Quote:
Originally Posted by 12thMan
Directly or indirectly, everything is related to Haynesworth one way or another. He'll be the elephant in the room yet again. He's the highest paid guy on the team and has been the most disappointing by far. Had Haynesworth lived up to his contract the past two years, I'm not sure the Redskins invest this much up front. It seems to me, the Redskins are planning on life without Mr. Haynesworth's services in the event he's his usual honory self.
|
Well but the Redskins got into this mess. Why make such a high investment in such a low character guy with a coach that was not in a stable situation? In the end, whether Haynesworth had worked or not, this team is notorious for putting square pegs in round holes. And part of this switch to the 3-4 means getting players that have both experience in playing the defense and/or are versatile enough to adjust to the new scheme.
My personal preference is a mix of the two. Cofield can excel as a 3-4 DE, and while he may do well as a 3-4 NT, personally I think it'd be a bit of a waste. The discussion is first and foremost on how players fit into scheme, and some fans like me hoping that the team uses new acquisitions to the best of their ability.
Let's look at the Ravens, Ngata is a beast and can play at any position along the d-line. But he's not their NT, they play him mostly at DE. They had Kelly Gregg as their NT, and then they drafted T. Cody to be their NT of the future. That to me is using your player to the best of their ability.
The reason people will continue to bring Haynesworth is because they want to b*tch about him.