As we all know by know, the Washington Redskins finally did something about the Albert Haynesworth debacle on Tuesday, suspending the $100 million dollar flop for the rest of the season without pay. The move brought a sense of relief around the Redskins’ organization, knowing they can focus on football now that the drama Haynesworth seemed to bring on a weekly basis is over with.
Yesterday, Mike Shanahan said that during their eight months together, Haynesworth was impossible to please, and it was simply time to part ways:
“He didn’t like the 4-3 defense a year ago,” Shanahan said. “He didn’t like the base defense. He didn’t like the nickel defense. He didn’t want to play nose tackle, didn’t want to play defensive end (in the 3-4 defense). We got him playing the nickel package, first and second and third down. He didn’t like first- and second-down nickel, wanted to play third-down nickel in passing situations. Hey, it was just time. It was just time to go in another direction.”
More surprisingly, Shanahan also said that he “hasn’t even discussed this situation with Dan” … meaning that overly-hands-on owner Daniel Snyder wasn’t aware of the suspension – which was officially for “conduct detrimental to the team” – before it happened. I don’t know about you, but I kind of love that.
Oh, and in case you’re still wondering if Shanahan made the right decision, we gently remind you of this.
Comedian/Redskins fan Danny Rouhier is a long-time favorite here at ReadAndReact, so we thought we’d check in on him for the first time this season to see how he’s doing. And as you might have guessed, he – along with every other Redskins fan in America – is understandably upset with the state of his favorite franchise.
This week, Rouhier turns nostalgic about the ‘Skins, drawing parallels between the up & down history of the club and that of an 80′s rock band. And once again, he delivers a gem with Redskins Week 10: Behind the Music:
Wait, who didn’t love Roxette in the early ’90s?!?
If it seems like we’re piling on the Redskins this week, it’s not intentional … there’s just always a bounty of great content whenever a team implodes on national television the way they did.
UPDATE: The details of McNabb’s contract have come out, and it looks like the guarantee is much lower than originally thought. Per usual, it’s a wildly confusing deal with all sorts of clauses and incentives, but if the Redskins decide to cut or trade McNabb after this year, they’re only on the hook for $3.75 million.
In perhaps the strangest move Daniel Snyder has made in the last 3-4 days, the Washington Redskins gave Donovan McNabb a 5-year contract extension on Monday. Under the terms of the deal, the 33-year old QB is guaranteed to make $40 million, and could make as much as $88 million with incentives. But that would mean that McNabb would have to play out his contract in Washington, which doesn’t seem overly likely considering his age, and his recently-strained relationship with head coach Mike Shanahan.
As we all know, just 2 weeks ago, McNabb was benched by Shanahan in overtime against the Lions, setting off a firestorm of controversy surrounding the franchise. On consecutive days following the incident, Shanahan blamed the benching on both McNabb’s physical conditioning and his grasp of the 2-minute offense … neither of which seemed like valid excuses for sitting down a six-time pro bowl quarterback (especially when the alternative was Rex Grossman). This inevitably led to accusations of racism against Shanahan from the media, which has been a topic of conversation in DC ever since.
So why did the Redskins make this deal? And why now? I mean, McNabb hasn’t exactly gotten off to a great start this season (7TDs, 8 INTs, 70.6 passer rating through the first 8 games), so this wasn’t a reward for his play of late. Was it an olive branch from the franchise to try and make Donovan feel better after his benching? Or was it an attempt by Snyder to make the whole racism thing just go away? You also have to believe that Shanahan was consulted on this move … so would that mean he’s sold on McNabb – who is clearly well past his prime – as his long-term solution at QB?
It just seems like a very oddly-timed move by the Redskins, and I can’t say I quite get it. But it’s not like we’re talking about Haynesworth money here. And either way, I think we can all agree that McNabb is a way better option than Danny-boy’s Plan B, which was going out and signing JaMarcus Russell.