Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

Another thing people always seem to forget is that steroids boost your confidence. Now some might say the fear of getting caught balances it out and can possibly force players to hold back, but when A-Rod was hitting 20 extra home runs a year from 2001-2003 and Barry ever since he left Pitsburgh, well needless to say everytime they stepped up to the plate there was little doubt that they could know virtually any decent pitch out of the park and that probably had more of an effect then most people will give credit for.

Either way it looks like Stubblefield, based on his numbers, might have juiced his first two years in the league. Then took about 2 years off. Then in 1997 when he realized how much better he was on steroids he decided that if there was ever a time to use it was during his contract year. Still though 15 sacks for a DT is insane.

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;532074]I think he was referring to me.

Ruhskins:

The Giants signed Boley and Bernard all they have left is Canty. Like I said yesterday, if he's signed that Giants D will be unbelievable. Don't tell me it won't? Be realistic, we need to shore our OL to counteract them. My point was we put all our eggs into 2 signing when we could have been doing what the Giants have done smartly and will do if Canty is signed. Filling many holes which we have still.

I hate the Giants by the way!![/quote]

And if they don't sign Canty, the Giants will also have only made two signings and still won't have addressed their needs at WR, LT, or in the secondary

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;532219]And if they don't sign Canty, the Giants will also have only made two signings and still won't have addressed their needs at WR, LT, or in the secondary[/quote]

Don't forget Mario Manningham (could be great, could be a bust) LT? They have the best OL according to all the experts, CB they are pretty good, I guess they could use one more. It's not like they have many holes like us and they can address those needs in this upcoming draft.

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;532227]Don't forget Mario Manningham (could be great, could be a bust) LT? They have the best OL according to all the experts, CB they are pretty good, I guess they could use one more. It's not like they have many holes like us and they can address those needs in this upcoming draft.[/quote]

If Mario Manningham is going to be their next Plaxico, more power to them. I didn't forget him, but then I hope you're not forgetting Thomas, Kelly, and Davis. They are looking to add depth to both their OL (ideally move Diehl inside and McKenzie to the bench, I think that's what I heard) and their secondary (particularly at safety where they are very young and inexperienced)

Really how many holes do we have that they don't have? And why can't we address needs in the draft? I understand they have more picks than we do right now but it's not like we don't have any picks and can't get more

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

oh yeah, paper had a nice stat today...

is was about the whole haynesworth 65% thing.

last year griffin played in like 46% of snaps, golston in like 44, monty in 41% and alexander in 28.3% (guessing a little on the first three, since i don't remember, but all 40something %).

so, yeah, with a rotation it shouldn't really be an issue. it's not like griffin and golston are terrible either.

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;532235]If Mario Manningham is going to be their next Plaxico, more power to them. I didn't forget him, but then I hope you're not forgetting Thomas, Kelly, and Davis. They are looking to add depth to both their OL (ideally move Diehl inside and McKenzie to the bench, I think that's what I heard) and their secondary (particularly at safety where they are very young and inexperienced)

Really how many holes do we have that they don't have? And why can't we address needs in the draft? I understand they have more picks than we do right now but it's not like we don't have any picks and can't get more[/quote]

Kenny Phillips was a stud as a rookie for them and Michael Johnson was solid. We are weak at LB with the loss of Washington, McIntosh had a bad year and Fletch is getting up there in age, on the DE Taylor and Carter are undersized and getting up in age, Evans might be gone, Daniels is Pre-historic. We need two OL players and RB I would start finding someone for the future.

We can argue about this till we are blue in the face, but if don't address those holes in the draft, we will still lose to the Giants despite our FA signings. They have made some nice moves themselves and if they sign Canty, that would be quite a D.

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

[quote=That Guy;532243]oh yeah, paper had a nice stat today...

is was about the whole haynesworth 65% thing.

last year griffin played in like 46% of snaps, golston in like 44, monty in 41% and alexander in 28.3% (guessing a little on the first three, since i don't remember, but all 40something %).

so, yeah, with a rotation it shouldn't really be an issue. it's not like griffin and golston are terrible either.[/quote]

I'm glad you brought this up

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;532248]Kenny Phillips was a stud as a rookie for them and Michael Johnson was solid. We are weak at LB with the loss of Washington, McIntosh had a bad year and Fletch is getting up there in age, on the DE Taylor and Carter are undersized and getting up in age, Evans might be gone, Daniels is Pre-historic. We need two OL players and RB I would start finding someone for the future.

We can argue about this till we are blue in the face, but if don't address those holes in the draft, we will still lose to the Giants despite our FA signings. They have made some nice moves themselves and if they sign Canty, that would be quite a D.[/quote]

Well they still haven't signed Canty, and I'm not saying they didn't make some good moves. Just saying so did we, and just like us they have holes to fill.

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

[quote=SFREDSKIN;532248]Kenny Phillips was a stud as a rookie for them and Michael Johnson was solid. We are weak at LB with the loss of Washington, McIntosh had a bad year and Fletch is getting up there in age, on the DE Taylor and Carter are undersized and getting up in age, Evans might be gone, Daniels is Pre-historic. We need two OL players and RB I would start finding someone for the future.

We can argue about this till we are blue in the face, but if don't address those holes in the draft, we will still lose to the Giants despite our FA signings. They have made some nice moves themselves and if they sign Canty, that would be quite a D.[/quote]

Dude, just let it go with the Giants. I'm sure the front office will address the offensive line in the draft, they'd be ridiculously stupid not to do so. Besides, you never know how the Giants' signings are going to work out. We don't know how durable Jacobs is going to be now that they don't have Ward, heck Canty could not work out for them, or Boley. Like I said, what's done is done in regards of the Hall and Haynesworth signings, there's nothing we can do to change that.

The draft and what happens there will determine how good our offensive line will be. Hopefully at team above us makes a mistake and lets one of the top tackles fall to 13th. Like I said, anything can happen. As I said, my only concern is that right tackle position, and I hope we can address that with our #13 pick.

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

Hey back to AH for a minute... I know one of the biggest gripes about him is that he [I]only[/I] has played about 65% of the snaps on defense. Well guess what?

Chickens butt... seriously, per our rotation Griff played the most snaps last year and you'll be shocked to know what the percentage was: about 50%. I think big Al will be a 2 down DT for us most series, like the Williams boys in MN, and maybe w/ the consistent rotation he'll stay healthier through the whole season too. Bottom line is Tenn worked him pretty hard compared to how we work our tackles.

Edit: Griff took about 55% of the snaps on d and that was way more than anyone else. Why don't I just provide the link since i can't get my shit straight...

[url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/01/tailor-made-for-redskins-defense/?page=2]Washington Times - Tailor-made for Redskins' defense[/url]

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

One of the things (maybe the only thing) Blache improved on from the Williams era is that he rotated his defensive lineman much more efficiently than Williams ever did.

Granted the value of having fresh bodies on the DL diminishes when all you ever do is blitz 6+, but it's the thought that counts!

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

The giants signed canty and depth is nice, But he's not better than tuck or osi so we wont see all three of them at the same time. So what I'm saying is **** the giants!

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

[quote=horse;532407]The giants signed canty and depth is nice, But he's not better than tuck or osi so we wont see all three of them at the same time. So what I'm saying is **** the giants![/quote]

Sick of hearing about the G-men dominating in '09 too. Nobody really taking into account Spags genius when it came to calling that defense. He's probably the best d-coordinator in football and unless NY somehow has a carbon-copy of him I think it's a bit premature for all of us to assume the defense will be exactly the same.

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

Get the hell outta the way boma, you aren't doing a thing but throwing money at everyone or anybody that needs a handout, with great results I might add. And the next TO is here to stay.....:doh:

AH is running the Nations Capital cus PFT said so!

ALBERT IS THE MOST POWERFUL MAN IN D.C.
Posted by Mike Florio on March 2, 2009, 8:08 a.m.

Step aside, Barack Obama.

After Friday, the most powerful man in Washington, D.C., isn’t the President of the United States. Instead, it’s the newly-minted defensive tackle of the Washington Redskins.

That’s the practical fallout of the decision to give Albert Haynesworth a seven-year, $100 million contract with $41 million guaranteed.

As one league source observed, “He runs the coach, he runs the team, he runs everything.”

Why? Because, like a top-five draft pick whose obscene contract insulates him as a practical matter from any real consequence for acting like a fool, Haynesworth can do and say whatever he wants in 2009 (and likely beyond) without consequence.

Apart from the team’s limited options when it comes to taking action against Haynesworth, the Redskins now have their own T.O. — a guy whom ownership will choose to enable rather than discipline since any antisocial behavior in which he engages, and for which he is punished by the team, will prompt a chorus of “I told you so.”

And that’s where it gets interesting. As one source with intimate knowledge of Albert’s ways observed, “You don’t know what Albert is gonna do and you can’t tell him what to do.”

Hey, Terrell, do you have any extra popcorn?

Re: Another Haynesworth Thread: Will AH Be The Next Dana Stubblefield?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;531821]Who knows, and this point it's pure speculation. However I do know that just because Stubby was a bust, it has no bearing on what is going to happen with Haynesworth.[/quote]

That's what I'm saying. I mean, what if Haynesworth signed with New England or Dallas? NFL Network and ESPN would be praising the move. Granted they may not have paid as much but there would be no talk of him being a bust. I understand this is due in large part to Dan Snyders history of overpaying for veteran players but this signing filled such a glaring need. Plus, Stubblefield was so good in SF because he played next to Bryant Young. The Redskins expected Stubblefield to be dominant on his own...he never was that kind of player. Haynesworth is that dominant force in the middle. Maybe in 3 years we'll be cursing his name too but it's a move the Redskins had to make in my opinion. We need a dominant player on the defense. Now, onto the Offensive line...thru the draft.

HAIL!