AH trade II La Canfora insists AH is indeed on the trading block.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

On Albert Haynesworth And The Nose Tackle Position

He's fine with DE, he just doesn't want to play NT much.

yeah, but Shanahan has publically named Haynesworth the teams starting NT and said that, while he'll be moved around, he will play NT as well. In my opinion, the skins are obviously trying to isolate Haynesworth. I think the desire for the two parties to split is very mutual.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

yeah, but Shanahan has publically named Haynesworth the teams starting NT and said that, while he'll be moved around, he will play NT as well. In my opinion, the skins are obviously trying to isolate Haynesworth. I think the desire for the two parties to split is very mutual.

Shanahan doesn't coach defense though. While I think it was a jab at Al, it would be idiotic for Shanahan to demand that Al is a NT and disregard Haslett's plans for him.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

Shanahan doesn't coach defense though. While I think it was a jab at Al, it would be idiotic for Shanahan to demand that Al is a NT and disregard Haslett's plans for him.

what on earth makes you think Shanahan disregarded Haslett's plans for Haynesworth? In all likelyhood, Shanahan was reinforcing Haslett's plans. And even if your assertation were true, last time i checked, Shanahan is the head coach of this team and Haslett works for Shanahan. Shanahan's also more accomplished. If there were ever a disagreement between the two, i'd side with Shanahan without even needing to knkow Hasletts side of the story.

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

I liked what Jason Reid's latest post said. Paraphrasing, "Veterans expressed concern that Haynesworth could become a distraction if he remains on the team".

What? Do they feel the same way about Rocky and JC? Did they feel the same way about Daniels, Springs, Fletcher, Portis and everybody else who has trained on their own in the offseason before?

In theory, couldn't any player on the team become a distraction?

You know why it is a distraction, because every stupid reporter asks every Redskin player and coach 6 questions about Haynesworth every time they meet with them.

again, who cares about voluntary workouts? Haynesworth skipped the teams first minicamp, for a defense in which he's learning a new position. Players "understand" when a teammate holds out due to a contract issue or something like that. But Haynesworth is absent because he and Shanahan are facing off against one another. Regardless of what anyone thinks about the switch to the 3-4, Shanahan is the boss. Haynesworth needs to be like everyone else and do what he's told and show up in camp and practice with his teammates. By not showing up, Haynesworth is alienating himself from the team. If the media weren't reporting this, then they wouldnt be doing thier jobs. Its entirely understandable why his teammates feel its a distraction.

[Pocket$ $traight]

[QUOTE=BigHairedAristocrat;690909]what on earth makes you think Shanahan disregarded Haslett's plans for Haynesworth? In all likelyhood, Shanahan was reinforcing Haslett's plans. And even if your assertation were true, last time i checked, Shanahan is the head coach of this team and Haslett works for Shanahan. Shanahan's also more accomplished. If there were ever a disagreement between the two, i'd side with Shanahan without even needing to knkow Hasletts side of the story.


I wasn't making an assertion. I was responding to your comment that Shanahan publicly named Al NT. I believe this was a shot at Al more than a directive.

You would side with Shanahan over Haslett on a matter of defensive strategy? That makes zero sense to me. Shanahan has a terrible track record on defensive line talent evaluation, in fact it contributed to him losing his job in Denver.

If Shanahan wants to succeed here, he needs to let the DC call the shots when it comes to defense, especially when it is a DC as accomplished as Haslett.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;690919]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

what on earth makes you think Shanahan disregarded Haslett's plans for Haynesworth? In all likelyhood, Shanahan was reinforcing Haslett's plans. And even if your assertation were true, last time i checked, Shanahan is the head coach of this team and Haslett works for Shanahan. Shanahan's also more accomplished. If there were ever a disagreement between the two, i'd side with Shanahan without even needing to knkow Hasletts side of the story.


I wasn't making an assertion. I was responding to your comment that Shanahan publicly named Al NT. I believe this was a shot at Al more than a directive.

You would side with Shanahan over Haslett on a matter of defensive strategy? That makes zero sense to me. Shanahan has a terrible track record on defensive line talent evaluation, in fact it contributed to him losing his job in Denver.

If Shanahan wants to succeed here, he needs to let the DC call the shots when it comes to defense, especially when it is a DC as accomplished as Haslett.

in my opinion, your faith in haslett is laughable. he is, by far, the worst defensive coordinator this team has had in a decade. the only faith i have in haslett is that shanahan had a whole year off to evaluate pretty much everything and he hand-picked him to be DC. i have no doubt that he and Haslett are on the same page when it comes to how the defense will be run and how to best utilize defensive players. I do agree that calling Haynesworth the teams starting NT was a comment primarily directed at Haynesworth - the big guy needs to swallow his pride and learn his place. We've brought in a couple dozen defensive linemen to compete for a roster spot, and instead of showing up and competing and practicing with his team, he's acting like he's above the team and staying away because he doesnt like whats going on. Shanahan's the head coach. Haynesworth needs to take a lesson from Clinton Portis and recognize that. We brought in two accomplished veteran RBs to compete with him. Instead of pouting and creating a fuss, he's shed his diva persona and is working out hard with the team, trying to prove to the new regime that he's worth keeping around. Haynesworth needs to get his butt inline.

[Pocket$ $traight]

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;690931]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

in my opinion, your faith in haslett is laughable. he is, by far, the worst defensive coordinator this team has had in a decade. the only faith i have in haslett is that shanahan had a whole year off to evaluate pretty much everything and he hand-picked him to be DC. i have no doubt that he and Haslett are on the same page when it comes to how the defense will be run and how to best utilize defensive players. I do agree that calling Haynesworth the teams starting NT was a comment primarily directed at Haynesworth - the big guy needs to swallow his pride and learn his place. We've brought in a couple dozen defensive linemen to compete for a roster spot, and instead of showing up and competing and practicing with his team, he's acting like he's above the team and staying away because he doesnt like whats going on. Shanahan's the head coach. Haynesworth needs to take a lesson from Clinton Portis and recognize that. We brought in two accomplished veteran RBs to compete with him. Instead of pouting and creating a fuss, he's shed his diva persona and is working out hard with the team, trying to prove to the new regime that he's worth keeping around. Haynesworth needs to get his butt inline.

What makes Haslett such a terrible DC? He had some pretty good Pittsburgh teams. He led the Saints to their first playoff win and was the NFL coach of the year.

I think it could be argued whether Haslett is by far worse than Blache. I guess we will see.

[MTK]

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;690931]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

in my opinion, your faith in haslett is laughable. he is, by far, the worst defensive coordinator this team has had in a decade. the only faith i have in haslett is that shanahan had a whole year off to evaluate pretty much everything and he hand-picked him to be DC. i have no doubt that he and Haslett are on the same page when it comes to how the defense will be run and how to best utilize defensive players. I do agree that calling Haynesworth the teams starting NT was a comment primarily directed at Haynesworth - the big guy needs to swallow his pride and learn his place. We've brought in a couple dozen defensive linemen to compete for a roster spot, and instead of showing up and competing and practicing with his team, he's acting like he's above the team and staying away because he doesnt like whats going on. Shanahan's the head coach. Haynesworth needs to take a lesson from Clinton Portis and recognize that. We brought in two accomplished veteran RBs to compete with him. Instead of pouting and creating a fuss, he's shed his diva persona and is working out hard with the team, trying to prove to the new regime that he's worth keeping around. Haynesworth needs to get his butt inline.

I'd say that's a stretch especially since we haven't even seen him coach a single snap yet.

Besides, George Edwards was pretty much a disaster in 2003. And if we're going back 10 years to '99, Mike "vanilla" Nolan was pretty bad. And of course Blache has his share of critics too.