Schefter: "Skins NOT shopping Big Al"

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I think you're making too big of a deal about a transition to the 3-4. It might only be half our defense in 2010, we still might spend a lot of plays in the 4-3. Secondly, there's not much in the way of schematic difference for the defensive line or the corners. For the defensive line, you simply adjust from a gap control style or to an attacking style. There's not a lot of read and recognition that goes on for the defensive line. For the corners, it comes down to playing man vs zones, again not a lot of read and recognition. It's the safeties and the LBs that do the reading and reacting, they'd be the ones affected by the 3-4 transition.

I'd argue that given the LBs will be getting acquainted with new responsibilities, there would be a greater need for a dominant force along the defensive line to occupy blockers and allow the LBs to make plays.

It doesnt really matter how much we use the 3-4 vs the 4-3. My larger point was that we were a 4-12 team with Haynesworth and everyone else playing their natural positions. I'm no fan of Greg Blache, but i'm not convinced that Haslett is any better. In fact, I don't really think he is. Whether its the 3-4 or 4-3 Defense, Our offense is going to be the strength of this team in 2010 and probably during Shanahan's entire tenure here. McNabb is useless to us if we dont protect him and give him playmakers. If we do both of those things, and let the Shanahans work their offensive magic we'll regularly score 28-31 points per game. That's enough to win 10 games or so. Infusing our offense with talent should be our #1 priority. Even if we have to do so at the "expense" of a defense in transiton.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Schefter is not going to say things just to curry favors with Shanahan. It's ridiculous to not believe him because of his relationship with Shanahan.

Fact is Haynesworth was brought up as a possibility back in late January/early February when the Redskins and Eagles first talked about McNabb. But he is not being actively shopped around. Does that mean he won't be traded? No. Although, as I've said a couple of times, I don't think he's going anywhere.

They'll listen to any and all offers for anyone and if the right one comes around they'll consider it. But they're not going around saying "What can you give us for Haynesworth?"

I never meant to imply that Schefter would be lying. Shanahan lies to Schefter to further his agenda. Schefter reports it. I don't see how this is such a hard concept for some to understand. Cerrato and Zorn played things pretty straight and never really did anything to surprise anyone. Things have changed now that we have more experienced guys in their places. We can't take anything they say at face value. This is common in the NFL. Friday or Saturday, the Eagles let it be known that hey would not even consider trading McNabb within the division. On Sunday, he was a Redskin. I'd be shocked if Haynesworth is still on the team in May.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

It doesnt really matter how much we use the 3-4 vs the 4-3. My larger point was that we were a 4-12 team with Haynesworth and everyone else playing their natural positions. I'm no fan of Greg Blache, but i'm not convinced that Haslett is any better. In fact, I don't really think he is. Whether its the 3-4 or 4-3 Defense, Our offense is going to be the strength of this team in 2010 and probably during Shanahan's entire tenure here. McNabb is useless to us if we dont protect him and give him playmakers. If we do both of those things, and let the Shanahans work their offensive magic we'll regularly score 28-31 points per game. That's enough to win 10 games or so. Infusing our offense with talent should be our #1 priority. Even if we have to do so at the "expense" of a defense in transiton.

Dismantling the successful unit of our team in favor of rebuilding the other unit does not seem to me like a strategy that will yield a Super Bowl any time soon.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I never meant to imply that Schefter would be lying. Shanahan lies to Schefter to further his agenda. Schefter reports it. I don't see how this is such a hard concept for some to understand. Cerrato and Zorn played things pretty straight and never really did anything to surprise anyone. Things have changed now that we have more experienced guys in their places. We can't take anything they say at face value. This is common in the NFL. Friday or Saturday, the Eagles let it be known that hey would not even consider trading McNabb within the division. On Sunday, he was a Redskin. I'd be shocked if Haynesworth is still on the team in May.

There is a quid pro quo relationship between media insiders and coaches/executives in positions like Shanahan. Shanahan won't screw Schefter with bad information. You're just wrong.

[SFREDSKIN]

I don't know about this, but it seems the relationship between Haynesworth and FO is deteriorating fast according to Jason Reid:


Haynesworth to skip Redskins voluntary workouts, attend mandatory sessions

Veteran defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth plans to report to the Redskins' mandatory offseason workouts, but probably will not attend voluntary sessions, two people in the organization with knowledge of the situation said Wednesday.

Haynesworth informed the sources, who requested anonymity because of Haynesworth's poor relationship with the new front office and coaching staff, that he would return to Redskins Park for mandatory workouts under the terms of the league's collective bargaining agreement. Haynesworth, whom the Redskins have attempted to trade, also has privately told friends he does not want to become a distraction because of his impasse with coaches about their plans to use him as a nose tackle in the Redskins' new 3-4 defensive scheme.

But Haynesworth also does not intend to spend more time at the team's training complex than he must, people with knowledge of the situation said.


The Redskins would prefer to trade Haynesworth before the three-day NFL draft that begins April 22, and ideally hope to have him off the roster before their first voluntary three-day minicamp begins April 16.

Of course, the possibility exists that Haynesworth will remain with Washington and be required to play a position that he has said he has no desire to play.

Although it is highly doubtful Haynesworth would attend the non-mandatory event this month, having the two-time all-pro still in the organization during the minicamp could present an uncomfortable situation for the Redskins. Coach Mike Shanahan and defensive coordinator Jim Haslett undoubtedly would face questions about the absence of Haynesworth, who also has raised Shanahan's ire with his decision to train on his own instead of participate in Washington's voluntary offseason conditioning program at Redskins Park.

The Redskins' second voluntary minicamp is scheduled for May 7-9. Haynesworth also could skip that one without facing potential disciplinary action. The team's third three-day minicamp in June is mandatory. Haynesworth would have to report to that one.

The Detroit Lions, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Jacksonville Jaguars and Tennessee Titans -- Haynesworth's former team -- are considered his most likely destinations if he is traded, according to two people with knowledge of the Redskins' efforts to end their relationship with Haynesworth. But the Redskins have already paid Haynesworth $32 million in the first 14 months of a contract he signed in February 2009, including a $21 million bonus on April 1 that was believed to be the largest single check written to one player in NFL history.

It is believed the Redskins hope to have Haynesworth pay back some of the recent bonus he received in an attempt to persuade them to complete a trade, which Haynesworth apparently would not be opposed to as long as Shanahan remains committed to him being a nose tackle. Haynesworth's base salaries of $3.6 million this season and $5.4 million in 2011 also are guaranteed as part of the record $100 million deal -- which included a then-record $41 million in guaranteed money - he signed with the team as a free agent last year.

Haynesworth has a non-guaranteed base salary of $6.7 million in 2012, so the average of the contract in the next three years is a little more than $5.23 million. That figure is relatively low for someone who was the league's premier defensive player during the 2007-08 seasons.

While clashing last season with former Redskins defensive coordinator Greg Blache, Haynesworth confided in friends he missed working in Tennessee's aggressive scheme under defensive line coach Jim Washburn, with whom he has a good relationship. With the Titans, Haynesworth had great freedom to rush the quarterback, which helped him record 14.5 sacks combined during the 2007-08 seasons -- an eye-opening total for an interior lineman who often faced double-teams. Haynesworth also enjoyed playing under Detroit Coach Jim Schwartz, who formerly was the Titans' defensive coordinator.

[SirClintonPortis]

The lesson to take (or retake) from that the media folks can be wrong.

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

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

With Twitter and Wikipedia who needs "real" sources anymore!

Unlike Wikipedia, disseminating information on twitter is dependent on the member doing the disseminating, and last time I checked, Schefter was as reliable a source as there is.

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I dont view it as mindgames. Haynesworth has already used the skins to get a ridiculous amount of money. By making it clear to him that he won't be happy with how he's used here, we're encouraging Haynesworth to help faciliate a trade to a team he'd otherwise be less inclined to play for... like Detroit.

I think that's manipulative and I doubt that's the plan.

I think that they would prefer to not trade him now that they've paid the big bonus. He can be a great player for the Skins. So, I don't think they want him to be unhappy with the prospect of how he might be used, I just think that they'll let him know that he'll be used in the way that the coaches see fit, for the good of the team, whether or not he likes it. How he responds to that will speak to the kind of player and man he is. How he feels about it is a personal problem.

But I could be wrong.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Because of his relationship with Shanahan, he can't be trusted. Schefter reports what Shanahan tells him. Shanahan has no reason to be truthful about anything. The fact that only Schefter is reporting that Haynesworth is NOT on the market, while Claton, Reid, and JLC all say that he is, only confirms that he is indeed available.

Shanahan doesn't sign his checks. I doubt that Schefter is going to publicly announce a report to further Shanahan's trade desires for a player. Wouldn't ESPN consider that unethical? At best it is a conflict of interest.

Reid and JLC do not have the inside track to the team. I think most people would agree with that. Everybody beats Redskins Insider to the stories now.

[SirClintonPortis]

The strongest case that Shanahan is going to boot Haynesworth out of here is his past conduct with other "rebels" like Foxworth or Lynch.

However, he may decide that Haynesworth may have a good point and give him a chance. We can only speculate on how likely Al is going to be here or not.

[SBXVII]

Sfredskins, I don't think it's deteriorating any faster then what was originally reported. Jason Reid simply repackaged the same info that was put out the week AH showed up and left not to return until the mini camp prior to draft day.

[celts32]

I think trading AH is an opportunity for the Redskins to finally use their financial resources to good use. I know 20 mil is a lot of money to eat but with that money paid he becomes a very marketable player. The Redskins have a draft pick shortage and could basically purchase a draft pick or two by trading big Al. I know he can be dominant at times when he wants to be but does anyone actually believe he is going to be here long term with Shanny and Allen anyway? It's pretty clear to me that they will eventually tire of him and end up cutting him for nothing in a year or 2 so why not get value for him now.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I never meant to imply that Schefter would be lying. Shanahan lies to Schefter to further his agenda. Schefter reports it. I don't see how this is such a hard concept for some to understand. Cerrato and Zorn played things pretty straight and never really did anything to surprise anyone. Things have changed now that we have more experienced guys in their places. We can't take anything they say at face value. This is common in the NFL. Friday or Saturday, the Eagles let it be known that hey would not even consider trading McNabb within the division. On Sunday, he was a Redskin. I'd be shocked if Haynesworth is still on the team in May.

That's not how it works. It's just not

[celts32]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I never meant to imply that Schefter would be lying. Shanahan lies to Schefter to further his agenda. Schefter reports it. I don't see how this is such a hard concept for some to understand. Cerrato and Zorn played things pretty straight and never really did anything to surprise anyone. Things have changed now that we have more experienced guys in their places. We can't take anything they say at face value. This is common in the NFL. Friday or Saturday, the Eagles let it be known that hey would not even consider trading McNabb within the division. On Sunday, he was a Redskin. I'd be shocked if Haynesworth is still on the team in May.

I agree with that.

[SBXVII]

In regards to the info being put out to media sources.... I could have sworn M.Shanahan mentioned the JC was the QB of the Skins when asked about JC with in the month or two of taking over the team. I could be wrong but I could have sworn. In any event JC is not going to be the QB of the Skins. Unless of course he's the #2 or #3 if he can't get himself traded.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

That's not how it works. It's just not

- The Eagles told their sources when they reported they wouldnt ship McNabb to an NFCEast team and then a day later they sent him to us.
- Parcells told his outlets he wouldnt trade Jason Taylor and then did so.
- Cerrato told his outlets he was having no conversations with Taylor or his agent... while he was actually neck deep in negotiations to trade for Taylor.
- Just a few months ago, Schefter reported that Shanahan was not close to a deal with the skins and then a day later Shanahan become our head coach.

Those are just the examples I can think of off the top of my head. Coaches and GMs lie to the media every single day. When it comes to Shanahan, Schefter is the absolute last person in the world we should beleive at face value. Reid, JLC, and Clayton, and others all indicate they have sources saying Haynesworth is on the market. Schefter is the only source saying he's not, and his report is ambigous and includes unnecessary comments meant to make Haynesworth not want to be here. If you beleive Schefter, then you probably beleived that there were WMDs in Iraq... even when every "neutral" source said that there wasn't.