Did We Shoot Ourselves In The Foot??

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Do the Skins play the Jets this year?

[Gmanc711]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Do the Skins play the Jets this year?

Only in the Super Bowl.... but the Jets wont get there

[Tahoe Skin]

Originally Posted by RedskinPete

You are SO RIGHT ABOUT Cerrato. He did SF in and when he is through here the same will be said. If anyone needs to go it is VINNY!!!! Trade him to the jets please Danny!!!! As for Coles I think he will not be right for the rest of his NFL days. Yes he plays hurt but he is not the player he thinks he is. Is Moss better only time will tell. One thing that looks to be true is Moss was a better Jet in the locker room and a real Jet then Coles ever was or would be after what he said! I Can't wait to see Taylor taking him out someday!!!! But Unless Vinny and Danny gets Smoot back as a Redskin I think we are no better off then we were a week ago!

I'm not sure it's Vinny's fault. I'm sure this had to be run by Prez Gibbs and Owner Snyder for approval, so they share in the responsibility.

[Tahoe Skin]

Originally Posted by Redskins_P

I really don't know why you think we were better off keeping a guy who doesn't want to be here.

Why? Dollars and common sense!

Whether or not we actually spend the cap money is academic now. If we had the cap space, options would be there. And that's the point: We greatly reduced, if not eliminated, many of our options.

I'd let him sit and pout all he wants. Sooner or later he'd have a change of heart, particularly if we're winning and get our act together offensively.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

You also have to think about what kind of message that sends though? You can sit on your ass and bitch and when we win we'll put you back in like nothing happened?

[CRT3]

Sit and pout on the bench??? Come on that does a team more harm then good. We could have just had him give us the 5 million back and release him and taken that money to shore up with 2- players versus taking Moss. But I think the prevailing thought was to start getting the Cap ready for 2006. My question about Cerrato is what has he done to hurt the team. We have been ahead of everybody in terms of the free agent thing for many years now. Our cap is right at the limit. Revenue for the Skins is up which plays a part in their thinking. So why the fuss?

[Redskins_P]

Originally Posted by Tahoe Skin

Why? Dollars and common sense!

Whether or not we actually spend the cap money is academic now. If we had the cap space, options would be there. And that's the point: We greatly reduced, if not eliminated, many of our options.

I'd let him sit and pout all he wants. Sooner or later he'd have a change of heart, particularly if we're winning and get our act together offensively.

Common sense? Having a player sit and pout and bring a negative attitude to the team is common sense?

Have you ever played any type of team sport? Have you ever heard of comradarie? Or team chemistry?

And what makes you think that he'll have a change of heart? And if we're winning with him "sitting and pouting" on the bench.....then why even let him play when he decides to have his "change of heart"? By that time we won't even need him.

Common sense? Please.

[SkinsRock]

We'll see what people think of this deal after Coles doesn't play half the season due to further injuring the toe from the artificial turf at Giants stadium. And when we have more cap room next year.
Actually, I was in the thought that if the Skins would have released him, we WOULD be getting something in return....$5 Million more room against the cap, which some of could have been used to sign a FA receiver. Maybe the NFL PA gave the Skins the impression that they wouldn't approve the give-back...they were already questioning it. That said, I think we made the best out of a bad situation, and Moss could end up being the super-fast WR that Coles was supposed to be for us. Remember, Griffin was a "disappointment" for the Giants before we signed him last year and he almost (should have) made the pro bowl, so why couldn't Moss be the same type of situation? It happens with players all the time....whether it's a different system or just a change of scenery. Any change is a risk, just like when "great" players struggle with a new team.

[2BIG2BSKINNY]

I aggre with SKINSROCK!
The only time though you should fear change is when we had something good. With our record we have some work to do, so why not try it. If Coles doesn't want to be here than good ridance. Moss could be the guy we are looking for. He has something to prove for now. You never know what the right combination of players will take you far. And it is obvious that coles and the redskins was not the right combo. Better we know now than later.

[Tahoe Skin]

Originally Posted by Redskins_P

Common sense? Having a player sit and pout and bring a negative attitude to the team is common sense?

Have you ever played any type of team sport? Have you ever heard of comradarie? Or team chemistry?

And what makes you think that he'll have a change of heart? And if we're winning with him "sitting and pouting" on the bench.....then why even let him play when he decides to have his "change of heart"? By that time we won't even need him.

Common sense? Please.

Yes, in fact, I played quarterback in high school and split end in college. And we had a couple of players pouting in high school and one in college. There's usually someone who's unhappy for selfish reasons. So if YOU had played football, you would know that "comradarie" and "team chemistry" is not always affected by one player's negative attitude. (For example, several Vikings players, including Culpepper, didn't want to see Randy Moss leave, and he was as disruptive as you can get. Even Jeff Garcia didn't want to see T.O. leave the Niners.)

Our players rallied around each other, and the discontents each found themselves alienated. Because of the peer pressure that existed in our squads, and because they saw we were occassionally winning, they each had a change of heart and straightened up. But you probably can't understand that.

And you also probably can't understand that common sense means that, rather than blow away all our cap money on one player in one year, we could have used that Cap Space to re-sign Smoot AND Pierce, PLUS maybe a pass rushing defensive end AND/OR a quality left guard. I'm sorry to say, but we just don't make smart management decisions. But don't take my word for how stupid this move was. Get a clue! Read today's Wash Times:

http://www.washtimes.com/sports/2005...0841-3835r.htm

The Washington Redskins will spend $9.3 million for Laveranues Coles not to play for them next season.
. . .
The $9.3 million figure, an acceleration of Coles' signing bonus, represents 11 percent of the Redskins' $85.5 million salary cap for next season -- and the latest example of how the Redskins continue to struggle with NFL caponomics.
One source with intimate knowledge of NFL players' contracts and team salary structures said no club has spent so much and gained so little as the Redskins.
Those kind of expensive mistakes explain why the Redskins likely will have to let top cornerback Fred Smoot leave as a free agent: They probably won't have enough room under the salary cap to re-sign him. The loss of Smoot would force the Redskins to gamble on Walt Harris as the new starting corner and leave them with no proven replacement for Harris at nickelback.
Those moves also explain why the Redskins settled for the cheaper and older David Patten at receiver instead of pursuing the top-end free agent wideouts, Derrick Mason and Plaxico Burress.

[Daseal]

I agree with Tahoe - I don't feel trading Coles was a good idea. He wasn't happy last year either, was he driving the locker room apart? We heard nothing that said or hinted at that. That cap hit is absolutely massive and handcuffed us. Not to mention it left us with a very average receiver with one year left on his contract.

[Redskins_P]

Originally Posted by Tahoe Skin

Yes, in fact, I played quarterback in high school and split end in college. And we had a couple of players pouting in high school and one in college. There's usually someone who's unhappy for selfish reasons. So if YOU had played football, you would know that "comradarie" and "team chemistry" is not always affected by one player's negative attitude. (For example, several Vikings players, including Culpepper, didn't want to see Randy Moss leave, and he was as disruptive as you can get. Even Jeff Garcia didn't want to see T.O. leave the Niners.)

Our players rallied around each other, and the discontents each found themselves alienated. Because of the peer pressure that existed in our squads, and because they saw we were occassionally winning, they each had a change of heart and straightened up. But you probably can't understand that.

And you also probably can't understand that common sense means that, rather than blow away all our cap money on one player in one year, we could have used that Cap Space to re-sign Smoot AND Pierce, PLUS maybe a pass rushing defensive end AND/OR a quality left guard. I'm sorry to say, but we just don't make smart management decisions. But don't take my word for how stupid this move was. Get a clue! Read today's Wash Times:

http://www.washtimes.com/sports/2005...0841-3835r.htm

The Washington Redskins will spend $9.3 million for Laveranues Coles not to play for them next season.
. . .
The $9.3 million figure, an acceleration of Coles' signing bonus, represents 11 percent of the Redskins' $85.5 million salary cap for next season -- and the latest example of how the Redskins continue to struggle with NFL caponomics.
One source with intimate knowledge of NFL players' contracts and team salary structures said no club has spent so much and gained so little as the Redskins.
Those kind of expensive mistakes explain why the Redskins likely will have to let top cornerback Fred Smoot leave as a free agent: They probably won't have enough room under the salary cap to re-sign him. The loss of Smoot would force the Redskins to gamble on Walt Harris as the new starting corner and leave them with no proven replacement for Harris at nickelback.
Those moves also explain why the Redskins settled for the cheaper and older David Patten at receiver instead of pursuing the top-end free agent wideouts, Derrick Mason and Plaxico Burress.

I played football almost all my life except for my senior year at HS. So I know what I'm talking about. Relax.

From what I remember we were never going to pursue Plax or Mason because of their asking price. Gibbs called Patten at 12:01 am right when Free Agency started, so obviously he was one the first players that we wanted to sign.

As for Smoot, almost everyone here realizes that he's as good as gone. We weren't going to sign him for more than what we offered.


We won't find out anything about this trade until we start playing some football games. Then we'll find out if we were better off with or without Coles. Until then YOU can keep on pouting and crying about how much of mistake we made.

Oh and by the way I understand alot of what you're saying so don't try to make me look stupid.

[Daseal]

Redskins P - Financially the trade didn't make sense. 9.3 for a player we don't even have this season. I'd rather have the 5 mil in cap room!

[Redskins_P]

Originally Posted by Daseal

Redskins P - Financially the trade didn't make sense. 9.3 for a player we don't even have this season. I'd rather have the 5 mil in cap room!

Me too, but why give him what he wants?

Maybe I'm just pissed about the whole situation. Trust me, I wasn't happy about the trade either, but then I thought about it and said fuck him. He doesn't want to be here.....let him go.

[SkinsRock]

Did We Shoot Ourselves In The Foot??

No, we just cut off a bad toe.