Redskin in Canada wrote:1niksder wrote:When you look at how he runs the team, the fact is he is not doing a bad job.
Is he out of the dog house? Not by a longshot
You and other posters on your side of the argument are RIGHT. The way the Team has been RUN will not drive the Team into "earning" a First Round Pick in the Draft. No last place in the standings. No Detroit Lions type of systematic dysfunctional disaster.
The problem is that, as opposed to you, I do not believe that there has been or there is a CONSISTENT PLAN to field a Team with a real prospect to win a Superbowl. The stopgap measures that have been taken throughout the years of his tenure have allowed us to range in performance from mediocre records to compeitive status at individual games or even short stretches throughout some seasons.
The problem is that this approach is FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED because he has never been, is not and will never be a true NFL Expert or anything close to what could resemble a good GM capable to field a Superbowl winning team. His decisions allow us to consistently generate expectations and even put good performances at times. But it will keep us in MEDIOCRITY.
I am not accusing the Danny of running this team to Detroit Lions status. I am accusing the Danny of keeping this team in MEDIOCRITY.
You are a far better expert at Skins numbers than I will ever be. You will not dispute these:Code: Select all
2008 8 8
2007 9 7
2006 5 11
2005 10 6
2004 6 10
2003 5 11
2002 7 9
2001 8 8
2000 8 8
1999 10 6
Overall, from 1999 to 2008, we have a record of 76 - 84
Maybe this is not a disaster á la Matt Millen Detroit Lions but it is a MEDIOCRE record. For those of you who would point out at the two 10 - 6 seasons, others would bring up the two 5 - 11 seasons.
Do you get any indications FROM THE ECORD that a tangible improvement has been made to win CONSISTENTLY? I do not mean a Superbowl, I mean only WINNING seasons?
The BEST living coach on Earth could not do it. John Madden, of all people, when commenting the departure by Joe Gibbs and his "mixed record" upon his second tenure with us said:
"The NFL changed and he had much better players the first time around."
Both were true statements. The fact that some of us point out in MODERN SPORTS that the MOST IMPORTANT position in any franchise is that of GM. This is true in the European soccer leagues, the MBA, the NBA, the NHL and of course, the highly competitive NFL.
To give you an example, the most important member of the Ravens is not on the field,. No, it is not Ray Lewis or Ed Reed. No, it is not its new coach. It is Ozzie Newsome, their GM. You can be a fan or not of this guy. But you cannot argue that, for the money, the Draft recruiting and FA acquisitions made by the Ravens have been more effective than ours. But I am ONLY using one example. I could have used instead the Colts or the Steelers with good GM. You get the point.
The fact that some of you use the Detroit Lions as a yardstick is pathetic. Use BOTH, the upper and the lower en of the stick to determine that the record and performance of this Team is MEDIOCRE (with admittedly some flashes of good and some disasters to match).
The question I pose to all of you is: Why are you still taking the same Kool Aid? Hope? Based on what? The promise of performance which results from new acquisitions which MAY turn out good? Have we not heard this before OFTEN?
Why is the Redskin Nation not rising itsvoice to demand ACCOUNTABILITY from the owner of the Franchise? All we get is, What?
He is not out of the dog house by a long shot.
No kidding.
I realise that RADICAL views are the target of criticism. Mine are RADICAL. But it takes RADICAL people like me to move the "average center" of public opinion at times.
Trust me, it would be a lot more comfortable to seat down and share the Kool Aid with all of you. I might even venture to predict a winning record for you next season to try to show that I am a better fan the more optimistic I become.
I DO NOT THINK SO.
Sigh ... it's as if you skimmed through the posts by Pulp and 1nik, completely ignoring what they actually wrote in a rush to make your own point. At least this is in the right forum because the "drinking the kool aid" stuff is complete hog wash.
).
...
Umm, okay... so the source familiar with the Redskins' thinking is Jason La Confora??? I mean, it's just ridiculous. Even ESPN gets JLC on their show when they want to ask about the Redskins. And we all know how accurate and objective JLC is. NOT! 
