Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=offiss]Matty you pretty much summed up my feeling's on Lavar we are paying him way to much money for what he bring's to the field, if he was paid like an average LB or there about's I would be fine, but to blow our cap out of the water for any LB other than lawerence Taylor is dumb on management's part, but if you except that kind of contract you better be able to justify it with your play and he never has.




when did lavar sign that contract ? what is the amount of money he will cost the skins against the cap, year by year, until the end of his contract ?

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

Lavar makes plays for hell sure everyone on this defense has gotten better or has been able to show their true talent for example Bowen is a good compareson we don't know if Bowen just all of a sudden became amazing because we only saw that one game but I do remember in the preseason Lavar had a similar game against the Falcons, He forced that fumble on Vick and actually sacked that guy who broke 2 nice breaks in the Pro Bowl. Lavar showed us that he fit well he didn't overpersue Vick at all he did this repetevly in the first quarter of that game and he and springs blitzing along with Bowen showing blitz led us to have a 24-0 lead against possibley the second best team in the NFC. All I'm saying is that it is quite possible that Lavar has gotten better just has most of our team I mean Smoot I always felt was good but I think he has proven it, also Bowen seemed better and I think we could hope the same of LAVAR. Springs once again put himself back with the big dogs in the leage and Griffin is showing his true potential. I just think Williams finds players strengths and then expliots them and if we had Lavar back we would be MUCH MUCH better due to his speed on blitzes, we blitz alot during that first game with Bowen and Arrington but as the season progressed we saw less elaborate blitzes. I just think that we should talk about how overrated a player is just because he hadn't been able to prove himself.

BOTTOM LINE I TRAILED OFF- WITHOUT WILLIAMS OUR DEFENCE PROLLY WOULDN'T BE SO GOOD AND IF WE WERE TO SUCK AND ARRINGTON WAS OUT YOU ALL WOULD BE COUNTING THE DAYS TO SEE ARRINGTON COME BACK. IT FEELS LIKE MANY OF YOU FEEL THAT WE DON'T NEED HIM OR HE IS OVERRATED AND OTHER PLAYERS ARE BETTER BECAUSE WE WERE SO GOOD AND YOU DON'T REMEMBER HIM BEING AS GOOD. I UNDERSTAND COMPLETLY BUT I THINK IT IS FAIR TO SAY SEEING THAT EVERYONE ELSE IMPROVED THAT HE WOULD TO, I DON'T THINK HE SPENDS ALL OF HIS TIME THINKING ABOUT 6 MILLION DOLLARS....... THATS WHAT SMOOT DOES. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU ALL BELIEVE THAT HE DOESN'T CONCETRATE ON THE COMING GAME AND DOESN'T LOOK AT FILM, IF YOU HAVE REASONING PLEASE TELL ME I AM WILLING TO HEAR IT I AM NOT JUST DESMISSING IT

BIGSKINBAUER OUT
WATCH 24 TONIGHT

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

From what I was able to understand from your post you're basing one good PRESEASON performance and judging him by that.

Stop judging anything by pre-season. Otherwise the 2nd year in Spurriers reign we would have been Super Bowl Champs.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=offiss]How's are defense been with Lavar on the field? We haven't stopped anyone, with Lavar out this year we were #1 most of the year and finished in the top 3, and what a comparison for Lavar to an undrafted journeymen in Marshall, .[/QUOTE]

LAVAR BEING OUT DIDN'T MAKE OUR DEFENSE BETTER I THINK YOUR THE ONLY PERSON ON THIS THREAD THAT THINKS THAT AND IF ANYONE ELSE FEELS THIS WAY SAY SO CLEARLY. WILLIAMS IS THE SOLE REASON WHY WE ARE BETTER NOT BECAUSE OUR BEST PLAYER IS SITTING OUT

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

what he is saying is that every player who played on the skins defense this past year played better than they ever have before , they all improved. it is fair to say lavar would have improved just as well. and he was already the best defensive player on the team.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

BigSKINBauer - your capital letters gets really annoying. It's not necessary. We'll read your post without them. There's no need to make punctuation harsh on the eyes.

We made a lot of big changes to our defense. Springs, Taylor, Washington, Daniels, Griffen, etc. I'm not taking anything away from Greg Williams, he has done an amazing job everywhere he's gone, but I feel we added a lot of talent to our defense too. I think Offiss has said that we'd be better off with LaVar in. However his contract doesn't measure up to his play. He's the highest paid linebacker in sports, and I'd be curious for someone to ask Williams who he'd rather have. Takeo Spikes or Lavar Arrington, maybe I can remember that for Joe's camp interviews! Lavar isn't exactly a "team player" see Marvin Lewis's defense. He'd complain about getting in the 3 point stance, always wants to freelance, etc. He has some big attitude changes to be a top LB in the league as far as I'm concerned.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

In fairness to LaVar though, he did say last summer that he was wrong to question Marvin Lewis and understands now why he wanted him to play the way he did. So I think he has matured. Guess we'll find out soon enough

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE]. I UNDERSTAND COMPLETLY BUT I THINK IT IS FAIR TO SAY SEEING THAT EVERYONE ELSE IMPROVED THAT HE WOULD TO, I DON'T THINK HE SPENDS ALL OF HIS TIME THINKING ABOUT 6 MILLION DOLLARS....... THATS WHAT SMOOT DOES.[/QUOTE]

BSB, that statement is so far off base it's almost not worthy of a reply but I will do so anyway, Lavar allowed his contract disagreement carry on during the season whether he was playing or not, Smoot on the other hand said nothing until the season was over, who put money before the job at hand? Lavar, I find it ironic that Lavar who sat out the whole year with a supposed 5 week injury did nothing but gripe, and Smoot who played through everything short of a broken bone, or a torn ligament, never made his pending free agency an issue until after the season was over. Let's face it Lavar hasen't stopped thinking about his 6 million dollar fantasy.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

OFFISS straight up are we better with lavar or not, I think you will answer yes but if not just give the reasons and even if you say yes do you think that we will improve significantly or not?

By the way this is a very fun thread

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]what he is saying is that every player who played on the skins defense this past year played better than they ever have before , they all improved. it is fair to say lavar would have improved just as well. and he was already the best defensive player on the team.[/QUOTE]

Thankyou wolf you just summed up in 60 words what I couldn't in a couple hundred!

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

offiss- Smoot one of my favorite players I don't want to see him go, he does bring the emotion and this year has proved that he can talk the smack and back it up. BUT he did talk about his contract during the season, many of us knew that Smoots last game may have been that Dallas game after the end of the game. Smoot also said something along the lines that him coming back was the decision of the front office and that he wanted to come back. He didn't talk alot about it but I definatly heard more FROM HIM during the season than I did after, most of the newspapers I read still use all the old quotes and just repeat the same stuff. As free agency is nearing i hope that he will sign, i won't blame him for trying for more money but i think that if we do not offer more he should sign with us. he spoke to bailey (so much for an unbiased source) and bailey said that he was unwanted when he was with the redskins. But bailey did say to find a team with both the money and the a good coaching staff and game. I think that many defensive players would love to play for a defense so that is so amazing and i can't think of much a better coaching staff in the league. I hope that smoot is JUST lobbing for extra cash and that would be fine I would most likely do the same but if he is truely willing to leave then I would have to say that I definiatly do not advocate what he is doing

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

Of course Smoot will talk to Bailey. He was the guy who helped him out when he first got here, and being traded doesn't cut off friendships. I think Smoot wants to be here, but I think he should also worry about the cash. I feel the Redskins will make him a fair offer, but I can't blame a guy for shopping himself. It'll kill me if Dallas gets him though!

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

Ok I lavar is there last year
we could have won 3 games on defense
so our standing is better

lavar is a difference maker

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=BigSKINBauer]OFFISS straight up are we better with lavar or not, I think you will answer yes but if not just give the reasons and even if you say yes do you think that we will improve significantly or not?

By the way this is a very fun thread[/QUOTE]

I say we are better off without Lavar as a team, reason? Instead of throwing 60 mil at a player who's job was more than adequately filled by an undrafted journeyman in Marshall and a promising young prospect in Clemon's, we could be using that money where we really need it offensive line and a big time reciever, straight up BSB do think we would be better with a top flight center and let's say Muhammad from Carolina at WR and probably another player as well, or Lavar, we already know our defense is stellar our offense is in need of help, which if it get's will only make our defense that much better by controlling the ball.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[quote]
Ok I lavar is there last year
we could have won 3 games on defense
so our standing is better

lavar is a difference maker
[/quote]
We could have won 3 games on defense huh? Please tell me how.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]We could have won 3 games on defense huh? Please tell me how.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Its not like Lamar Marshall stunk up the joint and was responsible for a ton of bad plays that cost us games. He played very well on defense; he wasent spectacular, but he didnt mess up either. There is no way LaVar would have been a 3 game swing, I doubt he would have even been a one game swing. All the games we lost defensivley were the results of blown coverage in the secondary (Clark, Taylor ) come to mind in the two Dallas games, which are the only games I can really stare at our defense for. Exactly which games would he have been a difference maker?

Look, I friggin love LaVar. I got his jersey, he was the first guy I went out to see at training camp to get his John Handcock. I love the way he goes about his business. I disagree with some of the more adiement posters, such as Offiss, where are very against him, but their opinion is very valid, and I understand where they are coming from. Are we a better team with LaVar on the feild, 100% absolutley, I dont think anyone is denying that. However, you're giving him way too much credit. One INT returned for a TD like 4 years ago, isnt going to translate into a THREE GAME SWING in one year.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

well we could have won like 14 totlal games if our offense was to score more than 21 points,, for the record i never said nothing about us being 9-7 with lavar, I don't think any single player could account for that.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=Daseal]Of course Smoot will talk to Bailey. He was the guy who helped him out when he first got here, and being traded doesn't cut off friendships. [/QUOTE]

dont take a line and do what the media did to gibbs saying he wanted to leave. I was almost advocating what bailey said as he told smoot to find a place that has a good coaching staff
Check for the redskins
Is proven and is going places
Check for redskins- Our defense is a very prideful defense that did oustanding and many players would love to play for a defense in which they are able to make a name for themselves.
and somewhere that pays alot
BIG BIG CHECK- I just hope that he will accept what we are giving or I am willing to sart up a charity drive for smoot. Donations to keep smoot here. We would give 100% of the procedes to him.

I'll be outside macy's with a bell, bring the donations $$$cash money$$$

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

Lets not hate on LaVar for the money offsiss, in all fairness if we can't do that with smoot we can't flip it and reverse it on Lavar. LaVar got himself that amazing deal just as smoot is trying to get himself an amazing deal.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=BigSKINBauer]Lets not hate on LaVar for the money offsiss, in all fairness if we can't do that with smoot we can't flip it and reverse it on Lavar. LaVar got himself that amazing deal just as smoot is trying to get himself an amazing deal.[/QUOTE]


When you take the big money you are held up to a higher standard, every player is judged by his contract if you accept the money you have to accept the critisism that comes with it if you don't live up to it, there's nothing wrong with Smoot trying to get the biggest contract possible he has that right, but there's nothing wrong with the fan's judging him by it, or management telling him goodby the asking price is to much. Let me ask you what's your feeling about Brunell? I will tell this a contract can affect the entire team in it's option's to bring in other player's, as well as committing to a player like Brunell who retarded the growth of our football team while coach tried to justify his contract, Ramsey right now could be leap's and bound's better in Gibb's offense if he was named starter from the onset, I wouldn't have a problem with Lavar if his contract was reasonable, my problem is he is not nearly worth the cap space he's eating up which in turn limit's our ability to fix other area's of our football team that really need help.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

didn't lavar renegotiate his original contract ? the front office people wanted lavar to be a redskin for the rest of his career or at least close to it, kinda like ray lewis and baltimore did.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

i have never blaimed brunnel for anything, He took the contract that he was given, it was amazing but we offered it, I blaim the descision makers not brunnel. I also don't blaim brunnel for sucking I blaim Gibbs for not taking him out. I do understand why he didn't take him out but i don't place the blaim on Brunnel

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=BigSKINBauer]i have never blaimed brunnel for anything, He took the contract that he was given, it was amazing but we offered it, I blaim the descision makers not brunnel. I also don't blaim brunnel for sucking I blaim Gibbs for not taking him out. I do understand why he didn't take him out but i don't place the blaim on Brunnel[/QUOTE]


That is the point WHY DIDN'T WE TAKE HIM OUT. Because of his contract, if Brunell was paid like an average QB he would have been pulled a lot sooner than he was, and there is a decent chance that he wouldn't have been named the starter to begin with, do you see how a contract can negativly affect the progress of a team? Do I blame management for those 2 contract's? You got that right! But that doesn't change the fact that he's not remotly worth it. My plan from the start was to not sign Brunell, and I would have never given Lavar anything close to the contract he recieved, how would our team look right now without Lavar's or Brunell's contract's? does anyone really think we wouldn't be head and shoulder's better this year with an additional 100 million to spend on free agent's and draft pick's?

Just because a player get's a big contract doesn't mean he's worth it.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

brunnell's contract wasn't the reason he started and was left as the starter for 9 games. the real reason for that is because he beat ramsey out in pre-season and he was joe's hand picked boy. nobody wanted brunnell the way gibbs did.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]brunnell's contract wasn't the reason he started and was left as the starter for 9 games. the real reason for that is because he beat ramsey out in pre-season and he was joe's hand picked boy. nobody wanted brunnell the way gibbs did.[/QUOTE]

Brunell was 1 pass better than Ramsey in the pre-season a bomb to McCant's for a TD that was the difference, neither one of them did anything so guess what contract took presedent, we all know Gibb's loved Brunell but if you think he wasen't pushing for all he was worth to try and justify Brunell's contract your only fooling yourself, no QB who played as horrible as Brunell would have lasted 9 games unless there was a contract of the magnitude of Brunell's, Brunell's performance in those 9 games were about as bad as I have ever seen.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

So all of the smart people agree. We keep LaVar!

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

angrryssg - We can't trade Lavar - that's not the issue. Read through the thread before putting in something that has been discussed over and over again. I'm sure you're the next coming of Thomas Edison, but what classifies people as "smart" for thinking Lavar deserves his contract? He's a whiner, he refuses to step up and take a leadership role, and he's the highest paid linebacker in football.

And BigSKINBauer. You did say that LaVar would have won 3 games had he been playing for us. Don't deny it, just stop making claims you can't defend in a last ditch effort to defend your failing point.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

I appologize for not being able to navigate through the forums like the rest of you pros. I think that I am up to speed now. Unfortunately you don't get paid alot of money in the NFL for being a leader. Players get paid based on their playmaking ability. Sad but true. Many true leaders on a football team stand on the sidelines, they are the vets, the well seasoned guys who for one reason or another are not the starter anymore, but that is their place on the team. This usualy happens when a younger potential starter gets a spot on the team. They push the leaders out to pasture. My case is that Lavar may not be a leader yet, but give it time and he will be.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

hey offiss, i think you and i could turn turn this into "the return of brunnell" thread. i agree with you when you say brunnell played the worst 9 games of any qb in history but the contract he signed was not the # 1 factor in gibbs decission to keep him in that long. it was because gibbs , for whatever reason, loved brunnell and was defending him week after week after week. gibbs was positive that brunnell was the perfect qb to run his offense and he was just waiting and hoping that his dreams would come true.if brunnell would have came to washington and signed a one year contract for the league minimum, he still would have been the starter. gibbs couldn't and still can't admit he made a mistake in getting brunnell.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

Well obviously he is not answering you, but I will. I agree with you 100% burnell was supposed to be his match made in heaven, but remember when Coach Gibbs said that he would have never come back if he didn't believe that Ramsey couldn't become the starter. Ramsey is the future now.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

i don't think gibbs ever had any intention of starting ramsey until maybe gibbs' 2nd year but with brunnells horrid play and the pressure gibbs was getting for it gibbs had to make a change.



offiss will answer, he's just not on line right now.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

You are correct according to plan Ramsey would not have come into play until later. As far as your buddy not being online I dont know.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=offiss]My plan from the start was to not sign Brunell, and I would have never given Lavar anything close to the contract he recieved, how would our team look right now without Lavar's or Brunell's contract's? does anyone really think we wouldn't be head and shoulder's better this year with an additional 100 million to spend on free agent's and draft pick's?

Just because a player get's a big contract doesn't mean he's worth it.[/QUOTE]And who did we have at the time of Lavaars signning at linebacker? Jesse Armstead and Jermiah Trotter. We go rid of old dead wood that was costing us a ton of cash. We spent more cash on the linebackers Arrington 1st then Barrow and Washington. 2 of the 3 were out with injuries and we had back ups step up. They did not know the backups would play above themselves and they did not know that 2 years ago when they resigned Lavaar.

So the question remains would we be a better football team with Lavaar? Character, athletic ability, and dominance as a football player clearly wins. He is better then any other backer out there.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=CRT3]And who did we have at the time of Lavaars signning at linebacker? Jesse Armstead and Jermiah Trotter. We go rid of old dead wood that was costing us a ton of cash. We spent more cash on the linebackers Arrington 1st then Barrow and Washington. 2 of the 3 were out with injuries and we had back ups step up. They did not know the backups would play above themselves and they did not know that 2 years ago when they resigned Lavaar.

So the question remains would we be a better football team with Lavaar? Character, athletic ability, and dominance as a football player clearly wins. He is better then any other backer out there.[/QUOTE]


Go back to one of my previous post's for the answer on that one, 60 mil would help our need's on offense much more than what Lavar bring's to the table, he's been living off his reputation as a phenomonal athlete coming out of Penn State, we could have a #1 defense next year without Lavar, we won't do much more than we did this year on offense if we don't address our need's, and his contract is not helping, he's a tremendous athlete but a slightly better than average LB who was easily replaced this past year. He's on his way to becoming the Jeff George of LB's only he's much more well liked. I base Lavar on his ability to play the position not his athletic abilities.

By the way who is he better than? On our own team he may not be better than M. Washington, and he certainly doesn't have the football smart's of Pierce, I have to assume you were talking about our LB's, that statement couldn't have been broad enough to include the rest of the NFL.

Take a good look at Sean Taylor now there's a football player, he had a better rookie season than any 1 of Lavar's season's. Taylor is what happen's when you combine athletic ability with football smart's in which Lavar is lacking.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]hey offiss, i think you and i could turn turn this into "the return of brunnell" thread. i agree with you when you say brunnell played the worst 9 games of any qb in history but the contract he signed was not the # 1 factor in gibbs decission to keep him in that long. it was because gibbs , for whatever reason, loved brunnell and was defending him week after week after week. gibbs was positive that brunnell was the perfect qb to run his offense and he was just waiting and hoping that his dreams would come true.if brunnell would have came to washington and signed a one year contract for the league minimum, he still would have been the starter. gibbs couldn't and still can't admit he made a mistake in getting brunnell.[/QUOTE]


I think we are both on the same track here with Brunell and Gibb's, obviously we can't read Gibb's mind and he's not admitting anything at this point, I do agree that he was set on Brunell from the onset in fact I had the pleasure of asking Ramsey personally about that on another site I was a little more tacktfull though, but I believe his reluctance to yank him was directly related to the major commitment financially that he made to him that's an awfully big pill to swallow in more way's than one.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=offiss]Take a good look at Sean Taylor now there's a football player, he had a better rookie season than any 1 of Lavar's season's. Taylor is what happen's when you combine athletic ability with football smart's in which Lavar is lacking.[/QUOTE]

I really have to disagree, I think Taylor and Arrington are so much alike in their playing styles it's not even funny. Taylor had a good rookie year, better than Arrington's 11 sack season a couple years ago? I don't think so.

They're both very aggressive and instinctive players who are going to make some spectacular plays. They're also both going to commit their share of whiffs on tackles and boneheaded penalties. Both of them are so physically gifted I think they tend to rely on their physical skills more than the mental portion of their game.

I really don't see what's different about the way they both play and approach the game.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I really have to disagree, I think Taylor and Arrington are so much alike in their playing styles it's not even funny. Taylor had a good rookie year, better than Arrington's 11 sack season a couple years ago? I don't think so.

They're both very aggressive and instinctive players who are going to make some spectacular plays. They're also both going to commit their share of whiffs on tackles and boneheaded penalties. Both of them are so physically gifted I think they tend to rely on their physical skills more than the mental portion of their game.

I really don't see what's different about the way they both play and approach the game.[/QUOTE]


When I wrote that I was thinking about just that the 11 sack's, but he was playing end not LB when he got those sack's and he was in a position where he didn't have to think, Lavar did get 11 sack's but he wasen't a disruptive force like Taylor, as well Taylor isn't going to rack up the sack's he disrupt's the passing game which he effect's from the secondary far greater than Lavar's pass rush, Lavar is not going to outmuscle TE's or tackles, I said it when we drafted him I didn't see an LT in him he will have to beat guy's with speed, you could get more sack's from smaller player's if you put them on the end position they will beat a big tackle with just pure speed, the problem with that is they will run the ball right down your throat, now Gibb's said something that was right on in his talk forum yesterday going to a 3-4 on passing down's and forcing the guard to have to get back and block Lavar now there's the way to use him, I agree with Gibb's he's to fast which will force team's to keep their TE's and back's in the backfield. In order for Lavar to have success he has to be mismatched against RB's I have seen plenty of TE's who have been able to lock him up 1 on 1 that wasen't even thought of with a LB like L.Taylor, unfortuantly we are paying him as if he was.

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=offiss] He's on his way to becoming the Jeff George of LB's only he's much more well liked. I base Lavar on his ability to play the position not his athletic abilities..[/QUOTE] What position has he played the last 3 years He has been bounced from part time end on 3rd down, to the SAM, and back to the Weak. So which position are you basing your opion on? JEFF GEORGE, are you seriuosly using him as a comparison to Lavaar? GIVE ME A FREAKING BREAK< THAT IS JUST PLAIN STUPID!!!

[/QUOTE]By the way who is he better than? On our own team he may not be better than M. Washington, and he certainly doesn't have the football smart's of Pierce, I have to assume you were talking about our LB's, that statement couldn't have been broad enough to include the rest of the NFL..[/QUOTE]
He is better then Washington and Pierce. Ath the time of his signing the mega contract he clearly was the best. He is a top 5 linebacker in the NFL, and I think you could rate Spikes, Brookings, Lewis, and Urlacher up with him. Grant it they all play different linebacker positions.

[/QUOTE]Take a good look at Sean Taylor now there's a football player, he had a better rookie season than any 1 of Lavar's season's. Taylor is what happen's when you combine athletic ability with football smart's in which Lavar is lacking.[/QUOTE] And he provide how many football smart plays? Did he recieve a few unsportmanlike penalties? Did he get benched during the season. Did he start every game? Did he turn one game around and to enable us to win?

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

LaVar is one of the top 10 LB's in the game, can you at least agree with that, offiss?

If you agree I'm not sure what we're all arguing about or why this thread has lasted so long. LOL

Re: Return Of Lavar
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]LaVar is one of the top 10 LB's in the game, can you at least agree with that, offiss?

If you agree I'm not sure what we're all arguing about or why this thread has lasted so long. LOL[/QUOTE]


Is Smoot a top 10 CB? If so let's give him 60 mil as well, My point is this even if he squeezed his way into the top 10 that doesn't make him an impact LB, it also doesn't mean he's that far ahead of let's say the guy who is top 20, let's face it Lemar is nothing special and our defense didn't mis a beat without Lavar, my point isn't that he's the worst LB in football, my point is he's not an impact LB, he's not special, is he a special athlete? Absolutly! Is he a special LB? I say no! I also say we could fill his position for a minimal contract and use the bulk for offensive help, that money would be far more usefull to the team than anything Lavar is going to bring to the table. William's could take an athletic rookie and turn him into a very good OLB, case and point Marshall and Clemon's guy's who couldn't make a roster are now being talked about in the same sentence as Lavar, LAVAR MARSHALL!

I know Lavar is here to stay I just disagree with his grossly overpaid contract, there's nothing that can be done about it now we are saddled with it, we probably wouldn't be talking about this if he wasen't trying to go after an additional 6mil on top of what he is already being paid, I just think about what we could do with his contract as well as Brunell to upgrade the rest of the team, over 100 mil in 2 player's 1 of which isn't even a starter, and the other, well you know my feeling's on that. :frusty: