Go Back   New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com > Main > Saints

Why not Fat Albert!!!!

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; Moot point bc there's no way Washington will be able to move him anyway. But after reading this, I learned more about his "status" with DC...lol!! Maybe it's time to add a drama queen smilie. HA!! The Washington Redskins gave ...

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-21-2010, 10:10 AM   #11
Site Donor
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 6,265
Blog Entries: 4
Re: Why not Fat Albert!!!!

Moot point bc there's no way Washington will be able to move him anyway.

But after reading this, I learned more about his "status" with DC...lol!!

Maybe it's time to add a drama queen smilie. HA!!

The Washington Redskins gave Albert Haynesworth(notes) a seven-year, $100 million contract with $41 million guaranteed before the 2009 season, and they probably assumed that they were paying enough to have Haynesworth play in whatever defensive scheme the team wanted without argument. Not so, of course. When Mike Shanahan hired defensive coordinator Jim Haslett in the offseason, and Haslett started installing his preferred 3-4 defense, Haynesworth balked, knowing that the move from the 4-3 would affect his stats. Defensive tackles in a 4-3 are able to attack more often because there are more people in the base formation. In a 3-4, Haynesworth's job will be to hold the point for other people, and that's true whether he plays the nose tackle or jumps out to an end position. Now, he would not be the focus -- he'd be tying up blockers for Brian Orakpo(notes) and Andre Carter(notes).
The Redskins knew full well that Haynesworth was unhappy, and paid his $21 million option bonus in April without incident -- surely they were hoping that it would all blow over. It hasn't. Haynesworth has skipped all of the Redskins' minicamps and OTAs, choosing instead to work out near his Nashville home. "I'm disappointed he's not here. Absolutely," team owner Dan Snyder told the Washington Post last week. "We're expecting our players to lead by example, and we're expecting our players to understand that they're Redskins and they need to be here."
The Redskins have made moves to augment a 3-4 line -- they traded for Rams defender Adam Carriker(notes), the former Nebraska standout who was always out of place in St. Louis' base 4-3. At 6-6 and 300 pounds, Carriker has the perfect technique and body style to project as a 34 end. And Monday, it was announced that the team came to terms with veteran Vonnie Holiday. The 34-year-old was one of the NFL's more productive 3-4 ends last season, racking up five sacks for the Denver Broncos at a position where quarterback takedowns aren't all that common. The Carriker and Holliday moves would seem to trap Haynesworth inside, exactly where he doesn't want to be.
But according to SI.com's Ross Tucker, the Holliday acquisition indicated that Haynesworth is on the outs, and that trade talks with the Minnesota Vikings are still in play. It makes sense in many ways -- the Vikings run the 4-3 that Haynesworth prefers, the Redskins have already paid so much of the contract, and the Redskins may think that it's worth it to be rid of the disruptive influence from a declining player. Not to mention the fact that tackles Kevin and Pat Williams(notes) will start the season on the bench if they are required to serve four-game suspensions as a result of their roles in the StarCaps case. Don't be surprised if the Redskins go forward without the biggest (and perhaps most regrettable) free-agent signing in team history.
saintsfan1976 is offline  
Latest Blogs
REFUND Last Blog: 12-07-2014 By: xan




Saints: A glimpse of the future Last Blog: 11-19-2014 By: lee909


Old 05-21-2010, 02:19 PM   #12
Pink Nightmare
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,905
Blog Entries: 7
Re: Why not Fat Albert!!!!

Man that is a fat dog!
SapperSaint is offline  
Old 05-21-2010, 02:46 PM   #13
Bounty Money $$$
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: 5800 Airline Dr. Metairie, LA.
Posts: 11,739
Re: Why not Fat Albert!!!!

Originally Posted by SapperSaint View Post
Man that is a fat dog!
Ha! Are you talking about your avatar? That guy was great in the Water boy. What was his name?
Rugby Saint II is offline  
Old 05-21-2010, 03:20 PM   #14
500th Post
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 970
Re: Why not Fat Albert!!!!

Brown and a 1st for Albert is WAY too much
Papa Voodoo is offline  
Old 05-21-2010, 03:24 PM   #15
1000 Posts +
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,623
Re: Why not Fat Albert!!!!

Brown for Haynesworth. Two problems solved. It's not about stats for Haynesworth as the article implied. In the 3-4 at NT, he would be facing double teams on every play, instead of the occasional double team in the 4-3. That would shorten his career and make it almost a certainty that he wouldn't recieve the full benefits of his contract. He's using the only leverage he has. Veterans do it all the time for one reason or another. He would instantly make the DL of the Saints a force. And with only one quality LB in Vilma, it would make Shanle's and whoever lines up in SLB this season jobs much easier.

Last edited by Cruize; 05-21-2010 at 03:27 PM..
Cruize is offline  
Old 05-21-2010, 05:38 PM   #16
Senior Citizen
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Gulfport, MS
Posts: 3,180
Blog Entries: 1
Re: Why not Fat Albert!!!!

Farmer Fran wasn't it? He likes to see homo's naked....
SaintPauly is offline  
Old 05-21-2010, 10:05 PM   #17
Site Donor 2014
Lucky Cat
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Metairie, LA
Posts: 8,617
Blog Entries: 5
Re: Why not Fat Albert!!!!

You know what you call that fat dog?


Nothing... he ain't coming anyway.
foreverfan is offline  
Old 05-21-2010, 10:14 PM   #18
100th Post
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 274
Re: Why not Fat Albert!!!!

welcome new guy, i regret to inform you that we've already discussed this in deep detail, please use search bar for enlightenment. If your lazy then I say this; The idea of a wide body is nice to have on defense I usually give players the benefit of the doubt, i understand where Fat boy is comming from. HELL NO @ giving up Jamaal Brown and a 1st for Albert, we could have had him for a 3rd why have a fire sale?
VillainAgain is offline  
Old 05-21-2010, 10:23 PM   #19
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: "Little Ole Town in Tejas"
Posts: 7,770
Re: Why not Fat Albert!!!!

Originally Posted by VillainAgain View Post
welcome new guy, i regret to inform you that we've already discussed this in deep detail, please use search bar for enlightenment. If your lazy then I say this; The idea of a wide body is nice to have on defense I usually give players the benefit of the doubt, i understand where Fat boy is comming from. HELL NO @ giving up Jamaal Brown and a 1st for Albert, we could have had him for a 3rd why have a fire sale?
Choup is that you..lol...
strato is offline  
Old 05-21-2010, 11:03 PM   #20
100th Post
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 339
Re: Why not Fat Albert!!!!

I'll tell you why not. He has a terrible work ethic. Namely none, take the money, and take as much money as you possibly can. Why would you want to add that kind of an attitude to a team first, nothing but positive mindset locker room that is obviously the best in the whole league. Why do you think the Saints are World Champs anyway?
realheavyd is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:08 AM.


Copyright 1997 - 2014 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts