Full Blown Mutiny

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Monk,

I completely agree that players who take pay cuts for the team are great, fantastic team players. I'd like to have a lot of those types of players.

However, money doesn't seem to be the real issue right now. It appears that Coles is more concerned about how he is being (mis)used.

I personally am very ambitious, eager to show what I can do, and want to work at a law firm that gives the opportunity to exploit and build upon my talents. So, I sympathize with Coles. I know he feels that he isn't be used properly - and I think many people agree with that assessment. He's a big-play, deep-threat wideout, but he was being used essentially as a possession receiver/extension of the running game. There are running backs catching balls in the flats who had better ypc than Coles.

So, while I'd prefer Coles to be happy even if he was sitting on the bench, I understand where he's coming from.

[monk81]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

Monk,

I completely agree that players who take pay cuts for the team are great, fantastic team players. I'd like to have a lot of those types of players.

However, money doesn't seem to be the real issue right now. It appears that Coles is more concerned about how he is being (mis)used.

I personally am very ambitious, eager to show what I can do, and want to work at a law firm that gives the opportunity to exploit and build upon my talents. So, I sympathize with Coles. I know he feels that he isn't be used properly - and I think many people agree with that assessment. He's a big-play, deep-threat wideout, but he was being used essentially as a possession receiver/extension of the running game. There are running backs catching balls in the flats who had better ypc than Coles.

So, while I'd prefer Coles to be happy even if he was sitting on the bench, I understand where he's coming from.

But what I'm reading is Coles won't even restructure his salary to facilitate a trade. If I was working for a company that I hated, and wanted to go work for another company, I would do anything I could to make that deal happen knowing how miserable I was working for my present company. But Coles IS looking at the money thing. If he hated Gibbs system and said it was a mismatch, yet was willing to restructure to get a deal done, I'd respect that, but Coles wants to have his cake and eat it too!!! We are going to take a $9 million cap hit......please read the topic COLE WONT RESTRUCTURE....it's about the money...

[Monksdown]

Hello guys,

Whenever asked about free agency and this off season, Joe reminds us time and time again that he is most concerned with maintaining his core group of guys. Whenever I have heard him respond in this way, I always wondered, who does he mean?

I think that there is a direct correlation between his core group philosophy and the gentleman that are actively trying to re-structure their contracts for the team. The team must view these individuals as keepers as I assume that by restructuring we are extending our deals with them.

So have a close look at the guys that re-structure, they are our core.

[Longtimefan]

I'm of the opinion this guy should be made to play out the contract he signed two years ago and cry the blues all he wants when he's finished. Either he play out the cantract' or he shouldn't be allowed to play for anyone else.Personally I would not want the guy playing for me because what guarantee do I have that in two years he's not satisfied with the way I run my offense and decides he wants to cut a simular tune?

There's far too much of this kind of attitude in professional sports anymore and it should not be allowed, though I don't know what you do to stop it espically when a player can pull this kind of act and there's some other team just waiting to give him an opportunity to do the same thing to them.

I've been a fan of Pro-Football since 1948 and I have never seen the likes of many of the things that are allowed to go on in the game today. In the day when football was "Football" Mr. Coles would play for the Redskins or he "would not" play for anyone. Back to the day is the only way to rid the league of this type nonsense, because I would be afraid to think of what would happen to a team with 53 Mr. Coles on it. When you don't like the way things are going, hold the team hostage by making unreasonable demands. I would not even consider trading Mr. Coles, or allowing him out of his contract even if it cost me money. Because if you do this you open the door for a lot of other little Coles to do the same thing in the future. There's much too much of this kind of thing going on in the league now days anyway, and I just think someone should take a stand and say enough is enough.

Good Luck Skins!! Things will look up in 05

[SmootSmack]

damn, a fan since 1948! You aren't kidding when you say longtimefan

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by Longtimefan

I'm of the opinion this guy should be made to play out the contract he signed two years ago and cry the blues all he wants when he's finished. Either he play out the cantract' or he shouldn't be allowed to play for anyone else.Personally I would not want the guy playing for me because what guarantee do I have that in two years he's not satisfied with the way I run my offense and decides he wants to cut a simular tune?

There's far too much of this kind of attitude in professional sports anymore and it should not be allowed, though I don't know what you do to stop it espically when a player can pull this kind of act and there's some other team just waiting to give him an opportunity to do the same thing to them.

I've been a fan of Pro-Football since 1948 and I have never seen the likes of many of the things that are allowed to go on in the game today. In the day when football was "Football" Mr. Coles would play for the Redskins or he "would not" play for anyone. Back to the day is the only way to rid the league of this type nonsense, because I would be afraid to think of what would happen to a team with 53 Mr. Coles on it. When you don't like the way things are going, hold the team hostage by making unreasonable demands. I would not even consider trading Mr. Coles, or allowing him out of his contract even if it cost me money. Because if you do this you open the door for a lot of other little Coles to do the same thing in the future. There's much too much of this kind of thing going on in the league now days anyway, and I just think someone should take a stand and say enough is enough.

Good Luck Skins!! Things will look up in 05

I love it when veteran fans tell there war stories. I agree with him. Screw the whiny little sissy Coles get some real men who want to play.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I feel that when you're maximizing your worth at the expense of your word THAT is when the scales are tipped in favor of playing for money and not for the love of the game.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

In all fairness angryssg, loyalty to one's football team isn't the same as loyalty to one's country.

And, while it's easy for us to say we'd all pay for nothing, or even pay to wear a 'Skins' uniform, it's probably a whole different story once you are a professional athlete. I don't believe that greed is something new to people - it's been around as long as people have been around.

Coles will be playing football whether he's a Redskin, Jet, Giant, Cowboy, etc. So, don't you think it's simply realistic for him to want to play for a team where he gets to play to his abilities?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

BTW, angryssg, do you know a Col. Bruce Haverty? He was stationed at Ft. Gordon before he shipped out in support of Iraqi Freedom.

[KLHJ2]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

BTW, angryssg, do you know a Col. Bruce Haverty? He was stationed at Ft. Gordon before he shipped out in support of Iraqi Freedom.

No, sorry I don't. I've only been here since OCT. I was overseas prior.

[Daseal]

This is somewhat off topic, one thing I thought was odd is football is so often compared to war and the players are seen as soliders. A soldier called a radio station I was listening to, and I've since forgotten the topic, but what stuck with me is how he compared all the people in his squadron, or whatever the small ones are called to players on a football team. I found it somewhat ironic.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

BTW, squadrons are usually (some special forces have squadrons) either aircraft/helicopter units or armored forces. Soldiers/marines are grouped into teams, squads, platoons, etc.

[Daseal]

yeah - I always get the terminology mixed up.

[Longtimefan]

You touched on a very interesting topic when you say Mr. Coles will be playing for someone, Jets, Cowboys, ect. That's the problem, he in all likelehood will be playing with someone else, and I blame that someone else for giving him that opportunity when he's failed to uphold the last obligation he signed on to do.

When "Football was Football" as opposed to this money making circus that,s going on today, he would not play for anyone else because no one else would touch him. That,s the advantage players have today, the can mess over a team and move on elsewhere and get another opporyunity to do the same thing to that team.

Unfortunately, we dont share that same luxary in the real world.

Te Redskins will be fine with, or without Mr. Coles.

Hail Skins!! It's "UP" in 05

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by ramseyfan

Second, as you correctly point out, Coles was given a large signing bonus as security. But now, the team apparently wants back the signing bonus (or a portion thereof). I don't think on the one hand you can honestly say that he accepted the CBA and should be held to it, but he should ALSO give back the signing bonus (if you in fact believe that).

He wants to void the contract, they have no obligation to void it, so adding such conditions seems perfectly valid. He's held to the CBA, and under that agreement he cant quit his job AND keep collecting paychecks, or else everyone would do that.

about the spurs comments - they gave up money, but THEY WIN GAMES... A LOT OF THEM. The patriot have also had good luck paying players below performance due to their record.

part of the problem is that LC's injury slowed him down some, and he's still being paid as if he were 100%. The other problem is that gibbs has used lots of short passing routes and likes letting his WRs block.