• Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.

S%^T hits the fan with Haynesworth

(From a Redskins Insider post, http://voices.washingtonpost.com/re...ynesworth/sources-nflpa-warned-hayneswor.html, which contains the actual CBA language, not Halsell's slightly misleading summary)

"Here's a the CBA's language concerning the potential forfeiture of signing bonuses:

Article XIV, Section 9

No forfeitures of signing bonuses shall be permitted, except that players and Clubs may agree: (i) to proportionate forfeitures of a signing bonus if a player voluntarily retires or willfully withholds his services from one or more regular season games; and/or (ii) that if a player willfully takes action that has the effect of substantially undermining his ability to fully participate and contribute in either pre-season training camp or the regular season (including by willfully withholding his services in either pre-season training camp or during the regular season or willfully missing one or more games), the player may forfeit the greater of: (a) 25% of the prorated portion of his signing bonus for the applicable League Year for the first time such conduct occurs after the beginning of training camp until the end of the season for his Club, and the remaining 75% prorated portion of his signing bonus for the applicable year for the second time such conduct occurs during that period that year; or (b) the proportionate amount of his signing bonus allocation for each week missed (1/17th for each regular season week or game missed).
(b) If a player with a signing bonus forfeiture clause voluntarily retires and misses the remainder of the season, and the player then reports back to the Club in the subsequent season, then the Club must either (i) take the player back under his existing contract with no forfeiture of the remaining proportionate signing bonus allocation, or (ii) release the player and seek repayment of any remaining proportion of the signing bonus allocated to future League Years.

(c) No forfeitures permitted (current and future contracts) for signing bonus allocations for years already performed, or for other salary escalators or performance bonuses already earned.

(d) A player's right to receive and/or retain a signing bonus may not be conditioned on the player's participation in voluntary off-season programs or voluntary minicamps, or for adverse public statements, provided that the Club may have non-proratable participation bonuses for its off-season workout program.

* * *

(g) For purposes of this Section 9, the terms "proportionate forfeitures" and "proportionate amount" mean 1/17th of that year's signing bonus allocation for each regular season week or game missed."

______________________________________________

I think there's good news and bad news. Under the bolded portion above, the good news is that there's a plausible argument that Albert may already have "willfully take[n] action that has the effect of substantially undermining his ability to fully participate and contribute in . . . pre-season training camp"--i.e., by refusing to show up to any voluntary practices or mandatory mini-camp and not preparing for training camp and by making clear that he will not play the position the coaches ask him to play, he's already violated this standard.

The bad news is the italicized portion: it seems to limit forfeiture to conduct that occurs after the beginning of training camp (though it could go from 25% to 100% with the second incident, so we could seek it all back relatively soon after training camp starts, I'd think).
 
He should easily be worth a 1st-round pick, given his value as a player and his small salary cap hit

You're kidding yourself if you think he's worth a 1st. A 29 year old, out of condition DT is worth a 3rd at best, and I think we'll be lucky to get a 4th (if we trade him). Not to mention this little temper tantrum he is throwing decreases his value - who wants to deal with that?!
 
I think that's a major issue. Who is going to want to deal with this guy?

- You have to run a 4-3
- You have to be willing to let him dictate how he's used
- If he has to pay back that 21 million he's going to want a new deal and more money
- ect, ect, ect

The list of teams that fit that bill can't be very long. I know it only takes one, but still.....
 
You're kidding yourself if you think he's worth a 1st. A 29 year old, out of condition DT is worth a 3rd at best, and I think we'll be lucky to get a 4th (if we trade him). Not to mention this little temper tantrum he is throwing decreases his value - who wants to deal with that?!
I said that's what his value is, a) once we don't seem eager to rid ourselves of him, and b) if other teams (and we, by looking to trade him w/o recouping the bonus) are thinking straight about the salary cap implications.

As to b), sure, his prima donna act this summer has knocked his market value down a notch, but anyone who watches the tape from last year can see how good he was, even though he was out of shape, and (apparently) in a scheme not much suited to his strengths. And again, a trade partner would not just be getting the rights to AH, they'd be getting the rights to him at $5M/year, and with the right to cut him at any point w/ no guaranteed money or cap acceleration, which is an incredible bargain. A 4-3 team (that's going to stay that way) w/o much money that needs to fill seats (and win games) would be well-advised to trade for him and send us a lot more than a 3d or 4th. (Though I have to admit--if Jammal Brown is only worth a swap of picks two rounds or so down from the middle of the draft, the market value for draft picks has really changed. Even so, my point is what I think his value is/what teams should be willing to do if their heads were screwed on straight, not what I necessarily think we will get for him.)
 
Looks like that bastage is calling our bluff and says he's gonna report to camp.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5318673

Bummer. Now I guess the FO has a big decision to make. Do you let him report? Do you eat the $21 mil and ship him elsewhere? Do you have him go all through camp and cut him at the last minute? The ONLY option I like is where he returns the money and we trade him.
 
Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see someone like London Fletcher or Phillip Daniels tell him he is not welcome, and have him not show up. We may never hear about it, but I wouldn't be surprised.
 
Sigh...going to be a long 30 something days until training camp.
 
Sigh...going to be a long 30 something days until training camp.
Go on a vacation with no internet access, or sports news except world cup for the next two weeks.

It makes it so much more bearable.......
 
We all seem to be in agreement, sit him/trade him/dog him/kill him.

However, if he walks into camp, in shape, and is throwing our O-linemen into the QB on every other play, salivation begins, and not just for fans.

Many a coach has found justification in compromising their principles, in order to accommodate the temper-mental shenanigans of game changing athletes. I doubt the current group is any different. If they can't trade him before camp begins, then the only way they would, is if he reports, fat & lazy. Which will become public knowledge, and make him next to impossible, to trade.

Haynesworth, this coming season's Defensive Player of the Year, still holds the cards.
 
We all seem to be in agreement, sit him/trade him/dog him/kill him.

However, if he walks into camp, in shape, and is throwing our O-linemen into the QB on every other play, salivation begins, and not just for fans.

Many a coach has found justification in compromising their principles, in order to accommodate the temper-mental shenanigans of game changing athletes. I doubt the current group is any different. If they can't trade him before camp begins, then the only way they would, is if he reports, fat & lazy. Which will become public knowledge, and make him next to impossible, to trade.

Haynesworth, this coming season's Defensive Player of the Year, still holds the cards.

I really don't think Shanny can afford to compromise his principles no matter what. It sets a bad example, and IMO, it could open the door for more trouble down the road with prima dona players. It would be the ultimate kick in the ass to the rest of the team who have all bought into the system, and done the work.

Defensive player of the year ? Wouldn't that require him to be on his feet most of the time, not on the turf squealing like a stuck pig ?
 
I hear you Ax. But I saw very little last year, nor have heard anything since then that leads me to believe Haynesworth is going to return to his former level of dominance. I think that's part of the problem. He's being paid a king's ransom to be the best in the game. He hasn't delivered so far, and that makes his petulance and selfishness all that much more intolerable.
 
ok...is it "bastage"...or is it...."bastige"?

we need consistency on this board you bastads!
 
Was wondering that myself when I used 'bastige.' According to the web, I've been using the fargin thing wrong.

Roman Moroni: You fargin sneaky bastage. I'm gonna take your dwork. I'm gonna nail it to the wall. I'm gonna crush your boils in a meat grinder. I'm gonna cut off your arms. I'm gonna shove 'em up your icehole. Dirty son-a-ma-batches. My own club!

Shyt.
 
Fargin Icehole and Sunny Beach were two of my favorites back in the day. I feel so freakin ancient. ;)
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users
As we enjoy today's conversations, let's remember our dear friends 'Docsandy', Sandy Zier-Teitler, and 'Posse Lover', Michael Huffman, who would dearly love to be here with us today! We love and miss you guys ❤

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top