Haynesworth to the Patriots for a 5th rounder.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

He talked big when he first got here too. The guy is a fraud. Sooner or later things will go bad in NE. Guaranteed.

Was he a fraud in Tennessee? Even POS people like Haynesworth have motivations.

He played huge in Tennessee because he was proud and wanted money. He came here and got his money and sat back like a POS.

But now he knows, if I don't get my ass in gear for Belichick nobody in the league will take me again and I'll be done. Shanahan could have sat on him until he came around to that same conclusion here.

The only way it goes bad in New England is if they extend him and give him a huge payday. Otherwise, just keep giving him the TO non-guaranteed type deal, and he'll shred offensive lines.

We blew this big time. Shanahan's my way or the highway won out over a basic understanding of human nature.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Was he a fraud in Tennessee? Even POS people like Haynesworth have motivations.

He played huge in Tennessee because he was proud and wanted money. He came here and got his money and sat back like a POS.

But now he knows, if I don't get my ass in gear for Belichick nobody in the league will take me again and I'll be done. Shanahan could have sat on him until he came around to that same conclusion here.

The only way it goes bad in New England is if they extend him and give him a huge payday. Otherwise, just keep giving him the TO non-guaranteed type deal, and he'll shred offensive lines.

We blew this big time. Shanahan's my way or the highway won out over a basic understanding of human nature.

For about 15 years, the nickname that Mike Shanahan has had around NFL circles is "My Way Mike". He has NEVER been a student of human nature or a man willing to meet someone even close to "halfway" when there is a difference of opinion. If you do not like "The Shanahan Solution" to a problem, then you need to go and find some other place to live/work/play where other folks will give a horse's ass about what you think or feel.

That is who he has been; that is who he is; that is who he is going to continue to be...

If that does not work for you as a fan, suck it up because that is what you will have to deal with for the next several years - - - unless Danny Boy reverts to his previously demonstrated meddling behaviors. Now that is an option Redskins' fans do not even need to contemplate...

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

For about 15 years, the nickname that Mike Shanahan has had around NFL circles is "My Way Mike". He has NEVER been a student of human nature or a man willing to meet someone even close to "halfway" when there is a difference of opinion. If you do not like "The Shanahan Solution" to a problem, then you need to go and find some other place to live/work/play where other folks will give a horse's ass about what you think or feel.

That is who he has been; that is who he is; that is who he is going to continue to be...

If that does not work for you as a fan, suck it up because that is what you will have to deal with for the next several years - - - unless Danny Boy reverts to his previously demonstrated meddling behaviors. Now that is an option Redskins' fans do not even need to contemplate...

Well this isn't really an argument in support of Shanahan's handling of Haynesworth, it's simply a "no duh, what did you expect" post.

What anyone expected Shanahan to do is not the point. The point is what should have been done. Just because everyone knows that Shanahan is always a rigid disciplinarian doesn't mean it's always the right way to handle situations.

Look back at the great Joe Gibbs. When Riggo was showing up hungover and half drunk you didn't hear Gibbs making a stink about it, even though he was regarded as being a tough discipline guy. He made exceptions, he understood human nature, and most of all he designed his system around the talents of his players and put them in position to be successful.

I don't like when a coach has a system and rigidly sticks to it. If you have a player of Albert's caliber, it seems that if you're worth your weight as a defensive mind you could find a way to use him as a havoc-wreaker. I'll bet that's what Belichick does.

Is Albert to blame here? Absolutely. I would have supported Shanahan if he benched him again this season for non-compliance. But to trade him away for a 5th round pick? I think he could have remained a rigid SOB without trading Haynesworth; eventually Albert would have decided he'd rather his legacy be one of dominance on the field rather than pouting off of it.

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Well this isn't really an argument in support of Shanahan's handling of Haynesworth, it's simply a "no duh, what did you expect" post.

What anyone expected Shanahan to do is not the point. The point is what should have been done. Just because everyone knows that Shanahan is always a rigid disciplinarian doesn't mean it's always the right way to handle situations.

Look back at the great Joe Gibbs. When Riggo was showing up hungover and half drunk you didn't hear Gibbs making a stink about it, even though he was regarded as being a tough discipline guy. He made exceptions, he understood human nature, and most of all he designed his system around the talents of his players and put them in position to be successful.

I don't like when a coach has a system and rigidly sticks to it. If you have a player of Albert's caliber, it seems that if you're worth your weight as a defensive mind you could find a way to use him as a havoc-wreaker. I'll bet that's what Belichick does.

Is Albert to blame here? Absolutely. I would have supported Shanahan if he benched him again this season for non-compliance. But to trade him away for a 5th round pick? I think he could have remained a rigid SOB without trading Haynesworth; eventually Albert would have decided he'd rather his legacy be one of dominance on the field rather than pouting off of it.

doubtful, pretty sure thats why this thread exists. although i do agree with you on the majority of your post

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Was he a fraud in Tennessee? Even POS people like Haynesworth have motivations.

He played huge in Tennessee because he was proud and wanted money. He came here and got his money and sat back like a POS.

But now he knows, if I don't get my ass in gear for Belichick nobody in the league will take me again and I'll be done. Shanahan could have sat on him until he came around to that same conclusion here.

The only way it goes bad in New England is if they extend him and give him a huge payday. Otherwise, just keep giving him the TO non-guaranteed type deal, and he'll shred offensive lines.

We blew this big time. Shanahan's my way or the highway won out over a basic understanding of human nature.

I'm surprised you're down with letting a player dictate things over the team. AH was the perfect example of what was wrong with the Skins under Vinny and Danny's control. The classic me guy. What this team needed was a little my way or the highway type of attitude. Shanahan stepped into an even bigger mess than I think he even realized before he took the job. And as we can see he's performing a major overhaul of the roster, getting rid of the headcases and me guys, and bringing in guys that have traits such as leadership, work ethic, effort, hustle, team, etc. Everything that AH did not represent.

AH was the one that blew this by not falling in line and playing ball the way a true pro is supposed to do, and paid to do. Again I can't figure out why you're on this bum's side. I know you like to argue for the sake of arguing, but you've lost some cred points on this one with me.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I'm surprised you're down with letting a player dictate things over the team. AH was the perfect example of what was wrong with the Skins under Vinny and Danny's control. The classic me guy. What this team needed was a little my way or the highway type of attitude. Shanahan stepped into an even bigger mess than I think he even realized before he took the job. And as we can see he's performing a major overhaul of the roster, getting rid of the headcases and me guys, and bringing in guys that have traits such as leadership, work ethic, effort, hustle, team, etc. Everything that AH did not represent.

AH was the one that blew this by not falling in line and playing ball the way a true pro is supposed to do, and paid to do. Again I can't figure out why you're on this bum's side. I know you like to argue for the sake of arguing, but you've lost some cred points on this one with me.

This is not arguing for its own sake, this is just me being right. If I cared about cred points, they'll be restored as soon as Albert gets his 10th sack this season playing next to Wilfork.

I do agree that you want your team buying into a disciplined philosophy and falling in line behind the leadership. But you can get that accomplished by sitting his ass on the bench until he decides to fall in line.

He didn't have leverage in the situation, there were plenty of seasons left on his contract.

Granted, there is a cost. You have to carry $5.4 million in cap space for a player who may continue to pout. And the locker room has to deal with the distraction. But we'd have been better off in the long run incurring that cost until he came around, rather than trading him for a measly 5th round pick two years from now.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This is not arguing for its own sake, this is just me being right. If I cared about cred points, they'll be restored as soon as Albert gets his 10th sack this season playing next to Wilfork.

I do agree that you want your team buying into a disciplined philosophy and falling in line behind the leadership. But you can get that accomplished by sitting his ass on the bench until he decides to fall in line.

He didn't have leverage in the situation, there were plenty of seasons left on his contract.

Granted, there is a cost. You have to carry $5.4 million in cap space for a player who may continue to pout. And the locker room has to deal with the distraction. But we'd have been better off in the long run incurring that cost until he came around, rather than trading him for a measly 5th round pick two years from now.

I think it's up for debate as to who is right or wrong. I know you like to proclaim yourself right like that ends the debate, but there were a couple of options Shanahan had and his choice was to cut our losses and get him out of our hair.

I don't think it should be underestimated how much the distraction factor plays in here. You could see that guys were clearly worn out talking about this last year and when Rak showed up to camp this year he basically said enough is enough, we can't have this again.

In order to truly move forward, I think it was best to get rid of all the distractions and all the things that handcuffed this team in the past. Whether it was poor attitudes, performance, work ethic, etc. One bad apple tends to spoil the bunch and AH was definitely rotten from that perspective.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I think it's up for debate as to who is right or wrong. I know you like to proclaim yourself right like that ends the debate, but there were a couple of options Shanahan had and his choice was to cut our losses and get him out of our hair.

I don't think it should be underestimated how much the distraction factor plays in here. You could see that guys were clearly worn out talking about this last year and when Rak showed up to camp this year he basically said enough is enough, we can't have this again.

In order to truly move forward, I think it was best to get rid of all the distractions and all the things that handcuffed this team in the past. Whether it was poor attitudes, performance, work ethic, etc. One bad apple tends to spoil the bunch and AH was definitely rotten from that perspective.

I do agree, that's a significant cost. But did we read anything this whole offseason indicating that Albert was still going to pout for us this year like he did last year? Or did we just assume he would.

I didn't see anything. I read that he was in much better shape (which he appears to be if you see photos of him as a Patriot). I think there's a decent chance he was planning to come this year and at least partially move on.

I think the transition from malcontent to player who's finally falling in line was happening faster that we all think. There's no evidence to suggest that wasn't the case, just a bunch of assumptions.

But hey like I said, in the end if Shanahan puts together a good defense and we improve, then Albert's cap space will have been put to good use, and you can't fault the decision. So you're right, to be fair I can't declare myself right on this. Shanahan can render the argument moot with a successful season, and I definitely hope that happens.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I do agree, that's a significant cost. But did we read anything this whole offseason indicating that Albert was still going to pout for us this year like he did last year? Or did we just assume he would.

I didn't see anything. I read that he was in much better shape (which he appears to be if you see photos of him as a Patriot). I think there's a decent chance he was planning to come this year and at least partially move on.

I think the transition from malcontent to player who's finally falling in line was happening faster that we all think. There's no evidence to suggest that wasn't the case, just a bunch of assumptions.

But hey like I said, in the end if Shanahan puts together a good defense and we improve, then Albert's cap space will have been put to good use, and you can't fault the decision. So you're right, to be fair I can't declare myself right on this. Shanahan can render the argument moot with a successful season, and I definitely hope that happens.

There wasn't much of an indication last year he was going to pull the crap he did. He took the $21M bonus on the premise he would show up and play, and all he did was show up and suck his thumb. So I think based on last year it was a safe assumption things weren't going to get better.

Funny, based on that photo in his NE uniform he looks heavier than last year to me, and I thought I read some tweets about reporters saying he was looking bigger. I can't imagine during a lockout he did much to stay in good shape. He's just not that kind of guy.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I do agree, that's a significant cost. But did we read anything this whole offseason indicating that Albert was still going to pout for us this year like he did last year? Or did we just assume he would.
I didn't see anything. I read that he was in much better shape (which he appears to be if you see photos of him as a Patriot). I think there's a decent chance he was planning to come this year and at least partially move on.

I think the transition from malcontent to player who's finally falling in line was happening faster that we all think. There's no evidence to suggest that wasn't the case, just a bunch of assumptions.

But hey like I said, in the end if Shanahan puts together a good defense and we improve, then Albert's cap space will have been put to good use, and you can't fault the decision. So you're right, to be fair I can't declare myself right on this. Shanahan can render the argument moot with a successful season, and I definitely hope that happens.

Let's talk assumptions here. Was it reasonable to assume that AH would continue to be a big ass distraction?

First, AH hated Shanahan - that is well documented and he has not take one inch of it back. He made absolutely nothing in the way of concillatory gestures to the team, coach, fans. If he had (i.e "I was being a little intransigent last year, I may have been wrong in my approach"), we most certainly would have heard about it. Barring a true, come-to-Jesus moment, the AH/MS relationship was far to gone to be fixed given the personalities involved.

In light of this damaged relationship, I would suggest that unless AH completely submitted to the Shanny way, he would have been a distraction b/c media, fans, etc. would be looking for friction to blow out of proportion - every play would have been analyzed to determine if AH was truly playing in line. Given how bad things got, it was not going to be a "we kissed, made up and are now bestest pals" turnaround. The circus would have continued even if AH played well ("Now that AH is playing well on 3rd downs, do you see an expanded role for him? Why now? Why not?, etc.").

Even if you don't accept that AH playing well was not a necessary cure to the problem, is it reasonable to assume AH had changed the attitudes that contributed to the problem? I suggest no.

AH reporting to camp is not a concillatory gesture, it is merely minimal compliance and in keeping with his actions last year. He never - to my knowledge - said "I am not going to do that". He just gave half assed attempts when put in situations he didn't like. Unless there is something to suggest he changed his ways, going to camp is nothing more than a continuation of his passive-aggressive compliance.

Last year, AH's attitudes and actions contributed to the circus that was AH. While never refusing a "direct order", Haynesworth made comments, took actions and demonstrated in every possible way that Albert was going to do it Albert's way or no way. To date, AH has done nothing to disavow his behavior from last year.

In light of his prior year's affirmative actions and his failure to disclaim those actions and attitudes, the reasonable assumption is not that he had been reached and had a professional epiphany. Rather, the more reasonable assumption is that AH intended to continue being Albert and create the same distractions he did last year.

Dear God, did I just write all that on Fatal Bert? Damn you Schneed, you made my ham sandwich taste bad.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Let's talk assumptions here. Was it reasonable to assume that AH would continue to be a big ass distraction?

First, AH hated Shanahan - that is well documented and he has not take one inch of it back. He made absolutely nothing in the way of concillatory gestures to the team, coach, fans. If he had (i.e "I was being a little intransigent last year, I may have been wrong in my approach"), we most certainly would have heard about it. Barring a true, come-to-Jesus moment, the AH/MS relationship was far to gone to be fixed given the personalities involved.

In light of this damaged relationship, I would suggest that unless AH completely submitted to the Shanny way, he would have been a distraction b/c media, fans, etc. would be looking for friction to blow out of proportion - every play would have been analyzed to determine if AH was truly playing in line. Given how bad things got, it was not going to be a "we kissed, made up and are now bestest pals" turnaround. The circus would have continued even if AH played well ("Now that AH is playing well on 3rd downs, do you see an expanded role for him? Why now? Why not?, etc.").

Even if you don't accept that AH playing well was not a necessary cure to the problem, is it reasonable to assume AH had changed the attitudes that contributed to the problem? I suggest no.

AH reporting to camp is not a concillatory gesture, it is merely minimal compliance and in keeping with his actions last year. He never - to my knowledge - said "I am not going to do that". He just gave half assed attempts when put in situations he didn't like. Unless there is something to suggest he changed his ways, going to camp is nothing more than a continuation of his passive-aggressive compliance.

Last year, AH's attitudes and actions contributed to the circus that was AH. While never refusing a "direct order", Haynesworth made comments, took actions and demonstrated in every possible way that Albert was going to do it Albert's way or no way. To date, AH has done nothing to disavow his behavior from last year.

In light of his prior year's affirmative actions and his failure to disclaim those actions and attitudes, the reasonable assumption is not that he had been reached and had a professional epiphany. Rather, the more reasonable assumption is that AH intended to continue being Albert and create the same distractions he did last year.

Dear God, did I just write all that on Fatal Bert? Damn you Schneed, you made my ham sandwich taste bad.

[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This is not arguing for its own sake, this is just me being right. If I cared about cred points, they'll be restored as soon as Albert gets his 10th sack this season playing next to Wilfork.

I do agree that you want your team buying into a disciplined philosophy and falling in line behind the leadership. But you can get that accomplished by sitting his ass on the bench until he decides to fall in line.

He didn't have leverage in the situation, there were plenty of seasons left on his contract.

Granted, there is a cost. You have to carry $5.4 million in cap space for a player who may continue to pout. And the locker room has to deal with the distraction. But we'd have been better off in the long run incurring that cost until he came around, rather than trading him for a measly 5th round pick two years from now.

he probably will do better in new england stat wise, although while playing here his stats wern't bad either, but as you said he will be playing next to wilfork, not carter and carriker.

and the second part of your statement makes no sense, the locker room has to deal with it? they had to deal with it last year and it was a huge distraction and it effected the team in a negative way. why would you want this to continue, for a half dozen sacks a year? i'd rather have a uniform team with everyone on the same page striving for one goal together.

and yoiur biggest flaw through out your entire arguement is that we would have to wait for hanyesworth to come around, how do you know this happens, because form all acounts of this guy he has no intergrity or heart and would never come around.

you usually have a good argument and a leg to stand on, but in this case i just don't get it, kinda like driving slow in the left lane