Return Of Lavar

[BigSKINBauer]

Originally Posted by 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.

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 $$$cash money$$$

[bertoskins]

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

[Daseal]

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

We could have won 3 games on defense huh? Please tell me how.

[Gmanc711]

Originally Posted by Daseal

We could have won 3 games on defense huh? Please tell me how.

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.

[BigSKINBauer]

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.

[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.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

[wolfeskins]

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.

[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

[offiss]

Originally Posted by 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

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.

[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.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

[CRT3]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by 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.

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.