Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

Friday before Round 2 starts is gonna be a hellacious day for FO's. I can't wait.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=SmootSmack;688564]I'll just repost what I did a few days ago, since it was missed:

The relationship between teams and the media is an admittedly complicated one. And the same media entity can have multiple sources within the same team making it even more complicated

Also, John Clayton did not say "actively shopping" he said "willing to part". And Schefter never said they aren't "willing to part" with Haynesworth. Like I said, they'll listen to offers for Haynesworth (more so than they would for say Devin Thomas) but they're not shopping him around.

Who's smootmsack? Anyhow see above. Actively shopping and willing to part with are not the same thing. They're simply not. What the Redskins are actively trying to do is improve the team[/quote]

LOL sorry for the typo...

I saw your post a couple of days ago - i just view "actively shopping" and "willing to part" as semantics. they can call it whatever they want to call it - at this point it doesnt really matter. At this point, the word is out that the skins are very interested in seeing what they could get for Haynesworth. they don't need to call 31 teams and try to sell him. everyone knows they want to get rid of him and teams will call if theyre interested. if theyre not interested, then actively shopping him by calling teams wouldnt make a difference anyway. I imagine there's a decent market for Haynesworth and he'll get traded sometime within the next 7 or 8 days.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=redsk1;688572]I would too. Hopefully we don't get too ancy and give him away. I'd rather him play for us this year. For god sake, he just got paid 20mill. You'd think he could suck it up and have a good attitude for a year.[/quote]

why should he? he got paid 32 mil for 13 months of good behavior. he has already recieved the majority of his contract money.

why would he want to stay on a 4-12 team, switching to a 3-4 and play for 6 mil the next few years when he can pout, get traded then sign a brand new stinking contract paying him more guaranteed money?

i think AH and his agent were licking their chops at realizing AH only has to be here for 13 months for 32 mil.

AH basicaly hit the double bonus lotto thanks to vinny and danny thinking they were clever with the way they "took advantage" of the looming uncapped year by frontloading AH's deal. im sure bruce came in and slapped them upside the head for being so stupid and greedy.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=SmootSmack;688568]I should clarify, what I meant to write and I think I did later in the post was that he's not looking to unload him but will consider it at the best value. But I, SmootSmack, hope that he doesn't settle for lower value. Mainly because of other moves that haven't yet panned out, I just hope they don't get into desperation mode here.[/quote]

Thanks for the clarification. So essentially, youre saying that the skins want draft picks (or specific players like Carriker). PLAN A was to do all sorts of little moves to acquire picks and players (trade campbell, landry, carter, rogers, mcintosh, portis, etc.). Since plan A hasnt worked thus far, the skins moved to PLAN B, which was to move Haynesworth as he probably has the value of about all of those guys combined? If the skins can get PLAN A to work before or during the draft, they'll have no need to execute PLAN B?

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=celts32;688571]I don't completely discount your theories on Schefter having a conflict of interest with the Redskins. However, I don't give any credence to any of JLC's ramblings about "league sources" and "people in the know" or any other code words he uses to descise the fact that he is just spouting out of his arse. [b]I don't think either of them are a great source when it comes to breaking news on the redskins. I think Schefter can be the best source for Redskins information as long [I]as it's information that the Redskins want leaked[/I].[/B][/quote]

I agree with that statement 100%, with special emphasis on the last part.

SmootSmack is my #1 source of Redskins information. In my book, he's just one notch above Florio.... kidding!

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;688576]LOL sorry for the typo...

I saw your post a couple of days ago - i just view "actively shopping" and "willing to part" as semantics. they can call it whatever they want to call it - at this point it doesnt really matter. At this point, the word is out that the skins are very interested in seeing what they could get for Haynesworth. they don't need to call 31 teams and try to sell him. everyone knows they want to get rid of him and teams will call if theyre interested. if theyre not interested, then actively shopping him by calling teams wouldnt make a difference anyway. I imagine there's a decent market for Haynesworth and he'll get traded sometime within the next 7 or 8 days.[/quote]

I don't see how you see actively shopping and willing to listen as the same thing. I used the SONAR example earlier (which i wrongly called radar). But let's look at a used car. Say I have a used car, good low mileage good value. Let's say its blue book is 27000. I lose my job and definitely don't want to keep the debt. I vigilantly market it on the web, and will take any offer because I want it off my books. Then a job opens, and I hadn't sold it. Now, I don't go cancel my 1 month ad, and if I get a call at or above blue book value I will listen to the offer, but I will be far less willing to sell just for selling sake.

AH before April 1st was actively on the market from what EVERYONE, including Schefter, says. After we paid the bonus, well yeah everyone knows we will trade him, but now, we want to recoup that bonus in the way of picks, or having Al pay it back, so we aren't selling at the same level we were before.

I just don't see the difference as semantics as much as a reflection of a shifted attitude or stance in the FO.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=over the mountain;688577]why should he? he got paid 32 mil for 13 months of good behavior. he has already recieved the majority of his contract money.

why would he want to stay on a 4-12 team, switching to a 3-4 and play for 6 mil the next few years when he can pout, get traded then sign a brand new stinking contract paying him more guaranteed money?

i think AH and his agent were licking their chops at realizing AH only has to be here for 13 months for 32 mil.

AH basicaly hit the double bonus lotto thanks to vinny and danny thinking they were clever with the way they "took advantage" of the looming uncapped year by frontloading AH's deal. im sure bruce came in and slapped them upside the head for being so stupid and greedy.[/quote]

His contract will follow him unless they negotiate an extension, within the 30pct rule, or throw on a mean bonus

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;688578]Thanks for the clarification. So essentially, youre saying that the skins want draft picks (or specific players like Carriker). PLAN A was to do all sorts of little moves to acquire picks and players (trade campbell, landry, carter, rogers, mcintosh, portis, etc.). Since plan A hasnt worked thus far, the skins moved to PLAN B, which was to move Haynesworth as he probably has the value of about all of those guys combined? If the skins can get PLAN A to work before or during the draft, they'll have no need to execute PLAN B?[/quote]

That's a fair assessment. I wouldn't say that Plan B is to trade Haynesworth, but I would say that you're right on Plan A and that Plan A is moving slower than hoped

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;688583]I don't see how you see actively shopping and willing to listen as the same thing. I used the SONAR example earlier (which i wrongly called radar). But let's look at a used car. Say I have a used car, good low mileage good value. Let's say its blue book is 27000. I lose my job and definitely don't want to keep the debt. I vigilantly market it on the web, and will take any offer because I want it off my books. Then a job opens, and I hadn't sold it. Now, I don't go cancel my 1 month ad, and if I get a call at or above blue book value I will listen to the offer, but I will be far less willing to sell just for selling sake.

[B]AH before April 1st was actively on the market from what EVERYONE, including Schefter, says. After we paid the bonus, well yeah everyone knows we will trade him, but now, we want to recoup that bonus in the way of picks, or having Al pay it back, so we aren't selling at the same level we were before.[/B]

I just don't see the difference as semantics as much as a reflection of a shifted attitude or stance in the FO.[/quote]

The unfortunate part of that aspect is AH is not worth the contract that we gave him. Other who were vieing for him in FA got to see how he plays after he's secured a huge payday.

That was the knock on him before he entered the FA market. Now teams are seeing what his competitive reaction is (not coming to camp in shape, taking plays off) after that and that is not conducive to a competitive team.

Other teams basically got to see us putt first and got to see our lie to the hole after we signed AH and had him play for us for a year. His fair market value has plummeted since and I don't see the Skins coming away with more than a 2nd round pick for him.


That may seem like peanuts after what Snyder paid him but that's what happens when you don't have a General Manager with foresight that's responsible for organizing the team to be competitive for years beyond the current.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;688583]I don't see how you see actively shopping and willing to listen as the same thing. I used the SONAR example earlier (which i wrongly called radar). But let's look at a used car. Say I have a used car, good low mileage good value. Let's say its blue book is 27000. I lose my job and definitely don't want to keep the debt. I vigilantly market it on the web, and will take any offer because I want it off my books. Then a job opens, and I hadn't sold it. Now, I don't go cancel my 1 month ad, and if I get a call at or above blue book value I will listen to the offer, but I will be far less willing to sell just for selling sake.

AH before April 1st was actively on the market from what EVERYONE, including Schefter, says. After we paid the bonus, well yeah everyone knows we will trade him, but now, we want to recoup that bonus in the way of picks, or having Al pay it back, so we aren't selling at the same level we were before.

I just don't see the difference as semantics as much as a reflection of a shifted attitude or stance in the FO.[/quote]

While your analogy might apply to someone like Chris Cooley (who hasnt been shopped at all as far as we know), i dont thinkit applies here. [I]Before[/I] word got out that we were actively shopping Haynesworth, I would agree with you. However, as I said before, now that words out, it really doesnt make a difference. In fact, if we really realy want to move haynesworth, the best thing we can do is sit back and see who approaches us. At this point, actively shopping Haynesworth would make us appear desperate and result in us having to accept something far below value for Haynesworth.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=SmootSmack;688588]That's a fair assessment. I wouldn't say that Plan B is to trade Haynesworth, but I would say that you're right on Plan A and that Plan A is moving slower than hoped[/quote]

Ok cool, thanks for the clarification. Either way, it seems like the skins objective is to acquire more draft picks and/or specific players who fit the teams offensive and defensive systems and theyre willing to do go to measures some would consider extreme to accomplish that goal.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;688601]While your analogy might apply to someone like Chris Cooley (who hasnt been shopped at all as far as we know), i dont thinkit applies here. [I]Before[/I] word got out that we were actively shopping Haynesworth, I would agree with you. However, as I said before, now that words out, it really doesnt make a difference. In fact, if we really realy want to move haynesworth, the best thing we can do is sit back and see who approaches us. At this point, actively shopping Haynesworth would make us appear desperate and result in us having to accept something far below value for Haynesworth.[/quote]

I think you're missing the point. Prior to paying him 21M as a bonus, the Skins were actively shopping AH [I]to avoid the huge cash payment[/I]. If we could have made that trade, DS saves 21M. Any team taking him would have to pay the 21M and so he was not particularly attractive financially.

After making the bonus payment (the reason we were shopping him), the impetus to trade him is gone. Now, if someone gives us a call and says "Hey, we'll give you a 2nd for Haynesworth" we'll think about it.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;688629]I think you're missing the point. Prior to paying him 21M as a bonus, the Skins were actively shopping AH [I]to avoid the huge cash payment[/I]. If we could have made that trade, DS saves 21M. Any team taking him would have to pay the 21M and so he was not particularly attractive financially.

After making the bonus payment (the reason we were shopping him), the impetus to trade him is gone. Now, if someone gives us a call and says "Hey, we'll give you a 2nd for Haynesworth" we'll think about it.[/quote]

i think youre missing the point. Neither Shanahan nor Allen were part of the front office that decided to sign Haynesworth. They don't care how much money he's being paid and they got approval from Snyder to do what they wanted, irreguardless of the financial aspect.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;688640]i think youre missing the point. Neither Shanahan nor Allen were part of the front office that decided to sign Haynesworth. They don't care how much money he's being paid and they got approval from Snyder to do what they wanted, [B]irreguardless[/B] of the financial aspect.[/quote]

Love that word. :)

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

They may not care how much he gets paid, but to assert that a 21M payout has no effect on their business decisions seems to be carrying their nonchalance to an extreme.

No, they don't have a vested interest in retaining AH as they aren't the ones who made the financial commitment to him. HOWEVER, it seemed to me that the reports from Schefter and such were that the Skins were shopping him at a bit of discount to avoid the 21M. It seems to me the only actual hard report of the Skins "shopping" AH came before the bonus payout. After the bonus payment, to my knowledge, there hasn't been a single solid report that the Skins have called any one and said - "Hey- will you give us an ____ rounder for AH". Rather, just some odd speculation that he's still available stemming from the Philly offer and AH's dissatisfaction with playng in a 3-4.

That's the point of CRedskins' analogy. We'll trade him for the right offer - but the right offer now is different then the one that would have saved us 21 Million.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

mm can i get a bid here, a bid there, who who who wants to bid, 25 to you sir can I get 30? 30 anyone thirty, thirty to the man with the hat, can I get 35? 35 can I get 35? let me hear 35? Going going gone.

Sold: fat ass overpriced B for 30 cartons of Kool. Please come up and collect your fat assed B.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;688667]They may not care how much he gets paid, but to assert that a 21M payout has no effect on their business decisions seems to be carrying their nonchalance to an extreme.

No, they don't have a vested interest in retaining AH as they aren't the ones who made the financial commitment to him. HOWEVER, it seemed to me that the reports from Schefter and such were that the Skins were shopping him at a bit of discount to avoid the 21M. It seems to me the only actual hard report of the Skins "shopping" AH came before the bonus payout. After the bonus payment, to my knowledge, there hasn't been a single solid report that the Skins have called any one and said - "Hey- will you give us an ____ rounder for AH". Rather, just some odd speculation that he's still available stemming from the Philly offer and AH's dissatisfaction with playng in a 3-4.

That's the point of CRedskins' analogy. We'll trade him for the right offer - but the right offer now is different then the one that would have saved us 21 Million.[/quote]

of course its different. before, we would have had to trade him at a discount, since the team receiving him would have had to pay him an absurd amount of money. now, we can trade him for more, since teams will not have to pay him the 21MM and he'll be extremely affordable for the next 3 years. A cheap team like Tampa or Detroit will most certainly be more interested in him now. Regardless, none of that changes the fact that Shanahan doesnt really want him on the team. If he did, he never would have been shopped in the first place. (the financial side of things works both ways. its a small part of the equation).

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

I hope we don't trade him this season.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=davy;688663]Love that word. :)[/quote]

Ha ha. It is one thing to use a double negative, it is another thing to misspell a double negative!

J/k BHA

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

LOL, i'm off today. i spelled smoot's name incorrectly and i dont think he appreciated it. :)

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;688677]of course its different. before, we would have had to trade him at a discount, since the team receiving him would have had to pay him an absurd amount of money. now, we can trade him for more, since teams will not have to pay him the 21MM and he'll be extremely affordable for the next 3 years. A cheap team like Tampa or Detroit will most certainly be more interested in him now. Regardless, none of that changes the fact that Shanahan doesnt really want him on the team. If he did, he never would have been shopped in the first place. (the financial side of things works both ways. its a small part of the equation).[/quote]

At this point, I am not sure how we disagree. Before bonus, willing to trade at a discount. After bonus, no discount. Both before and after bonus, Shanahan not a big fan of AH and is willing to get rid of him for the right price. Also, before and after bonus, not gonna just give one of the most, if not the most, talented DL player in the league away.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;688691]At this point, I am not sure how we disagree. Before bonus, willing to trade at a discount. After bonus, no discount. Both before and after bonus, Shanahan not a big fan of AH and is willing to get rid of him for the right price. Also, before and after bonus, not gonna just give one of the most, if not the most, talented DL player in the league away.[/quote]

well then i dont know where we truly disagree unless its just in terms of what it'll actually take for us to trade haynesworth. but i'd be shocked if he's on the roster 10 days from now. shanahan wants him gone. ultimately, i'd say if can we get a pick at the top of the 2nd round in 2010 or a 1st rounder in 2011, he's gone.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

Whoa, so let me get this straight. Our coaching staff should stay with the 4-3 to accommodate one guy who's getting attitudinal by the minute? If he can't get on board at any costs --literally and figuratively-- I don't want him on this team. I really don't see what's so hard to see about that. Shanny doesn't like the guy and I'm sure, at this point, the feeling is mutual. If the right deal comes along, let's just cut ties and keep it moving.

Over the past several seasons, the Redskins have had stellar defenses with less talent playing at the DT position. So I'm not buying the hype we should shuffle the deck to keep one guy happy. If Haynesworth wants to be happy, ship his tired ass back to Tennessee. Seriously. I'm really getting sick of this whole story.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=The Goat;688366]Shanny and Bruce seem to already be losing control of the situation. If we can believe earlier reports Albert went into the season (off-season) committing himself to be at the top of his game. I would argue two points: 1) AH at the top of his game is the most dominant defensive player in football 2) that fact should be enough reason to build the effing defense around him i.e. keep the 4-3 and improve on what we've got.

[B]Instead Shanny/Haslett/Allen have decided to force a scheme for which we don't even have the personnel. And because they effed up the trade w/ the Eagles it seems inevitable we'll lose our best player on the roster.[/B]

What is really frustrating about this is the simple fact we're not likely to stick w/ whatever Shanny and Haslett think they're doing anyway. Haslett is a mediocre to sub-par coach. His units have never impressed. And Shanny has a penchant for kicking DCs to the curb even when they perform well (some of his DCs in Denver produced top 10 defenses but still got axed). That's pure ego IMO. So Haslett is likely gone in a year and we start all over again defensively.[/quote] If we trade Haynesworth for peanuts after giving him $30M, then revert back to the 4-3 after a year of spotty results in the 3-4, then Shanahan should have lots of explaining to do.

Haynesworth is what he is - a dominant player when given the freedom to play the way [I][B]he[/B] [/I]wants to, but a pain in the ass if you ask him to do anything outside his comfort zone.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=SouperMeister;688716]If we trade Haynesworth for peanuts after giving him $30M, then revert back to the 4-3 after a year of spotty results in the 3-4, then Shanahan should have lots of explaining to do.

Haynesworth is what he is - a dominant player when given the freedom to play the way [I][B]he[/B] [/I]wants to, but a pain in the ass if you ask him to do anything outside his comfort zone.[/quote]

I agree.
I would rather have a roster full of talented players that make the playoffs more times than not, make an occasional SB and that [B]do not attend [/B]any of the off season voluntary programs than a bunch boyscout type players that get pushed around.
Dave Butz and John Riggins did their own thing, never attended any of the off season programs and they were referred to back them as players that played to the beat of a diffrent drum. Nobody screamed about it because it was ok back then.
Now we got a bunch of whiney coaches and fans that bitch about people that are different.
I am most amazed at some of the misquoted stuff that Haynesworth supposedly said.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

Trading to the Eagles would have been crazy. Trading him if Shanny wants to is cool, but not for a QB, and not when we would have to face him twice a year. He would have killed McNabb, literally.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=diehardskin2982;688678]I hope we don't trade him this season.[/quote]

Amen to that.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=SouperMeister;688716]If we trade Haynesworth for peanuts after giving him $30M, then revert back to the 4-3 after a year of spotty results in the 3-4, then Shanahan should have lots of explaining to do.

Haynesworth is what he is - a dominant player when given the freedom to play the way [I][B]he[/B] [/I]wants to, but a pain in the ass if you ask him to do anything outside his comfort zone.[/quote]

Soup, this doesn't make sense. Shanny should explain what and to [I]whom[/I]? He was bought here to change the culture and assemble a winning organization. If Haynesworth ain't down with that, then he's the one that should be explaining, not the head coach.

As far as Haynesworth being dominant, well, I guess this is where I part ways with most of those who post here. Haynesworth wasn't on the field enough, in my opinion, to be a truly dominant player. I would say he was definitely solid most of the last year and showed flashes here and there, but dominance and consistency go hand in hand in my book.

Shanahan isn't the problem, but it's starting to look like he inherited one.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=SouperMeister;688716]If we trade Haynesworth for peanuts after giving him $30M, then revert back to the 4-3 after a year of spotty results in the 3-4, then Shanahan should have lots of explaining to do.

Haynesworth is what he is - a dominant player when given the freedom to play the way [I][B]he[/B] [/I]wants to, but a pain in the ass if you ask him to do anything outside his comfort zone.[/quote]

Haynesworth likely would be released anyway in 3 more years so its not like we ever viewed him as an integral part of the long-term success of the team. all that being said, i also question the move to the 3-4 to begin with and think this team would be much better off sticking with the 4-3, playing orakpo at DE, and keeping haynesworth. moving to the 3-4 in 2010 strikes me as a stupid move all around, given all the other needs we have on the team. but if we're going to move to a 3-4, i'd rather go ahead and move haynesworth too. i certainly think we could get multiple, less talented players and/or picks out of it.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;688726]Haynesworth likely would be released anyway in 3 more years so its not like we ever viewed him as an integral part of the long-term success of the team. all that being said, [B]i also question the move to the 3-4 to begin with and think this team would be much better off sticking with the 4-3, playing orakpo at DE, and keeping haynesworth. moving to the 3-4 in 2010 strikes me as a stupid move all around, given all the other needs we have on the team. but if we're going to move to a 3-4, i'd rather go ahead and move haynesworth too. i certainly think we could get multiple, less talented players and/or picks out of it.[/B][/quote]

I agree.
This forced move to a 3-4 when our defensive roster is built for a 4-3. We do not have nearly enough quality LB's to play it for a whole season.
I am also not sold on this D-Coordinator. Has he ever had great success anywhere? I am asking because I do not know.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

It's really crazy to me that someone would support AH over MS.

Allen and Shanahan were brought in for a reason, the old way of doing things wasn't working. A new regime needs to do things their way. Just look at the changes made in Denver, first Cutler was shipped out and now Marshall. As great as those guys were for that team in the past, they were simply not a fit for their new direction.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=Mattyk;688728][B]It's really crazy to me that someone would support AH over MS.
[/B]
Allen and Shanahan were brought in for a reason, the old way of doing things wasn't working. A new regime needs to do things their way. Just look at the changes made in Denver, first Cutler was shipped out and now Marshall. As great as those guys were for that team in the past, they were simply not a fit for their new direction.[/quote]

Why did it ever get to this point? Portis has been much more of a malcontent as a Redskin than Haynesworth, but Shanahan did not pick on Portis as he has with Haynesworth. Deciding to workout on his own or voicing his opinion that he would rather not play in a 3-4, but will if asked.....is that worth turning a player into public enemy #1? I really have a problem with coaches that feel they have to publicly make a player out to be the bad guy. Keep it behind closed doors like Patriots do, not in the media.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=Pocket$ $traight;688548]tryfuhl, don't fill the Godzilla haters minds with facts. According to them the only times he stepped on the field he ended the play rolling around on the ground.

He had nothing to do with single handedly stopping the Giants line, fullback and rhinocerous of a runningback on that 4th and one. He also had nothing to do with shutting down Dallas' short yardage plays.[/quote]


You're right but what was the record in those games.
I didn't watch every snap this season, but he did pull up lame quite a bit. Also he missed four games.

When he was on the field, there is no doubt about it he was feared by the opposing team and was a disruptive force.

My 15-20 snaps per game was wrong, here is the official numbers I found while googling for it. 573/795 = 72.1%; 47.8 snaps per game. He is on par with most other DTs for snaps per game. The difference is they are not being paid 100M.

And love Albert or hate him, I am with the Coach first and foremost always.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=Defensewins;688731]Why did it ever get to this point? Portis has been much more of a malcontent as a Redskin than Haynesworth, but Shanahan did not pick on Portis as he has with Haynesworth. Deciding to workout on his own or voicing his opinion that he would rather not play in a 3-4, but will if asked.....is that worth turingin a player in public enemy #1?[/quote]

I don't think it's anything personal, I would guess that even before this offseason workout stuff came up AH was identified as a player to be moved this offseason.

I haven't heard a peep outta Portis lately, have u? He seems to be playing the good soldier routine just fine. Regardless, CP fits in to our plans, AH doesn't.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

How about Haynesworth to the Lions for Gosder Cherilus RT, the Lions 3rd Round Pick #66, and their 2011 3rd Round Pick.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=SkinsfanNTX;688749]How about Haynesworth to the Lions for Gosder Cherilus RT, the Lions 3rd Round Pick #66, and their 2011 3rd Round Pick.[/quote]

I would say keep the player and make those picks 2nd rounders

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=Mattyk;688733]I don't think it's anything personal, I would guess that even before this offseason workout stuff came up AH was identified as a player to be moved this offseason.

I haven't heard a peep outta Portis lately, have u? He seems to be playing the good soldier routine just fine. [B] Regardless, CP fits in to our plans, AH doesn't.[/B][/quote]

In your opinion.
We hear all this big talk about how Shanahan wants to change the culture and piss poor attitude of the players. How is keeping Portis who has a history of being the #1 selfish asshole on our team changing the culture?
Plus Portis has durability issues and possible concussion problems that he has not tested yet, not to mention his huge $10M a year cost. If our front office really thinks Portis fits into our future plans I disagree with them. Portis gives up ans stops running hard when things do not go well.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=Mattyk;688753]I would say keep the player and make those picks 2nd rounders[/quote]


AH is worth at least 2 second rounders for sure.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=Defensewins;688758]In your opinion.
We hear all this big talk about how Shanahan wants to change the culture and piss poor attitude of the players. How is keeping Portis who has a history of being the #1 selfish asshole on our team changing the culture?
Plus Portis has durability issues and possible concussion problems that he has not tested yet, not to mention his huge $10M a year cost. If our front office really thinks Portis fits into our future plans I disagree with them. Portis gives up ans stops running hard when things do not go well.[/quote]

Well I'll trust Shanny when it comes to Portis, he has a history there with him and knows him much better than any of us.

Re: Haynesworth trade possibly in the works
 

[quote=Defensewins;688719]I agree.
I would rather have a roster full of talented players that make the playoffs more times than not, make an occasional SB and that [B]do not attend [/B]any of the off season voluntary programs than a bunch boyscout type players that get pushed around.
Dave Butz and John Riggins did their own thing, never attended any of the off season programs and they were referred to back them as players that played to the beat of a diffrent drum. Nobody screamed about it because it was ok back then.
Now we got a bunch of whiney coaches and fans that bitch about people that are different.
[B]I am most amazed at some of the misquoted stuff that Haynesworth supposedly said.[/quote][/B]

I agree with your comments. I really would like someone to post all the stuff AH has said. Because the only thing being said about AH being uncooperative is by everyone but AH. The last qoute AH said is that he was willing to work with Haslett on his scheme.