Jump to content

Williams Asks for Extension or Trade


LoganF89

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, naptownskinsfan said:

 

Texans should let Tunsil walk and trade for Trent. They won't though bc they crazily traded two firsts for him.

I still wish Bruce could see the forest instead of just the trees. A good GM would’ve known Trent didn't want to play in DC and would've known the roster wasn't a playoff roster; instead the roster was young, rebuilding and it could use more draft capital.

Bruce should’ve traded Trent, AD, Kerrigan & VD to the Texans for Clowney, a 3rd, 5th & 6th. What a missed opportunity we had there to get Clowney, dump those salaries and give those 4 players a chance to play for a Super Bowl before their careers ended.

Edited by turtle28
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, MKnight82 said:

@Thaiphoon I'm done with this discussion.  I don't understand why you automatically assume a cancer survivor is using his story in some Machiavellian scheme to get money.  There's absolutely no proof that is what is happening.  

 

+1.  A lot of talk and zero factual evidence to support this ridiculous claim.  Two events happening closely together does not imply causation.  Billy punched a kid defending himself at school and wants to be class president.  Apparently Billy is a scum bag for using his fight at school as a shady scheme to get elected president.  Makes zero sense.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the cancer scare is what pushed Trent to the position he’s holding now and I see no issue with that. He should get as much money as he can because at any moment he could be gone and at least he wants to take care of his family. I personally wish we would just pay him. He’s my favorite player on the team and we need him but that’s obviously not going to happen. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lavar703 said:

I think the cancer scare is what pushed Trent to the position he’s holding now and I see no issue with that. He should get as much money as he can because at any moment he could be gone and at least he wants to take care of his family. I personally wish we would just pay him. He’s my favorite player on the team and we need him but that’s obviously not going to happen. 

I wouldn't say it's obvious that it's not going to happen. I think a contract extension could still be being negotiated as we speak. I think there's a good chance Trent is extended on a 3 year deal, and it could be a $55-60 million deal, we just don't know at this moment. 

My hope is that the new deal would lower his cap number for this year and then next year and in 2022 when Alex is off the books, his cap # will be higher.

Let's look at Lane Johnson’s break down. Yes, it's a 4 year $72 million deal on its surface, but it's a lot of funny money. He’ll never get that much, its really a 4 year deal for $54.6 million. He restructured his contract in 2019 and lowered his base $ to $800,000. He got a $3 million signing bonus. His restructure cost $4.25 and his cap it was $7.7. 

At signing he was guaranteed $20.35 million. That's his signing bonus and his 2020 & 2021 salaries. That = $22.5 million.

• 2019: Base: 800k, $2.6 SB, $4.25 restructure = $7.7m cap hit.
 
• 2020: $15.9m cap hit
 
• 2021: $16.5m cap it.
 
Jane Johnson was guaranteed $54 million over 4 years.
 
If the Redskins wanted to guarantee Trent $55 to 60 million over 3 years, they could make it so his cap number this year is like $10-12 million and his cap number shot up to $18 to $20 million in 2021 & 2022.
 
I think that’s reasonable. He could get $25 to 30 million at signing guaranteed.
Edited by turtle28
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, lavar703 said:

I think if we get a second for Trent we could get a good tackle. This draft is loaded with OT talent. Trey Adams, Prince and Austin Jackson could all be available in the second. 

Good point Lavar  

If it falls that way and we get a 2nd rd Pick, there should be a decent(second tier LT). Wish we had that other first rd Pick (Trent trade we should have had) as mentioned in other posts, we would have had that shot at the top tier LT.

LT is so important especially with a rookie QB  I have been critical of TW but in our situation the way it stands today, wouldn’t be that opposed to signing him to a deal  Don’t know for how long or for how much but we do need his services as long as his play hasn’t dropped off  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m going to be honest, I think a second round OT we may draft bc we traded Trent to say the Browns etc will be a serviceable player at best as a rookie. Yes, even the 2nd round OTs are talented, it’s very rare that a 2nd round OT comes in and starts at LT. They often are swing tackles as rookies or RTs.

IMHO if we trade Trent for a 2nd and then are trying to rely on that guy to start, we had better bring Donald Penn back on a one year deal. 
 

It wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world to be having an open competition between Christian and a 2nd round rookie for the starting LT job, but I wouldn’t feel great about that either. I’d feel much better if Penn was back in the mix competing with those two - and even Moses for the two starting OT jobs - bc let’s be honest, if we draft an OT at some point and re-sign Trent or re-sign Penn, Moses shouldn’t be handed the starting RT job like he was under Gruden the last three years either. Everyone knows that ever since Moses  signed his new deal, he’s been injury prone and his play has been inconsistent compared to how he played in 2015, 16 and 17.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, MKnight82 said:

@Thaiphoon I'm done with this discussion.  I don't understand why you automatically assume a cancer survivor is using his story in some Machiavellian scheme to get money.  There's absolutely no proof that is what is happening.  

 

Because he is. 

He's blaming the team for the cancer scare when you, yourself said that they are not responsible. 

Pretty much anyone looking at this knows that the team isn't responsible for diangosing cancer or for Trent's inability to actually go get a 2nd opinion. 

And yet, there he was all offseason last year and into the regular season, using it as a foil to extort more money from the Redskins.

The proof is there right now. 

The doctors he had a problem with are STILL with the organization. 

Yet he will come back and play.

Why? Why would he come back and play if those doctors are still there?

Reason? Money. Specifically he wants to be paid 30% above the market.

Which is what it was about last year. And what it still is about this year.

And he's relying on gullible people to react emotionally to this situation and blame the team. 

Again:

1) He he simply said he doesn't trust the trainers and S&C staff and wouldn't play until they were gone? I'd be right there with him

2) Had he simply said, "I want a new deal. I want more money" then I would respect that he's trying to get a payday late in his career. I could then decide if I thought it was reasonable. But I don't blame a guy for trying to get more money.

He did neither of those things. He blamed the team (and slandered people) for something they weren't responsible for and used it as the reason for his holdout. Then changed his story a few times along the way. 

Because this was NEVER about the "cancer scare". 

Again - there's one way to see who is telling the truth. An independent review of the situation. Guess who is stopping that review? Now ask yourself why ( these things can be laser focused to ONLY this situation so there's no HIPAA privacy issue).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Thaiphoon said:

Because he is. 

He's blaming the team for the cancer scare when you, yourself said that they are not responsible. 

Pretty much anyone looking at this knows that the team isn't responsible for diangosing cancer or for Trent's inability to actually go get a 2nd opinion. 

And yet, there he was all offseason last year and into the regular season, using it as a foil to extort more money from the Redskins.

The proof is there right now. 

The doctors he had a problem with are STILL with the organization. 

Yet he will come back and play.

Why? Why would he come back and play if those doctors are still there?

Reason? Money. Specifically he wants to be paid 30% above the market.

Which is what it was about last year. And what it still is about this year.

And he's relying on gullible people to react emotionally to this situation and blame the team. 

Again:

1) He he simply said he doesn't trust the trainers and S&C staff and wouldn't play until they were gone? I'd be right there with him

2) Had he simply said, "I want a new deal. I want more money" then I would respect that he's trying to get a payday late in his career. I could then decide if I thought it was reasonable. But I don't blame a guy for trying to get more money.

He did neither of those things. He blamed the team (and slandered people) for something they weren't responsible for and used it as the reason for his holdout. Then changed his story a few times along the way. 

Because this was NEVER about the "cancer scare". 

Again - there's one way to see who is telling the truth. And independent review of the situation. Guess who is stopping that review? Now ask yourself why ( these things can be laser focused to ONLY this situation so there's no HIPAA privacy issue).

 

You can keep posting this over and over again, but you're trying to pawn off your own opinion like its fact.  Its not.  Its your opinion.  An opinion based on a lot of speculation on your part.  And its an opinion I don't agree with.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, tredaddy said:

+1.  A lot of talk and zero factual evidence to support this ridiculous claim.  

What is ridiculous is arguing the Redskins are responsible for his cancer scare. They aren't. Yet he argued they are because he sat out all last offseason because of it.

Quote

Two events happening closely together does not imply causation. 

True. We agree. However, when the person lets it be known that he is acting in a particular manner BECAUSE of the other event? Yeah...

Quote

Billy punched a kid defending himself at school and wants to be class president.  Apparently Billy is a scum bag for using his fight at school as a shady scheme to get elected president.  Makes zero sense.  

Your analogy literally makes no sense in this case.

More apt is this. Billy falls down outside of school and then uses that injury as his refusal to attend classes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MKnight82 said:

You can keep posting this over and over again, but you're trying to pawn off your own opinion like its fact.  Its not.  Its your opinion.  An opinion based on a lot of speculation on your part.  And its an opinion I don't agree with.

Just as it's yours that he is doing this because of the cancer scare. It's cool if you don't agree with me. But again, the only way we see who is right is if there's an independent review.

And Trent is the one stopping it. Again...ask yourself why.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...