KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Actually you should have said "my post" not "us" since I only explained what a bridge metaphor was in response to the post that didn't quote what I said correctly. To the rest, whatever, don't care. I'm not interesting in insulting each other's posts on this. Here is my view, you can like it or not.
Yes, your condescension would cetainly seem to indicate as much.
But Danny cannot manage an organization without demanding personal respect and if he accepts this he is telling current and future negotiators that personal respect isn't required. It would be stupid and it would severely limit his ability to manage his organization.
Demanding respect and earning it are two totally different things. Sure he can demand it, doesn't mean that people have to give it. And the repercussions are what they are. I've seen enough examples of people that have left the organization due to their lack of respect for the way things are done, to know that respect is not something that there's a whole lot of around Redskin Park... not now... and not in the last five years that I've been close enough to the team to know the difference.
Whether you want to admit the reputation that this orgnization has forged under Snyder or not, seems of little consequence to whether or not that reputation exists outside the burgndy and gold faithful.
And Danny's statements during the LaVar case show he does in fact get it.
Actually, to me they just show that with the right amount of spin and propoganda, you can make the general public believe just about anything.
The only way LaVar comes back is with a public statement retracting the PERSONAL attacks on Danny.
I don't remember ever stating to the contrary. I agree... but how is that the same as 'no way Snyder would give (him) the chance' ...
... so is it no way as ou stated first, or only one way as you stated second? I agree that there might only be one way... that's definitively more than NO WAYS.
And if it did happen, wouldn't that just categorically PROVE that Lavar is a man who bleeds burgundy and gold like few others?
I am interested in a quote though that you know that LaVar was owed the money by Danny. I have no idea who said what in the negotiations. Can you show me how you know that?
Owed what money? What specifically are you talking about? The contract clause that was removed and never paid?
They were actually going to arbitration to settle it...
As expected, the rift between linebacker LaVar Arrington and the Washington Redskins will have to be settled by an arbitrator. Arrington, who signed a nine-year, $68 million contract in December, contends the deal with the Redskins, which was put together quickly because of a salary-cap related deadline is missing a $6.5 million signing bonus for the year 2006.
They DIDN'T end up going to actual arbitration and settled before the hearing, but I'm not sure how it can possibly be contended that Lavar didn't think he was owed the money.
The result was a settlement over the bonus with terms that favored the Redskins. They agreed to a deal that would make Arrington a free agent or net him a $3.25 million bonus if he made the Pro Bowl in two of the next four seasons. Obviously, he didn't and didn't see any of the bonus, but I'm really not sure why the Redskins would add anything at all if they didn't have any culpability in the matter, or feel that the arbitrator would see it that way.
And despite all of that, Lavar STILL redoes his contract one last time to let the Redskins out of paying him a huge chunk of money. A move so bold, that some questioned whether or not Snyder had circumvented the cap to get a player to agree to such a massive forfeiture of funds.
On the subject of Arrington, his situation last week is indicative of how some league owners talk a good game, and then fold when it's time to stand behind their words. The Redskins were aided in their quest to squeeze under the salary cap last week when Arrington elected to forfeit $4.4 million in deferred signing bonus money which was part of his 2003 contract extension. The move raised a lot of eyebrows around the league.
Several NFL teams had claimed that the Redskins could not mathematically get under the salary cap if it was set in the $94 million range, which it initially was (at $94.5 million), and that Washington needed a cap level in the $98 million range to be in compliance with the spending limit. And, presto, suddenly the team gained $4.4 million in cap relief (you do the math on the difference between $98 million and $94 million) when Arrington forfeited the deferred bonus money.
While no one was publicly willing to charge the Redskins with attempting to circumvent the cap, there were plenty of whispers that owner Dan Snyder had conspired to get the money to Arrington by surreptitious means.
Some owners contended they would request that commissioner Paul Tagliabue investigate the Arrington forfeiture in an attempt to ascertain if Snyder has played fast-and-loose with the cap rules, which could merit a fine and possible loss of draft choices. Such charges are difficult to prove, of course, but there have been three cases under the current system in which teams were sanctioned for violating the cap rules. Of course, when push came to shove, the whispered charges against Snyder and the Redskins were just bombast, and no team has officially sought an investigation of the Arrington matter.
I'm not for one second saying that things weren't said. But spin is spin.
Both guys are smart enough to see that for what it is and find some common ground one day in my opinion. And tht's all I was trying to say. You can say ''no way Snyder would give (him) the chance' all you like. I disagree, and i'm pretty sure if you asked Brian Mitchell... he'd tell you from first hand experience that it's certainly possible.
Mitchell said he has put behind him the animosity he's had toward big-spending Redskins owner Dan Snyder, who cut Mitchell five years ago to make room for an aging Deion Sanders.
"I started here. I played 10 years here. My home is here. I never wanted to leave Washington. I wanted to retire as a Redskin way back," Mitchell told WTEM radio. "Things changed. I left upset and with an attitude, but you get over things, and I made a phone call to Dan Snyder and expressed what I wanted to do, and he agreed with it."
