Lloyd Talks to Junkies About His Role

[Countertrey]

How are we supposed to argue if you keep making sense?

Be patient... there will be plenty of opportunities...

[Snout]

I don't know what has been said behind closed doors, so I cannot comment with any certainty about the Brandon Lloyd situation. What I can say is that there seems to be a pattern in JG's second tenture with players who find themselves in the doghouse, who say they are not sure why, and who are not sure how to get out. IF THAT IS TRUE, then that is a serious problem. For players JG inherited like Lavar, it is more understandable. For players he recruited here such as Adam and Brandon, it is less understandable. If JG cannot communicate with these guys, why did he sign them in the first place? If he has given up on them, what is the point of keeping them around?

I hope things work out with Brandon Lloyd. If they don't I hope the team learns from this mistake and stops making the same mistake over and over and over again.

[BossHog]

Doesn't this categorically prove that my blog this week was 100% correct?

Pig-headedness - nothing more.

Doesn't have anything to do with practice (or injuries for that matter), that's just coach speak to not have to say, "I doghoused him."

JF and I have repeatedly tried to tell you all that that's what this was all about, and finding logic and reason is just pointless. It's third grade bully tactics.

Will Clinton Portis be benched for fumbling the ball this week? Because apparently you're only allowed one mistake on this team - oh wait, that's a Brandon Lloyd rule and of course, all of this is his fault.



Good for the receivers too - I'm sure they did it because Brandon's a 'locker room cancer' right? Because they dislike him and he's a lousy, selfish teammate right?

No, they did what they did because they've watched him keep his mouth shut and be a team player, and THEY know he gives him a better chance to win in the field. What else matters? What could possibly vindicate B's situation more than his own teammates having to ask the staff to just give him a shot?

Pretty pathetic if you ask me.

I guess Adam Archuletta 'just couldn't stay healthy' either right?"

Pig-headed personnel decisions - proven categorically for you all to see.

[GSPODS]

Doesn't this categorically prove that my blog this week was 100% correct?

Pig-headedness - nothing more.

Doesn't have anything to do with practice (or injuries for that matter), that's just coach speak to not have to say, "I doghoused him."

I have REPEATEDLY tried to tell you all that that's what this was all about, and finding logic and reason is just pointless. It's third grade bully tactics.

Will Clinton Portis be benched for fumbling the ball this week? Because apparently you're only allowed one mistake on this team - oh wait, that's a Brandon Lloyd rule and of course, all of this is his fault.



Good for the receivers too - I'm sure they did it because Brandon's a 'locker room cancer' right? Because he's a lousy, selfish teammate right?

They did it because they've watched him keep his mouth shut and be a team player, and THEY know he gives him a better chance to win in the field. What else matters?

I guess Adam Archuletta 'just couldn't stay healthy' either right?"

Pig-headed personnel decisions - proven categorically for you all to see.

I take no issue with your being right about this. I was just hoping against hope, like several other members, that maybe there was something slightly less childish as part of the reasoning. If Redskins' teammates are begging for Brandon to get his number called he is obviously not a cancer. In fact, Brandon was among the first person to be congratulating other teammates for good plays this weekend. You've convinced me. It has to be Joe Gibbs. I really and truly hat the fact that you have to be right about this.

[VetSkinsFan]

From everything I've read and seen, things don't add up. They shouldn't add up, though. This isn't a reality show or your step-mother and father arguing over the 'new family' rules. We do not and probably should not know everything that happens behind closed doors. I would bet GSPODS life on the fact that there is a siginificant part of this story that we do not know.

How does everyknow KNOW that Lloyd will turn things around? I still don't see in the chances that he DID have, where he's preformed. Moss and COoley were in the same offense he was last year, as ARE was, and THEY are not having the same issues. There has to be something unique to Lloyd's situation that we're not aware of. I have a hard time believing that JG is just flexing.

[BossHog]

From everything I've read and seen, things don't add up. They shouldn't add up, though. This isn't a reality show or your step-mother and father arguing over the 'new family' rules. We do not and probably should not know everything that happens behind closed doors. I would bet GSPODS life on the fact that there is a siginificant part of this story that we do not know.

How does everyknow KNOW that Lloyd will turn things around? I still don't see in the chances that he DID have, where he's preformed. Moss and COoley were in the same offense he was last year, as ARE was, and THEY are not having the same issues. There has to be something unique to Lloyd's situation that we're not aware of. I have a hard time believing that JG is just flexing.

... and the Redskins are counting on you doing just that. How can they go wrong if they're infallible in everything that they do?

please don't tell me EVERYTHING you've seen leads you to believe that... everything that you WANT to see leads you to believe that... it's not like there isn't ample contrary information right here for you on this very board if you want it - but it's useless if you prefer to just ignore it in favor of what you already believe.



And aren't you the guy that recently said that you go solely from the press snippets that you read? If so, you needn't look any further for the source of the problem...

Bottom line (to me anyway) is that... when your own team goes to bat for you with legendary hall of fame coach - even THEY don't see this supposed issue. They just see a teammate that gives them a chance to win SITTING on the bench.

But hey, you're all welcome to continue to look at this through rose-colored glasses. Personally, I see a real personnel issue that has NOTHING to do with any individual player on the roster... including B.Lloyd.

For the record, I DON"T know that Brandon could turn things around, I only know that when your #1 and newly promoted #2 go down, putting in your number three to make plays is what makes the most football sense. I don't know that he'll be successful, I just know that I'd like to see the team do everything it can to win each week.

And sitting a good player on the bench when you need him - just isn't doing that IMO. Didn't make any sense with Arch, and it doesn't make any more sense with B. It's just throwing invested money away.

[GSPODS]

From everything I've read and seen, things don't add up. They shouldn't add up, though. This isn't a reality show or your step-mother and father arguing over the 'new family' rules. We do not and probably should not know everything that happens behind closed doors. I would bet GSPODS life on the fact that there is a siginificant part of this story that we do not know.

How does everyknow KNOW that Lloyd will turn things around? I still don't see in the chances that he DID have, where he's preformed. Moss and COoley were in the same offense he was last year, as ARE was, and THEY are not having the same issues. There has to be something unique to Lloyd's situation that we're not aware of. I have a hard time believing that JG is just flexing.

My life isn't worth much. You may want to increase your bet.
If Brandon Lloyd was 'preformed', why didn't they make him more like Art Monk?

[Redskin in Canada]

Doesn't this categorically prove that my blog this week was 100% correct?

Pig-headedness - nothing more...

Well, you have one side of the story. The other one, to be completely fair, was not covered because we had no input and acknowledgment from Brandon's side at that time that he had not tried his best -after- the interception. And we still do not know the full story, particularly the other side's.

All I need to know at this time is that it is a disciplinary move and if he has decided to work HARD and recover his spot, he will. Joe and Al put him on the field last Sunday. It started there and he will have further chances this coming week.

I do not mind having a self-confident, hungry and talented WR trying to recover his spot and proving that "trying to have fun" is not a synonymous for "I do not care".

[BossHog]

Doesn't this categorically prove that my blog this week was 100% correct?

Pig-headedness - nothing more...

Well, you have one side of the story. The other one, to be completely fair, was not covered because we had no input and acknowledgment from Brandon's side at that time that he had not tried his best -after- the interception. And we still do not know the full story, particularly the other side's.

All I need to know at this time is that it is a disciplinary move and if he has decided to work HARD and recover his spot, he will. Joe and Al put him on the field last Sunday. It started there and he will have further chances this coming week.

I do not mind having a self-confident, hungry and talented WR trying to recover his spot and proving that "trying to have fun" is not a synonymous for "I do not care".

Like I said, when you don't WANT to see it, you never will.

It's fine to say that we only have one side of the story, but EVERY week Joe is given an opportunity to provide a reason - he just chooses not to. And when you leave something open for interpretation - you either don't CARE if people come to wrong conclusions, or you're not handling issues to the point that they're no longer issues- either way, you're missing the boat. Joe's not dumb, neither are you - the ambiguity of it all is BY DESIGN.

And this 'Brandon got on the field last week' is ridiculous. He got on the field because EVEN after losing their top two WRs, the Redskins went to Thrash, Caldwell and McCardell. It took Brandon's TEAMMATES going to the coaches to get him on the field. That's WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY beyond what should be necessary... and if ONE of Moss or El is back from their injury... it'll just go right back to the way it was unless these childish bully tactics are stopped. Brandon will sit, and Joe will get a pass because, well because he's Joe.

[SkinsFreak]

First, I've been a Lloyd supporter. I have not bashed him for this situation. But I do believe there are two sides to every story.

I listened to the audio from the junkies show. A had a couple of thoughts, and this is complete conjecture on my part. I don't live in the area and don't see all the local news, so there certainly may be some inside facts I don't have.

BL said a few things that struck me as being 'slightly' odd, to me anyway.

He said things like....

He was 'told' he was being brought into a system that would include a lot of passing and he was to be the #2.

He then said that after he got here, he found out that wasn't the case, because this team wants to "run the ball 75% of the time".

On that note, in Gibbs' presser last week, when he appeared pretty upset, a reporter asked him about running 70% of the time. Gibbs got pretty angry at that question and said he has never said anything like that and he never said "run first". So where did that "70% running" leak to the media come from? Again, maybe I missed something.

With that said, I'm just wondering, and I have no proof, but if maybe Lloyd has been in Gibbs ear about some things, specifically the lack of a passing game or that this system is not for him. Maybe BL has been extremely outspoken behind closed doors, that he doesn't agree with Gibbs' offensive philosophies. We as fans hear a lot about players not 'buying into a system'.

He admitted that he was demoted for "loafing" on that play in the end zone. He was like "yeah, I did." Well, I didn't hear any remorse or regret in that. Or maybe something like... "yeah, I messed up on that play and I really need to make amends for that mistake and play much harder..."

I don't know. But what I do know is... I'd be taking a much different approach. Why? Because whether he remains with the Skins next year or moves on, he will need to do something to increase his earning potential, or at least something to warrant another team taking a chance on him and offering him a similar contract or salary.

I tend to agree with Brian Mitchell, it just 'appears' that Lloyd doesn't care, and that maybe Lloyd should be taking a different approach and a different attitude. That may just be Lloyd's personality, but Portis, for example, has been able to mesh with an outgoing personality. Lloyd maintains that there's nothing he can do. I disagree with that. I'm in no way suggesting this is entirely Lloyd's fault, but again, I do think there's two side to the story.

[SkinsFreak]

It's fine to say that we only have one side of the story, but EVERY week Joe is given an opportunity to provide a reason - he just chooses not to.

I agree, but I always took that as, well, the team may want to trade him a get something in return for him in the future. If the coaches publicly disclose their 'beefs' to the media, other teams will hear this and maybe shy away from taking him or would offer very little in return. Also, Gibbs just isn't that type of person.

But I will add this, in his presser on Monday, Gibbs mentioned, by name, every receiver on the team EXCEPT for Lloyd. I found that to be a bit odd. It just seems obvious to me that Lloyd, for what ever reason, rightly or wrongly, has gotten under Gibbs' skin.

[Fios]

But to that same extent, Gibbs could be poisoning the well by NOT talking, if we as fans are left to speculate and draw our own conclusions, the same can be said of a potential trading partner. If GM X looks at the information vacuum, it would not be unreasonable for him to assume that Lloyd's lack of PT is tied to his behavior which would lessen or possibly negate Lloyd's perceived value.

[SkinsFreak]

But to that same extent, Gibbs could be poisoning the well by NOT talking, if we as fans are left to speculate and draw our own conclusions, the same can be said of a potential trading partner. If GM X looks at the information vacuum, it would not be unreasonable for him to assume that Lloyd's lack of PT is tied to his behavior which would lessen or possibly negate Lloyd's perceived value.

Agreed. I don't think it's unreasonable for anyone to assume this isn't tied to his behavior behind closed doors and his admitted loafing. We heard the same things from San Fran. I mean, what else could it be? I refuse to believe Gibbs is just doing this out of some personal vendetta or just because he doesn't like the guy. There are too many examples of Gibbs working with players with less than desirable personalities.

[Fios]

As they say in the investment world, past behavior (recent and a decade ago) isn't necessarily predictive of future performance. I'll grant that it is odd that a coach with Gibbs' track record would be handling this situation in such a seemingly puerile fashion but odd is not synonymous with impossible. The actions of his teammates and Lloyd's own words are what we have to rely on thus far and those point to less than admirable behavior on the part of Gibbs.

[SkinsFreak]

Maybe those players weren't present at BL's tirade in Gibbs' office, if in fact, that is what happened, I don't know, I'm just speculating. Have we ever seen Gibbs like this before? I believe it was Gregg that had a beef with AA, not Gibbs.

I agree with you, BH and JF, but this is certainly a head-scratcher. You never know, maybe things are getting better and BL will have a more productive year. If Saunders put him in the game and called his number, based on lobbying by Lloyd's teammates, I have to think Saunders would only do that if Gibbs was ok with it. I really hope Lloyd gets his chance to be a contributor, this season ain't over yet.

[BossHog]

As I originally said in the blog, I COMPLETELY concede that there is responsibility on both sides in all of it.

But the pattern of castigating and then casting off, and then ultimately paying huge sums of dead money, is bad business.

I'm not trying to say that it's been a marriage made in heaven, I'm just saying that you reach a point where you hurt your football team when you can't find a way to make ANYTHING out of a huge investment.

To me, WHATEVER the skeletons are that are in the closet, need to be cast aside and do what's best for the team.

I think that considering the injury status of the receivers, time is of the essence. This team is 3-1 and going into a tough away game, we need to use every weapon we have at our disposal, and I think Lloyd can stretch the defense better than anyone else on the roster right now.

I think that if this team could put together what they did last week in the passing game, and keep the dimension that they had in the first half with the long ball, they're going to be really tough to stop... away or not.

And I think that if Moss and ARE are still nicked, from a FOOTBALL stand point, Lloyd's a better option to accomplish that than Thrash, Caldwell or McCardell.

I think that if the players on the roster have 'forgiven' Lloyd to the point that they request his insertion into the line-up, then I think it's safe to say that no matter what conjecture there is about not caring, or being a team player, they've looked past it far enough to see wht's best for the TEAM.

I'm not at all trying to judge who's 'right' in the situation, my impression is just, 'WHO CARES?" Get out there and play football and do everything you can do to win football games.

[SKINFAN]

he will be forgiven instantly if he restructures his contract... just giving a speculative angle on the situation..

[Fios]

Putting aside how unlikely that scenario is, why would he do that? What possible incentive, given his treatment thus far, would he have to help the team out of a contract bind?

[SkinsFreak]

Well said, BH, and I agree 1000%

Maybe last week was the first step. I'm sure Gibbs and Saunders will want to move somewhat cautiously, if you will, about increasing his involvement or workload. Maybe they want to see proof that BL isn't going to loaf before they game plan an attack that includes several plays specifically designed for Lloyd.

But I agree, if the players can move forward and let bygones be bygones, then the coaches need to as well. It is not good business practice to waste talent, especially at that price.

[GSPODS]

Putting aside how unlikely that scenario is, why would he do that? What possible incentive, given his treatment thus far, would he have to help the team out of a contract bind?

I'm thinking Zero because a restructure would mean Brandon would be staying with the Redskins, and based upon what we do know, or think we know, I can't see why Brandon would want to stay with the Redskins.

[BnGhog]

ITS NOT RIGHT! AND IT SUCKS FOR BLLOYD.


Hey BossHog, think it would help if we all put a petition together, that we the fans want BLloyd to play and get it to Gibbs?


Hey, it worked when the players did if vocally, it should work for us.

[Redskin in Canada]

I'm not at all trying to judge who's 'right' in the situation, my impression is just, 'WHO CARES?" Get out there and play football and do everything you can do to win football games.

I do not feel for a second that those considerations have not entered the picture in the analysis of Joe and Al on one side, and the analysis of Brandon on the other. You and I, but mostly Joe, would like this to be true. But as opposed to you and I, Joe wants him to know that it does not matter how talented, and it does not matter how much money he makes, if he does not play 110% EVERY play, he will not be trusted and he will be kept inhabiting the doghouse.

The fundamental premise in this analysis is that Brandon is the best option available after Moss and ARE. I truly feel that this -might- be true. But is it true? Certainly not in the book of FACTS, at least not yet. Certainly not on the stats. Certainly not on the ONE miserable play that he acknowledged to loaf about.

All I know is that if the guy the team made a multi-millionaire loafs, and acknowledges to have done so once, does not play HARD in EVERY play, I would be pretty mad and the doghouse is not a bad destination.

Yes, obviously this disciplinary action against Brandon is pretty stern. It is done indeed by DESIGN. Joe does not play things in the media and he is not known to want to get any input from outside the team (in all possible directions). He and the team, players and coaches, know what is going on inside. There has never been another coach that takes care of the dirty laundry inside than Joe.

There is also one more thing that has not been mentioned much in this board. This is the generation and cultural differences between Joe and Brandon. Joe has dealt with A LOT of players. But Brandon belongs to the rap generation. If a rap guy says "cool man, I am just having fun". It may sound VERY DIFFERENT to many different people. I know that such statement would sound to the older generation like:

"Sure Brandon, you go ahead and have fun with your money while the rest of the players make sacrifices playing with injuries and all."

While for a younger generation it might mean:

"Sure Joe, I can show you how good a receiver I am if you send me the ball."

The potential for miscommunication is enormous. But I am not surprised that Joe is as mad as he might be if Brandon acknowledged loafing.

It is not fair to compare a fumble by Portis to this "loafing incident". It is not the mistake, it is the lack of attempt at recovery and the attitude after the mistake that burned the coaching staff. And we do not even know what Al Saunders has to say about all of this yet.

Again, I am confident that Brandon will get enough chances to recover his spot in the team. It is up to him to do that, regardless of words that could be misinterpreted, his ACTIONS on the field will speak louder. I expect that louder speech to be good.

[Redskin in Canada]

As they say in the investment world, past behavior (recent and a decade ago) isn't necessarily predictive of future performance. I'll grant that it is odd that a coach with Gibbs' track record would be handling this situation in such a seemingly puerile fashion but odd is not synonymous with impossible. The actions of his teammates and Lloyd's own words are what we have to rely on thus far and those point to less than admirable behavior on the part of Gibbs.

So, if past performance is not predictive of future performance, why is Lloyd here? Did we not think that based on his track record we could do even more with him?

Most if not all posts on Joe and Brandon are based on VERY LIMITED ONE-SIDED information and here we all are making speculations about character judgments about BOTH persons. We obviously have more time in our hands than we need to.

To re-word your own statement: "it is not impossible that Joe may be handling things in such a seemingly puerile fashion" is totally uncalled for when you acknowledge the limited amount of information available in the public record aboutthis incident and on the track record of all concerned.

[Fios]

As they say in the investment world, past behavior (recent and a decade ago) isn't necessarily predictive of future performance. I'll grant that it is odd that a coach with Gibbs' track record would be handling this situation in such a seemingly puerile fashion but odd is not synonymous with impossible. The actions of his teammates and Lloyd's own words are what we have to rely on thus far and those point to less than admirable behavior on the part of Gibbs.

So, if past performance is not predictive of future performance, why is Lloyd here? Did we not think that based on his track record we could do even more with him?

Most if not all posts on Joe and Brandon are based on VERY LIMITED ONE-SIDED information and here we all are making speculations about character judgments about BOTH persons. We obviously have more time in our hands than we need to.

To re-word your own statement: "it is not impossible that Joe may be handling things in such a seemingly puerile fashion" is totally uncalled for when you acknowledge the limited amount of information available in the public record aboutthis incident and on the track record of all concerned.

What!?!? What point are you trying to make? Do you bother to read what I write? Cherry picking isn't helpful, I said past performance isn't NECESSARILY predictive. I mean for god's sake, you quoted my post and still got it wrong. I've said IN THIS VERY THREAD that the lack of information from Gibbs leaves us to speculate, fairly or not. Statements like "what we have to rely on thus far" are purposeful, yet you find some definitive conclusions that I CLEARLY avoided. And, regardless of anything else, there is, in fact, a chance that Gibbs has handled this badly. I have enough time on my hands to choose my words carefully, you clearly didn't take the time to read them.

[BnGhog]

Whatever.

We don't know both sides, you're right about that.

So, being that their is two sides and we only know what BLloyd said, means that their could be something Lloyd did to make this happen. I that what some of you are saying.

Whatever!

Whatever Lloyd did, is obviously not enough for the players to think anything of it or they would not be wanting him to play. If Lloyd did somthing to deserve the punishment, Dang it!, he said he knows where he made the mistake.

He's been punished now for three games, enough is enough.

I mean if he did something so bad for him to be benched for the season, and be traded?????? What could he have done that would be punished that badly? Was he involved in dog fighting or something?????