Hiring Gibbs Is Great, but Also Hiring a GM Would Be Better

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 7:41 am

"So why can't I shake the feeling that nothing has changed"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Jan15.html

Hmmm...Not that I totally disagree with Sally, but some things have changed!!

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 9:57 am

I read the article, DEHog, before you posted it...and part of it kinda irked me...when you read each passage separately.

When you consider the article as a whole, however, I think I agree with her that the Redskins STILL would be better off if we had a GM.

Unlike Sally, however, I give Gibbs more credit than she seems to.

psummersjr · Post by **psummersjr** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:27 am

I agree. I don't think the problem is as extreme as Sally suggests but I think it's something The Danny would be well-served to consider. It would be nice if we could get Casserly back.

gibbsfan · Post by **gibbsfan** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:52 am

psummersjr wrote:I agree. I don't think the problem is as extreme as Sally suggests but I think it's something The Danny would be well-served to consider. It would be nice if we could get Casserly back.

say when i first thought about this current so called gm -what popped into my mind was bobby beathard but if we could go get cass from the texans or even ron wolf it would be better than what we currently have right now. :idea:

psummersjr · Post by **psummersjr** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:54 am

I always liked Casserly. I think I was biased b/c I had personal ties to his family but he just struck me as a class act, in a Joe Gibbs kind of way.

psummersjr · Post by **psummersjr** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:55 am

Casserly was also Beathard's protege' which is why I think he's so good. Plus, he worked well with Gibbs and knew how to deal with a pain in the @$$ owner.

Robert K. · Post by **Robert K.** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 11:25 am

Justice Hog wrote:I read the article, DEHog, before you posted it...and part of it kinda irked me...when you read each passage separately.

When you consider the article as a whole, however, I think I agree with her that the Redskins STILL would be better off if we had a GM.

Unlike Sally, however, I give Gibbs more credit than she seems to.

Yep, I read the column late last night (I love how The Post generally has the next days columns available by midnight or so), and I was somewhat irked myself. But I guess that's just how Sally sees it from her vantage point in New York (where she lives full time). She seems to like being critical. But, she's right in that it would be nice to have a bit more of a buffer between Joe Gibbs and Dan Snyder.

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 11:43 am

Sally jenkins is a Snyder basher...

... and apparently she always will be.

I speak often of people that bash Snyder for the sake of bashing him, as opposed to only when he earns it.

I think that this proves she fits that category.

Sorry the bandwagon passed you by Sally, there won't be any room for you the next time around...

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 11:44 am

Not that I don't think the hiring of Gibbs was great. I do! But I think that she MAY be right. I don't think that there are many coaches who can run the personnel side and the coaching side by themselves. We have nothing that states that Gibbs can do it either. In his first reign he had great GM's. So if Gibbs is too busy with the coaching aspect, who then will be making player decisions? It goes back to Snyder and Cerrato, who have repeatedly proved that they make poor player decisions, i.e. getting rid of Kenny Watson, and getting Byron Chamberlain.

Still, I hope that Cerrato and Snyder will be improved just by having Gibbs around. And with the Excellent Staff that Gibbs is putting together he might be able to delegate effectively enough to handle the dual role.

Overall, I have very high hopes, but not having a GM does make me a little nervous. If Joe Thiesman was right when he said that Dan Snyder is looking forward to sitting back and being an Owner then why doesn't he hire a GM? Why does he continue to split the role with Cerrato? Does he not trust Cerrato to make the decisions? If so then why not hire someone whom he can trust? Unless, of course, he just wants to be a meddlesome owner...and this is what makes me nervous.

Chad Dukes

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 12:33 pm

We've all said and/or read time and again how Gibbs is a master at evaluating talent so why the sudden need for a GM? As Boss Hogg said, Sally Jenkins has made a point of slamming Snyder so I put very little stock in her opinion. Jenkins MO is to go negative or to go against what she perceives as popular opinion.
She's just parroting one of the "reasons Gibbs will fail" routine, there's nothing original there that hasn't already been dismissed on these boards. I don't recall the exact reason, but Kornheiser ripped her in a column a while back. One of her first columns for the Post was a plea to root against the U.S. athletes in the last summer Olympics. Now, I'm not jingoistic by any means but taking that stance is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to say "look at me, I'm different."
Cerratto doesn't get the credit he deserves.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 12:36 pm

Personally, I would love to see Gibbs step into the GM slot after he's done coaching!!

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 12:40 pm

And so we don't rip Sally exclusively, John Markon's column in the Times-Disgrace (a truly awful newspaper) is equally moronic. Gibbs "might have a quarterback." Might? Chris Samuels is not an example of a Bugel type tackle? Allow me to paraphrase Bugel: "Those two tackles should be in the Pro Bowl every year." Gibbs has gone on record praising Ramsey. It's one thing to write that crap if it were based on speculation, it is another thing entirely to write it when it has been refuted by the coaches themselves in public. Markon and Jenkins should be married.
And why is Cerrato ripped for bad moves but not given credit for guys like Randy Thomas and Lavarneus Coles?

letsrollburgundyngold · Fri Jan 16, 2004 1:16 pm

"It started when Snyder signed free agent quarterback Jeff George, shortly after Brad Johnson had guided Washington to its first playoff appearance since Joe Gibbs had retired.

Many in the organization, especially coach Norv Turner, tried to talk Snyder out of the move. VINNY CERRATO liked the move, having RIPPED Johnson from the time Washington got him (he was only a consultant at the time; Charley Casserly was still the GM)."
-from the Post back in 2001 or so...

That's why Cerrato is ripped for bad moves, because he has made them frequently in the past when it comes to evaluating POTENTIAL. We all saw what Coles, Thomas, Morton, and Hall had done the year before with the Jets in making it to the second round of the playoffs, wasn't very hard to see that they'd be good.

I also think Sally made very good points in her article about the 'short leash' that Snyder has frequently employed with his level of patience for success and his micromanaging meddling in affairs he's not really knowledgable about. Now I hate to give a Cow any credit, but at least Jerry Jones had played organized football and won a national championship, that somewhat qualifies him to make some football decisions because he knows what it takes to win, he's seen it first hand and been directly involved in it at least. Lil Dan has not.

However, I feel that if they stay out of Joe's way, he will showed that the 'de facto GM' experience he gained in fielding a NASCAR team and dealing with those monetary issues will easily translate over to the NFL along with his penchant for selecting talented, intelligent players...

RedskinsFreak · Post by **RedskinsFreak** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 1:20 pm

It's just so simple and doesn't take a whole lot of thought and/or talent to write stuff like that.

Even IF Snyderrato remains the de facto GM, Gibbs is going to point it in the right direction -- "we'd rather have this guy than that guy."

It seems Sally couldn't resist that ever-present urge to rip, even that all the surrounding circumstances suggest that it just wasn't necessary.

psummersjr · Post by **psummersjr** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 2:09 pm

One thing that's being missed is that coaches ALWAYS have a say in the players that are chosen, whether they have some sort of GM title or not. I think Gibbs will state his needs, present some lists of potential players to fill those needs and then delegate the responsibility of acquiring those players to Snyderrato (Freak:great one, by the way). Another thing that has been alluded to here is that Gibbs is known for his ability to create a good staff and delegate. I don't think Gibbs will be spread as thin as many coaches b/c he has so much trust in his assistants to make some player-related decisions themselves. That said, I don't think it would hurt to get a GM but I would let Gibbs choose that person b/c the relationship btwn the coach and GM is so crucial to effectively carrying out the necessary duties.

psummersjr · Post by **psummersjr** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 2:12 pm

BossHog wrote:I speak often of people that bash Snyder for the sake of bashing him, as opposed to only when he earns it.

To add to your statement Boss, I think Snyder has redeemed himself a bit, if only temporarily. I'm not saying we should take him out from underneath our watchful eyes but give him a break, he did bring Joe Gibbs back and for that, no matter how it turns out, I will always adore the man.

gibbsfan · Post by **gibbsfan** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 2:39 pm

psummersjr wrote:Casserly was also Beathard's protege' which is why I think he's so good. Plus, he worked well with Gibbs and knew how to deal with a pain in the @$$ owner.

keeps the tradition from the front office as well-that was my thought process from the begining when joe was rehired as coach.

psummersjr · Post by **psummersjr** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 2:42 pm

I've always wanted Casserly back and considering The Danny grew up a Skins fan, it surprises me that he was so quick to get rid of him. I guess he reminded him of the Cooke regime or something. Either way, it'd be great to have him back in the front office mix.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 2:51 pm

I didn't ask why Cerrato gets ripped for bad moves, nor did I attempt to defend those moves. I asked why he isn't credited for the good moves. And whether or not Coles et al have established NFL credentials doesn't negate the positive impact of their signings.

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 2:52 pm

Anonymous wrote:I didn't ask why Cerrato gets ripped for bad moves, nor did I attempt to defend those moves. I asked why he isn't credited for the good moves. And whether or not Coles et al have established NFL credentials doesn't negate the positive impact of their signings.

Whoops, forgot to log in, crap I won't be credited for that post.

psummersjr · Post by **psummersjr** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 2:57 pm

Anonymous wrote:I didn't ask why Cerrato gets ripped for bad moves, nor did I attempt to defend those moves. I asked why he isn't credited for the good moves. And whether or not Coles et al have established NFL credentials doesn't negate the positive impact of their signings.

I would argue mainly that although those were great signings, they were no-brainers and anyone could have done it. Spurrier probably told Cerrato he wanted a speedy receiver like Coles and The Danny opened his checkbook. I doubt Cerrato went out and did extensive research or anything. Cerrato doesn't have the ability to recognize potential, which is something Beathard and Gibbs had. They found good players where no one else could.

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 3:04 pm

Actually, Cerrato did do extensive research. Mark Maske had a very good, very detailed piece in the Post last year outlining the Skins process for evaluating their needs and who would best fill those needs. Keep in mind he could have signed Peerlees Price or David Boston. I'm not going to play the role of Ceratto defender here but to say Coles was just the most obvious fit simply is not accurate.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 3:09 pm

But why won't Snyder hire a GM? Why keep his hand in the cookie jar? Unless, he still intends to try to play with the big boys. I do think that Joe Gibbs will be able to handle Danny as long as Joe wins games, but it only takes a three game losing streak for Danny to become impatient. Then what? Will he be trading Ramsey for Bledsoe under Gibbs nose?

I think the next few years are going to be great, but I agree that hiring an experienced GM would make things better. And isn't that the whole point of her article? I know that she is an outside agitator, but in this case I don't think her point is too hard to see. Its not that she or I think that Gibbs will be a failure, but it would certainly better if we had a GM on par with Ron Wolf.

Chad

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 3:13 pm

I'll agree we need a GM if this thing turns out to be a total failure but until then I'm not troubled by the lack of one. Because for every Ron Wolf there is a Matt Millen.

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Fri Jan 16, 2004 3:19 pm

Forgot to log in!

Chad

The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Hiring Gibbs Is Great, but Also Hiring a GM Would Be Better

Hiring Gibbs Is Great, but Also Hiring a GM Would Be Better

how about

Could be right?

and another thing

But why won't Dan hire a GM?

Forgot to log in!