chiefhog44 wrote:Ray,
I think the plan from this management team is to build a team based on smart, team first guys that don't require huge salaries. I'm not convinced that they want a quick turnaround. I think they are building a team to compete in 2-3 years and on. Mike was not in favor of Kyle coming on board he said because it's going to take a LONG time to turn this franchise around, and Kyle had a very good thing going on in Houston. The only evidence of a quick turnaround is bringing in Donovan, which in my mind, is more of a stop gap and someone to teach our next QB (hopefully next draft), than a QB that's going to win it all for us this year or next.
Every time Bruce Allen was asked, his answer was no .. this is not a 2-3 rebuilding .. we intended to win now. And CLEARLY, by trading two picks for McNabb, that is the proof behind that claim. You don't trade for a QB who might only have 2-3 years left in him, to sit and wait.
chiefhog44 wrote:You keep bringing up Haynesworth, but Shannahan inherited him. He has already said that the contract for Haynesworth would never have happened under his watch, so he's going to continue to break Haynesworth down until he plays his way...and to be quite honest, it is starting to pay dividends. The guy is playing out of mind, and certainly better than last year when coaches just let him do anything he wanted, and the guy would fake injured every play because he was tired. You have to admit that right?
Last year, Haynesworth made the entire line play better, with Carter racking up a bunch of sacks along with Orakpo. Was his conditioning an issue? Absolutely .. but he came to camp this year 30 lbs lighter ... so I don't think Shanahan gets the credit for that.
And yes, he inherited Haynesworth, along with the rest of the team ... and his "breaking down" Haynesworth was pretty obvious ... and what I have a problem with. I think this rubbing Haynesworth's nose in the dirt was counter productive to the team's best interests, especially when not activating him in a couple of key games that he could have been used situationally (even if his cardio wasn't up to Shanahan standards)
I also think the McNabb handling highlights an inflexibility in Shanahan's overall approach toward his players ... and it doesn't take much of that to create problems in the locker room ... which ... I understand is a concern right now.
Not many players really cared much about Haynesworth's issues early on, but some of them began feeling as though Shanahan was going too far toward the end. McNabb, on the other hand, has been embraced by this team as a leader whom they trust to get the job done. Disrespecting him the way the two Shanahan's have done is way off base ... and has really caused a stir amongst the players.
chiefhog44 wrote:As for Moss, he has major talent, and would certainly be an upgrade, but he's just not a Redskin. Meaning they are trying to change the culture here and rid the team over overpaid, underpreforming me first guys. They would rather see if this undrafted WR Armstrong can continue making plays and develop. I love that. It's what most fans were clammering for since Danny took over as owner. We are developing talent. Banks, Armstrong, Moore, Torain, Lichtenstiger, and hopefully Perry are examples of that.
I'm not sure there is a such thing as "Not a Redskin". In that sense, Haynesworth is not a Redskin, but he's a valuable asset on the field.
And there is no comparison between Armstrong and Randy Moss ... none. I like Armstrong ... and he's a surprise ... but he isn't even in the same solar system as Moss. Tell me how you can make such a crazy comparison? Randy Moss played lights out for the Pats, and according to them ... no problems with him in the locker room. Being primarily a vertical threat ... he would be a perfect fit with McNabb's long ball arm. An almost ideal fit. If the Redskins were 2-6 ... no, don't sign him. But at 4-4, with a defense that is beginning to get the scheme ... and an offense that just needs to get it going ... I consider it a missed opportunity.
chiefhog44 wrote:As for Fanica, the guy is now a journeyman. He's not part of any teams long term plan, and that's why they didn't sign him. We're not going to fill that position until next year anyway, so why pay an arm and a leg for a player like that this year.
Because 2.5 M is not an arm and a leg .... having McNabb lose an arm and a leg from poor protection is what is going to be costly.
chiefhog44 wrote:As for Admas, the guy would have been out of the league had the Steelers OT not ruptured his tendon. The guy is getting crushed in Pittsburgh. I watch each game (wife is a Steelers fan). He gave up 1 sack and 4 preasures in their last game, more than twice any other lineman. Why would I want that?
For the same reason that you aren't a coach for the Steelers ... who believe he's playing very well, as was included in the link to the article I posted earlier.
chiefhog44 wrote:Bottom line, is that I think this will be a longer term plan than you think. As I have been saying, I think they brought Donovan in this year to learn the offense so he can start teaching next year. This year, they started fixing the line, and instituted a new scheme on defense. Next year, I bet they bring in a QB and trade or let go many on the defense that do not fit the scheme like Carter and Haynesworth (trade) and Rocky, Daniels, and Carlos (cut) They will only be able to overhaul only so much next year as well. And then the third offseason, is when they are targeting making a run. This team was loaded with crap thanks to Vinny, and it's going to take years for us to purge. Everyone last year said, blow the whole thing up. Well they blew up the entire staff, management and they blew up 1/3rd of the team. Next year will be another 1/3rd, and the next year will be another 1/3rd.
Again, you don't trade for a QB like McNabb to be a tutor and wet nurse to a Rookie QB prospect. He's here to win a Championship, and I tell you, this 3 year plan of yours is ALL WET. You cannot reconcile that approach with trading picks for older players as the Redskins did this past off season. WE DON"T HAVE THE PICKS. And there might not even be a season next year.
So, how are you going to address your o-line and your QB without the picks ? McNabb, so long as Shanahan doesn't destroy the relationship, should be able to fill the role of the franchise QB for the next 3 years, allowing the Redskins to address the other team needs. But the way it's going, that plan could be put in jeopardy by insulting and disrespecting the man. It's a very poor approach being taken.
chiefhog44 wrote:Feel free to make a mid year evaluation, I think people are getting frustrated with you because it's more like a mid-season bashing than an evaluation, and since this will be a multi year fix, that means we have to listen to your bashing for that much longer. It get's old.
What may be the problem you have is me pointing out in painful detail why you are wrong ...
And I'm not bashing the team ... I'm bashing a BRAND NEW COACH and his Boy, who has the ENTIRE FOOTBALL WORLD scratching their freaking heads, wondering WTF he is thinking.
You act as if a majority actually believe what YOU ARE SAYING .... you, my friend, it is you that is on "Homer" Island ... not me. My opinion comes from what I see, which is simply confirmed by the fact that the rest of the football world at large agrees.
Sorry if that frustrates you ... that is one of the hazards of being right, while the rest of the world is wrong.