Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth

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.

A true culture change would mean that he is GONE.

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.

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.

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 going forward.

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.

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.

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.

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.


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.

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.



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...

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.

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...

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...

This.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk

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.

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.


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.