I wish Hollywood would quit casting people in roles that they "have no interest in playing again" - Most notably, Jack Nicholson's Joker who HAD to be killed at the end of Batman 1989 so there'd be no need to bring back BATMAN'S ARCH-ENENY.  But this also happened with Doctor Who and Eccleston, who refuses to reprise the 9th Doctor role, meaning we'll never get a proper gathering of all the newest incarnations of The Doctor (a staple of the show's anniversary episodes). 

And now Weaving, whom I adore as an actor, won't ever repise the role of CAPTAIN AMERICA'S ARCH-ENEMY. Why cast him as The Red Skull when you can never use him again? Now Marvel is stuck with two choices: Never have the Red Skull return, which sucks because the Red Skull is THE Captain America villain, or recast, which also sucks because Weaving's performance was excellent and it puts a lot of burden on the actor who must walk in his shadow.

Given the choice between a big-name actor playing a recurring character one time, or a no-name actor playing the recurring character many times, I'll take the latter, thank you very much. 

And add me to the list of folks who would rather see Baron Zemo or Arnim Zola instead of Crossbones. Crossbones is just a villain version of the Punisher, basically. Nothing special about him. I suspect we're getting him because he's a lot like Bane, though... And that sucks. 

I can think of a dozen Captain America villains I'd rather see before that loser, Crossbones. Hell, I'd kill to see a properly-done Taskmaster in a Marvel movie. 

Really? Crossbones over Zemo? Man, there seems to be a real aversion to doing Zemo, from Bucky dying so abruptly in the first movie to this. It seems like a no-brainer to me- it's a nice gateway for a masters of evil story for the avengers, it gives us a proper replacement for the Red Skull, and it introduces the whole 'who owns Hydra now?' shtick that the animated avengers series so astutely picked up on. Yeah, not so keen on this whole thing, though I truly liked the first one. 

I think because of what Hugo Weaving said and to make sure people don't complain Red Skull was not "weaving-esque" they'll say that Crossbones is a descendant of Red Skull and if they involve him with another actor it will probably be in a post credit sequence.  Is there anything in canon that suggested Red Skull had offspring?

I have nothing against Crossbones, but if we can't get Skull back then I would rather have either Strucker or Zemo. Preferably Zemo. Someone who could reasonably have been utilizing Winter Soldier all this time.

Red Skull will be in it has Dell Rusk. Another actor will play him

so the cap's getting boned? i guess liefeld is phoning home all over those chesticles. heh heh heh

cross bones could just be working for red skull with the idea that  like the mandarin was he will return in three . since think Marvel does not want to make red skull like Lokie and use him in every marvel film and burn out the bad guy. and can  see  Nick make a cameo mostly to establish sharons history.

since Red Skull was flung out into the cosmos by the cosmic cube I think it's reasonable that he'd be involved with Thanos somehow

Well it is good that we are getting a rotation of criminals.  No need to dance the same few people into these movies or it makes the heroes look incompetent.