Redskins are the Cowboys of the new Millennium

[Deattribution]

*edit for title

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...len&id=1648438


I know he wasn't convicted, but he wasn't proven innocent either.
Didn't they even actually have the videotape of him, and a testimony from one of his friends?


Anyway he has past drug problems, and the Raiders are obviously releasing him for a reason... Part because of his cap, but still.


Oh, and how do the Skins ALWAYS have cap room?

For those too lazy for the link

--------------------------------------------


The slumping Washington Redskins have been granted permission by the Oakland Raiders to speak with Darrell Russell, ESPN.com has learned through team and league officials, but have not yet been able to initiate a dialogue with the defensive tackle, who has been reinstated by the NFL following a drug suspension.

The second overall choice in the 1997 draft, but a player who has not appeared in a game since 2001, Russell is expected to be released by the Raiders sometime early this week. ESPN's Chris Mortensen first reported Sunday that Russell, 27, was reinstated.


Russell will be subject to waivers after the Raiders release him, but no team is expected to claim him, since it would have to assume his current contract, which calls for a base salary of $10 million for 2003 and rises to $12 million in '05, the final year of the deal. Assuming that Russell clears waivers, he will become an unrestricted free agent, and able to strike an agreement with any team in the league.

That the Redskins already have permission to speak with Russell is significant, because it provides Washington a head-start in possible negotiations, and thus gives the club a small edge over other potential suitors. But as of Monday afternoon, the Redskins had not yet reached Russell, although team officials have spoken to his attorney, David Cornwell, and have conducted background checks on the player.

Russell has been represented by Leigh Steinberg since he entered the NFL but has been recently interviewing other agents and is expected to make a switch.

It is also key that the Redskins have permission from the Raiders, because it would likely be a violation of NFL anti-tampering rules for them to otherwise deal with Russell. The Redskins came under league scrutiny earlier this year for an alleged tampering violation in the case of safety Lawyer Milloy.

That investigation turned up no wrongdoing and, while the books have not been closed on it, it essentially has faded away quietly.

Russell tested positive for the designer drug Ecstasy in 2001, and he began that season serving a four-game suspension, but the sanction then was elevated to an indefinite one. While under league suspension, Russell was charged with drugging a woman with GHB, the so-called "date rape drug," and videotaping two friends allegedly raping her. But all 25 counts in that case were dropped in Sept. 2002 for lack of evidence.

Mortensen reported on Sunday that the Redskins could reach a deal with Russell by mid-week and that is certainly a possibility. But Russell has told friends that he would like to explore other options as well. At this point, though, Washington might be one of the few teams interested in Russell with sufficient cap room to sign him. The Redskins are about $1.4 million under the spending limit.

Before his suspension, the former Southern California star appeared in 75 games, starting in 65 of them, and had 229 tackles, 28 ½ sacks and five forced fumbles.
---------------------------------------

[JeeberD]

Hey now, the Cowboys didn't sign players with bad histories. They were just exceptionally good at drafting players who wound up in trouble...

[Samdari]

Originally posted by Deattribution
[BI know he wasn't convicted, but he wasn't proven innocent either.[/b]

Why are people continuing to hammer on this fact like it somehow makes it more likely that Russel committed these crimes than if he had been acquitted? Noone is ever proven innocent in our legal system (i.e. OJ was found not guilty, but he was hardly proven innocent) an acquittal simply means that there was not enough evidence to prove someone did something beyond a reasonable doubt. In this case, not even the prosecutor believed there was enough evidence. The fact that the charges were dropped in no way indicates that Russell committed those crimes, in fact, I think it means there was less evidence of that than in a typical case which goes to trial.

[JeeberD]

Innocent until proven guilty...

[Deattribution]

Originally posted by Samdari
Why are people continuing to hammer on this fact like it somehow makes it more likely that Russel committed these crimes than if he had been acquitted? Noone is ever proven innocent in our legal system (i.e. OJ was found not guilty, but he was hardly proven innocent) an acquittal simply means that there was not enough evidence to prove someone did something beyond a reasonable doubt. In this case, not even the prosecutor believed there was enough evidence. The fact that the charges were dropped in no way indicates that Russell committed those crimes, in fact, I think it means there was less evidence of that than in a typical case which goes to trial.

They're innocent till proven guilty in a court of law, but I can think whatever I want. An lets point out a very important line in your paragraph. - The fact that the charges were dropped in no way indicates that Russell committed those crimes, in fact, .I think it means there was less evidence of that than in a typical case which goes to trial. -

Now what the popular belief was, when he was acquited, Is everyone was surprised that the judge didn't atleast allow it to goto court. Let the jury decide because they did have *enough* evidence. they had several testimonies and evena videotape of the fact.. Just the judge decided it wasn't substantial enough beforehand.

Sure OJ was never convicted, but it doesn't mean I'm gonna invite him over for tea.

Just because he had a legal crew out the whazoo doesn't make him anymore innocent then he is guilty.

[Samdari]

Originally posted by Deattribution
evena videotape of the fact..

I do not understand a single other thing you wrote. From what I understand, though the video is WHY this did not go to trial. I have heard that she is very much not resisting anything done to her in the video. Just rumor though.

[Subby]

OJ lost his civil case.

[Deattribution]

Originally posted by Samdari
I have heard that she is very much not resisting anything done to her in the video. Just rumor though.

Most people don't when they're drugged... Just rumor though.

[Samdari]

Originally posted by Deattribution
They're innocent till proven guilty in a court of law, but I can think whatever I want.

Dola.

I do not disagree with your assertions that Russell is a scumbag, or even that he did those things. It was people using the fact that his case was dismissed as somehow proving he was guilty that really threw me for a loop.

I do really want to disabuse the notion that I am sticking up for Darrell though. He seems a bad idea for the Redskins for oh so many reasons.

[Samdari]

Originally posted by Deattribution
Most people don't when they're drugged... Just rumor though.

Right, but my rumor was not that she was not protesting because she was drugged out. Rather she was active and enthusiastic.

[SuburbanPimp]

I like to be positive about this.

If my Redskins can sign a couple more convicts, then we can have a nice scrimmage with your TEXAS STATE FIGHTIN' ARMADILLOS!!

[Bee]

Looks like the Cowboys are interested in signing him....so I guess the Cowboys are the Cowboys of the new millenium.