Out of the Rafters at the Q
Out of the Rafters
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2008
- Messages
- 26,339
- Reaction score
- 56,318
- Points
- 148
At what point are the Redskins no longer trying to get the highest value for the asset, and are instead just stubbornly punishing the asset?Fair point.
I don't care (unless the Browns can benefit), but l don't care what the Redskins do...however, why should they just release him without compensation?
Clearly the team decided to get as much for him as possible with no regard to whether he sits or plays. And why not?
Look at the NBA and the power the players have to control their trade destinations. Maybe that is a good thing as it IS their own destination, but the lack of respect to fulfill a signed contract pisses me off.
Maybe that makes me old, but l have no problem with a team expecting a player to play under contract, or with trying to get the highest value if trying to trade him.
There were rumors leading up to the draft last year that Williams wanted out, and his trade request has been public since at least last June: https://bleacherreport.com/articles...eportedly-demanded-trade-or-release-from-team
Draft, Pre-Season, Season, Trade Deadline, Off-season... they've all come and gone without a move by Washington.
I agree with you. Typically I'm against the player-controlled movement. But in this situation, the dude's served his time and been more than patient with the organization. We're a year later and they still haven't made a move.
If they came out and said they weren't going to trade him, and he's either going to play, or sit on the bench, then I wouldn't even have a problem with that. It's the being in-flux for a year that just has to end at some point.