Last week, I wrote a short piece on my thoughts on the situation regarding defensive tackle Albert Hayesworth. It is up to interpretation on his behavior and whether you deem it as one of a “malcontented” player, but it was my opinion based on his actions or lack thereof. With that said, I will eat crow on a point I made that was in-fact incorrect. I said Albert Haynesworth did not want to play in the 3-4 scheme. I was wrong for saying it that way, when in truth he is not certain about his comfort level playing nose tackle.
In the 3-4 defense there are three down lineman, two defensive ends and one nose guard. In the 4-3 base, there are four down linemen and Haynesworth has played defensive tackle his entire NFL Career. In an interview with Behind the Athlete, Haynesworth explains the doubt surrounding his participation in that certain scheme.
“At first I was a little iffy to it because I’ve never played in the 3-4. I don’t have a clue to how it’s really played. But then I talked to him [Jim Haslett] a little bit and he plans on just playing me in the middle a little bit and at end. I guess I’ll just move around and just wreak havoc; so as long as we’re doing that and I’m not just at one position, I’m fine, I’m fine with it.”
There you have it. And I admit that I must eat the crow. So what do I think now? Should Albert go, should Albert stay? I feel that he should be traded, should he not desire to be a viable member of this team. I also feel that hearing his name tossed around in trade rumors equals a spurned Haynesworth. I think that if motivated by desire to achieve “I told you so” rights as well as defend his talent, Haynesworth would still be an asset to the team. He said he would attend organized team activities, let’s see how this all pans out.
Topics: Albert Haynesworth