No Haynesworth against the G-Men [edit: Pats and Jets fans discuss Sanchez]

[blackglass3]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

We do tend to like literacy around here.

However, my understanding is that team was named due to the fact that "PLANE" was too big a word.

...for the team fans to spell.

 

[SanAngeloState]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

...for the team fans to spell.

word, I'm thinking there's no way this guy makes the team. Can't practice, can't play, questionable conditioning and work ethic. Sayonara!

 

[WhiZa]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

First play of the season I bet Chad henne will get sandwiched between haynesworth and wilfork and will be forced to retire after having most of his body crushed.

Dolphins won't be able to put him on IR since a crushed Henne is still better then their backup plan

 

[Sivy]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

you need to find a sense of humor. All those rings and you cannot manage to look like you've been there before.:rocker:

Question..whats it like knowing you will never see the jets win a superbowl? Honestly, are you a little tempted to switch teams?

 

[WestSideJohnny]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

We do tend to like literacy around here.

However, my understanding is that team was named due to the fact that "PLANE" was too big a word.

Wow. You're a witty one. :singing:

 

[Sivy]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Wow. You're a witty one. :singing:

I was being serious...I mean, there is no reason you HAVE to like the jets, so why not jump on another team..atleast then you would have the chance to pull for your favorite team in the superbowl.

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Apparently so, based on the past 10 years, last season's 14-2 record in a 'rebuilding' season with one of the NFL's greenest/youngest defenses, and the ONLY team in NFL history to go 16-0, and eventually even 18-0.

Thinking that the standard is higher here than in Washington is not exactly rocket science.

No, this is some preconceived elitist notion some of you Pats fans conjured up because you think it has some sort of entitlement to the Patriot nameplate. All teams strive for their players to be in shape, "patriot shape" is no different than any other team, and your team's record has no correlation. The success of the Patriots relative to the rest of the league has nothing to do with the condition of their players relative to the rest of the league.

Or are you suggesting that the Patriots obviously aren't conditioned like say for example the Jets, who had their way with them when it counted in the playoffs, or the Packers since they won the Superbowl, are those players in "Jets" or "Packers" shape? C'mon...

He has, as mentioned, regularly received Synvisc treatments just about every offseason or TC since 2006-2007. I am quite sure that Belichick knew about his situation. It is a long season, especially when you play almost every yr into January. It is a BB norm to allow proven vets to rest up during the TC sessions, so most of us don't see it as much of an issue at all. That is left to the ignorant.

All teams do this, the Pats are no different, not sure why some Pats fans think Belichick and/or the Patriots invented the wheel on what goes on in the league. I agree, I'm sure Belichick knows his condition, and is probably taking the right approach with the hope Haynesworth responds, but as we all know, he was an abject failure in Washington, and his character will always come into question until he proves it on the field, the Pats and Belichick are no different, and Belichick is taking a chance here, he gave up on a high character and quality player in Ty Warren, who did all the "right" things, or using your terms, the "Patriot way," Belichick risks alienating the players on the team if they sense they are giving unfair treatment or considerations to a player with a questionable past, or very questionable work ethic.

Yeah, that's what happened. It had nothing to do with his problems from day one with Shanahan, or his dislike for his role in a 3-4 defense. It was a big conspiracy where he "let himself go" just one yr removed from being the premeir free agent on the market. Instead of being dumb enough to give him a 100+ million dollar contract, we traded a 6th rd pick (in 2013 to boot), and a bucket of golfballs for him. The team then promptly signed him to a super low-risk/high-reward pact of approximately 1 million dollars. If he doesn't work out, it is not much different than picking up a league minimum vet who gets cut on a daily basis.

His problems with Shanahan from Day 1? What were they? Don't the Pats play a version of the 3-4, he didn't win much by going to the Pats. Maybe he did have a problem with Shanahan, that didn't give him the right to alienate his teammates, he had a locker room to answer to, he was the highest paid player on the team, and he gave up on them, forget Shanahan, what does that say about the rest of the team. He also didn't only have problems in Washington, their was a reason the Titans let him go. There is a reason why this player was available for such low compensation. I don't disagree about the low risk move and potential for reward, but a leopard of Haynesworth's stature, who isn't exactly young, as they say, "it's tough to teach an old dog new tricks," that may apply here.

As stated before, it is quite common for BB to give the proven vets time to heal and rest, due to the main goal of evaluating the players who are in need to make the 53 man roster. He has done it plenty of times before. If he doesn't work out, there is not much of anything lost at all, if he does work out Belichick will look like a genius...again.

Enjoy your 43 yr streak of...nothing...or was that changed by your playoff wins in the divisional round the past 2 yrs?

Not sure why you felt the need to add the barb and spin of 43 years, and considering the current success of the team under Ryan, who has made the "genius" look quite ordinary. I know it makes Pats fans feel better about themselves with the spin about the Jets playoff success, the last couple of years, but two trips to the AFC Championship game is pretty impressive. Maybe Haynesworth should strive for "Jets shape?"

 

[PATSNUTme]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

No, this is some preconceived elitist notion some of you Pats fans conjured up because you think it has some sort of entitlement to the Patriot nameplate. All teams strive for their players to be in shape, "patriot shape" is no different than any other team, and your team's record has no correlation. The success of the Patriots relative to the rest of the league has nothing to do with the condition of their players relative to the rest of the league.

Or are you suggesting that the Patriots obviously aren't conditioned like say for example the Jets, who had their way with them when it counted in the playoffs, or the Packers since they won the Superbowl, are those players in "Jets" or "Packers" shape? C'mon...



All teams do this, the Pats are no different, not sure why some Pats fans think Belichick and/or the Patriots invented the wheel on what goes on in the league. I agree, I'm sure Belichick knows his condition, and is probably taking the right approach with the hope Haynesworth responds, but as we all know, he was an abject failure in Washington, and his character will always come into question until he proves it on the field, the Pats and Belichick are no different, and Belichick is taking a chance here, he gave up on a high character and quality player in Ty Warren, who did all the "right" things, or using your terms, the "Patriot way," Belichick risks alienating the players on the team if they sense they are giving unfair treatment or considerations to a player with a questionable past, or very questionable work ethic.



His problems with Shanahan from Day 1? What were they? Don't the Pats play a version of the 3-4, he didn't win much by going to the Pats. Maybe he did have a problem with Shanahan, that didn't give him the right to alienate his teammates, he had a locker room to answer to, he was the highest paid player on the team, and he gave up on them, forget Shanahan, what does that say about the rest of the team. He also didn't only have problems in Washington, their was a reason the Titans let him go. There is a reason why this player was available for such low compensation. I don't disagree about the low risk move and potential for reward, but a leopard of Haynesworth's stature, who isn't exactly young, as they say, "it's tough to teach an old dog new tricks," that may apply here.



Not sure why you felt the need to add the barb and spin of 43 years, and considering the current success of the team under Ryan, who has made the "genius" look quite ordinary. I know it makes Pats fans feel better about themselves with the spin about the Jets playoff success, the last couple of years, but two trips to the AFC Championship game is pretty impressive. Maybe Haynesworth should strive for "Jets shape?"

The only ones impressed are Jets fans. Ryan is 3-2 against the genius and has not won any kind of a title. So, let's have some prospective. When he actually wins something then we can talk about his place as one of hte better coaches. Don't forget, Jets fans crowned Eric Mangini (the rat) as "Mangenius", then turned on him like a pack of dogs.

Let's also stay on topic. There is a whole Jets Suck thread if you want to respectfully make the point that the Jets don't suck.

Now as far a Albert is concerned. BB has a history of not playing certain players during pre-season while they get use to the system. Albert also had a major distraction going up until last week, which is now resolved. No further comment about that is needed on this thread as it's been beaten to death.

If Albert is not going to contribute to this team in a positive way, there is one thing for certain, BB will cut him like a bad habit and move on.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

you're red sox went nearly a century. did that make finally winning more or less enjoyable? and you must know the world changed last night when we completed a pass out of the wild cat. from small things mama!

86 years, but who's counting? And Yankees fans rubbed it in year after year after year, so I guess this is a little payback. We thought Bucky ******* Dent was the last straw, but still had to wait another quarter century.

And, BTW, 1968--2011 is 43 years, so you guys are just at the half way point. In another 43, you'll really enjoy it! In fact, by then, the Lombardi might well have been renamed and your grandkids can watch the Jets hoist the Belichick.

Otherwise, welcome to the Board. Reasonable comments and a sense of humor will make you a welcome oppo poster.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

you're red sox went nearly a century. did that make finally winning more or less enjoyable? and you must know the world changed last night when we completed a pass out of the wild cat. from small things mama!

You did notice that you had registered at patsfans.com, right?

If you want talk about baseball and the Red Sox, I suggest that you register at redsoxfans.com.

This may some to a shock to you, but not all Patriots are Red Sox fans and some do not even care about baseball.

 

[patriot lifer]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Another 2 for the ignore list; it's been a while. I think their fans get put out because of all the vulgarity on the New Jersey Jets' boards (hence they come here for greener pastures). There have to be near zero girls on those boards. Just dudes between 12 and 25. Few over 40 years old I'd expect, with the sheer lack of etiquette on the forums.

Although they'll never be as bad as the Steelers' boards, but that's another story.

 

[supafly]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

No, this is some preconceived elitist notion some of you Pats fans conjured up because you think it has some sort of entitlement to the Patriot nameplate. All teams strive for their players to be in shape, "patriot shape" is no different than any other team, and your team's record has no correlation. The success of the Patriots relative to the rest of the league has nothing to do with the condition of their players relative to the rest of the league.

Or are you suggesting that the Patriots obviously aren't conditioned like say for example the Jets, who had their way with them when it counted in the playoffs, or the Packers since they won the Superbowl, are those players in "Jets" or "Packers" shape? C'mon...



All teams do this, the Pats are no different, not sure why some Pats fans think Belichick and/or the Patriots invented the wheel on what goes on in the league. I agree, I'm sure Belichick knows his condition, and is probably taking the right approach with the hope Haynesworth responds, but as we all know, he was an abject failure in Washington, and his character will always come into question until he proves it on the field, the Pats and Belichick are no different, and Belichick is taking a chance here, he gave up on a high character and quality player in Ty Warren, who did all the "right" things, or using your terms, the "Patriot way," Belichick risks alienating the players on the team if they sense they are giving unfair treatment or considerations to a player with a questionable past, or very questionable work ethic.



His problems with Shanahan from Day 1? What were they? Don't the Pats play a version of the 3-4, he didn't win much by going to the Pats. Maybe he did have a problem with Shanahan, that didn't give him the right to alienate his teammates, he had a locker room to answer to, he was the highest paid player on the team, and he gave up on them, forget Shanahan, what does that say about the rest of the team. He also didn't only have problems in Washington, their was a reason the Titans let him go. There is a reason why this player was available for such low compensation. I don't disagree about the low risk move and potential for reward, but a leopard of Haynesworth's stature, who isn't exactly young, as they say, "it's tough to teach an old dog new tricks," that may apply here.



Not sure why you felt the need to add the barb and spin of 43 years, and considering the current success of the team under Ryan, who has made the "genius" look quite ordinary. I know it makes Pats fans feel better about themselves with the spin about the Jets playoff success, the last couple of years, but two trips to the AFC Championship game is pretty impressive. Maybe Haynesworth should strive for "Jets shape?"

The 'preconceived notion' that being having the best record out of all 32 NFL teams in the past 10 yrs is certainly in relation to the training/strength programs, and passing on some players that others would have taken. I am not sure why you are arguing that? Your comparisons to the Packers and Jets are laughable...the NYJ haven't done anything (except, like I said win in the divisional round), and the Packers are a very good team, but have not proved to be much of anything besides the flavor of the month.

Again, the notion that the standard of conditioning is just a little bit different around here is not exactly brain surgery.

As far as your 'new' HC and team---good job. They played much better in last yr's playoff game, and had a very good gameplan. However, before that game the coaches were 2-2 in direct combat against each other, so it's not exactly like RR is whipping Belichick's behind.

First, you may want to think about actually winning the division, which would be a start in the rivalry. You backed into the playoffs in 2009 with the lying down of the Indy Colts--that's quite an accomplishment. Last yr, you deserved the success, but your victories stopped one week removed of wild-card weekend (although the win was well deserved).

Point taken on a controversial selection of Haynesworth, but remember that no one wanted him, and that it is a very low risk/high reward signing. You would have more a point if they had gone out and drastically overpayed for him. By offering a very low draft pick and a very low salary, all they really did was give him a chance. That's something that has been done before in the likes of Dillon, Moss, and Harrison.

As far as 'giving up' on a high-character guy like Ty Warren...Belichick does what is best for this yr's version/future of the team. I hate to bring it up again, but some accounts have Warren not appearing...in 'Patriots shape.' At least when compared to the yrs gone past. With the salary involved, and all things considered, getting rid of a proven vet here is not exactly a new thing. Yes, some of them are 'high-character' guys, but I do not think BB is trying to win a character contest, I think he is trying to win a SB. Again.

I agree that until anything with Haynesworth 'pays off' the signing itself should be taken with a grain of salt, with a leaning towards it not working out. That is true. Only time will tell, but I don't see much wrong with the specifics of the deal, and the compensation involved. There have certainly been plenty of NYJ involved with some shady character issues, and past problems. Maybe BB stole a page out of the mighty Rex Ryan's page, and thought about adding someone in the trenches with some attitude? Maybe the compensation/contract involved was just too good to pass up for a guy who 2 yrs ago was considered one of the best defensive players in the game? Maybe he'll get cut this afternoon? Who knows? The addition of a lot of quality DL players should make that aspect of the defense better though.

 

[Calciumee]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Another 2 for the ignore list; it's been a while. I think their fans get put out because of all the vulgarity on the New Jersey Jets' boards (hence they come here for greener pastures). There have to be near zero girls on those boards. Just dudes between 12 and 25. Few over 40 years old I'd expect, with the sheer lack of etiquette on the forums.

Although they'll never be as bad as the Steelers' boards, but that's another story.

They will probably disappear in a week or two! And only come back to talk s**t before the two Pats-Jets games! And then disappear again!

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

No, this is some preconceived elitist notion some of you Pats fans conjured up because you think it has some sort of entitlement to the Patriot nameplate. All teams strive for their players to be in shape, "patriot shape" is no different than any other team, and your team's record has no correlation. The success of the Patriots relative to the rest of the league has nothing to do with the condition of their players relative to the rest of the league.

Or are you suggesting that the Patriots obviously aren't conditioned like say for example the Jets, who had their way with them when it counted in the playoffs, or the Packers since they won the Superbowl, are those players in "Jets" or "Packers" shape? C'mon...



All teams do this, the Pats are no different, not sure why some Pats fans think Belichick and/or the Patriots invented the wheel on what goes on in the league. I agree, I'm sure Belichick knows his condition, and is probably taking the right approach with the hope Haynesworth responds, but as we all know, he was an abject failure in Washington, and his character will always come into question until he proves it on the field, the Pats and Belichick are no different, and Belichick is taking a chance here, he gave up on a high character and quality player in Ty Warren, who did all the "right" things, or using your terms, the "Patriot way," Belichick risks alienating the players on the team if they sense they are giving unfair treatment or considerations to a player with a questionable past, or very questionable work ethic.



His problems with Shanahan from Day 1? What were they? Don't the Pats play a version of the 3-4, he didn't win much by going to the Pats. Maybe he did have a problem with Shanahan, that didn't give him the right to alienate his teammates, he had a locker room to answer to, he was the highest paid player on the team, and he gave up on them, forget Shanahan, what does that say about the rest of the team. He also didn't only have problems in Washington, their was a reason the Titans let him go. There is a reason why this player was available for such low compensation. I don't disagree about the low risk move and potential for reward, but a leopard of Haynesworth's stature, who isn't exactly young, as they say, "it's tough to teach an old dog new tricks," that may apply here.



Not sure why you felt the need to add the barb and spin of 43 years, and considering the current success of the team under Ryan, who has made the "genius" look quite ordinary. I know it makes Pats fans feel better about themselves with the spin about the Jets playoff success, the last couple of years, but two trips to the AFC Championship game is pretty impressive. Maybe Haynesworth should strive for "Jets shape?"

Who is this guy?

Never heard of him.

He seems impressed that they lose in the AFCCG.

 

[Calciumee]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

1969......

you're red sox went nearly a century. did that make finally winning more or less enjoyable? and you must know the world changed last night when we completed a pass out of the wild cat. from small things mama!

patman12 are you John W. Henry? Or Thomas C. Werner?

Must be if they are you're Red Sox!

P.S. Love what you have done since buying Liverpool

 

[Calciumee]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Who is this guy?

Never heard of him.

He seems impressed that they lose in the AFCCG.

Two years in a row...

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

The 'preconceived notion' that being having the best record out of all 32 NFL teams in the past 10 yrs is certainly in relation to the training/strength programs, and passing on some players that others would have taken. I am not sure why you are arguing that? Your comparisons to the Packers and Jets are laughable...the NYJ haven't done anything (except, like I said win in the divisional round), and the Packers are a very good team, but have not proved to be much of anything besides the flavor of the month.

Again, the notion that the standard of conditioning is just a little bit different around here is not exactly brain surgery.

As far as your 'new' HC and team---good job. They played much better in last yr's playoff game, and had a very good gameplan. However, before that game the coaches were 2-2 in direct combat against each other, so it's not exactly like RR is whipping Belichick's behind.

First, you may want to think about actually winning the division, which would be a start in the rivalry. You backed into the playoffs in 2009 with the lying down of the Indy Colts--that's quite an accomplishment. Last yr, you deserved the success, but your victories stopped one week removed of wild-card weekend (although the win was well deserved).

Point taken on a controversial selection of Haynesworth, but remember that no one wanted him, and that it is a very low risk/high reward signing. You would have more a point if they had gone out and drastically overpayed for him. By offering a very low draft pick and a very low salary, all they really did was give him a chance. That's something that has been done before in the likes of Dillon, Moss, and Harrison.

As far as 'giving up' on a high-character guy like Ty Warren...Belichick does what is best for this yr's version/future of the team. I hate to bring it up again, but some accounts have Warren not appearing...in 'Patriots shape.' At least when compared to the yrs gone past. With the salary involved, and all things considered, getting rid of a proven vet here is not exactly a new thing. Yes, some of them are 'high-character' guys, but I do not think BB is trying to win a character contest, I think he is trying to win a SB. Again.

I agree that until anything with Haynesworth 'pays off' the signing itself should be taken with a grain of salt, with a leaning towards it not working out. That is true. Only time will tell, but I don't see much wrong with the specifics of the deal, and the compensation involved. There have certainly been plenty of NYJ involved with some shady character issues, and past problems. Maybe BB stole a page out of the mighty Rex Ryan's page, and thought about adding someone in the trenches with some attitude? Maybe the compensation/contract involved was just too good to pass up for a guy who 2 yrs ago was considered one of the best defensive players in the game? Maybe he'll get cut this afternoon? Who knows? The addition of a lot of quality DL players should make that aspect of the defense better though.

I'm not at all knocking the Pats decision to trade for Haynesworth, and have agreed from the beginning it has some upside, just not sure if the kind of upside in a player that was once a dominating player at his position with chronic knee problems and seriously questioned work ethic and a risk to the locker room is worth it, I didn't think the Pats invested a lot at all.

I'm not sure how the team backed into the playoffs in 09, you can point out the Colt game all you want, the Jets had to win other games, I think that is an easy copout spin for Pats fans to deal with the Jets resurgence the last two years under Ryan.

Sure, winning the division, and a bye week would certainly help a championship run, one less game, game on the road, but while you "poo poo" their accomplishments the last couple of years, I can certainly counter that what they have done has still been impressive, considering they started with a rookie HC, and a rookie QB, a rebuilt core and a younger team, and have done it on the road. Beating the Pats at home, when the Pats had a bye, and everybody and their brother thought the Pats were unbeatable when Belichick had two weeks to prepare...

Bottom-line, Jets are a good team, and the division has to go through both teams, the Jets have had the more successful overall campaigns the last two years, and nothing really has changed this year. The Jets have made changes for the better, the Pats still have Brady and Belichick.

 

[JetFan1]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

Who is this guy?

Never heard of him.

He seems impressed that they lose in the AFCCG.

I'm impressed that the Jets have accomplished with a rookie HC and a rookie QB, it's a good start to the current era of the Jets franchise. There aren't many teams you note their success under the circumstances in the same light. But hey, if it makes you feel better to put that spin on it, have at it.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

I'm not at all knocking the Pats decision to trade for Haynesworth, and have agreed from the beginning it has some upside, just not sure if the kind of upside in a player that was once a dominating player at his position with chronic knee problems and seriously questioned work ethic and a risk to the locker room is worth it, I didn't think the Pats invested a lot at all.

I'm not sure how the team backed into the playoffs in 09, you can point out the Colt game all you want, the Jets had to win other games, I think that is an easy copout spin for Pats fans to deal with the Jets resurgence the last two years under Ryan.

Sure, winning the division, and a bye week would certainly help a championship run, one less game, game on the road, but while you "poo poo" their accomplishments the last couple of years, I can certainly counter that what they have done has still been impressive, considering they started with a rookie HC, and a rookie QB, a rebuilt core and a younger team, and have done it on the road. Beating the Pats at home, when the Pats had a bye, and everybody and their brother thought the Pats were unbeatable when Belichick had two weeks to prepare...

Bottom-line, Jets are a good team, and the division has to go through both teams, the Jets have had the more successful overall campaigns the last two years, and nothing really has changed this year. The Jets have made changes for the better, the Pats still have Brady and Belichick.

He's saying you backed in because......you like backed into the playoffs.

Besides, it's hardly jealousy when the "rivals" main accomplishment since Vietnam is winning a Division Round playoff game against a team that had over half of it's snaps taken by rookies and second year players.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Re: No Haynesworth against the G-Men

I'm impressed that the Jets have accomplished with a rookie HC and a rookie QB, it's a good start to the current era of the Jets franchise. There aren't many teams you note their success under the circumstances in the same light. But hey, if it makes you feel better to put that spin on it, have at it.

OK

You are impressed. We get it. Now please excuse yourself so the adults can talk football.