Redskins and Titans talking trade again on Albert Haynesworth

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well the Jets signed Howard Green, so they kind of got a former Redskins DT

What a downgrade.

Anyways...Twitter / Manish Mehta : #Jets have not made any ov ...

"Yet" sounds promising.

[Longtimefan]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Well the Jets signed Howard Green, so they kind of got a former Redskins DT

When the need arises things change. Howard Green played in twelve games for them last year.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Yes they play a 3-4.

Why would they want a guy that hates playing in 3-4 defense and is obviously not motivated to play?

[MTK]

Did you see him play against Dallas, or the entire preseason? He may be the most talented DL, but he's certainly not playing like it. I really hope we unload him before the trade deadline. He's dead weight in this scheme. Not saying it's anybody's fault, he's just not a fit here. If this staff was here last year there's no way he would have been brought in.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

IMO Haynesworth would make a *terrible* 3-4 DE. He doesn't want to be responsible for 2 gaps. Period the end. Therefore, there is no place for him on a 3 man line. Funny thing is, there are plenty of 4 man fronts, but Haynesworth doesn't want to compromise at all. He's not willing to sacrifice *anything* for the team. A 3-4 lineman must be selfless. That is beyond Haynesworth's capabilities.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

IMO Haynesworth would make a *terrible* 3-4 DE. He doesn't want to be responsible for 2 gaps. Period the end. Therefore, there is no place for him on a 3 man line. Funny thing is, there are plenty of 4 man fronts, but Haynesworth doesn't want to compromise at all. He's not willing to sacrifice *anything* for the team. A 3-4 lineman must be selfless. That is beyond Haynesworth's capabilities.

See this is where I wish people think about scheme rather than put their feelings about the guy into the discussion. Yes, we know he's a shithead, a big baby, a pouty fat ass that doesn't get with the program. But it's also a scheme issue.

Larron Landry was a terrible FS, and it was mostly because of scheme. Yes his personality may have some effect, but it's all about scheme. And maybe if AH put some effort into it, he'd be an average 3-4 D-lineman. If you read Tripp's analysis (if I understood correctly) both AH and Golston had issues in their gap responsibilities. AH doesn't fit our 3-4 scheme just as Landry didn't fit the FS position. And the team just needs to get rid of him.

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

IMO Haynesworth would make a *terrible* 3-4 DE. He doesn't want to be responsible for 2 gaps. Period the end. Therefore, there is no place for him on a 3 man line. Funny thing is, there are plenty of 4 man fronts, but Haynesworth doesn't want to compromise at all. He's not willing to sacrifice *anything* for the team. A 3-4 lineman must be selfless. That is beyond Haynesworth's capabilities.

Well the thing is it depends on what you're doing with the 3-4 front. Some coaches like to have players responsible for two gaps while others like to have their guys shoot the gaps. Personally I think Haslet like's both, but considering the fact that we have two undersized ILB's starting our team is forced to play a little more two gap.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

I'd like to clarify something here.

People think Shanahan wants Haynesworth to submit to him, and they claim that the ego of Mike Shanhan is the problem, and not Haynesworth.

I see it differently: Shanahan wants Haynesworth to submit to the TEAM.

Hell, I believe even Shanahan submits to the team. I don't see him as some dominatrix. I see him as somebody who is committed to the team above all else, and Haynesworth is a guy who is committed only to himself -- above all else. How in the world can anyone defend this behavior, and suggest that we'd be better off with such a player on the field?

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

I'd like to clarify something here.

People think Shanahan wants Haynesworth to submit to him, and they claim that the ego of Mike Shanhan is the problem, and not Haynesworth.

I see it differently: Shanahan wants Haynesworth to submit to the TEAM.

Hell, I believe even Shanahan submits to the team. I don't see him as some dominatrix. I see him as somebody who is committed to the team above all else, and Haynesworth is a guy who is committed only to himself -- above all else. How in the world can anyone defend this behavior, and suggest that we'd be better off with such a player on the field?

I highly doubt that anyone here thinks that Haynesworth is not a problem. Everything could have been avoided if he did the right things. I just don't think he wouldn't be a good player period in the 3-4 scheme or worth the ton of money that stupid Vinny gave him.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

I'd like to clarify something here.

People think Shanahan wants Haynesworth to submit to him, and they claim that the ego of Mike Shanhan is the problem, and not Haynesworth.

I see it differently: Shanahan wants Haynesworth to submit to the TEAM.

Hell, I believe even Shanahan submits to the team. I don't see him as some dominatrix. I see him as somebody who is committed to the team above all else, and Haynesworth is a guy who is committed only to himself -- above all else. How in the world can anyone defend this behavior, and suggest that we'd be better off with such a player on the field?

Because all the greats have ego issue's. I believe there was an interview with McNabb prior to season starting and he told the Philli news that he was not going to be a back up to no one, which is why he wanted to be traded. All the great players have this problem. Heck I'm waiting for Chad Johnson (Ocho...) to blow his top at some point either him or T.O. screaming that they aren't getting enough balls.

I agree with you though, I too see it as Shanahan trying to make Haynesworth think "team first" vs. "me first". All AH had to do was show up in the off season work out play the games, practice and let his play show he was not a fit in the system and most likely the team would have traded him. Instead AH sits out OTA's, grumbles about how the system is not for him, shows up and can't complete the test, practices half ass, gets mad cause he's not on the starting lineup, and to be honest ... maybe it is the scheme, maybe he's supposed to get up from his 3 point stance and grab the OL and just stand there taking up space in case a RB tries to squeek through. It's either that or he's not getting a good push from the get go. Which means he can't play NT.

I still say try him on the DE spot and if he doesn't work out sit him until another team is desperate enough to need him in their 4-3 scheme and we can get our value for him. The only thing giving him away accomplishes is the team doesn't have to see him in the locker room complaining. If he's such a dominating force to be reconed with then I would not just give him away. Especially after giving him 21 mill for which he refuses to return.

As far as I care he can ride the bench all yr. If I was Shanahan I'd have him warming the bench each game and when the media (you them, the ones keeping this saga going) asked about AH I'd say...."you need to ask him." AH thought he was swift in telling the media ... "go talk to the team about my injury." BS Haynesworth, you knew the team couldn't disclose your medical problems. If he really wanted the info out there he would have simply said what the problem was and let the media go to the coaching staff and confirm. Instead he tries to pull a fast one by not having to answer the media's question and the team not being allowed to tell the media keeps the spin going.

Nope, keep him on the bench. So each and every game the owner, GM, HC, players, and fans can all see what 21 mill bought us. Then trade him next yr, see how he likes not playing the whole yr.... maybe the 21 mill would be returned faster.

[Mechanix544]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

I'd like to clarify something here.

People think Shanahan wants Haynesworth to submit to him, and they claim that the ego of Mike Shanhan is the problem, and not Haynesworth.

I see it differently: Shanahan wants Haynesworth to submit to the TEAM.

Hell, I believe even Shanahan submits to the team. I don't see him as some dominatrix. I see him as somebody who is committed to the team above all else, and Haynesworth is a guy who is committed only to himself -- above all else. How in the world can anyone defend this behavior, and suggest that we'd be better off with such a player on the field?

Ummmm, this is where I think you are Wrong. Mike Shanahan is a dominatrix.


I dont know about you all, but every time I think of Mike Shanahan, i picture him in leathers and chains with a whip and a racquetball mouthpiece in his left hand.

[tryfuhl]

Any of the Jets talk might as well be sealed, they just signed Howard Green, yep.. him

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Any of the Jets talk might as well be sealed, they just signed Howard Green, yep.. him

Am I on your ignore list?

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Am I on your ignore list?

No, it won't let me because you're staff.

j/k

I just didn't notice.. I always just view the last page in this clusterscrew of a thread

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

Any of the Jets talk might as well be sealed, they just signed Howard Green, yep.. him

I have been wondering why we let Howard Green go. He played in almost every game last year (as a role player) for the best defense in the NFL last year but was beaten out by Kemo (who is terrible) and Bryant who can't be that good if he hasn't beaten out Kemo.