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

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by mheisig

AA proved his worth early on: pretty useless. I have no question he doesn't belong on this team, but once again we have a disgruntled player leaving the organization pissed off.

What the hell is with the management of this team that we seem to have more pissed players up and leave or get fired than any other team I'm aware of? Is it just because I follow the Redskins a lot closer than other teams, or does this team genuinely screw people over season after season?

I'm not arguing that AA should play or that he's good, I'm just wondering in general why these situations happen so freakin' often to this team.

Dude, you pretty much took the words right out of my mouth. I mean, we all knew Arch was unhappy and he didn't fit this scheme. I think that's a moot point.

But the bigger question is, why does this seem to be a consistent theme with our staff/management? Why is it that the coaches play the silence game with the media, toe the company line, and all of sudden we have another disgruntled player that is leaving the team. No way in hell it's always the player that's the problem.

Why do I get the impression that Gibbs has no control over this team??

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Dude, you pretty much took the words right out of my mouth. I mean, we all knew Arch was unhappy and he didn't fit this scheme. I think that's a moot point.

But the bigger question is, why does this seem to be a consistent theme with our staff/management? Why is it that the coaches play the silence game with the media, toe the company line, and all of sudden we have another disgruntled player that is leaving the team. No way in hell it's always the player that's the problem.

Why do I get the impression that Gibbs has no control over this team??

I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the organization as a whole to a certain point. The league is full of arrogant, crybaby players, but there are also plenty of decent guys who are honest, hard working players.

One, two, maybe three disgruntled players and I'd say it's a string of bad luck. This is getting to be a yearly occurrence, however. Every season it's one or two guys who get pissed off and leaving hating the team, season in and season out.

I'm not saying we should be out to make friends - yes, business is business and it can be rough. At a certain point you've got to start wondering if maybe it's not just a string of bad luck or some selfish players...

[Bill B]

Does this article pretty much mean that Archuletta was indeed the mole and not Springs like many had thought?

[dgack]

Originally Posted by Bill B

Does this article pretty much mean that Archuletta was indeed the mole and not Springs like many had thought?

Unless it was just a smokescreen, weren't there a number of references to how things had been run in the past, which would indicate it wasn't someone new like Arch?

[Bstanley]

Id just tell that "fag" to stop plucking his eyebrows for real!

[AlvinWalton'sNeckBrace]

still a load of crap. Did he really need Williams and Gibbs to sit down and hold his hand. They're the Redskins not the Archulettas...he's not special, you play like crap, you sit on the bench...I think it was pretty clear to everyone why he wasn't playing and when is Gibbs ever going to say "he sucks...he isn't playing well, blah blah blah." He's not going to do that ever, he tries to pump people up, so Arch needs to shut up...pack up his depends, and get out of town

[The Huddle]

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 that 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."

[riggoraider]

Originally Posted by The Huddle

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 that 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."

You are right the FO are some awful talent evaluators. AA was not supposed to say "hey look here I am not really that good of a cover guy, aren't the tackler that you think that I am and I am going to get burned constantly so I do not think hat you should pay me that much money" ...but BY GAWD!!!! after the fact you would think that he would have enough sense to not say jack about the team that he stuck it to

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by The Huddle

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 that 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."

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.

[Longtimefan]

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.

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

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.

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. I think what happened is, they had no idea how much Arch's coverage skills had deteriorated (which they would have if they had asked anybody else around the league). If they were fully aware of his coverage abilities and still gave him a 30 million dollar deal, then they are even dumber than we thought.

[GoSkins!]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

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....

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.

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by GoSkins!

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.

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.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

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.

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

[724Skinsfan]

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.