[mlmdub130]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Well this isn't really an argument in support of Shanahan's handling of Haynesworth, it's simply a "no duh, what did you expect" post.

What anyone expected Shanahan to do is not the point. The point is what should have been done. Just because everyone knows that Shanahan is always a rigid disciplinarian doesn't mean it's always the right way to handle situations.

Look back at the great Joe Gibbs. When Riggo was showing up hungover and half drunk you didn't hear Gibbs making a stink about it, even though he was regarded as being a tough discipline guy. He made exceptions, he understood human nature, and most of all he designed his system around the talents of his players and put them in position to be successful.

I don't like when a coach has a system and rigidly sticks to it. If you have a player of Albert's caliber, it seems that if you're worth your weight as a defensive mind you could find a way to use him as a havoc-wreaker. I'll bet that's what Belichick does.

Is Albert to blame here? Absolutely. I would have supported Shanahan if he benched him again this season for non-compliance. But to trade him away for a 5th round pick? I think he could have remained a rigid SOB without trading Haynesworth; eventually Albert would have decided he'd rather his legacy be one of dominance on the field rather than pouting off of it.

doubtful, pretty sure thats why this thread exists. although i do agree with you on the majority of your post