redskins expected to pick up RG3 's option

[dcrising]

Sally Jenkins certainly did us no favors. And really HATED Mike Wise

sally jenkins is a no talent hack who doesn't even live in the DMV area. she lives in NYC and has no idea what goes on here.

Mike Wise needed to stick to a subject he covered which is pro basketball otherwise he sucked ass as an opinion writer

 

[Caliskinsfan]

sally jenkins is a no talent hack who doesn't even live in the DMV area. she lives in NYC and has no idea what goes on here.

Mike Wise needed to stick to a subject he covered which is pro basketball otherwise he sucked ass as an opinion writer

Just adding to the Wash Post columnists and writers who have been a joke... The question was asked earlier in the thread by @redskinsfan

 

[redskinsfan]

Sally Jenkins certainly did us no favors. And really HATED Mike Wise

Amen to that. Sally Jenkins is worthless. And Jason Reid is one of her biggest defenders.

 

[redskinsfan]

Based on the info provided by Brandt, I can see the argument for extending Griffs contract.


Excerpt

The real key, as outlined in a post last year by Andrew Brandt of SI’s MMQB, is that the option amount is guaranteed only for a 2015 injury that knocks him out for all of 2016.

“The “true guarantee” for the option — guaranteeing the player against release due to skill, injury and salary cap reasons — does not activate until the start of the [2016] league year in March. NFL teams now have 10 more months of contract control and negotiating leverage with very little risk.”

That explains it.

Brandt also writes:

“The risk of serious injury is small; the reward of contract control is potentially significant.

In fact, the only way I would not apply the option for [2015] is if the player has a tenuous future for [2015], let alone [2016]. The risk of serious injury is small; the reward of contract control is potentially significant.

Exercising the option allows the team to: (1) evaluate the player another season before the decision point for the “true” guaranteed year, and (2) use the leverage of another contract year to negotiate an extension on team-friendly terms, knowing the player is under team control through 2015.”

So while there is some risk involved, it’s not quite what it seems.

Good article and good points raised in it. These were actually touched on in a prior thread some time ago. If Robert tanks, cut him before the 2016 season.

One reason not to pick up his option would be to avoid him viewing this season as a make or break year. But let Scot decide that.

 

[SoCalWizFan]

sally jenkins is a no talent hack who doesn't even live in the DMV area. she lives in NYC and has no idea what goes on here.

Mike Wise needed to stick to a subject he covered which is pro basketball otherwise he sucked ass as an opinion writer

I definitely didn't like Wise when he wrote for the WP especially with his non-stop articles about the Redskins name. However - I was pleasantly surprised when I read a column on ESPN's Grantland section that was written by him. He can be a very good writer in the right situation.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

i hate unnamed sources but people on this board think they are flawless and should be accepted as face value

i wonder where the trust in SM falls in on this if true or is danny really running the show still ?

This is such a frustrating argument. Deep Throat was an unnamed source. They remain anonymous for a reason, if you try to put a name to them they clam up again for obvious reasons.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Based on the info provided by Brandt, I can see the argument for extending Griffs contract.


Excerpt

The real key, as outlined in a post last year by Andrew Brandt of SI’s MMQB, is that the option amount is guaranteed only for a 2015 injury that knocks him out for all of 2016.

“The “true guarantee” for the option — guaranteeing the player against release due to skill, injury and salary cap reasons — does not activate until the start of the [2016] league year in March. NFL teams now have 10 more months of contract control and negotiating leverage with very little risk.”

That explains it.

Brandt also writes:

“The risk of serious injury is small; the reward of contract control is potentially significant.

In fact, the only way I would not apply the option for [2015] is if the player has a tenuous future for [2015], let alone [2016]. The risk of serious injury is small; the reward of contract control is potentially significant.

Exercising the option allows the team to: (1) evaluate the player another season before the decision point for the “true” guaranteed year, and (2) use the leverage of another contract year to negotiate an extension on team-friendly terms, knowing the player is under team control through 2015.”

So while there is some risk involved, it’s not quite what it seems.

While this news is a bit surprising this is a good explanation. I wondered all off season what they would do if he played pretty well. And make no mistake that is still a possibility. What options would they have then? Drafting a QB is such a crap shoot, franchising him would cost a fortune, so they would have been kind of stuck

I see this is a smart move, see what happens next week and keep your options open. You gotta have a QB.

 

[skinsdad62]

This is such a frustrating argument. Deep Throat was an unnamed source. They remain anonymous for a reason, if you try to put a name to them they clam up again for obvious reasons.

if you are going to say something put your name to it period . this aint watergate

and if accept nameless sources as fact then so be it i dont

and sometimes they are right but my policy is i dont buy unnamed sources in the sports arena

 

[redskinsfan]

if you are going to say something put your name to it period . this aint watergate

and if accept nameless sources as fact then so be it i dont

and sometimes they are right but my policy is i dont buy unnamed sources in the sports arena

But you're not buying an unnamed source, you're buying Mark Maske, who's putting his name on the line for this source. If it's JLC, I can see why you'd laugh him out of town. But with Maske, it's a different story. He could still be wrong. Peter King, another reputable reporter, had an unnamed source go south on him on the issue of whether Goodell actually saw the Ray Rice video. But, in general, these guys report things accurately. And because they're signing off on the unnamed source, you can feel comfortable believing that.

 

[skinsdad62]

But you're not buying an unnamed source, you're buying Mark Maske, who's putting his name on the line for this source. If it's JLC, I can see why you'd laugh him out of town. But with Maske, it's a different story. He could still be wrong. Peter King, another reputable reporter, had an unnamed source go south on him on the issue of whether Goodell actually saw the Ray Rice video. But, in general, these guys report things accurately. And because they're signing off on the unnamed source, you can feel comfortable believing that.

i am buying an un named source . dont tell me who i am buying maske is just a mouth piece

 

[redskinsfan]

i am buying an un named source . dont tell me who i am buying maske is just a mouth piece

I'm not telling you anything. If someone call anonymously into 106.7 and states that the Redskins are picking up RGIII's option, they you're buying into an unnanmed source. If Maske uses that as a basis for a report that the Redskins will do so, that's an entirely different thing.

 

[skinsdad62]

I'm not telling you anything. If someone call anonymously into 106.7 and states that the Redskins are picking up RGIII's option, they you're buying into an unnanmed source. If Maske uses that as a basis for a report that the Redskins will do so, that's an entirely different thing.

no different at all only the messenger is different

 

[Rock Strongo]

why?

lol

hes awful.

 

[redskinsfan]

no different at all only the messenger is different

Dude, there is. When Maske is using that source as the basis for his story, he's saying "trust me, you can rely on this source even if the source is unnamed." (Just to be clear, this isn't the same thing as if Maske were to simply report that an unnamed source made the statement. If he did that, he's not putting his name behind the source's credibility.)

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Without unnamed sources there is virtually no news. To dismiss them is nonsense. As I said if you put a name to the quote the quote is going to be totally different and pretty much watered down and useless.

That is all

 

[redskinsfan]

Without unnamed sources there is virtually no news. To dismiss them is nonsense. As I said if you put a name to the quote the quote is going to be totally different and pretty much watered down and useless.

That is all

Yep. The key is which reporter is putting his or her name to an unnamed source. If it's Richie Cunningham reporting for his Milwaukee high school paper, I can understand why you'd be skeptical. If it's a respected guy like Maske, that's a bit different.

 

[skinsdad62]

i dont care what reporter puts it out . it is more often more dubious then not . you want to trust maske , trust him .

i will withhold the validity of the story

there is no "key " there is no nothing put a name to it i am more apt to buy it

until then its speculation not fact

 

[redskinsfan]

So, what do you trust then, dad? When there's a report saying "Vic Beasley to visit Redskins tomorrow," is that speculation?

 

[skinsdad62]

Without unnamed sources there is virtually no news. To dismiss them is nonsense. As I said if you put a name to the quote the quote is going to be totally different and pretty much watered down and useless.

That is all

there is plenty of news with named sources . un named sources have agendas

so i take them with a grain of salt

if you wish to count them as fact without any possibility of fraud and deceit then do so

 

[redskinsfan]

there is plenty of news with named sources . un named sources have agendas

so i take them with a grain of salt

if you wish to count them as fact without any possibility of fraud and deceit then do so

So do named sources. Ever hear anything said from Drew Rosenhaus that isn't fraud and/or deceit?