| Welcome to the home of some of the Washington Redskins' most ravenous fans. If this is your first visit, please read our rules and regulations. You must register before you can access all of the forums, and to use all the board's features and options; members also enjoy fewer advertisements. |
| Author |
Message |
DaSkinz Baby
Hog
Joined: 24 Sep 2012
Posts: 287
Location: Clarksburg
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:08 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| markshark84 wrote: | | DaSkinz Baby wrote: | | Bishop Hammer wrote: | | SkinsJock wrote: | WHY do we HAVE TO get rid of the DC now?
WHY can this decision not wait until after the season is over?
Should we also get rid of ALL the other coaches AND players that are not doing their jobs?
 what is wrong with some of you guys? |
From what I've read the reason Haslett hasnt been let go is because of money. If they sack him now they'll have to pay out the rest of his contract. If the Shanny fires him at the end of the season the Skins won't have to pay him. If thats the case I see why they're waiting. Its not like anyone else on the coaching staff can do much better so the team might as well wait for the year's end. |
Not sure I believe that. When has Snyder ever worried about money?? I think we see what happens with the new DB coach and see if he has DC talent. If not wait and get Rex Ryan in here ASAP at the end of the year cause he will be fired from the Jets..... |
Not sure you are exactly using logic here......... at all.
In your first post, you say that we should fire Haz because:
1. the "new" DC can come in mid-season and make an first hand assessment of who should stay and who should get fired/cut.
2. The new DC will have time to decide which players fit into his system
--> This statement is then followed by your second post proclaiming that we should replace Haz with our CURRENT defensive backs coach..... One who, in his current position, could already do items 1 & 2. So the way I see it, you gave 2 unneccessary reasons.....
In your second post you state that we should fire Haz to replace him with Morris. Our DB coach. Not sure, but do you realize that our DBs are the worst defensive unit in football? Morris is their coach. You know that right? Does it make sense to replace our current DC with the coach currently in charge of the WORST defensive unit in the NFL? The coach of the unit that is the reason for why our D is horrendous. Also, remember his HC gig in TBay. Remember that defense??? They were DEAD LAST in the league in his final year as HC (and they started as a top 10 defensive in his first). So, I'll go out on a limb and say no, it doesn't make sense.
As a second option, you state Rex should come in and be our DC. Really?? You know that MS still provides major input on D. Do you honestly think that Rex and MS could co-exist?? You realize both these guys have large egos, right? You also want to bring in the Terrell Owens of coaches ---- one that mouths off to the press every opportunity he gets? He's a good defensive coach, but not exactly the best fit.
It appears that MS has not given up on the season. If he had, then he may consider a change, but he hasn't. It appears you have. |
No I used Morris as a stop gap. I would tend to think that Morris would give Rex Ryan our new DC next year better information that Hasbeen.......  |
|
| Back to top |
|
Redskin in Canada
~~~~~~
Joined: 08 Apr 2004
Posts: 10278
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| welch wrote: | Stick with Shanahan. No more organizational chaos. And I didn't see that the NFL had passed Joe Gibbs: who built toughness back into the Redskins and took them to the playoffs twice in four years?
The comments by Mann and Green are interesting because they put the cause way back to 1994, when Norv Turner brought in his unique style. Before that, the Redskins had had an unbroken line of powerful defensive teams, beginning with the day that George Allen traded for his Over the Hill Gang. Allen->Pardee->Petibon; Diron Talbert->Dave Butz->The National Defense.
Someone else said it: maybe it's worth spending more on defensive coaches than on free agents?
Still...don't fire Bruce Allen or Shanahan. Keep the continuity. Find another receiver, build the defense, protect RG3. If QB is more important than 30 years ago, then the trade for RG3 was absolutely necessary. That's a start.
 |
Amen, brother. |
|
| Back to top |
|
1niksder
**********
Joined: 27 Mar 2004
Posts: 16577
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 4:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| riggofan wrote: | | This comparison to the Colts is completely off base. The Colts were a playoff team two years ago. They lost their franchise QB and fell apart for a year because they didn't have a good backup option in place. It shouldn't be a big surprise that they're doing well with Luck. |
Actually he used a pretty good comparison...
Two years ago the Colts had a different Coach, GM, QB, and defensive scheme... Last year they went into the gutter which led to the new guys coming in.
Wasn't Shanny brought in to clean up Vinny's mess?
Well the guy that says who stays and who goes, who signs and who doesn't has been in Ashburn two and a half years , he has a new QB, a new GM, and he also changed the defensive scheme (for comparison purposes BOTH teams went from a 4-3 scheme to a 3-4 scheme). After two and a half years Shanny the GM has turned over the roster... there are only 14 players on the roster thsat were on the roster when he took over.... In less than a year the GM in Indy only has eleven guys left from that playoff roster that you speak of.
The Colts have found enough players (some were on the roster some weren't when the GM got there) to fit their NEW scheme and are ranked in the top 20 after being bottom 10 last year (they were top 20 at this time two years ago ) Two years ago (Shanny's first year) the D was 31st at this point of of the 2010 season and in the top 15 last year... TODAY they are in the bottom five 
| Redskin in Canada wrote: | | welch wrote: | Stick with Shanahan. No more organizational chaos. And I didn't see that the NFL had passed Joe Gibbs: who built toughness back into the Redskins and took them to the playoffs twice in four years?
The comments by Mann and Green are interesting because they put the cause way back to 1994, when Norv Turner brought in his unique style. Before that, the Redskins had had an unbroken line of powerful defensive teams, beginning with the day that George Allen traded for his Over the Hill Gang. Allen->Pardee->Petibon; Diron Talbert->Dave Butz->The National Defense.
Someone else said it: maybe it's worth spending more on defensive coaches than on free agents?
Still...don't fire Bruce Allen or Shanahan. Keep the continuity. Find another receiver, build the defense, protect RG3. If QB is more important than 30 years ago, then the trade for RG3 was absolutely necessary. That's a start.
|
Amen, brother. |
+1
Allen is doing a great job in his role has EVP, and IMHO Shanny should not only continue as HC but should be MORE hands on. Neither should have the role of GM
FTR: Two and a half years ago Canes and I were roughly 4 football fields apart on this subject  |
|
| Back to top |
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14701
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 1niksder wrote: | | riggofan wrote: | | This comparison to the Colts is completely off base. The Colts were a playoff team two years ago. They lost their franchise QB and fell apart for a year because they didn't have a good backup option in place. It shouldn't be a big surprise that they're doing well with Luck. |
Actually he used a pretty good comparison...
Two years ago the Colts had a different Coach, GM, QB, and defensive scheme... Last year they went into the gutter which led to the new guys coming in.
Wasn't Shanny brought in to clean up Vinny's mess?
Well the guy that says who stays and who goes, who signs and who doesn't has been in Ashburn two and a half years , he has a new QB, a new GM, and he also changed the defensive scheme (for comparison purposes BOTH teams went from a 4-3 scheme to a 3-4 scheme). After two and a half years Shanny the GM has turned over the roster... there are only 14 players on the roster thsat were on the roster when he took over.... In less than a year the GM in Indy only has eleven guys left from that playoff roster that you speak of.
The Colts have found enough players (some were on the roster some weren't when the GM got there) to fit their NEW scheme and are ranked in the top 20 after being bottom 10 last year (they were top 20 at this time two years ago ) Two years ago (Shanny's first year) the D was 31st at this point of of the 2010 season and in the top 15 last year... TODAY they are in the bottom five
| Redskin in Canada wrote: | | welch wrote: | Stick with Shanahan. No more organizational chaos. And I didn't see that the NFL had passed Joe Gibbs: who built toughness back into the Redskins and took them to the playoffs twice in four years?
The comments by Mann and Green are interesting because they put the cause way back to 1994, when Norv Turner brought in his unique style. Before that, the Redskins had had an unbroken line of powerful defensive teams, beginning with the day that George Allen traded for his Over the Hill Gang. Allen->Pardee->Petibon; Diron Talbert->Dave Butz->The National Defense.
Someone else said it: maybe it's worth spending more on defensive coaches than on free agents?
Still...don't fire Bruce Allen or Shanahan. Keep the continuity. Find another receiver, build the defense, protect RG3. If QB is more important than 30 years ago, then the trade for RG3 was absolutely necessary. That's a start.
|
Amen, brother. |
+1
Allen is doing a great job in his role has EVP, and IMHO Shanny should not only continue as HC but should be MORE hands on. Neither should have the role of GM
FTR: Two and a half years ago Canes and I were roughly 4 football fields apart on this subject |
What was the Colts cap situation like when the new regime took over? |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11511
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 8:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
OK 1niksder - some good points ...
I would only add that the Colts were not having to deal with the years of damage that Snyder and Cerato caused by not having even a semblance of a plan
I take nothing away from what the Colts have done
I also think that many here think we're not much better than we were and that this FO and coaching staff cannot get it done
I disagree
these last 7 weeks (and this whole season) are going to be the cornerstone of the building of a better product on the field
we do need some things to "fall into place" here but i still believe in this FO - mainly just because we haven't had one
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
|
 |
grampi
Hog
Joined: 20 Sep 2007
Posts: 1504
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here I think is an accurate description of the Redskins over the last 2 decades;
Most of their games over the course of the season will be close, but still losses, 2 to 4 losses will be to inferior teams, and they will be blown out once or twice. The team has had more personnel changes than any team in the league, from the GM all the way down to the water boy and nothing changes. There has been one thing, and only one thing thing over the last two decades that has remained a constant.....Dan Snyder. HE is the problem with this team and nothing is ever going to change until we get a new owner. Period. |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11511
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 1niksder wrote: | | ... Allen is doing a great job in his role has EVP, and IMHO Shanny should not only continue as HC but should be MORE hands on. Neither should have the role of GM |
I take it that you think that Mike should be more involved with the HC stuff and not be a part of the FO
OK - I'd like to see that, but do you really think that Mike's ego is going to be able to handle that - I don't
this is what I see - depending on how this next 7 weeks go -
The FO stays the same with Mike as HC AND possibly some coaching changes
or
new coaching staff and FO - maybe Bruce keeps his job
my ideal scenario for this off season would be
Bruce Allen and Bill Polian with a new coaching staff =  |
|
| Back to top |
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14701
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| grampi wrote: | | There has been one thing, and only one thing thing over the last two decades that has remained a constant.....Dan Snyder. |
I have no love for The Danny, but he didn't buy the team two decades ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Deadskins
JSPB22
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
Posts: 14701
Location: Location, LOCATION!
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SkinsJock wrote: | | 1niksder wrote: | | ... Allen is doing a great job in his role has EVP, and IMHO Shanny should not only continue as HC but should be MORE hands on. Neither should have the role of GM |
I take it that you think that Mike should be more involved with the HC stuff and not be a part of the FO
OK - I'd like to see that, but do you really think that Mike's ego is going to be able to handle that - I don't
this is what I see - depending on how this next 7 weeks go -
The FO stays the same with Mike as HC AND possibly some coaching changes
or
new coaching staff and FO - maybe Bruce keeps his job
my ideal scenario for this off season would be
Bruce Allen and Bill Polian with a new coaching staff = |
Personally, I'd rather Shanny be the personnel guy, and get a new coach. Mike has had some pretty good drafts these last three years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
SkinsJock
08 Champ
Joined: 24 Feb 2004
Posts: 11511
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Deadskins wrote: | | SkinsJock wrote: | | 1niksder wrote: | | ... Allen is doing a great job in his role has EVP, and IMHO Shanny should not only continue as HC but should be MORE hands on. Neither should have the role of GM |
I take it that you think that Mike should be more involved with the HC stuff and not be a part of the FO
OK - I'd like to see that, but do you really think that Mike's ego is going to be able to handle that - I don't
this is what I see - depending on how this next 7 weeks go -
The FO stays the same with Mike as HC AND possibly some coaching changes
or
new coaching staff and FO - maybe Bruce keeps his job
my ideal scenario for this off season would be Bruce Allen and Bill Polian with a new coaching staff = |
Personally, I'd rather Shanny be the personnel guy, and get a new coach. Mike has had some pretty good drafts these last three years. |
agreed - I just don't see his ego being able to handle that
Bruce and Mike could be a force but ... Mike wants EVERYTHING |
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
|
|
grampi
Hog
Joined: 20 Sep 2007
Posts: 1504
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Deadskins wrote: | | grampi wrote: | | There has been one thing, and only one thing thing over the last two decades that has remained a constant.....Dan Snyder. |
I have no love for The Danny, but he didn't buy the team two decades ago. |
Close enough.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
chiefhog44
**ch44
Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Posts: 2300
Location: Chicago
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| grampi wrote: | | Deadskins wrote: | | grampi wrote: | | There has been one thing, and only one thing thing over the last two decades that has remained a constant.....Dan Snyder. |
I have no love for The Danny, but he didn't buy the team two decades ago. |
Close enough.... |
Eh, round it up 8 years... Who's counting |
|
| Back to top |
|
DaSkinz Baby
Hog
Joined: 24 Sep 2012
Posts: 287
Location: Clarksburg
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Everyone is making some pretty valid points but I am sorry the roster we had still for me is a sticking point. Regardless of the cap, I look at Indy last year to this year and see us since Mike arrived and it sickens me that yet ANOTHER team has a quick turnaround and we pretty much are the same, I am sorry but it shouldn't take over 3 years to build a PRETTY GOOD team, and when you consistently get beat by weaker teams you ARE NOT A PRETTY GOOD TEAM, your a failure. It's like if it isn't one thing it's another, we say we don't have the right players but every player that leaves here pretty much leaves and is a pro bowler, latest example Carlos Stone Hands Rogers who can now catch anything and everything thrown his way. We had talent that was good but the front office on down has been the biggest problem. Now INHO we have an arrogant coach in Mike that is pretty much living on his past accomplishments and honestly if Dan Reeves hadn't built those two Denver teams I don't see Mike ever winning a SB and when his little cocky son is throwing everyone under the bus and not accepting his 50% then we continue to have a crappy product, and the people saying Mike drafted RG3 so give him another year, why? With some of the play calling being called why would you want to destroy your franchise QB? To send him out on another pass pattern so a hard hitting defensive back lays wood to him? Or another 330 pound defensive tackle crushes him on a QB keeper on the goal line rather than giving to Alfred Morris and running behind your LT who everyone claims is a Pro Bowl Tackle??? Sorry this is a ticking time bomb from what I can see and the explosion could be a career injury to RG3 and set's us back another 20 years. And if that isn't a compelling argument do you all want to even talk about Jim Haslett and his COMPLETE AND UTTER failure on the defensive side???? |
|
| Back to top |
|
riggofan
Hog
Joined: 13 Jan 2004
Posts: 2942
Location: Montclair, Virginia
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SkinsJock wrote: | OK 1niksder - some good points ...
I would only add that the Colts were not having to deal with the years of damage that Snyder and Cerato caused by not having even a semblance of a plan |
Some fair points, but I still don't remotely buy that the Redskins/Colts situations are a good comparison. And SkinsJock nailed why not. I understand that the Colts lost some key players and are installing a new defense or whatever, but there is no way you can argue that any new Colts coach is trying to overcome 20 years of systemic bad management of the team.
The past five years the Colts were 13-3, 12-4, 14-2, 10-6, 2-14. They clearly have been a well managed team during that time and have a culture of winning. We have a 20 year history of dysfunction and futility. You can see it in the players and the fans, when things go wrong we're all immediately saying, "Here we go again."
Every team is going to have a down year. There are a few teams like the Skins though that are trying to bounce back from a bad quarter century. |
|
| Back to top |
|
langleyparkjoe
**LPJ**
Joined: 05 Oct 2007
Posts: 5993
Location: Langley Park, MD *Tick Tock*
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| riggofan wrote: | Some fair points, but I still don't remotely buy that the Redskins/Colts situations are a good comparison. And SkinsJock nailed why not. I understand that the Colts lost some key players and are installing a new defense or whatever, but there is no way you can argue that any new Colts coach is trying to overcome 20 years of systemic bad management of the team.
The past five years the Colts were 13-3, 12-4, 14-2, 10-6, 2-14. They clearly have been a well managed team during that time and have a culture of winning. We have a 20 year history of dysfunction and futility. You can see it in the players and the fans, when things go wrong we're all immediately saying, "Here we go again."
Every team is going to have a down year. There are a few teams like the Skins though that are trying to bounce back from a bad quarter century. |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
Link
|
 |
| Page 12 of 19 | All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
