Official Post Game Discussion- Skins/Broncos

[VetSkinsFan]

I was praying that they didn't get shut out. I didn't want to be that rebound team.

[markshark84]

I disagree with the above opinions. Practicing losing is always harmful, be it preseason or the last game in a losing-record year.

Ask the Lions how losing in order to get high draft picks goes. The Patriots, Colts, and Steelers never get to pick high in the first round anymore. I can't imagine how they expect to maintain any success.

If Danny and Vinny are such idiots that an 8-8 year would make them think we were only one step away, then a 3-13 season isn't going to help us any more. Whatever marginal advantages a 3-13 season confers on the team, they will find a way to screw it up. I don't know why people assume they will get smarter and learn how to manage an organization just because we lost a bunch more games. Much better then, IMO, to cheer for the Redskins to win, game in and game out.

Trust me, they don't have to TRY to lose. They will do it on their own accord. I am not saying they should throw games or attempt to lose -- because they won't. It is in the players, coaches, and FOs best interest to win, regardles of whether the season is done. They won't have to do this. They will lose even when trying their best.

Your second paragraph is an example of how the FO works. The lions have a bad front office. The pats, pitt, and colts have good FOs. Doesn't have to do with where draft picks are. The fact is that I don't care if we lose to get higher draft picks. It doesn't matter. The chips will fall where they fall. There will be potential pro bowlers in the 6th round of any draft. History has proved this. You just need a talented FO to find those players. We don't have that with Danny and Vinny.

As far as paragraph 3, if you believe that our FO will find a way to screw it up, then why bother -- or why wouldn't you want to see a season that creates an end to our current inept FO? An 8-8 season may cause the current FO to stay put. If we were to win out and still get a new FO, I would be all for it. My position is that I would like to see a season where Danny realizes that our FO is horrible and he actually does something about it. Over the past decade, we have teetered on mediocrity --- and kept the same FO. It will take a very bad season for Danny to realize that we need to go in a different direction in terms of FO. Our past decade of mediocrity hasn't caused Danny to make that realization. He needs a kick in the face and an 8-8 season wouldn't do it. Besides, after last year, our 8-8 season (ending 2-6), caused people, including the fans and FO, to believe we were a playoff team. Why wouldn't the current FO think that an 8-8 season (ending 6-2) cause them to believe that this team was one step away? Danny would just spin this into how this team just needed time to come together. BUT, we all know this is crap.

The FO is, IMHO, the most important component of a franchise. Without a good FO that lacks the necessary vision to accomplish their goals, the team is destined for failure. I don't want this team to lose. I just want this team to place themselves in a position to succeed. That is impossible with the current structure of the organization.

[SnyderSucks]

I didn't get to watch the game today, can someone provide me with a review of how Chad Reinhart played?

www.profootballfocus.com

They grade all the players from all the teams each week.

[dlc]

While I think Moss adds to our team, I'd trade ey for an early pick (maybe an early 2nd rounder so we can stockpile Olinemen). We have Davis and he can learn to block a little better and do what we need there, and is younger. I really believe having 2 quality TEs is a luxary, a luxary the Skins can't afford - consdering our other issues.

You'd trade our best receiver and Pro Bowl TE and rely on a TE who's had a few decent games? And keep Moss instead?

Wow. ey is a guy we can rely on WHILE rebuilding, and you want to get rid of him? This is nominated as the bonehead post of the week.

This might not be the right move, but it's definitely not a bonehead post. ey is a good WR, but most people want to keep him around because he's a likable guy. Isn't that Snyder's mentality to personnel decisions?

A TE has two even responsiblities and ey is very good at one and below average on the other. Because he's likable, most people overlook the times he gets blown up by an LB or sometimes wiffs altogether.

With the exceptions of some (like Monk, Green, Mann), you should always be ready to trade players if it makes the team better as a whole. If we got a 2nd rounder or a pretty decent RT for ey with Yoder and Davis filling in, that's how you get better.

Bonehead decisions are picking players mostly on popularity and personality.

Look at the good teams. Indy dropped Marvin Harrison, Marshall Faulk, Edgerrin James. Patriots traded away Ty Law, Assante Samuel, Vrabel, Seymour (too many to list). These aren't just great players, most were symbols of the team before they left.

Smart teams look beyond emotional ties. Personnel is like investments, buy low and sell high.

ey is a franchise player and you don't trade away franchise player. He's led the team in receptions the past three years (2006-08 ) and was only behind Moss by 13 catches in Moss' record year. He had 37 catches as a rookie.

To think that we support ey b/c he's "a likeable guy" is absurd at the very least. He's a competitor, he's a Pro Bowler, and he's our best receiver. That, my friend, is why this is a boneheaded move.

And the majority of those players listed were either on the decline or on the end of their prime (stereotypically). ey's not there, and Asante was too expensive. Apples and oranges.

Please show me, with what I illustrated, how this is an emotional decision...

You managed to completely ignore the fact that I said that it's not definitely a smart move to get rid of him, but depending on what's offered it might be.

And you also ignored the fact that I said he was a very good receiver but TEs need to block as well as catch. I haven't heard anyone say that ey was a good blocker. Maybe average at best. An objective view of pass protection and run-blocking yesterday might also consider that the TEs did their job blocking as well.

Lastly, when does a TE ever be the franchise player you build around? QB, OT, DB, MLB, or RB perhaps. I don't think TEs make the top 5 of important positions. If we get a draft pick or a trade for that yields a solid or above average one of the positions, I'd take it in a heartbeat. Too bad we have Danny and Vinny behind determining that.

ey is a good player, but I think he's overrated to be called franchise or great. To think you're going to get something of value without giving up something of value is naive. ey, along with Moss, are probably our only options that would tempt organizations with a good pick or even a good prospect or two. Those who take smart risks are the ones who win.

The Skins have been doing it the wrong way this decade. We give up the no-names opting for the overrated big names. Buy high sell low.

[dlc]

I'm with you Vet and I even feel better going into Dallas!

We have a real shot at this one. Dallas is going to feel like they are a much better team than us, and they go into this week scrambled and confused after that awful game they played in Green Bay. We could sneak by with this one.

I feel the same way. Forget playing for draft picks.

Yes, we can beat Dallas. As long as we play the players that deserve to play, not the ones that on paper should be playing, we can be a competitive team again. We aren't the most talented, esp. with injuries, but in this league, the smart, disciplined and dedicated can overcome the talented.

Let's hope the confidence from last game will get these guys motivated.

[dlc]

Well put, IB.

I can't say I haven't danced with the very notion that you're pointing out here, but I just can't bring myself to do it. I can't help that every Sunday from when I wake up until 12:59p, the minute before kickoff, I hope that this is the week the Redskins turn it around!

And damn it, for the moment, they have. And I'm glad that I had high hopes for them and they pulled it out. Yes, I was upset when we spotted Denver 14 pts, but just like last year vs the Eagles, we prevailed.

I like the mentality of playing through mistakes. One criticism I had of Gibbs 2.0 which still lingers is that eliminating mistakes (TOs, penalties) was the key to victory. Although it is a valid goal, it was put at a higher priority than playing to win.

You need to take risks. The reason why JC and the rest of the team seem to play better when we're behind is because they are too scared of screwing up that they have forgotten to perform. The 14 pts off of huge mistakes gave the players and the coaches an excuse to take risks and do what they thought would succeed (benching Rogers, fake punt, targetting Kelly and Thomas, etc.)

[Redskin in Canada]

If Danny and Vinny are such idiots that an 8-8 year would make them think we were only one step away, then a 3-13 season isn't going to help us any more.

Amen.

But I wish to clarify:

1) They are idiots.

and

2) They will try to "sell it" to the fans asif the team was competitive. They are good at that with a new coach and even maybe a nother puppet at the FO.

My reaction:

If the fans want more of the same, supporting the owner and its mediocrity with merchandise and other purchases, it is their prerogative.

I will keep on supporting my Team on the field, I will not purchase a thing and I will keep providing RELENTLESS criticism and ridicule of the owner and his FO. THIS is my way to protest.

[SkinsJock]

I am really sorry that I missed the game as I understand that there were some good things that happened, this is great BUT nothing changes - this franchise needs to have a change of culture or we will just continue to see a mediocre product on the field - we need a change at the top and hopefully the new people will see some good things here with these players in the next 7 games that can mean that we are not far away from being a competitive franchise again soon - we are not a very good team at all - we just won one game, and we need to play better as a team consistently

HAIL

[VetSkinsFan]

Okay, dlc, point by point, my friend.

You managed to completely ignore the fact that I said that it's not definitely a smart move to get rid of him, but depending on what's offered it might be.

I thought I addressed it, but here we go. I don't think it's smart to trade our best receiver, PERIOD. We're not getting a lopsided deal for him, and he's the constant in our receiving corps.

And you also ignored the fact that I said he was a very good receiver but TEs need to block as well as catch. I haven't heard anyone say that ey was a good blocker. Maybe average at best. An objective view of pass protection and run-blocking yesterday might also consider that the TEs did their job blocking as well.

Rarely are 'good' TEs highlighted for their blocking. Look at any list. Gates, Gonzalez, Sharpe, Winslow (Chargers), Newsome. These were pass catching TEs, and they were fierce. Their first bullet in the HoF is not "great blocker."

Lastly, when does a TE ever be the franchise player you build around? QB, OT, DB, MLB, or RB perhaps. I don't think TEs make the top 5 of important positions. If we get a draft pick or a trade for that yields a solid or above average one of the positions, I'd take it in a heartbeat. Too bad we have Danny and Vinny behind determining that.

So now because it's never been done, it can't be done? Look, I may have exaggerated a bit on the franchise player, but IMO he's as close to one as we have currently. We have up and coming in Orakpo possibly, but atm, it's ey.

Cooley is a good player, but I think he's overrated to be called franchise or great. To think you're going to get something of value without giving up something of value is naive. ey, along with Moss, are probably our only options that would tempt organizations with a good pick or even a good prospect or two. Those who take smart risks are the ones who win.

...and that's my point. Why trade what little consistancy you have for the unknown? ey secures the TE position and gives you a potential 1k yard receiver. I think giving a young QB and a rebuilding line that kind of continuity is underrated.

The Skins have been doing it the wrong way this decade. We give up the no-names opting for the overrated big names. Buy high sell low.

I agree with this in a general sense, but I don't agree giving up your best receiver and best offensive player. Only the Browns and the Broncos accomplish moves like that, and I'm nto too confident in either one of these teams presently.


Did I address your points this time, little buddy?

[dlc]

Okay, dlc, point by point, my friend.

You managed to completely ignore the fact that I said that it's not definitely a smart move to get rid of him, but depending on what's offered it might be.

I thought I addressed it, but here we go. I don't think it's smart to trade our best receiver, PERIOD. We're not getting a lopsided deal for him, and he's the constant in our receiving corps.

And you also ignored the fact that I said he was a very good receiver but TEs need to block as well as catch. I haven't heard anyone say that ey was a good blocker. Maybe average at best. An objective view of pass protection and run-blocking yesterday might also consider that the TEs did their job blocking as well.

Rarely are 'good' TEs highlighted for their blocking. Look at any list. Gates, Gonzalez, Sharpe, Winslow (Chargers), Newsome. These were pass catching TEs, and they were fierce. Their first bullet in the HoF is not "great blocker."

Lastly, when does a TE ever be the franchise player you build around? QB, OT, DB, MLB, or RB perhaps. I don't think TEs make the top 5 of important positions. If we get a draft pick or a trade for that yields a solid or above average one of the positions, I'd take it in a heartbeat. Too bad we have Danny and Vinny behind determining that.

So now because it's never been done, it can't be done? Look, I may have exaggerated a bit on the franchise player, but IMO he's as close to one as we have currently. We have up and coming in Orakpo possibly, but atm, it's ey.

Cooley is a good player, but I think he's overrated to be called franchise or great. To think you're going to get something of value without giving up something of value is naive. ey, along with Moss, are probably our only options that would tempt organizations with a good pick or even a good prospect or two. Those who take smart risks are the ones who win.

...and that's my point. Why trade what little consistancy you have for the unknown? ey secures the TE position and gives you a potential 1k yard receiver. I think giving a young QB and a rebuilding line that kind of continuity is underrated.

The Skins have been doing it the wrong way this decade. We give up the no-names opting for the overrated big names. Buy high sell low.

I agree with this in a general sense, but I don't agree giving up your best receiver and best offensive player. Only the Browns and the Broncos accomplish moves like that, and I'm nto too confident in either one of these teams presently.


Did I address your points this time, little buddy?

There's no point for him to be a TE if he can't block well. Of course star TEs aren't as "known" for their blocking, but don't doubt that players and coaches don't consider it highly for that position and that those guys mentioned can't block well. The whole point of a TE is that you don't know if he's staying in and supporting the run/pass-block or if he's going out for a route.

If you think it doesn't matter:
"We used him almost as a tight end a lot, and not only did he do it willingly, he was a great blocker for us." -Gibbs on Monk

And because it hasn't been done, we should be the first to build a team around a TE? Repeat that to yourself again and tell me if you would repeat that in front of Bethard or Casserly. Feel free to specifically reference ey in that scenario. I'm all for open-mindedness but this is a stretch.

"Best player"? Perhaps...not even definitely, on the offense, but we're talking about a side that struggles to score 20 points. His stats only reveal the problems on that side of the ball, not how great he is. The years where we were winning were because of the run. TEs traditionally only play a big role in an offense when they are future HoFers or if the offense sucks. I lean towards the latter. The title "safety valve" often attributed to a TE is simply because they are the easiest guy to target.

To be clear with my criticisms, I do think he's "good" not "great". You've just assumed that he's great because of what? Pro Bowls? Well 1) my reference to popularity and 2) the Redskin voting campaigns probably have a lot to do with that. Did you notice that you had to preface him as a "potential" 1k yard receiver? The fact is he isn't one. And as many drops as Santana has had, he still is more of a threat, draws safety help and produces more than ey.

The argument that ey is irreplaceable for winning is what's crazy (as proven yesterday), not the opposite.

A downgrade in TE to Davis and Yoder (not bad) to upgrade whatever of the number of holes we have elsewhere is a smart move...if it could happen. Once again, I don't think Danny or Vinny are capable of pulling it off, but I think better FOs could.

[fredp45]

dlc -- thanks for fighting my fight here. I agree with all of your points and it's exactly why I'd recommend trading ey. I love ey, he's one of my favorite players on the Skins. However, in 2010 he'll be 29...do I truly believe the Skins have the personnel to compete deep into the playoffs next year? I don't. I've rooted for them for nearly 30 years...and one thing I've learned -- this game is about line play, not TE play. A good line makes a lot of things work. We need to improve our Oline, not to be dramatic but we might need 5 new Olinemen. I'm not sold on Jones or Dockery or Rabach, maybe 1 or 2 of them survive for one more year. We could use another CB, we could use a strong side LB, Fletcher seems to be slowing down, is Blades the guy at MLB? I think Portis is done and overpaid, so we could use a quicker running back to compliment Betts and Rock. I'd love to see Landry play SS - he'll be a stud there. He certainly isn't picking up FS very well, so we could use a FS. With Griffin being on the other side of 30, is Golston a starting caliber DT? If not, we need someone to play next to Haynesworth.

VetSkinsFan -- boneheaded to you, not to me. We have a good, maybe NOT great replacement in Davis, and having a Pro Bowl TE on this team is a luxary we can't afford with our other issues. BTW, what's this "little buddy" crap? You don't agree with someone so you try to pull the tough guy over a message board?

[REDEEMEDSKIN]

BMitch spell check dude.

They didn't loose or play to loose.

Pot, meet kettle.

[SKINFAN]

BMitch spell check dude.

They didn't loose or play to loose.

Pot, meet kettle.

LMAO


I'm so happy we broke the 17pt barrier!

[VetSkinsFan]

There's no point for him to be a TE if he can't block well. Of course star TEs aren't as "known" for their blocking, but don't doubt that players and coaches don't consider it highly for that position and that those guys mentioned can't block well. The whole point of a TE is that you don't know if he's staying in and supporting the run/pass-block or if he's going out for a route.

A TE isn't supposed to be able to block like an offensive tackle. This isn't the 80s and prior. This is a pass happy league and unless you have an AP or LT, you're going ot rely on the pass game more than the run game to succeed more times than not. Go ahead and name the successful dynasties with run first offenses. I bet there are more pass happy (and defense) makes the differences. And a TE with good hands will be more beneficial than an extra tackle in the game. That's called JUMBO packages.

If you think it doesn't matter:
"We used him almost as a tight end a lot, and not only did he do it willingly, he was a great blocker for us." -Gibbs on Monk

Yup, and he blocked well. That's ONE guy, and I don't think that Monk wasn't a unique character.

And because it hasn't been done, we should be the first to build a team around a TE? Repeat that to yourself again and tell me if you would repeat that in front of Bethard or Casserly. Feel free to specifically reference ey in that scenario. I'm all for open-mindedness but this is a stretch.

Yes, yes yes, 20 years ago, the entire game was different. Let's live in the now. In TODAY'S NFL, the passing game trumps predominately. Yes, I would suggest that you keep your best player on offense, a constant, and rebuild what you need around him, KNOWING THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE TE POSITION.

"Best player"? Perhaps...not even definitely, on the offense, but we're talking about a side that struggles to score 20 points. His stats only reveal the problems on that side of the ball, not how great he is. The years where we were winning were because of the run. TEs traditionally only play a big role in an offense when they are future HoFers or if the offense sucks. I lean towards the latter. The title "safety valve" often attributed to a TE is simply because they are the easiest guy to target.

The stats don't lie buddy, and I already quoted 'em. Whether ey's been the safety valve or the threat, he's performed. I can probably count on one hand how many times I've yelled at the TV about ey not catching a pass he should have easily caught. Moss? riiiggghhht. ey's a playmaker and he's consistant. And he's tough. I recall a season where he played thru the pain of a dislocated shoulder almost all 16 weeks. TOUGH and reliable.

To be clear with my criticisms, I do think he's "good" not "great". You've just assumed that he's great because of what? Pro Bowls? Well 1) my reference to popularity and 2) the Redskin voting campaigns probably have a lot to do with that. Did you notice that you had to preface him as a "potential" 1k yard receiver? The fact is he isn't one. And as many drops as Santana has had, he still is more of a threat, draws safety help and produces more than ey.

My reference to the stats are pretty concrete, but you appear not to want to acknowledge them. I guess the plain freakin fact that he led the Redskins in receptions the past three seasons has nothing to do with it, eh? Notice I didn't reference popularity or Pro Bowls...but I guess NFL stats are objective as well?

The argument that ey is irreplaceable for winning is what's crazy (as proven yesterday), not the opposite.

Yeah, b/c in statistical data, a sample size of 1 proves EVERYTHING!!!! I gotchya I'm happy we won. I don't think that can be attributed to the lack of ey's presence though.

A downgrade in TE to Davis and Yoder (not bad) to upgrade whatever of the number of holes we have elsewhere is a smart move...if it could happen. Once again, I don't think Danny or Vinny are capable of pulling it off, but I think better FOs could.

With the level of rebuilding necessary, I don't believe we should take away the one consistancy we have in the passing game. The next closest is El in the slot, and he's no where near close to ey's consistancy.

I understand about blowing a team up and starting over, but I don't believe we have to cut all ties. I believe that we should cut our losses (Rogers for instance) and build with what strengths we have. You don't see the Pats trading Welker and you don't see the Colts trading Wayne. The reason Harrison got cut, btw, was b/c he was injured the majority of the year, not b/c he was prime trade material. Keep the contexts straight.

[frankcal20]

This argument is getting really old. No way anyone trades Chris ey. He is a probowl TE who is a team player, great in the locker room and a fan favorite. We have stupid ownership but he knows where his money comes from and CC helps bring people in the stands, sells jerseys, etc. He's not getting rid of ey.

[DEHog]

This argument is getting really old. No way anyone trades Chris ey. He is a probowl TE who is a team player, great in the locker room and a fan favorite. We have stupid ownership but he knows where his money comes from and CC helps bring people in the stands, sells jerseys, etc. He's not getting rid of ey.

The first or second one??

[frankcal20]

There are two? It all reads like "Blah, blah, blah....foolishness"

[VetSkinsFan]

dlc -- thanks for fighting my fight here. I agree with all of your points and it's exactly why I'd recommend trading ey. I love ey, he's one of my favorite players on the Skins. However, in 2010 he'll be 29...do I truly believe the Skins have the personnel to compete deep into the playoffs next year? I don't. I've rooted for them for nearly 30 years...and one thing I've learned -- this game is about line play, not TE play. A good line makes a lot of things work. We need to improve our Oline, not to be dramatic but we might need 5 new Olinemen. I'm not sold on Jones or Dockery or Rabach, maybe 1 or 2 of them survive for one more year. We could use another CB, we could use a strong side LB, Fletcher seems to be slowing down, is Blades the guy at MLB? I think Portis is done and overpaid, so we could use a quicker running back to compliment Betts and Rock. I'd love to see Landry play SS - he'll be a stud there. He certainly isn't picking up FS very well, so we could use a FS. With Griffin being on the other side of 30, is Golston a starting caliber DT? If not, we need someone to play next to Haynesworth.

VetSkinsFan -- boneheaded to you, not to me. We have a good, maybe NOT great replacement in Davis, and having a Pro Bowl TE on this team is a luxary we can't afford with our other issues. BTW, what's this "little buddy" crap? You don't agree with someone so you try to pull the tough guy over a message board?

Don't be jealous, you can be my little buddy too. I've gained some weight since I left the Army, so I'm sure there are a few more little buddies out there as I get older.

[PulpExposure]

We can't trade ey for the simple fact of what it would do to our salary cap.

[frankcal20]

...and he's our best offensive player...

but that statement applies to most of our guys on offense.

[VetSkinsFan]

We can't trade ey for the simple fact of what it would do to our salary cap.

Pulp, please stop clouding judgment with facts. Thank you.

[DEHog]

We can't trade ey for the simple fact of what it would do to our salary cap.

Pulp, please stop clouding judgment with facts. Thank you.

What salary cap as of this moment there is not slary cap next year

[fredp45]

DE HOg -- exactly...in 2010, trading or cutting anyone won't be a cap issue.

I contend, if our best player is a pass catching TE then we are doomed. We need to improve our O Line...without that, we are nothing. ey remains a great TE on a lousy offense. I don't believe we get better holding onto him because he's "great in the locker room" -- who cares? Great in the locker room of a lousy team. I'm pretty sure Gonzalez was the best offensive weapon KC had last year and he was a good guy too. Please don't say, their offense isn't any good, they beat us!

This post is about, how do we make our offense improve over the long haul...and ey is great on the field, in the locker room, on the web with his stuff hanging our, etc...but all of that doesn't help us improve our O line...which is where this offense needs serious help. I believe he can bring something ipretty good n return too.

I ask -- you're the GM, what do you do to make our offense improve, and at the same time, fill all the other holes we have on this team? Keep two pass catching TE's?