Haynesworth: Dumb as a Brick?

[Rymanofthenorth]

We are the best amateur team in canada bar none. the only time we havent won national Championships since ive been with the Pack was when we suffered serious injuries to key players (our only real weakness is lack of depth). we dominate our league and we have been equal to teams from cities three times our size.

I was given invites to camps but the pay for a canadian lineman in canada at the time was far less than I made in the oilfield.

but you could be right, if we practiced more we would be better, but its our talent that wins us games.

 

[riggins44]

I think Cerrato was the one dumb as a brick. From what I've read he pushed to get Big Al. Cerrato set this team back years with way he built the team.

I have to agree with El. Would not be at all surprised to see Haynesworth on the team next year.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

going after AH was not a bad move, getting him was not a bad move, both were actually solid moves, however making promises that werent kept and alienating him, then hiring an offensive head coach who completely changed a decade of running the same base defence was not really a very good move (that could change, we all remain hopefull.)

 

[Elephant]

going after AH was not a bad move, getting him was not a bad move, both were actually solid moves, however making promises that werent kept and alienating him, then hiring an offensive head coach who completely changed a decade of running the same base defence was not really a very good move (that could change, we all remain hopefull.)

Most people will say it's a bad move because they have the advantage of looking back on it in retrospect. I remember a few outcries when he was signed. I was indifferent. I was excited with his potential! I was concerned what player would show up.

Early on in his first season with us, it was apparent we had a beast. Then I went to a few games and saw him perform live. That is when I finally got to see what I had been hearing, but couldn't see because the film didn't show it.

He was lazy! He half-assed it a lot more than he gave his all. Like I have told you in the past, you gain a much better understanding of a player when you watch them live. He gave 50%.

Then of course there was this year. I won't get into that, it has been discussed ad nauseum.

It comes down to the philosophy you have brought up in another thread that we have touched upon here. A player with a chip on his shoulder who gives 50% is not worth having on the team if it disrupts the rest of the team. Moral, Ryman. Moral is the one thing you seem to disregard when talking about an individuals ability as opposed to hard work.

You're correct when you say Gholston is no Albert Haynesworth and no amount of practice will change that. But you fail to see it the way others do because you have an Albert Hayesworth philosophy style. But, Anthony Bryant was way more productive than Albert Haynesworth for the last 4 games of the season. It doesn't matter what you feel about the coach's decision, Bryant was more productive, bottom line. No, coulda, woulda, shoulda's...the cold hard fact is that Bryant was more productive those last 4 games.

In retrospect, it was a bad move to sign Albert Haynesworth. Not because Shanahan handled him incorrectly, but because Cerrato had a history of not doing his homework and this club has a culture that an undiscliplined player like Al could not succeed in.

Could this have been different? I think if Tampa had signed Al, I think it could have been a lot different. Al got caught up in Shanahan trying to change the culture at Redskins' Park.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

morale is important, but are you saying our morale was improved by a coach who lied to players, picked favourites, picked scapegoats and made obviously poor decisions?

yes Bryant was more productive, than ah, he was more productive because he is a NT type, and he was playing NT in a scheme that needed a NT, oddly enough that defence was also far worse than the 4-3 we ran last year with AH playing somewhat out of position and two gapping, and FAR FAR worse than the attacking defence that AH played in in tenn. the cold hard fact is that we dropped from 10 running a non aggressive scheme that wasnt using our best player to is maximum, to 31 running an ill suited abortion of a scheme that actually hindered our best players and resulted in ah being on the bench more than the field.

in hindsight it was a bad move because we failed to use him properly, failed to keep even marginally happy and failed because he isnt the only good player who was wasted because of this, the biggest hindsight should be that we shouldnt have gone 3-4.

I see your argument, but I personally would rather win with jerks (not criminals mind you) than lose with nice guys.

 

[Elephant]

morale is important, but are you saying our morale was improved by a coach who lied to players, picked favourites, picked scapegoats and made obviously poor decisions?

The answer to this question is a resounding YES! The overhwelming majority of the players asked during camp last year said they were glad to see Shanahan instill more discipline!

yes Bryant was more productive, than ah, he was more productive because he is a NT type,

No! He was more productive because he was on the field! Why would you suggest it is anything else? In the last 4 games of the year, AH was suspended for his actions detrimental to the team! Bryant was on the field because he worked hard all season to overcome his deficiencies.

in hindsight it was a bad move because we failed to use him properly, failed to keep even marginally happy and failed because he isnt the only good player who was wasted because of this, the biggest hindsight should be that we shouldnt have gone 3-4.

You know I agree with the 3-4 argument, but the move was bad because the risk with AH was too high. Now, I can say that in hind sight, but the fact remains, AH's attitude is the reason he was an unsuccessful risk.

I see your argument, but I personally would rather win with jerks (not criminals mind you) than lose with nice guys.

Umm...when was the last time we won with jerks? Because it hasn't happened in my lifetime!

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

I think if you spoke to those players now after this season you would get a different answer, as someone else said, winning makes everything better, losing makes everything worse.

he was more productive obviously because he was on the field more, but he was also used correctly, if we tried to use him as a 3 tech you would easily see my point.

My argument isnt that the AH deal worked out, it obviously didnt and saying otherwise would be foolishness on the level of Lanky saying the 3-4 wasnt a mistake this year, the facts say otherwise, however saying that it easily could have worked had we not done things so stupidly is also a decent argument. even had he tried to play NT he wouldnt have put up very good numbers, thats also pretty much a given.

late eighties, Manley wasnt exactly a character guy El.

 

[Elephant]

late eighties, Manley wasnt exactly a character guy El.

Dexter Manley had a problem with drugs, and he was subsequently released. Albert Haynesworth does not equate to Dexter. Player with a with loss of moral compass due to his disease vs. ***hole who cares about himself only. Big difference!

As for AH, I believe you are still dealing in what coulda's and what shoulda's when I am stating the actions of Albert Haynesworth are the reason he is a failure in B&G.

You think his failings are about those around him and their lack of understanding for the big man putting him in a position to fail. I am saying it is the fault of the big man for being fundamentally self-centered that caused his demise in DC.

I think this may be one of those agree to disagree moments.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

I think his failure in the end is on him, but I think that not only did the team contribute hugely to it, but pretty much set it all up he just didnt do anything to stop it.

the difference to me between this situation (a bad one in hindsight) is different from the move to a 3-4 in that there was no way we could have made the 3-4 work while we could have made this work very easily imho.

 

[Elephant]

the difference to me between this situation (a bad one in hindsight) is different from the move to a 3-4 in that there was no way we could have made the 3-4 work while we could have made this work very easily imho.

I agree with this, but had we stayed with the 4-3, I still think AH was unlikely to buy in to Shanahan's rigid management style. I believe AH became accustomed to a culture at Redskins Park that allowed players to run wild. IMHO he would have balked regardless of the defensive scheme.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Man, Ryman will not budge one inch on the Haynesworth was misused angle. I guess you gotta give the guy credit for that, even if he is wrong.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

except that i am not wrong or are you arguing that we used him correctly and he failed to play well?

 

[Lanky Livingston]

At the NFL level, players *should* be skilled enough to play multiple positions. Is Haynesworth BEST at 2-technique DT or whatever? Sure, I'll concede that - but I will not concede that if he worked hard at it all summer during minicamps and regular camp, that he would not have come out and played extremely well at the NT spot for us. Instead, he mailed it in from day one of the new regime and showed everyone his true character.

 

[Bulldog]

Haynesworth has the emotional intelligence of a 12 year old.

He does what he wants to do and rebels when asked to do anything else. As his ex-wife indicated the money just made a complete monster of him as he was able to run amok on a scale only a few of us could have imagined.

This latest road rage, regardless of whether Haynesworth was solely at fault, is the third or fourth issue he has had OFF the field in the past 2 years.

This guy is quickly finding himself in Pacman Jones or Leonard Little territory as Public Enemy #1.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

At the NFL level, players *should* be skilled enough to play multiple positions. Is Haynesworth BEST at 2-technique DT or whatever? Sure, I'll concede that - but I will not concede that if he worked hard at it all summer during minicamps and regular camp, that he would not have come out and played extremely well at the NT spot for us. Instead, he mailed it in from day one of the new regime and showed everyone his true character.

Its 3 tech, and the NFL has become extremely specialised not many players are versatile enough to play multiple positions anymore or you would see many more conversions.

the easiest way for me to explain this to someone who doesnt understand Dline play is this, if you took Calvin Johnson and told him "you are now our blocking TE, because you are the biggest and fastest WR on the roster and fit the position physically the best" how do you think he would react? would he eventually be ok at it IF HE WORKED AT IT? well obviously, he is that good of an athlete. but would it be a monumental waste? of course. thats what we did, we took a guy who is a playmaker and asked him to become a pylon, and then wondered why he balked at it.

AH is not and never has been a stand in there and hold the point guy, thats a completely different skillset, his size and strength will fool people into thinking he could do it, but when you watch him you notice that he uses his legs a lot and is always moving, when he tries to maul inside he often gets washed out. you dont unlearn 20 years of football in one offseason, he would have been decent at best.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

BT , sadly I have to agree.

 

[Bulldog]

Forget the alignments, the fact of Haynesworth's character and how he showed up to play in 2009 in a 4-3 (ie 30 pounds overweight) should have been warning signs to Shanahan and Allen that #92 was going to be a problem in the 4-3, but moving him to the 3-4 would result in just what happened.

If the team was really going to go to the 3-4 and start over with character players as it should have, Haynesworth should have been dealt back to TN before the draft and none of what has happened the past 8 months would have come to pass.

You couldn't get a bucket of spit right now for Haynesworth in a trade.

A team will sign him if he is cut to a minimum deal with incentives but no one is going to give the Redskins ANYTHING of value for him now.

If the Redskins had 'limited' leverage last spring BEFORE all this garbage occurred, just think about what kind of leverage we have this time around.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Its 3 tech, and the NFL has become extremely specialised not many players are versatile enough to play multiple positions anymore or you would see many more conversions.

the easiest way for me to explain this to someone who doesnt understand Dline play is this, if you took Calvin Johnson and told him "you are now our blocking TE, because you are the biggest and fastest WR on the roster and fit the position physically the best" how do you think he would react? would he eventually be ok at it IF HE WORKED AT IT? well obviously, he is that good of an athlete. but would it be a monumental waste? of course. thats what we did, we took a guy who is a playmaker and asked him to become a pylon, and then wondered why he balked at it.

Lol - I will ignore your condescension, and address your counter example. If the Lions asked Calvin Johnson to do that, he would do that happily because he's a character guy. That of course is an extreme example, and would never happen. More likely would be the Cowboys asking Jason Witten to stay in and block a lot more. OH WAIT, that happened a couple years in a row! What a novel concept.

And players switch positions all the time; its part of the new style of defense. You've got nose tackles dropping into coverage, corners blitzing, corners converting to safety, OLBs putting their hand in the dirt and rushing the passer, DEs rotating in as DTs, etc.

AH is not and never has been a stand in there and hold the point guy, thats a completely different skillset, his size and strength will fool people into thinking he could do it, but when you watch him you notice that he uses his legs a lot and is always moving, when he tries to maul inside he often gets washed out. you dont unlearn 20 years of football in one offseason, he would have been decent at best.

Also, when you see guys like Theo Ratliffe making plays from the NT position, it completely destroys this argument.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

BT , he didnt show up 30 pounds overweight, and he played well in the 4-3 despite ebing asked to 2gap a lot more than he was told he would, hence his displeasure (along with the rest of us) at being miscast. if only he knew what was in store lol.

Lanky,actually the witten example isnt the same, Witten is a solid TE who is known as a receiver but the TE position requires you to be a blocker at least sometimes, a wr is rarely asked to block in line, just as a 3tech DT is almost never asked to hold the point.

who is Theo ratliff? I assume you mean Jay Ratliff the Nt for Dallass, you do understand that they dont use him veryoften like a two gap nose and that the two gapper in the dallass scheme is the strong side end right? Dalass soesnt play the same style as GB or the steelers both of whom are the teams we are supposedly modelling our scheme after.

 

[Ax]

...a wr is rarely asked to block in line...

It may be rare, but it happens. One, in particular, was Art Monk. His selflessness is partly what kept him out of the HOF for so long. Gibbs, in his meeting with Peety King, used film to show him all the different things he asked Monk to do, beside just being a receiver. Thankfully, as we all know, Monk ultimately got his deserved place in the Hall.

Haynesworth never will. He has the physical talents. His problem has been, and always will be, between his ears. You know, where the bricks are.