This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
When he wants to playThat being said I wonder if the Redskins are up for another in division trade...this time with the G-Men
No he isn't. Everyone already knew his work ethic is questionable. Washington just disregarded that fact, which is no surprise considering their track record of signing free agents.
That's like saying everyone knew Vernon Gholston could be a bust, the Jets just disregarded that fact.
In an uncapped system, I could envision a free-spending team like Washington making a killing on deals like this. Imagine the following completely made-up scenario: Buffalo wants Julius Peppers. Peppers is asking for $10 million a year, but Buffalo's owner is only willing to spend $8 million a year. Buffalo goes to Washington and convinces Washington to sign Peppers to a 6 year, $60 million dollar contract with $12 million in signing bonuses. Buffalo then trades their 2nd round pick to Washington for Peppers. Peppers gets his $10 million a year, Buffalo gets Peppers for $8 million a year, and Washington effectively "buys" a 2nd round draft pick for $12 million.It sounds far-fetched, but to be honest, it wouldn't be the first time that a team effectively "bought" a draft pick for cash considerations. There was a lot of posturing done when Denver traded Plummer to Tampa Bay, but in the end, it essentially just boiled down to Denver trading a cash asset worth a couple million dollars in exchange for a late draft pick.
WTF does Vernon Gholston have to do with Haynesworth?
SSOG talks fancy. He said:In an uncapped year, a team with less money might be tempted to give up a draft pick if they could get free agents cheaper, so a team with lots of money like Washington could do a sign and trade deal for them, paying the guy a big signing bonus, then trading him away.Whoa, that made my head hurt - I'm going to have to take your word that it makes sense.
Chase just likes to talk about the Jets. What he said was:It's wrong to think that rookies are risky and veterans are safe. Big name free agents like Haynesworth can bust just as easily as early draft picks like Gholston.
No it's not. Unlike Gholston, at least everyone has already seen what Haynesworth can do in the NFL in addition to his well known questionable work ethic. There was no NFL track record for Gholston or any other rookie. HTH.
Not so sure...At three years and $16 million, Haynesworth contract is now very tradeable
Since all the big bonus money is reportedly paid, his contract going forward seems very cap friendly although I don't pretend to know the cap ramifications of amortized signing bonuses.
Is he going to offensive lineman u again?
I don't mean to generalize (OK, I am), but Kris Jenkins also had the same label in Carolina and did well with the Jets for almost 2 years (prior to injury). Why he did is the big question. Of course he and haynesworth are individual people, but Jenkins felt a little slighted he was moved and was out to prove something. Haynesworth left on his own accord and cashed in...now who do you think is more "motivated" in that situation??I think if he is dealt, whoever gets him automatically gets better than what he gave in 09 and possibly even a career year.Morale of the story: Motivate the chubby guys.
Andrew Brandt's take was somewhat different. In his opinion, by paying the $21 mil. bonus, the Redskins made Haynesworth untradeable.
It's a fun theory but it's still 12 million dollars which is a lot of money to any businessman.
how was his work ethic questionable heading toward Washington?"Trouble-maker" "rebel rouser" practical joker, wise guy.....the guy is 330 pounds, strong as an ox and fast enough to catch WRs from behind.I don't know the Washington details but followed him in TEN a long time. I have a suspicion Chase is right but for me that's also coaching. They signed a guy coming off one of the most dominant seasons by a defensive player in a long time. What coach in their right mind let's any player (never mind that quality type) become a slacker? No doubt he's a pro and should behave as such and is thus deserving of blame too.Fisher/Schwartz run D was literally funneled to Haynesworth-not just a scheme where teams try to do it like so many do, they did it. Stunts in pass defense were all for his benefit as well. Keep in mind in just one game, rookie(then) Jason Jones had 2.5 sacks and I think a FF in one game replacing Haynesworth when he was hurt in TEN the year before. It's another example of how the D was so perfectly set up to both rely on one key player and to put him into a great opportunity to succeed. Sure Tennessee showed a ton of faith in Albert's abilities by doing that but Washington didn't. There's coddling and taking advantage of someone's talent. I don't think Washington did either.Again he's 330 pounds or so, strong enough to push 3 NFL OL and fast enough to catch Reggie Wayne and Greg Jennings. I have to figure any DL coach worth his salt can use a guy like that in some positive fashion.BTW The Lions have to be called by Washington even if just a courtesy call. They added Vandenbosch and I gotta figure Schwartz wouldn't mind revamping the Lions line into a Titans DL that was outstanding just 2 years ago. If he can build trenches in Detroit, folks will finally start to agree with me that Schwartz is a special coach on his way.
I'd like it too, but do you honestly see it working? He's already irked Shanny by not being at the voluntary workouts (which doesn't bother me since he showed up in person on day 1 to explain his absence later on). Haslett for whatever reason is locked into making the Skins into a 3-4/hybrid D when they have all the pieces in place for a damn good 4-3. Moving to a 3-4 puts Haynesworth either at NT (which he doesn't want to play) or at DE (which isn't a high impact position in the 3-4). It also puts Andre Carter at OLB again where he struggled. It puts Jarmon at either OLB or DE when he's a prototype 4-3 DE and thus wastes the 3rd round pick that was used on him. But back to Haynesworth....He's a bit high maintenance it seems, so I'm sure he's just tickled pink to hear that his name is being floated around out there in trades. Add all that up and I don't see him being very motivated and motivation seems to be one of his biggest problems.
Those were just some numbers I threw out. The market could determine the going rate. Maybe a 2nd round pick would be worth $5 million, while a 1st rounder would retail for $10 million.Remember, Pat Bowlen (one of the NFL owners with the lowest net worth) green lighted a trade that essentially bought a 7th round draft pick for $2 million. Compared to that, paying $5mil or even $10mil for a 2nd rounder is an outright bargain.
I'd take him and I'd still want to go defense with that 2nd pick. Washington's defense with him in it was night and day IMO. They fell apart at the end of the season without him in there, they were much tougher during the middle of the season with him in it. As a Dallas fan, get him out of Washington and back to Tennessee. As a Detroit native and having a love/hate relationship with the Lions, I'd like to see him play in Detroit too but not overpay for him and still get Suh or McCoy in this draft.
The problem I have with that is how long will Haynesworth going to be around for the Lions? Go back and look at last year's Washington Redskins posts, they were ecstatic when they signed Haynesworth and now it looks like he'll be playing for someone else.I don't like making this No. 2 pick based on getting some hired gun who may be gone from here in 1 to 3 years. The Lions aren't going to be title contenders in the next couple years.If they want Okung because they want Okung over Suh or McCoy then so be it. But don't take Okung because you think the jigsaw puzzle is being filled with Hayneworth on defense.Personally I lilke Suh or McCoy and you can sign in Haynesworth to help make the defense stronger now. The Lions have never had a good defense...never. If they really want to make a change, then they need to build a good defense.
If St Louis is really sold on Bradford I think it would be too dangerous to trade down and risk some other team trading up to get in front of them. It would be an interesting strategy if they tried though. The more drama added to the draft the better.If this deal gets done, would Washington attempt to trade up for Suh or McCoy? Couldn't St Louis safely trade down to 4 and still get Bradford?
A lot of the mocks I've read that had the Lions taking Suh stated that Schwartz hadn't had a strong DT like this since Haynesworth in Ten. and would like to have another one. If they managed to pull this off they could get a strong DT and an OT like Okung to protect Stafford. I'd think that Haynesworth would be happier in a 4-3 and the fact that he has a history with Schwartz could help.Still extremely unlikely. I wonder what Washington wants for him?
There's usually a team "out of nowhere" that comes up in these type trades where we all think we "know" Detroit and Ten are likely destinations. I agree doesn't seem like AJ's style.I wouldn't discount Baltimore or Jets(Ryan) as they have hated matching up against Haynesworth for years and clearly appreciate great defensive talent and the need to tailor a scheme to suit. They also have enough vets to blow off any poor behavior and not feel they're impressionable.I'd pencil the Jets in for AFCC if they landed Haynesworth. They could apply pressure to QB so easily and they already cover WRs so well.
I don't believe the Redskins have made no announcements about what D they'll run. Sure, I expect them to run a 3-4, but it hasn't been set in stone yet. Either way, I think Haynesworth could be a good DE in a 3-4.And, Shanahan being irked isn't a big deal, IMO. I'm sure he's been irked many times before in his career and not used that as a reason to trade a player. If they trade Haynesworth, they better get value in return.
Not sure I agree with his take. Here's the applicable quote:
All he's saying is that the Redskins won't pay him $21 million and than trade him. Although if they wanted to trade him, they would have obviously preferred to do so before the bonus was paid, but if the Redskins can recoup what they see as "value" in return (be it in a player, good draft picks, or even some of the $$$$) he is a very tradable commodity at a relatively reasonable contract.
Regarding the $21 million already paid, IMO there's no way the Skins move Big Al without him paying back a signifcant amount of that bonus.Avery said:
Hi Avery.So it's a cap friendlier contract potentially at this point afterall then?Avery said:
I don't see any way he'd pay money back. He has no need to. He'll report to mandatory practices and will play where they put him. If they want to go out of their way to make him miserable to try to get some $$$ back they'll just be hurting the team.If they can get value for him in a trade, fine. But they should forget about getting back money they paid.
Do you think he worth that much? I don't think Washington will get at first for him. Shaun Rogers was traded to Cleveland for 3rd and Leigh Bodden.
