Greg wrote:
I know you float the pom poms big time for your Pats, but it's kind of obvious that Belichick would see things more clearly on the defensive side of the ball since he's a defensive minded coach. Shanahan, on the other hand, has coached from the offensive perspective. The better comparison would be to compare Belichick to Haslett - which in case I would agree with you. I certainly hope for you sake that Belichick can get Hanesworth to play, but there is a big difference between coaching to the strength of your players and changing your entire philosophy on whichever side of the ball that player plays on, just to make that one player happy. Haslett coaches a pure 3-4 defense. Obviously Belichick mixes in a combination of the 4-3 and a 3-4. It's not so much of coaching to the player's strength. If that player is being a nuisance on your team, it doesn't matter how you try to coach that player up. For the record, the Redskins were trying to fit Al in a position in the 3-4 where he could show his strengths, but Fat Albert just wanted everything his way. So, I say good riddance to him! He's yours now! Good luck!
Just so I'm clear, I'm not a Haynesworth fan. Unlike Chad Johnson (who I also don't like) who has a general jackass but not a bad guy, Haynesworth has been a douche for most of his career. That said, the guy is also a beast of a football player and completely unblockable if he actually decides that he wants to play. The one good thing about the Patriots organization is that if a player decides that he doesn't want to play any longer, he won't be on this team. Ask Randy Moss! As for your point that "it's not so much of coaching to the player's strengths", we'll agree to disagree. It's all about coaching to the strength of the talent on your team. In fact, nothing is more important, in my opinion. If Barry Sanders is your running back and Heath Shuler is your QB, you're running the football as many times as you can!