The Hogster wrote:Why not make a decisoin to suspend him, or fine him. Noo, we have to paraade him out there in his uniform like he is in a Chunky Soup commercial and then not put him on the field.
It boils down to numbers, man, in every sense of the word. This is like the Ramsey situation. Why wouldn't we trade him to the Jets?? Because we need a serviceable backup, in case "THE MAN" goes down due to injury. Lavar still remains an able body, and if need be he will be called upon to play for this team.
IN the coaches' opinions, he's not the best at running this scheme. Hopefully, in between pouring his heart out on the air, he's studying harrrrrrd to be ready when called upon. If the man gets to play and he looks rusty, or reverts to his freelancing ways, than all of his complaining will have been for naught, other than for a paycheck, of course.
Okay Redeemed, you think this is about Arrington not being right for GW's scheme, huh?
Explain last year then. Why did GW start Lavar over Lemar Marshall, over Antonio Pierce? Why? Did he magically 'unlearn the system?" Please support your argument.
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:it would be unfair to tell a Warrick Holdman, "um, the guy you replaced, who hasn't played in over a year, is healthy again, so you got to step." That's just wrong.
Are you serious? That's just wrong? Whether you feel that the decision to put a player on the field is disrespectful or unjust [to Holdman], it would be a decision made to help the team improve on defense. Holdman directly contributed to Bell getting into the endzone on one of those TD runs because he didnt shed a block. This is a competitive business and if you can't perform as well as the next guy, then you deserve to be 2nd string.
If thats the case then Clark and a few other redskins need to be benched because I spotted A LOT of missed tackles.
So Lavar is unblockable now? If you can make that statement then I'm going to play along and say that Lavar wouldn't have been in position to make the tackle anyway.
vtfootball07 wrote:This is a competitive business and if you can't perform as well as the next guy, then you deserve to be 2nd string.
Currently, Holdman has done enough to warrant the coaches' decision to start him over #56. We can only speculate on what Lavar can or can't do for this team, based on his hype from 2 or more years ago. What has Lavar done lately, other than whine and complain? Not much.
As for this being a business...
I think it's clear that the team has been all about business, as the 3-1 record clearly shows. Whatever they're doing, seems to be working. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If we were 1-3, and Lavar were still on the bench, we'd be obligated to give the guy some PT, but the guys on the field have chemistry, which the coaches have worked hard to form.
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:it would be unfair to tell a Warrick Holdman, "um, the guy you replaced, who hasn't played in over a year, is healthy again, so you got to step." That's just wrong.
Are you serious? That's just wrong? Whether you feel that the decision to put a player on the field is disrespectful or unjust [to Holdman], it would be a decision made to help the team improve on defense. Holdman directly contributed to Bell getting into the endzone on one of those TD runs because he didnt shed a block. This is a competitive business and if you can't perform as well as the next guy, then you deserve to be 2nd string.
If thats the case then Clark and a few other redskins need to be benched because I spotted A LOT of missed tackles.
So Lavar is unblockable now? :roll: If you can make that statement then I'm going to play along and say that Lavar wouldn't have been in position to make the tackle anyway. :lol:
I understand what you are saying and did not mean to assert that LaVar would have been in position. I just have a problem with LA being put in the game called "wrong" as if it is a moral or ethical dilemma. Business is business, and results are all that matters. I don't care who is on the field so long as we win. Both Bowen and Ryan Clark played safety during the game. One may say that Bowen is a solid contributor and plays during the game because he fits certain packages. LaVar has also been called a solid contributor in the past. I find it hard to believe that a player as versatile as LA just doesn't fit into some of GW's schemes. Just my opinion.
The Hogster wrote:Okay Redeemed, you think this is about Arrington not being right for GW's scheme, huh?
Explain last year then. Why did GW start Lavar over Lemar Marshall, over Antonio Pierce? Why? Did he magically 'unlearn the system?" Please support your argument.
For the same reason that Coles and Gardner were starters on the team and were not jettisoned earlier. Joe inherited a "situation", not a team. Since last season he has begun to form HIS team, not Spurrier's or Marty's. Some pieces didn't/don't fit, and that's sometimes a hard truth to swallow. It just might be that Lavar is one of those square pegs trying to fit in a round hole.
Keep in mind, too, Danny signed Lavar to the extension BEFORE Joe arrived. Had Joe had a say in it, we wouldn't be in this situation right now, and Lavar might have been shipped to his boyhood team, the Stillers.
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:it would be unfair to tell a Warrick Holdman, "um, the guy you replaced, who hasn't played in over a year, is healthy again, so you got to step." That's just wrong.
Are you serious? That's just wrong? Whether you feel that the decision to put a player on the field is disrespectful or unjust [to Holdman], it would be a decision made to help the team improve on defense. Holdman directly contributed to Bell getting into the endzone on one of those TD runs because he didnt shed a block. This is a competitive business and if you can't perform as well as the next guy, then you deserve to be 2nd string.
If thats the case then Clark and a few other redskins need to be benched because I spotted A LOT of missed tackles.
So Lavar is unblockable now? If you can make that statement then I'm going to play along and say that Lavar wouldn't have been in position to make the tackle anyway.
I understand what you are saying and did not mean to assert that LaVar would have been in position. I just have a problem with LA being put in the game called "wrong" as if it is a moral or ethical dilemma. Business is business, and results are all that matters. I don't care who is on the field so long as we win. Both Bowen and Ryan Clark played safety during the game. One may say that Bowen is a solid contributor and plays during the game because he fits certain packages. LaVar has also been called a solid contributor in the past. I find it hard to believe that a player as versatile as LA just doesn't fit into some of GW's schemes. Just my opinion.
I still disagree. When Gibbs came here everyone was on the Gibbs type player train!! Gibbs this, Gibbs that. This to me seems like a Gibbs type action and now people are against it.
People earn positions and I assume as I dont know anymore than what you guys kno and Im going to take the coaches words for truth that Lavar has not EARNED his position back.
Now you can call me naive or whatever because I choose to stand behind my coaches, I really could careless.
Here's few numbers...
As Lavar playing time has gone South our opponents rushing yards are headed North..and we're headed into a game against the league best one two punch at RB!
Chi...41
Dal...90
Sea...119
Den...165
"Sean Taylor is hands down the best athlete I've ever coached it's not even close" Gregg Williams 2005 Mini-Camp
I think that the one point trying to be made by "us" Lavar supporters, is this. #56 is a playmaker, just like #21 is. Warrick Holdman can get his entire body into the shoes that Lavar wears. Arrington's shoes are too big for Holdman. They don't fit. This defense is good, it can be great, built around playmakers, not just schemes. We want to see this defense built around Arrington and Taylor because it makes so much sense. Gibbs offense couldn't get any yards until Santana and Brunell showed the Cowboys what they could do. Gibbs is starting to trust this offense and will open it up even more as we get better. If GW won't give Lavar a chance just like the offense had a chance to prove itself than what is the pt. of having Arrington on the sideline. WE NEED SACKS AND TURNOVERS AND EVENTUALLY LAVAR IS GOING TO BE IN THE MIDST. AS A REDSKINS FAN SINCE I WAS 6 YRS. OLD I CAN FEEL THIS IN MY GUT. LAVAR IS A PLAYMAKER.
vtfootball07 wrote:I just have a problem with LA being put in the game called "wrong" as if it is a moral or ethical dilemma. Business is business, and results are all that matters.
Not to Joe. He was clear that he wanted "character" guys on his team, and Lavar has not shown that over the past year. Sure, ST tried to make swiss cheese outta people, but those were personal problems. Lavar went after the team, publicly, and openly criticized the very team that allows him to live the lavish lifestyle he enjoys.
I don't care who is on the field so long as we win. Both Bowen and Ryan Clark played safety during the game.
Then just sit back, relax, and enjoy the team's progress. At 3-1 we are in control of the division, and look like we're gonna make the playoffs for the first time in a long time.
Since you don't care who plays and like to win, let the coaches coach, and let the players who are called upon play. So far, the coaches have earned the benefit of the doubt.
After listening to LaVar on the John Thompson show today and thinking about it, it's pretty clear that the vast majority of this has nothing to do with LaVar's playing. It's a personality issue. They have decided that LaVar is not a guy they want around.
Clearly the contract dispute and LaVar's comments after his injury have soured them on him. Its a shame though, as throwing away someone this talented both hurts our chances in games, and could easily lead to a team that doesn't respect ownership.
DEHog wrote:Here's few numbers... As Lavar playing time has gone South our opponents rushing yards are headed North..and we're headed into a game against the league best one two punch at RB!
Chi...41 Dal...90 Sea...119 Den...165
Has Lavar really been that effective in any of these games to have his presecence actually mean something? Im serious, not trying to be smart. You bring up some interesting stats.
So Lavar didn't play last year.
Marshall took his spot.
Marshall moved to MLB and now Holdman is in his old spot.
Arrington is back.
So Holdman can't play the position as well as Marshall?
I can see the train of thought but what if by some weird chance that Lavar is actually worse than Holdman. What would happen then?
What if the coaches break their integrity and give into a "Star" players demands what does that do to the rest of the team who has bought into the system and the coaches ideals? Aren't these the things we've been lacking for so long?
DEHog wrote:Here's few numbers... As Lavar playing time has gone South our opponents rushing yards are headed North..and we're headed into a game against the league best one two punch at RB!
Chi...41 Dal...90 Sea...119 Den...165
Don't forget about last year's numbers, though, DEHog. You can't discredit the success we had last year, when talking about our defense. If anything, the "regression" has more to do with the departure of A. Pierce than Arrington's absence, since, after all, Pierce contributed more to the overall team success than Lavar did last year.
My friend told me that Lavar said that on the radio, the coaches haven't been allowing him to practice. Anyone else here this. I just heard it through a friend, I don't know if its Lavar being Lavar or truth, I was wondering if any of u heard it or know the story. One of my questions is not allowed to practice this week, or past couple of weeks?
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:it would be unfair to tell a Warrick Holdman, "um, the guy you replaced, who hasn't played in over a year, is healthy again, so you got to step." That's just wrong.
Are you serious? That's just wrong? Whether you feel that the decision to put a player on the field is disrespectful or unjust [to Holdman], it would be a decision made to help the team improve on defense. Holdman directly contributed to Bell getting into the endzone on one of those TD runs because he didnt shed a block. This is a competitive business and if you can't perform as well as the next guy, then you deserve to be 2nd string.
If thats the case then Clark and a few other redskins need to be benched because I spotted A LOT of missed tackles.
So Lavar is unblockable now? If you can make that statement then I'm going to play along and say that Lavar wouldn't have been in position to make the tackle anyway.
I understand what you are saying and did not mean to assert that LaVar would have been in position. I just have a problem with LA being put in the game called "wrong" as if it is a moral or ethical dilemma. Business is business, and results are all that matters. I don't care who is on the field so long as we win. Both Bowen and Ryan Clark played safety during the game. One may say that Bowen is a solid contributor and plays during the game because he fits certain packages. LaVar has also been called a solid contributor in the past. I find it hard to believe that a player as versatile as LA just doesn't fit into some of GW's schemes. Just my opinion.
I still disagree. When Gibbs came here everyone was on the Gibbs type player train!! Gibbs this, Gibbs that. This to me seems like a Gibbs type action and now people are against it.
People earn positions and I assume as I dont know anymore than what you guys kno and Im going to take the coaches words for truth that Lavar has not EARNED his position back.
Now you can call me naive or whatever because I choose to stand behind my coaches, I really could careless.
Did Brunell earn his position back? I say no he didn't. Gibbs gave it to him out of default and a gut instinct. Lavar Arrington deserves to be on the field because he creates mismatches for the offense, and that is what GW defense is all about. It just doesn't make any sense to have him on the sideline, jacked up, and no body to hit, with a clean uniform.
I have held back from saying this. IT IS A SIN!
DEHog wrote:Here's few numbers... As Lavar playing time has gone South our opponents rushing yards are headed North..and we're headed into a game against the league best one two punch at RB!
Chi...41 Dal...90 Sea...119 Den...165
Don't forget about last year's numbers, though, DEHog. You can't discredit the success we had last year, when talking about our defense. If anything, the "regression" has more to do with the departure of A. Pierce than Arrington's absence, since, after all, Pierce contributed more to the overall team success than Lavar did last year.
That is kinda what I was thinking. If Im wrong Im willing to listen.
KPrince1975 wrote:We want to see this defense built around Arrington and Taylor because it makes so much sense. Gibbs offense couldn't get any yards until Santana and Brunell showed the Cowboys what they could do. Gibbs is starting to trust this offense and will open it up even more as we get better.
As much as I pull for Brunell, the success of the offense, as a whole, is the reason why the unit has vastly improved. The line protects the QB better, and the recievers are certainly an upgrade from last year's gripers.
I respect the talents of the Sean Taylors and Lavar Arringtons of the NFL, but, as the Patriots have shown, the team needs to pull together to win the big one, and Lavar is slowly drifting away.
All valid points...My point is Lavar played in the Chi game and then less in D and then 2 plays vs. Sea and none this past week. Yes we play very well against the run last year without Lavar, but we aren't doing it this year. I just can't see keeping a player like him off the field. He!! put him at MLB and move Lemar outside. "As GW said on June 18th I'm a better coach when Lavar's on the field".
"Sean Taylor is hands down the best athlete I've ever coached it's not even close" Gregg Williams 2005 Mini-Camp
John Manfreda wrote:My friend told me that Lavar said that on the radio, the coaches haven't been allowing him to practice. Anyone else here this. I just heard it through a friend, I don't know if its Lavar being Lavar or truth, I was wondering if any of u heard it or know the story. One of my questions is not allowed to practice this week, or past couple of weeks?
He said something to the likes of "You tell me you want me to show you in practice, but you don't give me the chance to show you [in practice]."
Personally, I think the coaches feel they can't wait for #56 to play catch up with the rest of the team. The team is on a roll, and we need to move forward. He kinda expressed last year that he was not coddled enough (:oops: kay, "mistreated" by the team during his injury; almost forgotten), and these coaches will not do that. Last year was a rebuilding year; this year, we're on a roll and we can't come to a sudden halt to make sure ONE guy is up to speed, when we have 12 more games [in a row] to play, and each one is key to our playoff hopes.
KPrince1975 wrote:We want to see this defense built around Arrington and Taylor because it makes so much sense. Gibbs offense couldn't get any yards until Santana and Brunell showed the Cowboys what they could do. Gibbs is starting to trust this offense and will open it up even more as we get better.
As much as I pull for Brunell, the success of the offense, as a whole, is the reason why the unit has vastly improved. The line protects the QB better, and the recievers are certainly an upgrade from last year's gripers.
I respect the talents of the Sean Taylors and Lavar Arringtons of the NFL, but, as the Patriots have shown, the team needs to pull together to win the big one, and Lavar is slowly drifting away.
I see him drifting away, and I know he is a grown man, but why can't the coaches communicate with him. They are the coaches. It seems like he is being allowed to make a mess of things. I just wish the coaches would lead him instead of misleading him! And him in uniform, being a pro bowl player and the face of this franchise, and then not playing him AT ALL, IS MISLEADING!
Chris Luva Luva wrote:"lavar wasn't even allowed to practice" has been merged with the already merged lavar thread.
All the merging almost buried this.
Did he really say this on the radio?
If so, that is a way to Never get on the field. Gibbs hates it when you air dirty laundry. This stuff needs to stay in house. If he really said this I will bet he is not activated this week.
"I DN'T ENVISION MYSELF LEAVING, BUT I CN'T STAY WHERE I'M NT WANTED AFTER ALL THESE REPORTS R COMIN OUT DAILY!" - TO
DEHog wrote:All valid points...My point is Lavar played in the Chi game and then less in D and then 2 plays vs. Sea and none this past week. Yes we play very well against the run last year without Lavar, but we aren't doing it this year. I just can't see keeping a player like him off the field. He!! put him at MLB and move Lemar outside. "As GW said on June 18th I'm a better coach when Lavar's on the field".
Of course, he didn't specify which PART of the field.
At 3-1, it seems like the team is doing just fine with him on the sideline.
John Manfreda wrote:My friend told me that Lavar said that on the radio, the coaches haven't been allowing him to practice. Anyone else here this. I just heard it through a friend, I don't know if its Lavar being Lavar or truth, I was wondering if any of u heard it or know the story. One of my questions is not allowed to practice this week, or past couple of weeks?
He said something to the likes of "You tell me you want me to show you in practice, but you don't give me the chance to show you [in practice]."
Personally, I think the coaches feel they can't wait for #56 to play catch up with the rest of the team. The team is on a roll, and we need to move forward. He kinda expressed last year that he was not coddled enough (:oops: kay, "mistreated" by the team during his injury; almost forgotten), and these coaches will not do that. Last year was a rebuilding year; this year, we're on a roll and we can't come to a sudden halt to make sure ONE guy is up to speed, when we have 12 more games [in a row] to play, and each one is key to our playoff hopes.
Yes we can, if that one player can make a difference to their team. There are 24 hours in a day, and somebody needs to take a few and help this man out, SO HE CAN HELP THIS DEFENSE GET MEAN!
Chris Luva Luva wrote:"lavar wasn't even allowed to practice" has been merged with the already merged lavar thread.
All the merging almost buried this. Did he really say this on the radio? If so, that is a way to Never get on the field. Gibbs hates it when you air dirty laundry. This stuff needs to stay in house. If he really said this I will bet he is not activated this week.
This is my entire point. The coaches and Lavar need to communicate and end this. Lavar thinks he can speak out because, in a way, this team depended on him, and now it doesn't and that is frustrating to him. The guy is frustrated so help him become unfrustrated. Slap him in the face and tell him to sit down and shut up and get ready to EAT PRIEST HOLMES ALIVE! Tell the man something. End this ridiculous situation one way or the other.
KPrince1975 wrote:I just wish the coaches would lead him instead of misleading him! And him in uniform, being a pro bowl player and the face of this franchise, and then not playing him AT ALL, IS MISLEADING!
I think I just saw a job posting on craigslist for a job over at Redskins Park, which might address this very issue:
Are you the next "Official Handholder of the Washington Redskins"???
Job description:Great opportunity for experienced handholder to lead high-priced employee through the rigors of an NFL season. Nanny's, babysitters, and social workers are encouraged to apply. Apply now to be a part of this billion dollar corporation. Enjoy preffered limited view seating right on the bench!!!
