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.