Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Haynesworth: Giants offered $80 - something million

BlueDave : 3/2/2009 11:47 pm
He talks about what everyone offered on Michael Irvin radio show. Tampa offered $100 as well. Contract discussions with Tennessee begin at 6:22. NFC East and Giants start at 10:50.
link - ( New Window )
I would have been happy to have him  
j_rud : 3/2/2009 11:48 pm : link
but it would have struck me as morally wrong to see him paid more than Osi and Tuck combined lol.
Would have been nice  
seeker716 : 3/2/2009 11:49 pm : link
But I'm glad we got the other 3 for that total offer
it looks  
Osi Osi Osi OyOyOy : 3/2/2009 11:50 pm : link
like Haynesworth was the #1 option for the Giants, but the Giants had a very good Plan B because they knew their chance of getting Haynesworth was unlikely.
Wonder what the guaranteed money was  
Scooter : 3/2/2009 11:50 pm : link
... in the packages offered by the Bucs and Giants.
Good to know...  
lono801 : 3/2/2009 11:51 pm : link
The Giants did much better this past weekend...

Great FA so far...

Ill pass on AH for 80+ million...
I'm so much happier with plan B than I would have been with plan A  
L.T.=Lawrence Taylor : 3/2/2009 11:53 pm : link
I just couldn't get over signing that guy. He's a jerk. Plain and simple any man who can step on another's face with cleats is a jerk plain and simple. Plus once we gave him all that money I'd be really worried about when exactly he was gonna start dogging it. He never did seem as motivated as he's been in the last two possible contract years..
I wonder if our plan A  
BlueDave : 3/2/2009 11:56 pm : link
wasn't exactly what it turned out to be. I don't think the Giants expected to get Heynesworth
Perfect example.....of  
lono801 : 3/3/2009 12:01 am : link
A guy that wants the Money...

Or two guys that want the Ring...and a great payday.

I hope AH is outstanding as a Skin...and they still finish 4th in The East...

Ill take Canty and Rocky...

Lono  
SanFranGiantsFan : 3/3/2009 12:05 am : link
Spot on.

"Whenever they say its not about the money, its about the money."
I'd take the 3 guys we signed over AH anyday.  
mjt832 : 3/3/2009 12:05 am : link
Snyder invested a lot of money in Haynesworth's basket. What happens if he get injured in the pre-season like Osi did?
I guess I'm in the minority  
Sy'56 : 3/3/2009 12:11 am : link
I would have rather had the best defensive lineman in football than the three guys we signed whom are going to cost us more. I'm not saying I'm unhappy or that we should have increased our offer, but Haynesworth would have brought this defense to a level we have not seen around here since the Parcells/Belichick era.
Sy  
lono801 : 3/3/2009 12:18 am : link
You of all people should know...it aint the 80's anymore...

What was the 'G' money?

Three or four years aint worth that kind of cash...

lono  
Sy'56 : 3/3/2009 12:24 am : link
If you actually think it would have been a 3 or 4 year deal, he would not have seen nearly have of the $80 million. Just like with Washington, he'll probably be finished or re-structured at the 4 year - $48 million point. The impact he could have been here would be more than anyone that we would pay that kind of money to.
Sy, same goes for all contracts  
seeker716 : 3/3/2009 12:28 am : link
so that's a moot point. Giants got much better value in the 3 players they signed than just Haynesworth.
Sy  
KsToNe498 : 3/3/2009 12:29 am : link
How did the 3 guys we signed cost us more then Haynesworth? We spent 81 million which is 19 less then Haynesworth got, I'm not sure on the guaranteed Bernard got but Canty and Boley cost us 27.5 guaranteed and I highly doubt Bernard got more then 8 which puts us a lot less in the guaranteed money then Haynesworth got. Oh and we got players that actually don't miss games unlike Haynesworth.

Trust me I would of loved to have had him here but ill take Rocky, Boley, Canty and the extra 19 mil to spend on a backup S, CB and Olineman pluss the rooks
I agree  
Osi Osi Osi OyOyOy : 3/3/2009 12:30 am : link
I would've rather had Haynesworth. The guy is the best D-Lineman in football and combined with Osi, Tuck, and Robbins would've formed the most devastating D-Line in recent memory.

But in football there is a lot of risk spending that much money on 1 guy no matter how good he is. Injuries are a part of the game, and serious injuries could stike at any time to anyone (see Tom Brady).

Signing Canty, Bernard, and Boley is the much safer move due to the inury factor. But I personally would've rather have had Haynesworth because while the risk was large, the reward was higher imo.
Sy  
KsToNe498 : 3/3/2009 12:31 am : link
you are basing this off us getting him for around 80 mil which was NEVER going to happen. We would of had to have matched the Skins offer or came close at about 97 mil
Sy  
lono801 : 3/3/2009 12:38 am : link
Thats Fair...I read that post...

Im glad The Giants were 20 million off when it came to signing AH...

AH aint worth 80/100 million...

Best FA week I have ever seen...

guys  
Sy'56 : 3/3/2009 12:40 am : link
read what I said again. I am in full agreement that we should not have increased our offer. I am simply stating I disagree with those that said they would rather have the 3 we signed than Haynesworth for whatever we offered him.

Haynesworth plus whatever D-line and LB we could get in the draft is better than Canty-Bernard-Boley. Again, I feel like I need to say again I am elated with what has transpired over the past few days. Just simply stating what I would have preferred.
I just have a feeling  
JoeMP2003 : 3/3/2009 12:42 am : link
that the Haynesworth thing is going to blow up in the Skins faces, if for no other reason than it almost always does. He is a great player, but hes never started more than 14 games (and hes only started more than 12 two times in his career.) He's never played more than 65% of the snaps for any defense he has played on. Great player, thats not even arguable. But he was SO dominant last year, and not just based on the higher sack total, that you could make the argument that hes already had his career year (which just so happened to be a contract year). People will expect the Albert Haynesworth of 2008, arguable MVP candidate, throughout the duration of the contract. That may not be reasonable
Joe  
Sy'56 : 3/3/2009 12:48 am : link
Weird, I was getting the same feeling too. Although it may have something to do with the fact that I hate the Redskins and I love seeing them make poor personnel moves. But beyond that...like Jacobs on a cheaper scale, he can't seem to keep his legs healthy for a whole season and that will, I promise, come back to haunt him at some point. 5 years? maybe. 4 years? maybe. 2 years? maybe. He relies on his leg drive a lot more than people think he does, which is part of the reason he gets such a push up the middle.
wasn't Haynesworth known as an underachiever before last year?  
chris r : 3/3/2009 12:56 am : link
underachiever + career year in contract year is bad news for the team that signs him based on his career year in his contract year.
His deal is essentially a 4 year deal  
JoeMP2003 : 3/3/2009 12:59 am : link
the money at the backend is likely something hes not going to see

But even so, we're talking about someone who since he became a full time starter in 2003 has missed 25 starts. Thats basically 4 starts a year

If he continues to miss games at this rate, and why wouldn't he as he has never displayed an ability to hold up for 16 games, is 12 games a year from Albert Haynesworth worth that money? And what if they get the Albert Haynesworth from pre 2007? Prior to that time Haynesworth was far from the game changer he is today. In 2006, with him as their defensive centerpeice, they finished dead last in the NFL in total defense. The two years prior they ranked 19th and 27th. Prior to 2007, while Haynesworth was a very good player, he was on no ones radar as the potential highest paid player in the NFL. In 2007 Haynesworth took his game to a whole new level (what a suprise, it was his contract year. They franchised him after that season) and their defense followed suit. He was in a contract year again this year and played even better. What if the Skins get a pre 2007 Haynesworth? Because thats certainly not worth the money they paid

Motivation and injury history + the Skins usually being wrong leads me to believe this will blow up in their face

It's not as if he's done nothing until the past  
Shockeyisthebest80 : 3/3/2009 1:05 am : link
few years. I remember him being dominant in the 2004 playoff game in New England.
I don't recall him being dominant in a 2003 playoff game at NE  
JoeMP2003 : 3/3/2009 1:17 am : link
I do recall that team losing Jevon Kearse that offseason (back when he was the freak) and completely falling into the tank for 4 years. They didnt stop anyone again until 2007. And Haynesworth was there starring throughout, obviously not playing on the level he seemed to find when dollars were to be made. He was not the level of player back then that he played to in his contract year(s) the last two years
AH will not live up to that contract  
ITaLiRiCaN : 3/3/2009 1:21 am : link
i'm telling you guys now..
Ital - I agree with you  
mjt832 : 3/3/2009 1:51 am : link
something is going to go wrong. I don't know what it will be but, it won't end well for AH and Washington.
I'd rather have the three guys  
jcn56 : 3/3/2009 4:46 am : link
Not that AH isn't immensely talented, but concentrating all of that salary on one guy means you get zero value from it when he's injured or underperforming. And from a guy who's had some injury issues and has had some questions regarding his work ethic, that's not a small risk.

The most telling part was how the Titans didn't seem to make much of an effort to retain him. It's not like they didn't have a need to keep him or didn't expect to be contending next year.
Haynesworth  
TrueBlue56 : 3/3/2009 4:46 am : link
reminds me alot of the Redskins acquiring Stubblefield years ago. Stubblefield was considered one of the best DT's in the league and was signed to the 2nd highest contract for a DT (John Randle was the highest paid). Stubblefield came over after 5 years with the 49ers, had his best year in the final year with the 49ers (contract year) and never played up to a high level with the Redskins.
jcn  
chris r : 3/3/2009 5:27 am : link
especially important to diversify your risks in this economy.
I would definitely rather have Haynesworth  
oipolloi : 3/3/2009 6:48 am : link
than Canty and Bernard. That's not even close imo.


When you throw Boley into the equation, then I go with what the Giants did because there is too much risk involved with AH's history of injuries.
DT  
Rich T : 3/3/2009 6:51 am : link
Rocky and Canty will be still be sacking the QB in the 4 quarter while Haynesworth will be wearing his oxygen mask on the sidelines.
I still think  
mrvax : 3/3/2009 7:01 am : link
the Giants KNEW they couldn't afford AH and they went into the bidding simply to raise the price. They knew Danny Boy would outbid them. Skins have no Eli to sign.

Yep, I do believe this all played out just as Reese & Co. suspected. They basically took Danny Boy to school.
Do you play poker? Here is my way of looking at it.  
Marty in Albany : 3/3/2009 9:10 am : link
Would you rather draw an ace or a pair of 10s?

Well it all depends on the situation: the type of game you are playing and the rest of the cards in your hand. A good player might win with either.

Let's wait and see what the final 53 players look like.
I'm with oi  
Overseer : 3/3/2009 10:05 am : link
LOVED the Boley signing.
Reese  
JoeMP2003 : 3/3/2009 2:20 pm : link
went out of his way in his conference call today to state the Giants never offered Haynesworth 80 mil
You know  
Semipro Lineman : 3/3/2009 2:31 pm : link
I can see a 5-year $65 million with 30 million guarantee offer from the Giants if they thought the talks about the Redskins were blowing smoke about offering the stars. It would probably fit the budget and stay within the Giant's tend of not adding on extra years just to inflate the overall contracts value for the sake of getting more press. I would be willing to bet a ton that Tampa's offer did that and thats why he took the Redskin offer.
Back to the Corner