Report claims Redskins won't cut Haynesworth

Just for the record - I am in 100% agreement with Schneed on this. Every day, Coach Mike should walk by AH and blatantly ignore the guy.

I got no problem having him sit on the bench/be inactive all season. One less roster spot? Fine - Practice him hard for a week, let him bitch & complain about shortness of breath or some other lame minor injury and then IR him for the season. He's out of the clubhouse, we get our roster spot and his big payday shrinks further & further.

The more I think of it, the more I like this idea - I wouldn't be surprised if Shanallen are just standing by the "IR button" hoping AH complains of an injury:
AH: (To Shanahan while walking off the practice field) I think I stubbed my toe and can't practice.
MS: If you are injured, hit the showers - otherwise get your ass back out there.
[Shockingly, AH hits the showers]
BA: (On AH's cellphone as AH is leaving the showers) Hey, Albert just heard about your toe injury. As a precautionary measure, we've placed you on IR. I'm sure you'll want to work out with your own trainer, so see you next year.

Yeah I hear you but Vick was a different type of gamble.

I just don't see AH playing at an all-pro level on a consistent basis for anyone. Not only would he have to get his ass in gear and start ballin', but he would have to lose the shitty attitude. Not happening. He got paid, he's happy, and now he's just content on playing out the string.

Yeah I hear you but Vick was a different type of gamble.

I just don't see AH playing at an all-pro level on a consistent basis for anyone. Not only would he have to get his ass in gear and start ballin', but he would have to lose the shitty attitude. Not happening. He got paid, he's happy, and now he's just content on playing out the string.

This is the $64,000 question and, to answer it, we are all just guessing as to what is going in AH's head. You (and others) think he's checked out and content to play out the string so keeping him around does nothing. I (and others) think he still gives a sh** about something (money, legacy, notoriety ... something he needs to be playing football to get) and so taking football away from him will get him to play well for us (for a year) and then we can get a decent trade for him.

I agree he has "no heart or passion for the game" but I think he does have passion about something and needs football to get it (whatever "it" is). Not being gifted with ESP, it is entirely possible that you may be right as to his future motivational potential.

And you need look no further than Michael Vick to see that teams are willing to take a shot on a questionable player. He's out of football, you don't know whether he'll still have any athleticism, the Eagles take a chance with a $5 million deal and boom, instant franchise QB.

If Haynesworth continues to act like a bum, he'll still get a couple mill from somebody just on the off chance he might dominate. But if he actually dominates for us in the closing years of his deal? Someone will pay him a big chunk of change, guaranteed.
His ego is greater than his Pavlovian desires. He thinks that he's the shit and that the 4-3 of the Jim Schwartz variety is THE WAY to use him, and it's 'his way or the highway". If he had any brains, he would have realized that he ain't the boss and that he wasn't going to get his way.

Vick underwent an entire attitude change in which he finally put the time in the film room and other areas and not just relying on natural talent. Haynesworth would probably walk in there thinking that he's back in Tennessee and back to doing "his thing", which includes him never finishing a whole season due to injury(for whatever reason) and embellishing injuries just to take a play off.

His ego is greater than his Pavlovian desires. He thinks that he's the shit and that the 4-3 of the Jim Schwartz variety is THE WAY to use him, and it's 'his way or the highway". If he had any brains, he would have realized that he ain't the boss and that he wasn't going to get his way.

Vick underwent an entire attitude change in which he finally put the time in the film room and other areas and not just relying on natural talent. Haynesworth would probably walk in there thinking that he's back in Tennessee and back to doing "his thing", which includes him never finishing a whole season due to injury(for whatever reason) and embellishing injuries just to take a play off.

Vick had the attitude change because he sat in jail, unable to play football and unable to earn the living he was used to.

Same thing with Haynesworth. You don't need jail to accomplish the same thing. You just have to take the opportunity to deny him the ability to earn that next contract. If he's non-compliant, you deactivate him without pay like we did at the end of last season.

Human nature is what it is. Sure he's a piece of crap, but he's still motivated by something.

Keep in mind that as soon as he ends up on a team in a 4-3 defense, he'll turn it on and dominate. Can you in good conscience let that happen? I could accept it if we got a high pick in return, but we all know that's not going to happen. Might as well sit on him.

Vick had the attitude change because he sat in jail, unable to play football and unable to earn the living he was used to.

Same thing with Haynesworth. You don't need jail to accomplish the same thing. You just have to take the opportunity to deny him the ability to earn that next contract. If he's non-compliant, you deactivate him without pay like we did at the end of last season.

Human nature is what it is. Sure he's a piece of crap, but he's still motivated by something.

Keep in mind that as soon as he ends up on a team in a 4-3 defense, he'll turn it on and dominate. Can you in good conscience let that happen? I could accept it if we got a high pick in return, but we all know that's not going to happen. Might as well sit on him.

At this point I don't see how the team can keep him on the roster without paying him. He would be a waste of time (the media circus), a waste of roster space, and a waste of money. I really don't care if he goes somewhere else and starts to dominate (we've seen plenty of that already anyway). The team made a mistake in getting him in the first place and they just need to move on. I would rather have the team/fans/sports media focus on other things instead of hearing about this guy for another season.

He is also facing possible suspensions for his off season shenanigans. He may not even be able to play a full season.
He needs to be off loaded to the first dumbass to offer us a trade.

At this point I don't see how the team can keep him on the roster without paying him. He would be a waste of time (the media circus), a waste of roster space, and a waste of money. I really don't care if he goes somewhere else and starts to dominate (we've seen plenty of that already anyway). The team made a mistake in getting him in the first place and they just need to move on. I would rather have the team/fans/sports media focus on other things instead of hearing about this guy for another season.

Every decision has a cost/benefit:

Costs of Keeping Him:
- 1 roster spot, the value of which is determined by how deep our team is. If our 53rd man sucks balls like he did last season, then there's really not much of a cost here.

- Salary and cap space, which at this point is relatively small

- Media headaches, which I think is overblown. What had more to do with our W/L record last year, the media asking questions about Haynesworth or our terrible transition to the 3-4 defense and terrible QB play?

Benefits of Keeping Him:
- keep him off opposing teams

- nowhere to go but up in terms of production, WAY up

- setting a tone for the team that you're not going to pout your way out of town, if you want to earn your next contract, you'll have to honor your first one.

Don't trade him in division, don't allow him to sign with any team he wants by cutting him. Take w.ever we.can get for him. Out of conference would be a plus.

Every decision has a cost/benefit:

Costs of Keeping Him:
- 1 roster spot, the value of which is determined by how deep our team is. If our 53rd man sucks balls like he did last season, then there's really not much of a cost here.

- Salary and cap space, which at this point is relatively small

- Media headaches, which I think is overblown. What had more to do with our W/L record last year, the media asking questions about Haynesworth or our terrible transition to the 3-4 defense and terrible QB play?


Injuries can dictate whether a roster spot is important or not. They could always happen, and on a rebuilding team I think is ridiculous to take up a roster spot on a guy you are trying to teach a lesson.

Unless the team finds a way to not pay him, I'm sure the other players are not going to be so crazy about the idea of AH sitting on the bench and still get paid. I doubt MS would play him if he stays, and if he does, it'd be minimal play.

The media will continue to make a story out of this as long as AH is on the roster. I'm sure many players are sick of having to comment on the story.


Benefits of Keeping Him:
- keep him off opposing teams

- nowhere to go but up in terms of production, WAY up

- setting a tone for the team that you're not going to pout your way out of town, if you want to earn your next contract, you'll have to honor your first one.

AH has spent the last two years out of shape and playing at a subpar level. I really doubt he's going to be that dominant.

As I said before, I doubt MS will play him, so you are being very optimistic on this aspect.

And as far as your third point, well the Bengals have done that with Ochocinco and now they are doing it with Palmer, it hasn't gone too well for them. The team should focus on not bringing trouble players like Haynesworth in the first place. That's how you set a tone and culture on the team, not by keeping a malcontent on the roster and paying him to sit on the bench.