Skip to content

Al Wilson stands up for Albert Haynesworth

We’ve been searching for someone, anyone who’ll take the side of Redskins defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth in connection with his recent decision to skip a mandatory minicamp and openly demand a trade. 

And we’ve finally found somone.  Actually, GoVolsXtra.com — an unexpected source of material for us during the emerging slow period — found him.  He’s former University of Tennessee linebacker Al Wilson, whose common first name and common college program apparently provided enough of a connection to get Wilson to stand up for Haynesworth.

Wilson, who last last played in 2006 to cap eight seasons with the Denver Broncos, doesn’t like the criticism coming from other members of the Redskins.

“I think his teammates should support him a little more,” Wilson
said. “I do believe that.

“A lot of times players, when [players] get in front of cameras, they
allow emotions to take over.  It shouldn’t be that way.  Some things
should be in house.  Some things you should keep to yourself.”

Yes, Al Wilson.  Some things you really should keep to yourself.

And maybe that’s why, per the same report, Haynesworth avoided the media at the inaugural A3 Celebrity Golf Tournament, hosted by the agency that represents him.

Permalink 42 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Denver Broncos, Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Washington Redskins
42 Responses to “Al Wilson stands up for Albert Haynesworth”
  1. GassiusClay says: Jun 20, 2010 10:17 PM

    Wilbon has also defended AH on PTI…dont understand that one either

  2. djstat says: Jun 20, 2010 10:23 PM

    It is very simple. Albert Haynesworth signed with the Redskins based on the money and the scheme they were running. All he has done right now is express his displeasure with his role in the new system and skip a mini camp. So Haynesworth cashed the check, big deal. He is was being smart. The Redskins could have avoided that big bonus by cutting him. They chose not to.
    Traditionally management has all the leverage against the players and in this rare case, the player has more leverage. I do not agree with Fat Albert, but I understand his point.

  3. brownsfn says: Jun 20, 2010 10:40 PM

    @djstat
    What the hell point are you talking about???If the guy didn’t want to play in the 3-4 or for the Redskins then his DUMB ass shouldn’t have cashed the 22 million dollar check…your point make absolutely NO SENSE..

  4. this class sucks says: Jun 20, 2010 10:40 PM

    How hard were you looking Florio? Wilbon, the host of PTI with your hero TK has defended him. There have been a few others here and there as well.
    I don’t feel bad for him because he is making so much money, but it is ridiculous to think that a team can bring in a guy with a lengthy contract and if doesn’t play well they can tear up that contract and cut him. But if a player comes to team, signs a contract to play a certain position, and they eliminate that position, than everyone is like “HOW DARE HE.” I don’t feel bad for him, but it isn’t so ridiculously one sided as you are making it seem.

  5. mwcarolina says: Jun 20, 2010 10:44 PM

    djstat, the Redskins didnt write in the contract, you only play in a 4-3 defense. When he signed, he thought that Zorn would stay forever and we would win, however, that didnt happen. We switched coaches and defenses and now he’s unhappy, he could’ve left if he didnt want the money, however, he wanted the money and stayed, the Redskins have more people on their side than this 100 million dollar crybaby has on his. He’s wrong, the Redskins are right. Shanahan is trying to change the culture here.

  6. rickvaldez says: Jun 20, 2010 10:47 PM

    Why would they cut him. They still had to pay the money either way

  7. jusford says: Jun 20, 2010 10:48 PM

    Shouldn’t Lord Favre weigh in on this?

  8. funi says: Jun 20, 2010 10:54 PM

    One idiot UT player sticking up for another! I bet Al Wilson says Leonard Little was not drunk when he killed that lady.

  9. Hail2ThaRedskins says: Jun 20, 2010 11:00 PM

    It is absolutely laughable that Wilson says that Haynesworth’s teammates should support him more. It is Haynesworth himself who is saying he doesn’t give a chit about his teammates. He doesn’t want to do his part in a new scheme as a teammate and on top of that he is saying he wants to be traded away from his teammates. His current teammates owe him NOTHING! Whether or not you side with Haynesworth or Redskins management in this situation, one thing is certain – Haynesworth is giving his teammates two middle fingers and they don’t owe him a damn thing.

  10. EL Swami says: Jun 20, 2010 11:00 PM

    I’d play the 3-4 for 100 mil

  11. tdowdy11 says: Jun 20, 2010 11:22 PM

    The Redskins offered him an out. They said if you don’t want to play in a 3-4 then just forfeit the signing bonus and we will release you. AH just decided that he would make more money with the Redskins and is trying to get them to cut him so he can go sign another contract with another team and make even more money to stay out of shape and constantly get hurt for. He knew that if he didn’t take the signing bonus, he wouldn’t get another big deal like that with another team. So as a result, he took the money and is playing his cards to get the Redskins to cut him.
    What the Redskins need to do is tell him he doesn’t have to play in a 3-4 and bury him so far on the bench on the 3-4 scheme and only have him play in a rare play or 2 that they go back to a 4-3 base. They need to tell him to play in a 3-4 or sit on the bench.

  12. Meat Tuperello says: Jun 20, 2010 11:25 PM

    One un funi idiot trying to make a funny comment. Nice.

  13. chhutson27 says: Jun 20, 2010 11:33 PM

    @ this class sucks
    That’s the perk of being THE BOSS. Bosses can do that with employees. Employees don’t tell the boss what to do. Haynesworth is the employee. He shows up to do what the boss tells him to do. Did you ever play sports? If you did, did you ever tell the coach what to do? They are the coach, the owner is the boss. What he says, goes.

  14. DB26 says: Jun 20, 2010 11:34 PM

    Simply put, very few 3-4 DL are contributors in the “statistical” sense. When that happens, their bargaining leverage drops significantly. Not to mention, they likely want Haynesworth to play the nose. At NT, he will basically need to shoot the middle and eat up the C & G to make a hole for the LB to flow to the ball. If @ DE, Haynesworth would have an opportunity to be more disruptive, which viewing his career, that would likely appease him.
    I honestly think he wants out of Washington, not the scheme. NOBODY makes that much of a fuss about a scheme change.

  15. chhutson27 says: Jun 20, 2010 11:38 PM

    In my own opinion, if I were the Redskins and couldn’t get him to come out and play, I’d fine him right up until the day before the season, then trade him to the Raiders, where he’d play in the 3-4 anyway, but in the black hole they call Oakland.

  16. rovibe says: Jun 20, 2010 11:43 PM

    Gimme a break with all these dumb comments. He’s not defending Haynesworth’s actions, he’s just saying the other guys shouldn’t be airing their complaints about him publicly. And he’s right. Nobody on the outside needs to hear it from the other Redskin players to know that AH is making an ass of himself over all this. But by doing that publicly, they’ve now contributed to the bad atmosphere Haynesworth already managed to create by himself. That puts more pressure on their team to cut him loose, when they should be trying to get him to suck it up and play another year so they can get some of their money’s worth out of him.

  17. McWest says: Jun 20, 2010 11:58 PM

    @djstat
    No, djstat. That money was guaranteed. Cutting Haynesworth wouldn’t have prevented the $21 million payment. He was guaranteed $41 million in the 1st 4 years of his contract. He has now collected $32 million. I’m not sure, but I think by him not showing up for mandatory camp, the other $9 million is forfeited. The only reason it wasn’t paid in a signing bonus was because the Skins couldn’t fit it in under the cap last season. They were banking on this season being uncapped.

  18. rraider says: Jun 21, 2010 12:36 AM

    Why wouldnt he cash the check………….they owe’d him the money per his contract! To say later ” if you want your freedom dont cash the check and walk away” is crazy. If there was a way for the skins to get out of that contract\payment they would have 1 month after signing the guy. This is all on skins for signing the guy.
    ( note see D Hall and Raiders….8 mil hit vs. 24 mil hit if they didnt realize mistake when they did…….wish they would have learned and structured Jmarcus contract differently)

  19. azwildcats96 says: Jun 21, 2010 1:03 AM

    Maybe Al Wilson left the Broncos with a bit of ill will regarding the way they handled his neck injury. All of the right things were said when he was cut but it’s possible he harbors animosity towards Shanny deep down inside.

  20. The Hogster says: Jun 21, 2010 1:18 AM

    @djstat – Since you said it was “very simple,” why don’t you understand that the Redskins would have still had to pay Fat Albert the 21M if they “cut” him as you suggested?? SMH

  21. dlmcc0909 says: Jun 21, 2010 1:19 AM

    Shanahan leveled with him and told him they were swithcing to that defense. He had the choice to either cash the check or be released. He chose to cash the check therefore showing a willingness to play. for him to skip camps and be a jerk is a total scumbag thing to do after taking their money. You sign a contract to play for the team, therefore doing what they ask you to do even if you do not agree with the decision. The fact that he was even given a choice was generous on the part of the Redskins.
    We have seen alot of lousy guys come along in this league. My feeling is this guy is the biggest jerk of them all.

  22. AcidSoda says: Jun 21, 2010 2:14 AM

    Why would shanahan, or the d coordinator switch the set up to a 3-4 to begin w/? Players’ strengths? Speedy linebackers and not enough end rushers? I’m telling you if you have fat albert to begin you’d want to build a 4-3 setup. When he plays he’s a dominant DT, and I really don’t understand why you wouldn’t want to build a d-line around him. It’s like using Tony Gonzales only as a blocking TE. Or drafting Ndamukong Suh and putting him as a NT and not having him rush the qb. (Granted Suh is probably gonna be better than Haynesworth, but when that dude plays hard he’s a monster.)

  23. RUGGERLAD says: Jun 21, 2010 2:17 AM

    If Al wants out he just needs to hand the Skins a cheque for 21 million.

  24. this class sucks says: Jun 21, 2010 3:01 AM

    This situation isn’t that one sided. AH is an easy guy to go against because he has so much money and because of his past. But the NFL system is deeply flawed. Like I said earlier, a team can void a contract and cut a player before it comes to term, but a player can’t just leave a team.
    If the 49ers signed a CB and then they decided to switch to a Tampa 2 what would they do? Probably cut the CB they signed. But what if the corner is really good but he doesn’t want to play in the Tampa 2? What can he do? Nothing. He can hold out and get fined and take his chances, or he can request a trade and hope it can be worked out. But it is an unfair system. I think the rules need to change so that if an NFL team cuts a player 100% of the contract is guaranteed. That will probably never happen but until then, I will usually be on the side of the player before the team.

  25. geek says: Jun 21, 2010 6:02 AM

    Some of these comments are spot on, Florio – this is not a one-sided issue. I hate greedy players as much or more than greedy owners and GMs. If this were the first time Snyder had thrown caution to the wind and given a big-name free agent big money, I’d say the team was getting $crewed. But it isn’t, is it? This is the latest example of Redskin Buyer’s Remorse. Is Fat Albert right? No. Is the team a victim of a greedy player? No.
    BTW, Wilson’s comments wouldn’t be considered support for Haynesworth where I come from. What you quoted didn’t support him at all! They criticized the players for taking their (possibly legitimate) gripes out of the locker room.

  26. Rojo Johnson says: Jun 21, 2010 8:20 AM

    Brownsfn: I agree with djstat.
    This class sucks: It wasn’t Florio who wrote this. It was M.D. Smith
    chhutson27: your opinion makes no sense. Why does everyone think the Raiders would take him?
    Rovibe: I guess that comes from people speaking before reading the article.
    Dlmcc0909: I think Albert showed a willingness to take the money, not to play. His agent doesn’t seem to be telling him to do something different. I think the contract written by Snyder gives him leverage here. More power to him. Snyder needs to be reminded that he ruined this franchise for generations.
    AcidSoda: it’s like filling a square peg in a round hole. It’s forcing an ideology on people not suited to go along with it. It doesn’t make sense.
    Geek: Florio did not write this. It was M.D. Smith.

  27. fresno500 says: Jun 21, 2010 8:28 AM

    What came first, the check or the 3-4 defense?

  28. Wolfskins says: Jun 21, 2010 8:56 AM

    Everyone,
    For all of you that’s understanding Haynesworth’s side of things by saying the scheme change isn’t fair…. answer this. Why would the team INTENTIONALLY use their best player in a way that doesn’t fit his strengths? What I mean is wouldn’t the coaching staff WANT AH to excel and help the team win? Isn’t that the overall goal for the coaching staff? Otherwise they would get fired just as quickly as any player would get cut….
    Seriously, all this business about Haynesworth not liking the 4-3 is ridiculous. Either he: is not smart enough to learn a new system; is a glory hog and can’t think about the team; or doesn’t want to be exposed as being a guy that plays on his ability, not what the scheme asks him to.
    @DB26, Haslett said recently that AH could and would probably be used at DE. And Shanny said he could be used at NT or DE… they just didn’t know where since he hasn’t shown up to anything. I agree… as a DE, AH would really get to showcase his talents.
    I just think he wants out and he probably was going to do this all along… look at the list of teams he was looking at: Tampa Bay (seriously… their coach could get fired any day now); Skins (Zorn was possibly going to get fired after one year… and there’s been nothing stable about our franchise the last 10 years); Detroit (really… uh, they’ve been the second worse run franchise in the NFL.. Oakland being #1). Sorry but this was nothing more than a money grab for him. If he wanted to be on a team that would stay 4-3, he should have went to a stable franchise… like Tennessee.
    If he really was a team first guy and cared about football more than money, he’d at least come to camp and see if this fit his skillset or not. He wanted the money and that’s it….

  29. MBF says: Jun 21, 2010 9:00 AM

    Look, for $60 million, I’d be willing to clean out the locker room after the game. But I do understand that it sucks to be told you’re going to have one job and then have your boss force you to do another. I’m not sure Florio would be thrilled if NBC moved him from covering football to tennis.

  30. Black QB White RB says: Jun 21, 2010 9:02 AM

    Put yourself in AH’s shoes…
    Here’s 21 mil if you can agree to play 3-4…or we release you, and you go find another job.
    Obviously 21 million dollars in hand is better than looking for work, so you convince yourself it’ll be alright, and take the money. Everyone reading this would do the same.
    but once you’ve got the money in the bank, it becomes easier to rethink, stew over things a bit, and come to the conclusion that change isn’t gonna be easy just cause yer loaded, and now you’re pouting……
    Not saying he’s right, but I can see how this has morphed into the mess that it has.

  31. 1DaKiddd says: Jun 21, 2010 9:26 AM

    How often is it that the team does not revolve around the highest paid player? It has happened at least twice with the Redskins in recent years. Lavar Arrington and now Haynesworth. Usually the highest paid will be the QB and the offense is based on his strengths. In these cases, the defenses have not been based on their strengths.
    The Redskins like to plug people where they want to and shoot themselves in the foot. Archuleta, Jason Taylor, etc…

  32. tiger2471 says: Jun 21, 2010 9:35 AM

    No matter what anyone says, we as regular employees don’t get guaranteed money, but if we did, we can’t tell the employer, “Oh, I don’t like my new job now; I want to quit, thanks for the 21 million!” That sh*t won’t go down anywhere period. Just like Darnell Dockett said, he’d play any damn defense they told him for that kind of money and still whoop ass! That’s a football player and a damn good one at that. The only thing Fat Albert is doing is making a case for the owners come negotiation time, he may have ruined guaranteed money for a lot of guys and any guaranteed money in the future will be a heavy laden, structural contract with tons of expectations in order to get said money. All in all he’s a big fat thief! One thing is for sure, he’ll NEVER get another big contract and the closest thing he’ll get to the HOF is watching old clips of Reggie White being inducted.

  33. Nebster21 says: Jun 21, 2010 9:37 AM

    djstat says:
    June 20, 2010 10:23 PM
    It is very simple. Albert Haynesworth signed with the Redskins based on the money and the scheme they were running. All he has done right now is express his displeasure with his role in the new system and skip a mini camp. So Haynesworth cashed the check, big deal. He is was being smart. The Redskins could have avoided that big bonus by cutting him. They chose not to.
    Yeah they chose not to assuming he would come in and play. He lied to the Redskins. PS I want to see where in the contract he has it said that he is to play in the 4-3. I hope his NFL career is over. He will not get a multiple year contract from here on out unless he changes his attitude big time.

  34. AllThat says: Jun 21, 2010 10:02 AM

    So he screwed Danny boy out of $21 mil. No big deal. It’s only a dog….errrr I mean money….
    Clinton Portis

  35. Jabberwocky says: Jun 21, 2010 10:54 AM

    It’s laughable to hear you fools talk about not accepting the bonus he was rewarded. Who in their right mind would do such a thing? The thing that pisses me off is that everyone believes he’s totally in the wrong. Nothing can be further from the truth. Is Al being selfish? Sure, but so is management for misusing a great DT by switching to a 3-4 alignment. This is from a notoriously badly managed franchise.

  36. Coach Stram says: Jun 21, 2010 11:54 AM

    ACTUALLY…………..Wilson is correct – it pains me to admit it, though.
    Haynesworth teammates spouting off, trashing him and his heart and selfishness ( though true ) needed to be kept “in house”.
    One classeless move after another.
    I really didnt get the sense Wilson was supporting Hanesworths decision in any way.
    But then again, I love watching the Redskins crumble and bumble…….so to heck with it- MORE PRESS IN REDSKINS CAMP!!!!!

  37. boysroll says: Jun 21, 2010 12:19 PM

    can we all move on? this is the hisory of this joke of an org. so accept it and move on. How many disgruntlyed players have played for this org? its astonishing the way you get treated there by weasel boy. They are not going to be competitive anyway as I cannot see them beating any team in the nfc east. They lost all 6 last year correct.
    Lets talk about teams that have a chance for the SB and all move on with this nonsense…….

  38. Weissie says: Jun 21, 2010 1:43 PM

    First off I hardly consider the Redskins a joke of a organization. Second he got his money, cut this joke of a supposed athlete and move on, so this cancer cannot disrupt this camp anymore. It didnt matter 4-3 3-4, he knew what he was doing, he came to washington to get paid, lesson learned, enough said……….

  39. tiger2471 says: Jun 21, 2010 3:03 PM

    How in the hell can the Redskins be a joke of an organization when they are the 1st or second most profitable organization PERIOD?! They make money every year, we’re not freakin’ Detroit or Oakland fool!

  40. this class sucks says: Jun 21, 2010 3:39 PM

    @Rojo Johnson
    Why do you think Smith wrote this? The author clearly says “Mike Florio.”

  41. Hollywood26 says: Jun 21, 2010 4:14 PM

    I have no problem with Hayneworth wanting the money because who wouldn’t? However, when he took the money he took it with implied consent to do whatever the team needed him to do. I still wouldn’t care if he actually came to camp. I mean, I defended him through the voluntary stuff but this was a mandatory and he’s still all about self. And trust me, his teammates kept their frustrations mum for a whole year while they watched his selfish behavior. So when they feel he’s abandoned them despite their having tried to cover for him of course they are gonna go public.

  42. Bious says: Jun 21, 2010 4:37 PM

    How exactly would things here stay in house when he isn’t attending mandatory camps?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!