Skip to content

Jim Haslett describes Albert Haynesworth in a nutshell: “He doesn’t want to do anything”

Washington Redskins v Chicago Bears Getty Images

Redskins defensive coordinator Jim Haslett swears that he likes Albert Hayesworth.  He also is convinced Haynesworth is a good person and will be a great player again once he plays on a four man line.

The problem, as Haslett explained to Howard Balzer on the “Zach and the Coach Show” on 101 ESPN radio in St. Louis, is that Haynesworth just won’t do anything.

“He can do almost anything he wants. He doesn’t want to do anything. To me that’s the issue,” Haslett said. “He’s one of those guys you walk in a meeting and you tell him, ‘Put down the phone.’ The next day you have to tell him to put down the phone. The next day, you tell him to put down the phone.

“You tell him, ‘Don’t read the newspaper in meetings.’ The next day you have to tell him the same thing. It doesn’t stick; it’s an every-day thing.”

Haynesworth basically decided last year he didn’t want to play in a 3-4 defense.  The Redskins stubbornly kept him, to their detriment.

“He just didn’t want to play in this scheme. He didn’t want to play in the 3-4,” Haslett continued. “He didn’t want to do the things we wanted. Then we said, ‘OK, if you’re not going to do it, let’s not do it. Let’s play nickel, play the 3-technique.’

“Then, it got to the point where he said, ‘I don’t want to play first- and second-down nickel. I just want to play third-down nickel.’ Oh my God, you’re relegating yourself to 10-15 snaps a game. Then after that he didn’t want to do the blitzes, he just wanted to rush.”

So, basically every negative image you’ve ever had about Haynesworth is true.  Got it.

Permalink 49 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, St. Louis Rams, Top Stories
49 Responses to “Jim Haslett describes Albert Haynesworth in a nutshell: “He doesn’t want to do anything””
  1. beastofeden says: Jun 7, 2011 5:31 PM

    It’s funny that the picture to this blog is of Haynesworth’s most productive game. He shredded Chicago.

  2. 504in860 says: Jun 7, 2011 5:32 PM

    Sounds like Haslett is describing his stint as head coach of the Saints.

  3. thephantomstranger says: Jun 7, 2011 5:32 PM

    Yep, I’m convinced Haynesworth is a good person now, too.

  4. descendency says: Jun 7, 2011 5:33 PM

    I think Albert thinks he’s on fire. He has perfect “stop, drop, and roll” technique.

  5. touchdownroddywhite says: Jun 7, 2011 5:35 PM

    Wow. D-bag gets 100 mil to do absolutely nothing.

    And people wonder why there aren’t enough “pro-player” folks on the lockout.

  6. airraid77 says: Jun 7, 2011 5:36 PM

    If he is that bad, then cut him. If he is that bad, then nobody else will pick him up. Oh wait, they will…….guess he aint that bad.

  7. jm11890 says: Jun 7, 2011 5:37 PM

    lmAo

  8. bucngator says: Jun 7, 2011 5:39 PM

    Wow, such a blatant breach of contract….

    If I sign a contract with anyone and accept payment, then I fail to perform my service, I’d be in court as quickly as the process server could find me!!

    How is what he’s doing legal?? Besides the fact Snyder has a propensity to overpay for aging talent…… that shi~ ain’t right!!

  9. thefirstsmilergrogan says: Jun 7, 2011 5:42 PM

    roddy: there are a hundred guys hovering between training camp bodies and practice squad dummies and special teamers being ground up by the football industry for every guy like Albert Haynesworth.

    You are pro-owner in all likelihood because of a predisposition toward management or an antipathy for trade unions. Then, as do most folks, you find facts to agree with your predisposition and use them as evidence.

  10. jutts says: Jun 7, 2011 5:45 PM

    Everybody shredded the Bears O-line last year.

  11. wwwfella says: Jun 7, 2011 5:47 PM

    When your hungry your motivated you need to work to eat, bu when your full its hard to get motivated. When you reach your goal whatever that is most people are content. Everyone wants to be the champ but true champions train to stay the champ.

  12. tkl601 says: Jun 7, 2011 5:48 PM

    Why noy know this information BEFORE you pay a guy $100+ MIL!

  13. jackfnburton says: Jun 7, 2011 5:48 PM

    Hey, nobody put a gun to Snyder’s head and made him write that check.

  14. sabeybaby says: Jun 7, 2011 5:52 PM

    Fat Albert has to be the King of the Turds.

    You Skins fans can thank Little Danny Boy for enabling him to be King. $100 mil plus doesn’t get much these days.

  15. gf2711 says: Jun 7, 2011 5:52 PM

    I don’t know, Mr. Haslett, the office sure seems like a good place to keep up with the news and current events…

  16. FinFan68 says: Jun 7, 2011 5:53 PM

    Paying him a big contract was a colossal mistake. He is a stupid and lazy ingrate that taints the image of NFL players

  17. airraid77 says: Jun 7, 2011 5:55 PM

    much like you pro player sympathist, thefirstsmilegrogan.
    You think that if you get the rich guys, it will make your life better, and it never does.
    MOST PRO OWNER people, I suspect are smart enough to know that this is not about the owners as individuals, but about the individual knowing it is their wallets at stake.

  18. danimalk82 says: Jun 7, 2011 6:09 PM

    Hahaha WOW. This is probably the most entertaining thing you guys have posted in a while. I could watch the follies of the Redskins and Raiders ALL DAY LONG.

  19. wizahdry says: Jun 7, 2011 6:11 PM

    That was the sound of Albert’s already low trade value dropping further. Sure the Skin’s will appreciate their coach airing dirty laundry on a player.

  20. wferg1121 says: Jun 7, 2011 6:15 PM

    You know as much as I am not a Albert Haynesworth fan and he certianly didn’t help Haslett. Everyone knows the defense for the redskins was not the problem until after Shannahan’s/Haslett arrived. Previously they were always in the top 10 in defenses until last year they were near the bottom… They had the wrong defense for the personel they had. Too me that is not the players, that is coaching. The redskins as always is just a big question mark.

  21. hobartbaker says: Jun 7, 2011 6:15 PM

    Haslett describes Albert in a nut casing.

  22. marcinhouston says: Jun 7, 2011 6:32 PM

    Has any defense associated with Jim Haslett in the last 10 years done anything?

  23. schmitty2 says: Jun 7, 2011 6:38 PM

    The condition test fiasco should have been the only proof the Skin’s needed to see to know he is a turd..but then the sight of him falling down and staying down after he couldnt catch Vick on MNF should have reason enough to dump his a$$

  24. weneedlinemen42 says: Jun 7, 2011 6:43 PM

    “Haynesworth basically decided last year he didn’t want to play in a 3-4 defense. The Redskins stubbornly kept him, to their detriment.”

    Was it to their detriment? They had already paid him when he went full-on turd. So it didn’t cost them any extra money.

    No one wanted to trade for him, so they couldn’t get anything in return. Allowing him to leave risked having him turn up on a divisional rivals roster, motivated if only for Redskin games. So keeping him ensured they wouldn’t have to play him in a scheme of his choosing.

    The Titans were reported to be the most serious bidders (a mid to low pick) but they were on the schedule last year and their level of interest seemed to be over-played by the media. So, keeping him didn’t cost us any draft picks, at least not any above the 4th round and probably not even that.

    It cost us a roster spot, but most teams can afford to keep a roster spot open. It’s not great but it wasn’t a killer blow to the team.

    So, what did Shanahan get for holding on to Haynesworth? He got to demonstrate to team that star players no longer got special treatment. He got to prove that contracts don’t matter. That anyone who doesn’t work hard enough doesn’t play. That anyone who puts in his time, gets to play. That position battles will be decided on the practice field and on merit not pay-cheque.

    Did the Haynesworth saga affect the players. Hell yes, in a recent practice the players teased someone about lying on the ground for too long by calling him “Haynesworth.” Shanahan has turned him into a joke, a jibe, an example that every other player on that roster understands.

  25. nfl25 says: Jun 7, 2011 7:06 PM

    so ur saying he is or isnt a good teamate? i couldnt undertsand which way jim was going with this

  26. seabreezes51 says: Jun 7, 2011 7:17 PM

    He will be an Eagle. They will get him cheap, maybe free.
    He will make the Pro Bowl, will be a monster for one season.
    If there is a season

  27. radrntn says: Jun 7, 2011 7:34 PM

    can’t blame the guy, the way shanahan disrespected him last year. Cant wait to see you playing along side seymour albert.

  28. vahawker says: Jun 7, 2011 7:52 PM

    Guy was a total loser, slacker, garbage underachiever until his contract year, then he played hard. Got the FT, played hard again…got paid stupid amounts of Danny bucks and reverted back to his true self. And the “brain(dead)” trust in DC is surprised? Tells you all you need to know about Danny Boy

  29. 12is3times4 says: Jun 7, 2011 7:55 PM

    Jim Haslett: “[Haynesworth] doesn’t want to do anything.”

    In related news, water is wet, the sky is blue, the sun came up in the east this morning and is expected to go down in the west this evening.

  30. skins3yearplan says: Jun 7, 2011 8:00 PM

    Why the HELL are the skins not suing Albert for breach of contract? Honestly, I think they could win this case quite easily. It would definitely be easier for Danny boy to win against Albert than the City Paper!

  31. tommytd says: Jun 7, 2011 8:10 PM

    DUH! Unload ‘em.

  32. riverhorsey says: Jun 7, 2011 8:14 PM

    When you have to tell a guy 3 days in a row about the same problem and he still keeps doing it you have a guy w a very serious, serious attitude problem.

    If you have to tell him more than two days in a row about the same simple issue then that should be enough to impose serious fines and suspensions.

    Hasslet was wrong about one thing, the guy will never be a great player again.

  33. bucks12965 says: Jun 7, 2011 8:15 PM

    The Skins only had to pay pay him $41 mil. Not $100. That $100mil was only if they keep him for the full 7 years of the contract.

    So the fat slob was really a bargain if you look at it that way.

  34. theblowtorchreview says: Jun 7, 2011 8:27 PM

    He’s pretty damn good at fleecing Danny Boy and the Deadskins!

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the Redskins have a well deserved rep among NFL players………it’s where you go to get rich and “die”.

  35. whatchutalkinabouthillis says: Jun 7, 2011 8:36 PM

    @bucks12965
    I find that paying anyone, any sum of money, to loaf around and be a failure of a human being is money wasted.

  36. jskill3 says: Jun 7, 2011 8:45 PM

    Sounds like my teenage daughter. Except that -for 100 million, she actually would put the phone down and do her chores.

  37. bronco1st says: Jun 7, 2011 8:49 PM

    Couldn’t have happened to a more deserving owner.

  38. toiletking says: Jun 7, 2011 8:57 PM

    I’d be angry with Haynesworth, but anything that takes money out of Snyder’s greasy pocket is fine with me.

  39. radrntn says: Jun 7, 2011 9:11 PM

    bucks12965 says: The Skins only had to pay pay him $41 mil. Not $100

    wrong he got 32 million in the first year, and got a 21 million bonus last year, which was cheaper to pay than not pay where his salary thru 2013 was guaranteed.

  40. crise40g says: Jun 7, 2011 10:03 PM

    Wow, only one Raider Hater here?! Unbelievable.

    I feel the ‘Skins pain. Haynesworth is cut from the same cloth as JaBustus. Snyder should follow Al’s lead and just cut the fat and be done with him.

    Win, lose or tie…Raiders ’til I die!

  41. bbb82 says: Jun 7, 2011 10:05 PM

    What a sad waste of a human being.

  42. hobartbaker says: Jun 7, 2011 10:15 PM

    A shell of his former self but still a nut.

  43. cmahdavi says: Jun 7, 2011 10:20 PM

    To all the people out there who don’t think this is a huge mistake on the part of the Redskins consider the following:

    There is a salary cap. (I know not last year but teams don’t have infinite money to pay players) Money spent on Al could have been spent on other players but wasn’t. It could have been spent on a scout so God forbid the Redskins actually build through the draft and not like they are in a franchise mode in Madden football.

    Yes, it is very useful that people can see Haynesworth not getting special treatment…Unless you consider the fact that he is getting special treatment.

    See, MOST players if they say “screw you” without literally saying “screw you” to the coach get cut. Al isn’t – By treating him differently than a typical player you would be treating him in a special way (thus special treatment) . So the fact that they are making a mockery out of him just shows the real problem: the rules apply to some players and not all, not matter how bad the special player acts. It’s not like they are garnishing his pay. He is getting EXACTLY what he wants. HE WINS.

    At the end of the day it doesn’t matter if you bring in a coach and his clique of people and declare “new culture.” You actually have to purge the locker room cancers. Redskins are not. They are playing dollars first then winning. The people I feel most sorry for are the fans. They are dedicated and have consistently supported mediocrity going on 20 years now. They deserve better. As much as I hate the fact their team is named after a racial slur and they support that, they are loyal and have to put up with a lot. Haynesworth is a symptom of a larger problem. It’s why the Redskins are not a respectable franchise. There is no willingness to “do the work” from the top down on a consistent basis.

  44. wetdentist says: Jun 7, 2011 10:25 PM

    funniest article i have ever read on this site

  45. goombar2 says: Jun 7, 2011 10:35 PM

    touchdownroddywhite says: Jun 7, 2011 5:35 PM

    Wow. D-bag gets 100 mil to do absolutely nothing.

    And people wonder why there aren’t enough “pro-player” folks on the lockout.
    ————————————————————-

    I’m sorry, but if there was EVER an anti owner story it’s the Haynesworth saga! Haynesworth didn’t pay himself!

    When Snyder brought out the Brinks trucks, he raised the pay scale for all franchised DEs. So with owners complaining about salaries getting out of control, maybe SOME owners should mind the costs for players?

    I mean really, what would you think of a business if they payed an intern more than anyone else? Yet, for Haynesworth’s production for Washington, that’s what it amounted to.

    Just more Stupid Snyder showing why he’s constantly ranked as one of the worst owners and thought of by most fans as such. If this guy didn’t keep bringing in the bucks from idiot fans, he’d easily be the worst.

    And those defending Snyder on the Haynesworth deal, save the bandwidth. Nobody’s buying your arguments.

  46. goombar2 says: Jun 7, 2011 10:36 PM

    Sorry, DTs… Not DEs.

  47. andyreidisfat says: Jun 7, 2011 11:39 PM

    thefirstsmilergrogan says:
    Jun 7, 2011 5:42 PM
    roddy: there are a hundred guys hovering between training camp bodies and practice squad dummies and special teamers being ground up by the football industry for every guy like Albert Haynesworth.

    You are pro-owner in all likelihood because of a predisposition toward management or an antipathy for trade unions. Then, as do most folks, you find facts to agree with your predisposition and use them as evidence.
    ———————————————————–

    Thank you sir. Very good I agree completely.

    ———————————————————airraid77 says:
    Jun 7, 2011 5:55 PM
    much like you pro player sympathist, thefirstsmilegrogan.
    You think that if you get the rich guys, it will make your life better, and it never does.
    MOST PRO OWNER people, I suspect are smart enough to know that this is not about the owners as individuals, but about the individual knowing it is their wallets at stake.

    ———————————————————-

    Ok so as smart as the other post was this was is as dumb. First I think I understand what your saying , but it is hard to figure.

    How does anyone who sides with the players “getting the rich guys” They are all rich. And no matter what happens the NFL owners will still make crazy amounts of money. So I don’t really see how being in support of the players is “getting the rich guy”.

    Now with the second thing you said I had all kinds of trouble trying to figure out what you were saying but i am guessing you ment that if the players win people will pay more for NFL tockets et al?? If so that is a stupid statement. If the owners were making trillions they would still raise the ticket prices. In fact they will raise them until people stop paying. Thats how it works sir. I think you should really consider the first guy and what he said. Are you looking for a poit of view supported by facts ??? Or more likely are you for facts that support you point of view ?? Always ask your self that question before you take a side of anything. You will always be right more often if you do.

  48. rcali says: Jun 8, 2011 1:21 AM

    Yep, the Titans knew all this. Redskins, such suckers.

  49. dd393 says: Jun 8, 2011 6:50 AM

    Maybe Snyder can hire Haynesworth to be the ‘Skins next head coach.

Leave a Reply

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