Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

People are really worried about his 20 snaps a game 2x a year against us??

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Mattyk;810362]People are really worried about his 20 snaps a game 2x a year against us??[/quote]

Its more of an image and pride thing, for our organization. It makes us look foolish and sheds poor light upon us if Haynesworth is able to dominate us. I think that will affect our locker room, our faith in our management, and our potential future free agents. They might say "haynesworth did great elsewhere, the redskins hold you back."

And yes I don't want to see Haynesworth get his revenge on us.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

I don't think Albert has a helluva lot left, honestly. But all he has to do is get up and play for two games a season, and we'd be end for a world of "YOU SEE, THE REDSKINS MISHANDLED HIM!" from media and the fanbase a like.

I mean personally, I think Trent could just wave a Big Mac in front of Albert's face and throw it before every snap and Albert would chase after it, essentially taking him out of the game. But I don't know what the teams Big Mac budget is.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Mattyk;810362]People are really worried about his 20 snaps a game 2x a year against us??[/quote]

No, I'm not. But I'm still with Schneed. I'm worried about his possible dominance in 16 games for a division rival.

I say trade him to DT-hungry Denver for anything you can get. Anything. A conditional 7th round pick if need be. Then he's off the team but he's not tearing it up in Philly or for some other close competitor.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=skinster;810364]Its more of an image and pride thing, for our organization. It makes us look foolish and sheds poor light upon us if Haynesworth is able to dominate us. I think that will affect our locker room, our faith in our management, and our potential future free agents. They might say "haynesworth did great elsewhere, the redskins hold you back."

And yes I don't want to see Haynesworth get his revenge on us.[/quote]

Players go to other teams all the time and play well. I don't see AH going somewhere else and playing well having any sort of huge impact on us at all, at least not how you have described.

Having him on our team already impacts the locker room, faith in management, etc.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Lotus;810366]No, I'm not. But I'm still with Schneed. I'm worried about his possible dominance in 16 games for a division rival.

I say trade him to DT-hungry Denver for anything you can get. Anything. A conditional 7th round pick if need be. Then he's off the team but he's not tearing it up in Philly or for some other close competitor.[/quote]

I'm all for sending Haynesworth to Denver too. Let him suck wind in the thin Colorado air.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Mattyk;810367]Players go to other teams all the time and play well. I don't see AH going somewhere else and playing well having any sort of huge impact on us at all, at least not how you have described.

Having him on our team already impacts the locker room, faith in management, etc.[/quote]

I guess all this disagreeing comes down to is I think Haynesworth will be a dominant force (especially if he is an eagle with washburn as his coach), and you do not think he will be effective enough to embarrass us.

I don't want him on our team, but we can keyshawn his ass and sit him a year and just not have a 53rd player (which looking at our roster, really won't be that big a deal. Or he can buy his way out of the contract by returning 16 mil of the bonus money if he is that unhappy being sat. No distraction has to be made if he is not there.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;810349]Essentially, we're handing him a roster spot while someone competing their ass off to make the team doesn't because of Feigner's shit. I have a problem with that.[/quote]

A roster spot that won't be used anyway. The full team isn't active on game days so you essentially have guys that are collecting spots on a team that aren't being used. Why not sit his fat ass down and show him and other would be free agents that you aren't coming to DC with this kind of act.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Mattyk;810362]People are really worried about his 20 snaps a game 2x a year against us??[/quote]

If he gets into a 4-3 with his old defensive line coach, he would be on the field for a lot more than 20 snaps a game because he would actually buy into the defense and would embrace his role.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

More on the moron:

[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/crime-scene/post/prosecutors-could-call-10-witnesses-in-haynesworth-sex-abuse-trial/2011/07/11/gIQAyCRA9H_blog.html]Prosecutors could call 10 witnesses in Haynesworth sex abuse trial - Crime Scene - The Washington Post[/url]

Prosecutors had offered to dismiss the sexual abuse charge if Haynesworth would plead guilty to simple assault, but Bolden rejected the deal, saying his client was innocent.

Haynesworth was absent at Monday’s hearing, the second time he has not attended hearings in the case. Haynesworth was also absent from a May hearing, although the judge overseeing that hearing agreed with Bolden’s request to waive his client’s appearance.

Haynesworth’s absence Monday seemed to anger Wynn, who chided Bolden for “making assumptions” that it would be permissible for Haynesworth not to be there.

After the hearing, Bolden said he was surprised by the number of witnesses the government plans to call in its case. “They overcharged it and they are now going to over-try it,” he said.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

He's not going to get many snaps in any kind of defense if he's suspended for half the season.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Schneed10;810381]If he gets into a 4-3 with his old defensive line coach, he would be on the field for a lot more than 20 snaps a game because he would actually buy into the defense and would embrace his role.[/quote]

Plus it is not just the snaps that he would have against us. If he is making another rival better over 16 games, that works out poorly for us.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=NC_Skins;810380]A roster spot that won't be used anyway. The full team isn't active on game days so you essentially have guys that are collecting spots on a team that aren't being used. [B]Why not sit his fat ass down and show him and other would be free agents that you aren't coming to DC with this kind of act.[/B][/quote]

This is the most stupid argument people make about the Haynesworth situation. We're not some freaking school or reformatory that teaches undisciplined players a lesson. We just need to stop getting morons like Haynesworth on our team. And we got rid of the dumba$$ that used to sign players like Haynesworth.

I don't get this hard on people have about "teaching him a lesson." Sh*t, did we teach Brandon Lloyd a lesson? There have been a number of free agents that cost us money/picks, who came here and didn't do squat. And they are gone.

And for the people that keep bringing Keyshawn's name. He was suspended for the last 7 games of the 2003 season. And you know what happened next? HE WAS GONE. They traded his a$$ to Dallas the following March.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Ruhskins;810418]This is the most stupid argument people make about the Haynesworth situation. We're not some freaking school or reformatory that teaches undisciplined players a lesson. We just need to stop getting morons like Haynesworth on our team. And we got rid of the dumba$$ that used to sign players like Haynesworth.

I don't get this hard on people have about "teaching him a lesson." Sh*t, did we teach Brandon Lloyd a lesson? There have been a number of free agents that cost us money/picks, who came here and didn't do squat. And they are gone.

And for the people that keep bringing Keyshawn's name. He was suspended for the last 7 games of the 2003 season. And you know what happened next? HE WAS GONE. They traded his a$$ to Dallas the following March.[/quote]

I wonder if you would feel this way had you paid him the 40 million. I bet your opinion would be different. This isn't about teaching anyone a lesson. It's about money. The Redskins want a return on the 40 million. They don't want AH to leave town and get another big contract w/out getting something back. None of the other guys you mentioned got this kind of dough. I can't blame the Redskins for dragging this out. The fans and media are making this out to be a bigger deal than it really is.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=skinsfan69;810421]I wonder if you would feel this way had you paid him the 40 million. I bet your opinion would be different. This isn't about teaching anyone a lesson. It's about money. The Redskins want a return on the 40 million. They don't want AH to leave town and get another big contract w/out getting something back. None of the other guys you mentioned got this kind of dough. I can't blame the Redskins for dragging this out. The fans and media are making this out to be a bigger deal than it really is.[/quote]

I would probably feel this way, if AH had been a model player when he was with the Titans, but he wasn't. He was a trouble maker, yet the team decided to pay him $40 mil. Now, I understand an argument about the team wanting to get something in return. And the team should trade him to the team that gives us the best compensation. But as I said, I don't get the whole "let's teach him a lesson" or "we need to set an example to other FA" or "this is a changing culture" crap.

The team has made a myriad of costly mistakes in the past, right up until last year when they wasted two draft picks on McNabb. The only way things are going to change for the Redskins is for management to make sound decisions, do their homework with FA, and stay away from troublemakers.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=skinsfan69;810421]I wonder if you would feel this way had you paid him the 40 million. I bet your opinion would be different. This isn't about teaching anyone a lesson. [B]It's about money. The Redskins want a return on the 40 million.[/B] They don't want AH to leave town and get another big contract w/out getting something back. None of the other guys you mentioned got this kind of dough. I can't blame the Redskins for dragging this out. The fans and media are making this out to be a bigger deal than it really is.[/quote]

How are we getting our money's worth if AH is on the bench or pouting on the field?

We simply aren't going to get our money's worth from him.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

For me it's not about teaching a lesson or about the money (the money is a sunk cost). It's simply about the fact that he carries a low salary cap charge, I don't want him on another team, and I remain convinced that he'll reach a point where the quest for more money will motivate him to get his ass in gear again.

I could care less about the 53rd roster spot we'd gain by cutting him, that's not going to be an impact player no matter what. Haynesworth, however, might be.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

Any emotional argument is bogus. Whether it's because you hate him for being a piece of shit and don't want to see him paid another red cent, or because you want to see him taught a lesson and rot on the bench, or because you're principled and don't want to let him get away with this crap.

All of those arguments are meaningless. The smart decision makers set emotions aside and make the decision based on what's best for the organization/country/team/company [B]going forward[/B].

The bottom line is Haynesworth still has the capability to be dominant. You don't have to cater to him, he'll come around when he wants another big payday. Either that, or get a high pick for him in a trade where you can send him out of our division. Either is a decision that is most likely to positively impact the Redskins on a go-forward basis.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Schneed10;810425]For me it's not about teaching a lesson or about the money (the money is a sunk cost). It's simply about the fact that he carries a low salary cap charge, I don't want him on another team, and I remain convinced that he'll reach a point where the quest for more money will motivate him to get his ass in gear again.

I could care less about the 53rd roster spot we'd gain by cutting him, that's not going to be an impact player no matter what. Haynesworth, however, might be.[/quote]

See your argument makes sense, personally I doubt it would happen, but it makes sense. I just gave up on this guy a long time ago. I think it would be great if he can come to his senses and dominate, but I just don't think that will happen. Especially if he gets suspended, although I don't think we're going to hear about this anytime soon. The league has wayyy to many priorities to be worrying about this moron.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Ruhskins;810418]This is the most stupid argument people make about the Haynesworth situation. We're not some freaking school or reformatory that teaches undisciplined players a lesson. We just need to stop getting morons like Haynesworth on our team. And we got rid of the dumba$$ that used to sign players like Haynesworth.

I don't get this hard on people have about "teaching him a lesson." Sh*t, did we teach Brandon Lloyd a lesson? There have been a number of free agents that cost us money/picks, who came here and didn't do squat. And they are gone.

And for the people that keep bringing Keyshawn's name. He was suspended for the last 7 games of the 2003 season. And you know what happened next? HE WAS GONE. They traded his a$$ to Dallas the following March.[/quote]

He was gone only because they didn't give him 21 million dollars and then have him turn around and renig on his word to do what the coaches asked him to do.

This isn't about "punishing" Fat Albert or teaching him a lesson (he'll never get it). This is about changing the culture. I'm fine with sitting the fat ass on the bench. We've shown to many guys in the league that Washington is the place to come to get paid big, but perform little. No more. It has to start at some point.

Many of you fans cried and cried for a culture change. Well, you got it, and now you are bitching? Worse than Dan Snyder IMO.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=NC_Skins;810435]He was gone only because they didn't give him 21 million dollars and then have him turn around and renig on his word to do what the coaches asked him to do.

This isn't about "punishing" Fat Albert or teaching him a lesson (he'll never get it). This is about changing the culture. I'm fine with sitting the fat ass on the bench. We've shown to many guys in the league that Washington is the place to come to get paid big, but perform little. No more. It has to start at some point.

Many of you fans cried and cried for a culture change. Well, you got it, and now you are bitching? Worse than Dan Snyder IMO.[/quote]

A true culture change would mean that he is GONE.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Lotus;810424]How are we getting our money's worth if AH is on the bench or pouting on the field?

We simply aren't going to get our money's worth from him.[/quote]

Perhaps he'll realize that he's not going anywhere, man up, start acting like a pro, have some pride and play up to his capabilities.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Schneed10;810426]Any emotional argument is bogus. Whether it's because you hate him for being a piece of shit and don't want to see him paid another red cent, or because you want to see him taught a lesson and rot on the bench, or because you're principled and don't want to let him get away with this crap.

All of those arguments are meaningless. The smart decision makers set emotions aside and make the decision based on what's best for the organization/country/team/company [B]going forward[/B].

The bottom line [B]is Haynesworth still has the capability to be dominant.[/B] You don't have to cater to him, he'll come around when he wants another big payday. Either that, or get a high pick for him in a trade where you can send him out of our division. Either is a decision that is most likely to positively impact the Redskins on a go-forward basis.[/quote]

After watching this bum for two years I'm not so sure of that. He makes a great play and follows it up with 2-3 bad ones, gets tired or hurt and leaves the game. If I were them I'd just put his worthless ass in or passing situations, use him like they did Jumpy Geathers back in the early 90's.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

Stainsworth has made a mockery of NFL contracts and of organizational and coaching authority.
I hope Roger G has seen this and gives this bum the maximum suspension possible.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Schneed10;810381]If he gets into a 4-3 with his old defensive line coach, he would be on the field for a lot more than 20 snaps a game because he would actually buy into the defense and would embrace his role.[/quote]


That's not true. That same defensive coach has been on record as saying that Albert never bought into the scheme or did what they asked him in Tennessee. He finally took Albert and pretty much let him free lance and get after the QB. Basically he just wants to rush the passer and jump gaps.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Schneed10;809918]I don't agree. If he continues to be non-compliant we should have the legal discourse to retain his contract while deactivating him from the 53-man roster. I don't think our options are limited to:

- Keeping him and paying him
- Releasing or trading him

We should be able to Keyshawn his ass if he's not living up to his contract. I doubt any mediator would side with Haynesworth in a situation where he's knowingly and purposely not doing what he's told.

It's in our best interests to keep him and let him come around. What's he going to do, pout forever? Eventually, once you realized you had no option, wouldn't you want to make an impact again? If he continues to be a non-compliant piece of junk you Keyshawn him and get him out of your locker room. But you don't have to give him away for nothing.[/quote]



Unless the new CBA has new provisions allowing a team to "Keyshawn a player's ass" for more than 4 games, that option will not be open to the Redskins.

That issue has been decided by an arbitrator back about 2007...

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Alvin Walton;810444]Stainsworth has made a mockery of NFL contracts and of organizational and coaching authority.
I hope Roger G has seen this and gives this bum the maximum suspension possible.[/quote]

The stupidity of the situation has to belong to the side of the table that handed $21M to the other side of the table believing that someone who has been a trouble-maker and a spoiled brat all of his career was about to change his stripes and become a sacrificing team-player.

The mockery belongs with the guys who handed over the $21M.

The scorn for being an a$$hole belongs with AH...

[QUOTE=sportscurmudgeon;810460]The stupidity of the situation has to belong to the side of the table that handed $21M to the other side of the table believing that someone who has been a trouble-maker and a spoiled brat all of his career was about to change his stripes and become a sacrificing team-player.

The mockery belongs with the guys who handed over the $21M.

The scorn for being an a$$hole belongs with AH...[/QUOTE]

This.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

You can't receive a comp pick if you release a guy in the midst of his contract and he goes somewhere else and has a monster year for them can you?

I wouldn't release him as long as he has trade value though. If I were in the 'Skins FO, I'd make a trade based upon us receiving a conditional draft pick depending on how he plays on his new team. If he plays poorly, we receive a 4th. If he plays good but not great, we receive a 3rd. If he becomes dominant and plays a bunch of snaps and makes the Pro Bowl, we get the 2nd we're looking for. I think that would be fair to both teams, and odds are we won't get a 2nd for him anyways unless teams get into a bidding war with each other, which sounds unlikely.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Ruhskins;809820]I thought that this had been reported before.

Regardless, I would say that the Redskins will find a market for him. It is to their benefit to have stories like this out there, so teams won't wait out for him to get cut. But at the same time, the Redskins need to be flexible on the price. Honestly, his best destination will likely be Denver, since they are in desperate need of a 4-3 DT. If Philadelphia offers the best price, then I say deal him.[/quote]


That is nuts to give him to Philly. Knowing our luck he will get a fire under his ass whenever he plays us and buries whoever is our QB that Sunday.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;810460]The stupidity of the situation has to belong to the side of the table that handed $21M to the other side of the table believing that someone who has been a trouble-maker and a spoiled brat all of his career was about to change his stripes and become a sacrificing team-player.

The mockery belongs with the guys who handed over the $21M.

The scorn for being an a$$hole belongs with AH...[/quote]


Exactly, Vinny and Danny were on crack when they came up with that contract. Took millions away from our cap for years. Money that could have helped get us some younger, more hungry FAs.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=Schneed10;810426]
All of those arguments are meaningless. The smart decision makers set emotions aside and make the decision based on what's best for the organization/country/team/company [B]going forward[/B].


The bottom line is Haynesworth still has the capability to be dominant. You don't have to cater to him, he'll come around when he wants another big payday. Either that, or get a high pick for him in a trade where you can send him out of our division. Either is a decision that is most likely to positively impact the Redskins on a go-forward basis.[/quote]

It's all about the odds of 2 or 4 regular season games in the next couple of seasons, a draft pick, and a current roster spot then. Well, management also needs to appraise his[I] likely [/I]contributions if he were to stay.

My counteropinion is that two potential regular games lost and missing out on him "dominating" for us is not worth the roster spot, especially for a short term asset like Haynesworth currently is.

Every team who wants to "buy" AH is going to assess the risk of him not playing up to his capabilities, whatever they are. The question they would as is "what's the probability that he's going to be Mr. Dominant vs the probability that he's going to be Mr. Lemon"? Mr. Dominant will provide much utility/benefit while Mr. Phat will provide almost nothing. I don't see the chances of AH being that high that he will dominate for us because he soured the relationship with his coaches so badly. In numbers, Albert Haynesworth is capable of providing 10 utility units, but the probability of that happening is likely low. So, the expected value is of utility units is lower than his capable utility.
Also, if he were such a "guaranteed" superstar, then that 2nd round price Shanahan set would have been paid a long time ago. But hell, even the Titans and Jeff Fisher didn't want to cough up the goods.

Another matter is how long he is going affect other teams in the league. Albert Haynesworth is on the wrong side of 30 and has NEVER been durable enough to last a whole season. With his style of play, he is going to get a lot of wear and tear on his body, and his natural abilities are going to fade away.
Not only that, if he does have an impact year next year and helps the Eagles sweep us, we get to pick higher in the draft, which means a better selection of players who might contribute to use beyond the next 3 years. I think 33 years is a safe estimate of when he will no long be dominant.


Then there's the muddy waters of how much he directly hurts this team. If he goes to the Eagles, there are two games that they might win thanks to him. Then again, we might split the series even with him there or even sweep them. But, you then have to consider that "Mr. Dominant" also hurts every other team in the league.

So in short, "smart" decision makers would evaluate just how likely each of the scenarios regarding AH is going to happen, how long will impact last, and how "strong" the impact is.
I wouldn't feel bad about Haynesworth leaving dominating, because gambling that he might fail or his impact on the Redskins minimal is far more likely than having him return to being a "superstar". AH gives a new meaning to the word stupid; even if he wants the carrot at the end of the maze, will he figure out how to get there again? I doubt it. If they're really scared of him going to Philly, then lower the damn price ship him off to an some AFC team so that he gets to hurt us directly for one or none games.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;810460]The stupidity of the situation has to belong to the side of the table that handed $21M to the other side of the table believing that someone who has been a trouble-maker and a spoiled brat all of his career was about to change his stripes and become a sacrificing team-player.

The mockery belongs with the guys who handed over the $21M.

The scorn for being an a$$hole belongs with AH...[/quote]

I don't kow. I wouldn't say all that. I wanted him, I was glad they picked him up. I was all excited about how our defense would roll over other teams with him on it. Then after he showed up to a 4-3 team of which he wanted he decides he does not like how strict and rigid Blache's scheme is and speaks out against it, complains, takes plays off, so on and so forth. Then the whole coaching staff gets changed as well as the scheme to a 3-4 and he pouts and complains all offseason. Given the opportunity to simply not accept the money and request a trade or to be cut he decides to take the money as if he has decided to go along with the program. Yet he chooses not to participate in OTA's, shows up out of shape, kept cutting his own work load, then got benched.

I do not fault the people handing over the $21 mill I fault the player for taking the money with the understanding he is to perform then refuses to perform.

I guess it goes back to a big issue.... a team can cut a player at any given time, even though they will have to pay a portion of his salary for future years but what can a player do if he's unhappy? All he can do is become a problem big enough for the team to want to trade or cut him. Which is what AH is doing. He should never have accepted the money. Right now I'd make darn sure I had one spot for him just to be on the team and ride the bench all year. Activate him but don't use him. Only carry 2 QB's, cut down on the number of RB's, where ever you need to cut but AH would be riding the pine all year unless the Eagles want to give up a 2nd round draft pick and a conditional 3rd. ;) paybacks are a biotch.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;810472]Exactly, Vinny and Danny were on crack when they came up with that contract.[B] Took millions away from our cap for years. [/B]Money that could have helped get us some younger, more hungry FAs.[/quote]

He has only been here 2 yrs..... right? Plus I keep hearing how he's not effecting the cap all that much this year or whatever years are left on his contract which is why many people think we should just find a way to keep him.

I'll agree with you though we should have been getting younger a long time ago like back in 2002. Instead each year we kept bringing in older vets at each position.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;810478]It's all about the odds of 2 or 4 regular season games in the next couple of seasons, a draft pick, and a current roster spot then. Well, management also needs to appraise his[I] likely [/I]contributions if he were to stay.

[B]My counteropinion is that two potential regular games lost and missing out on him "dominating" for us is not worth the roster spot, especially for a short term asset like Haynesworth currently is.[/B]

Every team who wants to "buy" AH is going to assess the risk of him not playing up to his capabilities, whatever they are. The question they would as is "what's the probability that he's going to be Mr. Dominant vs the probability that he's going to be Mr. Lemon"? Mr. Dominant will provide much utility/benefit while Mr. Phat will provide almost nothing. I don't see the chances of AH being that high that he will dominate for us because he soured the relationship with his coaches so badly. In numbers, Albert Haynesworth is capable of providing 10 utility units, but the probability of that happening is likely low. So, the expected value is of utility units is lower than his capable utility.
Also, if he were such a "guaranteed" superstar, then that 2nd round price Shanahan set would have been paid a long time ago. But hell, even the Titans and Jeff Fisher didn't want to cough up the goods.

Another matter is how long he is going affect other teams in the league. Albert Haynesworth is on the wrong side of 30 and has NEVER been durable enough to last a whole season. With his style of play, he is going to get a lot of wear and tear on his body, and his natural abilities are going to fade away.
Not only that, if he does have an impact year next year and helps the Eagles sweep us, we get to pick higher in the draft, which means a better selection of players who might contribute to use beyond the next 3 years. I think 33 years is a safe estimate of when he will no long be dominant.


Then there's the muddy waters of how much he directly hurts this team. If he goes to the Eagles, there are two games that they might win thanks to him. Then again, we might split the series even with him there or even sweep them. But, you then have to consider that "Mr. Dominant" also hurts every other team in the league.

So in short, "smart" decision makers would evaluate just how likely each of the scenarios regarding AH is going to happen, how long will impact last, and how "strong" the impact is.
I wouldn't feel bad about Haynesworth leaving dominating, because gambling that he might fail or his impact on the Redskins minimal is far more likely than having him return to being a "superstar". AH gives a new meaning to the word stupid; even if he wants the carrot at the end of the maze, will he figure out how to get there again? I doubt it. If they're really scared of him going to Philly, then lower the damn price ship him off to an some AFC team so that he gets to hurt us directly for one or none games.[/quote]

If your refering to trading him to the Eagles? I'm not scared of him and I think we of all teams would know his weakness's. I'd trade him to them in a heartbeat for the right price.

BUT, I wouldn't give him away or cut him simply to rid the team of a malcontent. He was paid $32 mill to do a job for which he CHOSE not to do. For that reason alone I'd make his life miserable, suit him up every Sun., and sit him on the bench to watch the game. He would have a few options, sit on the bench and stew all year long listening to fans ridicule him from othe sidelines, or he can decide to play ball and request to get more playing time in the 3-4 defense he hates soo much, or he can pay back a large portion if not the whole portion and request a trade.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

He has only been with us for a couple years, but that money wasted will affect us for longer. Sure you say it might not affect us all that much, but still we signed him to a $100 millioin contract over 4 years, with a big chunk that was up front. Think of that money that could have been spent filling multiple gaps in the offensive line, maybe sign some younger FAs for depth at DB or WR. The AH move isn't as bad as say the Heath Shuler disaster, but it probably ranks as the #2 disaster of the past 20 years.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;810483]He has only been with us for a couple years, but that money wasted will affect us for longer. Sure you say it might not affect us all that much, but still we signed him to a $100 millioin contract over 4 years, with a big chunk that was up front. Think of that money that could have been spent filling multiple gaps in the offensive line, maybe sign some younger FAs for depth at DB or WR. The AH move isn't as bad as say the Heath Shuler disaster, but it probably ranks as the #2 disaster of the past 20 years.[/quote]


Totally agree with you, but he's here and we can't go back and change the past. So lets somewhat forget that the mistake was made to pick him up for such a high cost and look to what we have, a player who is only making what just about all the other players are making for the remaining portion of his contract. Which in comparison is supposedly not that big a deal.

The issue I have is he accepted the $32 mill. Not for free but to perform whatever task was asked of him. and he chose not to uphold his part of the bargin/contract. In VA thats a type of fraud. You get paid to perform a service and you don't do the work that you were paid to do. If the team has no recourse in getting the money back then let him rot on the bench and not play.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=SBXVII;810482]If your refering to trading him to the Eagles? I'm not scared of him and I think we of all teams would know his weakness's. I'd trade him to them in a heartbeat for the right price.

BUT, I wouldn't give him away or cut him simply to rid the team of a malcontent. He was paid $32 mill to do a job for which he CHOSE not to do. For that reason alone I'd make his life miserable, suit him up every Sun., and sit him on the bench to watch the game. He would have a few options, sit on the bench and stew all year long listening to fans ridicule him from othe sidelines, or he can decide to play ball and request to get more playing time in the 3-4 defense he hates soo much, or he can pay back a large portion if not the whole portion and request a trade.[/quote]Philly is the worst-case scenario of AH directly affecting our wins and losses. With Casey Rabach as the center, AH is rather capable of screwing us. But then again, they swept us last year easy-peasy without him...

Letting him stew on the bench makes it harder to trade him. Thus, more likely than not, we'll eventually have to make a choice between letting him go for cheap or for free if we choose that route. Teams are going to say "it's too risky for us to pay for a volatile player like him, lower the price or no deal". Major character flaws, needs "babying", and even when "motivated", he's prone to embellishing injuries to take plays off. [B] If[/B] someone actually does pay the 2nd rounder, I'll be happy as anyone, but I'm certainly NOT counting on that happening, especially with what he's done.
AH is like a junk bond. You're going to say "wow, look his [I]potential return[/I]", but once that bond issuer defaults and can't pay you anything, you're going to say "$#@!"

Actually, for someone as capable of Haynesworth, I'm surprised no rumors of teams offering a 1st for him ever surfaced. Goes to show how teams view him. They're scared to take him for too much due to fear of the "lemon" Haynesworth.

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=SirClintonPortis;810487]Philly is the worst-case scenario of AH directly affecting our wins and losses. With Casey Rabach as the center, AH is rather capable of screwing us. But then again, they swept us last year easy-peasy without him...[/quote]

The Eagles swept us?

Huh...I guess that whole Week 5 "Donovan gets his revenge" thing was a mirage...

Re: Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth
 

[quote=NLC1054;810488]The Eagles swept us?

Huh...I guess that whole Week 5 "Donovan gets his revenge" thing was a mirage...[/quote]
Whoops.

But the second game was so bad, it could count as two games. It was "Historic", mate, HISTORIC, I tell you!!!!! :D

Oh, and Lady Luck was good to us. Jason Avant, the new dropaholic receiver to laugh at.