Arrington Interview

offiss · 03-25-2004, 03:06 AM

What I would like to here from skin's management is an explanation on the 6.5mil, it seem's that this conversation took place, now did lavar misunderstand and it was some how already inc. in the contract, or was it left out, if so what's the reason why it was left out? was the contract restructured in a way that the bonus was left out but made up in another area of the contract, I think management's silence may be telling as far as guilt goes.

JWsleep · 03-25-2004, 12:49 PM

Here's the weird thing about the misunderstanding. There is simply NO WAY the skins could ever have agreed to the extra 6.5 where Lavar says it is. That is not a contract the skins could sign. Now I can understand if the overall numbers are off, but it can't really be that the skins said, "sure, 18 mil cap hit in 2006" and then removed it in the fine print. Maybe they said that they would add 6.5 somehow, somehwhere, but it couldn't have been as an additional, separate 6.5 in 2006. (Or LA is right and they just lied to him up and down. But that is so odd. Why would they do that if they were trying to make LA a skin for life at the expense of Champ?)

Still, LA's new contract isn't SO big, all things considered. So it's not beyond the pale that there was a serious misunderstanding. But then what the Hell was Posten doing?

Sure, I know, sports curmug. We don't have all the facts. But given what we've got so far, it's an odd situation. And if LA has to prove fraud, it's a tough row to hoe for him. But after TO, I guess you never know...:confused:

azskinsfan2 · 03-25-2004, 08:52 PM

I really don't know what to think. I don't believe Lavar would lie about it. What's he got to gain? Are the Skins suddenly going to say OK, let's give it to him anyway to calm him down? I don't think so. And I don't think the Skins would try to rip him off either. Why sign one of the most popular Skins to make him a Skin for life, then screw him in the process??? Who knows????
Certainly not us!!!!! It'll probably go down to what's in writing. But like said before, there's the whole TO situation too. Maybe what's in writing is in invisible ink!!!!!!!!

Daseal · 03-25-2004, 09:51 PM

The difference is TO got off because of what he put in his contract. LaVar is going to get laughed at for what's not in his contract.

Sueing the Redskins for low-balling you is about the worst argument in the NFL today. LaVar is being paid as the top LB in the league, and he's top 5, but not #1. I'd take two or three other LBs ahead of him.

03-25-2004, 12:49 PM	#47
JWsleep Propane and propane accessories Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Houston, TX Age: 55 Posts: 4,719	Here's the weird thing about the misunderstanding. There is simply NO WAY the skins could ever have agreed to the extra 6.5 where Lavar says it is. That is not a contract the skins could sign. Now I can understand if the overall numbers are off, but it can't really be that the skins said, "sure, 18 mil cap hit in 2006" and then removed it in the fine print. Maybe they said that they would add 6.5 somehow, somehwhere, but it couldn't have been as an additional, separate 6.5 in 2006. (Or LA is right and they just lied to him up and down. But that is so odd. Why would they do that if they were trying to make LA a skin for life at the expense of Champ?) Still, LA's new contract isn't SO big, all things considered. So it's not beyond the pale that there was a serious misunderstanding. But then what the Hell was Posten doing? Sure, I know, sports curmug. We don't have all the facts. But given what we've got so far, it's an odd situation. And if LA has to prove fraud, it's a tough row to hoe for him. But after TO, I guess you never know...:confused: __________________ Hail from Houston!

03-25-2004, 08:52 PM	#48
azskinsfan2 Special Teams Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Tucson, Arizona Age: 67 Posts: 232	I really don't know what to think. I don't believe Lavar would lie about it. What's he got to gain? Are the Skins suddenly going to say OK, let's give it to him anyway to calm him down? I don't think so. And I don't think the Skins would try to rip him off either. Why sign one of the most popular Skins to make him a Skin for life, then screw him in the process??? Who knows???? Certainly not us!!!!! It'll probably go down to what's in writing. But like said before, there's the whole TO situation too. Maybe what's in writing is in invisible ink!!!!!!!! __________________ Long live Sonny J!!! Rock on Redskins!!!!!!

03-25-2004, 03:06 AM	#46
offiss Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ] Age: 60 Posts: 3,097	What I would like to here from skin's management is an explanation on the 6.5mil, it seem's that this conversation took place, now did lavar misunderstand and it was some how already inc. in the contract, or was it left out, if so what's the reason why it was left out? was the contract restructured in a way that the bonus was left out but made up in another area of the contract, I think management's silence may be telling as far as guilt goes.

03-25-2004, 09:51 PM	#49
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 41 Posts: 8,341	The difference is TO got off because of what he put in his contract. LaVar is going to get laughed at for what's not in his contract. Sueing the Redskins for low-balling you is about the worst argument in the NFL today. LaVar is being paid as the top LB in the league, and he's top 5, but not #1. I'd take two or three other LBs ahead of him.

Arrington Interview

Locker Room Main Forum