he can use up their cap space instead of ours.

John Manfreda · Post by **John Manfreda** » Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:13 pm

roybus14 wrote:I ask that question because it appears that there are some guys on the defense like Archuleta and Rogers that are not where they are supposed to be in this so-called "scheme", getting burnt and missing tackles. If the two of them continue to stink up the joint and don't get benched, then it was personal and had nothing to do with Football on the field with Lavar last year. It was retaliation for his off the field stuff.

If he was so undisciplined, then why is he a starter this year for a coach that is known for his discipline????

I personally think this doesn't sounds like Gibbs based on his reputation, but I don't know him so it could be like him, he might be like that, I don't believe it but u never know. My friend knows some of the REdskins old timers and new ones and he said there reputation is nothing like some of them really r, he said some of them r real jerks but when the camaras come on there this nice, friendly wouldn't harm a sole person. If u wanna know who I am talking about message me, I am not going to degrade a player as a person on a message board, even if they r a jerk. I don't know them so I am not going to state it as a fact. He said though Portis is really cool he's someone u would like to have a beer with, he said Moss is really chill he is a guy u can watch tv with all day, Jansan is the man, he said Ramsay is a good guy, he actually said don't let Lavar fool u he is really smart.

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:02 am

theoneandonly#9 wrote:LaVar wants to free-lance (just like LT did) That really doesn't happen in Greg Williams' scheme. He is a great player, but I love Marcus Washington in this defense. Before this season is over I am sure he will be high on the list of interceptions, and tackles.

Getting rid of LaVar was addition by subtraction. Even his teammates blamed him personally for 3 losses the last year he played regularly, including taking his helmet off and drawing a 15 yard penalities and hits so late they were practically in the parking lot after the game.

After a bocku buck deal he spent the next two years crying like a baby over another bonus he wanted. Why on earth would Snyder have paid him that much money and stiffed him over a few mil more and sour the deal? It makes no more sense than cry baby Arrington.

And LT didnt' give up several big plays for each great one.

There is no comparison.

theoneandonly#9 · Post by **theoneandonly#9** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:09 am

True too, I would never compare anyone to LT. And when are the talking heads going to stop calling L. Thompson by those initials? I know they are also his, but in football there will only be one LT.

roybus14 · Post by **roybus14** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 10:12 am

Good responses from all.....

Well if Archuleta and Rogers are where they are supposed to be, then how long does the coaching staff allow them to "not make the play"?

With all that went on last year with Lavar and all the talk about him being a "freelancer" and not being where he is supposed to be, we gave up alot of yards and third down conversions that we normally didn't give up Monday night. So that has me wondering whether or not guys are where they are supposed to be since this defense is predicated on that last year.

The one thing though that is still amazes me is that this defense, based on game 1, appears to ineffective if Springs is not on the field and that GW appears to not have an answer for it. Springs was hurt a couple of times last year but we didn't look like we looked Monday night.

Right now, former Skins like B-Mitch, Doc Walker, and Charles Mann are questioning alot of the defensive departures and acquisitions, mainly Smoot and Ryan Clark and how management was not willing to pay those guys less than what Archuleta got to keep them...

USAFSkinFan · Post by **USAFSkinFan** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 11:25 am

The Hogster wrote:By the way, it doesn't appear personal to me anymore. I watched the "Manning Bowl" and Lavar didn't play on a lot of 3rd downs and Goal line for the Giants either.

Not to mention, he implied that the coaches were exaggerating his knee injury, yet he was listed as Questionable for the entire week of their game last week.

Truth comes to light.

Amen... when the Giants went to their nickel and dime packages, Arrington was the first to sit down...

poper2 · Post by **poper2** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 12:17 pm

ATV wrote:Rogers got beat. It happens. He's still a good cornerback.

As for Archuleta, I thought he had a pretty good game. What did I miss?

Rogers got beat all game long against #2 and #3 WR's. What will he go against Owens and Glenn? He better act right!

JansenFan · Post by **JansenFan** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 12:19 pm

USAFSkinFan wrote:
The Hogster wrote:By the way, it doesn't appear personal to me anymore. I watched the "Manning Bowl" and Lavar didn't play on a lot of 3rd downs and Goal line for the Giants either.

Not to mention, he implied that the coaches were exaggerating his knee injury, yet he was listed as Questionable for the entire week of their game last week.

Truth comes to light.

Amen... when the Giants went to their nickel and dime packages, Arrington was the first to sit down...

but but... He's Mr. Nickels. Shouldn't he play only on nickel packages.

dumbest. nickname. ever.

PulpExposure · Post by **PulpExposure** » Thu Sep 14, 2006 2:13 pm

Right now, former Skins like B-Mitch, Doc Walker, and Charles Mann are questioning alot of the defensive departures and acquisitions, mainly Smoot and Ryan Clark and how management was not willing to pay those guys less than what Archuleta got to keep them...

Way different salary cap situation for Smoot at least. Archuleta got a massive contract, I believe in part because the salcap rose so drastically this year.

theoneandonly#9 wrote:True too, I would never compare anyone to LT. And when are the talking heads going to stop calling L. Thompson by those initials

Maybe when people know his real last name is Tomlinson? Until then, LT is easier...

KazooSkinsFan · Post by **KazooSkinsFan** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:24 pm

PulpExposure wrote:
Way different salary cap situation for Smoot at least. Archuleta got a massive contract, I believe in part because the salcap rose so drastically this year.

I am not against Archuleta, but it seems hard to believe he was worth the same numbers as a pass rusher, jack of all trades and top receiver. Couldn't we have gotten him for less money? Not that Snyder cares, except it does take cap space.

Mursilis · Post by **Mursilis** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:28 pm

KazooSkinsFan wrote: I am not against Archuleta, but it seems hard to believe he was worth the same numbers as a pass rusher, jack of all trades and top receiver. Couldn't we have gotten him for less money?

No, that's about the going rate for safeties who can't cover.
:lol:

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:45 pm

Mursilis wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote: I am not against Archuleta, but it seems hard to believe he was worth the same numbers as a pass rusher, jack of all trades and top receiver. Couldn't we have gotten him for less money?

No, that's about the going rate for safeties who can't cover.

If they both play for the duration of the contracts (niether will) you can say it's the same money. Other than that it isn't

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 4:50 pm

1niksder wrote:
Mursilis wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote: I am not against Archuleta, but it seems hard to believe he was worth the same numbers as a pass rusher, jack of all trades and top receiver. Couldn't we have gotten him for less money?

No, that's about the going rate for safeties who can't cover.

If they both play for the duration of the contracts (niether will) you can say it's the same money. Other than that it isn't

roybus14 wrote:
Right now, former Skins like B-Mitch, Doc Walker, and Charles Mann are questioning alot of the defensive departures and acquisitions, mainly Smoot and Ryan Clark and how management was not willing to pay those guys less than what Archuleta got to keep them...

They point those that have left in order to have something to talk about. How about the real Saftey and Cornerback that were missing. When your starting CB doesn't play and your top backup S goes down before the 1st defensive play, the secondary will suffer. The problem is nothing has been fixed as far as personel goes. GW has had a week to adjust the scheme and Fox as been here a week longer but who knows.

theoneandonly#9 · Post by **theoneandonly#9** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 8:07 pm

PulpExposure wrote:
Right now, former Skins like B-Mitch, Doc Walker, and Charles Mann are questioning alot of the defensive departures and acquisitions, mainly Smoot and Ryan Clark and how management was not willing to pay those guys less than what Archuleta got to keep them...

Way different salary cap situation for Smoot at least. Archuleta got a massive contract, I believe in part because the salcap rose so drastically this year.

theoneandonly#9 wrote:True too, I would never compare anyone to LT. And when are the talking heads going to stop calling L. Thompson by those initials

Maybe when people know his real last name is Tomlinson? Until then, LT is easier...

Whoops, brain fart...got me thanks

yupchagee · Post by **yupchagee** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 11:38 pm

aswas71788 wrote:Something you must keep in mind is that not all players thrive in the same environment. While LaVar thrived in his first years here, it was a different defensive system than Gibbs/Williams uses. There is no knock on LaVar or Gibbs/Williams. LaVar's style of play does not fit the defensive scheme now being used. That does not mean that LaVar is not the same or better than he was or that he will not thrive in a different defensive scheme. Personnally, I hope he does great, except when the Giants play the Redskins, because Arrington gave much to the Redskins and to the DC area while he was here.

LA likes to play agressively. GW uses agressive schemes. He should have fit in perfectly.

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:04 am

roybus14 wrote:I ask that question because it appears that there are some guys on the defense like Archuleta and Rogers that are not where they are supposed to be in this so-called "scheme", getting burnt and missing tackles. If the two of them continue to stink up the joint and don't get benched, then it was personal and had nothing to do with Football on the field with Lavar last year. It was retaliation for his off the field stuff.

If he was so undisciplined, then why is he a starter this year for a coach that is known for his discipline????

Lavar was a victim of his contract. We just simply could not afford him anymore. I love Lavar to this day Im still a fan of his he does not look right in a giants uniform. As far as Archaletta goes he had a decent game and Rogers is making progress. The thing is when your offense is not producing that means your defense is out on the field a whole lot longer and therefore more chances for the opposing team to score. Its simple pick up the production on offense and we will be fine. Once Portis is healthy we will really be able to kick it up a notch at this point we just got to hope we can get production from either Betts or Duckett and you know who we play this week.

roybus14 · Post by **roybus14** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 8:10 am

HEROHAMO wrote:
roybus14 wrote:I ask that question because it appears that there are some guys on the defense like Archuleta and Rogers that are not where they are supposed to be in this so-called "scheme", getting burnt and missing tackles. If the two of them continue to stink up the joint and don't get benched, then it was personal and had nothing to do with Football on the field with Lavar last year. It was retaliation for his off the field stuff.

If he was so undisciplined, then why is he a starter this year for a coach that is known for his discipline????
Lavar was a victim of his contract. We just simply could not afford him anymore. I love Lavar to this day Im still a fan of his he does not look right in a giants uniform. As far as Archaletta goes he had a decent game and Rogers is making progress. The thing is when your offense is not producing that means your defense is out on the field a whole lot longer and therefore more chances for the opposing team to score. Its simple pick up the production on offense and we will be fine. Once Portis is healthy we will really be able to kick it up a notch at this point we just got to hope we can get production from either Betts or Duckett and you know who we play this week.

I agree with your Lavar point but I have to "beg to differ Cliffer" on your other point(s). Through the preaseason and now one regular season game, the defense, in particular, those two dudes are looking mighty suspect. We had the same problem with the offense not producing last year but the defense still held strong.

The Ravens defense has been able to be consistently a top ten defense for the past 5-6 years despite having an offense that is anemic. That team has actually been lead by it's defense and has been able to survive when their "shut-down" corner, Chris McAllister, has been hurt. Hell, they lost Duane Starks and Will Demps, keep right on rolling. Now they got Samari Rolle but he's getting old and Ed Reed, another guy from "the U" like Sean Taylor, has been very, very strong in his play at Safety.

Why is that team able to lose key components on their defense and continue to be very good and we can't???

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Was it Personal or Was it Football?

Was it Personal or Was it Football?

Re: Was it Personal or Was it Football?

Re: Was it Personal or Was it Football?

Re: Was it Personal or Was it Football?