What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

In todays Washington Post they report that Sean Taylor will not be able to make the workouts currently going on at Redskins Park. After reading the article I thought well atleat this time it seemed everyone was on the same page and after his trial he will be there.

Then I went to [url]http://www.redskins.com/[/url] where both Mark Brunell and Larry Michael report that Sean was infact at Redskins Park working out. What the hell? This is like the 2nd or 3rd time within a month that the Post is WRONG. Why should fans even bother with the Post if they are going to be Wrong atleast once a month.

Thank God for the Warpath...

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

Well, he may be there now but it's possible that when everyone actually reports he won't be there. Besides, I think the organized workouts are still a ways off.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

The Post is definitely sucking lately. But I'll bet Taylor will end up missing some workouts because of his trial. He'll probably approach the workouts on a day-by-day basis. Make the ones he can make, miss the rest.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

who gives a rip about the post when you can get all your redskin info right here,plus here is alot more accurate

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

I wish Redskins.com would utilize transcribers, and put it into print! I can't see or hear.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

I think last year the Redskins denounced the paper and said it was no longer the source for new on the skins.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

[QUOTE=backrow]I wish Redskins.com would utilize transcribers, and put it into print! I can't see or hear.[/QUOTE]

My bad!

I check Redskins.com, and sure enough, they have a story up! (Must be reading over my shoulder!)

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

The Post and the Skins' owner are at war. The Post is pissed that Snyder is breaking news on redskins.com. That said, any true journalist won't let their bosses' battle get in the way of reporting on the Skins.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

us skin fans are just so damn sexy. there jealous

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

[quote=BigSKINBauer]us skin fans are just so damn sexy. there jealous[/quote]

You sexy mother f***cker!!

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

Also the Post was apparently pissed that the Skins cancelled the bulk of their season tickets. They used to give out tickets as perks to employees (from writers on down to delivery people), but it turned out that they were mostly just being sold. So the Skins enforced the "per account" season ticket limit on the Post (which had always been on the books, just not enforced) and they had to give up several hundred seats.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

It's odd in this case becuase apparently the post's sources were Taylor's lawyers. Maybe they're surprised that Sean is in DC? Or maybe they said Sean will be in FLA for the trial, so he won't be at OTAs, meaning: When the trial is on, Sean will obviously be here. But otherwise, not.

Whatever the mix up, skins.com are super happy to point it out!

It's nice to have mulitple sources--the Post has been weak lately, but no doubt at some point they'll have something that the skins don't want us to know. My attitude is great, the more info I can get, the better. How else am I gonna waste my time in the offseason? ;)

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

the post's info came straight from sean's laywers, that's a good source, and the permitted time off is probably accurate too. That doesn't mean sean has to miss every practice if he doesn't want to, but it kinda seems like the skins are TRYING to feed missinformation to the post on purpose.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

ESPN has been reporting on radio all day the based on a statement from ST's legal team that "after much discussion, both ST and his legal team argree that he must miss first camp for trial prep". After much consideration, I'm sure ST can be of great value in prepping his defense!

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

nice.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

[QUOTE=JWsleep]It's odd in this case becuase apparently the post's sources were Taylor's lawyers. Maybe they're surprised that Sean is in DC? Or maybe they said Sean will be in FLA for the trial, so he won't be at OTAs, meaning: When the trial is on, Sean will obviously be here. But otherwise, not.

Whatever the mix up, skins.com are super happy to point it out!

It's nice to have mulitple sources--the Post has been weak lately, but no doubt at some point they'll have something that the skins don't want us to know. My attitude is great, the more info I can get, the better. How else am I gonna waste my time in the offseason? ;)[/QUOTE]


What I like about the Washpost article: "believes the defense has a strong case"

"Sharpstein said he expects Taylor to be at Redskins Park by late April -- offseason organized team activity practices likely will not begin until May -- and [B]believes the defense has a strong case[/B]. The case has been continued several times since September, but Sharpstein said he expects it will go to trial as scheduled next month.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

[quote=Redskins8588]In todays Washington Post they report that Sean Taylor will not be able to make the workouts currently going on at Redskins Park. After reading the article I thought well atleat this time it seemed everyone was on the same page and after his trial he will be there.

Then I went to [URL="http://www.redskins.com/"]http://www.redskins.com/[/URL] where both Mark Brunell and Larry Michael report that Sean was infact at Redskins Park working out. What the hell? This is like the 2nd or 3rd time within a month that the Post is WRONG. Why should fans even bother with the Post if they are going to be Wrong atleast once a month.

Thank God for the Warpath...[/quote]

Do you think that they made up the quote from the attorney?

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

[quote=Grim21Reaper]Do you think that they made up the quote from the attorney?[/quote]

I think this whole thing with the WP is a huge non story. Its a credible source, it turned out not to be true. redskins.com sure is milking this like a 6 year old though.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

[SIZE=+2][B]Taylor Makes It to Redskins' Camp[/B][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]By Jason La Canfora and Howard Bryant
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, March 28, 2006; E03
[/SIZE]
Washington Redskins safety Sean Taylor reported to Redskins Park for an offseason workout yesterday, a day after one of his lawyers said he would not attend because he needed to prepare for his trial next month in Miami.
Taylor was unavailable for comment. His attorney, Richard Sharpstein, said, "Sean felt he needed to be with his team."
"We decided we didn't need him to be here," Sharpstein said in a telephone interview from Miami. "Sean was comfortable with where we were with the case, and we'll handle it down here and he can work with us on the weekends."
Taylor, 22, goes on trial April 10. He is facing felony assault charges and a misdemeanor count of battery after being arrested last June for allegedly pulling a firearm on three people he believes stole two all-terrain vehicles from him.
Sharpstein said Sunday that Taylor would be unable to attend the voluntary workouts at Redskins Park. "Sean is working out on his own and he's working with us to prepare for the trial as well," he said. "It's necessary for him to be here working with us, and he'll be back in Washington as soon as possible."
However, Taylor was one of several prominent players, including newcomers Brandon Lloyd and Antwaan Randle El, who arrived yesterday morning in Ashburn.
Last spring, Taylor skipped the Redskins' offseason program to remain in Florida. Coach Joe Gibbs and other team officials were eager for Taylor to participate in workouts at Redskins Park this spring -- which generally run from Tuesday through Thursday each week.
Sharpstein said Monday that Taylor is expected to participate fully until the time of his trial, which could last several days.
Lloyd had not been expected to attend the workouts yesterday because, despite being traded March 11 from San Francisco for a third-round draft choice this season and a fourth round choice next year, he does not have the new contract that was part of the trade negotiations that brought him to the Redskins.
He said one of the reasons he attended was his confidence that his representatives and the Redskins will have a deal completed by next week. Under his current deal, which will pay him $1.6 million, Lloyd will be eligible for free agency after the 2006 season.
"I know it was a surprise," Lloyd said, smiling, "but I'm here."
[I]Redskins Notes:[/I] Linebacker Chris Clemons arrived eager to begin workouts. With the departure of LaVar Arrington and the Redskins showing patience in looking to free agency for a weak-side linebacker, Clemons, who missed the playoffs with a knee injury, has a chance to win Arrington's former job. . . . Mark Brunell, Clinton Portis, Shawn Springs, Lloyd, Randle El, Santana Moss, Ladell Betts, David Patten, Lemar Marshall, Chris Samuels, Chris Cooley and Andre Carter were at Redskins Park. . . . The Redskins re-signed restricted free agent guard Derrick Dockery. . . . The NFL awarded 32 compensatory draft choices to 19 teams for players lost in free agency last year. The Redskins were awarded a seventh-round pick.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

Nothing to do with Taylor, but as a kid the Washington Post was the only source of Redskins news. The Sports section was packed with info, stories and back stories. These days its pretty skeletal. Online is pathetic coverage and print version is lackluster in this day and age of information. I count on thewarpath.net for a combination of ALL Redskins news. Thanks to all Warpathers!!! Post has been slacking for a few years since the seat debate happened. As far as redskins.com has developed in the last 3 years.... A plus plus!!! Remember when? Bucs site killed ours? Redskins.com the best out there right now!!! GO SKINS!!!

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

[quote=That Guy]I think this whole thing with the WP is a huge non story. Its a credible source, it turned out not to be true. redskins.com sure is milking this like a 6 year old though.[/quote]

It sounds like Taylor and his attorney had a miscommunication.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

I still believe the post is the best place to get analysis on the team...Wilbon, Boswell, Wise and Tony. K. are the best in town.

Re: What doe the Washington Post have against the Redskins?
 

[QUOTE=NoviSkins]I still believe the post is the best place to get analysis on the team...Wilbon, Boswell, Wise and Tony. K. are the best in town.[/QUOTE]



The Post was the only source of info on the team for many, many years. Now in the age of computer technology more people rely on internet sources for their information. Even now for people who do not have computers, and are in the area wanting info on the skins the Post is probably their only source. The post did rectify the report on ST in todays issue. Sounds like ST and his attorney got their wires crossed.