Albert Haynesworth: Cry Baby Or Man on a Mission?

Joe Burgett @JoEburGett_WESenior Writer IIIJune 17, 2010

LANDOVER, MD - NOVEMBER 15:  Albert Haynesworth #92 of the Washington Redskins speaks with reporters afetr the game against the Denver Broncos at FedExField on November 15, 2009 in Landover, Maryland. The Redskins won 27-17. (Photo by Larry French/Getty Images)
Larry French/Getty Images

Anyone who has seen the sporting news as of late knows about the Albert Haynesworth situation. If you missed it, let me fill you in. Basically, Haynesworth was ticked off because the Washington Redskins (his team) switched from a 4-3 defense to a 3-4 package.

The Redskins allowed him to seek a trade, but there were no takers. And it's obvious why, it's because of the massive money involved. I mean come on, who would take on this man's deal?

He has the largest contract for a defensive player in NFL history, with a $100 million deal. Now, since he couldn't get a trade, it looked as if he'd just go back to the 'skins and play at least until someone traded for him, he was released, or his deal expired.

He even was offered $21 million to come on and play for this season, and Haynesworth took it. I mean come on, who wouldn't, right? But, the big man seemed to have pulled an Ocean's 11 here, as he kinda took the money and ran!

Haynesworth did not show up at voluntary work outs, which I don't see as a big deal. Many players have skipped that before, so it's not a biggy. But then, he missed a mandatory training camp with the Redskins. This is unacceptable really.

Now, it looks as if Haynesworth will not be going to back.

He got the largest deal for a defensive player in NFL history for a reason, this man has proved he can play. But last year, he didn't nearly live up to expectations, and his numbers from Tennessee, where he played well, won't help him look good now.

The NFL is a "what have you done for me lately" kind of league. Sure, you had a good few seasons before, but if you can't produce now, you mean little in the fans' eyes or management's. That may be a bit harsh, but it's true.

And it would be different if you just had a down season, like many players do, then try hard to improve and what not.

But now Haynesworth isn't trying at all, he's pulling a stunt that's not worth it.

If he had a great year last year, say, 10 sacks and 50 tackles, then yeah, he "may" have a case. But the dude didn't get near that, and he's pulling this?

And even if he did have a great year, then why not just come back and prove you're still good?

Look, a 4-3 defense and a 3-4 defense are different, but both have at least one DT and two DEs. Haynesworth would play a good bit at the NT position if anything, then move around when need be, like he did in Tennessee.

I'm all for this guy moving around if he can be used well there, but he won't even come on the field to see how he'd do in the 3-4. Which is very sad to me.

He's basically being given this large contract here because he's proven that he can produce. But, he didn't prove that last year in the defense he was supposed to have killed in.

He's wanted this former Redskins' defense in a 4-3, because he believes he can play better and pack up the stats in it. But like I said, he didn't do that last year in this defense. And if he's so good, like he seems to put himself off as, then why not prove you can do it in any defense?

The new 3-4 defense is not a big deal for him playing wise, he'd play a lot. I understand wanting to look good. But, if you're a talented player, you could play in any defense and produce well.

Sure, there are some who can really only play one defense well. But, I've seen many defensive players switch defensive styles and play well in all of them. It's what you do on the field, and how good a player you are that matters. If you're as good as advertised, you'll produce no matter the defense to me.

Now Haynesworth's "defense" in this here is that the owner, Dan Snyder, told him he's playing ONLY in the 4-3. This is according to Haynesworth and has not been confirmed. Not calling Haynesworth a liar here, but it's hard to believe that Syder would promise something like this, much less would be be able to make sure it happened.

If one defense is sucking overall, and you bring another guy in to make it better, then chances are the defense will change no matter how good one player was in it. You've got 10 other guys sucking on the field in it, and who cares how number 11 did, he'll have to fall in line with the others to learn the new defense and do well in it just like the other 10.

Like many have said, if this rumor of Syder saying he's only playing in the 4-3 while with the Redskins is true, then he should have gotten it in writing. I could easily tell you that Syder won't admit to it if it was true.

But hey, maybe I'm out of line here kinda calling Haynesworth somewhat of a cry baby. It's obvious he is a man on a mission though, even if that mission is "mission impossible."


The latest in the sports world, emailed daily.