Page 1 of 2
Micheal Wilbon's reaction and what to do now
Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 6:22 pm
by BurgundyandGoldfaith
In our nations capital, the endless saga continues with yet another "circumstance" that does not seem to happen in other cities. This of course, is Albert Haynesworth. Today on ESPN980, the hosts were fortunate enough to get a call from Micheal Wilbon in order for him to weigh in on the Haynesworth situation. We've all pretty much come up with the same conclusion - Haynesworth is in the wrong. Unfortunately, Wilbon applauded Haynesworth's decision and said he was so happy to see it happen. Firstly, I'd like to know how others feel about this and whether it is another in a long string of Post writers who vehemently oppose anything Snyder-led or just an offbeat moment for someone who covered this team.
Now the real question at hand is what to do now with Haynesworth and what the real story is behind this. Is he overweight? Did he know he'd do this when he signed the check? Is this the best way to make your stock attractive to other teams?
Maybe we'll get a 3rd from Tennessee, or Minnesota. Personally I'd like to see him sit. Make him sit and take a stand for the integrity of football. With an uncapped year Snyder could put a stamp on the end of overpaying for veterans and immediately cement the Redskins organization as tough and team first. Teach grown men that you can't just pout and have whatever you want.
Make him Sit
Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 6:38 pm
by tribeofjudah
Keep him and make him sit.... is that punishment enough?
Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 9:36 pm
by yupchagee
Get what we can. Maybe sue for breach of contract & get some $ back.
Posted: Wed Jun 16, 2010 9:41 pm
by HarleyHog
make him SIT
after he learns that one, teach him to fetch the slippers.
and if Wilbon wants to keep him, he gets to scoop up after him.
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:35 am
by Countertrey
yupchagee wrote:Get what we can. Maybe sue for breach of contract & get some $ back.
No. We can't get what he's worth on a football field. NFL execs are saying that, right now, considering his attitude and complete unreliability, that value is a 3rd rounder or equivalent.
... he needs the Sean Gilbert treatment. He plays for the Redskins, as they have paid him to to... or he sits on his substantial butt until someone in the AFC pays what he's worth.
Yes... not only do we demand what his talent demands... but we do not deal with anyone in the NFC.
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:35 am
by Skinsfan55
At my job if you don't show up to work for 3 days it's job abandonment and you're immediately terminated. Why not with AH?
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:36 am
by Countertrey
Skinsfan55 wrote:At my job if you don't show up to work for 3 days it's job abandonment and you're immediately terminated. Why not with AH?
Are you kidding? Then, he gets everything he wants, and the Redskins are completely screwed.
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:38 am
by Skinsfan55
Well, you would also have to pay back any bonus money (vacation days you took that were unearned etc.)
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 7:44 am
by Countertrey
Skinsfan55 wrote:Well, you would also have to pay back any bonus money (vacation days you took that were unearned etc.)
He had the option of giving up the bonus and being released back in Feb. He took the money, and now wants to walk as well.
No. If he wants to play somewhere else, tell him we will take offers NEXT February. In the mean time, if he wants to leave that badly, he plays here, works his fat ass off, plays his ass off, and makes himself the most desirable DL in history...
THEN we can talk. He plays HERE in 2010... or he sits.
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:11 am
by VetSkinsFan
Countertrey wrote:Skinsfan55 wrote:Well, you would also have to pay back any bonus money (vacation days you took that were unearned etc.)
He had the option of giving up the bonus and being released back in Feb. He took the money, and now wants to walk as well.
No. If he wants to play somewhere else, tell him we will take offers NEXT February. In the mean time, if he wants to leave that badly, he plays here, works his fat ass off, plays his ass off, and makes himself the most desirable DL in history...
THEN we can talk. He plays HERE in 2010... or he sits.
I concur.
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:26 am
by Cappster
I believe we need to get rid of him in some way, shape, form, or fashion as soon as we can. He is a cancer and this situation needs to be resolved preferably before training camp. I do not want to hear about Haynesworthless for the rest of the year and have the coaches and players have to answer questions about that sorry sack.
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:54 am
by SkinsJock
I hope that both the Redskins and Haynesworth get what they deserve out of this.
Haynesworth is saying that the Redskins mislead him and that he does not want to be here. OK!
The Redskins are saying that they gave him the option of leaving or paying him $21 million to be a part of whatever defense we have here this year. At the time Haynesworth considered the choices available to him, he was aware of the high possibility that this defense would be partly a 4-3 defense. He made the choice to take the money.
If he's changed his mind, then he just needs to give the money back and we all know that will not happen.
If he has decided that he wants to leave AND keep the money then I hope he is treated accordingly by the Redskins
we are so lucky that Allen & Shanahan are here and presumably have Snyder's full support in managing this mess
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:03 am
by SkinsJock
I think that how this Haynesworth issue is managed by Allen and Shanahan will be a really good indicator to everyone that this franchise is being well managed by these guys and I hope they handle this in a way that there is no doubt that we are a very well managed franchise that treats all of their players fairly
We need to see these guys be VERY firm and VERY fair
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 12:34 pm
by Andy614
I say keep him until the season starts. There is bound to be injuries on other teams that will up his value. He already has his money so there is no rush to do anything. Even if he sits for a few games. He made his bed.
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 1:18 pm
by spenser
Countertrey wrote:Skinsfan55 wrote:Well, you would also have to pay back any bonus money (vacation days you took that were unearned etc.)
He had the option of giving up the bonus and being released back in Feb. He took the money, and now wants to walk as well.
No. If he wants to play somewhere else, tell him we will take offers NEXT February. In the mean time, if he wants to leave that badly, he plays here, works his fat ass off, plays his ass off, and makes himself the most desirable DL in history...
THEN we can talk. He plays HERE in 2010... or he sits.
Word. Thats exactly what we need to do unless we can get decent compensation this year.
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:30 pm
by riggofan
SkinsJock wrote:The Redskins are saying that they gave him the option of leaving or paying him $21 million to be a part of whatever defense we have here this year. At the time Haynesworth considered the choices available to him, he was aware of the high possibility that this defense would be partly a 4-3 defense. He made the choice to take the money.
I heard this story too, and I just don't understand how this is legal. Its just crazy. I'm sure it has to do with the weird contracts in the NFL, money not being guaranteed or whatever. But it still seems insane.
I also don't understand why the NFLPA would decide to back Haynesworth up on this matter. This sets a terrible precedent in the future for some stud player who has a chance to see an incredible payday like Big Al got. If you can take a $21 million check and then six weeks later tell the team you don't want to come to work, why would owners risk it?
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 6:00 pm
by langleyparkjoe
If he sits, he keeps the money right? I mean, he wouldn't get his bonus money but he'll keep the old money?
Posted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 8:45 pm
by Snout
What was Wilbon's reason?
Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 12:04 am
by chiefhog44
I'm soooooooooooooo tired of Wilbon. I would ban the post if I lived in DC. He's such a tool
Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 2:35 am
by The Hogster
Take Haynesworth's fines and use them to pay the legal fees for Albert's baby-mama / stripper. Maybe that increases the chances that AH ultimately repays a big part of that bonus money one way or another.
Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 7:51 am
by SkinsJock
From what has been reported, the fines will not amount to anything significant at all - Personally, I hope this guy gets treated harshly by the team and by the media BUT I think the current FO might choose what's best for the Redskins
Haynesworth can only 'add' to our defense - not having him is not going to make much of a difference - we are not winning OR losing games because of just 1 player
Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:03 am
by CanesSkins26
Snout wrote:What was Wilbon's reason?
Wilbon wasn't really supporting Big Al. Instead, he was saying that he was happy with the number offseason shows this year because he doesn't like the way that the NFL runs the offseason.
Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:10 am
by CanesSkins26
Here's an article on what Wilbon said (he makes some good points).
Michael Wilbon has made a pretty nice career out of defying conventional wisdom. I know that. I understand it. When D.C. goes gaga for Ovechkin, Wilbon says the kid needs to check himself. When D.C. goes gaga for Stephen Strasburg, Wilbon says he'd rather watch the NBA Finals. When D.C. does the Salsa, Wilbon breaks out a Polka.
Still, Wilbon managed to sneak up on me yet again this week, becoming the only person in America to sort of come out in defense of Albert Haynesworth.
(And as I've said over and over again, I love Wilbon, and he's never been anything but class to me. I wish he wrote this column for our paper, but since he didn't, I'll collect the relevant quotes for your reading pleasure.)
"I hope Albert Haynesworth never reports," Wilbon said on ESPN 980's Sports Fix. "It's great. Standing ovation from the West Coast for Albert Haynesworth."
Why? Well, the answer revolves around Wilbon's deep belief that the NFL's offseason is a joke, and that anything that can help crumble that system is a good thing.
"I love this story, because of course Albert Haynesworth should be at something mandatory, but I love that these offseason workout things [have] so much drama now," Wilbon said. "Because they shouldn't even be having this junk. It's just another management control tool, that they should be around these camps every single day of the offseason. I love it that these things are blowing up in some teams' faces....
"They need to get rid of them. They need to be against the rules of the CBA. It's junk. The general public, they'll stand for anything NFL management says people should do, go along with this stuff. These guys should be off. It's the OFFseason. I don't care how much they get paid, they don't get paid nearly as much as baseball and basketball players, who have OFFseasons. You know, this is just garbage."
Wilbon said a veteran player told him the reason the NFL has so many more injuries now is because players never get a chance to recuperate. He said the Redskins' frequent offseason workouts this year will backfire. He said this is an issue the union should fight, that it's worth walking out or striking over. And so he said that Haynesworth brings him joy.
"It's ridiculous. It's just absurd on every level," Wilbon said. "And again, as media, we're just lapdogs for whatever NFL management says. I mean, we're just like tools. Whatever they say, they're just roasting another player. There's so little questioning of the NFL offseason, I'm amazed by it. But then again, there's so little questioning of the NFL, except for day-to-day coaching decisions of whether a guy should use a timeout or not, some minutiae, some crap. But this thing should be attacked publicly, and it almost never is....
"[Haynesworth] should comply. He signed a deal, he should go comply. The standing ovation for Haynesworth is as a representative of any rebellion against this thing, against The Man, if you will. It's not an applause for Haynesworth specifically. It is what he represents, those players who are basically saying I'm not coming to your garbage, just leave me alone, I'm not even answering the phone....
"Again, Haynesworth has no wiggle room. There's no honor in sort of messing with the contract for Haynesworth; he just signed it a minute and a half ago. But what I love is any situation that calls for a guy to thumb his nose at the NFL alleged offseason."
(Wilbon also said he didn't even know about the latest drama until calling into the show, and that "the greatest thing about being away from Washington for the last two months is not having to hear about Redskins' offseason drama.")
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2010/06/wilbon_offers_haynesworth_a_st.html
Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 12:06 pm
by langleyparkjoe
Wilbon's a d-bag for applauding what Albert "stands for". Here's my bottom line, if you don't like the rules of the NFL as a player (regarding offseason or anything else for that matter) get the heck out of the NFL than. There's PLENTY of athletes that will abide by the rules just to get an opportunity to play.
@ the newest d-bag
Posted: Fri Jun 18, 2010 12:25 pm
by Chris Luva Luva
I doubt most people will read this article. It'll be highly evident by their post...
That being said, I agree that fans/media are too eager to side with the management side of the NFL. It's a huge double standard in a lot of situations where an organization can screw a player over but when a player attempts to do the same, it's all of a sudden wrong.
It's evident that even management is starting to realize that the off-season is too long but until an owner says it, most people won't agree. Which is Mike's point.
If anything, Mike used the wrong situation to use a vehicle for his message.