Haynesworth is Behaving Selfishly

[BringBackJoeT]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Did you guys see this very interesting note from Phillip Daniels? According to him, he's been told that AH is not necessarily penciled in at NT, he might be playing some end. In reality, it's probably been the plan all along to move him back and forth from NT to end based on matchup, situation, etc.

But really, you're going to get your chance to make plays, you won't be a NT the entire time. And you still can't get here??



washingtonpost.com

Also from Daniels: "There is no room for negotiation at 4-12 . . . It says this is voluntary . . . [but] after a 4-12 season, it's mandatory."

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Did you guys see this very interesting note from Phillip Daniels? According to him, he's been told that AH is not necessarily penciled in at NT, he might be playing some end. In reality, it's probably been the plan all along to move him back and forth from NT to end based on matchup, situation, etc.

But really, you're going to get your chance to make plays, you won't be a NT the entire time. And you still can't get here??



washingtonpost.com

Daniels did the same thing with Springs

Springs' absence angers Daniels - Washington Times

And here are the reasons why I don't think this is a big deal compared to the Springs situations, from the article:

Coach Jim Zorn said he hasn't heard from Springs. The cornerback's voice mailbox was full, and he didn't respond to a text message.

Springs skipped almost all of the 2007 offseason to register his displeasure with the Redskins over their desire to rework his contract. He also missed this offseason's workouts until the mandatory minicamp May 2-4.

[over the mountain]

And what happened to springs after that?

Could you imagine what AH would do if we asked him to take a pay cut? hahaha

Hey albert I know your only making 3.8 mil this year and you consider yourself an all-pro player but, buddy old pal of mine, would you mind taking a pay cut for the benefit of the team?

ya know, that local team discount that brady did for the pats a couple years ago?

[KI Skins Fan]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Daniels did the same thing with Springs

Springs' absence angers Daniels - Washington Times

And here are the reasons why I don't think this is a big deal compared to the Springs situations, from the article:

I could give you approximately 35,000,000 reasons why it is.

Just think of it! How can you not be appalled by his behavior when he is already being paid a King's Ransom and he can't be bothered to show up for three days of work once or twice a month? I just don't see how that can be defended.

And please don't come back with the letter of the law union agreement argument because I doubt that the either the NFLPA or the owners could imagine a contract as front loaded as Haynesworth's when that agreement was signed. AH doesn't exactly need to go home to work a part-time job during the offseason to make ends meet, you know.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

I could give you approximately 35,000,000 reasons why it is.

Just think of it! How can you not be appalled by his behavior when he is already being paid a King's Ransom and he can't be bothered to show up for three days of work once or twice a month? I just don't see how that can be defended.

And please don't come back with the letter of the law union agreement argument because I doubt that the either the NFLPA or the owners could imagine a contract as front loaded as Haynesworth's when that agreement was signed. AH doesn't exactly need to go home to work a part-time job during the offseason to make ends meet, you know.

There is no reason to defend it, it is VOLUNTARY. Do you know what VOLUNTARY means? You guys got your panties in bunch because of how much is getting paid, so you expect him to be holding open the door for all of the other players. Get over his contract, the Redskins wrote it and he signed it. It is in the past.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan

I could give you approximately 35,000,000 reasons why it is.

Just think of it! How can you not be appalled by his behavior when he is already being paid a King's Ransom and he can't be bothered to show up for three days of work once or twice a month? I just don't see how that can be defended.

And please don't come back with the letter of the law union agreement argument because I doubt that the either the NFLPA or the owners could imagine a contract as front loaded as Haynesworth's when that agreement was signed. AH doesn't exactly need to go home to work a part-time job during the offseason to make ends meet, you know.

Because Mike Florio and Jason LaCanfora say it is a big deal?

Originally Posted by Defensewins

There is no reason to defend it, it is VOLUNTARY. Do you know what VOLUNTARY means? You guys got your panties in bunch because of how much is getting paid, so you expect him to be holding open the door for all of the other players. Get over his contract, the Redskins wrote it and he signed it. It is in the past.

Sadly, some people won't get over this. They are like bitter girlfriends, they are going to hold that grudge forever it seems.

[Defensewins]

^LOL!
The Paparazzi of NFL writers. Didn't LaCanfora guarantee Haynesworth would get traded? He is still upset about it.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Bottom line, AH should be here, but it's not required so he doesn't have to. Not much MS can do, he can't violate the terms of the CBA.

In any business situation where you require a team effort from 50+ people and everyone else is going "over and above" and you decide to only work your M-F, 8x5, you're a selfish person with no loyalty to your teammates or the organization. Period, end of story.

[KI Skins Fan]

[QUOTE=Slingin Sammy 33;699906]Bottom line, AH should be here, but it's not required so he doesn't have to. Not much MS can do, he can't violate the terms of the CBA.

In any business situation where you require a team effort from 50+ people and everyone else is going "over and above" and you decide to only work your M-F, 8x5, you're a selfish person with no loyalty to your teammates or the organization. Period, end of story.[/QUOTE]

CORRECT! Anybody who works for a living should understand this. For those of you who are defending Haynesworth's actions, trust me, if you were at work busting your butt, doing extra for the good of the organization and another person in your organization who was making 100 times more money than you were for doing the same job couldn't be bothered to come in to work, you would deeply resent it. Admit it.

[12thMan]

It's still being reported locally that the Skins would like to move Haynesworth at the right price. It seems that Tennessee wanted a third rounder for AH, but the Skins didn't bite.

The best case scenario at this point, for both sides, is an injury elsewhere in the NFL that makes Albert more tradeable (is that a word?), if you will.

[MTK]

Report: Albert Haynesworth interested in joining the Vikings | ProFootballTalk.com

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

It's still being reported locally that the Skins would like to move Haynesworth at the right price. It seems that Tennessee wanted a third rounder for AH, but the Skins didn't bite.

The best case scenario at this point, for both sides, is an injury elsewhere in the NFL that makes Albert more tradeable (is that a word?), if you will.

You mean we have to give them a draft pick to take him?

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Report: Albert Haynesworth interested in joining the Vikings | ProFootballTalk.com

Given the recent ruling against the Williams Wall, one would think that the draft day talk about AH to the Vikings would heat up.

I'm not demanding a Haynesworth trade - I'm on the fence about him - but the Vikes do have players like Loadholt who would fill a need for us and would look good in the b&g.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Report: Albert Haynesworth interested in joining the Vikings | ProFootballTalk.com

The question becomes whether the Vikings are still interested, whether the Redskins are willing to move him, and whether the two sides can strike a mutually acceptable deal.

wait, isn't that 3 questions

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

wait, isn't that 3 questions

It's the new math. 1=3. Lol.