Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 2:36 pm
Countertrey wrote:^ +1
Countertrey wrote:^ +1
So is that +2?
So is that +2?
The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era
Washington football community discussions spanning the Redskins to Commanders era. 20+ years of game analysis, player discussions, and fan perspectives.
https://the-hogs.net/messageboard/
Haynesworth Done!!!!
Page 6 of 8
So is that +2?
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 2:46 pm
By the way, the Post is reporting that Haynesworth's suspension has gone over very well with the players on team . . .
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 2:49 pm
Irn-Bru wrote:By the way, the Post is reporting that Haynesworth's suspension has gone over very well with the players on team . . .
Well, at least some good has come of this.
Wait... are you saying you trust the Post's reporting on this issue, IB?
[size=0]His suspension has gone over very well with the players on THN, as well![/size]
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 2:50 pm
I don't know. I haven't read the quotes or considered how they might have been taken out of context. It'd be nice if I could trust them, of course, but what are you gonna do?
All of this is just FWIW.
All of this is just FWIW.
Re: 20/20 Hindsight
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 3:29 pm
GoSkins wrote:Guys...seems a lot of you are looking in the rearview mirror and saying...if this, if that. Please stop. AH made a commitment to play for the Redskins and he didn't. I don't care how you paint this; it all gets back to AH not living up to the standards of being a professional football player. God knows he was given a lot of chances to change and he didn't. End of story.
AMEN.
Re: 20/20 Hindsight
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 3:50 pm
GoSkins wrote:Guys...seems a lot of you are looking in the rearview mirror and saying...if this, if that. Please stop. AH made a commitment to play for the Redskins and he didn't. I don't care how you paint this; it all gets back to AH not living up to the standards of being a professional football player. God knows he was given a lot of chances to change and he didn't. End of story.
+1
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 4:45 pm
Carlos Rogers said it best.
"I like Al, and a lot of guys like Al, but Coach Shanahan runs this now, It's not the way it used to be around here, and that's just the way it is."
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 4:50 pm
well... of course.Deadskins wrote:Countertrey wrote:^ +1Countertrey wrote:^ +1
So is that +2?
Re: 20/20 Hindsight
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 5:05 pm
GoSkins wrote:Guys...seems a lot of you are looking in the rearview mirror and saying...if this, if that. Please stop. AH made a commitment to play for the Redskins and he didn't. I don't care how you paint this; it all gets back to AH not living up to the standards of being a professional football player. God knows he was given a lot of chances to change and he didn't. End of story.
I have been saying this since it WAS happening, not hindsight.
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 5:06 pm
Irn-Bru wrote:By the way, the Post is reporting that Haynesworth's suspension has gone over very well with the players on team . . .
You expect anyone to stand up against Shanahan? It's the PC and only acceptable reply from the Redskins regardless of how each individual feels.
Re: 20/20 Hindsight
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 5:18 pm
VetSkinsFan wrote:GoSkins wrote:Guys...seems a lot of you are looking in the rearview mirror and saying...if this, if that. Please stop. AH made a commitment to play for the Redskins and he didn't. I don't care how you paint this; it all gets back to AH not living up to the standards of being a professional football player. God knows he was given a lot of chances to change and he didn't. End of story.
I have been saying this since it WAS happening, not hindsight.
Yep, this same argument was going on during the pre-season.
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 6:56 pm
And the coaches gave AH a number of chances to change and he didn't.
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 8:03 pm
I would say, "good riddance to bad rubbish".
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 8:42 pm
VetSkinsFan wrote:chiefhog44 wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:frankcal20 wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:frankcal20 wrote:A coach develops a game plan each week. A coach works with player's during the week to put them in the right position for the coming game. Of course coaches have influence on how player's play but coaches can not make a guy try to tackle a guy like Jacobs up around the shoulders like Rocky did this Sunday. If you look at Sunday's game, especially in the 1st half, the player's were in position to make the play but they didn't. What else can any coach do. Well, there is one thing he can do and that's put that player on the bench. See Phillip Buchanan and Rocky who were both benched for either the entire or part of the game for CRAP play and lack of tackling fundamentals.
And the coach doesn't instill and reinforce those tackling fundementals?
And I thought Buchanon was hurt.<edit> you're right, he was benched.
Sure the coach teaches fundamentals but let me ask you this. Should a coach be teaching professional football players how to tackle at this point? Most have been playing for 20+ years. I would hope that they would know how to tackle at this point. I'm sure at video session yesterday, players saw how pathetic they looked trying to tackle and I'm sorry but I'm not putting that on the coaches.
It's the coaches' jobs to ensure that the standards are upheld.
You are grasping for a life preserver. Let me help you out. Say it with me slowly.
Sorry, I, am, wrong.
So.... these guys execute 100% of the time and they NEVER need reminders/refreshers? I got something to say slowly to you, but it's not appropriate in this forum.
You're drowning
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 8:51 pm
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 8:57 pm
Deadskins wrote:[
What is it about members of this board and reading comprehension? Your comments earlier implied that the tackling problems in the Giants game has no bearing on the coaching the players receive at the NFL level. My question about them suddenly sucking at tackling was rhetorical. I was asking to point out to you that if this is an ongoing problem, then the coaches are at fault for not teaching proper technique after first seeing this problem. I don't blame the DC so much as the individual position coaches, because the DC is more about schemes than individual coaching, but he is the boss, and so is ultimately responsible for the the coaching under him.
And by superior, I meant your comments to another poster to the effect of "come back when you know something about NFL coaching," when you obviously have a serious lack of understanding in the area yourself.
No, my comment stated that the bad tackling has been inherited and has been a problem for years. The scouts and coaches (who are primarily responsible for bringing in players... I thought, until you rolled your eyes at that) have plagued this team over the last 17 years. How does a DC get blamed for their poor tackling?Comprehension? look in the mirror.
And how do I have a serious lack of understanding myself? There is not one thing that I have stated that is false. I'm just calling someone else out who is telling another member that his post was idiodic and giving him some backround of which he speaks.
Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 9:05 pm
Countertrey wrote:Vonnie Holiday's opinion...
Wow! He certainly didn't pull any punches.
NB this interview, Vetskins. It might be time to reconsider your opinion that Shanahan hasn't brought a better atmosphere to the Redskins. The more detail that comes out, the more it sounds like players are totally behind what Shanahan is doing . . . especially with respect to Haynesworth. Holiday respects Haynesworth as a man and is a good friend, but he makes it pretty clear here that it's not Shanahan who's at fault.
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 12:36 am
So how does AH's signing rank among the all time bone-headed decisions by Snyder????
I'd put him right up there with Neon Deon.
I'd put him right up there with Neon Deon.
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:11 am
Perhaps the most important part of being a good football player is loving to play the game. Al doesn't.
Good riddance.
DarthMonk
Good riddance.
DarthMonk
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:12 am
Vonnie Holliday gets it.
Haynesworth never will.
Haynesworth never will.
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 9:24 am
VetSkinsFan wrote:Irn-Bru wrote:By the way, the Post is reporting that Haynesworth's suspension has gone over very well with the players on team . . .
You expect anyone to stand up against Shanahan? It's the PC and only acceptable reply from the Redskins regardless of how each individual feels.
I think you are really grasping at straws at this point. First you said that you saw no cohesion behind Shanahan on this team, because players like Daniels and Fletcher apparently don't count. Since that time more and more players have come out with even stronger words. I don't know how else I'm supposed to react to Rogers explicitly saying
I like Al, and a lot of guys like Al, but Coach Shanahan runs this now, It's not the way it used to be around here, and that's just the way it is.
OK, maybe Rogers is just making it up. But then check out the interview Holiday did with ESPN. One instance of players banding together behind Shanahan, I'm willing to agree may just be for show or coincidence. But then you get two, three, four, five instances . . . and maybe it's time to admit that you had it wrong from the beginning. Or at least admit that you've got to do some mental gymnastics to deny the trend.
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:02 am
Irn-Bru wrote:Countertrey wrote:Vonnie Holiday's opinion...
Wow! He certainly didn't pull any punches.
NB this interview, Vetskins. It might be time to reconsider your opinion that Shanahan hasn't brought a better atmosphere to the Redskins. The more detail that comes out, the more it sounds like players are totally behind what Shanahan is doing . . . especially with respect to Haynesworth. Holiday respects Haynesworth as a man and is a good friend, but he makes it pretty clear here that it's not Shanahan who's at fault.
I go off of what details that come out. Up until this week, little has come out with the team against big Al, and that is what I have been going off of. As more details come out, my opinion may change. I've readily admitted that big Al has been a spoiled brat in the whole deal. But I don't believe that Shanahan doesn't have a few smudges on that halo that some people appear to be blinded by.
What won't change is my opinion that both parties are at fault. I've never suggested that big Al has been right and Shanahan has been wrong. This isn't the only decision that Shanahan has made that has allowed me to form my opinion of Shanahan, and until his decision-making changes, my opinion stands.
And as for the mental gymnastics comment, I have an opinion of that that you may or may not want to hear.
And I still stand by my comment that if there is anyone on big Al's side still, they're not going to publicly come forward. And please, don't read between the lines. I never said Daniels and Fletcher don't count. But if you seem more intelligent than taking the word of 4% (Daniels and Fletcher) and saying that everyone believes it.
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:19 am
chiefhog44 wrote:Deadskins wrote:
What is it about members of this board and reading comprehension? Your comments earlier implied that the tackling problems in the Giants game has no bearing on the coaching the players receive at the NFL level. My question about them suddenly sucking at tackling was rhetorical. I was asking to point out to you that if this is an ongoing problem, then the coaches are at fault for not teaching proper technique after first seeing this problem. I don't blame the DC so much as the individual position coaches, because the DC is more about schemes than individual coaching, but he is the boss, and so is ultimately responsible for the the coaching under him.
And by superior, I meant your comments to another poster to the effect of "come back when you know something about NFL coaching," when you obviously have a serious lack of understanding in the area yourself.
No, my comment stated that the bad tackling has been inherited and has been a problem for years. The scouts and coaches (who are primarily responsible for bringing in players... I thought, until you rolled your eyes at that) have plagued this team over the last 17 years. How does a DC get blamed for their poor tackling? Comprehension? look in the mirror.
And how do I have a serious lack of understanding myself? There is not one thing that I have stated that is false. I'm just calling someone else out who is telling another member that his post was idiodic and giving him some backround of which he speaks.
Thanks for proving my point.
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:43 am
VetSkinsFan wrote:I go off of what details that come out.
Yeah but in some cases those details have been dismissed a bit unfairly, IMO.
Up until this week, little has come out with the team against big Al, and that is what I have been going off of.
I think that has more to do with Shanahan not having taken official action than anything else. If the players had been saying these kinds of things in previous weeks even as Shanahan continued to try to work with Haynesworth, everyone would have cited that as evidence that the team was rebelling and Shanahan was losing control. So it's damned if you do, damned if you don't.
And as for the mental gymnastics comment, I have an opinion of that that you may or may not want to hear.
I doubt there's anything you could say that would offend me, so go ahead if you'd like. I think people have gotten a little entrenched with their views and are willing to justify them with suspect reasoning.
And please, don't read between the lines. I never said Daniels and Fletcher don't count.
Well, you said that they were already team-first guys and therefore the fact that they were speaking up wasn't evidence that the team was banding together behind Shanahan. That's what I meant by saying they didn't count.
Posted: Thu Dec 09, 2010 12:16 pm
Irn-Bru wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:I go off of what details that come out.
Yeah but in some cases those details have been dismissed a bit unfairly, IMO.Up until this week, little has come out with the team against big Al, and that is what I have been going off of.
I think that has more to do with Shanahan not having taken official action than anything else. If the players had been saying these kinds of things in previous weeks even as Shanahan continued to try to work with Haynesworth, everyone would have cited that as evidence that the team was rebelling and Shanahan was losing control. So it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. This is exactly my dislike. It should have not been able to go this longAnd please, don't read between the lines. I never said Daniels and Fletcher don't count.
Well, you said that they were already team-first guys and therefore the fact that they were speaking up wasn't evidence that the team was banding together behind Shanahan. That's what I meant by saying they didn't count. Not my intent. I realize that team first guys are going to be team first guys. I was referring to the people we never hear from aren't going to take a position opposing their HC in this turmoil. That silence or siding with the coach are the only PC reactions.