We might as well discuss this. With Kris Jenkins out for the year, I am sure we will hear suggestions from the media that the Jets might be interested in disgruntled Redskins lineman Albert Haynesworth. The 6'6" 350 pounder is in the second year of a seven year, $100 million contract. He made the Pro Bowl and All Pro teams in 2007 and 2008. Like Jenkins, he has a rare blend of strength, size, and athleticism.
Why is he available? Despite taking Washington's big money offer less than a year ago, he wants out instead of playing in a 3-4 scheme. The team offered to try and accomodate him by offering to move him if he would not take a $21 million bonus. He took the money and skipped offseason drills in protest. It's one thing for Darrelle Revis to hold out for a new deal after outperforming his old contract. It's another to take a monster deal and then throw a temper tantrum because you don't like the scheme a year later. In case you were wondering, Haynesworth also complained about the defensive scheme last year. He also came into camp out of shape and failed multiple conditioning drills.
The guy's physical skills are enticing. There's a reason he is available, though. I'm usually for rolling the dice on big talent when all it would cost is a mid to late round Draft pick. This is a definite exception, though. Perhaps he would embrace playing for Rex Ryan like so many do. Perhaps he would be fine playing in a 3-4 here. The problem is the Jets would depend on this guy if they got him. This is very tempermental guy who has frankly acted like a selfish baby the past few months. What would happen if he decided he didn't like the system or wasn't getting enough playing time or thought it was too cloudy overhead for him to play hard? It's worth nothing that those two All Pro seasons happened to come when he was without a contract for the next year. He may have Jenkins' ability but none of his commitment to team or work ethic.
I vote do not pursue.
How do you vote?
Should the Jets pursue Albert Haynesworth?
Yes (667 votes)
No (942 votes)
1609 total votes