Did We Shoot Ourselves In The Foot??

What other 2, 3 or 4 players were we going to sign? It's not like we were going on a FA shopping spree.

Perhaps we're not going on a spending spree cause we now have $9 million LESS to do so because of the Coles trade. I can think of several people we could have gotten, beginning with one named Fred Smoot.

Oh My God! Please let Coles fail his toe test, so we can undo this stupid trade!

Jets are not going to fail his toe. Even with a bad toe he is better than Moss. this trade is a done deal...

Perhaps we're not going on a spending spree cause we now have $9 million LESS to do so because of the Coles trade. I can think of several people we could have gotten, beginning with one named Fred Smoot.


We weren't going on spending spree anyway (read the Washtimes article titled "Skins done in Free agency") even before the Coles trade. And as for Smoot, we made our offer, and we weren't going to budge (read the WPost).

I really don't know why you think we were better off keeping a guy who doesn't want to be here. Sometimes you gotta bite the bullet and cut your losses. Coach Gibbs has said over and over again that he wants players who want to be "real Redskins". Coles doesn't fit that criteria.

Maybe someone can help me with this. Why are we going to pay the remaining 5 mil of his signing bonus. I understand it was a signing bonus but he wants out of his contract not us. I understanding the cap hit regardless of if we pay him I just don't understand why we are paying it.
Because we were contractually obliged to. Why didn't we fight it? Because it isn't a big free agency selling point to race like mad to avoid paying players already on the roster.

Put it another way. We can get another $5 million. We can't get back our reputation if we screw someone out of $5 million.

Who knows. We gave D. Sanders all his money too. :vomit-smiSo what your saying we could have negotiated with him and not paid the 5mil.

It appears to be a big mess. Arrington's and Sean Taylor's contract are issues too.

It's a good move if we can get our #1 signed we won't have a prob finding the room for the rest of our pick's they won't be high priced after the #1, and we clear Cole's contract for next year when we will be in a more realistic position [hopefully] to make a serious push at a SB.

I am more than willing to go into this season without Smoot, and at this point I don't want him for the money he's asking, I believe it's to much, nobody else has so much as come close to anything we have offered for Smoot, I wonder why?

Yes. I hated this deal from day 1 and now finnally so do the press .

We didn't get a Scrub? Word out of NY Moss was on the way to the bench and McCarrins would have a new starter friend. He is injury prone and becoming hit shy ... but hey at least we got something he will go well with our outher No.3. recievers like Thrash and Givens.

We couldn't have made Coles play ? No? When was the last player to hold out for an entire year?

He would have been locker room cancer ? If we won who would listen ? If he was locked out he would have cost us 3.2 million this year. Instested he cost us 9.2 million andhe gets to play for someone else . How does that make sence finicially or football way ? And for all of those relived we have saved the cap room remember we still need to replace him .

Did we shoot ourselves in the foot ... Damn yes. Did we move into the Basement oh god yes.....


There is one thing that bothers me though . The trade cap hit isn't 9.2 million but 6 million. I thought we had more than 8 million under the cap after the Nobel, Harris restructures and ecent signings.

bedlamVR, Noble and Harris haven't re-signed or restructured. They barely take any cap space.

The last player to hold out for an entire year was Keenan McCardell last year until he got traded.

Wow, there's some really good points being made on both sides of this debate. Like most fans, I'm incredibly frustrated with this whole situation, and Laveranues Coles is now officially on my "least favorite athlete" list, and would probably be at the top of that list-- if it weren't for the fact that Terrell Owens plays for the Eagles.

I agree with the sentiment that this was pretty much a lose-lose situation, and the only person you can really put any blame on is Coles himself. He bears the sole responsibility and culpability for this mess. His yards-per-catch have been on a downhill slide since he injured his toe, he refuses to get the toe surgically repaired, and now he blames Gibbs' conservative approach to his statistical decline. While Gibbs certainly-- and voluntarily-- bears some of the blame for the offense's failures, the poor performances of the players within that offense are equally accountable for the overall ineptitude, and Coles is just as guilty for his inability to seperate from defenders as Brunell is for failing to throw catchable passes, and Gardner is for dropping half the passes that were catchable.

Coles decided to take the Redskins hostage this offseason, blame Gibbs for his problems, and force the team to lose valuable cap space to grant him his wish of leaving only two seasons after Snyder generously gave him a huge signing bonus-- a bonus the Redskins will honor, despite his refusal to honor the terms of the contract which brought him that bonus.

Yes, the Redskins got screwed cap-wise for 2005. But the silver lining is that removing Coles from the books for 2006 definitely eases the burden of that cumbersome cap year, and the Redskins were able to get a valuable player in exchange for Coles. Most importantly, they rid themselves of a player that would have been a distraction and a potential locker room cancer. You might argue that he kept quiet last season, but the fact is, there are players who heard or otherwise sensed his disgruntlement throughout the season. Maybe that's why guys like Randy Thomas were so quick to say they'd rather not have a player like that around.