Quote:
|
Originally Posted by joecrisp
Only in this case, the relationship is much more direct, and judging by the fringe benefits (and whatever other possibly unrevealed compensation) the Extremeskins staff is enjoying, I'd say they have quite a vested stake in their positive representation of the team. They've said it themselves: they'd be foolish to bite the hand that feeds them.
|
and that is why their articles are bullshit and reflect the opinions only of the fans that are happy with every move the team makes. I am still somewhat pissed about the aritcle that divided the fans up into two groups in the lavar issue and not only stating a differense in opinion but telling the fans what was the 100% right opinion and what was the "the world is flat" dumbass opinion. The REDSKINS shouldn't be allowing articles that divide the fan base on redskins.com
---------------
and speaking of danny boy deserving some respect.
ESPN TEN MORE NFL TRUTHS
"5. Redskins owner Daniel Snyder deserves credit for allowing Joe Gibbs to bench LaVar Arrington.
You hear all the horror stories about Snyder's being a meddlesome owner who has ruined the Redskins. You never hear the good stuff.
How many NFL owners would let a guy they gave an eight-year, $80 million contract rot on the bench? Even if the guy was a stiff, most owners would demand that a player in Arrington's situation play simply because of the dollars involved.
Arrington, despite a 2004 knee injury, isn't a stiff. He can still do the things that made him a three-time Pro Bowler. Arrington just isn't "assignment sound" enough for Joe Gibbs and defensive coordinator Gregg Williams. Gibbs and Williams adopted the defensive approach that has been the mainstay of Bill Belichick's New England defenses. Belichick will sacrifice athleticism at linebacker for players who will always fill the right gap."