Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: RedskinsInsider and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

What to do with Albert Haynesworth? Chat with Tracee Hamilton, Thursday at 9:30 a.m.

For the latest edition of her daily "First Things First" chat, Post columnist Tracee Hamilton is pondering the Albert Hayneworth dilemma. Submit your questions, but first, read on to see what's on her mind:

Albert Haynesworth won't participate in voluntary workouts. Now he won't participate in next week's voluntary minicamp -- even though the Redskins just cut him a check for $21 million. The Redskins would like to deal him, but his ridiculously huge contract makes that difficult.

Like Queen Victoria, Mike Shanahan is not amused with Haynesworth thus far, and I don't blame him. This is a true standoff. What should the team do if Haynesworth won't toe the line? Can you just cut loose a guy to whom you owe so much money, even if you've got Snyder's checkbook? I say send a multimillion dollar message, but it's easy to say that when it's not my money. What do you say?

By David Larimer  |  April 7, 2010; 11:24 PM ET
Categories:  Albert Haynesworth  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Analysis: Shanahan in test of wills with Haynesworth
Next: Haynesworth might learn a few things about Shanahan from Plummer

Comments

If we can't trade him, I say bench him for the next three years.

Posted by: Salinas1 | April 7, 2010 11:43 PM | Report abuse

This is so disappointing.

We finally appear to be moving the the right direction... we have a franchise QB.... everyone is there working hard.....and we have one bad apple...... unfortunately,he must go...

I'm hopeful we can get something in return

I guess the only thing good that comes out of this mess is that Snyder finally gets it, and that's worth $100 million to us skins fans

Posted by: imthedude | April 7, 2010 11:48 PM | Report abuse

repost from earlier today:


I think the "Haynesworth mess" is largely of the redskins making. They have mishandled this opportunity from day one, and continue to make bad decisions on how to get the best production from him. It's not like he's some brat #1 draft pick who is holding out for crazy money and complaining about the scheme he is being asked to play in without ever setting foot on a pro field.

This guy is one of the most feared defensive players in football, a two-time All Pro and the best Defensive Tackle in the game. He received these accolades by being a destructive force, penetrating the backfield and causing mayhem for other teams offense. How many DT's have had 18.5 sacks in 3 years - including last year where we had him playing gap control?

That's where the problem starts. We misrepresented (lied to him) how we were planning to use him to pursued him to sign with us. Then used him incorrectly. WHY? What the hell were we thinking? Why get a destroyer and havoc maker and put him on a leash and tell him to control a single gap in the line? Turn the guy lose already!

We should be building a 4-3 defense AROUND him. Look at the elevated production we got from Carter last year, and do you think it's a coincidence that Orakpo turned in those kind of rookie numbers?

Elite, game changing D linemen do not grow on trees. Why do we continue to jerk him around and poke him with sharp sticks? Why are we switching to a scheme our BEST player doesn't like, and that we don't even have the right personnel for?

Albert claimed that he is training on his own to get back in the kind of shape he was in the last two years in Tennessee - the years he had 14.5 sacks and was All Pro. If that's what he's doing LET HIM! It's only a big deal if we make it one. So why did we make it one?

We all need to CALM DOWN and let this play out a little. If he shows up in shape and starts knocking Guards and Centers on their asses, then shut up, take the leash off and let the guy do what he does best - Destroy the other team. Last year sucked in so many ways - but it's over It's time to hit the re-set button and focus on getting our best players in the best position to make plays and then turn them loose.

Seriously, would have been happy seeing Albert in an Eagles helmet lining up over Rabach twice a year for the next 5 years?

We have a lot of holes on this team. We also have the most dominant DT in football on this team. Let's get him happy and fill the other holes and stop F'ing around.

Posted by: edvar | April 7, 2010 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Edvar - that was so on target and excellent.

Skins just keep making a mess and now Shanahan is acting like a spoiled child who has to have his way.

Most of you have probably read or heard the remarks by Jake Plummer regarding Shanahan's childishness - which does not bode well for the Burgundy and Gold.

Posted by: Lisa_R | April 8, 2010 12:07 AM | Report abuse


Reposting some posts from last thread for Diesel44

Good convo Diesel...wanted to make sure ya saw the posts since the thread ended.

Posted by: leevi98 | April 7, 2010 11:43 PM
And you were wrong even though you copied from wiki as well.
Posted by: Diesel44 | April 7, 2010 11:55 PM | Report abuse
it has nothing to do with being right or wrong. We are talking about defenses and the different ways to use them...and the many variations of each.....Where is this right or wrong thing coming from?
Posted by: leevi98 | April 7, 2010 11:59 PM | Report abuse
We do not have the personnel to run a 3-4 yet. This is why we are going to run a HYBRID 3-4.

Posted by: Diesel44 | April 7, 2010 10:47 PM | Report abuse

interesting.... the HYBRID 3-4 is Belichick's style of the 3-4.

So that would not make since cause a true 3-4 is easier to run with less or not the right players than the HYBRID 3-4. The key to the HYBRID 3-4 is flexibility of personnel. To be able to effectively switch from a 4-3 to a 3-4 to a dime defense and all points in-between requires versatility at nearly every position. Players have to be able to run and cover and hit. Linemen have to be strong enough to hold the point in the 3-4, but get up field in a 4-3. Defensive backs have to be very good in zone coverage but competent in man coverage when needed. It requires a special skill set, but also an above-average football IQ.


Posted by: Diesel44 | April 7, 2010 11:52 PM


that would be really nice if we could indeed run the HYBRID 3-4
Posted by: leevi98 | April 8, 2010 12:02 AM | Report abuse


Anyway...We are both Skins fans and apart of the Nation....So we should be buddies! :) I'm not here to fight...Only thing i have against anyone on this blog is negativity and complaining about the saem stuff over and over again....It gets old....
we have a new FO who has a plan and they are slowly putting it together. So i am not going to blame the new because of the old and their mistakes.
So I'm choosing to be positive and supportive until we see the finished product.
CHEERS DIESEL! My favorite player too! :)
Posted by: leevi98 | April 8, 2010 12:06 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: leevi98 | April 8, 2010 12:14 AM | Report abuse

edvar -

You obviously gave that a lot of thought and your argument probably best summarizes the pro-Hanyesworth side. Now go back a couple years. This is almost the exact same argument made for one Terrell Owens: big numbers, best at his position, and so on. It didn't work in Philly, Dallas, or even Buffalo. A football team is a complicated machine with 22 parts that must work off the same page - one malfunctioning part and the machine is no longer effective. Albert is getting paid huge bucks to play for the Washington Redskins, not Albert Haynesworth, Inc. If he can't figure out that simple concept, then I say adios.

Posted by: bones21 | April 8, 2010 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: SteveMG | April 7, 2010 9:48 PM

Yawn...yeah, you been saying this over and over and over and...

Posted by: Skins930 | April 8, 2010 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Hey all,

I'm definitely leaning more in the edvar/Lisa_R camp here. I'm sorry, but Haynesworth was clear from the moment he arrived that he came because he thought the 'Skins were keeping a 4-3, and he thought he could continue to be a disruptive force here. He's always been clear on the fact that he's looking out for what he hopes will be his place in history--being considered one of the best Defensive Tackles ever to play the game. Only on a team as messed up as the Redskins seem to be could a player wanting to do what is necessary to be the best ever be considered a bad thing.

Bones21, while I like your argument, there's a significant problem with a Terrell Owens comparison. Terrell Owens was a HORRIFIC locker room presence. Haynesworth isn't exactly a shining leader for our team, but it wasn't until the end of last season that he said anything particularly wrong. He never called out other players by name (to my knowledge, at any rate), and he backed up his teammates on the field. Now if you want to argue that his not participating in voluntary activities this offseason is a problem, that makes sense, but the comparison with TO is a bit overboard. Bit of a straw man, in my eyes, at any rate.

Seriously though, I think this is kind of a ridiculous issue. Haynesworth may not have lived up to his contract last season, but he was FAR from the problem on this team. The defensive line was one of the few bright spots of last season, and I think it's ridiculous to throw that all away.

Posted by: harlequin115 | April 8, 2010 12:21 AM | Report abuse

edvar -

You obviously gave that a lot of thought and your argument probably best summarizes the pro-Hanyesworth side. Now go back a couple years. This is almost the exact same argument made for one Terrell Owens: big numbers, best at his position, and so on. It didn't work in Philly, Dallas, or even Buffalo. A football team is a complicated machine with 22 parts that must work off the same page - one malfunctioning part and the machine is no longer effective. Albert is getting paid huge bucks to play for the Washington Redskins, not Albert Haynesworth, Inc. If he can't figure out that simple concept, then I say adios.

Posted by: bones21 | April 8, 2010 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Nice post...I completely agree....the only thing big Al is concerned with is his own stats....THAT is why he does not want to be a nose in the 3 -4 cause your job is to occupy your gap and O line for the line backers to read and make plays...that hurts Big Als stats...

so yeah dude is not a team player

that is the first I've hear that Big AL was lied to to get him signed.....

How can you blame the new HC and front office for that even if he was lied to? They were not here!

Posted by: leevi98 | April 8, 2010 12:22 AM | Report abuse

This conflict is being painted in black and white terms -- and there really is no reason for that. There's ton of room between 'My way or the highway' and "I'm Jim Zorn, hip hip hooray".

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 8, 2010 12:24 AM | Report abuse

Bones21

One of the big differences is that TO was a spotlight hogging self promoter who had hissy fits on the sidelines and accused his QB of being gay.

Nobody lied to TO saying he would be the #1 guy and then made him stay in and help block on running downs and take him off the field and most passing downs. That would have been a terrible waste of his talents - sort of like using Albert as a gap control DT or a space eating NT.

That's the problem.

Now Shanny's ego is getting in the mix and it is going to get really stupid if they don't all chill out.

WaPo is just laughing as they fan the flames of this controversy. It sells newspapers and runs up the blog posts, but does not help the situation. So be it.

Posted by: edvar | April 8, 2010 12:27 AM | Report abuse

harlequin

You shoot down your own argument in your first paragraph. I don't think Al came here just because we had a 4-3, he came here for $100 million. Also, your comment about him making his place in history is exactly what I'm saying - he's all about Albert Haynesworth.

Posted by: bones21 | April 8, 2010 12:29 AM | Report abuse

Hey leevi98, I don't think anyone is trying to imply that Haynesworth was intentionally lied to, it's more that the circumstances totally changed the direction of the defense for this team. I think few people would argue against the idea that Haynesworth would be terribly mis-used as a nose tackle. He's too tall for his weight to play the position, and more importantly, it's a waste of his talents. It's like the idea of comparative advantage in economics--Haynesworth CAN play the position, but a player of significantly less talent could probably hold down the center just as well. Haynesworth knows his strength is hitting the gap in a 4-3, and he wants to be in a position to make the most of his career. I don't begrudge him that.

God knows, I think Mike Shanahan is a brilliant coach, and obviously I'm just sitting at home typing this up, but I don't understand the switch to a 4-3. As I've said earlier, our defensive line was probably the only bright spot last season, and switching it up just because Shanahan (who, by all accounts, did little with the defense in Denver) likes the theory of the 3-4 better concerns me. As was mentioned above, Haynesworth is the sort of player you build a defense around, and it seems that both Blache and the current coaching staff decided to push a square peg into a round hole instead. People claim Haynesworth only cares about money, but it's been pointed out he turned down a bigger paycheck offer from Tampa Bay in exchange for the chance to win in a system that fit his strengths. I take Haynesworth at his word when he says he wants to be remembered as the greatest at his position, and I can understand the frustration that he would be feeling at being pushed into a position where he can't demonstrate his talents.

It would be different if our defensive line performed so badly last season that a clear overhall was needed, but right now, I don't see the need for Shanahan's switch to a 3-4. It seems like a waste of our talents (with the possible exception of Orakpo, and frankly, I still see him as best suited to a 4-3 DE), at a time when our team has PLENTY of other issues to deal with.

Posted by: harlequin115 | April 8, 2010 12:32 AM | Report abuse

Trade that out-of-shape waste of space now.

I can't believe how many of you think the HEAD coach should suck up to a player (no matter how good he is or what he is paid).

What, $30M isn't enough to make the workouts?

The Skins should cut their losses and dump him. He's a cancer.

Posted by: PrinceBuster21 | April 8, 2010 12:35 AM | Report abuse

I'm in favor of Shanahan and Albert resolving their issues.

But if a trade is made, here's what I'm hoping for and why:

We send Albert to the Raiders for Nnamdi Asoumgha.

Then I want to hear Sam Huff try to pronounce Nnamdi Asoumgha.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 8, 2010 12:39 AM | Report abuse

Nice post...I completely agree....the only thing big Al is concerned with is his own stats....THAT is why he does not want to be a nose in the 3 -4 cause your job is to occupy your gap and O line for the line backers to read and make plays...that hurts Big Als stats...

so yeah dude is not a team player

that is the first I've hear that Big AL was lied to to get him signed.....

How can you blame the new HC and front office for that even if he was lied to? They were not here!

Posted by: leevi98 | April 8, 2010 12:22 AM


So Levi98, how do you know what Albert is concerned about? You hang after the games and chat. Bottom line is you don't know squat and are making assumptions to validate your opinion of him.

If you didn't know about the Skins intentions being misrepresented to him, I recommend you read the newspaper every once in a while. No big secret there, sorry you didn't get the 9-11.

And I can't blame the new FO for misleading Albert, but I can call them on changing the scheme to one that doesn't fit our existing personnel well, and does not leverage the talents of THE ONE superstar we have on this team.

Seriously, does anybody else on our roster dominate a game like Albert can and has? Except maybe McNabb, now that we have signed him?

But yeah, let's get rid of the bum.

Posted by: edvar | April 8, 2010 12:39 AM | Report abuse

bones21, how do I shoot down my own argument in the first paragraph? I never say Haynesworth didn't care about the money, I just point out that at least one other team (Tampa Bay) offered him more, but he turned them down because he thought he had the chance to be more successful in Washington. How does that in any way counter my argument? Now you can argue that means he's all about Albert Haynesworth, but I'd point out that I'd rather have a disruptive individual like him on our team, and if his self-interest coincides with him playing well (which it does), I have no problem with that motivation. Dude wants to be known as the best, he needs to play well. That's what we paid him all that money for. Throwing it away after one miserable season is pretty foolhardy.

Also, someone want to explain to me why it is that we're keeping Clinton Portis because of the $7 million or so he's owed this season, but we're perfectly willing to cut a check to Haynesworth for three times that amount and then let him go?

Posted by: harlequin115 | April 8, 2010 12:49 AM | Report abuse

Trade that out-of-shape waste of space now.

I can't believe how many of you think the HEAD coach should suck up to a player (no matter how good he is or what he is paid).

What, $30M isn't enough to make the workouts?

The Skins should cut their losses and dump him. He's a cancer.

Posted by: PrinceBuster21 | April 8, 2010 12:35 AM |

Wrong.

repost:

I remember Pat Riley talking about the challenges of coaching superstars after he left coaching the LA Lakers to all those championships. He basically said - Hell yeah you give the elite guys special treatment. Doesn't make it unfair because you also demand more from them. The trick is knowing who the elite guys are, and who is the supporting cast.

If I just handed a 25(?) million dollar check to an elite game changing athlete, I'd be making darn sure that all efforts were aligned to get the maximum production from him and that he was happy. He has a guaranteed contract and all of your money - what else are you gonna do? Bench him? Trade him? Why? You just got him.


So Princebuster, it's not about the coach sucking up to a player, it's about the coach using a little skill to manage the situation so as to RETAIN a superstar and get him to perform at a very high level - which would greatly benefit the team.

Posted by: edvar | April 8, 2010 12:54 AM | Report abuse

it's not about the coach sucking up to a player, it's about the coach using a little skill to manage the situation so as to RETAIN a superstar and get him to perform at a very high level - which would greatly benefit the team.

Posted by: edvar

EXACTLY

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 8, 2010 1:00 AM | Report abuse

Wrote two additional comments and RI dumped them both - don't know what happened. No swear words or references to anyone's mother. Anyone else having a problem?

Posted by: bones21 | April 8, 2010 1:01 AM | Report abuse

Is the MS vs AH thingy really as bad as the post is making it out to be, or is this just rabble rousing?

Losing AH would hurt more than losing pick #37 unless we get a high to mid 1st and a 2nd.

Gotta agree, time for some ego checking at the door.

Posted by: Skins930 | April 8, 2010 1:06 AM | Report abuse

I remember Pat Riley talking about the challenges of coaching superstars after he left coaching the LA Lakers to all those championships. He basically said - Hell yeah you give the elite guys special treatment. Doesn't make it unfair because you also demand more from them. The trick is knowing who the elite guys are, and who is the supporting cast.

Posted by: edvar | April 8, 2010 12:54

With limited basketball knowledge, I looked up Pat Riley in the wikipedia. This account looked eerily familiar:

Six games into the 1981–82 season, Magic Johnson said he wished to be traded because he was unhappy playing for Westhead. Shortly afterward, Lakers' owner Jerry Buss fired Westhead. At an ensuing press conference, with Jerry West at his side, Buss named West head coach. West, however, balked, and Buss awkwardly tried to name West as "offensive captain" and then named West and Riley as co-coaches. West made it clear during the press conference that he would only assist Riley, and that Riley was the head coach. Thereafter, Riley was the interim head coach, until his status became permanent.

That said, the reason You do this game w/ Haynesworth instead of Portis is that Haynesworth is the superstar. He's the one making the most money. He's the guy you have to make an example of.
Yes, he's dominant, but Shanahan is making sure that he's not bigger than the team.

Posted by: MNSkinsFan | April 8, 2010 1:14 AM | Report abuse

From previous post:

"it's about the coach using a little skill to manage the situation so as to RETAIN a superstar and get him to perform at a very high level - which would greatly benefit the team."

Agree, but superstar status also demands a little higher level of responsibility. It's a two-way street.

Posted by: bones21 | April 8, 2010 1:15 AM | Report abuse

"I'm starting to like the cut of his gibberish."

Posted by: NateinthePDX | April 8, 2010 1:23 AM | Report abuse

I agree with those who are saying that Shanahan is wrong to turn this into a situation. Haynesworth has the most upside of any player on the team. It is the coach's job to ensure that he achieves that upside.

Posted by: DKSW | April 8, 2010 1:33 AM | Report abuse

How many of you would skip voluntary work related meetings if you knew your boss was keeping tabs on them? Come on...you know you'd be there.

The guy is being paid and he needs to at least be willing to be apart of the solution. At least help the new regime get off to a good start and then act like a spoiled 300+ pound grown child.

Posted by: thepinched | April 8, 2010 1:44 AM | Report abuse

Put him on the bench for the next 3 years. Let him play on the scout team and let the real first stringers use him to get better. Hell he has been paid let him be water boy on game days!

Posted by: mycroft711 | April 8, 2010 2:31 AM | Report abuse

VOLUNTARY.

Shanahan is raising with the worse hand.

Its stupid.

Let him lollygag and ignore him. Say "While we would prefer he be here, AH is a great player and he will be ready and here when we get started with our mandatory minicamp program". Then ignore it.

You moronic press tools pimping this are like a bunch of 6th graders yelling "fight fight fight" on the playground.

Its much ado about nothing, but the eyeballs are hitting the site, huh?

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | April 8, 2010 2:55 AM | Report abuse

The Phillydelphias did not rebuild their O-line thru the draft when they went on their 3 NFC championship run. I know its confusing

Posted by: skinshaveaGM | April 7, 2010 4:24 PM
=======================================
Posted by: skinshaveaGM | April 7, 2010 4:24 PM

What are you talking about? The Eagles spent first round picks in 96 and 98 with Mayberry and Thomas. Welbourn was a fourth rounder. Fraley was undrafted. When Welbourn left they spent a fourth rounder on Herremans. When Mayberry left they used a first on Andrews...

Posted by: KingJoffeJoffer | April 7, 2010 4:54 PM

Now I know reading comprehension is not a requisite for blogging but next time remember what I said before sticking your foot in your mouth.

The 2002-2004 seasons the Phillydelphias made the NFC championship game and 04 ended up in the Superbowl.

2000, 2001 and 2002 drafts produced no starters on O-line. Before that since 96 they had found starters on the O-line with Welbourn being drafted as a Tackle but moved to guard and both he and Mayberry were nothing special. Welbourn was replaced by Shawn Andrews, not Herremans who was drafted the next year, but Shawn went on injured reserve during the 1st game of the season, so a back up filled that roll. Tra Thomas proved to be their best pickup in 98 as Welbourn and Mayberry finished their careers somewheres else. Herremans replaced Runyan(I think) in 05, but the Phillydelphias have only made it to the championship game once since 04!

The point is that the draft is not the only way to rebuild an offensive line. And it isn't. The Washingtons will draft an offensive linemen this year and that leaves 3 drafted possible starters, including dockery and heyer.

Posted by: skinshaveaGM | April 8, 2010 3:32 AM | Report abuse

edvar nailed it.

Kiss his fat sweaty butt, coax him into getting into great shape, and let him twist Tony Romo's head off next year.

Ego, Pride, Stubborness... whatever it is, it's about to put a huge hole in our Defense and compromise the play of Orakpo and everybody else who flourished as a result of Haynesworth. He's one of the strongest guys in the league.

We really shouldn't screw it up, if at ALL possible.

Team chemistry, yeah, I get it. There must be a better way than cutting ties, though.

Posted by: Thinker_ | April 8, 2010 3:42 AM | Report abuse

3 of Phillydelphias starters on O-line the past 2 years and going into this year were not drafted by the team: Peters, Cole, and Jackson. So unless the Phillydelphias draft a starter this year, only 2/5 of their line have been drafted the past 3 years. Again building a team includes a whole offseason and not just the draft.

Posted by: skinshaveaGM | April 8, 2010 3:44 AM | Report abuse

AH just wants to drive his boat around the lake at 140 mph for another few weeks.

He still thinks its the off season.

He has a signed contract that says it is.

Its not like figureing out Haslett's defense is going ot be too tough for him to figure out from the 3/4 nose, 3/4 end, or 43 DT.

Shanahan, with a LOT of help from the press, are making way too big a deal out of this.

Shanny has a huge stack in this poker game, and there is no need for him to get mixed up in a pot with this trifling trash hand.

Posted by: SkinsfaninKaneohe | April 8, 2010 3:48 AM | Report abuse

Over the years the Phillydelphias O-line have had their share of injuries just like the Washingtons: Max-Jean Gilles, Todd Herremans, and Shawn Andrews all whom had missed at least 1 full season, since 2006.

Posted by: skinshaveaGM | April 8, 2010 3:52 AM | Report abuse

Just for fun --

Skins over last 3 drafts: 21 picks, 4 2009 starters, 9 2009 reserves, 2 active with other teams, 3 OOL, 3 IR/PUP

Cowboys: 26 choices, 3 starters, 13 reserves, 4 with other teams, 3 OOL, 3 IR/PUP

Jets: 13 picks, 4 starters, 5 backups, 2 to other clubs, 2 OOL, 0 IR

Patriots: 28 choices, 4 starters, 8 backups, 4 to other teams, 7 OOL, 5 IR/PUP

Saints: 17 picks, 4 starting, 7 reserves, 2 on other clubs, 2 OOL, 2 IR

Bears: 30 picks, 7 starters, 11 backups, 3 on other teams, 8 OOL, 1 IR

This building through the draft bit works better in theory than in practice...

Posted by: Samson151 | April 7, 2010 10:19 PM
Don't let p1skunk or King JJ see this. We don't want their heads to explode.

Posted by: skinshaveaGM | April 8, 2010 3:58 AM | Report abuse

heh heh

Posted by: skinshaveaGM | April 8, 2010 4:00 AM | Report abuse

Edvar's post is spot on. He's expressing the same sentiment I have, but he's done much better.

Managers need to be adept at exploiting the talent on their staff, in the interests of the team, and a good manager needs to be part psychologist.

Not all people tick the same. Being flexible in your management style doesn't make you weak, or a doormat, it's what makes a manager effective, or not.

As I said, Big Al does need to amend his ways, but to expect him to change 100% is unrealistic. Let's shoot for a 10 - 20 % improvement from him.

Figure out what works, and do it.

Our D-Line is one area that's relatively solid for the Redskins.. Football players play football - Big fella may not want to play the nose in a 3-4, but he may also have a very good reason for not wanting to.

He was right about Blache's system not playing to the strength of his players as well.

Whomever says a 3-4 is what we need, may not necessarily be right...

Posted by: Chia_Pet | April 8, 2010 4:31 AM | Report abuse

We have a lot of holes on this team. We also have the most dominant DT in football on this team. Let's get him happy and fill the other holes and stop F'ing around.

Posted by: edvar | April 7, 2010 11:51 PM | Report abuse

I'm hearing what you're saying edvar, and I totally agree. But SHANAHAN is following his old playbook on franchise development, when what's called for here is a new dynamic. I suppose it too much to ask to expect an old dog to perform new tricks. Too bad because that's JOE GIBBS II, I'm afraid.

Posted by: glawrence007 | April 8, 2010 4:35 AM | Report abuse

Just for fun --

Skins over last 3 drafts: 21 picks, four 2009 starters, nine 2009 reserves, two active with other teams, 3 Out of League, 3 on IR/PUP

Cowboys: 26 choices, 3 starters, 13 reserves, 4 with other teams, 3 OOL, 3 IR/PUP

Jets: 13 picks, 4 starters, 5 backups, 2 to other clubs, 2 OOL, 0 IR

Patriots: 28 choices, 4 starters, 8 backups, 4 to other teams, 7 OOL, 5 IR/PUP

Saints: 17 picks, 4 starting, 7 reserves, 2 on other clubs, 2 OOL, 2 IR

Bears: 30 picks, 7 starters, 11 backups, 3 on other teams, 8 OOL, 1 IR

This building through the draft bit works better in theory than in practice...

Posted by: Samson151

Posted by: Samson151 | April 8, 2010 5:01 AM | Report abuse

Only on a team as messed up as the Redskins seem to be could a player wanting to do what is necessary to be the best ever be considered a bad thing.

Posted by: harlequin115 | April 8, 2010 12:21 AM


You can't possibly be serious...

It's one thing to WANT to be the best, it's another thing to STRIVE to be the best. If you don't put in the necessary work (voluntary workouts as just one example), you won't come anywhere near that goal. And by all accounts, he's doing the bare minimum. Anyone who backs his words up is at Redskins Park proving to Shanahan and anyone else paying attention that not only he belongs here but he can be counted on to be a leader. No such effort has come from Haynesworth to date.

So you Haynesworth Fan Club members can buy his B.S. wholesale if you like, but I base my opinion of him on his actions. And right now his actions say he's as much to blame for this potential mess as anyone.

Posted by: brownwood26 | April 8, 2010 5:08 AM | Report abuse

Samson, that's not a good sampling dude...a lot of times draft picks (especially late rounders) don't get into the starting lineup or play a key role until year 4 or 5. Building thru the draft is not a short term solution...it's a long term commitment.

And I don't know about you, but I certainly don't aspire to be the Jets or the Cowboys or the f-ing Bears. If you throw up draft numbers, you might wanna use teams that use the draft, you know, WELL (i.e.-Pittsburgh, New England [who you included], Indy).

If you go back 5 years instead of 3, you'll see those numbers in a much different light.

Posted by: brownwood26 | April 8, 2010 5:14 AM | Report abuse

"Skins over last 3 drafts: 21 picks, 4 2009 starters, 9 2009 reserves, 2 active with other teams, 3 OOL, 3 IR/PUP"

Interesting post Samson. From your numbers, the 6 teams in your post have 79 of their draft picks on their rosters -- an average of 13 guys per team. A bit less than I'd expect, but not much. The draft is a game of odds. You improve your odds with more picks and in earlier rounds.

Lets take a quick check of the Skins and see what we can glean?

The guys we picked in the top 51 are:
Orakpo (13), Thomas (34), Kelly(51), Davis (48), Landry (6).

The next highest pick was Barnes at 80.

All the starters came from guys in the top 51 slots. We just traded away the #37 pick. Odds are that guy would have been a starter.

Posted by: zcezcest1 | April 8, 2010 5:18 AM | Report abuse

Anyone else see this? Lame...

McNabb's dad says timing of trade had meaning
Posted by Mike Florio on April 8, 2010 12:41 AM ET
Though we've yet to hear anything from Donovan McNabb's mother regarding the deal that sent his son from Philly to Washington, Donovan's dad has chimed in.

Regarding the timing of the trade, which went down on Easter evening, Sam McNabb said, "Absolutely, it meant something," according to Jarrett Bell of USA Today (via Sheil Kapadia of philly.com).

"We were celebrating Jesus' resurrection, right? Then we turn around and Donovan gets resurrected. Just perfect."

Ugh.

We'll now yield the floor to the commenters.

Posted by: brownwood26 | April 8, 2010 5:26 AM | Report abuse

SAMMY thinks a lot of his little boy doesn't he? That's pretty tall cotten.

Posted by: glawrence007 | April 8, 2010 5:33 AM | Report abuse

I think that the players should handle it within the organization. Back in my earlier days, the leaders of the pack had a meeting to try to rationalize and articulate the reasons one should participate as a team player, and with his salary, a positive leader he should be, rather than a disruptive broken link. If that doesn't work, than go to mode 2, a GI shower, and if that doesn't work, early termination. On a Recon Team, you were as good as the weakest link and you could say, any team is as good as the weakest link. But than again, even though our lives were on the line, no one made $100,000, yet $100,000,00. How stupid this world is getting to, to pay that kind of money without some team protective clauses in the contract.

Posted by: schultzy | April 8, 2010 5:46 AM | Report abuse

I say this. It was very well documented that before Haynesworth signed with us, he wanted to be assured he WOULD NOT be asked to play NT or just a space eater. And he was given that assurance. He is not a utility D lineman or 5th round draft choice or undrafted FA. These are the guys who are willing to do anything including giving the HC a manicure. Big Al is at the top of his profession in his chosen career field and in his prime. He wants to be in a situation where he can best utilize his talents and maximize his potential. This is not being a Diva, it is being a motivated professional. People in his position in ANY career field usually feel the same, and usually ask for various assurances to protect their career before signing with a new organization. Their position, and it is usually very logical, is that they are hired specifically because an organization wants to tap into their unique talents, skills, and experience, and therefore maximizing it also maximizes their value to the organization. I would be suprised and disapointed in him if he WASNT unhappy about being asked to play NT. One of the major assurances he was given to get him to sign is being renegged on. This is just wrong. And again, in EVERY career field in the Western Economic System, business, journalism, entertainment, etc... the more accomplished and highly compensated people are given MORE input into their job roles, not LESS. I don't understand why so many people seem to think athletes, unlike every other job area in the world, are supposed to behave MORE like Army privates or Burger King burger flippers as they become more accomplished and well paid. "Damn, he's the best D lineman in football and made 100 million; he should run around the field naked during the half time show if Shanny and Snyder want". Dont you folks see how ridiculous you are being? Al is being asked to relinquish much of his ability to do what he does best, while he's in his prime, when he was assured he wouldn't be asked to do that very thing. And I didn't see anywhere that Al refused to play NT. And please, asking players to treat voluntary activites as manatory is just plain wrong, and it would be treated as such in any other work environment, including the sports journalism business.

Posted by: kenboy1 | April 8, 2010 6:01 AM | Report abuse

How stupid this world is getting to, to pay that kind of money without some team protective clauses in the contract.

Posted by: schultzy | April 8, 2010 5:46 AM

Not sure what you want in your "team protective clauses" but the contract is full of them. The team has the right to terminate his contract, without showing cause. How much more protective can you get?

He's in a union and the union has an agreement with the league as to what is required and what is not. What the team is trying to get him to do is to participate in activities which are not required, and he's refusing.

The only thing here that looks "stupid" was the management team that gave him this contract with so much guaranteed money, not "the world" that allowed them to make fools of themselves.

Posted by: League-Source | April 8, 2010 6:01 AM | Report abuse

And he was given that assurance....

Big Al is at the top of his profession in his chosen career field and in his prime.

And please, asking players to treat voluntary activites as manatory is just plain wrong, and it would be treated as such in any other work environment, including the sports journalism business.

Posted by: kenboy1 | April 8, 2010 6:01 AM |

If it wasn't in his contract -- "Big Al won't play NT" then it wasn't an assurance. You probably were the guy who negotiated LaVar's contract. "Sure it doesn't saw $4 million, but it was an assurance...."

Big Al is not at the top of his profession. He gave that up once he signed. Anyone who watched him last year could see that he wasn't delivering the conditioning and the effort that he'd "assured" the team he would provide.

Everyone does "voluntary" activities at work. People come in early and people stay late. They work weekends. They skip lunch. It's called giving 110% as opposed to what Big Al is doing -- "work to rules." When unions "work to rules" work comes to a slowdown and the customers suffer. You can't build an NFL team around 53 guys who work to rules.

This is why he never should have been signed and it's why Shanahan wants to trade him, which is the team's right.

Posted by: League-Source | April 8, 2010 6:22 AM | Report abuse

kenboy, are you Haynesworth's agent? I mean, really...where was it "documented that before Haynesworth signed with us, he wanted to be assured he WOULD NOT be asked to play NT or just a space eater"? Anyone who's paid even a little attention to the Redskins over the last decade would know that the coach is subject to change at ANY time and the dynamic you signed up for could change as well. There's nothing you can realistically put in a contract that would "protect" him from that. So Haynesworth didn't get the script flipped on him just to screw with him; there's a new coach and a new philosophy being implemented. And I don't know about you, but I'm not telling my coach (you know, the guy in charge) to change what he does to accomodate one player.

THAT is the culture that is being changed here. Nobody changed their philosophy for Stephen Davis or LaVar Arrington (guys that actually made names for themselves as Redskins). So why would you expect this staff to change philosophy for Albert Haynesworth? All 53 men are supposed to work as a team. And any man on the roster putting his needs or wants over the TEAM'S gets sent packing. Fat Albert included.

Posted by: brownwood26 | April 8, 2010 6:24 AM | Report abuse

I thought the days of playing a player out of position were gone when Blache left? Do you really believe that AH's best position is NT? They are playing him because he's the Dlman they have, but I give you LL as an example why that logic is flawed. Square peg, round hole. The Skin's are forced to utilize their most talented Dlman because of the sins of the past (yes leevi98 I went there..old argument), no high picks in the past used to address this position, and only 4 picks so far in the 2010 draft. Wil they trade down, get picks, and use one or two on the NT/DT position? Will Shanny be the one to back down from this faceoff? My vote is to find a middle ground and move on.

Posted by: TWISI | April 8, 2010 6:33 AM | Report abuse

Hey all,

I'm definitely leaning more in the edvar/Lisa_R camp here. I'm sorry, but Haynesworth was clear from the moment he arrived that he came because he thought the 'Skins were keeping a 4-3, and he thought he could continue to be a disruptive force here. He's always been clear on the fact that he's looking out for what he hopes will be his place in history--being considered one of the best Defensive Tackles ever to play the game. Only on a team as messed up as the Redskins seem to be could a player wanting to do what is necessary to be the best ever be considered a bad thing.

Bones21, while I like your argument, there's a significant problem with a Terrell Owens comparison. Terrell Owens was a HORRIFIC locker room presence. Haynesworth isn't exactly a shining leader for our team, but it wasn't until the end of last season that he said anything particularly wrong. He never called out other players by name (to my knowledge, at any rate), and he backed up his teammates on the field. Now if you want to argue that his not participating in voluntary activities this offseason is a problem, that makes sense, but the comparison with TO is a bit overboard. Bit of a straw man, in my eyes, at any rate.

Seriously though, I think this is kind of a ridiculous issue. Haynesworth may not have lived up to his contract last season, but he was FAR from the problem on this team. The defensive line was one of the few bright spots of last season, and I think it's ridiculous to throw that all away.

Posted by: harlequin115 | April 8, 2010 12:21 AM | Report abuse

I agree, harle Q. TO was a "me me me" kind of guy. In his mind, everything revolved around him.

AH has been a standup kind of guy. He has fought in the trenches, has stood up for his teammates. He may not be a team leader, but he is a force.

And this argument about only playing 70% of plays, and having to come out frequently... Come on, he's fighting 2 320# trained OL on every play. He has admitted that he wasn't in the shape he wanted to be in last year, and is doing something about it. Sure, it's not the preferred method of being in sessions with his teammates. But he is preparing for the season.

Yes, he's paid a lot of money. But that is the agreement he made with DS and VC. It's irrevelant to the 2010 season. Let's get our focus where it belongs, on putting together the best roster for 2010 and the following seasons.

Posted by: frediefritz | April 8, 2010 6:42 AM | Report abuse

Who Cares. Time to move on. Kiss and make up.
All the fuss over how much a player gets paid. Who should care except Snyder. Now that there's no cap and teams are cleansing themselves of bad contracts and players why should this be a big deal.
If he doesn’t want to play, fine, give him a TV at the end of the bench so he can watch the game. When someone gets hurt during the game there’s always someone smiling. There will be someone who wants to play his position.
Move on.

Posted by: 2ndtierfan | April 8, 2010 6:46 AM | Report abuse

and speaking of kissing and making up...

beep beep

Posted by: frediefritz | April 8, 2010 6:53 AM | Report abuse

What you guys want Shanny to do is what Gibbs II did, and I know this because every former player of Gibbs said it.

He went soft on the players the second time, maybe he didn't care to be the hard nose guy anymore or maybe he thought thats what had to be done.

Did we make two playoffs yes, did we ever have a realistic shot at a SB no.

Bill B. runs the Pats this way, Parcells ran the teams he coached this way.

Posted by: Flounder21 | April 8, 2010 6:54 AM | Report abuse

In an hour I can find a thousand guys who would trade places with Albert Haynesworth.

In this economy I can find 15 million families out their who could use his salary just to put food on the table.

Albert Haynesworth, it is time to grow up and be an adult.

Posted by: BigTrees | April 8, 2010 8:08 AM | Report abuse

LEAVE FAT ALBERT ALONE. HE is feared around the league by offensive lineman. And when he comes back in the same shape he was in Tenn. watch out!!! Everybody on the team said this guy is A NIGHTMARE. That hasn't changed.

Oh yeah and G Blanche was using the whole D wrong according to other sources around the league, so don't blame Al for speaking up after the fact..

Posted by: COLUMBIASKINS | April 8, 2010 9:06 AM | Report abuse

Fat Albert's 2009 Stats- 37 Tackles, 4 sacks.

That's 8Mil/sack or 864,864/tackle.

Damn, what a bargain!

Posted by: bostskin | April 8, 2010 9:45 AM | Report abuse

I say put Buttersworth on Special Teams - let's see how much he likes runing up and down the field on punts and kickoffs.

Posted by: josetucson | April 8, 2010 10:20 AM | Report abuse

I think this is being mishandled. Don't tick the guy off by talking about trading him.He is not missing anything that is required of him. You've got the most dominant defensive player in the league. The titans showed how he needs to be used so stop trying to put a square peg in a round hole and use the guy the right way.

Posted by: ttribbett | April 8, 2010 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Football is the ultimate team game and the coach rules. Especially a coach with the pedigree of Shanahan. Trade Fat Albert for the best package of draft choices you can get and move on. You can't have your highest paid player be a malcontent like he is, even if he is good when he's on the field. Shanahan and Haslett have made the judgment that a 3-4 defense without Albert is better than a 4-3 defense with Albert. Those are the kind of judgments they get paid to make and they've proven to be pretty damn good at it. Albert is fat and lazy. You never give a guy like that a big contract. It always comes back to haunt you.

Posted by: dwill2 | April 8, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Football is the ultimate team game and the coach rules. Especially a coach with the pedigree of Shanahan. Trade Fat Albert for the best package of draft choices you can get and move on. You can't have your highest paid player be a malcontent like he is, even if he is good when he's on the field. Shanahan and Haslett have made the judgment that a 3-4 defense without Albert is better than a 4-3 defense with Albert. Those are the kind of judgments they get paid to make and they've proven to be pretty damn good at it. Albert is fat and lazy. You never give a guy like that a big contract. It always comes back to haunt you.

Posted by: dwill2 | April 8, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

Football is the ultimate team game and the coach rules. Especially a coach with the pedigree of Shanahan. Trade Fat Albert for the best package of draft choices you can get and move on. You can't have your highest paid player be a malcontent like he is, even if he is good when he's on the field. Shanahan and Haslett have made the judgment that a 3-4 defense without Albert is better than a 4-3 defense with Albert. Those are the kind of judgments they get paid to make and they've proven to be pretty damn good at it. Albert is fat and lazy. You never give a guy like that a big contract. It always comes back to haunt you.

Posted by: dwill2 | April 8, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

There is nothing written in stone saying Albert will be a space eating NT, only thing I heard is we may play the same style of 3-4 as the Steelers. But how about letting Albert play the style of NT as Jay Ratliff who is now the most feared interior d-lineman in the league. Ratliff gets up field from the NT position and blows up running plays and pressures the QB, so a NT still can play the way Albert wants to play. All he needs to do is give this a chance and meet Haslett and Shanny half way. Another big time 3-4 lineman is Darnell Dockett, who switches from the 5 technique/3-4 DE to NT depending on the down and distance. AH is too too talented to just trade away unless its a trade we can't refuse, maybe like swapping 1st rd picks,also something like Carriker, Oshiomogho Atogwe and the Rams 2nd rd pick. Thats a trade scenario that can help us at multiple positions, and helps Rams get a stud DT for Spags defensive scheme and get a franchise QB in Bradford.

Posted by: robbkels | April 8, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Cancer spreads like Wildfire. A Cancer that's 6'6 350Ibs tub of lard, that's a big A** cancer. The cure? Shanha-Allen!

Dump this fool! get some picks back!

Posted by: alucard1 | April 8, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company