Su'a Cravens to return to Redskins? Or another team?

[the lone star]

9 hours ago, Slateman said:

I couldn't care less about his tackle numbers. He is the only viable option this team has to cover tight ends.

I'd take him on the Cowboys, that's for sure.

[the lone star]

On 12/14/2017 at 2:19 AM, turtle28 said:

He flashed that last year and he’s a good blitzer.

Yeah, he's a good all-around talent. He reminded me a little of Polamalu at USC. Not as good as Troy, of course, but he has all-around ability.

[Slateman]

8 hours ago, MKnight82 said:

No you can't.  No player is going to dismiss a player from a team.  The NFLPA would throw a fit.  These guys look out after each other's financial well being.  You'd be putting the Captains in an impossible situation.  

You could have the Captains meet privately with the front office and get their opinions, but ultimately the move to dismiss Cravens would have to come from the front office.  

Cravens would find a job elsewhere. His financial well being is his own problem and l honestly, if it were truly that big of a deal, the team captains could take care of him financially.

The move would come from the front office, but the team captains make the decision. If the concern is whether or not the team will accept Cravens "abandoning" the team, then the team has to make the decision, not the front office.

[Thaiphoon]

46 minutes ago, Slateman said:

Cravens would find a job elsewhere. His financial well being is his own problem and l honestly, if it were truly that big of a deal, the team captains could take care of him financially.

The move would come from the front office, but the team captains make the decision. If the concern is whether or not the team will accept Cravens "abandoning" the team, then the team has to make the decision, not the front office.

Well then, in that case, why not remove the front office from all personnel issues? Just let the players decide everything. 

Sorry, that's not how things work.

[Thaiphoon]

On 12/14/2017 at 3:34 AM, turtle28 said:

You skipped over the main point, Compton has had far more snaps. 

I don’t think Cravens is to slow to be an in the box safety, that’s a narrative that his detractors have created or those that want to force him to play ILB every down eventhough that’s not a natural position for him because they don’t like the safety position.

So much of safety is reading the Qb, having good instincts, being able to be a solid tackler who won’t miss tackles as the last line of defense and being a good blitzer. Those things defiance Cravens.

 

A guy like Cravens would be covering TEs & RBs out of the backfield, being used at the line of scrimmage to jam slot WRs and as a blitzer. 

I’m sure if he’s back that he’s going to be a dime ILB again and a back up safety. 

Ok sure... then let's just go with last year. 2 turnovers vs. 1. Triple the tackles.

And yes, Cravens is not as fast as he needs to be as a safety. 

[Slateman]

2 hours ago, Thaiphoon said:

Well then, in that case, why not remove the front office from all personnel issues? Just let the players decide everything. 

Sorry, that's not how things work.

Because this isn't an evaluation of talent or even commitment. This is a question of whether or not the team wants him back.

[MKnight82]

33 minutes ago, Slateman said:

Because this isn't an evaluation of talent or even commitment. This is a question of whether or not the team wants him back.

Does your employer let you decide if your fellow employees get to keep their jobs?  I’m betting no.

[Slateman]

7 hours ago, MKnight82 said:

Does your employer let you decide if your fellow employees get to keep their jobs?  I’m betting no.

If the problem has to do with work environment and is independent of production and cost, then yes.

Moreover, playing on an NFL team is nothing like working in the real world. It's more akin to military. And you can bet your *** that a good commander isn't going to push out someone without consulting with NCOs.  Not for something like lack of heart.

 

Honestly, if you're not going to ask your senior players to make this decision, or at least heavily influence it, then there's no point in having team captains. You may as well send Dan Snyder's kids out there to call heads or tails.

[Thaiphoon]

1 hour ago, Slateman said:

If the problem has to do with work environment and is independent of production and cost, then yes.

Moreover, playing on an NFL team is nothing like working in the real world. It's more akin to military. And you can bet your *** that a good commander isn't going to push out someone without consulting with NCOs.  Not for something like lack of heart.

 

Honestly, if you're not going to ask your senior players to make this decision, or at least heavily influence it, then there's no point in having team captains. You may as well send Dan Snyder's kids out there to call heads or tails.

NCOs can only provide feedback. Its the CO that forces separation from service.

What you're asking for is the CO to turn over his lawful duties to people that are not authorized to perform them.

Back to the team. The captains can enact punishment. Kinda like a players-only kangaroo court. They can provide feedback on how the team views the player.

But the team captains do not work in the front office. They are not authorized to make personnel decisions on who to cut/trade/keep. And you don't want them to have that authority.

[Slateman]

28 minutes ago, Thaiphoon said:

NCOs can only provide feedback. Its the CO that forces separation from service.

What you're asking for is the CO to turn over his lawful duties to people that are not authorized to perform them.

Back to the team. The captains can enact punishment. Kinda like a players-only kangaroo court. They can provide feedback on how the team views the player.

But the team captains do not work in the front office. They are not authorized to make personnel decisions on who to cut/trade/keep. And you don't want them to have that authority.

But NCOs can go and request/advise that the individual be moved somewhere else.  And as someone who served on an NCO review board, CO's often turn over responsibilities and delegate authorities in regards to personnel performance and corrective actions. 

If the team captains offer a kangaroo court, then there is no purpose in having team captains. I'm not asking that they get authorized to make all the personnel decisions. I'm saying this particular question is unique and needs to be made by the team, not the front office.

Cravens returning to the team has three questions:

1. Is he ready/capable of returning? This has already been answered.

2. Is he willing to put in the work going forward? This question is irrelevant,  as the Redskins are not on the cusp of making the playoffs. They can afford to bring him into camp next season and work him/play him and determine his commitment.

3. Will the team accept him, after leaving the team so suddenly last season? This is the question that only the team can answer, and only the team captains (assuming they are actually team leaders) can organize and ultimately decide.

 

So while the front office will have the final say, they will simply execute on whatever the team captains decide.

[ripsean21]

Thing is there should be a spot on this team if he’s willing to come in and work his tail off and essentially be a rookie again. Come in earn your respect and earn a spot on the field. This guy could be a huge difference maker for this team in the Nickle. We have had issues with tight ends for years we need this guy to be the guy to end that. We can’t afford to just throw away top end picks if we can get them to contribute. That’s a big if but if he is committed I’d give him a chance. But nothing’s givin!!!!

[Jeezy Fanatic]

I don't think Cravens sees another NFL paycheck unless he decides to Su'a the league over his head injuries.

[turtle28]

20 hours ago, Thaiphoon said:

Ok sure... then let's just go with last year. 2 turnovers vs. 1. Triple the tackles.

And yes, Cravens is not as fast as he needs to be as a safety. 

Stats don’t tell the whole story, I remember a poster told me that once. Care to tell me who that was?

A 40 time doesn’t matter as much as on the field speed, quickness and instincts. Cravens is an awesome player if his mind is right. I’d take him anywhere on the field but his natural position is as a SS or WLB. 

[the lone star]

I don't think Cravens is that slow at all tbh. He lost weight too IIRC

[Thaiphoon]

21 hours ago, turtle28 said:

Stats don’t tell the whole story, I remember a poster told me that once. Care to tell me who that was?

A 40 time doesn’t matter as much as on the field speed, quickness and instincts. Cravens is an awesome player if his mind is right. I’d take him anywhere on the field but his natural position is as a SS or WLB. 

You were talking about game changing plays. I mentioned that Compton has more. You countered that he has had a longer career. So I picked the same year. When counting HOW MANY each had, we need to...count...them. What you are complaining that I'm referencing is "stats", I'm actually compiling their "game changing plays". I could've stopped at turnovers. But you would've tried to talk to me about his other plays. Since the only other thing Cravens did was tackle someone, that's the only comparison we have. Hence my reference to tackles. But please, do convince me that Cravens has been a better player than Compton (even as limited physically as he is). Fact is, he's not. He wasn't. He was lost as a LB and lost as a Safety. He's got an impressive athleticism. Great. But that didn't translate onto the field last year. And last year, the guy you're convinced was the better player. Wasn't. By pretty much all measurements.

And..."if his mind is right"? This is the same guy who quit on his college team and now has quit on the Redskins. Yeah. I'm totally trusting him that he will pinkie swear that he won't be a head case and a problem later on.