Three and Out:Lenny P on Gardner, Buges, Barrow By R Tandler

[1niksder]

Three and Out: Lenny P. on Gardner, Buges, Barrow


By Rich Tandler Editor-in-Chief
Date: Jul 24, 2005

A "reporter" shows his bias again, another turn in the Barrow saga, and Bugel keeps a low profile.


Rod Gardner
This from ESPN.com’s ace pro football “reporter”, Len Pasquarelli:


Some silly comments from Redskins' officials this week, contending that, if they don't release wide receiver Rod Gardner before camp starts, they still don't want him at practice. The guy is under contract and, as such, the Redskins can't deprive him the right to earn a living. Excusing him from offseason workouts is one thing. Trying to keep him out of camp, where he has the contractual right to participate, is another.

I put the term “reporter” in quotes because Lenny P. always editorializes in his “reports”, which are supposed to be news and not commentary. And, when it comes to the Skins, he just flat out hates them. Here are the facts on this matter:

First of all, Lenny, those “silly comments” first came from Joe Gibbs himself in a press conference at minicamp. During a press conference he flatly said that Gardner would not be participating in camp, end of story. Apparently, Lenny did not catch that statement, which was only reported in both of the DC major dailies as well as here, on Redskins.com and anywhere else that reports on—not editorializes about—the Redskins.

As for the “right to earn a living” and “right to participate” nonsense, from where does Lenny get that? Didn’t he ever hear about the Bucs “deactivating” Keyshawn Johnson a couple of years ago? The archives don’t go back that far, but I’m sure that it was a move that Lenny roundly applauded at the time because Jon Gruden was the one who did it. They kept Johnson on the roster, they paid him what money he was due, and they barred him from participating in practice; in fact, they barred him from the team’s facilities altogether. How this is different from what the Redskins plan to do with Gardner is unclear. As long as he’s on the roster he’ll get paid whatever money he is due as though he was in camp. That kills the “right to earn a living” count in Lenny’s indictment.

The Redskins will keep Gardner right up until the minute they need the cap space to sign Jason Campbell or Carlos Rogers. In fact, they probably have the cap room needed to sign one of them and still keep Gardner. That may be a few weeks as the signing of first-round picks is proceeding at a snail’s pace. In that few weeks, a receiver for a team that has Super Bowl aspirations could sustain a season-ending injury and that team might be willing to give up a draft pick to acquire a replacement. The odds are against that, but there’s no point in the Redskins releasing Gardner until they absolutely have to on the slim chance that it may happen. And, contrary to what Lenny P says, they have every right to do so.

Mike Barrow
Speaking of Redskins who are unlikely to be on the final 53-man roster this year, there is news that the Redskins have given Barrow permission to seek a trade. His saga has gone full circle in the last couple of months. After he missed all of last year with a knee injury and was slow to rehab during the offseason. It seemed virtually certain that he would be a June 1 cut, with the Redskins gaining $1.7 million in cap space in the process. He avoided The Turk, however, and was seen at minicamp working out and appearing to move quite well. It looked like he was back on the depth chart at middle linebacker, perhaps at the head of it. With this week’s report, however, it’s obvious that the Redskins were not quite as impressed by Barrow’s progress as they seemed to be a month ago. This means that Lemar Marshall and Warrick Holdman will compete for the starting job at middle linebacker, the spot that is the heart of Gregg Williams’ defense.

Joe Bugel
By his nature, the Redskins’ Assistant Head Coach—Offense is not the shy and retiring type. He’s one of those people whose presence is generally felt, even in a place full of other high-power personalities. At the recent minicamp, however, the offensive line coach was nowhere to be found or heard from. Last year, he was front and center. He couldn’t wait to give his new offensive line a new nickname, The Dirtbags. Then came the regular season and the offense flopped with the line taking its share of the blame. The line was called a lot of variations of “Dirtbags”, most of which are unacceptable to recount here. It seems that Bugel has learned his lesson—a line needs to accomplish something before it gets a nickname. The Hogs were well on their way to Super Bowl XVII when their moniker became public knowledge. Bugel is being quiet about this group, and that’s the smart thing to do. Should they perform successfully we’ll hear plenty from Boss Hog.

OUT!

[BATMAN]

Editorials and comment like the one from Rich have been reduced to sniping, and complaining about the Skins or defending sniping and compalining about the Skins.

I will be glad when the players can put on the pads and play a game so all of this off season bullcrap can stop between the so called experts.

The truth is that Rich is wasting his time defending the Skins of last year simply because the Skins of last year STUNK. They made huge errors and lots of them....Joe Gibbs included. The team will be far better than last year and Joe Gibbs has certainly learned his lesson with players and schemes, but lets not try to revise history. Last years Skins need not be defended because we were bad....very bad. And as a result, media experts are going to be critical up until we start winning, and proving that we can make good personnel decisions as well as on the field decisions.

[SKINZ_DOMIN8]

Editorials and comment like the one from Rich have been reduced to sniping, and complaining about the Skins or defending sniping and compalining about the Skins.

I will be glad when the players can put on the pads and play a game so all of this off season bullcrap can stop between the so called experts.

The truth is that Rich is wasting his time defending the Skins of last year simply because the Skins of last year STUNK. They made huge errors and lots of them....Joe Gibbs included. The team will be far better than last year and Joe Gibbs has certainly learned his lesson with players and schemes, but lets not try to revise history. Last years Skins need not be defended because we were bad....very bad. And as a result, media experts are going to be critical up until we start winning, and proving that we can make good personnel decisions as well as on the field decisions.

LOL If I were to post something this insightful I would be jumped on by the homers.

But good post. This is what I have been saying all along basically: until we win all the goody-goody feel-good smiles and camp interviews don't mean a hill of beans to me. And furthermore, until we win the media has every right to bash ANYONE associated with this team.

[1niksder]

So it seems that it's the Homers versus the Haters. Anything remotely optimistic and you are a homer- right.

Can it be that some have the attention span bigger than that of a Nat, and we are able to take a look at all that happened last year(not just the negative), and what direction the team seems to be going in now and be optimistic.

Why is it that anyone that takes the time to reveiw and research the Redskins and comes away with a positive outlook automaticlly wrong

Most articles that perdict the doom and gloom for the Skins are full of errors, misquotes and rehashed old (but negative) stories.

To come down on Rich for taking the time to produce a article about the Redskins that is filled with facts, references and a general idea of how he comes to his conclusions were bound to be to complicated for you to understand SKINZ_DOMIN8, but don't drag BATMAN down with you.
It's bad enough he was confused for Batman2K5, whom got under the Homer's Skin way more than this new breed of HATER

[Redskin in Canada]

.. complicated for you to understand SKINZ_DOMIN8, but don't drag BATMAN down with you.

Come on! He appears to need all the help he can get. It is very lonely at the bottom of the barrel. When he runs out of his two arguments, he is left with nothing but negative posts.

It's bad enough he was confused for Batman2K5, whom got under the Homer's Skin way more than this new breed of HATER

No, they are not haters posts, They are bad posts made by bad Cowpuke fans -DISGUISED- as Skins posters. And they are bad Cowpuke fans because the good ones at least try to provide semi-coherent arguments and facts to support some of their opinions.

Thanks always for these news 1niksdeR !!! I always appreciate them. Do not let the haters distract you from doing this. I appreciate the effort and thank you for sharing it with -REAL- Skins fans. Good fans contribute in many ways, bad fans are just that: bad fans.

[SKINZ_DOMIN8]

So it seems that it's the Homers versus the Haters. Anything remotely optimistic and you are a homer- right.

Can it be that some have the attention span bigger than that of a Nat, and we are able to take a look at all that happened last year(not just the negative), and what direction the team seems to be going in now and be optimistic.

Why is it that anyone that takes the time to reveiw and research the Redskins and comes away with a positive outlook automaticlly wrong

Most articles that perdict the doom and gloom for the Skins are full of errors, misquotes and rehashed old (but negative) stories.

To come down on Rich for taking the time to produce a article about the Redskins that is filled with facts, references and a general idea of how he comes to his conclusions were bound to be to complicated for you to understand SKINZ_DOMIN8, but don't drag BATMAN down with you.
It's bad enough he was confused for Batman2K5, whom got under the Homer's Skin way more than this new breed of HATER

Let's highlight some specifics:

1. Our offense was so bad it can only get better.

2. Our defense should be even better irregardless of whether Mr. Can't Get Right plays one down for us.

3. Our Receivers are probably the best since Gibbs I.

4. We drafted quality, blue chip players, Campbell and Rogers.

I hope this is "positive" enough for you. These are the very scant optimistic thoughts that get me through the day in regards to the Skins.

[JPM36]

Len Pasquarelli should be ashamed of himself. I can remember a time when I considered him to be a fine NFL journalist, and I took everything he wrote very seriously. Now he has allowed his hatred of the Redskins to cloud his judgement in every article he writes about the Burgundy and Gold. It's seriously ridiculous. The guy is making a fool out of himself.

This stuff about the Skins being "silly" with Gardner and "keeping him from doing his job" is absolute garbage. The Keyshawn Johnson thing brought up by Tandler is a great example of just how wrong and hypocritical Len is.

Bill Belichick could force his players to eat (insert whatever word you want here) to help their performance and Pasquarelli would praise him for it.

Meanwhile anything that Joe Gibbs does is 100% wrong.

And why does Lenny have so much faith in and love for BB? B/c he's won 3 Super Bowls of course.

Well guess what Len? So has Joe Gibbs. And no matter how many spitefilled columns you write to try to make him look bad or stupid, he'll still have 3 more rings than you, you fat (insert whatever word you want here)

[Countertrey]

LOL If I were to post something this insightful I would be jumped on by the homers.

Believe it or not, sometimes, people get jumped on simply because they have said something incredibly inane.

Some people say stupid things more often than others.

[SCSkinsFan]

"Should they perform successfully we’ll hear
plenty from Boss Hog."

I didn't know that "Boss" was that tight with Rich Tandler.

[BATMAN]

Let me dispel several possible misconceptions: I am not a Redskins hater or a Cowboy fan. However, I am a realist, veteran observer of the game of football, especially when being played by the Skins, and I don't pull any punches and don't tell people what they want to hear.

Homers are ALWAYS going to call somebody out when somebody disagrees with the popular notion that their team is infallible, is perfect, is about tolaunch an undefeated team, and that their players on the TODAY team all have pro bowl potential. That is however not what you will get from me. I am sorry if I offend you with facts or with predictions that usually come true.

With that said, yes the Redskins stunk last year and nobody need to defend that team because there were REASONS for that losing season...not excuses. Reasons.

Reason #1 The Skins were taken over by new coaches, a new philosophy, a new system, and a new "way" of expectations....both on and off the field. Compared to the past, this was a radical change for many of the players.

Reason #2 The Redskins play calling was conservative, disjointed, and often times perplexing as Joe Gibbs and staff were adjusting to many changes in the NFL in their comeback attempt. Gibbs will make the necessary changes this year.

Reason #3 While Peyton Manning, Brett Favrre, and Tom Brady have benefited from having the same offensive system in place for 4, 5, or 6 years in a row.....Patrick Ramsey was not only just beginning his classroom work on a new Gibbs system...but Patrick was further held back by his foot surgery that prohibited him from even practicing until the opening of training camp. Then after the pre season games, Patrick was forced to once again sit on the bench and wait his turn. This will be a night and day change for Patrick and I have already prediction pro bowl type numbers for Ramsey this year.

Reason #4 Injuries. The Skins were hurt by injuries at key positions at key times, especially on the offensive line..the key to Joe Gibbs offense. TWO of the Skins FIVE offensive linemen will be different than those who started and ended last season. That WILL make a huge difference.

I love the Skins. But don't ever expect this person to applaud when the jokes aren't funny or see everything through rose coloured glasses. My glass is always half full, however, Gibbs actually owns this glass called the Redskins, therefore I can stand back at times and determine if that glass is half full or half empty and do it objectively.

Last year this glass was half empty. This year the Skins glass is nearly 3/4 full. Thats my opinion. No Redskins hater here. Just the truth and a straight shooter.

[1niksder]

I love the Skins. But don't ever expect this person to applaud when the jokes aren't funny or see everything through rose coloured glasses. My glass is always half full, however, Gibbs actually owns this glass called the Redskins, therefore I can stand back at times and determine if that glass is half full or half empty and do it objectively.

Last year this glass was half empty. This year the Skins glass is nearly 3/4 full. Thats my opinion. No Redskins hater here. Just the truth and a straight shooter.

You call them reasons and not excuses but the haters will lable them excuses.

You're giving the same "reason" that are regularly veiwed as homeristic (there isn't enough negativity in your reasoning you must be a homer).

Reason #1 The Skins were taken over by new coaches, a new philosophy, a new system, and a new "way" of expectations....both on and off the field. Compared to the past, this was a radical change for many of the players.

This has been the case year in and year out for awhile now. The fact that the staff and 91% of the team is intact would be a positive for most teams but if a redskin fan points it out he's a homer or wearing rose colored glasses.

Reason #2 The Redskins play calling was conservative, disjointed, and often times perplexing as Joe Gibbs and staff were adjusting to many changes in the NFL in their comeback attempt. Gibbs will make the necessary changes this year.

Gibbs started re-working the offense before the season ended
and has continued down that road. If you read the press the only changes that have been make were - Coles took off - Gardner is leaving sooner or later and we drafted a QB in the 1st round. It's not being a homer when you say that the 2 wideouts that were added will improve the passing game (based on their previous performances (avg.15+ ypc)).

Reason #3 While Peyton Manning, Brett Favrre, and Tom Brady have benefited from having the same offensive system in place for 4, 5, or 6 years in a row.....Patrick Ramsey was not only just beginning his classroom work on a new Gibbs system...but Patrick was further held back by his foot surgery that prohibited him from even practicing until the opening of training camp. Then after the pre season games, Patrick was forced to once again sit on the bench and wait his turn. This will be a night and day change for Patrick and I have already prediction pro bowl type numbers for Ramsey this year.

You took the words out of my mouth... except the pro bowl numbers part. Not saying he won't put up those type of numbers but not saying he will

Reason #4 Injuries. The Skins were hurt by injuries at key positions at key times, especially on the offensive line..the key to Joe Gibbs offense. TWO of the Skins FIVE offensive linemen will be different than those who started and ended last season. That WILL make a huge difference.

And those that started last year will add depth. Maybe Portis won't have anoter miserable 1300+ yard season

[Deadskins]

the Redskins stunk last year and nobody need to defend that team

I understand all of your points, and there are several valid ones, but I don't agree with this quote. The offense under Brunell stunk last year. The defense was excellent. If the offense had been even respectable (not giving up 1 or 2 TDs per game), we would have easily been 10-6 instead of 6-10. You can be realistic and still see the progress that was made simply by making the switch at QB.

And not to pick nits, but "half-empty" is still empty.

[Redskin in Canada]

With that said, yes the Redskins stunk last year and nobody need to defend that team because there were REASONS for that losing season...not excuses. Reasons.

When somebody makes a -GENERALIZATION- like that one, the "reasons" seem pale by comparison.

Last year this glass was half empty. This year the Skins glass is nearly 3/4 full. Thats my opinion. No Redskins hater here. Just the truth and a straight shooter.

Half-empty = stunk?
3/4 = good? mediocre? great?

I do not know how meaningful half-empty or 3/4 of a glass is. Ah! But I know that the Redskins defense was top in the NFC and third in the NFL. No half or 3/4 glasses there.

The offense made tremendous progress over the year. From the low point of the loss to the Giants to the win against Minnesota, great progress was accomplished. To brand the whole season bad and to say in a single adjective that the team stunk, well, it is simplistic and just plain wrong. The "reasons" that you write are valid in several respects. But they do not do justice to a whole team, players, coaches and front office, who have made very big progress in relation to the mess that we were in.

I do not need to defend last year's team. It is up to the fans to appreciate progress made toward victory and glory again. It is this -PROCESS- that is worth studying and learning from. Everybody loves to watch a win. Few are interested to appreciate the painstaking work that goes with several losses in the -PROCESS- to win again.

The Skins were not a winning team last sason. That is not rocket science. But can you describe the tremendous progress made on different positions, sub-units of offense and defense? Were the Skins that lost to the Giants at the beginning of the season the same ones that defeated them at the end of the season?

It is just plain uninformed to put last season's into a single adjective to the Skins. We leave that to Puke fans, thus the "confusion".

[BATMAN]

Redskins fan in Canada;

You seem to want to pick and choose your games and say "well we were great in this game" or "we were great here or there" so the season wasn't really that bad.

But the reality is that you can find something good in any bad situation. That however, doesn't make the bad situation into a good situation.

The Redskins were bad last year, mostly on offense but its a team game so therefore they were bad. They were especially bad in the Dallas game when the game was won with 30 seconds left and the defense gave up a long TD pass when everybody in the stadium knew a pass was coming. Thats on the defense so don't quote me defensive rankings in order to prove that the defense was great. Key situation breakdowns are "reasons" for the Skins adding so many cornerbacks. You might think the Skins defense is well off and great, but Greg Williams obviously feels the need for improvement, like I do.

But most of my thoughts have been centered around the offense, which was BAD. You don't have to like that word, but thats what this offense was last year...it was bad.

[Redskin in Canada]

You seem to want to pick and choose your games and say "well we were great in this game" or "we were great here or there" so the season wasn't really that bad.

NO, I did not pick the games in random order. I picked games at the beginning of the season and then at the end of the season. UYou missed the point again. It is about -PROGRESS-.

Interestingly, the example you pick is one that is on defense, not offense, and one in which injuries prevented the secondary from having its normal starters.

There are fans that like winning but that do not have the patience to support the team's growth and putting things together. I am a fan that acknowledges a loosing season but that also acknowledges true progress.

Many steps in the right direction have been taken over the last year. If last year was as BAD as you say, there would be no hope this season.

Maybe you should recall 1981 and ...

... 1982!

There are lessons in our history. Review them.

[SKINZ_DOMIN8]

With that said, yes the Redskins stunk last year and nobody need to defend that team because there were REASONS for that losing season...not excuses. Reasons.

When somebody makes a -GENERALIZATION- like that one, the "reasons" seem pale by comparison.

Last year this glass was half empty. This year the Skins glass is nearly 3/4 full. Thats my opinion. No Redskins hater here. Just the truth and a straight shooter.

Half-empty = stunk?
3/4 = good? mediocre? great?

I do not know how meaningful half-empty or 3/4 of a glass is. Ah! But I know that the Redskins defense was top in the NFC and third in the NFL. No half or 3/4 glasses there.

The offense made tremendous progress over the year. From the low point of the loss to the Giants to the win against Minnesota, great progress was accomplished. To brand the whole season bad and to say in a single adjective that the team stunk, well, it is simplistic and just plain wrong. The "reasons" that you write are valid in several respects. But they do not do justice to a whole team, players, coaches and front office, who have made very big progress in relation to the mess that we were in.

I do not need to defend last year's team. It is up to the fans to appreciate progress made toward victory and glory again. It is this -PROCESS- that is worth studying and learning from. Everybody loves to watch a win. Few are interested to appreciate the painstaking work that goes with several losses in the -PROCESS- to win again.

The Skins were not a winning team last sason. That is not rocket science. But can you describe the tremendous progress made on different positions, sub-units of offense and defense? Were the Skins that lost to the Giants at the beginning of the season the same ones that defeated them at the end of the season?

It is just plain uninformed to put last season's into a single adjective to the Skins. We leave that to Puke fans, thus the "confusion".

Tremendous Progress ?? What are you talking about? The same offensive offense that cost us every game last year? Had we just averaged a measely 10 more points per game with our decent defense then what would our record have been?

And by the way, who was it specifically that cost us the first Giants game hmmmmmmmmm???? Let me give you a hint: the same "player" that couldn't throw deep to save his life.

You talk like anyone that has the "gall" to criticize the Redskins should be whacked but this is more proof that a lot of Skins fans agree with my assertions that the time of the "Burgundy and Gold" sunglass wearin' ain't cuttin' it any longer.

[1niksder]

To quote BATMAN..... The Offense was Bad last year

To quote RiC.........The Defense was Good last year

To quote THE FACTS...... The Redskins were good last year in 6 games and bad in 10 games.

The facts say the team wasn't that good based on the won/lost record.
The facts also say the margin of defeat wasn't insurmountable in any lost last year meaning the team wasn't that bad.

To quote 1niksdeR.........

[Redskin in Canada]

Tremendous Progress ?? What are you talking about?

You will only get reminders from me this season. I already gave up on you, like most other posters.

But please note, it will be a lot more fun to cheer -for- the Redskins, -all- the Redskins, than against all or some of them this season. And -that- is due to the PROGRESS achieved this season.

[1niksder]

Tremendous Progress ?? What are you talking about? The same offensive offense that cost us every game last year? Had we just averaged a measely 10 more points per game with our decent defense then what would our record have been?

Are you saying there wasn't tremendous progress from the Gints game(1 game you seem to have a vivid memory of) and the season ending victory over the Vikes(a contest I've never seen you reference)

You talk like anyone that has the "gall" to criticize the Redskins should be whacked but this is more proof that a lot of Skins fans agree with my assertions that the time of the "Burgundy and Gold" sunglass wearin' ain't cuttin' it any longer.

Anyone who has the gall to criticize a team should be able to justify his or her argument with than the play of a QB in 1 game were he came off the bench...(you know the story, you just don't like him)... That game would be a legit argument if you could point to more than that one game OR not so often. Ramsey didn't have a great year by any stretch of the imagination but he wasn't as bad as you always portray him to be. To understand why Ramsey had a bad game in week 3 is not wearing "Burgundy and Gold" sunglass (which I happen to have 2 pair of... 1 with Skin's emblem 1 without ), But for you not to understand why he had dificulties makes me wonder if you even understand the postion you complain so much about.

[sch1977]

He cant justify anything, that is why he speaks and leaves