Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;685150]Is Al that big of a distraction to the team? They would have to despise him to go through with that because that is a lot of trouble to, most likely, downgrade at DT. It isn't a cost cutting move because the 4th pick is going to be making huge guaranteed money. To me, that would be a waste of our 4th pick because you have to commit that pick to get anywhere near the production that you are shipping out.

Granted, you will get some type of pick or two for the big guy but this is a lot of effort to take a step back.[/quote]

I know! If they wanted to get rid of the #1 problem child it would be CP not AH.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=Trample the Elderly;685154]I know! If they wanted to get rid of the [B]#1 problem child it would be CP not AH.[/B][/quote]

Amen

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;685150]Is Al that big of a distraction to the team? They would have to despise him to go through with that because that is a lot of trouble to, most likely, downgrade at DT. It isn't a cost cutting move because the 4th pick is going to be making huge guaranteed money. To me, that would be a waste of our 4th pick because you have to commit that pick to get anywhere near the production that you are shipping out.

Granted, you will get some type of pick or two for the big guy but this is a lot of effort to take a step back.[/quote]

Throughout this entire thread, i've made it clear that his being "a distraction" has little - if anything - to do with us wanting to move him. our desire to move him is atleast 99% about acquiring offensive talent.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;685182]Throughout this entire thread, i've made it clear that his being "a distraction" has little - if anything - to do with us wanting to move him. our desire to move him is atleast 99% about acquiring offensive talent.[/quote]
Unless there's something more to us wanting Atogwe and Carriker from the Rams.. I wouldn't say 99% at all

I'd say most of it had to do with the bonus, then playing position issues and possible picks somehow round the majority out.. pure speculation though

You can make it as clear as you want but do either one of us know?

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=Defensewins;685152]I agree that we are fine with Okung or with out. We draft him or trade down and get another OL.
I disagree about getting rid of Haynesworth as a bonus. There will be a talent void in our D-line if Hayneswrth leaves and we do not properly replace him. Kemoeatu is questionable coming off a major injury. Our other DLineman are not difference makers. We will create a hole.[/quote]

You must not have read my post. Getting rid of Haynesworth is not the bonus. Ensuring Suh or McCoy fell to us, enabling us to trade down out of th e#4 pick is the bonus.

If Haynesworth leaves, we'd definitely have a hole... but i'd argue we have bigger holes all across our offensive line (and potentially at WR) that need to be filled. We've made an investment in acquiring Donovan McNabb. we need to do everything we can to make that investment pay off.

When Shanahan became our HC and Haslett became our DC, we signaled that we would no longer be a defense-first team. That sign was confirmed when we traded for McNabb: Offense will be the strength of this team.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=tryfuhl;685187]Unless there's something more to us wanting Atogwe and Carriker from the Rams.. I wouldn't say 99% at all

I'd say most of it had to do with the bonus, then playing position issues and possible picks somehow round the majority out.. pure speculation though

You can make it as clear as you want but do either one of us know?[/quote]

Even in that scenario, we'd likely get a pick in return. And it would also be able to use less picks on our defense and more on our offense. Either way, trading Haynesworth would give us more 3-4 players and more offensive talent.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

So I know this person who's as good a source on Haynesworth as Schefter is on Shanahan and this person says "Albert's very excited about McNabb and the rest of the additions the team has made. He's talking regularly with coach Haslett and is excited about the upcoming season."

so take that for what you will

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=SmootSmack;685292]So I know this person who's as good a source on Haynesworth as Schefter is on Shanahan and this person says "Albert's very excited about McNabb and the rest of the additions the team has made. He's talking regularly with coach Haslett and is excited about the upcoming season."

so take that for what you will[/quote]
:)!!

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=SmootSmack;685292]So I know this person who's as good a source on Haynesworth as Schefter is on Shanahan and this person says "Albert's very excited about McNabb and the rest of the additions the team has made. He's talking regularly with coach Haslett and is excited about the upcoming season."

so take that for what you will[/quote]

He was fibbing to you, to get a message through to Shanahan and BA. Geez keep up

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

This all means AH is surely to be traded!

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=SmootSmack;685292]So I know this person who's as good a source on Haynesworth as Schefter is on Shanahan and this person says "Albert's very excited about McNabb and the rest of the additions the team has made. He's talking regularly with coach Haslett and is excited about the upcoming season."

so take that for what you will[/quote]

If I was a player I would be too. For all the fabricated distractions being created, I hope he has a great year for us. All the moves that they are making should motivate all the guy's on the roster. AH at the end of his career wants to be compared to Reggie White and the only way that will happen is if he is on a conteder. For what its worth I think that Albert should call into one of these radio programs and state flat out "I want to be a Redskin and I will do everything they ask me to do on the field".... wait a sec he did do that on sirus sat radio, lol.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;685143][B]Honestly, i think we WANT to ensure that Detroit takes Okung so Suh or McCoy will fall to us and we have a number of opportunities to trade down.[/B] I think this has been what we've been hoping for all along and trading Haynesworth to either team would only help ensure the draft unfolds as we want. Obviously, we wouldnt move Big Al just to make that happen, but it would be an added bonus.[/quote]

You must have dreamed up that idea. The biggest hole we have is Left Offensive Tackle. Okung is a consensus Top 5 Draft Pick who plays left tackle. Why wouldn't we want him to be there so we have a chance of filling that hole? Please don't tell me that some of the other OT's in the draft are just as good or almost just as good because they're not.

We can get another draft pick by trading JC or we can trade a 2011 pick for a pick this year if someone good falls in the draft but we must have a top notch LT from somewhere to get the production we need on offense.

If Okung is gone at #4, then I agree that trading down might be a good thing to do but if he's there I believe we need to take him.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;685318]You must have dreamed up that idea. The biggest hole we have is Left Offensive Tackle. Okung is a consensus Top 5 Draft Pick who plays left tackle. Why wouldn't we want him to be there so we have a chance of filling that hole? Please don't tell me that some of the other OT's in the draft are just as good or almost just as good because they're not.

We can get another draft pick by trading JC or we can trade a 2011 pick for a pick this year if someone good falls in the draft but we must have a top notch LT from somewhere to get the production we need on offense.

If Okung is gone at #4, then I agree that trading down might be a good thing to do but if he's there I believe we need to take him.[/quote]

Okung isnt much better than the next level of tackles and if we trade down, we could concievably get two of them. this is a ridiculously deep draft and we have a ton of needs. drafting okung would only fill one of them.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;685327]Okung isnt much better than the next level of tackles and if we trade down, we could concievably get two of them. this is a ridiculously deep draft and we have a ton of needs. drafting okung would only fill one of them.[/quote]

That's what I've been saying, trade down if possible and get 2 OL.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;685327]Okung isnt much better than the next level of tackles and if we trade down, we could concievably get two of them. this is a ridiculously deep draft and we have a ton of needs. drafting okung would only fill one of them.[/quote]

That is not 100% true. Obviously we have to wait a couple of years to know for sure, but I am hearing more and more that in terms of a true Left Tackle that can handle the NFL speed rushers only Okung has the talent to step in right away and do ok.
Bulaga and th eothers are getting talked about as an immediate starters at Right Tackle, but they will have trouble like Robert Gallery did at Left Tackle against the speed rushers.
Either way it is all opinions at this point.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

The only thing missing from the title of this story is the word "ANYMORE".

The Skins are not shopping Albert "ANYMORE"...since the Eagles did not want to swap and nobody else wanted a 100 million dollar attitude. With that said, it is a relief that Big Al will be dominating one side of the line because he is a monster and it takes 2 linemen to come close to stopping him. Orakpo will benefit lining up beside Big Al.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=SmootSmack;685292]So I know this person who's as good a source on Haynesworth as Schefter is on Shanahan and this person says "Albert's very excited about McNabb and the rest of the additions the team has made. He's talking regularly with coach Haslett and is excited about the upcoming season."

so take that for what you will[/quote]

Clearly, your source isn't keeping up with the outstanding insiders at the Post:
[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/analysis-shanahan-in-test-of-w.html?wprss=redskinsinsider]Redskins Insider - Analysis: Shanahan in test of wills with Haynesworth[/url]
[quote]
And earlier Wednesday, it was learned Haynesworth probably will not attend Washington's first voluntary minicamp that begins April 16.

Haynesworth plans to participate in all mandatory offseason team events under the terms of the collective bargaining agreement, two people with knowledge of the situation said. But Haynesworth would not face disciplinary action for skipping non-mandatory activities at the park.


It's one thing for Haynesworth to train on his own, which irritated Shanahan. But for Haynesworth, the Redskins' highest-paid player and arguably their most talented, to be elsewhere during a minicamp, well, I imagine that would simply be unacceptable to Shanahan.

...

Haynesworth has made it clear he does not want to play the nose. Shanahan has made it clear Haynesworth is the Redskins' starting nose tackle. In holding firm with Haynesworth, Shanahan is sending a clear message that he sets the agenda for the Redskins -- not the players. Even a player as talented as Haynesworth.[/quote]

I thought it was said that AH did plan on being at the April minicamp?

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;685189]You must not have read my post. Getting rid of Haynesworth is not the bonus. Ensuring Suh or McCoy fell to us, enabling us to trade down out of th e#4 pick is the bonus.

If Haynesworth leaves, we'd definitely have a hole... [B]but i'd argue we have bigger holes all across our offensive line (and potentially at WR) that need to be filled. We've made an investment in acquiring Donovan McNabb[/B]. we need to do everything we can to make that investment pay off.

[B]When Shanahan became our HC and Haslett became our DC, we signaled that we would no longer be a defense-first team. That sign was confirmed when we traded for McNabb: Offense will be the strength of this team[/B].[/quote]

I do not agree with creating a problem to solve another. If we lose Haynesworth and opposing teams gash us for 5 yards a run next year, our season will be over. No playoffs. Stopping the run is rule #1 to any defense.

On your rather large assumption that we have signaled offense over defense is a stretch. You can believe what you want. But nobody at Redskins park has said we are an offensive team first over our defense. Our offense has sucked for a while and it is where we need the most help. Our failure over the last 10 years to address our O-line adequately in the draft did not mean we were a defense first team. We invested several good draft picks on WR's, QB's that did not pan out, rather than picking O-Lineman. There is a long list of offensive players we drafted that have field and/or are no longer on team.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

There is no way around it: Big Al is a troubled individual. He has anger and ego issues and only his immense talent has saved him He is on his own mission and all the skins can do is plug him into defense end and say "KILL"..."DESTROY". Its all he's good for.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=internetcareer;685358]There is no way around it: Big Al is a troubled individual. He has anger and ego issues and only his immense talent has saved him He is on his own mission and all the skins can do is plug him into defense end and say "KILL"..."DESTROY". Its all he's good for.[/quote]

I for one am ok with that.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;685360]I for one am ok with that.[/quote]
Same here.. we're the Redskins.. warriors

not the Washington Good Samaritans

I'm not saying pick up baby killers but a guy who said he wants to actually earn his money and wants to play at his best position is hardly a concern for me. We bitched when Cooley was blocking way more than running routes despite needing his help, why can't we bitch when Al should be going after the passer instead of having a 3-way with 2 OL?

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=12thMan;685309]This all means AH is surely to be traded![/quote]

hahahaha! I really hope not, but if he is, I hope we can get Gaither and a 1st out of it. That would be a trade I would make.

Or a 1st and 3rd.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;685318]You must have dreamed up that idea. The biggest hole we have is Left Offensive Tackle. Okung is a consensus Top 5 Draft Pick who plays left tackle. Why wouldn't we want him to be there so we have a chance of filling that hole? Please don't tell me that some of the other OT's in the draft are just as good or almost just as good because they're not.

We can get another draft pick by trading JC or we can trade a 2011 pick for a pick this year if someone good falls in the draft but we must have a top notch LT from somewhere to get the production we need on offense.

If Okung is gone at #4, then I agree that trading down might be a good thing to do but if he's there I believe we need to take him.[/quote]

yea, the most important person in the draft for us is OKUNG. But if he is not available then perhaps the prudent move is to just go ahead and take Trent Williams because tackle is a CRITICAL need. We cannot draft a project.

Although I suppose we could always trade for somebody's left tackle and a draft pick for our #4 pick if Bradford was available. I just don't know if Buffalo or Cleveland or Seattle have a left tackle that we might want.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=tryfuhl;685362]Same here.. we're the Redskins.. warriors

not the Washington Good Samaritans

I'm not saying pick up baby killers but a guy who said he wants to actually earn his money and wants to play at his best position is hardly a concern for me. We bitched when Cooley was blocking way more than running routes despite needing his help, why can't we bitch when Al should be going after the passer instead of having a 3-way with 2 OL?[/quote]

The sad thing is AH could beat two OL with enough frequency to be a force in the running and passing game if he'd take his head out of ass.

On a side note, when did it become ok to tell your boss you're not going to do something or follow an assignment? I'd having him cleaning my toilets if I were ol' Danny Boy. I bet he'd be more than happy to play NT after a month or so of cleaning up after me.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=DIE-NASTY;685409]The sad thing is AH could beat two OL with enough frequency to be a force in the running and passing game if he'd take his head out of ass.

On a side note, when did it become ok to tell your boss you're not going to do something or follow an assignment? I'd having him cleaning my toilets if I were ol' Danny Boy. I bet he'd be more than happy to play NT after a month or so of cleaning up after me.[/quote]

you do realize that these are voluntary and that if the Skins management team looked like they were forcing AH to be there, they could be fined or have draft picks taken away right? AH has said he's not going to miss any mandatory ones.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=DIE-NASTY;685409]The sad thing is AH could beat two OL with enough frequency to be a force in the running and passing game if he'd take his head out of ass.

On a side note, when did it become ok to tell your boss you're not going to do something or follow an assignment? I'd having him cleaning my toilets if I were ol' Danny Boy. [B]I bet he'd be more than happy to play NT[/B] after a month or so of cleaning up after me.[/quote]

So you're ok with our coaching staff having players play out of position? :doh:

I thought that ended with Blache retiring.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

I dunno why, but I think A.H. gets his shit together and has 12+ sacks this year, and our team leads the league in sacks this season. Top 5 Defense this year. But only if Haynesworth stays.

:D

Gosh, I really, truly want him to succeed. I really hope the reports of him being excited are true, cause if they are, thats enough to make any skins fan excited as well. Things are changing for the better. A happy, excited motivated Haynesworth with Orakpo now being a veteran, only means LOTS of trouble for opposing defenses. I just hope we run the 43 more than the 34.

Carter, Kemoeatu, Haynesworth, Orakpo

That is one scary ass looking line for offenses lining up opposite them.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

It is a bad sign that Al gets a check for 21 million 6 days ago and refuses to show up for things. Voluntary or not, he is not doing the best thing for the team.

This sucks, he was one of my favorite players but if he keeps blowing off Shanahan, he is gone. Phat Al doing whatever the eff he wants is not part of the new plan.

I am pissed.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

AH will be at April's Mini Camp & i think he will stay after that, once he sees how things are coming together. Make no mistake we need him, DF wins CHAMPIONSHIPS or did we forget.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

If we played AH as a 1 technique nose like Jay Ratliff - quick and penetrating rather than just space clogging - AH may actually like it and flourish.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=internetcareer;685358]There is no way around it: Big Al is a troubled individual. He has anger and ego issues and only his immense talent has saved him He is on his own mission and all the skins can do is[B] plug him into defense end and say "KILL"..."DESTROY". [/B]Its all he's good for.[/quote]

I'm cool with that. :woot:

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=Lotus;685477]If we played AH as a 1 technique nose like Jay Ratliff - quick and penetrating rather than just space clogging - AH may actually like it and flourish.[/quote]

I agree - I'm really hoping Haslett will do that.. This would make the situation win-win for both sides..

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

My gut feeling tells me AH will be traded. Tennessee, Detroit or TB could be his destination. The only way he stays is if he gets on the same page as Shanahan, if traded to either Detroit or TB and the Skins are able to get their 1st round pick, then they should pick Suh or McCoy to replace AH, trade down from their 4th, get an OL and another pick. In a fight between 2 strong egos, Shanahan wins, he's the coach.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;685547]My gut feeling tells me AH will be traded. Tennessee, Detroit or TB could be his destination. The only way he stays is if he gets on the same page as Shanahan, if traded to either Detroit or TB and the Skins are able to get their 1st round pick, then they should pick Suh or McCoy to replace AH, trade down from their 4th, get an OL and another pick. In a fight between 2 strong egos, Shanahan wins, he's the coach.[/quote]


We aren't getting a top 3 pick for him, I am starting to wonder if anyone wants to deal with him. This situation really looks bad.

I will be surprised if we are able to trade down from the 4th pick too.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=DIE-NASTY;685409]The sad thing is AH could beat two OL with enough frequency to be a force in the running and passing game if he'd take his head out of ass.

On a side note, when did it become ok to tell your boss you're not going to do something or follow an assignment? I'd having him cleaning my toilets if I were ol' Danny Boy. I bet he'd be more than happy to play NT after a month or so of cleaning up after me.[/quote]
Okay and if they put him at safety he should play that, doesn't mean he should be there.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

I love all the concessions being made here for Big Al. Oh, he's going to be motivated this year. He has something to prove. He'll be beast in the 34. Man, whatever. If $100 million can't motivate this guy, nothing will. I so wish the Redskins could trade him. The issue isn't whether he comes to camp in shape or not, but the fact that he doesn't give a shit about the perception he's creating and that he's not aboard with the Sheriff Shanahan.

As far as AS reports that Big Al (Phat Al, Fat Al, Godzilla or whatever we're calling him these days) is staying means nothing until we get past draft day.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

As far as distractions go, all he has to do is show up! No big deal. Do what you're supposed to do, man. It ain't hard. I'll bet anything from dollars to doughnuts, if he stays and this year's Skins don't live up to it's potential, I'll guarantee you that AH will be the first one bitching and moaning about playing in a 3-4 and how it wasn't a good idea. I can see it coming.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=12thMan;685903]I love all the concessions being made here for Big Al. Oh, he's going to be motivated this year. He has something to prove. He'll be beast in the 34. Man, whatever. If $100 million can't motivate this guy, nothing will. I so wish the Redskins could trade him. The issue isn't whether he comes to camp in shape or not, but the fact that he doesn't give a shit about the perception he's creating and that he's not aboard with the Sheriff Shanahan.

As far as AS reports that Big Al (Phat Al, Fat Al, Godzilla or whatever we're calling him these days) is staying means nothing until we get past draft day.[/quote]
What if the money IS motivating him? Is anyone following the guy around seeing if he's working or not? Maybe he thinks that he'll be better off doing his own thing during voluntary time, doesn't mean he's eating nachos at the Wizards games.

The guy himself said that he was embarrassed that the fans were questioning his impact and he wanted to be put into a position to earn the salary that he was offered; he didn't feel like the role he played really capitalized on what he could do.

How can you fault a guy for that? He's a smart guy and a hell of a player, once they start doing line work he'll be there. I get the whole team cohesion thing but if he wants to work with a specialist to be on top of his game, great, I support that.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=tryfuhl;685924]What if the money IS motivating him? Is anyone following the guy around seeing if he's working or not? Maybe he thinks that he'll be better off doing his own thing during voluntary time, doesn't mean he's eating nachos at the Wizards games.

The guy himself said that he was embarrassed that the fans were questioning his impact and he wanted to be put into a position to earn the salary that he was offered; he didn't feel like the role he played really capitalized on what he could do.

How can you fault a guy for that? He's a smart guy and a hell of a player, once they start doing line work he'll be there. I get the whole team cohesion thing but if he wants to work with a specialist to be on top of his game, great, I support that.[/quote]

If memory serves me correctly, I remember the presser after he got signed to that monster contract and went of his way to quell any doubts that he would live up to his contract. This was last year! So if the money was/is motivating him, I suppose he would have been in better shape last year too? But he wasn't was he? He missed two critical divisional games. Yeah I'm going there.

Andre Carter, Brian Orakpo, and London Fletcher certainly played motivated, with the same lousy trainers and defensive coaches, and for a fraction of what Haynesworth pulls in. Here we are entering year two still talking about --questioning-- whether Haynesworth is motivated. He could have squashed that last year as far as I'm concerned.

Look, I hope the guy has a monster year. He's a Redskin and I'm pulling for him. But his approach, well intentioned or not, just isn't striking the right tone this team needs now. It reeks of more of the same from another underachieving FA signing.

Re: Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"
 

[quote=12thMan;685938]If the money was/is motivating him, I suppose he would have been in better shape last year too? But he wasn't was he? He missed two critical divisional games. Yeah I'm going there. Andre Carter, Brian Orakpo, and London Fletcher certainly played motivated, with the same lousy trainers and defensive coaches, and for a fraction of what Haynesworth pulls in. Here we are entering year 2 still talking about --questioning-- whether Haynesworth is motivated. He could have squashed that last year as far as I'm concerned.

Look, I hope the guy has a monster year. He's a Redskin and I'm pulling for him. But his approach, well intentioned or not, just isn't striking the right tone this team needs now. It reeks of more of the same from another underachieving FA signing.[/quote]

Yeah and he played in games he could've skipped just as easily. He could be pushing it harder than our guys are now, who knows.