Big John Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 This picture is genius Even with the "W" going over his fingers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaman Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 Even with the "W" going over his fingers? Haha, Good Eye, totally missed it. And yes, I still like it, lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 (edited) Completely agree. He says the Skins aren't living up to their side of the bargain, but then he has no problem cashing their check. You can't have it both ways (or maybe he will, who knows...). I can understand the arguments of keg and guys like Mike Wilbon (who has zero love for NFL owners), but he signed a contract and there is no language in it that says the team must run a 3-4. The scathing comments from his teammates are the clearest evidence of the type of guy Haynesworth is. I hate to be defending Haynesworth, but in the "he said, she said" scenario, he says the Skins PROMISED him he would not have to play in a 3-4. Law is a verbal contract is as legit as a written one. Really, at this point I have this warm fuzzy feeling about it because Snyder and Haynesworth truly deserve each other - let's face it, even if the money had motivated Haynesworth as opposed to doing the opposite, it would have been VERY difficult for him to live up that contract. Edited June 21, 2010 by Chavez Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 Dumb and dumberer meet Megan Foxy and Megan Foxier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ayestunod Posted June 21, 2010 Author Share Posted June 21, 2010 yeah they do deserve each other. Snyder wasn't bright for making such a lucrative contract but that's Snyder for you. But all in all..like haynesworths teamates say.. He is always about what benefits him. This also helps owners in their case of gauranteeing money to players it's most likely going to put a strain on the talks for bargaining agreement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 yeah they do deserve each other. Snyder wasn't bright for making such a lucrative contract but that's Snyder for you. But all in all..like haynesworths teamates say.. He is always about what benefits him. This also helps owners in their case of gauranteeing money to players it's most likely going to put a strain on the talks for bargaining agreement as are 99.9% of the players in the NFL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 (edited) as are 99.9% of the players in the NFL Seriously? In the NFL? You seriously think that only 1 in 1,000 players are willing to make sacrifices for the benefit of the team? That's 2 players in the entire league. Wow. I consider myself cynical, but I'm nowhere near being in your league when it comes to that. Edited June 21, 2010 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 Seriously? In the NFL? You seriously think that only 1 in 1,000 players are willing to make sacrifices for the benefit of the team? That's 2 players in the entire league. Wow. I consider myself cynical, but I'm nowhere near being in your league when it comes to that. Eh. Aaron Kampman was considered a GOOD guy, a leader, in GB but when they went from a 4-3 to a 3-4 he didn't PUBLICLY whine about it, but by all accounts his displeasure with it was no secret. And that's what happens when a "good" soldier has to do something he doesn't want to do. Imagine that with Haynesworth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Square Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 Seriously? In the NFL? You seriously think that only 1 in 1,000 players are willing to make sacrifices for the benefit of the team? That's 2 players in the entire league. Wow. I consider myself cynical, but I'm nowhere near being in your league when it comes to that. I kind of liked Shanny's comment about how he expected Haynesworth to line up as a free safety if he was asked to do it. For the money, I think he should stop trying to be "bigger than the team". In the end, you are a defensive lineman. You shouldn't be able to dictate to the team, what kind of defense they are going to play. If you hate the 3-4 that much, than take a pay cut and get traded. If he was serious about some kind of "guarantee" that he would never play in a 3-4, he should have gotten it in the written contract. The dude is a d-bag and I'm still kind of amazed that people would back him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 Eh. Aaron Kampman was considered a GOOD guy, a leader, in GB but when they went from a 4-3 to a 3-4 he didn't PUBLICLY whine about it, but by all accounts his displeasure with it was no secret. And that's what happens when a "good" soldier has to do something he doesn't want to do. Imagine that with Haynesworth. That's one. I wonder who the other one is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted June 22, 2010 Share Posted June 22, 2010 also posted this in the Seymore thread -but i just can't get enough bashing this guy. Bank sues Albert Haynesworth for $2.4 million Posted by Michael David Smith on June 22, 2010 11:29 AM ET A Tennessee bank is suing Redskins defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth, alleging that he has failed to make payments on a loan. The Knoxville News Sentinel reports that Clayton Bank & Trust sued Haynesworth in connection with missed payments on a $2.38 million loan. The bank is asking for more than $2.4 million, which includes the amount of the loan, unpaid interest and late charges. The bank reportedly made the loan in June of 2009, three months after Haynesworth signed a $100 million contract to leave the Titans for the Redskins. Haynesworth has already made $32 million from the Redskins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby's Hubby Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 also posted this in the Seymore thread -but i just can't get enough bashing this guy. Bank sues Albert Haynesworth for $2.4 million Posted by Michael David Smith on June 22, 2010 11:29 AM ET A Tennessee bank is suing Redskins defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth, alleging that he has failed to make payments on a loan. The Knoxville News Sentinel reports that Clayton Bank & Trust sued Haynesworth in connection with missed payments on a $2.38 million loan. The bank is asking for more than $2.4 million, which includes the amount of the loan, unpaid interest and late charges. The bank reportedly made the loan in June of 2009, three months after Haynesworth signed a $100 million contract to leave the Titans for the Redskins. Haynesworth has already made $32 million from the Redskins. bankers, always jittery. why did he need a loan after his contract? isn't it usually before when they are broke but getting paid later? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.