The Hogster wrote:The deal is that we are wasting 12 million dollars this season by not playing the guy, even if just a little.
That's only one sentence. He wanted three!
Lavar Arrinton.... Merged
-
cvillehog
- Hog
- Posts: 5220
- youtube meble na wymiar Warszawa
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 3:03 pm
- Location: Richmond, VA
-
The Hogster
- #######
- Posts: 7225
- Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:13 pm
- Location: Washington D.C.
-
REDEEMEDSKIN
- ~~
- Posts: 8496
- Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
The Hogster wrote:REDEEMEDSKIN wrote: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.
Yeah but we just settled his arbitration hearing this past offseason, so I don't get your point.
My point is, the first contract Lavar signed basically said we were stuck with him through the length of the contract. Of course, we did rob him of $6.5 million to make up for it...
However, this renegotiation, mediation, arbitration, or whatever you want to call it, was done with the following in mind:
"When negotiating a contract, always leave a way to get out of it."
That's precisely what Joe did. While we are currently "stuck" with #56, it's no longer a gimme that he'll be due that bonus he thought we stole, plus we have the chance that he will not play for us (okay, won;t be on the team.
) sooner than the original contract stated.Again, Joe is cleaning house. If Lavar wants to play for this team, he will have to play by house rules. His actions need to speak louder than his words. He talks a good game, but it seems like he's not walkin' it, in terms of being a true "team player". It seems like he's out for #1, himself, with the way he's handled things.
Back and better than ever!
I think this article below, from the laundry rag/post (thanks to 1niksder) is pretty close - I think that we will see him playing as soon as GW and Joe think the situation warrants it. These guys are in charge and this is their team at this point. Given their "progress" and our record this year, IMO, they deserve our support. Questioning the logic is fine but IMO it is not that big a deal, hopefully!
Wash. Post article
Wash. Post article
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance
Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
-
The Hogster
- #######
- Posts: 7225
- Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:13 pm
- Location: Washington D.C.
I am always positive about our team. I supported the Coles trade, Gardner trade, and starting Mark Brunnell. I would even support the Arrington benching if his replacement were clearly superior.
The only reason why this is a big deal is not so much that Arrington is a 3 x Pro-Bowler, but Holdman has not done anything except whiff at Tatum Bell (out of position) and loose containment on the game breaking TD. Our D-Ends also haven't gotten sacks.
Our Defense is great, but we need to force turnovers. Our offense will not be turnover free for an entire season, so at some point we have to force some turnovers, a thing for which Lavar has the ability to contribute.
The only reason why this is a big deal is not so much that Arrington is a 3 x Pro-Bowler, but Holdman has not done anything except whiff at Tatum Bell (out of position) and loose containment on the game breaking TD. Our D-Ends also haven't gotten sacks.
Our Defense is great, but we need to force turnovers. Our offense will not be turnover free for an entire season, so at some point we have to force some turnovers, a thing for which Lavar has the ability to contribute.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________
___________________________
Scooter wrote:I'd be very surprised if Arrington's not in the lineup in KC.
I'd get ready to be surprised then. Lavar is done on this team -- for better or worse. IMO, we could use his talent. But, barring an injury to Holdman, unless he can impress the coaches with a new attitude he won't see full game in a Skins uniform.
"The biggest misrepresentation there is that [it's because] Dan's got a lot of money. That's not it," Gibbs said. "We've got a rule. Believe me, if we had no rules, Dan would spend some money."
— Bobby Beathard
— Bobby Beathard
AZHog wrote: Lavar is done on this team, barring an injury to Holdman, unless he can impress the coaches with a new attitude he won't see full game in a Skins uniform.
Where did this information come from?
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance
Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
Is he starting? No.
Is he playing any major defensive role? No.
Is he playing Special Teams -- even though he said he would? No.
Is he doing anything constructive for the team other that mouthing off about his playing time? Sure doesn't seem that way.
It's pretty obvious that the writing's on the wall. Like I said, unless Holdman gets injured or Lavar changes his attitude 180 degrees, he won't start.
Is he playing any major defensive role? No.
Is he playing Special Teams -- even though he said he would? No.
Is he doing anything constructive for the team other that mouthing off about his playing time? Sure doesn't seem that way.
It's pretty obvious that the writing's on the wall. Like I said, unless Holdman gets injured or Lavar changes his attitude 180 degrees, he won't start.
"The biggest misrepresentation there is that [it's because] Dan's got a lot of money. That's not it," Gibbs said. "We've got a rule. Believe me, if we had no rules, Dan would spend some money."
— Bobby Beathard
— Bobby Beathard
-
The Hogster
- #######
- Posts: 7225
- Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:13 pm
- Location: Washington D.C.
Unless Arrington is saying one thing to the media and another thing to the coaches, then I don't see the major problem with his attitude. But I defer to the coaches...listening to Gibb's press conference though, he seems increasingly ticked off that the Defense is not forcing any turnovers and that we are not getting a short field.
He even said that he wanted Lavar on the field but that it is a coach's decision on Redskins.com, I would think we will see Lavar in the future if this trend of not getting turnovers continues.
It all smells of high drama because Lemar Marshall filled in quite well for Arrington last year (better than Holdman this year) yet when Arrington was less than 100 percent after the injury he regained his role with the team.
This year, with arguably a lesser player in front of him, he has yet to do that. I hope he comes around and makes this situation right with the cocaches and gets back out there to smack people around.
He even said that he wanted Lavar on the field but that it is a coach's decision on Redskins.com, I would think we will see Lavar in the future if this trend of not getting turnovers continues.
It all smells of high drama because Lemar Marshall filled in quite well for Arrington last year (better than Holdman this year) yet when Arrington was less than 100 percent after the injury he regained his role with the team.
This year, with arguably a lesser player in front of him, he has yet to do that. I hope he comes around and makes this situation right with the cocaches and gets back out there to smack people around.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________
___________________________
when are we going to let the dog out?
By Leonard Shapiro
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 12, 2005; Page E06
Saying, "I've put myself in the doghouse somehow," Washington Redskins linebacker LaVar Arrington has no idea why he's not playing and vehemently disagreed with defensive chief Gregg Williams's assertion last week that players who want to be on the field Sunday "have to do it in practice."
During his weekly appearance on "The John Thompson Show" on WTEM radio, Arrington said yesterday: "Like Coach Williams says, I've got to show them in practice. Well in practice, give me some reps [repetitions] so you can see what I can do. If you're not going to play me, then don't play me. Just don't make things up about why I'm not playing. I'm healthy. I'm of sound mind and body. Don't try to slander me. It's being insinuated that I'm not smart enough to play this defense. That's absurd.
Despite being aggressive, the defense has not created any turnovers in the last three games.
Notebook: LaVar Arrington says he is in the 'doghouse' and he doesn't know why.
"If you have a guy that you say he needs to prove he knows the schemes, if he doesn't do much of anything, how do you get the opportunity to see if he's improved. That's where I'm at."
Arrington, a three-time Pro Bowl player, was on the Redskins' active roster but did not play in the team's 21-19 loss to the Denver Broncos on Sunday. The week before against Seattle, he was in on two plays.
Coach Joe Gibbs said on Monday he hopes Arrington will play more. He said he didn't play against Denver because he did not figure into the game plan against a team that runs deceptive cutback plays and often throws from outside the pocket.
"If I was making an educated guess, if you go six plays to four plays to two plays to no plays, I would say it's going the opposite way," Arrington said, when Thompson asked him if there was a chance he would play more this season. "As far down as I can go is being inactive. I haven't been put on the inactive list yet. I don't know if it's something they're planning. . . . I'm watching the game [Sunday] and I know in my heart I can make a difference.
"When you see close games being won and close games being lost, it's difficult. I was someone this organization leaned on to get through these type of games. It's still 12 weeks to go [in the regular season]. It doesn't seem like this is going to change any. I don't know how to take it, or how to react to it. . . . I'm not someone content on collecting a check. It's what I've been reduced to."
Arrington also indicated he would have no problem playing on special teams if he was asked to do so.
"I approached [special teams coach] Danny Smith," he said. "If he wants me to do something, let's have it. I'm with it. I just want to help. . . . I'm not playing because I can't play. I don't know why I'm not playing. . . . If they put me out there to hit somebody, that's what I'll do.
"I'm to the point now that it's overshadowing what we're doing. I hate that this is where we're at. I'd rather know why I'm in the position I'm in. . . . I can handle you telling me. It's not telling me."
Sounds real bad...It's complete BS that Lavar isn't getting playing time, and from what it sounds like above he is not getting much practice time either!
Come on Danny Boy....own up and tell your teams fans what is going on!
PS.(how does Lavar like his big screen TV?)
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 12, 2005; Page E06
Saying, "I've put myself in the doghouse somehow," Washington Redskins linebacker LaVar Arrington has no idea why he's not playing and vehemently disagreed with defensive chief Gregg Williams's assertion last week that players who want to be on the field Sunday "have to do it in practice."
During his weekly appearance on "The John Thompson Show" on WTEM radio, Arrington said yesterday: "Like Coach Williams says, I've got to show them in practice. Well in practice, give me some reps [repetitions] so you can see what I can do. If you're not going to play me, then don't play me. Just don't make things up about why I'm not playing. I'm healthy. I'm of sound mind and body. Don't try to slander me. It's being insinuated that I'm not smart enough to play this defense. That's absurd.
Despite being aggressive, the defense has not created any turnovers in the last three games.
Notebook: LaVar Arrington says he is in the 'doghouse' and he doesn't know why.
"If you have a guy that you say he needs to prove he knows the schemes, if he doesn't do much of anything, how do you get the opportunity to see if he's improved. That's where I'm at."
Arrington, a three-time Pro Bowl player, was on the Redskins' active roster but did not play in the team's 21-19 loss to the Denver Broncos on Sunday. The week before against Seattle, he was in on two plays.
Coach Joe Gibbs said on Monday he hopes Arrington will play more. He said he didn't play against Denver because he did not figure into the game plan against a team that runs deceptive cutback plays and often throws from outside the pocket.
"If I was making an educated guess, if you go six plays to four plays to two plays to no plays, I would say it's going the opposite way," Arrington said, when Thompson asked him if there was a chance he would play more this season. "As far down as I can go is being inactive. I haven't been put on the inactive list yet. I don't know if it's something they're planning. . . . I'm watching the game [Sunday] and I know in my heart I can make a difference.
"When you see close games being won and close games being lost, it's difficult. I was someone this organization leaned on to get through these type of games. It's still 12 weeks to go [in the regular season]. It doesn't seem like this is going to change any. I don't know how to take it, or how to react to it. . . . I'm not someone content on collecting a check. It's what I've been reduced to."
Arrington also indicated he would have no problem playing on special teams if he was asked to do so.
"I approached [special teams coach] Danny Smith," he said. "If he wants me to do something, let's have it. I'm with it. I just want to help. . . . I'm not playing because I can't play. I don't know why I'm not playing. . . . If they put me out there to hit somebody, that's what I'll do.
"I'm to the point now that it's overshadowing what we're doing. I hate that this is where we're at. I'd rather know why I'm in the position I'm in. . . . I can handle you telling me. It's not telling me."
Sounds real bad...It's complete BS that Lavar isn't getting playing time, and from what it sounds like above he is not getting much practice time either!
Come on Danny Boy....own up and tell your teams fans what is going on!
PS.(how does Lavar like his big screen TV?)
Are you referring to Dan Snyder or Danny Smith?
If Snyder, why do you think Danny has anything to do with this? Gibbs is the GM and HC. He has final say-so about who's playing. Next on the pecking order would be GW -- Danny's nowhere near that.
If Smith, not sure why Lavar's not at least on ST.
If Snyder, why do you think Danny has anything to do with this? Gibbs is the GM and HC. He has final say-so about who's playing. Next on the pecking order would be GW -- Danny's nowhere near that.
If Smith, not sure why Lavar's not at least on ST.
"The biggest misrepresentation there is that [it's because] Dan's got a lot of money. That's not it," Gibbs said. "We've got a rule. Believe me, if we had no rules, Dan would spend some money."
— Bobby Beathard
— Bobby Beathard
-
The Hogster
- #######
- Posts: 7225
- Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:13 pm
- Location: Washington D.C.
REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:The Hogster wrote:REDEEMEDSKIN wrote: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.
Yeah but we just settled his arbitration hearing this past offseason, so I don't get your point.
My point is, the first contract Lavar signed basically said we were stuck with him through the length of the contract. Of course, we did rob him of $6.5 million to make up for it...
However, this renegotiation, mediation, arbitration, or whatever you want to call it, was done with the following in mind:
"When negotiating a contract, always leave a way to get out of it."
That's precisely what Joe did. While we are currently "stuck" with #56, it's no longer a gimme that he'll be due that bonus he thought we stole, plus we have the chance that he will not play for us (okay, won;t be on the team.
Again, Joe is cleaning house. If Lavar wants to play for this team, he will have to play by house rules. His actions need to speak louder than his words. He talks a good game, but it seems like he's not walkin' it, in terms of being a true "team player". It seems like he's out for #1, himself, with the way he's handled things.
The team can always get out of an NFL contract, but I sort of get your point. No matter what the fans might say, there is no way you can convince anybody in the NFL that Lavar Arrington can't play more than 2 snaps a game.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________
___________________________
-
REDEEMEDSKIN
- ~~
- Posts: 8496
- Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
The Hogster wrote:The team can always get out of an NFL contract, but I sort of get your point. No matter what the fans might say, there is no way you can convince anybody in the NFL that Lavar Arrington can't play more than 2 snaps a game.
Agreed. Can you imagine what havoc a controlled (within the system) a hungry Lavar Arrington could potentially wreak on opposing teams?????
Hopefully, we get to see this sometime this season. However, as Joe says, its a coaches decision.
Back and better than ever!
-
SkinsBigtime
- Hog
- Posts: 214
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 9:31 am
- Location: Annapolis
-
REDEEMEDSKIN
- ~~
- Posts: 8496
- Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
SkinsBigtime wrote:I'm so suprised with Lavar's patience through this whole thing. I mean, he is a three-time probowler!!! I think it would get me pretty steamed to be benched for an entire game, but Lavar is as cool as a cucumber.
It's amazing how much patience a feww million dollars can buy, huh?
He's still getting a paycheck, while he sits, so it's not THAT hard for him.
However, as an entertainer, it must really burn inside to not be able to showcase his skills.
Back and better than ever!
-
The Hogster
- #######
- Posts: 7225
- Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:13 pm
- Location: Washington D.C.
I agree with you there. I am sure we all would forget about this mess if by week 7 Lavar has been integrated into the second string defense and is making his presence felt. I would just love to put out Eli Manning or D-McNabb or even Drew Bledsoe with a Aikman like head rocker.
Best wishes to Lavar.
Best wishes to Lavar.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________
___________________________
-
Dannyboysucks
- piglet
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:37 pm
- Location: Beaufort SC
I'm going to change my stance on this situation. LA seems to be telling the truth. The coaching staff is not. Is this a carry over from the contract, undiscipled work patterns, the blaming of coaches for his knee issues... I don't know. But why is the staff vague. Why does the staff dance around questions addressed about LA. Certainly seems to be cowardly, and if their not careful it will funnel down to disention within the team. Gibbs is used to mananging head cases with Manley, Riggins, Theismann, so I have full confidence in our coach. I just hope our coach sees a defense that doesn't take the ball away, doesn't rush the passer, and is starting to feel a little pressure with stopping the run. LA surely wouldn't hurt.
-
REDEEMEDSKIN
- ~~
- Posts: 8496
- Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 3:12 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Dannyboysucks wrote:I'm going to change my stance on this situation. LA seems to be telling the truth. The coaching staff is not.... But why is the staff vague. Why does the staff dance around questions addressed about LA.
The coaching staff isn't lying. I thing they divulge information on a "need-to-know" basis, and it's apparent that they feel we don't need to know. As for dissention (sp?), I'm confident that they will deal with it as they should, in house.
While it's cool to have Lavar openly talk about his feelings and emotions, I think it would be wise for him not to continue to stir the pot, as he is doing (intentionally or not).
Back and better than ever!
Alright, check this out
http://extremeskins.com/CrazyZeb/Week15 ... isBack.mpg
I found it on the "official"
website... however they do have a pretty cool Film Zone, but whatever.
Now maybe he doesnt need to play LB, and by watching that clip, he NEEDS to play DE.
I mean the guy is a playmaker, and I'll just leave it at that.
http://extremeskins.com/CrazyZeb/Week15 ... isBack.mpg
I found it on the "official"
website... however they do have a pretty cool Film Zone, but whatever.
Now maybe he doesnt need to play LB, and by watching that clip, he NEEDS to play DE.
I mean the guy is a playmaker, and I'll just leave it at that.
joebagadonuts on IsaneBoost's signature:
-- "I laughed. I cried. Better than Cats"
-- "I laughed. I cried. Better than Cats"
-
gay4pacman
- Pacman Rules
- Posts: 1842
- Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 8:56 pm
- Location: Lawn Monster
-
jeremyroyce
- Hog
- Posts: 1351
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:27 pm
It seems to me that everyone is failing to mention that LA is getting paid what 50 million dollars, he took the Redskins to court over what 6.5 million dollars, and he also called Daniel Snyder a thief and the devil... Now he just keeps opening his mouth and making things worse... Would you want this guy on your team after this... LA is all about him and he is not a team player... Its time to send him packing good day
-
Scottskins
- ########
- Posts: 2591
- Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 1:54 am
- Location: The other Washington
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2189391
"LaVar said nobody's talked to him," Gibbs said. "I've talked to LaVar more than any other player I've ever coached in 30 years, probably three times more. I've had great conversations with him, and told him exactly what he needs to do. Our coaching staff here has got tons of experience, and, I believe, play the best guys. And so at whatever point LaVar's the best person to be in there, I'm convinced he'll be in there."
Gibbs' assistants have been more blunt. Gregg Williams, the assistant head coach for defense, said last week that Arrington needs to practice better, and Joe Bugel offered probably the most revealing insight -- that the team can't play someone who mixes one flashy play with four or five bad ones.
Then Lavar talked more crap on his radio show.
Lavar is definitely done on this team unless he has a complete turnaround. He may have pushed Gibbs too far already. Lavar will never see his potential fullfilled with the head on his shoulders. He's too immature and just makes bad decisions...
"LaVar said nobody's talked to him," Gibbs said. "I've talked to LaVar more than any other player I've ever coached in 30 years, probably three times more. I've had great conversations with him, and told him exactly what he needs to do. Our coaching staff here has got tons of experience, and, I believe, play the best guys. And so at whatever point LaVar's the best person to be in there, I'm convinced he'll be in there."
Gibbs' assistants have been more blunt. Gregg Williams, the assistant head coach for defense, said last week that Arrington needs to practice better, and Joe Bugel offered probably the most revealing insight -- that the team can't play someone who mixes one flashy play with four or five bad ones.
Then Lavar talked more crap on his radio show.
Lavar is definitely done on this team unless he has a complete turnaround. He may have pushed Gibbs too far already. Lavar will never see his potential fullfilled with the head on his shoulders. He's too immature and just makes bad decisions...
Death to the EGO! RIP 21