Will Arrington take a pay cut? (MERGED)

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

If it's in the papers it must be true, he's coming back!!

I guess we'll see. I'd love to be wrong.

Dude,. what is your problem? All I said what was in the paper this morning. you always have some sort of smart ass thing to say to what ever I put out here. It was in the paper that he met w/ Dan, did I say he was staying, I SAID IT LOOKS LIKE ITS A 50 - 50 SHOT. CAN YOU READ!!!!

[MTK]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

Dude,. what is your problem? All I said what was in the paper this morning. you always have some sort of smart ass thing to say to what ever I put out here. It was in the paper that he met w/ Dan, did I say he was staying, I SAID IT LOOKS LIKE ITS A 50 - 50 SHOT. CAN YOU READ!!!!

LOL, you really are the most touchy/paranoid person I have ever seen on a message board.

I was kidding around, that's what the was for.

[Luxorreb]

Senorice Moss? What is his name? Is he in the draft? Any vid of him?

[Schneed10]

I don't like Lavar Arrington, and I want him off the team.

I know a bunch of people will probably chastize me for that statement, but consider, what has he done for the Redskins since Gregg Williams has been here? Squat. Considering the reputation of Gregg Williams, it's highly doubtful that Williams is just wrong on Arrington. He thinks Arrington is a liability, he can't be relied upon to stay home when a play isn't coming his way. He's overly aggressive, tries to jump routes, and takes poor angles (probably because he has lost a step, but thinks he can still run at the speed he always used to). He's not an asset in pass coverage, can't stay with the better tight ends in the league, which means Taylor has to do it. For all the money we're paying Lavar, doesn't it say the world of him that Williams takes him out on 3rd downs?

Given Lavar's history, and given Gregg Williams' reputation for being such a good defensive mind, I'm going to side with Williams 100 times out of 100. I'd like to see Lavar gone, there are players we can get to perform better than him in the Gregg Williams system that would cost tons less.

Now, how feasible it is to get him off the team is an entirely different story. Trading or cutting him before June 1 would result in a $12 million cap hit in 2006. If he were on the team in 2006, he's count $12 million all the same. But we'd have to pay someone to replace him, so it would be a net hit to our cap. If we get rid of him after June 1 though, the cap hit will be more palatable. Should be interesting to see what happens.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I don't like Lavar Arrington, and I want him off the team.

I know a bunch of people will probably chastize me for that statement, but consider, what has he done for the Redskins since Gregg Williams has been here? Squat. Considering the reputation of Gregg Williams, it's highly doubtful that Williams is just wrong on Arrington. He thinks Arrington is a liability, he can't be relied upon to stay home when a play isn't coming his way. He's overly aggressive, tries to jump routes, and takes poor angles (probably because he has lost a step, but thinks he can still run at the speed he always used to). He's not an asset in pass coverage, can't stay with the better tight ends in the league, which means Taylor has to do it. For all the money we're paying Lavar, doesn't it say the world of him that Williams takes him out on 3rd downs?

Given Lavar's history, and given Gregg Williams' reputation for being such a good defensive mind, I'm going to side with Williams 100 times out of 100. I'd like to see Lavar gone, there are players we can get to perform better than him in the Gregg Williams system that would cost tons less.

Now, how feasible it is to get him off the team is an entirely different story. Trading or cutting him before June 1 would result in a $12 million cap hit in 2006. If he were on the team in 2006, he's count $12 million all the same. But we'd have to pay someone to replace him, so it would be a net hit to our cap. If we get rid of him after June 1 though, the cap hit will be more palatable. Should be interesting to see what happens.

Sounds about right. I love Lavar but I think maybe he moves on if monetarily possible.

[htownskinfan]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I don't like Lavar Arrington, and I want him off the team.

I know a bunch of people will probably chastize me for that statement, but consider, what has he done for the Redskins since Gregg Williams has been here? Squat. Considering the reputation of Gregg Williams, it's highly doubtful that Williams is just wrong on Arrington. He thinks Arrington is a liability, he can't be relied upon to stay home when a play isn't coming his way. He's overly aggressive, tries to jump routes, and takes poor angles (probably because he has lost a step, but thinks he can still run at the speed he always used to). He's not an asset in pass coverage, can't stay with the better tight ends in the league, which means Taylor has to do it. For all the money we're paying Lavar, doesn't it say the world of him that Williams takes him out on 3rd downs?

Given Lavar's history, and given Gregg Williams' reputation for being such a good defensive mind, I'm going to side with Williams 100 times out of 100. I'd like to see Lavar gone, there are players we can get to perform better than him in the Gregg Williams system that would cost tons less.

Now, how feasible it is to get him off the team is an entirely different story. Trading or cutting him before June 1 would result in a $12 million cap hit in 2006. If he were on the team in 2006, he's count $12 million all the same. But we'd have to pay someone to replace him, so it would be a net hit to our cap. If we get rid of him after June 1 though, the cap hit will be more palatable. Should be interesting to see what happens.

I agree with everything you said except the first line,I like lavar,but he's just not performing like he should for the money,yes,he had a good game last week,but sat was obviously the biggest game of his carrer and he has 2 tackles? 2 tackles in the biggest game of your career is not a good statement

[mheisig]

As much as I love Lavar, I think we have so much depth at LB that we'd be okay if he left.

What would be awesome would be to trade him and Ramsey for a top-notch DE. I can't think of any teams with a great DE who are desperate for a QB and LB off the top of my head. Ideas, anyone?

I think Ramsey upped his stock quite a bit, especially given how many teams are desperate for a even halfway decent QB. And Lavar certainly helped his trade value a bit these past couple of games.

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by htownskinfan

I agree with everything you said except the first line,I like lavar,but he's just not performing like he should for the money,yes,he had a good game last week,but sat was obviously the biggest game of his carrer and he has 2 tackles? 2 tackles in the biggest game of your career is not a good statement

If you're basing every players worth off the big game in Seattle, half the team should be cut. That's a pretty lousy rationale.

Base his worth of the entire season, or better yet his last 2-3 seasons and try to find a pattern.

Unfortunately the pattern seems to be inconsistent and downhill overall.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by htownskinfan

I agree with everything you said except the first line,I like lavar,but he's just not performing like he should for the money,yes,he had a good game last week,but sat was obviously the biggest game of his carrer and he has 2 tackles? 2 tackles in the biggest game of your career is not a good statement

He is a fan favorite, and you have to love the things that he says. He always comes out and says that he bleeds Redskins, burgundy and gold all the way, and all that stuff. I do love that about him. He's mentioned before that he'd rather retire than go to another team (though I think he was embellishing there).

Thing is, the things Lavar says and the things Lavar does often run contrary to one another. He'll say he's all Redskins, but then he'll gripe about the coaches instead of buckling down and studying harder and playing with discipline. In the middle of the season this year, he got all pissed that he wasn't getting playing time. Then he came out and did an interview with Michael Irvin, and he was humble in front of national TV, saying that hey, he needs to get better to play in this system, and that if GW said he wasn't good enough, that meant he needed to get better. But he never did anything to get any better. He seems to say one thing and do another, and because of that, he's not viewed as the emotional leader of the Redskins.

He's got a lot of talent, I just don't think you can count on the guy. He's not dependable. He'll say one thing, and do another. He'll overpursue and won't be where you need him to be. I think that's the quality he lacks most: dependability. And a superstar on D, making a ton of money, needs to be dependable at the very least.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

He's got a lot of talent, I just don't think you can count on the guy. He's not dependable. He'll say one thing, and do another. He'll overpursue and won't be where you need him to be. I think that's the quality he lacks most: dependability. And a superstar on D, making a ton of money, needs to be dependable at the very least.

I'm sick of people making comments like "he overpursues, is too aggressive, and isn't where he's supposes to be" like all the problems with the defense are LaVars fault. If every player were where they supposed to be 100% of the time, then no opponent would score any points against Washington. When was the last time they blanked somebody?

But realistically, LaVar is done as a Redskin. I've said this before; when has the Washington front office ever cared about taking a huge cat hit? And even if he was willing to restructure, he would still be gone. Just ask Stephen Davis, Champ Bailey, Fred Smoot, Antonio Pierce, and eventually, Patrick Ramsey. Even further down the road, it's going to happen to Samuels, Portis, and Taylor once they're all used up, and most of you will hate on them too. That's how we do it in Washington.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

I'm sick of people making comments like "he overpursues, is too aggressive, and isn't where he's supposes to be" like all the problems with the defense are LaVars fault. If every player were where they supposed to be 100% of the time, then no opponent would score any points against Washington. When was the last time they blanked somebody?

But realistically, LaVar is done as a Redskin. I've said this before; when has the Washington front office ever cared about taking a huge cat hit? And even if he was willing to restructure, he would still be gone. Just ask Stephen Davis, Champ Bailey, Fred Smoot, Antonio Pierce, and eventually, Patrick Ramsey. Even further down the road, it's going to happen to Samuels, Portis, and Taylor once they're all used up, and most of you will hate on them too. That's how we do it in Washington.

The logic of the first paragraph makes zero sense at all. Not all the problems of the D are Lavar's fault. The bottom line is that playing him means the risk of letting up a big play is too high to justify his massive contract. The guy is taken out on 3rd downs for crying out loud, the down in which the offense is most likely to drop back and pass, playing right into Lavar's supposed strength. Supposedly, he's a great pass rusher, but Williams won't even put him on the field to use that talent. Doesn't that tell you volumes about how Lavar can't be trusted??

[dgack]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Just ask Stephen Davis, Champ Bailey, Fred Smoot, Antonio Pierce, and eventually, Patrick Ramsey.

Not really a fair list considering that Davis was washed up (sorry, but the fact that Carolina needs 4 startable RB's on the roster is proof that Davis just can't play anymore), and Bailey got us Portis.

Smoot and Pierce were players I wish we could have kept but considering the difficulties both have faced this season (one couldn't stay out of trouble off the field, the other had a hard time staying on it), I don't feel that we got burned.

Ramsey? *Shrug*. My feeling on Ramsey has always been that he's not as bad as some people make him out to be, but he's nothing special. Maybe he goes somewhere else and becomes the next Trent Green and we kick ourselves for not sticking with him. But I'll wager there's a lot more chance he goes somewhere else and turns into the next Heath Shuler.

As for Lavar, he is done here. Lavar likes to think he is smarter than everyone else, and all this talk about how much he loves it here is designed to get the fans on his side and (he thinks) improve his leverage. He's played well in several games this year, but I think it was too little, too late, and this IS a business. He simply isn't worth the amount of money he's due for what we're getting out of him.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

I'm sick of people making comments like "he overpursues, is too aggressive, and isn't where he's supposes to be" like all the problems with the defense are LaVars fault. If every player were where they supposed to be 100% of the time, then no opponent would score any points against Washington. When was the last time they blanked somebody?

But realistically, LaVar is done as a Redskin. I've said this before; when has the Washington front office ever cared about taking a huge cat hit? And even if he was willing to restructure, he would still be gone. Just ask Stephen Davis, Champ Bailey, Fred Smoot, Antonio Pierce, and eventually, Patrick Ramsey. Even further down the road, it's going to happen to Samuels, Portis, and Taylor once they're all used up, and most of you will hate on them too. That's how we do it in Washington.

Sadly to say it's not personal. The same thing happens to other players around the league when their cap figure becomes too high. So don't make it seem like the Redskins are any different from the rest of the league. The lesson that needs to be learned is not to sign players to that kind of contract when you know full well you have no intentions of honoring it just to get them to play for a few years and then be gone. Too much to pay one player and not win a championship. Remember, LaVar is also due a roster bonus of 6.(something) so when it comes to restructering his contract, good luck with the Postons. I hope the Redskins don't sign players to any more contracts like they did Samuels, Steven Davis, and LaVar. If they remain with the team, they have to be redone too many times.

[mheisig]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I don't like Lavar Arrington, and I want him off the team.

I know a bunch of people will probably chastize me for that statement, but consider, what has he done for the Redskins since Gregg Williams has been here? Squat. Considering the reputation of Gregg Williams, it's highly doubtful that Williams is just wrong on Arrington. He thinks Arrington is a liability, he can't be relied upon to stay home when a play isn't coming his way. He's overly aggressive, tries to jump routes, and takes poor angles (probably because he has lost a step, but thinks he can still run at the speed he always used to). He's not an asset in pass coverage, can't stay with the better tight ends in the league, which means Taylor has to do it. For all the money we're paying Lavar, doesn't it say the world of him that Williams takes him out on 3rd downs?

Given Lavar's history, and given Gregg Williams' reputation for being such a good defensive mind, I'm going to side with Williams 100 times out of 100. I'd like to see Lavar gone, there are players we can get to perform better than him in the Gregg Williams system that would cost tons less.

Now, how feasible it is to get him off the team is an entirely different story. Trading or cutting him before June 1 would result in a $12 million cap hit in 2006. If he were on the team in 2006, he's count $12 million all the same. But we'd have to pay someone to replace him, so it would be a net hit to our cap. If we get rid of him after June 1 though, the cap hit will be more palatable. Should be interesting to see what happens.

That's an excellent analysis. I think what you said boils down to whether GW and Co. think Lavar is simply underachieving or if he's an actual liability to the team. In order to justify LOSING alot of money on him he would have to be a major bur in someone's ass and a real liability. If it's the same to keep him or cut him prior to June 1st I think they'll probably just keep him around, even if he's just a backup LB (that's some sweet backup pay though).

[dmek25]

I Think Lavar Sits Down With Coach Gibbs In The Off Season And Takes A Pay Cut To Remain A Redskin.sounds Simple Enough