Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Does anyone get the impression that we signed Cory Hall because either (1) the Skins know Sean Taylor may not be showing up for mandatory camp, and/or (2) the Skins are taking their first step to eventually unloading Sean Taylor? After all, Taylor's been downright rude to Gibbs, is obviously not the Redskin "character-type" that Gibbs likes, and is seemingly the Coles-type distraction that Gibbs is wont to unload: selfish, disgruntled and contractually unatainable. I mean if he wouldn't return my calls, and winds up holding out - I'd negotiate with teams and try to unload him for multiple high picks. Maybe not just yet, but maybe in June when he decides to hold out!

I know, I know - you would think Taylor knows he runs the risk of losing $$$ if he doesn't show up for mandatory camp. But maybe he's smoking that same Florida ganja that Ricky was smoking. Or, maybe, just maybe Rosenhaus is thinking that if Sean Taylor pisses the Skins off the way Coles did, the Skins will pull another bonehead move and trade Taylor just the way they gave in to Coles. So . . . Taylor gets traded, Taylor gets the sweet deal that he'd like, and the Skins get slammed like they did in the Coles/Jets deal. Do I hear Champ Bailey and the Denver Broncos giggling, and is that Antonio Pierce and Fred Smoot smirking in the background??

Or maybe we learned our lesson in the Coles/Jets deal and will let Taylor sit for a year, call it a breach of contract, and then smartly spread his money around to upgrade our DE/DT/LG spots for the coming year? And then, we do what the Dolphins did!!! Go after all that bonus money the player got! Hey, how bout that: The Skins finally get smart in their negotiations. Or, perhaps it's just the contract lawyer in me that's tired of seeing teams stupidly tear up bilaterally negotiated contracts by caving in to the ridiculous demands of today's prima donnas. Or, maybe it's just late and there's doesn't seem to be any interesting news to purview.

But, if we are going to trade him, can we please get someone who knows how to negotiate with other teams? :smashfrea

I'm tired of having Broncos and Jets laughing at us. :iamwithst

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

There is no way that ST will be traded or cut.

For one, we'd take a monster cap hit next season.
Second, the guy's going to be an All-Pro game-changer.
Third, I'd take out the entire front office before we traded him.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

i getting tired of hearing this shit.

manley was not a "character guy".
riggins was not a "character guy".

joe gibbs needs to take control over his players. if he cant, he should go back to nascar.

gibbs has done a very poor job of dealing with his players.

look, dont renegotiate with taylor. if he holds out, the team can fine him 6k a day.
and if he holds out after week 6(or 8, i dont remember) the skins can take away his years salary and some signing bonus. you dont get rid of him. you will never get anything near his value.
its best to just take the major loss and stand with integrity than give in to this BS.

btw, ST has 6 years left on his contract, he wont hold out for half his career.

please joe gibbs, dont fuck this up.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

We heard the same kind of nonesense last year when he was firing his agents, and he would be a big holdout and on and on, and guess what he was one of the first guy's in, now anyone close to him say's he just want's to stay away from the media as long as possible because he's tired of them, and it's a contract holdout, has anyone heard Taylor say he's holding out for a new contract? People like to make up there own stories and he's probably tired of it. Taylor is not an outgoing guy, but that doesn't make him a bad guy, my money is on him being at mandatory workout's.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Look, the kid just wanted to completely get away from football for awhile...He'll be here when it's mandatory. This isn't about his contract. Next year when he has another year under his belt he will feel more confortable with how the nfl works so he won't need to get away like he does this year. Then next year he will show up to the not-so-mandatory, mandatory practices......and we will all forget this ever happened. Hell, in week one when makes his first big monster tackle for the season we won't even remember this happened.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

the kid may be a nutcase, but he wants to play more than anything else... he rushed a bad deal because he didn't want to risk not playing, and he was crying when he didn't start that first game...

its a bit like the LT deal... if he weren't so good, he'd be gone... but he's relatively cheap, he can play well and if he's not showing up to our camp (bundled with the offseason stuff) his trade value won't be nearly as high as you think it'd be...

he hasn't missed anything mandatory yet, so until he does (or starts stinking it up) i'm not going to be that concerned...

hall is semi-insurance, but the real motive was that gregg williams likes safeties that can cover more than CBs who can't... hall is super cheap and he was a starter; the guy they let go has 0 starts to his name i believe...

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=Tahoe Skin]

I'm tired of having Broncos and Jets laughing at us. :iamwithst[/QUOTE]
I dont understand why the Broncos are laughing at us? The Jets, maybe, but not the Broncos. Why because they got Bailey and a second round pick for Portis? So what, for Bailey being a "shut down" corner he did get lit up alot last year. As for the second round pick, wasnt that Tatum Bell? What has he done so far? Yeah, he will be a good back in there system, but so what!! Would you rather us have Candidate running the ball for us still? I would hope not!! And yeah Betts is a good RB when he isnt hurt, and just because he had one good game against the Vikings D last year, I wouldnt rush him into the starting position just yet...

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=jamf]
gibbs has done a very poor job of dealing with his players.

look, dont renegotiate with taylor. if he holds out, the team can fine him 6k a day.
and if he holds out after week 6(or 8, i dont remember) the skins can take away his years salary and some signing bonus. you dont get rid of him. you will never get anything near his value.
its best to just take the major loss and stand with integrity than give in to this BS.

btw, ST has 6 years left on his contract, he wont hold out for half his career.

please joe gibbs, dont fuck this up.[/QUOTE] How has Gibbs mishandled his players, I just don't get your statement. The only one that has left unhappy under Gibbs was Coles.

Has he renegotiated with Taylor? All he has said publicly is that he is disappointed that he is a no show at voluntary camp. If he starts to miss time then he will be fined under the guidlines of the CBA.

Gibbs has had plenty of head cases on teams in the past and always seems to find a way of dealing with each player individually. #36 sorry number 21 or is it 36, no its 21 will feel the wrath from the best fans on the planet.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

CRT - Gardner also asked to be traded. I wonder if it had something to do with Gibbs putting a lot of blame on our WRs while protecting Brunell and his system.

As far as Sean Taylor. Trading him is ridiculous. We'd NEVER get what he's worth (because in my opinion we may never see someone with his attributes again), and he hasn't done anything yet. The media lit him up last year. Let him relax and enjoy himself until camps become manditory. If he's not there when they're manditory -- start with the fines.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Please stop it with the Sean Taylor cut, traded, on the way out garbage.. Per his contract HE HASN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG! He is missing VOLUNTARY workout and team activities. Granted he is the only one on the team not there, but until he misses anything mandatory all he is hurting is people's feelings.. Good lord people relax..

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Let's not blow things out of proportion here, Hall is being brought in for depth, I really don't think there's any need to look at this move any other way.

Taylor isn't missing mandatory practices. As much as it sucks, and as much as the staff would like him to be there, guess what? He doesn't have to be there. Once the workouts become mandatory, if he doesn't show then we'll have cause for concern.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Yeah it's definitely way way too early to seriously think about trading the guy. I don't think he's a bad guy, I think he's just shy and reserved. He also is coming off his rookie season in which he played 16 games plus 5 preseason games, as opposed to the 11 or 12 he was used to in college. I'm sure that has taken it's toll on him. So if reports say that he just needs a break and he'll report when it's mandatory, then I am inclined to believe that until he proves otherwise. Let's cut the guy some slack, it's not like he's pulling a Randy Moss and walking off the field while there's time left on the clock, or pulling a TO and demanding to renegotiate after one year.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

I don't know about shy, my friend has a picture of Sean posterizing him at a basketball court. :)

However, I really don't think he's a bad guy either. Definitely an introvert and I think he'll be here when it's mandatory.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

First let me respond to the question posed by the thread: I don't agree that we should look to trade or cut ST at this point. I would, however support plugging Hall in for the first few series of the first few games to let Taylor sit on the bench and think about why he's not starting for this football TEAM.

That said, I'm really shocked at how many people are so willing to make excuses for this guy. He needs time away from football? What? Is there any reason on earth why Sean Taylor deserves more time away from football than any other player in the league? Is there any other second year player in the entire NFL sitting at home right now taking an extended offseason because they're just not quite used to this whole NFL thing? Is there any other player in the league sitting at home, pretty much for no reason at all right now? I mean we talk about this guy like he's more fragile than our wives/girlfriends when it's a really bad month with heavy flow.

Look, I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but I have a problem downplaying ST's absence as just a minor inconvenience or no big deal because the workouts are "voluntary". I mean for just one moment, step back and consider how ST looks to you in any other uniform. I mean picture Eli Manning, Larry Fitzgerald or Jonathan Vilma sitting at home right now, refusing to return their coach's calls, and simply not showing up for OTAs without a single excuse (except rampid speculation that they just wanted a few more weeks after over 3 months off to chill and keep away from the media). What would you think about those guys?

I'm just bothered by how much people are willing to cater to the 4 year old who wants to sit in the corner pouting, avoiding everyone else at the party because somebody said "boo" to them.

I'm sorry if I'm an insensitive prick (and many times I am), but this little boy has got some SERIOUS growing up to do. And I, for one, am concerned that that immaturity IS going to effect his development as a football player and his abilities on the field. And, Yes, I do hope I am dead wrong.:rant:

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=PSUSkinsFan21]First let me respond to the question posed by the thread: I don't agree that we should look to trade or cut ST at this point. I would, however support plugging Hall in for the first few series of the first few games to let Taylor sit on the bench and think about why he's not starting for this football TEAM.

That said, I'm really shocked at how many people are so willing to make excuses for this guy. He needs time away from football? What? Is there any reason on earth why Sean Taylor deserves more time away from football than any other player in the league? Is there any other second year player in the entire NFL sitting at home right now taking an extended offseason because they're just not quite used to this whole NFL thing? Is there any other player in the league sitting at home, pretty much for no reason at all right now? I mean we talk about this guy like he's more fragile than our wives/girlfriends when it's a really bad month with heavy flow.

Look, I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but I have a problem downplaying ST's absence as just a minor inconvenience or no big deal because the workouts are "voluntary". I mean for just one moment, step back and consider how ST looks to you in any other uniform. I mean picture Eli Manning, Larry Fitzgerald or Jonathan Vilma sitting at home right now, refusing to return their coach's calls, and simply not showing up for OTAs without a single excuse (except rampid speculation that they just wanted a few more weeks after over 3 months off to chill and keep away from the media). What would you think about those guys?

I'm just bothered by how much people are willing to cater to the 4 year old who wants to sit in the corner pouting, avoiding everyone else at the party because somebody said "boo" to them.

I'm sorry if I'm an insensitive prick (and many times I am), but this little boy has got some SERIOUS growing up to do. And I, for one, am concerned that that immaturity IS going to effect his development as a football player and his abilities on the field. And, Yes, I do hope I am dead wrong.:rant:[/QUOTE]

You love the "voluntary doesn't mean voluntary" argument. But I'm sorry it does. It is what it is. Is Taylor a pussy? Yes. Does he need to get his act together? Yes. Does he need to grow up? Yes. Does he need to get in touch with coach Gibbs? Yes. Does he have to show up for these OTAs? NO.

Are other players there, despite the fact these workouts are voluntary? Yes. Is this cause for us to question Sean Taylor's committment to the Redskins? Yes. Should we demand improvement from him? Yes. Should we cut him or trade him, or even bench him for a game? No way, not until he does something WRONG.

And that's your bottom line.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Agreed Schneed10.

I'm not trying to downplay Taylor's absence, but it is what it is. He's missing voluntary workouts. The Skins could cry all they want, but in the end the league would shrug it's shoulders and say so what... he's missing voluntary workouts.

Do I like it? Hell no. The guy could at least return phone calls to his boss.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Not every person is a team type player. What I mean is that they keep to themself and are not the leader or group type guys. From what I have seen and heard about Taylor is that he is a little secluded type person. Their is nothing wrong with this as long as he can work with and perform well as a group. We all know from last year that he has no problem fitting in during pratice and shines on game day. If I was a player I would want to avoid the media whenever I could. If he is doing the proper training and comes to camp on time who gives a shit what he does until then as long as he stays out of trouble.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]You love the "voluntary doesn't mean voluntary" argument. But I'm sorry it does. It is what it is. [/QUOTE]

Actually, I'm not saying voluntary doesn't mean voluntary. What I'm saying is I can't believe how nonchalant so many people are about the fact that he's missing the OTAs. I'll conceed that contractually ST doesn't have to come to the OTAs. But you know what, nobody else HAS to either, yet they're all there. That, to me, is a problem that I'm not willing to dismiss without a good reason. And the excuse that he's just a little too emotional right now to be there, is not, in my opinion, a valid reason. Again, I'm just surprised so many are willing to say: "well, Portis said he needed some time away, and he's shy, so what are you gonna do?" What are you gonna do? Bench him. Sit him. Yell at him. Shake him around. Do SOMETHING for God's sake to let him know that this is not ok. He's a professional, he's part of a team, it's time to act like it.

[QUOTE]Should we cut him or trade him, or even bench him for a game? No way, not until he does something WRONG.
And that's your bottom line.[/QUOTE]

Well then this is where we differ. I think he has done enough wrong to sit for a few series, because I think his actions are "WRONG." Not calling your coach back is wrong. Not showing up without an excuse is wrong. It's certainly not right, because if it was, ST wouldn't be the only player in the NFL to do these things without a valid reason.

What I'm proposing isn't ground-breaking here. Coaches in professional sports have sat players over the years for any number of reasons. Tell me where the rule is that a player can [u]only[/u] be sat for breaching his contract? Disrespecting your coach is the fastest way to get benched on some teams. Showing up out of shape is another (stay tuned for whether that is the case or not). Failing to show a team attitude is another. Guys have been benced for getting arrested. That doesn't breach their contract, and they may be found innocent eventually, but players have still been benched for it. I'm sorry, but to propose that Gibbs has no right to make a player sit for showing him complete disrespect by not even calling the man back? That, to me, doesn't make sense.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=firstdown]Not every person is a team type player. What I mean is that they keep to themself and are not the leader or group type guys. From what I have seen and heard about Taylor is that he is a little secluded type person. Their is nothing wrong with this as long as he can work with and perform well as a group. We all know from last year that he has no problem fitting in during pratice and shines on game day. If I was a player I would want to avoid the media whenever I could. If he is doing the proper training and comes to camp on time who gives a shit what he does until then as long as he stays out of trouble.[/QUOTE]

Again, I refuse to believe ST is the ONLY player in the league who is shy, introverted, secluded, whatever. Every other guy is there, he should be too. And if you think that missing OTAs (where they are working on techniques, drills, and defensive schemes) when you've only played your rookie year so far is not going to be detrimental to his development as a player? Then you're far more optomistic than I am.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Bench him for missing voluntary workouts?? I think the NFLPA would probably have something to say about that.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Bench him for missing voluntary workouts?? I think the NFLPA would probably have something to say about that.[/QUOTE]

Actually the NFLPA wouldn't have anything to say about it. As long as the Skins are paying his contract, there isn't a single thing the NFLPA could do about the Skins' decisions regarding who to start and who to sit. Can you imagine the precident that would set? Then every second stringer could go crying to the NFLPA every time they don't get to start and simply claim that it's because of a personal issue with the coach.

Trust me on this one, as a legal matter, as long as ST gets his paycheck, the NFLPA has no say in who the Skins start and who they sit, for any reason or for no reason at all.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

I'm not so sure about that, I don't think a team can discipline a player for missing voluntary workouts.

They would probably have to say it's for another reason, but if they bench him and say it's for skipping the OTAs, I would think the league wouldn't be kosher with that.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I'm not so sure about that, I don't think a team can discipline a player for missing voluntary workouts.

They would probably have to say it's for another reason, but if they bench him and say it's for skipping the OTAs, I would think the league wouldn't be kosher with that.[/QUOTE]
In theory:
Joe Gibbs - We've decided to start Hall this game. We just feel he has a better handle on the playbook and what we are trying to accomplish.

Who's going to make a stink about that?

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=BrudLee]In theory:
Joe Gibbs - We've decided to start Hall this game. We just feel he has a better handle on the playbook and what we are trying to accomplish.

Who's going to make a stink about that?[/QUOTE]

That's my point, but if they say we're starting Hall because Taylor is a punk and skipped the OTAs, the league isn't going to go for that.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

This has got to stop. The only way Sean Taylor will not be on the feild for the Washington Redskins come September 11th, is if there is a saftey who can do the job better than he can. If Taylor holds out of training camp, thats a real possibility, because he wont have a full grasp on the playbook. If he is in camp, which the rumor is that he will be, he will be on the feild on 9/11/05. Period. The fact that we signed this guy, who may be decent but nothing spectacular, dosent make me think for a second that Taylor is going anywhere.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Not only is it for depth, but it IS an insurance policy, JUST in case. I mean that one year deal is a good way of watching your ass.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Once ST reports to camp and begins working with the team and coaches, all this will be like a fart in the wind. The only thing I don't understand is the "not returning the coaches call" thing. I think at least he could do that. But we don't really have all the inside scoop about that either. Most of what we are reading and talking about is heresay anyway. OTA's? Did they even exist ten years ago? ST isn't pulling an "Iverson". When the chips are down and we take the field Monday night in Dallas, who do you want starting at safety for the Washington Redskins? Hall or Taylor? Its kind of a no brainer. If he's in training camp and shows up in shape and hitting like a beast, I've got no beef with this. He's a bit of a kook. So was Riggo, Manley, Theismann, Sonny J., Brian Mitchell, Pat Fischer, Billy Kilmer etc. just to name a few. They all did ok.. Not everyone has to be like Darrell and Art.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Tahoe Skin, I was just over on the Hogs.net and I read your exact same post over there. Don't you think we have talked about Sean Taylor enough? There have been numerous threads about this guy since he began making headlines, don't you think it's about time to let dead dogs lye.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]I'm not so sure about that, I don't think a team can discipline a player for missing voluntary workouts.

They would probably have to say it's for another reason, but if they bench him and say it's for skipping the OTAs, I would think the league wouldn't be kosher with that.[/QUOTE]

First, if I were to sit him, it'd be more for not calling Gibbs back than anything.

Second, you have to understand that the NFLPA is nothing more, and nothing less than a labor union. Anything that is not in the collective bargaining agreement is simply untouchable by the union. They can piss and moan about how their player is being treated, but they have no legal power to do anything that is not forbidden by the collective bargaining agreeement. Without a doubt, I am sure that certain forms of "discipline" are covered, including fines, suspensions, extra calisthenics at practices, and probably even certain forms of verbal or physical reprimand. But there is no way the union can have any say over whether a team labels a guy as "starter" or "second string" because the implimentation of those restrictions would be completely unworkable. There are simply too many outs for a team to justify their lineup for the NFLPA to have any say over how a team sets its lineup, and, therefore, any clause related to grievances for playing time or string designation would be too vague and ambiguous to be enforceable. As such, it is inconceivable that such a clause would even be included in the collective bargaining agreement. There is simply no "right to be first string" for the NFLPA to enforce.

That said, I see that I am in the serious minority of people who would sit ST for a couple series to teach him a lesson about respect, so I will just accept that and move on. Here's to hoping that ST learned everything he needs to know about being an NFL safety in his rookie year so that learning defensive sets and techniques at the OTAs proves to be a more pointless exercise to him than hacking away on the playstation in Miami.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

1. I doubt that the Skins will trade Sean Taylor because I don't think they could get sufficient value in return to take the chance that this guy actually realizes his physical potential as a football player. Imagine if they cut him loose and in anotehr year or so Taylor grows up and becomes a latter-day Ronnie Lott. Once again the Skins' organization will look like bumbling fools. They won't take that risk...

2. I know we haven't heard Taylor say he wants a new contract - because we haven't heard him say anything at all including that he does NOT want a new contract - but here's the fly in the ointment. Why did he hire Drew Rosenhaus - currently the King of Contract Renegotiation in the NFL? Maybe Taylor just hired him because he thinks Rosenhaus is a nice guy - - or maybe ...

3. I have no idea if "all Taylor wants to do is play football" because I can't read his mind. If he wants to play football so much, I'd expect him to be at the "voluntary" team events - - but that's just me. I'll defer to the mind-reading experts here as to what he REALLY wants to do.

4. I don't know if he is a bad guy or a good guy either. I do know that he is not a very reliable guy; I know he does not plan ahead in his life very well; I know that he doesn't always think that rules apply to him. I know those things because of his behaviors and not because I can read his mind.

5. I think the KEY question for the coaching staff to evaluate here is whether ot not Taylor's behavior in not returning phone calls and missing voluntary workouts will spill over to other players on the team. IF they conclude that it will - or it has - then they need to do something to punish Taylor - and others - for such behaviors. IF they conclude it will not, then they need to decide whether or not a punishment for Sean Taylor will get him to behave the way they would want him to behave or if it will make him a bigger MEATHEAD. That is the current Joe Gibbs Challenge!

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=PSUSkinsFan21]First, if I were to sit him, it'd be more for not calling Gibbs back than anything.

Second, you have to understand that the NFLPA is nothing more, and nothing less than a labor union. Anything that is not in the collective bargaining agreement is simply untouchable by the union. They can piss and moan about how their player is being treated, but they have no legal power to do anything that is not forbidden by the collective bargaining agreeement. Without a doubt, I am sure that certain forms of "discipline" are covered, including fines, suspensions, extra calisthenics at practices, and probably even certain forms of verbal or physical reprimand. But there is no way the union can have any say over whether a team labels a guy as "starter" or "second string" because the implimentation of those restrictions would be completely unworkable. There are simply too many outs for a team to justify their lineup for the NFLPA to have any say over how a team sets its lineup, and, therefore, any clause related to grievances for playing time or string designation would be too vague and ambiguous to be enforceable. As such, it is inconceivable that such a clause would even be included in the collective bargaining agreement. There is simply no "right to be first string" for the NFLPA to enforce.

That said, I see that I am in the serious minority of people who would sit ST for a couple series to teach him a lesson about respect, so I will just accept that and move on. Here's to hoping that ST learned everything he needs to know about being an NFL safety in his rookie year so that learning defensive sets and techniques at the OTAs proves to be a more pointless exercise to him than hacking away on the playstation in Miami.[/QUOTE]

Yeah dude you sound like you'd run the team like Tom Coughlin. First, sitting him for a couple of series hardly sends any message at all. I don't even know what the point would be. They'd basically be saying, "Sean, we don't like you missing OTAs, so we're going to sit you to start the game. But we're going to get you back in the lineup real quick because we think you're that good, despite the fact that you missed the OTAs."

I just don't see the point. Rule with an iron fist and players are going to start getting pissed at you. Being a hard-ass is one thing, but if your players resent you they won't play for you. You want tough discipline, but not at the expense of rationality. The punishment has to fit the crime. And since these are voluntary workouts there is no crime, and hence there should be no punishment.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

That said, I'm not making excuses for him. If he starts missing mandatory camps and practices, then I'll have a serious problem.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon]1. I doubt that the Skins will trade Sean Taylor because I don't think they could get sufficient value in return to take the chance that this guy actually realizes his physical potential as a football player. Imagine if they cut him loose and in anotehr year or so Taylor grows up and becomes a latter-day Ronnie Lott. Once again the Skins' organization will look like bumbling fools. They won't take that risk...

2. I know we haven't heard Taylor say he wants a new contract - because we haven't heard him say anything at all including that he does NOT want a new contract - but here's the fly in the ointment. Why did he hire Drew Rosenhaus - currently the King of Contract Renegotiation in the NFL? Maybe Taylor just hired him because he thinks Rosenhaus is a nice guy - - or maybe ...

3. I have no idea if "all Taylor wants to do is play football" because I can't read his mind. If he wants to play football so much, I'd expect him to be at the "voluntary" team events - - but that's just me. I'll defer to the mind-reading experts here as to what he REALLY wants to do.

4. I don't know if he is a bad guy or a good guy either. I do know that he is not a very reliable guy; I know he does not plan ahead in his life very well; I know that he doesn't always think that rules apply to him. I know those things because of his behaviors and not because I can read his mind.

5. I think the KEY question for the coaching staff to evaluate here is whether ot not Taylor's behavior in not returning phone calls and missing voluntary workouts will spill over to other players on the team. IF they conclude that it will - or it has - then they need to do something to punish Taylor - and others - for such behaviors. IF they conclude it will not, then they need to decide whether or not a punishment for Sean Taylor will get him to behave the way they would want him to behave or if it will make him a bigger MEATHEAD. That is the current Joe Gibbs Challenge![/QUOTE]

On point number 5, it seems that every other player is at the OTAs, so I don't think Taylor is spreading any cancer throughout the team. As Gibbs continues to fill the locker room with good-character guys, attitudes like Taylor's become an increasing minority, thereby minimizing the chances that a few bad apples will spoil the bunch.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]Yeah dude you sound like you'd run the team like Tom Coughlin. First, sitting him for a couple of series hardly sends any message at all. I don't even know what the point would be. They'd basically be saying, "Sean, we don't like you missing OTAs, so we're going to sit you to start the game. But we're going to get you back in the lineup real quick because we think you're that good, despite the fact that you missed the OTAs."

I just don't see the point. Rule with an iron fist and players are going to start getting pissed at you. Being a hard-ass is one thing, but if your players resent you they won't play for you. You want tough discipline, but not at the expense of rationality. The punishment has to fit the crime. And since these are voluntary workouts there is no crime, and hence there should be no punishment.[/QUOTE]

No, Tom Coughlin is an ass. I don't agree with his coaching style at all, and I would not run my team like him. Not sure where you fail to see the middle ground here, but I'm not talking about a guy showing up 5 minutes late for a team meeting. I'm talking about a second-year guy completely ignoring his coach, showing complete disdain for his entire team, and missing workouts he really does need............not a pro-bowler who shows up late for one meeting (a.k.a Michael Strahan).

And the point of sitting him is to send a message to him, the rest of the team, and the public at large that disrespect has consequences. If he does it again after you sit him for a few series, you sit him for a game, and so on and so forth. I don't think it's all that strange of a concept that discipline for first-time offenders should be less than discipline for repeat offenders. He pulls the same crap next year, increase punishment even more, but don't get walked all over by some 22 year old who thinks he's above the rest of the team.

And players won't play for you if they don't respect you either, so I'm sorry but I've had enough years of players treating Skins' coaches like jokes because they were too afraid to say a word of disapproval to anyone. Did you really think the players played hard for Turner or Spurrier? Did you really think they respected them at all? Those guys let the players walk all over them, never dished out a bit of discipline, and what do we have to show for it? I fail to see how your coaching style has ever proven more effective? On the other hand, guys like Parcells, Ditka, Shannahan, Gruden, Billick and Belicheck have never had a problem getting tough on players, and they have how many rings?

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

I think much is being made over nothing.

The media and we the fans are probably more bothered by his absence than the team is. Do you think the players and coaches are beating themselves over the head right now wondering why Taylor isn't there? I really doubt it, it's probably business as usual at Redskins Park.

As for benching him to teach him a lesson, we benched him last year for a game after his DWI incident for missing practice, that sure seemed to do the trick, huh?

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]As for benching him to teach him a lesson, we benched him last year for a game after his DWI incident for missing practice, that sure seemed to do the trick, huh?[/QUOTE]

That's a fair point. I guess a lot of my frustration comes from the fact that I don't know if there is any way of getting through to this kid.

But assuming someone like me wants to punish him for not calling Gibbs back: what else could they do? It's just entirely too helpless of a feeling for me to think that there is nothing that would work, so just let him go and show complete disdain for the coaching staff and team and then jump right into the starting lineup like nothing ever happened. The message that sends is "if you're good enough, you can tell me to go F%#K myself, and I'll still play you and let you start, then flip me off whenever you want."

Again, I know I'm in the minority here for wanting to even bother trying to get through to this kid, but don't they have to do SOMETHING to try to make sure this isn't a yearly occurence? Maybe the answer to that is "No"?.......I don't know............I'm just really frustrated by this.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=PSUSkinsFan21]

And the point of sitting him is to send a message to him, the rest of the team, and the public at large that disrespect has consequences. If he does it again after you sit him for a few series, you sit him for a game, and so on and so forth. I don't think it's all that strange of a concept that discipline for first-time offenders should be less than discipline for repeat offenders. He pulls the same crap next year, increase punishment even more, but don't get walked all over by some 22 year old who thinks he's above the rest of the team.
[/QUOTE]

What you are suggesting is ridiculous.. You're assuming that sitting him will teach him a lesson.. Benching someone for the first couple series of a game for missing VOLUNTARY workouts just proves that you are petty to your team.. If he pulls it again next year bench him for longer? I thought the point of benching this year was to teach him a lesson.. What's next a 4 game suspension? Your other points (that I didn't quote) regarding Turner and Spurrier were somewhat valid but without organizational accountability, which we have lacked since Gibbs the 1st time (except Schottenheimer's one year) is what causes players to run amok, not the discipline style of the coach.. Billick is known as a players coach, he won, Vermiel is a players coach, he wins, Marv Levy was a players coach and he won, there are plenty of examples of you not having to be an ass to your players to be successful..

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

And I think we can feel comfortable that Gibbs is a player's coach.

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

Matty:

If Gibbs keeps calling Taylor - and never gets a return call as has been reported - then at least one coach must be concerned that everyone else is here and Taylor is not. If this were no big deal, why would Gibbs be on the phone more than once?

In addition to Taylor missing a game last year after his DWI incident, Taylor did not start in the first game of the year. Remember the other players "consoling him" on the bench? So, he did not get the message then and therefore, I doubt that it will be significantly more effective this year.

BTW, there was an article in the NYT about Drew Rosenhaus. It said that he represented 91 different NFL players. That's a lot of balls to keep up in the air at the same time when it gets to be crunch time for contract negotiations, no?

Re: Hall In, Taylor Out??
 

[QUOTE=Paintrain]What you are suggesting is ridiculous.. You're assuming that sitting him will teach him a lesson.. Benching someone for the first couple series of a game for missing VOLUNTARY workouts just proves that you are petty to your team.. If he pulls it again next year bench him for longer? I thought the point of benching this year was to teach him a lesson.. What's next a 4 game suspension? Your other points (that I didn't quote) regarding Turner and Spurrier were somewhat valid but without organizational accountability, which we have lacked since Gibbs the 1st time (except Schottenheimer's one year) is what causes players to run amok, not the discipline style of the coach.. Billick is known as a players coach, he won, Vermiel is a players coach, he wins, Marv Levy was a players coach and he won, there are plenty of examples of you not having to be an ass to your players to be successful..[/QUOTE]

Vermeil has won what? Levy has won what? Last I checked both have combined for Zero rings.

You're right. A player should be able to say FU*K You to the coach and still play if he's good enough. And because any small amount of discipline might not be successful, you just shouldn't bother. Absolutely. Players should definitely be allowed to show complete disrespect for their team and coaches and the precedent we should set for that behavior is to name that player your starter, because after all, nothing is more important that how fast a player can run and how high he can jump and how many plays he can make. Attitude means nothing and respect for the team should be completely discounted.

Look, all I'm getting at is I think it's a little hasty to say that what I'm proposing is so "rediculous". Players have been benched and kept out of the starting lineup for less. Why we're so afraid to do it is beyond me.