[JoeRedskin]

Lots and lots of assumptions about how information is gathered, reported, and "sourced."

I will respond with my own assumption - that no one responding in this thread, other than SS, (1) works in sports media; (2) has specific knowledge of any statements actually made and attributable to a specific player or Redskins' employee; (3) no one has specific knowledge of how "porous" other teams are when it comes to "leaking" information.

Cole's reporting on this has yet to be substantiated by any attributable source. Further, to my knowledge, no other reporter, either locally or nationally, has indicated that their own "sources" support the claim of Cole's unidentified source. Based on my past observations, if there was any truth to the statement, one or two (at least) other reporters with different "unidentified sources" would be chiming in saying things to the effect "that's what my guy says too" or words to that effect. The fact that no such statements have been made and, in fact, most local media has shot down the statement or been implicitly supportive of RGIII's public denial speaks volumes to me about the credibility of the original report.

As to leaks, I just don't think the Skins have any more than any other team. Given the attention caused by a former rookie of the year and "face of the franchise" player falling out of favor with all sorts of side issues - conflicts with coaches real and imagined, vocal parents, and the player constantly (until recently) making controversial or unwise statements to the media, reliable individuals within the organization are likely to speak out of turn and reporters are likely to provide the information b/c it is generally of interest to the fan base.

I suspect that "leaks" have been going on for years (decades), but are just much more accessible in this era of instant information gratification.

I can only imagine the field day social media would have had with the 1990's Cowboys.