stoney26 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 $100 million for a guy to ride the bench and I'm on drugs? That's funny. Didnt know ah sat the bench last year. All I remember is him playing the highest percentage of snaps he's ever played his entire career. But don't let facts get in the way of your opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
talk show host Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 how is this news? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianm23 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I would take a 7th rounder for that Fat @ss at this point. you are on drugs. I would rather make him sit the bench all year than get a stinking 7th round pick in return. $100 million for a guy to ride the bench and I'm on drugs? That's funny. Didnt know ah sat the bench last year. All I remember is him playing the highest percentage of snaps he's ever played his entire career. But don't let facts get in the way of your opinion. Stoney, keep up bro. Read the following quotes above yours as to see the sequence. MEANDWARF wasn't suggesting he sat the bench or anything you said. Talk about missing your mark. /facepalm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingdaddy Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 We can trade Albert but whomever we get is gonna be just as far behind in learning the system as he is. I don't see us dealing him straight up for a 3-4 defensive lineman. I'm not saying keep him, but it is what it is..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnyfan57 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 That's funny. Didnt know ah sat the bench last year. All I remember is him playing the highest percentage of snaps he's ever played his entire career. But don't let facts get in the way of your opinion. That's only a fact if you ignore the 4 games he sat out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 how is this news? It's not but apparently ESPN reads PFT.... http://extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=324177 But Haynesworth could show up in Detroit and know Jim Schwartz's defense cold. I still think Detroit or Tennessee are the most likely trading partners. I listed the Bengals because I know how much defensive coordinator Mike Zimmer respects Haynesworth's talent. And the fact that Cincinnati leads the league in offering fresh starts now that Jerry Jones has temporarily shuttered his reform school. And NFP.... http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Haslett-on-Haynesworth-Its-not-right-6883.html&team=101 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 If Haynesworth doesn't get traded he's going to be behind his teammates in learning the new defense. Redskins defensive coordinator Jim Haslett says Haynesworth has already missed a lot of valuable time in the offseason program. "When I first got here, we met on a daily basis with the players, we did walk-throughs three times a week with the players . . . so it was a process," Haslett said. "And it wasn't you walk in and one day you know [everything]. It was probably a two-month process just to get 'em lined up right. . . . "So to walk in off the street and to think you're going to know . . . this is one of these defenses that you just don't walk in and think you're going to learn right away. It's not that easy." Yeah, and that's why they absolutely refused to bring in any D-Linemen after the draft, because they couldn't possibly be able to learn enough and contribute in any real way unless they were here the entire time. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingGibbs Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I'll be so glad when Albert is off of this team (and he will be) so we can concentrate on the guys that are working their ass off trying to make this a better team. Albert could sell some of you a :pooh: sandwich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurseReversed Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Call me spiteful but if it is true that we really want don't want him here after whats happened, and we cannot get good value for him in a trade, I would rather him sit out the whole season then get a trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kindred Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 ENOUGH. Come game time, the best person will play. Whether that is AH if he's picked everything up by then, or somebody else because he hasnt or we've traded him for somebody else. FINISH. DONE. END STUPID AH THREADS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinTerrorist Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 If Haslett really believes what he is saying, then how can he justify letting Al step right in as if he has been there since day one. Is that fair to the guys that have been? The starting lineup is NEVER decided by what's 'fair.' if big al comes to camp in shape and looking like the AH from the titians, then he can sit out every ota IMO. I'd also be willing to bet that wouldn't be a problem with the coaches next offseason either. This is borderline rablerousing from the media, guarented big al is workin out; now he's got something to proove... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Yawn, When the mandatory stuff starts and he is a no show then AH should be in the conversation. If he is playing DE how far behind is he going to be when it comes to dominating the guy or two guys in front of him to the point that he can't disrupt the opposing offense opening day? Haslett doesn't have a 700 page playbook does he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MassSkinsFan Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I have a question - maybe you think it's stupid - is there a good reason for Shanahan/Allen to deny trade rumors? Does it somehow make AH easier to trade if we appear to not want to trade him? If the answer is no, then I'm inclined to believe we won't be trading him. Just curious - it's a genuine question, not something fueled by a need to advocate one way or the other... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Adama Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 journalism today as we know it is a freaking JOKE!!!!!! I totally agree. Between taking quotes out of context and spinning a yarn out of it to having imaginary sources...it is not journalism rather the enquirer has moved to sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paloosa Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I agree with a lot of my fellow ES posters. This is a waste of a thread and Jason Reid is a joke of a reporter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Yeah, and that's why they absolutely refused to bring in any D-Linemen after the draft, because they couldn't possibly be able to learn enough and contribute in any real way unless they were here the entire time. :thumbsup: Okay, Cali, now you're getting ridiculous. I'm sorry, but I will take the defensive coordinator's word over yours or anyone else's on here ten times out of nine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xero21 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I could have sworn players have been saying this defense is more about reacting and less about thinking. And yet we are all concerned about Haynesworth getting behind. Something tells me that if he shows up in shape for all mandatory camps he will be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I could have sworn players have been saying this defense is more about reacting and less about thinking.And yet we are all concerned about Haynesworth getting behind. Something tells me that if he shows up in shape for all mandatory camps he will be fine. Our defensive coordinator differs in opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahons21 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I could have sworn players have been saying this defense is more about reacting and less about thinking. -Ya you have to know how to react a certain wait to particular plays. The hope is after extensive practice, it's like second nature to these guys. If Haynesworth reacts differently than he is supposed to, it may work out for the Redskins, or it may leave a gaping hole. Is that worth the risk? And yet we are all concerned about Haynesworth getting behind. Something tells me that if he shows up in shape for all mandatory camps he will be fine. -IF he shows up, and IF he's studied the playbook he should be fine. With the history of Haynesworth's work ethic since he's been in the league, both as a Titan and a Redskins, I'm slightly worried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I have a question - maybe you think it's stupid - is there a good reason for Shanahan/Allen to deny trade rumors? Does it somehow make AH easier to trade if we appear to not want to trade him? If the answer is no, then I'm inclined to believe we won't be trading him. Just curious - it's a genuine question, not something fueled by a need to advocate one way or the other... The way I look at it is this: If Shanahan and Allen were actively wanting to trade a player (forget that it's Haynesworth), then they would be contacting teams in one form or another. Which, if so, any denials in the press about wanting to trade that same player would be moot because they teams they are contacting already know the real story anyway, so they're not gonna pay attention to what's being said in the press. The best way of raising the possible asking price for a player is to make it seem as if there are several teams seriously wanting that player and creating a somewhat false bidding war. I personally think Shanahan and Allen would trade Haynesworth IF the price is right...but they also don't mind keeping him on the roster if nobody makes a sincere and worthwhile offer. Their comments in the press are more or less genuine in how they see Haynesworth's absence--they think it's FAR better for him to be with the team right now and show their disproval through the occasional one-off comment ("You're either in or you're out", "We have enough guys here right now and will be fine", etc, etc.). The coaches are staying "on message", and they should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 Okay, Cali, now you're getting ridiculous.I'm sorry, but I will take the defensive coordinator's word over yours or anyone else's on here ten times out of nine. If you take Haslett at his word literally, then that means he would balk at getting new D-Linemen after they've already started OTAs, though lol... But obviously you've missed the intent of my post, which was this: worrying about Haynesworth being "behind the curve"--in MAY--is ridiculous. Every team in the league brings in new players all through the offseason with the idea that they WILL and SHOULD be able to pick up enough of the scheme to contribute. Otherwise nobody would be wanting to trade for Haynesworth, because he'd be coming to their team "behind the curve". Which would make these trade rumors even more irrelevant than they are now. Get it? lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MassSkinsFan Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 I personally think Shanahan and Allen would trade Haynesworth IF the price is right...but they also don't mind keeping him on the roster if nobody makes a sincere and worthwhile offer. Their comments in the press are more or less genuine in how they see Haynesworth's absence--they think it's FAR better for him to be with the team right now and show their disproval through the occasional one-off comment ("You're either in or you're out", "We have enough guys here right now and will be fine", etc, etc.). The coaches are staying "on message", and they should be. Yup - I agree with this. I also don't think the price is going to be right unless someone gets really desperate (a la Jason Taylor 2 years ago). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirtyfive2seven Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 There is little doubt of denying that the defense was much better with Haynesworth but with the amount of bodies the skins are bringing in I think they will be fine with or without him. Sure he's a dominant player when he wants to play. Think Brandon Marshall last season. Didn't he sit out the first 4 games or something then when the Broncos were 5-0 he couldn't wait to come back. I have a feeling Haynesworthless could do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mahons21 Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 If you take Haslett at his word literally, then that means he would balk at getting new D-Linemen after they've already started OTAs, though lol... -They would have missed some OTA's but certainly not all of them, or even half from what I understand. But obviously you've missed the intent of my post, which was this: worrying about Haynesworth being "behind the curve"--in MAY--is ridiculous. Every team in the league brings in new players all through the offseason with the idea that they WILL and SHOULD be able to pick up enough of the scheme to contribute. Otherwise nobody would be wanting to trade for Haynesworth, because he'd be coming to their team "behind the curve". Which would make these trade rumors even more irrelevant than they are now.Get it? lol... -Problem is Al is learning a new scheme, a 3-4 is totally different than a 4-3. All the teams mentioned in acquiring Al either a.) already have experience with him, or b.) run a 4-3, which wouldn't require him to have to learn as much as a 3-4 would. -Every team does bring in players, but usually the players already run the scheme... If they don't, like the case of the Redskins acquiring Jason Taylor, it usually doesn't work out all that great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted May 24, 2010 Share Posted May 24, 2010 There is little doubt of denying that the defense was much better with Haynesworth but with the amount of bodies the skins are bringing in I think they will be fine with or without him. Sure he's a dominant player when he wants to play. Think Brandon Marshall last season. Didn't he sit out the first 4 games or something then when the Broncos were 5-0 he couldn't wait to come back. I have a feeling Haynesworthless could do the same. No, Marshall was on the field from game one last season (he started in game 2). Maybe you're thinking of Crabtree? By the way,last offseason Singletary said about Crabtree that they were "moving on without him" while he held out lol...I don't let that term mean anything more than coaches saying that "life goes on". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.