Haynesworth is Behaving Selfishly

[over the mountain]

I dont know if posting articles talking aobut other players not attending mandatories really helps your cause when those players are sitting out for contract reasons.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

There really isn't a side of the story to give. There was a voluntary mini-camp. He's on a workout regiment in Tennessee that, in his estimation, prevented him from going.

I guess his side of the story might be "I'm a better player for not going". A lot of fans would call bs on that, I suppose. Saying "he should have been there" is too broad for my tastes. Maybe the best argument against Haynesworth's actions is that his head coach thought he should be there.

I guess I can see the selfishness in trying to make yourself the best player you can be (at the expense of...well, something), but I don't know. This is pretty ridiculous that the fans and media are more worked up about this than the Redskins are.

Indeed.. but what head coach wouldn't say that?

As far as worst argument.. DS is disappointed. Non-story considering everyone wanted him not to have personnel input. Sure he signs the checks but whatever.

As far as the comparisons to players holding out for contracts in other posts, that's not what's going on obviously in this case, nor does it appear that AH will actually be holding out.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Haynesworth is sitting out because Shanahan said he was the redskins starting NT and he doesnt want to play NT. Yes, he's also made comments that Haynesworth will be moved around, but at the end of the day, he's the NT and thats the last thing in the world he wants to do. He feels "deceived" beacuse his current situation is completely different than what it was a year ago. Well, he needs to get over it. he can play chicken with Shanahan and Allen all he wants, but he's never going to win. If he's traded, it won't be because he's being a punk.

Hopefully, someone close to him will get his mind straight. whatever role he ends up playing for the team, we'll be much better with him than without him. And if Haynesworth really wants out, his best chance at getting traded is to disprove those of us who think he's a selfish diva who only wants money and play hard. Then, and only then, he might be able to show other teams that he's worth giving up whatever it is we'd insist on in a trade. Who knows, he might even find that being a NT isn't that bad.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Haynesworth is sitting out because Shanahan said he was the redskins starting NT and he doesnt want to play NT.

I didn't even read past this because it itself was incorrect. Do you just ignore every time it's posted that he had already planned his offseason program before the new regime and staff were in? Or do you just choose to conveniently ignore it?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by over the mountain

I dont know if posting articles talking aobut other players not attending mandatories really helps your cause when those players are sitting out for contract reasons.

I think it does, in the sense that these camps, while helpful, are not the tell tale sign of success in the upcoming season. A disgruntled player is a disgruntled player regardless of the reason. In Johnson's case, they just renegotiated 2 years ago, and now he see's Marshall get paid, and wants more. But I am fairly positive he will be on the roster and playing to his level, just as I am sure AH will be too.

These OTA/minicamps seem like they were purposely included so that players could use them to express displeasure with the FO. I know that's not the case, but if a player is unhappy or wants to make a non-binding statement, this has become the acceptable way to express it.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by GMScud

It's not too often I side with PFT/Florio, but this is dead on IMO:


Haynesworth was promised before signing he could attack the quarterback when he came to Washington. The Redskins even considered trying to bring his old Titans defensive line coach Jim Washburn to town. Haynesworth had Snyder's ear.

Now that's all changed. He's being asked to occupy blockers, and he can't go around the coaches to get to Snyder anymore.

To this, we say: grow up. Things in life happen that are bigger than you. Coaches get fired, schemes change.

The Haynesworth camp would be better off not giving his side of the story.

Haynesworth feels "deceived" by Redskins | ProFootballTalk.com

I feel that that's fair.. aside from the running to Snyder thing. Did he run to Snyder last year or just regularly meet with the guy? Who knows.

We've probably all accepted job offers that ended up entailing stuff that wasn't covered beforehand and we took it for a bit and then moved on. If they mislead him then it's on the Skins whether that be Blache or Snyder. However, with the coaching change you do have to accept that. Until I hear a quote from Haynesworth (not from a close associate, former barber, or Delorean-driving person from the future.. or was it the past? or present person that went into the future and then came back to report it, there we go) saying that he's not happy with the coaches, the scheme, his position, etc then everything is fine. We'll start to find out any REAL news next month.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Haynesworth is sitting out because Shanahan said he was the redskins starting NT and he doesnt want to play NT. Yes, he's also made comments that Haynesworth will be moved around, but at the end of the day, he's the NT and thats the last thing in the world he wants to do. He feels "deceived" beacuse his current situation is completely different than what it was a year ago. Well, he needs to get over it. he can play chicken with Shanahan and Allen all he wants, but he's never going to win. If he's traded, it won't be because he's being a punk.

Hopefully, someone close to him will get his mind straight. whatever role he ends up playing for the team, we'll be much better with him than without him. And if Haynesworth really wants out, his best chance at getting traded is to disprove those of us who think he's a selfish diva who only wants money and play hard. Then, and only then, he might be able to show other teams that he's worth giving up whatever it is we'd insist on in a trade. Who knows, he might even find that being a NT isn't that bad.

Both parties involved flat out deny this to be the case. I think there's legitimate reason to believe that Haynesworth would rather play the 4-3 because he's comfortable with it, but there's no evidence to suggest that he's so much as disgruntled with a switch to the 3-4.

I also don't think there's any reason to think he's feeling either deceived or disgruntled. The only person to actually use the word "deceived" was La Canfora. He's trying to summarize the mood of the situation in a word, of course, but I'm not even really sure he has any more access to the situation than I do at this point (which would be: none). His "sources" have yet to be correct.

I think he's been quoted as suggesting that perhaps his talents would be wasted eating up blockers, but there's no reason to necessarily think that the 1st team NT for the Redskins (even if it's Haynesworth) is going to primarily eat space. That's not really what Jay Ratliff does in Dallas, for example. Haynesworth could end up being a one-gap NT. That decision probably hasn't been made yet.

Kris Jenkins is a little bit bigger than Haynesworth, and Shaun Rogers is about his size, they both went from 4-3 DT to 3-4 NT and flourished. The difference with Haynesworth is that instead of coming out of the game on passing downs, he may just slide outside the Guard.

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

I didn't even read past this because it itself was incorrect. Do you just ignore every time it's posted that he had already planned his offseason program before the new regime and staff were in? Or do you just choose to conveniently ignore it?

I'm sure alot of players had plans before the new regime came in. But when Shahanan came in and asked all the players to show up, everyone that had made other plans changed them and showed up with the rest of the team. Whatever regimen Haynesworth is on, he could most certainly adjust it to have shown up for minicamp if he wanted to. He doesn't. Sure, none of us know for sure what is going on in Haynesworth's head, but it doesnt take rocket science to figure out that he's probably not happy.

[Ruhskins]

I think this story needs to die down until mandatory camp. Otherwise the same thing will happen over and over again, bitter girlfriends will continue to bitch about Haynesworth, people in the middle will try to argue both sides, the pro-Haynesworth people will continue to defend him, and the people that are sick of this story and believe this is overhype will continue to do so.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I'm sure alot of players had plans before the new regime came in. But when Shahanan came in and asked all the players to show up, everyone that had made other plans changed them and showed up with the rest of the team. Whatever regimen Haynesworth is on, he could most certainly adjust it to have shown up for minicamp if he wanted to. He doesn't. Sure, none of us know for sure what is going on in Haynesworth's head, but it doesnt take rocket science to figure out that he's probably not happy.

This is all true (most likely), but it's not like Haynesworth is the only one of the Shanahan-Haynesworth dynamic that has to earn the others' respect. There's nothing that says that Mike Shanahan has to be accomodating of Haynesworth's desire to be the best individual player he can be, but it would certainly be in his benefit to give Haynesworth whatever he needs to thrive for this team.

Frankly, if the Redskins can't win this year with McNabb, 29-year old Haynesworth, Carter, Fletcher, Rogers, 29-year old Portis, Cooley AND Davis, how the heck are they going to win when McNabb's gone, Haynesworth's gone, Carter and Fletcher are gone, and who-knows-what is going on in the secondary?

Again, there's no reason to think this relationship won't work out just dandy, at least for a year. I'm just saying if it doesn't, you have to hold both parties accountable to some degree, because frankly, the responsibility falls with the head coach to make it work (and to get rid of him if he can conclude that it just isn't going to work).

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Both parties involved flat out deny this to be the case. I think there's legitimate reason to believe that Haynesworth would rather play the 4-3 because he's comfortable with it, but there's no evidence to suggest that he's so much as disgruntled with a switch to the 3-4.

I also don't think there's any reason to think he's feeling either deceived or disgruntled. The only person to actually use the word "deceived" was La Canfora. He's trying to summarize the mood of the situation in a word, of course, but I'm not even really sure he has any more access to the situation than I do at this point (which would be: none). His "sources" have yet to be correct.

I think he's been quoted as suggesting that perhaps his talents would be wasted eating up blockers, but there's no reason to necessarily think that the 1st team NT for the Redskins (even if it's Haynesworth) is going to primarily eat space. That's not really what Jay Ratliff does in Dallas, for example. Haynesworth could end up being a one-gap NT. That decision probably hasn't been made yet.

Kris Jenkins is a little bit bigger than Haynesworth, and Shaun Rogers is about his size, they both went from 4-3 DT to 3-4 NT and flourished. The difference with Haynesworth is that instead of coming out of the game on passing downs, he may just slide outside the Guard.

I don't disagree with anything that you said about how Haynesworth can be used here. He's our starting NT and hopefully Haslett will find a way to make him be more than just a space eater. But still, my point is that, whatever his desire (to stay or be traded) Haynesworth would have best been served by showing up and participating in minicamp (at minimum).

I don't think we should automatically beleive every single report out there about Haynesworth being disgruntled, but when those reports keep coming in, you can't just ignore them. I realize that sometimes guys in the media have agendas, but they don't just make stuff up. If they did, they'd lose all credibility. I know some people will say that guys like JLC have none anyways, but thats simply not true. They do have credibility, which is why they have their jobs. Its just that certain people who dont like what they're reporting, claim that they have none.

My hope is that, regardless of how Haynesworth feels, he silences all his detractors by showing up for mandatory team activities in great shape, and, when he's here, he does everything he's asked and dominates. That said, i think its very possible that he shows up out of shape and unmotivated. I've yet to read anything indicating he's currently working out very hard. One would think that, if Haynesworth was, his agent would be getting the word out as a way to improve his client's image. For the entire offseason, every single media outlet I can think of has painted Haynesworth (rightly or wrongly) in a negative light. Either there is truth to alot of these reports or Chad Speck simply isnt doing his job.

[tryfuhl]

None of the reports have any actual info though. It's just being recycled over and over because there's no other real news.

Instead of a reporter really taking the time to turn the Cushing thing into a story into the dangers of young men falling into the steroids trap (unless I've missed this.. or it's still developing) they're taking the easy way out and just sweeping the shit across the floor without actually dumping it.

So because you haven't read anything indicating that he's currently working out very hard you think that it's very possible that he shows up out of shape? Man it just never ends with you does it?

[GTripp0012]

I can and will ignore the reports, so long as they are without any substance. When there is actually evidence uncovered of a rift between player and organization, I will give the problem it's due. Until then, it's not going to be a story just because NFL Total Access can lead with it, and Jason Reid can make every third post Haynesworth-related, and Matt Mosley can remind you that having Haynesworth probably cost the Redskins about three wins last year.

I'm not sure what Chad Speck can do to make this less of a story. There's no substance here. There are no facts to issue a denial on. He actually wasn't at the voluntary mini-camp. Conclusions drawn from that by over-zealous reporters really can't be controlled by the agent, I don't think.

I think he was always planning on being at the mandatory mini-camp that's upcoming, so if he misses that, well then this story has some legs. He won't miss it though. Haynesworth could have taken preventative measures against this, but how was he to know that Brett Favre would basically stay out of the limelight for four months? That's just unfair to pin on him.

[tryfuhl]

I must be on BHA's ignore list haha

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

I don't think we should automatically beleive every single report out there about Haynesworth being disgruntled, but when those reports keep coming in, you can't just ignore them. I realize that sometimes guys in the media have agendas, but they don't just make stuff up. If they did, they'd lose all credibility. I know some people will say that guys like JLC have none anyways, but thats simply not true. They do have credibility, which is why they have their jobs. Its just that certain people who dont like what they're reporting, claim that they have none.

Fair points in here. However, what I also see is that this is a topic that has been overhyped by this media, and in order to keep the hype up a lot of these reporter keep regurgitating the same story in a different way. I think people need to have a bit of common sense with overhyped story, because that what they are, overhyped. There may be some truth to it, but often the truth doesn't sell, the overhype/exaggerated does, especially when it comes to polarizing players (for instance I think the same thing would happen if this was Clinton Portis).

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

My hope is that, regardless of how Haynesworth feels, he silences all his detractors by showing up for mandatory team activities in great shape, and, when he's here, he does everything he's asked and dominates. That said, i think its very possible that he shows up out of shape and unmotivated. I've yet to read anything indicating he's currently working out very hard. One would think that, if Haynesworth was, his agent would be getting the word out as a way to improve his client's image. For the entire offseason, every single media outlet I can think of has painted Haynesworth (rightly or wrongly) in a negative light. Either there is truth to alot of these reports or Chad Speck simply isnt doing his job.

I think it be ridiculously stupid for Haynesworth to show up out of shape and not ready to play. He has been a successful player in the past, and you're right, if he doesn't then his agent and whoever his people are, are not doing their jobs. I still think that Haynesworth has always been painted in a negative light, and that will never go away (see Randy Moss, TO, etc., etc.). No matter what he does, people will always criticize him. And honestly, that's where I think his mistake is, he (or his agent) needs to be aware of this negativity. But also fans need to be aware of this negativity painted by the media, as I said overhyped/exaggerated/negativity sells.