Does character count?

[crlesh]

Having recently moved to Boston from Northern Virginia, I'm constantly inundated with the New England sports talk. Every once in a while, they decide to stop talking about the Red Sox for 5 minutes so they can mention the Patriots. While there's been a few issues in recent years with 'character issues' on the Pats team, it seems as though they by and large stay focused on the TEAM... hence the three Super Bowls in four years. Look at the transformation of former disgruntled Corey Dillon. He has TEAM written all over him now.

So how can the Redskins become a TEAM? Gibbs is talking the talk, shoot... everyone knows that's what he's all about. Then key is that the leaders on the field (players) need to step up and make everyone accountable. Get Moss and Taylor in the camps and make it known that TO-like behavior won't be tolerated on their team. You think the Redskins' teams of the 80s would have put up with a TO? Forget the coaching staff - we need stronger leaders on our team!

[irish]

Unfortunately it looks like the skins will tolerate or at least reward TO-like behavior. Moss gets his contract fixed after holding out, Taylor's new contract is on the way. Like someone said, talent will make some tems put up with this crap for a little while. Too bad the skins seem to be one of those teams.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by irish

Unfortunately it looks like the skins will tolerate or at least reward TO-like behavior. Moss gets his contract fixed after holding out, Taylor's new contract is on the way. Like someone said, talent will make some tems put up with this crap for a little while. Too bad the skins seem to be one of those teams.

I would not put Moss in the category as a hold out. He only missed voluntary work outs. Yes he should have been with his team but I would have to save hold out for missing a mandator pratice or camp.

[MTK]

We had our share of problematic players in Gibbs' first stint. Riggins being the classic example.

Of course every team is going to have a couple of guys that don't fit your ideal mold, but the idea is to surround those couple of players with guys that do.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

We had our share of problematic players in Gibbs' first stint. Riggins being the classic example.

Of course every team is going to have a couple of guys that don't fit your ideal mold, but the idea is to surround those couple of players with guys that do.

I read and article that talkd about how Gibbs had to deal with the same player behavor back in the 80's and then they talked about 5 or 6 different players. After I read the article I realized that things have not changed very much egos, holdouts, etc...

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I read and article that talkd about how Gibbs had to deal with the same player behavor back in the 80's and then they talked about 5 or 6 different players. After I read the article I realized that things have not changed very much egos, holdouts, etc...

I think the difference is that now players have more freedom to move than they did back then. Teams looked the other way back then because the players had no real leverage.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

I think the difference is that now players have more freedom to move than they did back then. Teams looked the other way back then because the players had no real leverage.

The article I read and the players they talked about that Gibbs had to deal with are the same exact problems we hear about today. I think the only difference is today we have more media and hear more about the situations teams and players are having. What was not news back in the 80s is big news tody.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

I don't think that Moss got rewarded for holding out. I think he just signed the contract that he was due. If we overpaid for him, yes, I'd agree that he got what he wanted by holding out. I just don't think we signed him for anything more than an average contract for a decent #2 receiver.

[irish]

Malcolm, your statement seems to contradict itself. First you say he didnt get rewarded for holding out, then you say he got what he wanted by holding out. I'm confused.

I dont care what amount of $ he was paid or if it was in or out of line with other receivers, he held out and was rewarded for doing it. This is why the skins are in the mess that they are in, players that have never done anything come here for a payday. They know it, their agents know it and its killing this team.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by irish

Malcolm, your statement seems to contradict itself. First you say he didnt get rewarded for holding out, then you say he got what he wanted by holding out. I'm confused.

I dont care what amount of $ he was paid or if it was in or out of line with other receivers, he held out and was rewarded for doing it. This is why the skins are in the mess that they are in, players that have never done anything come here for a payday. They know it, their agents know it and its killing this team.

Just like Matty said, "A deal is a deal." The contract was due regardless of holdout. He could have shown up at the park, been at all the workouts and still would have gotten a new contract. When I say he didn't get rewarded, I'm saying we didn't overpay him because of his holdout. We paid him, what I feel, is a typical amount for an above average receiver.

[MTK]

If part of the agreement with Moss and the Skins was that he would get a new deal upon his arrival here (which apparently was the case), then I can't blame Moss too much for holding out. A deal's a deal.

If he has a monster season and then holds out again next year, I'll be irked.

[Schneed10]

He may have stayed home from workouts until he got his contract, but that doesn't mean the Skins were giving into his demands. Signing him now was just smart business. The guy is a free agent after this season. He just came off a bad year, so now is the time to strike if you want to get him for a discount price. If he puts up 1100 yards and 8 TDs this year, I guarantee you he'll command a lot more than what we just paid him. His "holdout" isn't what motivated the Skins to sign him. They signed him because they felt they could lock him in long-term at a price that they think will prove to be very worth it.

Now, how good Moss really is can be debated. But if you think he's a #1 receiver, as they do, then signing him now was smart.

If you think he's a bum, then that something entirely different.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

A little off subject, I was looking at that interview with Rosenhaus. DAMN, that guy is such a douche. I did like the things he had to say about the Skins as a team (not the comment about Snyder though).

[irish]

If you think the skins have locked moss in long-term then you are fooling yourself. If he has the kind of season you mention he will no doubt want a new contract and hold out again. However its doubtful the skins would pay because for whatever reason the skins dont seem to hang onto guys, theyd rather bring in new guys and pay them. There is no such thing as long-term in the nfl today.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by irish

If you think the skins have locked moss in long-term then you are fooling yourself. If he has the kind of season you mention he will no doubt want a new contract and hold out again. However its doubtful the skins would pay because for whatever reason the skins dont seem to hang onto guys, theyd rather bring in new guys and pay them. There is no such thing as long-term in the nfl today.

This is foolishness. Santana Moss isn't the same kind of bad-character guy that T.O. is. He won't demand a new contract next year. Take it to the bank.