Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=Longtimefan;264454]During the process of negotiation with Archuleta and his agent, the team made clear the role they expected him to play. There was uncertaintity surrounding the status of Sean Taylor at the time, and they had made up their mind if Ryan Clark wanted more than they were willing to pay, they would let him walk because they wanted to up grade the position, and felt Archuleta would be a physical upgrade to Clark.

In reality ,there wasn't much in terms of negotiation, the Redskins made him an offer he couldn't refuse. They were well aware of his limited coverage skills, but they led him to believe he and Marcus Washington were going to be used in blitz packages, and that's what they were expecting from him. It was clear in September that Archuleta was not going to be the starter oposite Taylor. Pierson Prioleau was to be the starter, but when he got hurt on the opening kickoff, and Shawn Springs got injured, they could not play Archuleta the way they had intended to play him. When he speaks about being lied too, this is obviously what he is refering too. They contracted him to blitz, injuries foiled the plan, they had to use him, but in ways they were well aware he was not best suited. When we all witnessed he could not cover, he was left holding the bag with basically no place for him in the defense You really can't blame Archuleta for an experiment gone bad, the team should have taken more into consideration his limitations, and not been so willing to make such a huge financial commitment to a player that limited.[/quote]All very true, but on top of all that, his play significantly declined from last season.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=djnemo65;264457]I think it's crazy to think they brought Archuleta in to be essentially a third down blitz specialist. You don't give a guy a 10 million dollar sb to be a situational guy....[/quote]

They did for Randle El. He was brought in to be a situational guy that they hoped could be made into a number three receiver, and payed the same.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

Since when was it the coaching staffs responsibility to go to Arch and tell him what he is doing wrong? This is something he should take upon himself to approach the coaches and ask. I'm not saying that he has not done this but from his statement it seems like he is waiting for them to come to him.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=gibbsisgod;264463]Since when was it the coaching staffs responsibility to go to Arch and tell him what he is doing wrong? This is something he should take upon himself to approach the coaches and ask. I'm not saying that he has not done this but from his statement it seems like he is waiting for them to come to him.[/quote]

You can't be serious. By definition, a coach is supposed to instruct thier players, specifically as to correcting and improving their performance.

In relation to business, the standard business model uses a performance appraisal feedback model to ensure that this issue cannot happen. This would include the coaches defining a list of objectives for the player to meet, and for the coaches to define the players role in the organization. If this were done in this case, it would be much easier for a GM to look at a situation and say if the coach or player is at fault and make corrections in the future.

It is easy to look at AA, the money he was payed, and the plays he left on the field, but I sure would like to know what he was really told he would be doing when the Skins were trying to get him to play here instead of Chicago (who must have wanted him for some reason???). Again, can someone tell me why a perennial top 5 (Bears) defense wanted him if everyone knew he was so bad?

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[QUOTE=The Huddle;264444]I don't have any idea whether Archuleta has been lied to or not because I don't know what has/hasn't been said to him behind closed doors.

What I do know is that it was the Redskins, not Archuleta, who made him the highest paid safety in the history of football. In order for them to have done that, you've got to believe they gathered 'round a table and said "Look, whatever it takes to get this guy we've got to pony it up because we just can't risk letting him get away, he's going to be our difference maker- he's [I]that[/I] good." And then- oops- he wasn't.

What's really new here? The Redskins have been paying top dollar for mediocre players on the open market for years now. No shock there. Now, they've got a pissed off player accusing the organization of lying to/misleading him. That's becoming a disturbingly common occurance as well.

It's time to stop shooting the messenger. Archuleta might have had a horrible season, but if he was drawing a journeyman's salary this wouldn't be a front page story and we'd all be shrugging it off as "we need another saftey."[/QUOTE]


Amen. Adam Archuleta is a worthless putz, but it wasn't like he was banging on the doors of Redskin Park begging to come here. The fools who thought he was worth a $10 million signing bonus are just as at fault.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[QUOTE=djnemo65;264457]I think it's crazy to think they brought Archuleta in to be essentially a third down blitz specialist. You don't give a guy a 10 million dollar sb to be a situational guy. Not at safety.[/QUOTE]

That would appear to be the conventional wisdom. But as we can see, the Redskins don't necessarily follow that.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=GoSkins!;264464]You can't be serious. By definition, a coach is supposed to instruct thier players, specifically as to correcting and improving their performance.
[/quote]
I'm dead serious! I'm not talking about coaches putting in the gameplan with players and making sure they know the plays. I'm also not talking about coaches putting players through drills that help with fundementals(sp?). I'm talking about players staying after practice and working on their own to get better, i.e: WR catching balls from coaches or O-lineman working with coaches on footwork. These are the things the player needs to take upon himself. Its not the coaches job to go to AA and ask him to say after pratcice to work on technique.

I dont know if he has done these things or not to show the coaching staff he cares about his job. but,If he had done these things, I'm convinced that he would be on the field more.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

This AA thing reminds me a lot of other players, as to what happens to them when they fall out of favor with the coaching staff. There have been plenty of players that all say the same things. They dont talk to them, no reason for not playing, not telling them how to improve. There is a recurring theme with this defensive staff. Aside from AA not playing worth a damn, as a professional he deserves reasoning for benching, for not playing at all. In the washington post and times both have articles saying that he found out in a walk through that prealoue (however that is spelled) was starting. the walk through before the game!! that is crazy. this defensive staff, starting with GW has to get off their high horse and come back to reality. it started with smoot, clark, pierce, arrington, and now AA. GW thinks its his system, that players dont matter, well we all see what happens when you dont have the skill players in important positions. Its about players too.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

Players come and go all the time. It's the nature of FA. players say things all the time as well. it does not mean it's true, or in this case, that he was kept out of the loop or anything else for that matter. When GW had a band of heartbreakers and lifetakers (sorry CE) last season, nobody on the squad seemed pissed off, and everybody loved GW. So........AA say he bad. Did GW change???? Not likely. IMO, I believe GW is an ego maniac, but he makes it work, or at least can. Q. what is the difference last to this year? A. AA has his feelings hurt....................move on. It was a mistake to bring him here, and his ego is bruised, and looking for someone to blame. my ego would be a bit spanked as well

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

AA has actually suprised me on this. I expected him to start crying before now. he may have been overpaid but that only leads to one conclusion...who decided to pay this scrub this much money? who evaluated his play and decided he was worth all the money we gave him. Our problems go way deeper than just not having the right players. I dont think we have the right folks doing the talent evaluations. Until that is corrected you will continue to the skins make awful decisions regarding drafting players, signing free agents and evaluating talent. The focus this offseason should be to hire a general manager before anything else.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

I was one of those guys who gave Archuleta the benefit of the doubt. He's had a roller coaster of a career, and figured, in the right role, he could be a positive thing for the defense. He's a hard hitter, and had some very good seasons in St. Louis.

Looking at things, Archuleta is better suited for the 04 and 05 versions of the Redskins defense, when the primary goal was to blitz, and blitz often. Because of injuries, and the lack of depth in the secondary, G-Dub has had to scale back his blitz coverages tremendously this season, hence hanging Archuleta out to dry.

However, with this media coverage, he has pretty much written his ticket out of town. I'm torn when it comes to the situation. While the coaching staff should say something, any Joe off the street could look at the film and see that Archuleta has played very poorly this year.

A proactive player would have approached the staff to see what he could do to get back in good graces. Archuleta chose not to, and I think that eats at the coaching staff more than his on field play.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

I think the Redskins felt desperate enough at the time to sign AA since it wasn't clear that ST would be on the field. There were not a lot of available hard-hitting FA Safeties. AA's agent knew this and I'm sure exploited this for his client's financial benefit. The Redskins organization knew they were overpaying but I guess couldn't see an alternative plan. They needed someone that could knock someone's head off, again IF ST was not going to play. Looking back was it a foolish move? Yes. At the time was it a totally unreasonable move? Not really.

What AA is saying now is his side of the story not the absolute true side of the story. AA has a responsibility as a professional to work on his areas that are in need of improvement. Does anyone here think he came up to one of his coaches and asked for help and they said "f*ck off". Doubtful. More likely he's used to being pampered and having people come to him not the other way around. GW doesn't treat any player better than another and some of these guys can't handle not being #1.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

We are never going to know what REALLY happens behind the scenes. Consequently, we have a small chance of drawing the correct conclusion in most situations

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=724Skinsfan;264484] GW doesn't treat any player better than another and some of these guys can't handle not being #1.[/quote]
Amen!!

Some people think this is GW being an ego-maniac when in reality he treats everybody equally. Players like LaVar and AA have been the "Stars" on every team for which they have played. They have gotten used to everyone catering to them. Gibbs and Co. are trying to turn this organization around and it starts with treating everybody equally, not pampering the "privledged" ones.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=gibbsisgod;264487]Amen!!

Some people think this is GW being an ego-maniac when in reality he treats everybody equally. Players like LaVar and AA have been the "Stars" on every team for which they have played. They have gotten used to everyone catering to them. Gibbs and Co. are trying to turn this organization around and it starts with treating everybody equally, not pampering the "privledged" ones.[/quote]

Why does it seem like he makes it a point to send a message to the stars though? That's just the feeling I get. It's almost like he want's everyone to know who's in charge.

These guys just want to play football.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

Speaking of interesting quotes, here's Brian Mitchell on Joe Gibbs:

[B]Old-school Redskins say Gibbs needs to get tougher[/B]

By Ohm Youngmisuk
New York Daily News
(MCT)
ASHBURN, Va. - As an incredibly disappointing and underachieving season finally comes to an end on Saturday, several Washington Redskins are bracing for what has become an annual Washington ritual.
Just like the cherry blossoms blooming in the spring along the Potomac river, Washingtonians can always count on Daniel Snyder spending millions in free-agency dollars to overhaul the Redskins in the offseason.
However, the biggest change the Redskins might make could come from within.
According to some of his former players, Joe Gibbs has to revert back to being the old school yet innovative coach who produced the three Super Bowl trophies that sit in the Redskins Park lobby. He has to, they say, turn away from being the new-age coach who has tried so hard to adapt to today's game while also serving as team president, handpicking his own players.
"I think he has gotten a little soft on the guys," said Brian Mitchell, who flourished under Gibbs as one of the league's premier returners. "When I got here, I was treated just the same as Art Monk was treated, not as a fifth-round pick. I was treated as an equal. On this (current) team, you see favoritism to certain players."
"I don't see the same guy (Gibbs) today," added Mitchell, who is a talk-show host on WTEM-sports radio in Washington. "I see a guy who was once a disciplinarian without having to yell (going) to making a lot of excuses (for players). I don't think he held people accountable. When Santana Moss got a 15-yard penalty for retaliating, (Gibbs) made an excuse instead of saying (Moss has) to think."
As the Redskins (5-10) look to spoil the Giants' playoff aspirations tomorrow, Gibbs has been busy trying to figure out what has gone so wrong in D.C. The Redskins began the season with Super Bowl expectations after finishing 10-6 and winning six straight games before losing to Seattle in the divisional round last year.
However, Gibbs and the Redskins over-tinkered in the offseason. High-priced additions such as wide receiver Brandon Lloyd, safety Adam Archuleta, wide receiver Antwaan Randle El and defensive end Andre Carter have not lived up to expectations and their exorbitant salaries.
And truthfully, neither has Gibbs, perhaps the biggest personality in Washington outside of the President. The 66-year-old Hall of Fame coach is just 21-26 since returning to run his beloved franchise.
In his dual role, Gibbs has his hands full from coaching to personnel moves, such as trading valuable high draft picks for players like T.J. Duckett and Lloyd. Saying it was best for the team, Gibbs hired offensive guru Al Saunders and uncharacteristically handed over all the play-calling duties to Saunders so he could focus on other aspects.
"A lot of people are wondering if (Gibbs) did this all on himself or was he pushed or forced," Mitchell said. "What has Gibbs done? He puts in offenses and calls plays and plays chess with defensive coordinators and normally beats them. Now, he stands on the sidelines. I don't see him as that type of guy."
The drastic change resulted in disaster as the Redskins' offense looked mostly pathetic under the aging Mark Brunell, whom Gibbs was too loyal to. Gibbs switched to the inexperienced 2005 first-round draft pick Jason Campbell a few weeks too late, then lost running back Clinton Portis to a season-ending injury last month.
The Redskins' defense, which has shuffled players in and out in consecutive offseasons, has also faltered after stellar seasons under associate head coach Gregg Williams.
On Thanksgiving eve, Gibbs criticized his players in a team meeting, ordering them to play more smash-mouth, Redskins-brand of football. The Redskins are 2-3 since but have played better as running back Ladell Betts has rushed for 100 yards or more in five straight games for an average of 135.6 yards.
"He addressed the team in a tone that hadn't been done all year," said Rick (Doc) Walker, Gibbs' former tight end who also is a talk show host on WTEM. "They have gotten back to the hard core that is the way Joe coaches. It is not a social club, a country club. It is a work factory."
Change doesn't take place overnight, not even for masterminds like Gibbs. It's taken him almost three seasons just to clean up the mess left behind by predecessor Steve Spurrier.
"I said I was starting all over," Gibbs said in a conference call this week about when he returned to coaching. "I had a lot of great memories. But it really doesn't buy you anything when you are living in the present day and when you are coaching in modern times here."
Now Gibbs, who has two years remaining on his contract, is trying to figure out how to make all the pieces and coaches he has assembled fit and flow. Maybe all Gibbs has to do is be himself and do what he does best.
"Joe has been too judicious in giving out authority," Walker said. "This has to be a dictatorship. He has to be the one voice. (The players) believe in Joe. But Joe has to believe in Joe."
---

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;264485]We are never going to know what REALLY happens behind the scenes. Consequently, we have a small chance of drawing the correct conclusion in most situations[/QUOTE]

That won't stop us from offering up half-baked theories and arguing about them to no end.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=mheisig;264491]That won't stop us from offering up half-baked theories and arguing about them to no end.[/quote]

My theories are 66% baked.

It does seem like the coaches tend to shut out some players when they are not performing, though. I don't blame AA for being pissed if that's what happened, but this is not how you handle it. Seems like a common theme these days.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

My half baked theory is this, Williams hasn't talked to him because he pretty much made up his mind weeks ago that Arch is a project that he's given up on and he won't be back, so why bother. Probably not the best way to go about things, GW is a hard ass no doubt but he's a no BS guy as well. He's not going to sugar coat things by telling him to keep working hard when he knows he's a guy he no longer wants in his system.

As much as Arch is disappointed in the coaches, the coaches are probably equally as disappointed in his piss poor play and overall inability to pick up this defense. He's a lost cause in their eyes.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;264497]My half baked theory is this, Williams hasn't talked to him because he pretty much made up his mind weeks ago that Arch is a project that he's given up on and he won't be back, so why bother. Probably not the best way to go about things, GW is a hard ass no doubt but he's a no BS guy as well. He's not going to sugar coat things by telling him to keep working hard when he knows he's a guy he no longer wants in his system.

As much as Arch is disappointed in the coaches, the coaches are probably equally as disappointed in his piss poor play and overall inability to pick up this defense. He's a lost cause in their eyes.[/QUOTE]

Half baked yet delicious. I agree. AA was a huge letdown, and Williams was the one who campaigned for him and got him here. Evidently GW's way of dealing with that is to say nothing and move on.

Maybe it's GW being a hard ass, maybe it's his "personality" or whatever, but frankly I think it boils down to crappy management. If it's true that AA was yanked and nobody has said word one to him, I feel bad for him regardless of whether or not he could cover his own shadow. That's no way to treat somebody, no way to lead a team or boost morale or inspire a group of people. It's immature and asinine.

This whole thing sounds like Arrington's story all over again just with Archuleta's name. Hell, it sounds like pretty much like the story of a half dozen or so players who have left this organization over the past few years.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[QUOTE=GoSkins!;264461]They did for Randle El. He was brought in to be a situational guy that they hoped could be made into a number three receiver, and payed the same.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, but with ARE you had a multi-dimensional guy who could impact the offense in several different ways, which was especially important given what Saunders was trying to implement. I'm not saying they didn't overpay, but at least it was clear from the start what they were going to use him for. If you bring in a safety to be a blitz specialist, you are insane. While I concede they clearly they are insane, it still doesn't make any sense to suggest that the brought Arch in for this purpose, because they ended up using him in coverage and benched him when it became clear how bad he was at that. If he was really brought in to be a blitzer, why doesn't he get on the field on blitzing downs? Why doesn't he get on the field at all? Obviously it's because he can't cover, and because his skill set is below what they expected. People make it sound as if Proileau starting in the opener was part of the plan, and I'm sorry, the front office is crazy and stupid but not so crazy and stupid as to pay 10 mil in guaranteed money for a backup safety.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=djnemo65;264504]Yeah, but with ARE you had a multi-dimensional guy who could impact the offense in several different ways, which was especially important given what Saunders was trying to implement. I'm not saying they didn't overpay, but at least it was clear from the start what they were going to use him for. If you bring in a safety to be a blitz specialist, you are insane. While I concede they clearly they are insane, it still doesn't make any sense to suggest that the brought Arch in for this purpose, because they ended up using him in coverage and benched him when it became clear how bad he was at that. If he was really brought in to be a blitzer, why doesn't he get on the field on blitzing downs? Why doesn't he get on the field at all? Obviously it's because he can't cover, and because his skill set is below what they expected. People make it sound as if Proileau starting in the opener was part of the plan, and I'm sorry, the front office is crazy and stupid but not so crazy and stupid as to pay 10 mil in guaranteed money for a backup safety.[/quote]

I agree with you on your point about Prielou (this guy has the hardest damn name to spell!). If anyone thinks they had him slated as a starter when the season started, I don't think so.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

Well at least we only have to live one more game with him wearing the burgundy and gold. I want players here who have a desire to wear the burgundy and gold with pride. I would think on the pro level hand holding is not a requirement and most players are smart enough to figure out they are not playing up to standards and have to do something about it - heck my high school coach never had to address us verbally - it was all right on film when we reviewed it together as a team.
Let hope if the Redskins have to go out and pay a lot of money to replace AA they get someone with coverage skills in mind first and run stuffing ability second.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=Bill B;264510]Well at least we only have to live one more game with him wearing the burgundy and gold. I want players here who have a desire to wear the burgundy and gold with pride. I would think on the pro level hand holding is not a requirement and most players are smart enough to figure out they are not playing up to standards and have to do something about it - heck my high school coach never had to address us verbally - it was all right on film when we reviewed it together as a team.
Let hope if the Redskins have to go out and pay a lot of money to replace AA they get someone with coverage skills in mind first and run stuffing ability second.[/quote]

I don't think Arch is asking anybody to hold his hand, where did you get that from? And I might add, I wouldn't question his committment to the Burgundy and Gold either, he's just asking for the common courtesy of being told one thing or another...anything in fact. Remember, we knocked on his door and asked him to cancel his flight to Chicago.

It's the lack of communication between players and coaches that has obviously been one of the many downfalls of this franchise for the last several years. We don't talk to the media, and appearantly we don't talk to the players either. How can you succeed in that environment?

If he was the first to come up with this type of story, then you'd have to say, okay this is an isolated incident with Arch and the staff. No biggie, let's move on without this guy.

The more this story unfolds, the more it's playing out like LaVar's bitter departure.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

AA needs no explanation from the coaches as to why he was benched. here is how it probably went.

GW- "ok adam, i want you to cover player 0,just keep him in front of you, no matter what, just keep him in front of you. if he catches the ball, make the tackle".

GW probably told this to AA a thousand times.

AA- "ok coach, i got it. player 0 will not get past me"!

what happens in the game? AA constantly lets player 0 get past him.

AA gets benched, no explanation needed.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[QUOTE=djnemo65;264504]Yeah, but with ARE you had a multi-dimensional guy who could impact the offense in several different ways, which was especially important given what Saunders was trying to implement. I'm not saying they didn't overpay, but at least it was clear from the start what they were going to use him for. If you bring in a safety to be a blitz specialist, you are insane. While I concede they clearly they are insane, it still doesn't make any sense to suggest that the brought Arch in for this purpose, because they ended up using him in coverage and benched him when it became clear how bad he was at that. If he was really brought in to be a blitzer, why doesn't he get on the field on blitzing downs? Why doesn't he get on the field at all? Obviously it's because he can't cover, and because his skill set is below what they expected. People make it sound as if Proileau starting in the opener was part of the plan, and I'm sorry, the front office is crazy and stupid but not so crazy and stupid as to pay 10 mil in guaranteed money for a backup safety.[/QUOTE]



Archuleta was not brought in to be just a third down safety. He was to be an overall part of the defensive rotation with emphasis placed on his ability to blitz the QB, not just on third down. They invisioned using him much like they did Matt Bowen before he got hurt. Bowen was not that great at coverage either, but the way GW uses his secondary people, they are in many instances interchangable depending on the defense and based on down, and distance. His safeties would blitz throughtout the course of the game. If you recall the GW defense of 04, they were a blitz machine, not limited to any particular down. Had not we sustained so many injuries in the secondary so early in the year, maybe we could have gotten more use out of Archuleta because they would have been able to use him the way they had origionally intended too.

If you want to credit the stupidity to anyone in particular, you can lay it at the feet of GW. He's the one who wanted him, and with his knowledge of defense, he also knew he was "not" a cover guy, and he knew it before he came here.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=12thMan;264513]I don't think Arch is asking anybody to hold his hand, where did you get that from? And I might add, I wouldn't question his committment to the Burgundy and Gold either, he's just asking for the common courtesy of being told one thing or another...anything in fact. Remember, we knocked on his door and asked him to cancel his flight to Chicago.

It's the lack of communication between players and coaches that has obviously been one of the many downfalls of this franchise for the last several years. We don't talk to the media, and appearantly we don't talk to the players either. How can you succeed in that environment?

If he was the first to come up with this type of story, then you'd have to say, okay this is an isolated incident with Arch and the staff. No biggie, let's move on without this guy.

The more this story unfolds, the more it's playing out like LaVar's bitter departure.[/quote]

Why would talking to the media make the organization any better? Sure it would give us fans more insight but just because one talks to the media doesn't make the entity any better. What is wrong with trying to keep issues in house and thus avoiding a media circus?

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=Bill B;264534]Why would talking to the media make the organization any better? Sure it would give us fans more insight but just because one talks to the media doesn't make the entity any better. What is wrong with trying to keep issues in house and thus avoiding a media circus?[/quote]

Maybe I didn't make my point clearly. I'n saying we should vent everything to the media and make a big deal out of it. What I'm saying is it looks like we don't communicate well in public or private.

If we're keeping so much 'in house', how come AA wasn't a part of those in house conversations about his standing with the team? To be clear, I'm not saying Gibbs or Williams should be kissing Archuletta's a**. But he was brought here under the guise of being a very intregal part of the defense and then is relegated to riding the pine.

My issue with all of this, isn't really about AA or whoever, it's just that this seems to be a re-ocurring thing with the Skins. Personally, I hope he's gone next year.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

He's just going to laugh all the way to the bank and his wife's cooch.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=ncskinsfanec;264380]Happy trails you overpaid underachiever!! I don't like guys who don't live up to a fat contract!![/quote]

which is a common thing when players get signed to the Redskins.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

Everyone says that about the Redskins, but you can easily say that about a lot of other teams draft picks as well. Tomato, tomatoe.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=Blue Star;264551]which is a common thing when players get signed to the Redskins.[/quote]


sad but true.:(

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

Not really... the failures are just more memorable.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[QUOTE=Blue Star;264551]which is a common thing when players get signed to the Redskins.[/QUOTE]

Kinda like T.O. How's he working out for you? Causing any distractions lately?

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;264557]Kinda like T.O. How's he working out for you? Causing any distractions lately?[/quote]

there both are causing distractions but ones produced and the other has well regressed

the 10 million dollar signing bonus of TO came with 70+ catches, 12 TDs, and 1000+ yards with two games missed worked out ok, could of been better.

the 10 million dollar signing bonus of archuleta got you blow coverage, missed tackles, 1 pass defended, and 1 sack and a hitter for special teams, which worked out terrible.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=12thMan;264541]Maybe I didn't make my point clearly. I'n saying we should vent everything to the media and make a big deal out of it. What I'm saying is it looks like we don't communicate well in public or private.

If we're keeping so much 'in house', how come AA wasn't a part of those in house conversations about his standing with the team? To be clear, I'm not saying Gibbs or Williams should be kissing Archuletta's a**. But he was brought here under the guise of being a very intregal part of the defense and then is relegated to riding the pine.

My issue with all of this, isn't really about AA or whoever, it's just that this seems to be a re-ocurring thing with the Skins. Personally, I hope he's gone next year.[/quote]

I think he will be gone as well - the bridge has basically been burned - how could he work with the d coaches anymore? I think he will be a post June 1st cap cut. One interesting thing I have brought up before is somehting AA brought up in the Post article today dealing with safeties coach Steve Jackson has been miserable. I wouldn't mind seeing Jackson shown the door as well and put Jerry Gray in charge of the whole secondary.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=Blue Star;264560]there both are causing distractions but ones produced and the other has well regressed

the 10 million dollar signing bonus of TO came with 70+ catches, 12 TDs, and 1000+ yards with two games missed worked out ok, could of been better.

the 10 million dollar signing bonus of archuleta got you blow coverage, missed tackles, 1 pass defended, and 1 sack and a hitter for special teams, which worked out terrible.[/quote]

don't forget the one punt that was blocked because he blew an assignment!

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

He's right in a way...if the coaching staff has really been ignoring him like he says then that's pretty childish. Just look him in the eye like a man and tell him why he is not playing. I mean they have half a season of documented proof why he was benched. There was just no need for the childish were not talking to you attitude. Either way he's gone...it's just a matter of how they do it and how big the cap hit is.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

[quote=Blue Star;264560]there both are causing distractions but ones produced and the other has well regressed

the 10 million dollar signing bonus of TO came with 70+ catches, 12 TDs, and 1000+ yards with two games missed worked out ok, could of been better.

the 10 million dollar signing bonus of archuleta got you blow coverage, missed tackles, 1 pass defended, and 1 sack and a hitter for special teams, which worked out terrible.[/quote]

Hows that liquored up kicker FA acquisition doing for you guys. Wait.. I just remembered.

Re: ESPN: Archuleta: 'I don't like getting lied to'
 

I don't know ahat the big deal is about this interview. He just said that he wants to be told the truth no matter if it is good or bad and thats the end of the story. I don't know why people think its a comunication thing becasue what do you want the coaches to say to him with six games to play. Gibbs "hey AA I know you have sucked this year so after the season we are going to cut you but I hope you play hard the next six weeks when we put you in the game". Come on think about if your boss came to you and said he was going to fire you in six weeks. I'm sure you would work real hard at your jod known that.