Big Al suspended for the remainder of season

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Not quite. They kept him purely because of the money involved, and example it would have shown had they did so. You don't give a man 21 million dollars (after asking him over and over if he was going to cooperate) and then cut him without him giving money back. That's exactly what he wanted. You also don't trade him for unless he gives money back for the exact same reason. Listen to Shanny and read between the lines. Hell, he was direct about it. He flat out said that AH wasn't going anywhere (released or traded) unless he was willing to give some of that money back.

Shanny is smart and knows what he's doing. The players hate AH and for the coach to let this douche bag to get his way, it would have open the floodgates for the rest of the idiots in the league to do the same thing. You mean I can get paid upfront money, act like a douche bag, get cut/traded and get more money? WHERE DO I SIGN UP AT? This way, he sits at home and rots.

Your argument doesn't work because "they" didn't give him the money. Just because AH was paid by Vinny/Snyder then cut by Shanahan/Allen, doesn't mean that Shanahan/Allen would pay a player then cut them. The trick is to avoid paying the player in the first place, and only Vinny and Snyder are to blame for that. I have confidence in Shanahan and Allen to find committed players and pass on the slouches.

And, I don't think Shanahan or Allen care about the money.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by mooby

Well now we have an idea of where Fat Albert was on Thursday night. And there's photographic evidence too!

I really don't care if the guy goes out and has a couple drinks. John Riggins would go our and get drunk and so did Sonny Jurgenson and both are in the HOF.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by GhettoDogAllStars

Your argument doesn't work because "they" didn't give him the money. Just because AH was paid by Vinny/Snyder then cut by Shanahan/Allen, doesn't mean that Shanahan/Allen would pay a player then cut them. The trick is to avoid paying the player in the first place, and only Vinny and Snyder are to blame for that. I have confidence in Shanahan and Allen to find committed players and pass on the slouches.

And, I don't think Shanahan or Allen care about the money.

My argument does work. You forget that they redid his contract to front load it this year due to the uncapped year. He was acquired by Vinny/Snyder, but he became Shanny's problem when he inherited the team and had the contract reworked. He wasn't going to rework that contract with such a heavy front load without having assurances from AH that he was going to do his part. They did their part in giving him the money upfront, he is the one that didn't fulfill his. I'm almost certain we'll see the Redskins try to get back money from him.

You are right in a certain sense because it's more about the tone he's setting and the examples he's making for the culture to come. However, had this been some other guy not making hardly any money, he'd been cut day 1. He cut Devin Thomas, and he has LOADS of "potential/talent". Bottom line, it had to do with the money.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I really don't care if the guy goes out and has a couple drinks. John Riggins would go our and get drunk and so did Sonny Jurgenson and both are in the HOF.

Well I never said having a drink is bad, but when you are apparantly drunk at 1:30 in the morning and you have to be at practice in the morning, it doesn't create a good impression.

This ain't the 80's anymore, and Joe Gibbs is not our coach. He put up with it knowing Riggins would give his best on the field, and that is not something Haynesworth is known for. Our current head coach preaches accountability, responsibility, and practicing good before you can play. So why would you want to be out at 1:30 in the morning knowing you have to have a good practice in order to play? That just screams Haynesworth doesn't give a f.

Btw please don't compare Sonny Jurgensen and John Riggins to Albert Haynesworth. He may have the talent to be a HOFer, but he sure as hell doesn't have the right mentality. This isn't 20 years ago, and you can't just get away with behaving like an idiot and expecting people not to treat you like one.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

I wonder how much money they can recoup from this 4 game suspension?

Haynesworth's contract has in it his base salary for the 2010 season. That is DIFFERENT FROM the roster bonus he got in 2010.

Whatever that base salary is, the Skins can get 4/16ths of it (25%) of it by not issuing him paychecks for the four games he is suspended.

The NFLPA WILL contest this suspension unless there is video evidence demonstrating Haynesworth molesting the team puppy out at Redskins Park. I have no idea if they will prevail, but they will appeal this decision through the processes established in the CBA.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I wonder, for conduct detrimental, can they get reimbursed for a portion of the signing bonus? I am thinking not, but just don't know.

joe, what about entering into a contract in bad faith, i.e. AH entered into 7 yr contract with the intention of only honoring the first 15 months.

i figured these contracts are iron clad to exclude some of the more traditional types of breaches and remedies but, if the skins can prove via emails, TC btw AH and his agent that he only entered into the K to receive the majority lump sum of the 38 or so mil in the first 15 months then he would act in detrimental manner to force the skins to trade/release him.

its a big if.

i still firmly believe AH and his agent only entered into a K with the skins because they couldnt resist the chance to collect 38 mil for 15 months, then force his way to a trade or release so he could sign a new major contract with a new team. I think any team who was interested in AH this offseason quickly lost interest when they learned that they would have to sign AH to a new K. of course, what has been reported in the media is that any new team for AH would have to repay the skins approx 18 mil.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

Haynesworth's contract has in it his base salary for the 2010 season. That is DIFFERENT FROM the roster bonus he got in 2010.

Whatever that base salary is, the Skins can get 4/16ths of it (25%) of it by not issuing him paychecks for the four games he is suspended.

The NFLPA WILL contest this suspension unless there is video evidence demonstrating Haynesworth molesting the team puppy out at Redskins Park. I have no idea if they will prevail, but they will appeal this decision through the processes established in the CBA.

You couldn't come up with a better metaphor than that? Hah. I lol'd though. Good one.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I really don't care if the guy goes out and has a couple drinks. John Riggins would go our and get drunk and so did Sonny Jurgenson and both are in the HOF.

IMO it is a pattern and practice of lying to skins reps/coaches that is the problem, not the couple of drinks.

You look like a liar when you have a "bad" practice thursday, have drinks until atleast 1:30 am, then say you are sick and cant practice friday.

[CrustyRedskin]

AH is a worthless POS and nobody make me think any different.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I really don't care if the guy goes out and has a couple drinks. John Riggins would go our and get drunk and so did Sonny Jurgenson and both are in the HOF.

Different times my friend ............

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

So does anyone still side with AH?

I surely do not side with Haynesworth; I was leery of giving a guy with "work ethic issues" and "anti-social behavior issues" $40M guaranteed on the day they signed him.

I do think that this suspension without pay keeps him as a distraction for the team and keeps this nonsense in the news/media far longer than it needs to be there. If the Skins simply were to keep him on the roster and announce every Wednesday for the next 4 weeks that he will not be playing, that would be less intrusive - - no NFLPA appeals and the like. Or maybe they suspend him WITH pay so there really isn't all that much for the NFLPA to appeal about.

The amount of money the Skins are likely to recoup is not nearly a number that means the difference between profit and loss for the team.

I think the cleanest break possible - - suspension with pay for the rest of the year and banishment from Redskins' Park and all team activities - - is best for the team.

By the way, he can always buy a ticket and go to the game as a fan; the team CANNOT prevent that. I wonder what fan reaction in FedEx would be if he were sitting in an aisle seat on the 40 yardline...???

[44ever]

Shanahan: Albert Haynesworth to play any position Redskins ask him | ProFootballTalk
Flipadelphia says:
Jul 19, 2010 11:46 AM
"Fat Al is gonna tear that team apart. He will do his best to make sure they dont win this year and that he is released after or during the season.
Expect alot of grumbling, sitting on the bench alone and phantom injuries out of that guy"

^^^Whoever this guy is, he hit the nail right on, all the way back in July. In fact many fans of other teams said the same thing. Seems we were the only ones blinded once again by a "Big name" signing, well most of us.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by Paintrain

Ehh, yes they got a 2nd and a 5th but in order for someone to 'get us' IMO they needed to draft a player that contributes to their team with that pick. The Dolphins drafted Pat White with our 2nd round pick and I want to say we got our 6th round pick back, didn't we?

Either way, Al will become the new Deion, Bruce Smith, Jeff George that lazy journalists will trot out whenever we sign a free agent or trade for a veteran.

Journalists are not lazy when they report facts. Those three guys - - along with Archuletta and Lloyd and - - you want me to go and find a few other names like Carrier? - - represent a sorry history of the ownership and the front office of the Washington Redskins for the last decade. Calling a reporter "lazy" simply allows you to pretend that the folks running this team for the last 10 years are better than stumblebums. They were not...


BTW, I think - - could not prove this beyond a reasonable doubt - - that signing Haynesworth was a Danny Boy move that Vinny merely carried out. Remember, I have had next to nothing nice to say about Vinny for the past 5-8 years but in this case, I suspect that this bad move is not something to put on his ledger.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

So does anyone still side with AH?

In this situation I can not side with either side.
Both sides have some blame.
AH has most of the blame for being such turd.

A talented but troubled player like AH and boy scout type coach like Shanahan can not live together on the same team.
AH was Shanahn's Full metal Jacket Private Pyle!




See the similarities?
The eyes?
Fat and easily shaken.
AH will go to another team that has a coach that can handle a player like AH. Clearly Shanhan isn't the bigger man and does not have the capacity to handle a weak minded player like AH.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

My argument does work. You forget that they redid his contract to front load it this year due to the uncapped year. He was acquired by Vinny/Snyder, but he became Shanny's problem when he inherited the team and had the contract reworked. He wasn't going to rework that contract with such a heavy front load without having assurances from AH that he was going to do his part. They did their part in giving him the money upfront, he is the one that didn't fulfill his. I'm almost certain we'll see the Redskins try to get back money from him.

You are right in a certain sense because it's more about the tone he's setting and the examples he's making for the culture to come. However, had this been some other guy not making hardly any money, he'd been cut day 1. He cut Devin Thomas, and he has LOADS of "potential/talent". Bottom line, it had to do with the money.

I believe they did their contract stuff in April. I'm not sure if it was a reworked contract, or just a check that was due as part of the original agreement. At that time, I'm not sure they had enough evidence about Haynesworth's poor work ethic to justify his release then. Also note that he was already under contract. They didn't give him a contract, they just got stuck with it. Reworking it, because it makes financial sense, is unrelated.

In any case, they didn't release him then because they wanted to try to make it work. Thomas, on the other hand, is unproven. I don't think Shanahan cares about an unproven guy. He's not going to keep around a guy like Thomas, who doesn't work hard, just because he *might* do something one day. Haynesworth has already done something in this league -- he is a proven commodity, and worth fighting for. Thomas is not.

So, they tried, and it might be over, but I'm not convinced of that yet.